BS: Damian Green

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 10:55 AM

"JUST TELL US WHAT YOU THINK!!!"

This bellowed comment from the guy who has studiously ignored four questions which I've asked him directly not once, but twice! In the extremely unlikely event that he really Di miss them the previous two times, here they are again...

"He denies it"

Well he would, wouldn't he?

"There is no evidence for it"

It will be a networked computer. There will be an audit-trail which will carry evidence of the person whose account was logged-in at the time the material was downloaded. Are you claiming that this audit-trail doesn't exist? Where is your evidence?

"Except the claims....of ex-cops with a grudge"

Where is your evidence of this simply being a matter of them holding a 'grudge'? Do you know the gentlemen personally? Have you discussed their views with them?

"It was ten years ago"

Are you claiming that there is a Time-Limitation on government ministers' Gross Misconduct? Evidence that this is the case?

Come on Professor, we're all waiting with bated breath for your pearls of wisdom...

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 10:24 AM

The people defending him here are arch-Tories to a man, Jim. Remember Tories? Self-interest first, the rest can go to hell as long as I'm all right Jack. As soon as a Tory is attacked for anything at all, his or her army of lackeys crawl out to attack that self-same press that has always been SO good to them, they go for the jugular of the BBC which is so establishment (and fairly Tory - think Nick Robinson, Andrew Neil, Jeremy Paxman, Kamil Ahmed, tbe Dimbleby clan...),and God help you if you are a mere individual - why, Green's lackey fell on his sword for passing leaks to Damian who escaped unscathed (until now), and now those two coppers are likely toast as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 10:05 AM

"there are only accusations about pornography."
Those accusations should have been investigated when made against somebody holding political office - they were covered up
"And that the accusations have been denied"
Of course they have - when have politicians ever owned up to anything?
"might hold a grudge against the person they accuse."
So an accuser who might.... is guilty without being tried but if a politician denies something is above investiation
Sound like the Brave New World you people have sought and won
"The rule of (UK) law provides that a person is innocent until proven guilty."
Isn't it what this is all about?
The accusations were never followed up
"So as yet we are not discussing "Parliamentary Pornos".
"Yes we are I've put up the figures for how many politicians have been accessing porn - they are obviously as above investigation as is Fireproof Damian
ONE MORE TIME
Why do you people scurry to defend these people - beyond me!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 09:53 AM

"I have said to support your vicious insinuation?"
Try
"How many reading this have watched no porn on their own computers?"
"How about you find anything I have said to support your vicious insinuation?"
If it#s such a vicious insinuation to suggest you watch porn, why are you demanding that the policeman who exposed the practice by politicians be punished - or is it not "vicious" if politicians indulge in it?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 09:35 AM

No, Keith. I am not jumping through your hoops. I set you the task of providing examples of my views about Green and you have not provided them.

To paraphrase your own words

Heheh, there is absolutely no evidence.
That is why you had to make up lies and shit about me Keith.

Or maybe I should quote (parrotphrase?) your pet parrot, Iains

How about you find anything I have said to support your vicious insinuation?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 09:24 AM

"You certainly are a valiant defender of porn, Iains . Fits perfectly with your previously-insinuated tastes."

I know you inhabit a sandal wearing fantasy world shaw and make shit up as you go along.

How about you find anything I have said to support your vicious insinuation? Mudrat is far too kind a description for a piece of filth like you.

Perhaps your fixation on the subject is because you are a closet pornographer.
Methinks he doth protest too much

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 09:16 AM

From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:58 AM
"What would you like my opinion on?"
Nothing Keith - just making an observation
Just put an example of your not responding on the thread where you are defending Parliamentary Pornos

And where it has been pointed out, on numerous occasions that, as yet, there are only accusations about pornography. And that the accusations have been denied. And the allegations were brought by those who might hold a grudge against the person they accuse.

The rule of (UK) law provides that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

So as yet we have no real evidence which is capable of corroboration.
So as yet we are not discussing "Parliamentary Pornos".

