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 |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We don't expect anything else. He is a politician." And yet millions still voted for him 
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
"We don't expect anything else. He is a politician. And yet millions still voted for him
"Indeed. If all politicians are equally liars, then you can't expect anything better, so, let's vote for the one with the record of lying. It's a race to the bottom, if you believe that. Do I believe that all politicians, or even most, are pure as the driven snow? Absolutely not. But they're not all the same. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"His £200,000 legal costs and rising (that we are paying for) , will confirm this in a legally dressed-up style. He should be barred from work paid for by the state, unless it's a job whilst in prison " Well depending on what the privilege and standards committee says if he suggestions is that he gets a 10 day suspension from parliament, then the recall process can start… mps would need to vote on it, but if 10% of his constituents sign the petition there would be a by election! If it’s gets to that stage I am guessing there is a zero percentage chance of him contesting it… there is no way he would let his final act being turfed out by the public … | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We don't expect anything else. He is a politician. And yet millions still voted for him
Indeed. If all politicians are equally liars, then you can't expect anything better, so, let's vote for the one with the record of lying.
It's a race to the bottom, if you believe that.
Do I believe that all politicians, or even most, are pure as the driven snow? Absolutely not. But they're not all the same."This.. And when the base line is set at the behaviour of people like Boris then we are in a mess, I suppose we can only improve on that .. The trope of 'all politicians lie' so it's ok' really does indicate just how bad our politics and engagement by the public with that is.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We don't expect anything else. He is a politician. And yet millions still voted for him
Indeed. If all politicians are equally liars, then you can't expect anything better, so, let's vote for the one with the record of lying.
It's a race to the bottom, if you believe that.
Do I believe that all politicians, or even most, are pure as the driven snow? Absolutely not. But they're not all the same.
This..
And when the base line is set at the behaviour of people like Boris then we are in a mess, I suppose we can only improve on that ..
The trope of 'all politicians lie' so it's ok' really does indicate just how bad our politics and engagement by the public with that is.."Worse, I think people like Johnson use it. Oh, all politicians lie, so you can't expect higher standards, they'll never happen. Vote for me, lying liar who lies, and not those people with little or no record of lying! The fact we can't dig up dirt means they must be even worse! I expect higher standards. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We don't expect anything else. He is a politician. And yet millions still voted for him
Indeed. If all politicians are equally liars, then you can't expect anything better, so, let's vote for the one with the record of lying.
It's a race to the bottom, if you believe that.
Do I believe that all politicians, or even most, are pure as the driven snow? Absolutely not. But they're not all the same.
This..
And when the base line is set at the behaviour of people like Boris then we are in a mess, I suppose we can only improve on that ..
The trope of 'all politicians lie' so it's ok' really does indicate just how bad our politics and engagement by the public with that is..
Worse, I think people like Johnson use it.
Oh, all politicians lie, so you can't expect higher standards, they'll never happen. Vote for me, lying liar who lies, and not those people with little or no record of lying! The fact we can't dig up dirt means they must be even worse!
I expect higher standards."Normalisation of previously unacceptable behaviour. The level and extreme nature of the corruption since the 2019 election (using the pandemic as a smokescreen) has pushed the barometer so far that people now seem to accept waaaaay more than they would have a decade or two ago! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We don't expect anything else. He is a politician. And yet millions still voted for him
Indeed. If all politicians are equally liars, then you can't expect anything better, so, let's vote for the one with the record of lying.
It's a race to the bottom, if you believe that.
Do I believe that all politicians, or even most, are pure as the driven snow? Absolutely not. But they're not all the same.
This..
And when the base line is set at the behaviour of people like Boris then we are in a mess, I suppose we can only improve on that ..
The trope of 'all politicians lie' so it's ok' really does indicate just how bad our politics and engagement by the public with that is..
Worse, I think people like Johnson use it.
Oh, all politicians lie, so you can't expect higher standards, they'll never happen. Vote for me, lying liar who lies, and not those people with little or no record of lying! The fact we can't dig up dirt means they must be even worse!
I expect higher standards.
Normalisation of previously unacceptable behaviour. The level and extreme nature of the corruption since the 2019 election (using the pandemic as a smokescreen) has pushed the barometer so far that people now seem to accept waaaaay more than they would have a decade or two ago!"Indeed. If Johnson is guilty of 10x unacceptable behaviour and Starmer is guilty of 2x unacceptable behaviour (hypothetically), it's all unacceptable. I'd go for the least unacceptable option I have and push for reform. As they said in the Paterson debacle, they just want to be treated as the rest of us would be. Ok, let's make that so. Clean it all out, robust standards, discipline you can't lean on or make go away. (By "us" they might mean their wealthy mates who can do whatever the fuck they want. By "us" I mean every adult in this country) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If Boris ‘gets away’ with this and is allowed to continue as an MP he will destroy the Tory party " There's been quite a lot of stuff that should have been a hard line. And yet here we are, and some claim everyone is the same | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If Boris ‘gets away’ with this and is allowed to continue as an MP he will destroy the Tory party " Maybe..  
I think the survival of the brand beyond all individual ego's will ensure they prevent him being back in power..
The vote on Sunak's attempt to undo Boris's mess over the protocol should give an indicator of how much of a hold the cultists of the ERG etc have and how they are seen as relevant.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If Boris ‘gets away’ with this and is allowed to continue as an MP he will destroy the Tory party Maybe..
I think the survival of the brand beyond all individual ego's will ensure they prevent him being back in power..
The vote on Sunak's attempt to undo Boris's mess over the protocol should give an indicator of how much of a hold the cultists of the ERG etc have and how they are seen as relevant.."True, this is a win win for opposition parties though | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If Boris ‘gets away’ with this and is allowed to continue as an MP he will destroy the Tory party Maybe..
I think the survival of the brand beyond all individual ego's will ensure they prevent him being back in power..
The vote on Sunak's attempt to undo Boris's mess over the protocol should give an indicator of how much of a hold the cultists of the ERG etc have and how they are seen as relevant..
True, this is a win win for opposition parties though "An emphatic vote for pragmatism over fantasy..
Bit by bit the oven ready deal in all its failings will in time be picked over and subjected to common sense and reality over the cultish rhetoric that we have now.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This committee hearing is a really… really hard watch Johnson is squirming all over the place…. Apparently leaving do’s were allowed after all according to boris! " I'd probably end up throwing things. I'm glad other people are watching, for my blood pressure. They wanted to be treated just like everyone else. It was around the time I couldn't go to a dear friend's funeral, people missed the deaths of their family members. The Queen attended Prince Philip's funeral alone, even though she was *fucking exempt* from the law and all law. Just like anyone else... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well boris is being skewered by sir Bernard Jenkins… if this is supposed to be the friendly stuff wait till we get to the others! " The committee have to make a decision, is Boris lying or is Boris an incompetent idiot who didn’t know the rules | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed…" Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well boris is being skewered by sir Bernard Jenkins… if this is supposed to be the friendly stuff wait till we get to the others! The committee have to make a decision, is Boris lying or is Boris an incompetent idiot who didn’t know the rules " Does Harriet Harperson not know the mobile phone rules when driving?  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well boris is being skewered by sir Bernard Jenkins… if this is supposed to be the friendly stuff wait till we get to the others! The committee have to make a decision, is Boris lying or is Boris an incompetent idiot who didn’t know the rules Does Harriet Harperson not know the mobile phone rules when driving? "You can ask her? Pretty sure she's got an email address..  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do' "Whataboutery. Cool. If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well boris is being skewered by sir Bernard Jenkins… if this is supposed to be the friendly stuff wait till we get to the others! The committee have to make a decision, is Boris lying or is Boris an incompetent idiot who didn’t know the rules Does Harriet Harperson not know the mobile phone rules when driving?
You can ask her?
Pretty sure she's got an email address.. "Holier than thou socialist who wouldn't respond to a mere pleb, especially being a Conservative voter. A witness said she asked the predictable question 'Don't you know who I am'? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions."This.. I suspect she was dealt with under the law despite her status at the time which is right and proper..
