Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
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 Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting, that's coming up as a page not known for me. But yes it says something is seriously wrong with parliamentary rules when MPs trying to influence a judge - an actual crime that could result in a prison sentence if you or I did it - are merely suspended for one day (and is this a day when parliament is not even in session?). Meanwhile an MP for the opposition party is given the same sentence for being honest and saying what the entire world knows, that our current PM does not know how to tell the truth. The UK government really has been taken over by criminals..." As your single post indicates, nobody seems to care  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting, that's coming up as a page not known for me. But yes it says something is seriously wrong with parliamentary rules when MPs trying to influence a judge - an actual crime that could result in a prison sentence if you or I did it - are merely suspended for one day (and is this a day when parliament is not even in session?). Meanwhile an MP for the opposition party is given the same sentence for being honest and saying what the entire world knows, that our current PM does not know how to tell the truth. The UK government really has been taken over by criminals... As your single post indicates, nobody seems to care "The reason for that is the majority of the electorate voted for this mess. The silence is those struggling to defend it or those ashamed they called it to power. Everyone else...who knows. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Still nothing "Not a peep... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There you go . . . 'Labour MP Apsana Begum defrauded council out of £64,000 in social housing claims, court hears' 4 days ago. Happens in every party every year - But at least now you can say Deflection Deflection Deflection. "That really is deflection. It's not alright that she, or anyone else behaves like this. I'm delighted she was convicted. Dishonest and criminal. Trying to influence the judiciary though. Try to undermine the legal system as a member of Parliament though? Abuse of power and privilege... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?) "Quite right. Another deflection. If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account. Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK? Afe you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh Dear! The SNP yet another political party messing about where they really shouldn't be messing about? How deflecting can this all be, lol? "See above. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait..." This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait..." You were right, the deflection has begun | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... You were right, the deflection has begun "You do realise the people providing the deflection are doing so in sarcastic tones because it was announced 'they'll be along to deflection | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?"George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used. Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days ""Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government? "Left wing" because the government is Tory? It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
"Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised."'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster. It always comes from left wingers, and very often Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement? Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so? These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so. Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
"I didn't mention nor invite deflection. I have merely pointed it out as it happened. You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?"I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?"It is. "Such egregious behaviour is corrosive to the rule of law and, if allowed to continue unchecked, could undermine public trust in the independence of judges." "The MPs behaviour was found to have "caused significant damage to the reputation and integrity" of the House of Commons." It was dealt with by their Standards Committee, the Chair of which is not a Tory. Just pique my curiosity... why did these MPs write to senior judges involved with the case? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?"Did I, or was it a stand alone comment? You seem to be annoyed about something completely unrelated to what I posted and have chosen to make several,unsuplorted, assertions. If you feel that you have to be "right" then you are welcome to carry on on your own. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?
It is.
"Such egregious behaviour is corrosive to the rule of law and, if allowed to continue unchecked, could undermine public trust in the independence of judges."
"The MPs behaviour was found to have "caused significant damage to the reputation and integrity" of the House of Commons."
It was dealt with by their Standards Committee, the Chair of which is not a Tory.
Just pique my curiosity... why did these MPs write to senior judges involved with the case?
"That wasn't so hard, was it? Suspension from Parliament for a single day for doing something so serious seems quite minimal a punishment to me. Not to you? This was the same as for another MP, correctly, identifying the Prime Minister as a liar. The punishment was appropriate for the breach in rules but does not seem to be of equivalent severity compared to this. They wrote to judges to influence a decision on the release of character references in the case of a fellow MP on trial for sexual assault who was ultimately convicted. Why this would be important in this case I have no idea, but if it was not I'm not sure why they would have been motivated to try to influence judges in their decision making in such a serious case. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?
Did I, or was it a stand alone comment?
You seem to be annoyed about something completely unrelated to what I posted and have chosen to make several,unsuplorted, assertions.