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:58 AM

"What would you like my opinion on?"
Nothing Keith - just making an observation
Just put an example of your not responding on the thread where you are defending Parliamentary Pornos
You never respond to awkward questions and of late you have been whining that there is too much for you to respond to
Out of the mouths....
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:50 AM

Jim,
You never respond to what people say if it doesn't suit you

Not true. What would you like my opinion on?
Just ask.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:49 AM

Heheh, there is absolutely no evidence against him.
That is why you had to make up lies and shit about him Steve.
Remember? You said police raids had found leaked government documents.
Lie.
You said he had been shown as dishonest. Another lie.

You have previously been dismissive of eye witness testimony as evidence, but that is all that exists.
And, those eye witnesses bore a grudge.
And, they waited ten years to come forward.
And, their testimony does not even incriminate him or even identify him as the person responsible.
And, a reliable witness, the Deputy Speaker, testified that her computer was similarly effected at the same time.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:48 AM

"JUST TELL US WHAT YOU THINK!!!"
You never respond to what people say if it doesn't suit you - why change the habit of a lifetime?
Anybody who had the amount of porn he had on a parliamentary computer should be sacked if he doesn't have the decency to resign
The police have covered up this behaviour for a decade - maybe a few heads should roll there as well
We are talking about the elected guardians of our morals and the forces of law and order here - not exactly your average wankers (wankers all maybe - but far from average)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:35 AM

"...bearing in mind he is clear he never put it there or watched it..."

Heheh. In the words of Mandy Rice-Davies...

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:29 AM

Dave,
You stated quite categorically that "Every post of yours puts you firmly on the anti-Green side,

Yes I did. Do you really think that he should stay?

If I got it wrong, say so.
JUST TELL US WHAT YOU THINK!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 08:07 AM

"Make child molesters Great Again"
Donald Trump

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 07:01 AM

Ughhh! Donuel - That is disgusting!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 06:41 AM

BEST PORN SITE IN THE WORLD

nOTHING IS HIDDEN HERE

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 06:18 AM

"Do you not get bored with the constant copy and paste?"
Idiots might regard it copy and paste - the more thoughtful know it to be information
Hardly surprising that it "bores" you
"We are!"
Attempting to speak for others without first seeking their agreement is a sign of megalomania
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:58 AM

That is not the point in Question, Keith. You stated quite categorically that "Every post of yours puts you firmly on the anti-Green side, as I said" but you have, as yet, not come up with anything to substantiate that. Can you do so?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:53 AM

Dave,
Every post of yours puts you firmly on the anti-Green side, as I said.
You have still provided no examples of this Keith. What you do is go on with

Just settle it then Dave.
Do you think he should go because of an unsubstantiated claim that legal porn was on his computer, bearing in mind he is clear he never put it there or watched it, and that the Deputy Speaker says it happened to her computer too because of poor security back then?
Or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:38 AM

List "we," Iains.

Let me get it going for you:

Iains

Er...

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:37 AM

Do you not get bored with the constant copy and paste? We are!

Howsabout an original thought? Just to surprise us.

It is an original, Iains. I introduced the phrase here to explain why some people cannot possibly communicate on a reasonable level. It is as valid today as it always has been.

Your parroting of anything that Teribus or Keith say is however blatant plagiarism and sycophantic in the extreme. It does make sense of why Keith does not challenge you on your constant sniping though. Birds of a feather I suppose.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:22 AM

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

Do you not get bored with the constant copy and paste? We are!

Howsabout an original thought? Just to surprise us.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:19 AM

You certainly are a valiant defender of porn, Iains . Fits perfectly with your previously-insinuated tastes...

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:18 AM

Exactly, Dave. I could have added that it also feeds into the human propensity for adopting double standards, arising directly from that denial. I can't forget a little incident years ago in our session when, after an hour's worth of the usual laddish ogling of the nice young lady customers coming in, one of the chaps (who had been entirely complicit in the aforementioned grubby proceedings) suddenly whipped round and said that if anyone looked at HIS daughter in that way he'd punch his bloody lights out...

Hey Keith! Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do
You're half crazy...

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:08 AM

I have seen pornography descibed in many ways, but a sickness.
Make it all up as we go along do we shaw? You perhaps have some medical qualifications to substantiate this claim, that you have yet to boast about?

“Porn addiction” is not an official diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-V (DSM-5).

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 05:02 AM

HAL makes more sense, Steve!