I never knew that the penalty for excess speed also included being banned from sitting as Chair of a Parliamentary Committee..
Then again she was unanimously elected by the Committee as per the standing orders etc and with Conservative MPs in the majority..
Now..
Back to Boris..  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well boris is being skewered by sir Bernard Jenkins… if this is supposed to be the friendly stuff wait till we get to the others! The committee have to make a decision, is Boris lying or is Boris an incompetent idiot who didn’t know the rules Does Harriet Harperson not know the mobile phone rules when driving?
You can ask her?
Pretty sure she's got an email address..
Holier than thou socialist who wouldn't respond to a mere pleb, especially being a Conservative voter.
A witness said she asked the predictable question 'Don't you know who I am'? "Now, now.. Don't talk yourself down, even if she agrees with you I would imagine she would refrain from calling you that.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions."Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments. No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks. "I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well boris is being skewered by sir Bernard Jenkins… if this is supposed to be the friendly stuff wait till we get to the others! The committee have to make a decision, is Boris lying or is Boris an incompetent idiot who didn’t know the rules Does Harriet Harperson not know the mobile phone rules when driving?
You can ask her?
Pretty sure she's got an email address..
Holier than thou socialist who wouldn't respond to a mere pleb, especially being a Conservative voter.
A witness said she asked the predictable question 'Don't you know who I am'?
Now, now..
Don't talk yourself down, even if she agrees with you I would imagine she would refrain from calling you that..
"I really don't mind being called a Conservative voter | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks. "He certainly was when Boris was fined but only at the gullible who voted for him given he has a proven history of lying, getting sacked for it etc.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well boris is being skewered by sir Bernard Jenkins… if this is supposed to be the friendly stuff wait till we get to the others! The committee have to make a decision, is Boris lying or is Boris an incompetent idiot who didn’t know the rules Does Harriet Harperson not know the mobile phone rules when driving?
You can ask her?
Pretty sure she's got an email address..
Holier than thou socialist who wouldn't respond to a mere pleb, especially being a Conservative voter.
A witness said she asked the predictable question 'Don't you know who I am'?
Now, now..
Don't talk yourself down, even if she agrees with you I would imagine she would refrain from calling you that..
I really don't mind being called a Conservative voter "I'm up for the holier than thou bit but alas personal antics possibly mean no chance ..  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. " 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account."He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
He certainly was when Boris was fined but only at the gullible who voted for him given he has a proven history of lying, getting sacked for it etc..
"Easy to laugh when nobody can vote you out | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do' "Because Chris Bryant did the honorable thing and recused himself because of comments made about boris in the past, in this case the committee was made up of 4 tories, 2 labour mps and an SNP mp… And I would argue that boris got roasted the worst by sir Bernard Jenkins and Alberto Costa, 2 Tory mps But so much for “this was all the left” narrative…. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace !" Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave! "Psst Cheshire.. The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied.. He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Because Chris Bryant did the honorable thing and recused himself because of comments made about boris in the past, in this case the committee was made up of 4 tories, 2 labour mps and an SNP mp…
And I would argue that boris got roasted the worst by sir Bernard Jenkins and Alberto Costa, 2 Tory mps
But so much for “this was all the left” narrative…."I was talking about Harriet Harman touching 100mph on the motorway and other speeding, plus illegal mobile phone use. Do you approve of this? Bumbling Bernard couldn't roast a potato with the latest air fryer. Boris dispatched him easily | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave! "Good. Get him, then get her. Fascinating that you think of breaking the law while prime minister, admitting to it, lying to parliament about it, etc, as "uneaten cake". First ever prime minister admitting a crime while in office. He pardy hardied while we couldn't see our relatives as they died. Uneaten cake. Gosh. Poow widdle Bowis. Her conduct is entirely irrelevant to his criminality. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
He certainly was when Boris was fined but only at the gullible who voted for him given he has a proven history of lying, getting sacked for it etc..
Easy to laugh when nobody can vote you out "Well he certainly shares some acquaintances that's for sure as evidenced when Boris was Foreign Secretary and avoided his own security to spend a boozy evening with an ex KGB official.. Russian report forthcoming yet? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
"But she did bad things too! I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
"I realise that thanks. She was however in pontification overdrive from what I saw. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
He certainly was when Boris was fined but only at the gullible who voted for him given he has a proven history of lying, getting sacked for it etc..
Easy to laugh when nobody can vote you out
Well he certainly shares some acquaintances that's for sure as evidenced when Boris was Foreign Secretary and avoided his own security to spend a boozy evening with an ex KGB official..
Russian report forthcoming yet?"Well that's not fair. Boris only wants to be held to the same standards that any of the rest of us would be. And by the rest of us, he means anyone else who can get away with anything they fucking want to. Us? We actually face consequences. That's not allowed for poow widdle Bowis | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren”" See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know! "I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Good. Get him, then get her.
Fascinating that you think of breaking the law while prime minister, admitting to it, lying to parliament about it, etc, as "uneaten cake".
First ever prime minister admitting a crime while in office. He pardy hardied while we couldn't see our relatives as they died. Uneaten cake. Gosh. Poow widdle Bowis.
Her conduct is entirely irrelevant to his criminality. "Let's put things in perspective. Because, whatever we may think about partygate, we should never let it override the single most valuable service that Boris Johnson performed for the UK. Stopping Jeremy Corbyn from becoming Prime Minister
And with that, I'm off down the pub
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules. "Don’t worry… I was asking Cheshire
I know he didn’t watch a second….because there is a specific tell in the word salad of justification he tried to put up…. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Good. Get him, then get her.
Fascinating that you think of breaking the law while prime minister, admitting to it, lying to parliament about it, etc, as "uneaten cake".
First ever prime minister admitting a crime while in office. He pardy hardied while we couldn't see our relatives as they died. Uneaten cake. Gosh. Poow widdle Bowis.
Her conduct is entirely irrelevant to his criminality.
Let's put things in perspective. Because, whatever we may think about partygate, we should never let it override the single most valuable service that Boris Johnson performed for the UK.
Stopping Jeremy Corbyn from becoming Prime Minister
And with that, I'm off down the pub
"Oh goodness. You think I give a shit about that? I want consequences for those in power. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
Don’t worry… I was asking Cheshire
I know he didn’t watch a second….because there is a specific tell in the word salad of justification he tried to put up…. "haha! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules. "What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
But she did bad things too!
I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister"It's not but it shows how the acolytes of the blind buffoon can't accept reality.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate "I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta."You're very aggressive aren't you | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you "Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
But she did bad things too!
I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister
It's not but it shows how the acolytes of the blind buffoon can't accept reality.."There really isn't any argument that makes any sense, is there? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
But she did bad things too!
I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister
It's not but it shows how the acolytes of the blind buffoon can't accept reality..
There really isn't any argument that makes any sense, is there?"None presented, to be fair it's a classic case of I can't defend Boris because pretty much everyone with a modicum of intelligence knows his word can't be trusted.. So like this lot in power it's deflection.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?"What substance would you like? I haven't watched it. I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate. You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive. "If you don't like what I have to say, then probably best to ignore me. I'll continue to give your advice the respect it deserves. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
But she did bad things too!
I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister
It's not but it shows how the acolytes of the blind buffoon can't accept reality..
There really isn't any argument that makes any sense, is there?
None presented, to be fair it's a classic case of I can't defend Boris because pretty much everyone with a modicum of intelligence knows his word can't be trusted..
So like this lot in power it's deflection.."I mean I suppose it's a step up from "he's doing his best". That was wild. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
If you don't like what I have to say, then probably best to ignore me. I'll continue to give your advice the respect it deserves."Why do you keep talking about the respect that I deserve? You don't know me, as I don't know you. Do you often disrespect people you don't know? I think that says much more about your good self than I. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive. "Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
"Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing? Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
But she did bad things too!
I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister
It's not but it shows how the acolytes of the blind buffoon can't accept reality..
There really isn't any argument that makes any sense, is there?