If you feel that you have to be "right" then you are welcome to carry on on your own."I'll state it up the second time. I didn't reply to you comment, hence I quoted the poster. You choose to engage. It's funny you seem to have so much to say regarding me making 'several assertions' regarding you, I made one. Even more funny when your first post on the Labour MP thread was to deflect to this subject. And now you come on this thread saying it would 'be adult to agree' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?"I do take your point though. You were referring to a specific post in the thread rather than the actual point I raised. It would be nice if, as a courtesy, people could also address the actual thread before starting side arguments and sucking out all of the air. It does very often take a lot of patience and effort to get a direct answer from anyone in this forum. Pefsonal insults do not help that process either. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?
I do take your point though.
You were referring to a specific post in the thread rather than the actual point I raised.
It would be nice if, as a courtesy, people could also address the actual thread before starting side arguments and sucking out all of the air.
It does very often take a lot of patience and effort to get a direct answer from anyone in this forum.
Pefsonal insults do not help that process either."Which was exactly what o was getting at. Where was the personal insult? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?
Did I, or was it a stand alone comment?
You seem to be annoyed about something completely unrelated to what I posted and have chosen to make several,unsuplorted, assertions.
If you feel that you have to be "right" then you are welcome to carry on on your own.
I'll state it up the second time. I didn't reply to you comment, hence I quoted the poster. You choose to engage.
It's funny you seem to have so much to say regarding me making 'several assertions' regarding you, I made one.
Even more funny when your first post on the Labour MP thread was to deflect to this subject. And now you come on this thread saying it would 'be adult to agree' "See above. I mistakenly read your post to imply that I was "left wing" as I, incorrectly, assumed that you were respoding to the thread as a whole because that would be a reasonable thing to do. I didn't really say much at all. Actually, I agreed that the punishment was appropriate for the dishonest Labour MP. It's difficult to do any more than that. I then wondered if this matter was equally serious as an additional contribution. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?
I do take your point though.
You were referring to a specific post in the thread rather than the actual point I raised.
It would be nice if, as a courtesy, people could also address the actual thread before starting side arguments and sucking out all of the air.
It does very often take a lot of patience and effort to get a direct answer from anyone in this forum.
Pefsonal insults do not help that process either.
Which was exactly what o was getting at.
Where was the personal insult?""Fancy growing up a bit?" was intended as a compliment? Feel free to have the final word. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?
I do take your point though.
You were referring to a specific post in the thread rather than the actual point I raised.
It would be nice if, as a courtesy, people could also address the actual thread before starting side arguments and sucking out all of the air.
It does very often take a lot of patience and effort to get a direct answer from anyone in this forum.
Pefsonal insults do not help that process either.
Which was exactly what o was getting at.
Where was the personal insult?
"Fancy growing up a bit?" was intended as a compliment?
Feel free to have the final word."Oh I see how it works.. It's OK for you to say 'it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?' But isn't OK for me to say 'fancy growing up a bit?' You never insulted me but I did you? If that's how you see things, I think we're done here | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh there will be some ludicrous deflection at some point. Just wait... This is what has become known as a typical post from left winger round here. It seems to a fair few round here that you can say 'oh they'll defend/deflect'. And this inevitably happens before anyone of a different opinion even says anything. It's quite the playground round here these days
"Typical" in that it points out a serious failing by the government?
"Left wing" because the government is Tory?
It would be adult for someone to agree as I have, unambiguously, stated that both the convicted Labour MP and the SNP/Crown office affair were correctly criticised.
'Typical' of a 'left wing' poster.
It always comes from left wingers, and very often
Where does 'oh there will be deflection' point out anything regarding the governement?
Why should anyone agree with you, because you say so?
These MPs have been sanctioned for breaking the rules and rightly so.
Where does 'oh they'll deflect' even come into it before giving anyone the opportunity to agree or disagree?
I didn't mention nor invite deflection.
I have merely pointed it out as it happened.
You have just agreed with me,so it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?
I didn't say you did. Hence why I quoted the person who said it and not yourself You did however state 'still nothing' in response to said poster.
Fancy growing up a bit?
I do take your point though.
You were referring to a specific post in the thread rather than the actual point I raised.
It would be nice if, as a courtesy, people could also address the actual thread before starting side arguments and sucking out all of the air.
It does very often take a lot of patience and effort to get a direct answer from anyone in this forum.
Pefsonal insults do not help that process either.