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

Can bee seen in a whole new light :-)

I agree about the morality of porn. I viewed some a few times and, to be honest, enjoyed it on a purely carnal level but whenever I give it some thought I know your points are absolutely valid. What crosses my mind about people using it is whether they realise that the actors are all someones daughters (and sons!) and what they would think if it was their kith and kin.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 04:53 AM

You're beginning to sound like Hal the computer, Keith.

Personal morality? It goes beyond personal when it involves the exploitation, or the objectification, or the physical abuse of women and children. Men too. The trouble with most in-denial porn users is that they see it as victimless. Well it isn't. The objectification of women feeds into the ruthless fashion industry and makes millions of women and girls miserable about and their body image, so easy to exploit, and can lead to them to throw themselves away online to predatory strangers and to suffer from eating disorders in desperate attempts to make themselves more sexually attractive. I'm not quite sure about the harmless porn that pfr seeks to justify, but all of the rest is about someone ruthlessly exploiting someone else, even if those victims see themselves as non-victims. They are not, and they are helping to make victims of women in general. Pornography is a sickness.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 04:48 AM

Every post of yours puts you firmly on the anti-Green side, as I said.

You have still provided no examples of this Keith. What you do is go on with

If you have no opinion about it, why post to this thread?

Well, as I said earlier, my reasons for posting to the thread are none of your business. If the moderation team chose to intervene I am more than happy to accept their rulings. You, fortunately, are not one of them.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 04:40 AM

"I have put up enough statistics to show exactly how many politicians indulge in on-line porn - only a "smear" is you regard facts as such"

Those statistics apply to a total staff of 5000+. You have no idea who those individuals may be. Therefore you are smearing one individual without a grain of evidence. So in this particular case your post, like many others you produce, is worthless.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 04:22 AM

Have I got that wrong Dave, or will you tell us if you think he should go or stay over this.

If you have no opinion about it, why post to this thread?
Just to snipe at one side and stir up shit without committing yourself?
You do that quite a lot Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 04:18 AM

Dave,

Every post you have made here has been against Green.
I don't recall saying anything either for or against his use of porn. If I did, can you link me to it or is it just more made up shit? :-)
Still not had a response to this. No surprise really.

Dave, I have not commented on the use of porn which I see as a matter of personal morality.
The main discussion point here is should Green resign/be sacked.
Every post of yours puts you firmly on the anti-Green side, as I said.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 03:45 AM

"but your severely anti opinion of porn is stuck in a bygone age of over simplistic analysis."
There is a difference between the salacious and clandestine marketing of sex and a healthy and free celebration of sexuality - one is just business, the other is being human - I won't insult your intelligence by saying which is which.
Pornogrophy presents women as a group as 'available' and is not 'modern' in any way, but a return to the attitude the a woman's place is in bed and in the kitchen.
I have always been a keen fan of sex - that does not mean I tink it should be confined to marriage or childbearing.
Like all natural acts, once it becomes a produce, which is what pornogrophy make it, it becomes oppresive, even dangerous to those in less of a position to defend themselves.
I am a keen supporter of the philosophies of feminism and can still remember the contempt and anger when the suggestion that women should be able to buy drink alone and buy their own drinks wherever the wished.
Even today a rape victim is put on trial if she coplains to the authorities by having to defend her own attitude to sex.
I suggest you look at the percentage of convictions in rape trials and then go and look at the possible numbers of rapes that are never reported because of the victims awareness of how she will be treated in our green and pleasant land.
"same as most folk music."
Something else we will never agree on
"That's all you need to keep a smear going."
I have put up enough statistics to show exactly how many politicians indulge in on-line porn - only a "smear" is you regard facts as such
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 03:37 AM

I suppose for someone like Jim a constant smear campaign is all that is required, why worry about a little thing called evidence.
Pathetic!

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Mr Red
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 03:15 AM

if the police acted in character, they would have long-'disappeared' the evidence

And wouldn't parliament?

Give me odds on that one if you can!

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Dec 17 - 02:50 AM

Every post you have made here has been against Green.