None presented, to be fair it's a classic case of I can't defend Boris because pretty much everyone with a modicum of intelligence knows his word can't be trusted..
So like this lot in power it's deflection..
I mean I suppose it's a step up from "he's doing his best". That was wild."Surreal given he repeated the mistakes he made in the early part of the pandemic, and ignored the scientific advice which led to more deaths in not locking down as advised.. Then had to.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression."I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
But she did bad things too!
I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister
It's not but it shows how the acolytes of the blind buffoon can't accept reality..
There really isn't any argument that makes any sense, is there?
None presented, to be fair it's a classic case of I can't defend Boris because pretty much everyone with a modicum of intelligence knows his word can't be trusted..
So like this lot in power it's deflection..
I mean I suppose it's a step up from "he's doing his best". That was wild.
Surreal given he repeated the mistakes he made in the early part of the pandemic, and ignored the scientific advice which led to more deaths in not locking down as advised..
Then had to.."Also surreal given the refrain at the time that they wanted to be held to the same standards as the rest of us. The rest of us would have faced serious consequences, and sooner. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He has been absolutely fried….. the great thing about this committee is that it is absolutely chocced with qc’s and the questioning has been forensic! And this last section is aimed at the Johnson backing media and the likes of GBnews and talk Tv telling them to get stuffed… Really? I can't take it seriously. You've got the preposterous Harriet Harman, a QC, and the solicitor general when the law that banned driving while using a mobile phone was introduced, reversing into a parked car whilst on a mobile, piously telling Boris Johnson he should have known better over covid and effectively it doesn't matter what he says because she's pre-judged the Inquiry already! She shouldn't be let near a car ever again, as she's been banned from driving in the past, twice for speeding! Pompously, she tells Boris he should have 'seen what's in front of him and recognised a party' but this was where he worked and lived! She should be more sympathetic with her fellow human beings. Surely the speedometer was in front of her, when it showed 99mph on the M4 near Swindon and she should have recognised she was speeding on an industrial scale! But that's the Left for you.... full of hypocrisy and 'do as I say, not as I do'
Whataboutery. Cool.
If anyone does anything wrong, they should face the consequences of their actions.
Of course it's cool. Standing by for the 'what about me, I couldn't visit X in hospital' comments.
No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. Putin must be laughing his ass off while we talk again about cake and leaving drinks.
I don't give a shit. If he broke the law and lied to parliament, he should be held to account.
He is being. By a pious three times law breaker whose dangerous speeding and mobile phone use seems more serious to me than uneaten cake and seeing colleagues off when they leave!
Psst Cheshire..
The Chair doesn't vote unless it's tied..
He will be judged by his peers in Parliament if it gets that far..
But she did bad things too!
I didn't know that was an argument that worked in primary school, let alone when you were the fucking prime minister
It's not but it shows how the acolytes of the blind buffoon can't accept reality..
There really isn't any argument that makes any sense, is there?
None presented, to be fair it's a classic case of I can't defend Boris because pretty much everyone with a modicum of intelligence knows his word can't be trusted..
So like this lot in power it's deflection..
I mean I suppose it's a step up from "he's doing his best". That was wild.
Surreal given he repeated the mistakes he made in the early part of the pandemic, and ignored the scientific advice which led to more deaths in not locking down as advised..
Then had to..
Also surreal given the refrain at the time that they wanted to be held to the same standards as the rest of us.
The rest of us would have faced serious consequences, and sooner."Many did which on top of the hypocrisy of the behaviour must really grate with those fined, let alone the emotional trauma of those who abided by the rules and laws at the most awful times of loss for them.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
"You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I mean I suppose it's a step up from "he's doing his best". That was wild. Surreal given he repeated the mistakes he made in the early part of the pandemic, and ignored the scientific advice which led to more deaths in not locking down as advised.. Then had to.. Also surreal given the refrain at the time that they wanted to be held to the same standards as the rest of us. The rest of us would have faced serious consequences, and sooner. Many did which on top of the hypocrisy of the behaviour must really grate with those fined, let alone the emotional trauma of those who abided by the rules and laws at the most awful times of loss for them.." Indeed. And the fact that he thinks that we've forgotten, that he might come back, that he thinks he might evade even the most minimal of consequences... it's just galling. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
"Not always no, it can be assertive in some contexts.. And there are other times it's used in different ways etc.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I mean I suppose it's a step up from "he's doing his best". That was wild. Surreal given he repeated the mistakes he made in the early part of the pandemic, and ignored the scientific advice which led to more deaths in not locking down as advised.. Then had to.. Also surreal given the refrain at the time that they wanted to be held to the same standards as the rest of us. The rest of us would have faced serious consequences, and sooner. Many did which on top of the hypocrisy of the behaviour must really grate with those fined, let alone the emotional trauma of those who abided by the rules and laws at the most awful times of loss for them.. Indeed. And the fact that he thinks that we've forgotten, that he might come back, that he thinks he might evade even the most minimal of consequences... it's just galling." I'm biassed against him which stems from his time as Mayor and some of the stunts and bullying he tried to get away with but I will say I didn't relish his position and the scale of the problem at the outset.. And I had to give him the benefit of the doubt in not locking down sooner but after that and what's come out since it's all par for his Ego in how he carried on.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Not always no, it can be assertive in some contexts..
And there are other times it's used in different ways etc.."Funny how the swearing only appears when it's in opposition to another's viewpoint Anyway, I've said what I think. I'll leave it there | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Not always no, it can be assertive in some contexts..
And there are other times it's used in different ways etc..
Funny how the swearing only appears when it's in opposition to another's viewpoint
Anyway, I've said what I think. I'll leave it there "Put your name forward as a moderator perhaps if your actually that concerned.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Not always no, it can be assertive in some contexts..
And there are other times it's used in different ways etc..
Funny how the swearing only appears when it's in opposition to another's viewpoint
Anyway, I've said what I think. I'll leave it there
Put your name forward as a moderator perhaps if your actually that concerned.. "I'm sure he's a liar (as is every other politician in my opinion) but let's wait for the verdict | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Not always no, it can be assertive in some contexts..
And there are other times it's used in different ways etc..
Funny how the swearing only appears when it's in opposition to another's viewpoint
Anyway, I've said what I think. I'll leave it there
Put your name forward as a moderator perhaps if your actually that concerned..