Which was exactly what o was getting at.
Where was the personal insult?
"Fancy growing up a bit?" was intended as a compliment?
Feel free to have the final word.
Oh I see how it works..
It's OK for you to say 'it wasn't so hard to act like a grown-up, was it?'
But isn't OK for me to say 'fancy growing up a bit?'
You never insulted me but I did you?
If that's how you see things, I think we're done here "  First thing I thought when I read his last post. It's difficult to take posts seriously when someone is so blatantly hypocritical. Now awaiting the "deflection" which I'm sure will be along any second | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?
It is.
"Such egregious behaviour is corrosive to the rule of law and, if allowed to continue unchecked, could undermine public trust in the independence of judges."
"The MPs behaviour was found to have "caused significant damage to the reputation and integrity" of the House of Commons."
It was dealt with by their Standards Committee, the Chair of which is not a Tory.
Just pique my curiosity... why did these MPs write to senior judges involved with the case?
That wasn't so hard, was it?
Suspension from Parliament for a single day for doing something so serious seems quite minimal a punishment to me. Not to you?
This was the same as for another MP, correctly, identifying the Prime Minister as a liar. The punishment was appropriate for the breach in rules but does not seem to be of equivalent severity compared to this.
They wrote to judges to influence a decision on the release of character references in the case of a fellow MP on trial for sexual assault who was ultimately convicted.
Why this would be important in this case I have no idea, but if it was not I'm not sure why they would have been motivated to try to influence judges in their decision making in such a serious case."Ok | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?"I would say yes. They should have a lot more than a one day suspension. It would seem to be at the very least contempt of court. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?
I would say yes. They should have a lot more than a one day suspension. It would seem to be at the very least contempt of court."Off with their heads????? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?
I would say yes. They should have a lot more than a one day suspension. It would seem to be at the very least contempt of court.
Off with their heads?????"Now you are being silly. But corruption should be penalised. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?
I would say yes. They should have a lot more than a one day suspension. It would seem to be at the very least contempt of court.
Off with their heads?????
Now you are being silly. But corruption should be penalised. "What would you suggest ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?
I would say yes. They should have a lot more than a one day suspension. It would seem to be at the very least contempt of court.
Off with their heads?????
Now you are being silly. But corruption should be penalised.
What would you suggest ?"How about investigated by the CPS and Police, if guilty, then resign as MPs and imprisoned. This Govt is corrupt & we need proper controls to stop them thinking it is one rule forvthem and another for ordinary people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here's a bit more deflection, as there is nothing wrong with a bit of deflection on a Sunday... The case of the £600k missing from the SNP coffers... aye that's an internal party matter... but wait, what's that... the SNP run Crown Office has been found to be meddling with the Police Scotland investigation... "we would prefer if you changed the wording of the investigation... in fact can you just drop it please as Nippy isnae happy aboot this". A piece in The Times if you want a good read and a really really good example of judiciary interference/influence! (oh, almost forgot, not the first time the Crown Office has been pinged for this... you might consider this a mild pingdemic?)
Quite right. Another deflection.
If the SNP have been interfering with the Crown Office then it is scandalous and they should be held to account.
Does that make what these Tory MPs did OK?
Are you unable to say this was wrong and deserves a more severe penalty?
George and Jean at No.42 were wittering something the other day about a few MPs who had broken a code, I originally thought it was something to do with Davinci. Anyway Jean later piped up about the wrong stationery having been used.
Neither George nor Jean are clued up on the range of punishments available to the standards committee, let alone how the members arrived at the punishment they did hand out. I didn't press them any further and let them get on with talking about the weather and asking whether I would be watching the Antiques Roadshow this week..
Is the fact that sitting MPs tried to improperly inluence judges a serious matter or not?
I would say yes. They should have a lot more than a one day suspension. It would seem to be at the very least contempt of court.
Off with their heads?????
Now you are being silly. But corruption should be penalised.
What would you suggest ?