I don't recall saying anything either for or against his use of porn. If I did, can you link me to it or is it just more made up shit? :-)

Still not had a response to this. No surprise really.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 09:10 PM

Jim - we are mostly on the same side most of the time,
but your severely anti opinion of porn is stuck in a bygone age of over simplistic analysis.
It's the 21st century now, there are different kinds of porn, different kinds of porn producers and consumers,
and differing feminist perspectives on it...

Most porn is still shite, same as most folk music.
But a minority of porn is positive and has eff all to do with the capitalist commercial porn industry..
..again, similar to the minority interest home made do it yourself folk music we tend to appreciate...

Our more relaxed and sensible European neighbours must look at us Brits in astonishment at the palava we make about porn.
Especially when it is used as a weapon in the downfall of important public dignitaries.

It would be so much healthier if some folks could keep it in perspective, and see things less in high contrast black and white....

Obviously the Gary Glitters are served to rights and get what they deserve for their vile appetites..

and this Green appears to be a slimy liar and wanker, willing to blame and destroy anyone but himself for being caught out..
As usual his tory mates are automatically leaping to his defense and closing ranks to attack the whistleblowing old ex rozzer...

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 08:32 PM

Not quite sure what your point is, Stanron. If Jesus had really existed (doubtful) and had said all those very wise things (probably put forward by a committee, but hey ho, if they're wise they're wise), then Christianity would be very plausible indeed. But the problem with wonderful ideas, such as Christianity, one-nation conservatism and socialism, is that some prat will always come along, pervert it and spoil it all. Tsk.

The main problem with Green is that he is denying, Clinton-like, what seems bleedin' obvious to all of us fools who take any interest in such things: that he seems to kinda likes a bit of wanking-at-work. Not a mortal sin, but a habit that requires careful, er, handling by public servants in the public eye such as his good self. Then there's those rather awkward groping allegations...

I call for the sword of truth to be wielded!

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Stanron
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 08:05 PM

Steve, there was a time when Christianity was plausible. Is it now?

Jim, "If Green is innocent, there are plenty who aren't"

That's all you need to keep a smear going.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 07:35 PM

"There is no evidence."
Probably not - if the police acted in character, they would have long-'disappeared' the evidence
Surely the proof of the pudding is in the actual number of items of evidence indicating that Parliamentary doesn't just happen, but it is fairly common.
If Green is innocent, there are plenty who aren't
"what is it about bad apples "
Isn't that what they said about clerical abuse?
Go count the numbers involved - hardly "a few"
"readers wive's tits and fanny...???"
Oh - that's alright then -as long as its only married women being degraded - 'slice off a cut loaf' so to speak.
The victims of porn are not just those directly and voluntarily involved but women as a whole who are presented as a gender who are 'available'- 'page three style.
When in a hole, stop digging Iains
Perhaps you'd better fall back on personal abuse - it comes more natural to you.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 07:09 PM

I repeat for your benefit, Stanron. This isn't really about just porn. Loads of people use porn (me never included, but hey). Loads of people look at porn, furtively, on their work computer. If I, as a schoolteacher, had been found to be using porn on my school-supplied computer, I would have be been sacked. Simple as that. Now this chap has protested that he neither downloaded nor used the porn on his public-money-supplied computer. The ex-cop who blew the whistle has stated that it is inconceivable that Green didn't know about the porn files (hope you're keeping up...). If that's the case, and, in the absence of contrary evidence I'd say that it was very plausible, then Green has a lot of explaining to do. Why did he not create a big stink about the porn at the time? Wouldn't you have done in the same position? Why is he not threatening to sue the cops? Actually, it's the cops threatening to sue HIM! He is a very savvy, consummate politician. He was devious enough to be in grateful receipt of leaked documents disadvantageous to Labour. No big deal - they're all at it, etc. But he allowed his lackey to fall on his sword over it. He's denied everything. Now he's been accused of inappropriate sexual advances. So what's it all about? It's about the second-in-command of the country having his honesty and integrity severely called into question. People like you and Iains are falling for the routinely trotted-out establishment strategy of using attack as a means of defence. Two old blokes long-retired from the force are hardly going to have sinister, conspiratorial, political motives. Anyone doing what they've done gets immediately shatupon from on high. They're in deep doodah and they knew they would be. What they've done was against the rules and they are risking their pensions, reputations and freedom. Here's the thing. The genie can't be shoved back in the lamp. Your protestations may well have an element of justice-not-served about them, but we are talking here about a man in his Bill Clinton moment. You and your allies spend massive amounts of your energy picking holes in Corbyn's character, trying to depict him as an apologist for antisemitism and terrorism on the most scant of the evidence. All the evidence against your man is, er, uncomfortably building, to say the least. We want honest people running us, not ruthless weasels who squirm away from the truth in order to save their skins, or blokes with one hand on the mouse and the other on their dicks in office time. He has a lot to explain and a lot to prove, and denial simply ain't cutting it for him. That's what this is about.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Mr Red
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 06:58 PM