I'm sure he's a liar (as is every other politician in my opinion) but let's wait for the verdict "He's already admitted misleading Parliament.. Today was for him all about trying to justify that he has done.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? " Has the verdict been delivered yet? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? " My guess is absolutely not. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet?" Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum." Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? " I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone." Ooh you just earned such a spanking. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone." It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? My guess is absolutely not." I think if he is found to have done what's alleged by the Committee and then the vote in the house goes against him it will be that process which will hurt him the most regardless of how it pans out.. Sunak in giving a free vote is letting his MPs decide if Boris is finished or carries on, also the whole process is in some ways parliament trying to move on from his time.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? My guess is absolutely not. I think if he is found to have done what's alleged by the Committee and then the vote in the house goes against him it will be that process which will hurt him the most regardless of how it pans out.. Sunak in giving a free vote is letting his MPs decide if Boris is finished or carries on, also the whole process is in some ways parliament trying to move on from his time.." Common sense reply | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. " Really? You do realise it's not about Tory v Labour or right v left. It's about a liar who was our PM who spat in our faces over this whole affair. If a PM of any other party had done this, they would have pissed off people just as much. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. " I'm sorry if that's your interpretation. I don't think we're that important. I think the only bar here is forum rules. So if you find out I'm facing criminal charges (I am not), probably best not to speculate in the forum, that might fall foul of the rules. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. " Do you seriously think that if labour had been in power and their PM had acted in the same manner there wouldn't be a discussion? The first Prime Minister in office to be fined for law breaking.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. Really? You do realise it's not about Tory v Labour or right v left. It's about a liar who was our PM who spat in our faces over this whole affair. If a PM of any other party had done this, they would have pissed off people just as much." I believe I've said repeatedly, if anyone does this, they should be held to the same standards. Apparently this is persecution because reasons | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
"Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about. So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. Really? You do realise it's not about Tory v Labour or right v left. It's about a liar who was our PM who spat in our faces over this whole affair. If a PM of any other party had done this, they would have pissed off people just as much. I believe I've said repeatedly, if anyone does this, they should be held to the same standards. Apparently this is persecution because reasons" If everyone of a left or right leaning could genuinely become a little more accepting things would be so much better | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. Really? You do realise it's not about Tory v Labour or right v left. It's about a liar who was our PM who spat in our faces over this whole affair. If a PM of any other party had done this, they would have pissed off people just as much. I believe I've said repeatedly, if anyone does this, they should be held to the same standards. Apparently this is persecution because reasons If everyone of a left or right leaning could genuinely become a little more accepting things would be so much better " Indeed. Let's accept the relentless lying & corruption of the man who was our PM. The man who made the rules we were all supposed to follow, who told us we were all supposed to follow them before breaking them himself. And breaking the law. And fostering an environment were that rulebreaking & lawbreaking was rife. Who cares about all those loved ones we lost? Who cares about all those funerals we couldn't go to? who cares about the utter contempt millions of people were treated to by the PM? Let's skip on our way with a song in our heart and a whistle on our lips | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. Really? You do realise it's not about Tory v Labour or right v left. It's about a liar who was our PM who spat in our faces over this whole affair. If a PM of any other party had done this, they would have pissed off people just as much. I believe I've said repeatedly, if anyone does this, they should be held to the same standards. Apparently this is persecution because reasons If everyone of a left or right leaning could genuinely become a little more accepting things would be so much better " Accepting of what? The Prime Minister committed a crime. He admitted that by accepting the fixed penalty. Are you advocating accepting criminals? Rehabilitation and giving people pathways back into society is a worthwhile goal, but I'm not sure Johnson is a good target for that work, given the vast need for bringing people back into their society after they've served their time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules " So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. Really? You do realise it's not about Tory v Labour or right v left. It's about a liar who was our PM who spat in our faces over this whole affair. If a PM of any other party had done this, they would have pissed off people just as much. I believe I've said repeatedly, if anyone does this, they should be held to the same standards. Apparently this is persecution because reasons If everyone of a left or right leaning could genuinely become a little more accepting things would be so much better " Some things can't be accepted as an across the board rule though can they? I won't ever forgive Blair and his government for sending our troops out in soft skinned vehicles in Afghanistan when there were safer alternatives on the market that performed better against an IED.. Ditto of all the fuck ups Boris made the picture of the Queen sat alone at her husband's funeral whilst he was having parties and allowing the actions of others that he knew full well were morally indefensible is something he won't be forgiven for.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? " If he'd been offered a nine day suspension before the start of the hearing I think he would have accepted it, after much melodramatic bluster if course. But the votes against the Windsor Protocol being so low may mean that he's less bothered about being in the House now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet? Not as far as I know. This is chat. Welcome to the forum. Since he's not been found guilty, shouldn't you wait before discussing punishment or is it ok if it relates to a Tory? I wasn't aware that speculation on a swinging forum had any bearing on anything. Or that we weren't allowed to speculate. About anyone. It would seem to be very much dependent upon whom and what you're discussing. Really? You do realise it's not about Tory v Labour or right v left. It's about a liar who was our PM who spat in our faces over this whole affair. If a PM of any other party had done this, they would have pissed off people just as much. I believe I've said repeatedly, if anyone does this, they should be held to the same standards. Apparently this is persecution because reasons If everyone of a left or right leaning could genuinely become a little more accepting things would be so much better Some things can't be accepted as an across the board rule though can they? I won't ever forgive Blair and his government for sending our troops out in soft skinned vehicles in Afghanistan when there were safer alternatives on the market that performed better against an IED.. Ditto of all the fuck ups Boris made the picture of the Queen sat alone at her husband's funeral whilst he was having parties and allowing the actions of others that he knew full well were morally indefensible is something he won't be forgiven for.." Quite I think that slap in the face, to us, to the monarchy, is indefensible. As is leading countries into the long wars in the Middle East and lying or misleading the public about what was there. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? If he'd been offered a nine day suspension before the start of the hearing I think he would have accepted it, after much melodramatic bluster if course. But the votes against the Windsor Protocol being so low may mean that he's less bothered about being in the House now." Good point..
The landscape has certainly changed in the last 16 months.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Interesting snippet. Apparently Sunak released his tax returns today after promising for months he'd publish them. What a coincidence details of his taxes were released at exactly the same time Johnson is once again a turd v visibly smeared across the papers." Yeah. Very convenient for him | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"...So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs" • Ooooft! I love it when Polly talks dirty, the veritable filth-monster! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules " There have been a lot of bizarre claims on here over the years. This is right up there. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Will Johnson get any meaningful punishment? Has the verdict been delivered yet?" No…. The committee will now write a report with a suggestion of a punishment (if any) which will then be voted on by the entire House of Commons… If the suggested punishment is longer than a 10 day suspension…. That would then trigger the recall of an mp procedure | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules There have been a lot of bizarre claims on here over the years. This is right up there." Yeah, it's up there with "colds aren't caused by viruses, they're caused by stress" or "police can't enforce the law if I break it in my house" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude." What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. " Because it's Boris Johnson, or because you have such low standards for a prime minister? I expect better, personally. I obeyed the law. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. " No they wouldn't, I don't know anyone in my extended family or friends or ex colleagues who was given a fixed penalty for breaking the law at that time.. Because they didn't.. Nor would Boris and Sunak have if they had applied the same standards the rules they had set in law for everyone.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. Because it's Boris Johnson, or because you have such low standards for a prime minister? I expect better, personally. I obeyed the law. " Because its a tight rope. It would be pretty easy for you considering you don't go out.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. Because it's Boris Johnson, or because you have such low standards for a prime minister? I expect better, personally. I obeyed the law. Because its a tight rope. It would be pretty easy for you considering you don't go out. "I go out. I just don't like shitty shops. Hope this helps. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. No they wouldn't, I don't know anyone in my extended family or friends or ex colleagues who was given a fixed penalty for breaking the law at that time.. Because they didn't.. Nor would Boris and Sunak have if they had applied the same standards the rules they had set in law for everyone.." This idea it's hard for people to obey the law, particularly politicians, is absurd. If it's so hard to obey the law, maybe we should recognise that and stop punishing people for breaking it And by people I mean poor people, not just poow widdle Bowis | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. Because it's Boris Johnson, or because you have such low standards for a prime minister? I expect better, personally. I obeyed the law. Because its a tight rope. It would be pretty easy for you considering you don't go out.
I go out. I just don't like shitty shops. Hope this helps."No that doesn't help at all. Good night K | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nobody could be prime minister during covid, without breaking rules So what part did he have to do? Have parties? Lots of parties? That sounds vitally important during a crisis. Party hard dude. What part did he have to do ? I dont know what you mean. No he didn't have to have parties and even if he didn't they could still find another rule he broke. Because it's Boris Johnson, or because you have such low standards for a prime minister? I expect better, personally. I obeyed the law. Because its a tight rope. It would be pretty easy for you considering you don't go out. "If it was a bad law that was so exceptionally hard to follow, then maybe Johnson should not have set it. However one should expect that even if absolutely nobody else properly understands these laws, the people that actually enact them should do. After all, we do believe that our members of parliament very carefully examine every single page and individual clause of the legislation that they vote upon? They are highly paid professional people as I understand it, and the PM is only receiving his salary of £165,000 because of his willingness and ability to do better than any other person in government. He takes the pay because "the buck stops here". It is the very description of his task that he must understand what is going on, make hard decisions, and take the responsibility for those decisions. If, as Johnson appears to be saying, the law he made was utterly impossible to obey, then perhaps the government should publicly apologise to all those who fell foul of it. The law should be retrospectively struck down, and all those convicted through it should be given no-fault pardons and suitable recompense for the damage they suffered. All those responsible for enacting that law should be dismissed for inability to perform in their jobs. Or Johnson should grow some balls and for once in his life take responsibility for his actions and suffer the consequences. He either failed to understand very simple rules that he himself had signed off, rules that could be understood by a ten year old; or he understood the rules and deliberately disregarded them, then lied about it multiple times. From his own statement Johnson is either (a) of sub-normal intelligence, thus should never have been allowed into any position of responsibility and must be immediately dismissed as being incapable of performing the duties of a member of parliament; or (b) capable of understanding the law but guilty of deliberately and flagrantly breaking the law, and must be immediately dismissed as being of unsuitable character to perform the duties of a member of parliament. Either way he should go, and all those involved in enabling his actions should similarly go. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about.