How about investigated by the CPS and Police, if guilty, then resign as MPs and imprisoned. This Govt is corrupt & we need proper controls to stop them thinking it is one rule forvthem and another for ordinary people."Thought it might be something like this… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting, that's coming up as a page not known for me. But yes it says something is seriously wrong with parliamentary rules when MPs trying to influence a judge - an actual crime that could result in a prison sentence if you or I did it - are merely suspended for one day (and is this a day when parliament is not even in session?). Meanwhile an MP for the opposition party is given the same sentence for being honest and saying what the entire world knows, that our current PM does not know how to tell the truth. The UK government really has been taken over by criminals... As your single post indicates, nobody seems to care "Was it on sky? So far I've learnt that nicola sturgeon getting her house painted was relevant but the numerous financial irregularities from Alex are not? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There you go . . . 'Labour MP Apsana Begum defrauded council out of £64,000 in social housing claims, court hears' 4 days ago. Happens in every party every year - But at least now you can say Deflection Deflection Deflection.
That really is deflection.
It's not alright that she, or anyone else behaves like this.
I'm delighted she was convicted. Dishonest and criminal.
Trying to influence the judiciary though. Try to undermine the legal system as a member of Parliament though? Abuse of power and privilege..."How can a thread about a tury mp being turned around into a debate about labour,possibly be classed as defection? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There you go . . . 'Labour MP Apsana Begum defrauded council out of £64,000 in social housing claims, court hears' 4 days ago. Happens in every party every year - But at least now you can say Deflection Deflection Deflection.
That really is deflection.
It's not alright that she, or anyone else behaves like this.
I'm delighted she was convicted. Dishonest and criminal.
Trying to influence the judiciary though. Try to undermine the legal system as a member of Parliament though? Abuse of power and privilege...
How can a thread about a tury mp being turned around into a debate about labour,possibly be classed as defection?"The deflection was invited as per usual and duly provided in a sarcastic way. This thread hasn't turned into a debate about labour. Fancy checking out the thread about this said Labour MP and see it said about Conservative MPs but of course it only happens one way | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There you go . . . 'Labour MP Apsana Begum defrauded council out of £64,000 in social housing claims, court hears' 4 days ago. Happens in every party every year - But at least now you can say Deflection Deflection Deflection.
That really is deflection.
It's not alright that she, or anyone else behaves like this.
I'm delighted she was convicted. Dishonest and criminal.
Trying to influence the judiciary though. Try to undermine the legal system as a member of Parliament though? Abuse of power and privilege...
How can a thread about a tury mp being turned around into a debate about labour,possibly be classed as defection?
The deflection was invited as per usual and duly provided in a sarcastic way. This thread hasn't turned into a debate about labour.
Fancy checking out the thread about this said Labour MP and see it said about Conservative MPs but of course it only happens one way "Yup. I added the deflection simply because the deflection was invited. And I'm totally clear that it was all to do with sarcasm from the posters above me. People who ask for serious discussion should perhaps be the ones who use it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There you go . . . 'Labour MP Apsana Begum defrauded council out of £64,000 in social housing claims, court hears' 4 days ago. Happens in every party every year - But at least now you can say Deflection Deflection Deflection.
That really is deflection.
It's not alright that she, or anyone else behaves like this.
I'm delighted she was convicted. Dishonest and criminal.
Trying to influence the judiciary though. Try to undermine the legal system as a member of Parliament though? Abuse of power and privilege...
How can a thread about a tury mp being turned around into a debate about labour,possibly be classed as defection?
The deflection was invited as per usual and duly provided in a sarcastic way. This thread hasn't turned into a debate about labour.
Fancy checking out the thread about this said Labour MP and see it said about Conservative MPs but of course it only happens one way
Yup. I added the deflection simply because the deflection was invited. And I'm totally clear that it was all to do with sarcasm from the posters above me.
People who ask for serious discussion should perhaps be the ones who use it.
"As I said previously it's becoming standard now. Invite sarcastic responses and then complain about said responses. It's quite funny though so let them carry on | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyway... Surely attempted bribery should carry a custodial sentence. Lets hope not!" It hasn't yet been referred to the Police, has it? If it is an arrestable offence, then arrest them - until then, make your voice heard with your MP. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There you go . . . 'Labour MP Apsana Begum defrauded council out of £64,000 in social housing claims, court hears' 4 days ago. Happens in every party every year - But at least now you can say Deflection Deflection Deflection.