Quote of the week from a Chief of police:

police should not be interfering with politics

Which I had some sympathy with except that the "interference" comes from ex police officers, then I thought:

Don't we have elections to choose police commissioners?

Politics is interfering with policing. More than as legislators!

It's a jungle out there.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 06:03 PM

How different this all could be if Green had just casually fessed up..

"Oh.. yeah.. that porn... quite good innit.. particularly the red head with the spray can of cream..
well why not relax and have a quick look on me tea breaks...
it's more entertaining than looking over yet another boring cabinet paper"...

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Stanron
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 05:55 PM

There is no evidence. My guess is that no evidence will appear. If evidence did appear it would only prove that the people presenting it have broken the law. By now evidence isn't needed. The whole purpose of the exercise was to attack the Government. This has been successful. Gullible people will accept the smear and the lack of evidence will be forgotten. Result for the left.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 05:22 PM

The fact remains proof is required to determine guilt. So far we have allegations, backed by further allegations. Some in breach of the data protection act, others breaking contracts of enduring confidentiality.
The latter two are self obvious offences and deserve punishment. The original allegation has yet to be proven.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 04:42 PM

Again I have to differ.

Whatever Damien Green, or anyone else, does in the privacy of their own home (providing it is legal) is no concern of mine.

However he was a paid public servant who made use of his state provided computer to access pornography.

Not only is it monumentally stupid to do so, it is a dereliction of duty to us, the public.

He deserves to be dismissed if for no other reason than he has proved himself unfit for the position.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 04:11 PM

Well there we have to totally disagree.
The major issue is that a copper with a dodgy pedigree screwed up and was forced to resign. He held a grudge for 10 years and is making allegations based on material he held illegally. Confidence in the police is already abysmally low. If Quick is not made an example of there will be a further serious loss of confidence in the police. Already other ex policemen are supporting his actions by seemingly backing up his allegations. They should be stripped of their pensions and charged at the very least of breaching the data protection act. I have no doubt other charges could be generated due to the political interference resulting from their actions.
The only satisfactory outcome for this imbroglio is to have the courts decide upon the rights and wrongs of all the issues raised.
   The sooner the better.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 03:48 PM

No Iains .......... the MAJOR issue is that a senior conservative politician used his State provided work computer to access pornography.

I you did that at work or I did that at work we would be dismissed instantly.

No if's, no but's, no maybe's.

That is the MAJOR issue, all you are trying to do is fudge the debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 03:06 PM

BBC Newsnight ran a timely item last night on porn's increasing acceptance in Society..

I've not seen it so can't comment on the side of the fence it leant most towards, but it's on catch up...

Personally, I support 'good' porn - the work of creative artists and decent ordinary folk expressing & celebrating human sexuality.

I condemn most of dehumanising exploitative corporate capitalist porn,
and the vile harmful abusive product of depraved criminals..

The latter probably most appealing to senior tories and other child molesters...

What a lot of fuss if all Green is accused of is readers wive's tits and fanny...???

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Iains
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 02:58 PM

Try understanding my previous post. what is it about bad apples in every barrel you are not capable of understanding. Even for you your post is rather stupid

Subject: RE: BS: Damian Green
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Dec 17 - 02:52 PM

"Home Secretary Jacqui Smith was said to be "mortified" after she was forced to offer a humiliating apology for an expenses claim which included adult films watched by her husband."
Is you point that all politicians are prone to using pornography or0 just that there's no harm in it because they all do it.
What's your point Iains - "he/she does it too sir" seems a little beyong the infantile even for you?
Jim Carroll