So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message."Ah, the number of times I have heard someone be rude, obnoxious or aggressive only to be told that they should be forgiven, ignored or celebrated as they are so passionate..... Get of jail card 101 Ironic given the thread title and the amount of righteousness floating about | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about.
So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message.
Ah, the number of times I have heard someone be rude, obnoxious or aggressive only to be told that they should be forgiven, ignored or celebrated as they are so passionate..... Get of jail card 101
Ironic given the thread title and the amount of righteousness floating about "It's not righteousness. It's anger & disgust. Many of us lost loved ones & were unable to see them before they died. Many of us were unable to even go to their funerals. And then we learned Johnson was merrily breaking the rules he'd set & told us all to follow. While presiding over party central at downing st. And ever since the story broke he's adopted a shifting series of lies to cover his own ass. Fuck Boris Johnson. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about.
So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message.
Ah, the number of times I have heard someone be rude, obnoxious or aggressive only to be told that they should be forgiven, ignored or celebrated as they are so passionate..... Get of jail card 101
Ironic given the thread title and the amount of righteousness floating about
It's not righteousness. It's anger & disgust.
Many of us lost loved ones & were unable to see them before they died. Many of us were unable to even go to their funerals. And then we learned Johnson was merrily breaking the rules he'd set & told us all to follow. While presiding over party central at downing st. And ever since the story broke he's adopted a shifting series of lies to cover his own ass.
Fuck Boris Johnson.
"I think you have missed the point by a country mile
I was referring to excusing peoples behaviour by calling them passionate, anything to say on that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about.
So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message.
Ah, the number of times I have heard someone be rude, obnoxious or aggressive only to be told that they should be forgiven, ignored or celebrated as they are so passionate..... Get of jail card 101
Ironic given the thread title and the amount of righteousness floating about
It's not righteousness. It's anger & disgust.
Many of us lost loved ones & were unable to see them before they died. Many of us were unable to even go to their funerals. And then we learned Johnson was merrily breaking the rules he'd set & told us all to follow. While presiding over party central at downing st. And ever since the story broke he's adopted a shifting series of lies to cover his own ass.
Fuck Boris Johnson.
I think you have missed the point by a country mile
I was referring to excusing peoples behaviour by calling them passionate, anything to say on that?"Fair enough. I didn't realise that's what you meant. I was addressing Johnson's unforgivable behaviour. Insulting other users on here isn't on, but I see no issue with swear words in general. As long as they're not abuse aimed at another forum user, they're just language. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about.
So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message.
Ah, the number of times I have heard someone be rude, obnoxious or aggressive only to be told that they should be forgiven, ignored or celebrated as they are so passionate..... Get of jail card 101
Ironic given the thread title and the amount of righteousness floating about "Well said, so I got mugged in london years ago by a diverse bloke 6ft-er, very passionate about what he was doing lol Then, do you wanna meet him and forgive him as first crime, really sorry blah blah blah. Yeah right | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about.
So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message.
Ah, the number of times I have heard someone be rude, obnoxious or aggressive only to be told that they should be forgiven, ignored or celebrated as they are so passionate..... Get of jail card 101
Ironic given the thread title and the amount of righteousness floating about
It's not righteousness. It's anger & disgust.
Many of us lost loved ones & were unable to see them before they died. Many of us were unable to even go to their funerals. And then we learned Johnson was merrily breaking the rules he'd set & told us all to follow. While presiding over party central at downing st. And ever since the story broke he's adopted a shifting series of lies to cover his own ass.
Fuck Boris Johnson.
"Rather not lol But get your point | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" No 10 is a cramped mid terrace where Boris was working and living. 3,800 square feet and 100 rooms isn't my idea of a cramped mid terrace ! Not my words! In Sue Gray’s preliminary findings in January 2022, it was found that groups of government officials worked “under difficult conditions in buildings that could not be easily adapted as COVID secure workplaces.” Around 375 people, including civil servants and special advisers, work in buildings across 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street, in “cramped” facilities that have not been significantly updated since the 80s. Apparently, it's like navigating a “rabbit warren” See… this is all platitudes… I know with this answer that you didn’t watch a second of today’s hearing at all…… ask me how I know!
I didn't watch it, but I also don't give a shit if the terrace is the size of a literal shoebox or the entire of England. Rules are rules.
What's with the constant swearing? It makes you're point emotional, getting emotional is never good for debate
I'll give your point the consideration it deserves. Ta.
You're very aggressive aren't you
Do you have anything of substance to add, or are you just going after my style, on a forum where one of the rules is not to go after the way in which commentators write (particularly spelling and grammar)?
What substance would you like? I haven't watched it.
I don't remember 'going after' your spelling or grammar, I mentioned your overall 'tone' devalues the debate.
You don't have to change of course but you really don't need to be so aggressive.
Only in your opinion given your the only one that sought to raise it..
Do you believe that aggression in debate is a good thing?
Her points would be well made but I get lost in the aggression.
I don't see the aggression your referring to but as I said that's your opinion..
You don't see think swearing is an aggressive form of language?
Swearing can be an emphatic form of language. But I have lived in communities where it is just the standard form of English. In any case everyone on this site knows the grown up words. So really, the fact that a post may be phrased with a few ancient anglo-saxon words should take away nothing from the information that is presented. At most it should indicate that the subject is something that the poster has some level of passion about.
So shit, fuck, cunt and donkeyballs - let's read the message, not the individual words of the message.
Ah, the number of times I have heard someone be rude, obnoxious or aggressive only to be told that they should be forgiven, ignored or celebrated as they are so passionate..... Get of jail card 101
Ironic given the thread title and the amount of righteousness floating about
It's not righteousness. It's anger & disgust.
Many of us lost loved ones & were unable to see them before they died. Many of us were unable to even go to their funerals. And then we learned Johnson was merrily breaking the rules he'd set & told us all to follow. While presiding over party central at downing st. And ever since the story broke he's adopted a shifting series of lies to cover his own ass.
Fuck Boris Johnson.
I think you have missed the point by a country mile
I was referring to excusing peoples behaviour by calling them passionate, anything to say on that?
Fair enough. I didn't realise that's what you meant. I was addressing Johnson's unforgivable behaviour.
Insulting other users on here isn't on, but I see no issue with swear words in general. As long as they're not abuse aimed at another forum user, they're just language.
"
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job). "Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults. My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job).
Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults.
My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though."The fuck we do! But Feisty you ended up posting multiple posts on the point of another poster’s swearing just taking the thread waaaay off topic. I see these totally tangential posts all the time (not you) and it just feels like deliberate thread hijacking and derailing. It bogs down discussion and along with quote+reply ends up making threads unreadable (and again in some cases I believe that may be the point of doing it). Just my opinion obviously | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job).
Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults.
My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though.
The fuck we do! But Feisty you ended up posting multiple posts on the point of another poster’s swearing just taking the thread waaaay off topic. I see these totally tangential posts all the time (not you) and it just feels like deliberate thread hijacking and derailing. It bogs down discussion and along with quote+reply ends up making threads unreadable (and again in some cases I believe that may be the point of doing it).
Just my opinion obviously "You're right, I did. It did deflect from the thread. So does Matt Hancock and Rishi Sunak | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job).
Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults.
My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though.