That really is deflection.
It's not alright that she, or anyone else behaves like this.
I'm delighted she was convicted. Dishonest and criminal.
Trying to influence the judiciary though. Try to undermine the legal system as a member of Parliament though? Abuse of power and privilege...
How can a thread about a tury mp being turned around into a debate about labour,possibly be classed as defection?
The deflection was invited as per usual and duly provided in a sarcastic way. This thread hasn't turned into a debate about labour.
Fancy checking out the thread about this said Labour MP and see it said about Conservative MPs but of course it only happens one way
Yup. I added the deflection simply because the deflection was invited. And I'm totally clear that it was all to do with sarcasm from the posters above me.
People who ask for serious discussion should perhaps be the ones who use it.
As I said previously it's becoming standard now.
Invite sarcastic responses and then complain about said responses.
It's quite funny though so let them carry on "Yup. lol. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. And nothing that changes stays the same. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyway... Surely attempted bribery should carry a custodial sentence. Lets hope not!" Who said anything about bribery? That's a criminal offence you know. I'm sure if there was any evidence of this then you'd get unanimous support for the CPS to prosecute. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyway... Surely attempted bribery should carry a custodial sentence. Lets hope not! Who said anything about bribery? That's a criminal offence you know. I'm sure if there was any evidence of this then you'd get unanimous support for the CPS to prosecute." Precisely this. Either it's an indictable offence or it isn't! So no amount of whinging and moaning about what people want it to be will change that. But it's fun to whinge and moan and make childish snidery I guess - The weather is too hot weather is too cold lol. Perhaps God hates me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe if the people happy to ignore a sexual harassment case,simply because the alledged perp is a Tory, want to indulge In their usual labour whataboutery,they should start their own thread on labour mps who have tried to influence a judge. I just think its important to keep the thread on track "Yet YOU are the one who changed it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wonder what it is with tories and sexual harassment? Maybe it's in the criteria at Eton?" maybe it’s how they have been brought up waching how poor nanny and the maid being treated lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe if the people happy to ignore a sexual harassment case,simply because the alledged perp is a Tory, want to indulge In their usual labour whataboutery,they should start their own thread on labour mps who have tried to influence a judge. I just think its important to keep the thread on track "
Funny you haven't mentioned keeping others on track when they suit you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wonder what it is with tories and sexual harassment? Maybe it's in the criteria at Eton?maybe it’s how they have been brought up waching how poor nanny and the maid being treated lol" https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/29/no-10-denies-claims-boris-johnson-squeezed-thigh-journalist-charlotte-edwardes Maybe there should be some sort of training course to ensure the few bad apples realise sexual assault is not acceptable in 2021. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/21/tory-mps-suspended-for-trying-to-influence-judge-in-elphicke-case Here is the full link ..mine wouldnt work before. Trying their best to ensure an alledged victim of sexual abuse doesnt get justice. That world honourable suits them perfectly . Great bunch of lads." In what way were they trying to "ensure a victim of sexual abuse didn't get justice"? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" By LionelhutzFind posts by Lionelhutz Man 13 minutes ago Wonder what it is with tories and sexual harassment? Maybe it's in the criteria at Eton?" Then you complain about the thread NOT being on track !!! lmfao!!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just to put the story entirely straight - as some seem to have missed this fact - It was the Commons Standards Committee that gave the one day suspension - No judge was involved in the decision. " Its quite apparent that many haven't read the background and the facts of this case! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just to put the story entirely straight - as some seem to have missed this fact - It was the Commons Standards Committee that gave the one day suspension - No judge was involved in the decision. Its quite apparent that many haven't read the background and the facts of this case! " Yup. Usual Usual | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Several cons mps have been suspended from the commons....tried to influence a judge presiding over the trial of a former colleague accused of sexual misconduct But the story is absolutely nothing to do with a judge." And there was me thinking they tried to bribe the judge | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Several cons mps have been suspended from the commons....tried to influence a judge presiding over the trial of a former colleague accused of sexual misconduct But the story is absolutely nothing to do with a judge. And there was me thinking they tried to bribe the judge " lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