The fuck we do! But Feisty you ended up posting multiple posts on the point of another poster’s swearing just taking the thread waaaay off topic. I see these totally tangential posts all the time (not you) and it just feels like deliberate thread hijacking and derailing. It bogs down discussion and along with quote+reply ends up making threads unreadable (and again in some cases I believe that may be the point of doing it).
Just my opinion obviously
You're right, I did. It did deflect from the thread.
So does Matt Hancock and Rishi Sunak "Not really though. They are contextually in the same space because they were ministers working under Johnson. There are definite connections when talking about the behaviour of our elected representatives and what is deemed acceptable. The style of someone’s posts is clearly a different topic  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job).
Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults.
My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though.
The fuck we do! But Feisty you ended up posting multiple posts on the point of another poster’s swearing just taking the thread waaaay off topic. I see these totally tangential posts all the time (not you) and it just feels like deliberate thread hijacking and derailing. It bogs down discussion and along with quote+reply ends up making threads unreadable (and again in some cases I believe that may be the point of doing it).
Just my opinion obviously
You're right, I did. It did deflect from the thread.
So does Matt Hancock and Rishi Sunak
Not really though. They are contextually in the same space because they were ministers working under Johnson. There are definite connections when talking about the behaviour of our elected representatives and what is deemed acceptable. The style of someone’s posts is clearly a different topic "Yes really though. What does Rishi's 'tax return' have to do with Boris Johnson? These threads always go the same way, start with a topic and then... But that Tory, but that Tory, but that Tory. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job).
Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults.
My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though.
The fuck we do! But Feisty you ended up posting multiple posts on the point of another poster’s swearing just taking the thread waaaay off topic. I see these totally tangential posts all the time (not you) and it just feels like deliberate thread hijacking and derailing. It bogs down discussion and along with quote+reply ends up making threads unreadable (and again in some cases I believe that may be the point of doing it).
Just my opinion obviously
You're right, I did. It did deflect from the thread.
So does Matt Hancock and Rishi Sunak
Not really though. They are contextually in the same space because they were ministers working under Johnson. There are definite connections when talking about the behaviour of our elected representatives and what is deemed acceptable. The style of someone’s posts is clearly a different topic
Yes really though. What does Rishi's 'tax return' have to do with Boris Johnson?
These threads always go the same way, start with a topic and then...
But that Tory, but that Tory, but that Tory.
"Confess to not reading EVERY post in this thread (eyes started to glaze over). I believe the only reference to Sunak was the deliberate timing of the publication of his tax return on a day when most eyes are directed at Johnson. A statement of fact. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job).
Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults.
My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though.
The fuck we do! But Feisty you ended up posting multiple posts on the point of another poster’s swearing just taking the thread waaaay off topic. I see these totally tangential posts all the time (not you) and it just feels like deliberate thread hijacking and derailing. It bogs down discussion and along with quote+reply ends up making threads unreadable (and again in some cases I believe that may be the point of doing it).
Just my opinion obviously
You're right, I did. It did deflect from the thread.
So does Matt Hancock and Rishi Sunak
Not really though. They are contextually in the same space because they were ministers working under Johnson. There are definite connections when talking about the behaviour of our elected representatives and what is deemed acceptable. The style of someone’s posts is clearly a different topic
Yes really though. What does Rishi's 'tax return' have to do with Boris Johnson?
These threads always go the same way, start with a topic and then...
But that Tory, but that Tory, but that Tory.
Confess to not reading EVERY post in this thread (eyes started to glaze over). I believe the only reference to Sunak was the deliberate timing of the publication of his tax return on a day when most eyes are directed at Johnson. A statement of fact."That was the only reference I believe. Deliberate timing is opinion not fact. There is fact in that he released it on the same day, but absolutely no proof that he done it deliberately. Anyway, looks like we're taking it waaaay off so should probably stop now | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Also, anyone see that in the leaked Matt Hancock Whatsapp messages there was an exchange between Hancock and Johnson where the Health Sec told the PM a couple who refused to self isolate on return from Dubai were fined £10,000. Johnson’s response “splendid” What a hypocrite!" Par for the course, eh? It's splendid when rules come down hard on others. Did they get £200k to defend themselves in public? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wow the ebb and flow of this thread is a doozy! Boris apologists seemingly unable to accept criticism of their boy because...tribalism. Deflection all over the place. Attempting to once again paint the issue as being “only about cake”. Attempts at whataboutery that are not even relevant. A total diversion on the merits of swearing
I mean FFS (see what I did there? )
Johnson’s actions are indefensible and that was completely evidenced by his patchy inconsistent defence. The chaps sitting behind him looked increasingly uncomfortable as if the writing they knew was on the wall was just lit up with floodlights.
This wasn’t about parties. That was subject to police investigation, FPNs, and Sue Grey report (oh what irony that people try to quote that in defence while mere days ago were questioning its impartiality LOL). This Committee (with a tory majority) was focused on Johnson, a sitting PM, lying to Parliament, repeatedly. Even The Times had a cartoon of a bear shitting in the woods (oops swearing again)
We all know that Johnson presided over the most corrupt, self serving, self enriching, transfer of public assets to private hands in history with the PPE scandal (BTW what IS happening to Baroness Mone?) They stole OUR money!
We all know that Johnson was a declared security risk. MI5 & MI6 warned against him being made Foreign Secretary. And yet he slipped his security detail, flew to Italy and “partied” with “Ex”-KGB (still carrying his documents marked secret). That alone should have been a criminal offence and possible treason!
As Mayor of London he made sure his latest squeeze received over £100k of public money for “consultancy”.
The footballisation of politics seems to men that none of those in Team Boris appear to be able to accept their boy is a rotten egg. Wake up. You lost! Accept it. Move on. Johnson doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself (as his cancer diagnosed wife can probably attest while he was busy shagging Carrie, and getting her a top job).
Swearing is obviously OK, we're all adults.
My point was when used with such aggressiveness, it takes away what may be a good point raised. We don't actually see it too often round here. We do see plenty of swearing though.
The fuck we do! But Feisty you ended up posting multiple posts on the point of another poster’s swearing just taking the thread waaaay off topic. I see these totally tangential posts all the time (not you) and it just feels like deliberate thread hijacking and derailing. It bogs down discussion and along with quote+reply ends up making threads unreadable (and again in some cases I believe that may be the point of doing it).
Just my opinion obviously
You're right, I did. It did deflect from the thread.
So does Matt Hancock and Rishi Sunak
Not really though. They are contextually in the same space because they were ministers working under Johnson. There are definite connections when talking about the behaviour of our elected representatives and what is deemed acceptable. The style of someone’s posts is clearly a different topic
Yes really though. What does Rishi's 'tax return' have to do with Boris Johnson?
These threads always go the same way, start with a topic and then...
But that Tory, but that Tory, but that Tory.
Confess to not reading EVERY post in this thread (eyes started to glaze over). I believe the only reference to Sunak was the deliberate timing of the publication of his tax return on a day when most eyes are directed at Johnson. A statement of fact.
That was the only reference I believe. Deliberate timing is opinion not fact. There is fact in that he released it on the same day, but absolutely no proof that he done it deliberately.
Anyway, looks like we're taking it waaaay off so should probably stop now "I can 100% guarantee you it was deliberate timing. Press Office determine when to release govt related information. The conversation would be “when is it best to bury contentious info”. But yes straying off topic. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. " That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. " And it's not like colleagues departing from Number 10 were at heightened risk of disability or death from a pandemic, through no fault of their own. The goodbyes that senior NHS staff didn't get to do might have been their last chance. His justifications just make everything worse. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it." Obeying the law is lacking empathy? Give me strength. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it." Maybe, I don’t know. But does that mean what Johnson did was ok? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it. Maybe, I don’t know. But does that mean what Johnson did was ok?" This "but they did it" idea of justice is utterly bizarre. Your Honour, yes, I killed that person with malice aforethought. That is indeed murder. But other people have murdered people, and they probably had bad reasons or jobs I think are illegitimate. You should not imprison me. That's just logic. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it. Maybe, I don’t know. But does that mean what Johnson did was ok? This "but they did it" idea of justice is utterly bizarre. Your Honour, yes, I killed that person with malice aforethought. That is indeed murder. But other people have murdered people, and they probably had bad reasons or jobs I think are illegitimate. You should not imprison me. That's just logic." It is a worrying trend. Social media provides a wide platform for odd ideas. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it. Maybe, I don’t know. But does that mean what Johnson did was ok? This "but they did it" idea of justice is utterly bizarre. Your Honour, yes, I killed that person with malice aforethought. That is indeed murder. But other people have murdered people, and they probably had bad reasons or jobs I think are illegitimate. You should not imprison me. That's just logic. It is a worrying trend. Social media provides a wide platform for odd ideas." Maybe I'm old fashioned (how did that happen) but I think that people should obey the law (generally, some exceptions in extreme circumstances. I know some people will argue that lockdowns are tyranny therefore, but... whatever). If people do not obey the law, then that should be dealt with according to the standards society has set. We should also look into the individual circumstances of the offence, but one of those is not "other people do bad things too". That's why we have a criminal justice system, not just a "persecute John Smith department". | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it. Maybe, I don’t know. But does that mean what Johnson did was ok? This "but they did it" idea of justice is utterly bizarre. Your Honour, yes, I killed that person with malice aforethought. That is indeed murder. But other people have murdered people, and they probably had bad reasons or jobs I think are illegitimate. You should not imprison me. That's just logic. It is a worrying trend. Social media provides a wide platform for odd ideas. Maybe I'm old fashioned (how did that happen) but I think that people should obey the law (generally, some exceptions in extreme circumstances. I know some people will argue that lockdowns are tyranny therefore, but... whatever). If people do not obey the law, then that should be dealt with according to the standards society has set. We should also look into the individual circumstances of the offence, but one of those is not "other people do bad things too". That's why we have a criminal justice system, not just a "persecute John Smith department"." Stop being so radical swing!
Call me old fashioned too but I expect to hold our elected representatives, who are supposed to govern on our behalf (and not via some God given right) and therefore work for US, to higher standards than joe public.
If you make the rules/laws then you more than anyone else should abide by them! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Saying 'goodbye and thank you' to colleagues was an important and 'morale boosting ' part of his job???? I don't recall any senior ranking NHS bosses doing the same for the nurses and medics that left. That's because senior ranking NHS bosses are self serving wankers and should not be in the jobs that they are. They have zero comprehension of issues front line staff face, nor any empathy. If they do have empathy they certainly don't show it. Maybe, I don’t know. But does that mean what Johnson did was ok? This "but they did it" idea of justice is utterly bizarre. Your Honour, yes, I killed that person with malice aforethought. That is indeed murder. But other people have murdered people, and they probably had bad reasons or jobs I think are illegitimate. You should not imprison me. That's just logic. It is a worrying trend. Social media provides a wide platform for odd ideas. Maybe I'm old fashioned (how did that happen) but I think that people should obey the law (generally, some exceptions in extreme circumstances. I know some people will argue that lockdowns are tyranny therefore, but... whatever). If people do not obey the law, then that should be dealt with according to the standards society has set. We should also look into the individual circumstances of the offence, but one of those is not "other people do bad things too". That's why we have a criminal justice system, not just a "persecute John Smith department". Stop being so radical swing!
Call me old fashioned too but I expect to hold our elected representatives, who are supposed to govern on our behalf (and not via some God given right) and therefore work for US, to higher standards than joe public.
If you make the rules/laws then you more than anyone else should abide by them!"Oh if you think this is radical
Holding them to the same standards might be a start. I think they think they should be held to the same standards as *their peers* - which, OK, the rich, powerful and connected tend to get away with some shit. That's not OK and that should stop.
I think they should be held to the same standards as the poorest, most vulnerable, most socially isolated person who has been accused of what they're doing. (Will they think that's an appalling, unacceptable way to be treated? Probably. Which is why we should ensure robust standards for everyone. Gosh) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
sorry for swear word | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How's about we stop demonising the bloke. He smashed Corbyn, win red seats and has been great over vaccine and Ukrainian. A man for the people not robot like puppet Starmer. Me I am still fan, not like before but I go off em all in the end lol. It's Labour next time so we see what they can do. Hoping for better times higher interest rate today is crap sorry for swear word "First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. He did the best he could. Poow widdle Bowis | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How's about we stop demonising the bloke. He smashed Corbyn, win red seats and has been great over vaccine and Ukrainian. A man for the people not robot like puppet Starmer. Me I am still fan, not like before but I go off em all in the end lol. It's Labour next time so we see what they can do. Hoping for better times higher interest rate today is crap sorry for swear word
First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office.
He did the best he could. Poow widdle Bowis"Lots of crime in office for Labour! Cirbyn, Kinnock son and OK Starmer got off with beer and curry but not in everyone opinion. And the mp on train with covid. Like other people say, liars the lot of em!!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How's about we stop demonising the bloke. He smashed Corbyn, win red seats and has been great over vaccine and Ukrainian. A man for the people not robot like puppet Starmer. Me I am still fan, not like before but I go off em all in the end lol. It's Labour next time so we see what they can do. Hoping for better times higher interest rate today is crap sorry for swear word
First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office.
He did the best he could. Poow widdle Bowis
Lots of crime in office for Labour! Cirbyn, Kinnock son and OK Starmer got off with beer and curry but not in everyone opinion. And the mp on train with covid. Like other people say, liars the lot of em!!! "Ok. Apply consequences to all of them, if that's true. If they're all liars, if they all break the law, then throw the book at them. Every single one. Doesn't make what Boris did any better. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office." It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How's about we stop demonising the bloke. He smashed Corbyn, win red seats and has been great over vaccine and Ukrainian. A man for the people not robot like puppet Starmer. Me I am still fan, not like before but I go off em all in the end lol. It's Labour next time so we see what they can do. Hoping for better times higher interest rate today is crap sorry for swear word "Johnson doesn’t need anyone to demonise him, he does a good job all on his own. He us a self serving, corrupt, narcissistic, arrogant, lazy, traitorous, thieving snake. He should be behind bars (not for partygate, for enabling grand theft) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law." Trustworthy contemporaneous media would be inclined to disagree. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-rishi-sunak-partygate-fines-b2056369.html Regardless, it's a super good look, isn't it? I make the law, you have to follow it even if you can't see your dying loved ones, but fuck it, I'm going to party, because leadership. Law is very important. Yes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How's about we stop demonising the bloke. He smashed Corbyn, win red seats and has been great over vaccine and Ukrainian. A man for the people not robot like puppet Starmer. Me I am still fan, not like before but I go off em all in the end lol. It's Labour next time so we see what they can do. Hoping for better times higher interest rate today is crap sorry for swear word
Johnson doesn’t need anyone to demonise him, he does a good job all on his own.
He us a self serving, corrupt, narcissistic, arrogant, lazy, traitorous, thieving snake. He should be behind bars (not for partygate, for enabling grand theft)"Yeah, this is just visceral for a lot of people. There is so much else that's wrong with how he led the country. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How's about we stop demonising the bloke. He smashed Corbyn, win red seats and has been great over vaccine and Ukrainian. A man for the people not robot like puppet Starmer. Me I am still fan, not like before but I go off em all in the end lol. It's Labour next time so we see what they can do. Hoping for better times higher interest rate today is crap sorry for swear word
Johnson doesn’t need anyone to demonise him, he does a good job all on his own.
He us a self serving, corrupt, narcissistic, arrogant, lazy, traitorous, thieving snake. He should be behind bars (not for partygate, for enabling grand theft)"Don't hold back! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law." Which in relation to yesterday's proceedings is completely irrelevant. The current issue is did he mislead the HoC, either deliberately or by not clarifying a previous statement at the earliest opportunity. It suits Johnson's supporters to make this about the utility of Covid rules and guidance or not but it's a smokescreen. It could be about sausages for all I care. A member of the Executive has to be held to account if they mislead the Legislature as in doing so they are misleading us. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law." Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Which in relation to yesterday's proceedings is completely irrelevant. The current issue is did he mislead the HoC, either deliberately or by not clarifying a previous statement at the earliest opportunity. It suits Johnson's supporters to make this about the utility of Covid rules and guidance or not but it's a smokescreen. It could be about sausages for all I care. A member of the Executive has to be held to account if they mislead the Legislature as in doing so they are misleading us." He did mislead the House. They're trying to work out if it was reckless or intentional. The only evidence supporting claims he intentionally misled parliament came from his former top adviser, Cummings, who Boris said could not be “treated as a credible witness” given the “animus” he bears towards him. And that's a very fair point. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Which in relation to yesterday's proceedings is completely irrelevant. The current issue is did he mislead the HoC, either deliberately or by not clarifying a previous statement at the earliest opportunity. It suits Johnson's supporters to make this about the utility of Covid rules and guidance or not but it's a smokescreen. It could be about sausages for all I care. A member of the Executive has to be held to account if they mislead the Legislature as in doing so they are misleading us." Quite. The frippery surrounding this undermines the importance of our legislature and having people operating openly and honestly. We should owe our institutions greater deference than to let people behave as Johnson did. (And if others behaved similarly, they should face consequences in equal proportion. I give zero fucks who it is - I care about the integrity of the institution) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. " You didn't watch it did you Cheshire
Imagine if you had..
Stay on topic eh.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Which in relation to yesterday's proceedings is completely irrelevant. The current issue is did he mislead the HoC, either deliberately or by not clarifying a previous statement at the earliest opportunity. It suits Johnson's supporters to make this about the utility of Covid rules and guidance or not but it's a smokescreen. It could be about sausages for all I care. A member of the Executive has to be held to account if they mislead the Legislature as in doing so they are misleading us. He did mislead the House. They're trying to work out if it was reckless or intentional. The only evidence supporting claims he intentionally misled parliament came from his former top adviser, Cummings, who Boris said could not be “treated as a credible witness” given the “animus” he bears towards him. And that's a very fair point. " So this is about whether he's a liar or he's incompetent. Fabulous. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. You didn't watch it did you Cheshire
Imagine if you had..
Stay on topic eh.."But mummy, Harriet stole cookies, so I get to steal cookies too! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. You didn't watch it did you Cheshire
Imagine if you had..
Stay on topic eh.."I have and she used thar exact analogy | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. " Was Harman Chairing a committee to (a) consider law breaking or to (b) consider misleading the House? I know you know the answer, but humour us all, tell us if it was a or b. A one letter reply would be lovely. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Which in relation to yesterday's proceedings is completely irrelevant. The current issue is did he mislead the HoC, either deliberately or by not clarifying a previous statement at the earliest opportunity. It suits Johnson's supporters to make this about the utility of Covid rules and guidance or not but it's a smokescreen. It could be about sausages for all I care. A member of the Executive has to be held to account if they mislead the Legislature as in doing so they are misleading us. He did mislead the House. They're trying to work out if it was reckless or intentional. The only evidence supporting claims he intentionally misled parliament came from his former top adviser, Cummings, who Boris said could not be “treated as a credible witness” given the “animus” he bears towards him. And that's a very fair point. So this is about whether he's a liar or he's incompetent. Fabulous." The great deflection.. He's not a liar, he's someone so stupid he didn't think the rules for all meant himself too .. Or arrogant.. Sheesh so many character traits except honesty, decency and integrity.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. You didn't watch it did you Cheshire
Imagine if you had..
Stay on topic eh..
But mummy, Harriet stole cookies, so I get to steal cookies too!"Straws and clutching.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Which in relation to yesterday's proceedings is completely irrelevant. The current issue is did he mislead the HoC, either deliberately or by not clarifying a previous statement at the earliest opportunity. It suits Johnson's supporters to make this about the utility of Covid rules and guidance or not but it's a smokescreen. It could be about sausages for all I care. A member of the Executive has to be held to account if they mislead the Legislature as in doing so they are misleading us. He did mislead the House. They're trying to work out if it was reckless or intentional. The only evidence supporting claims he intentionally misled parliament came from his former top adviser, Cummings, who Boris said could not be “treated as a credible witness” given the “animus” he bears towards him. And that's a very fair point. So this is about whether he's a liar or he's incompetent. Fabulous. The great deflection.. He's not a liar, he's someone so stupid he didn't think the rules for all meant himself too .. Or arrogant.. Sheesh so many character traits except honesty, decency and integrity.. " The UK deserves much better than someone who is either a liar or an incompetent. We should believe in ourselves that such a thing is possible, and stop trying to defend the dregs. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. You didn't watch it did you Cheshire
Imagine if you had..
Stay on topic eh..
But mummy, Harriet stole cookies, so I get to steal cookies too!"Yes, whataboutery! And what's wrong with that? It forms one of the pillars of equality. Did you support the equalisation of the gay age of consent from 18 to 16 in the late 90s.? One of the arguments was, what about the heterosexual age of consent being 16? So when people say what about Corbyn (table of 6 or more) and Ferrier (covid + on the train) they're simply interested in equality before the law. Boris appears to be being treated overly harshly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. Was Harman Chairing a committee to (a) consider law breaking or to (b) consider misleading the House? I know you know the answer, but humour us all, tell us if it was a or b. A one letter reply would be lovely." Cheshire's answer will be flim flam of the highest order.. Wif waf so full of holes even Boris might doff his cap.. He'll probably ramble on about the Harold Wilson era in another disparate attempt to ignore the reality.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. Was Harman Chairing a committee to (a) consider law breaking or to (b) consider misleading the House? I know you know the answer, but humour us all, tell us if it was a or b. A one letter reply would be lovely." Or c) She's already considered it and condemned him before the Inquiry got underway | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. You didn't watch it did you Cheshire
Imagine if you had..
Stay on topic eh..
But mummy, Harriet stole cookies, so I get to steal cookies too!
Yes, whataboutery! And what's wrong with that? It forms one of the pillars of equality. Did you support the equalisation of the gay age of consent from 18 to 16 in the late 90s.? One of the arguments was, what about the heterosexual age of consent being 16?
So when people say what about Corbyn (table of 6 or more) and Ferrier (covid + on the train) they're simply interested in equality before the law. Boris appears to be being treated overly harshly. "OK. Prosecute them. Haul them before similar processes. Or get up in courts all across the land and argue that all the murderers in prison murdered people, therefore this accused murderer should stop being persecuted. Equality doesn't mean letting everyone off. It especially doesn't mean letting off someone with the resources to deflect while prosecuting those who do not (the general public) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"First ever Prime Minister found to have committed a crime in office. It wasn't a crime. The law he broke wasn't a criminal law. Harriet Harperson has broken the law 3 tines. The irony! With a straight face, she preached to Boris yesterday that if the speedometer shows 100mph, he shouldn't have needed someone else to tell him he was doing a ton! Says Harriet, whose speedometer showed her touching a ton on the M4 near Hovis's house!! Perhaps she should have had a passenger telling her she was 30mph over the limit on this occasion! Hypocrite! Imagine the carnage if she'd crashed at that irresponsible speed. You didn't watch it did you Cheshire
Imagine if you had..
Stay on topic eh..
But mummy, Harriet stole cookies, so I get to steal cookies too!
Yes, whataboutery! And what's wrong with that? It forms one of the pillars of equality. Did you support the equalisation of the gay age of consent from 18 to 16 in the late 90s.? One of the arguments was, what about the heterosexual age of consent being 16?
So when people say what about Corbyn (table of 6 or more) and Ferrier (covid + on the train) they're simply interested in equality before the law. Boris appears to be being treated overly harshly. "What the actual fuck are you rambling on about now Cheshire..
Boris is toast mate, his party knows it needs to ditch him for good after it sacked him as PM..
It's not infamy he's a victim of, it's his own ego coming home to roost..
And he'll be off into the sunset with not a care for those of you who can't accept he's gone, he doesn't care and never has.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
