BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 07:20 PM

Next stop Poldark
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 06:54 PM

things have gone a bit quiet round here just lately...


so just to spice things up a bit...


Oh Jeremy Corbyn....ooooooh Jeremy...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 05:01 PM

:-D

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 03:27 PM

I can talk about Italian recipes for at least a thousand posts. Or cheese. Any food really. Or drink. Nero d'Avola. Especially if it's Morrisons The Best. For a fiver. Come on, Dave...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 02:55 PM

Depends on the topic Dave. For instance the Brexit discussion can change day by day, although I have to say I've yet to read a postive report.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 12:59 PM

Agreed, Steve. Saw what needs saying. Counter argument once if required then leave it. A concept alien to those who try to wage these wars of attrition.

Just a suggestion to der management. Once a thread gets to 100 posts very little else is likely to be said.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 12:34 PM

Jim - As I said earlier, if mudcatters more sensible than Keith [or bob]
want to start threads in favour of right wing politicians and values,
and do it in a friendly civil manner..

Absolutely no problems...

I'd look forward to enjoying debates with intelligent opponents
who don't kick off from their first post with hostility and belligerence...

As much as I'm a bloke who can also enjoy sweary insulting rough and tumble,
I'd prefer if that is not the accepted default norm in BS...

Let's save the vicious punch ups for rare special occasions...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 12:04 PM

Unless he is prepared to engage in discussion (he never has been so far) leave him to stew - he's trying to get this thread closed
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 12:00 PM

bob - yes.. and up is down, left is right, night is day, hate is love...

in the dank festering alternative reality under-realm where you lurk and plot...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 12:00 PM

Well I suppose we've said most of what's to be said about the tousled moptop eejit for now. Perhaps a new thread when he comes out with more gobshitery. Maybe he'll take a leaf out of that Aussie moron's book and try to ban Muslims. He won't then have to look at postboxes and bank robbers any more. I suppose it's nighty night, dear thread...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 11:54 AM

Do you actually know what neo-fascism is, Boob-ad?

Wikipedia - "Neo-fascism is a post–World War II ideology that includes significant elements of fascism. Neo-fascism usually includes ultranationalism, populism, authoritarianism, nativism and opposition to immigration, as well as opposition to liberal democracy, parliamentarianism, Marxism, Communism and socialism."

Precisely the opposite of the philosophy of those who oppose you, Stanton, Nigel, Iains, Keefy, etc. If anyone is a neo-fascist around here, it's you bunch of fuckin' Muppets.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: bobad
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 11:37 AM

Nigel and Stanron have the right of it, the neo-Fascists have won the Mudcat. Congratulations boys, have fun with your mutual wanking.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 10:25 AM

"Two threads on Corbyn withdrawn from Mudcat and two threads on Boris allowed. It's pretty obvious isn't it?"
I suggest you go count the dozen or so closed thread on criticisms of Israel
They have become bigger no-go areas than those on MacColl
Johnson has been proven guilty of racism and Parliamentary impropriety
Corbyn has been accused (by Friends of Israel) of attending a rally commemorating the victims of a shot-down plane
I wonder if he'd been attacked if he had joined Benjamin Netanyahu in the fairly recent celebration of the Terrorist attack on the King David Hotel where 91 people of various nationalities were killed and 54 injured (Brits, Israelis, hotel staff and guests...)
It seems some terrorist attacks become permissible acts of national liberations when it is convenient for them to be !!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 10:07 AM

Any thread on antsemitism, real or imagined, degenerates into a shit-slinging battle in next to no time. Any thread about Jeremy Corbyn will inevitably sink into antisemitism as it is all the right wing on here and the right wing press can think to say about him. That is the 'pretty obvious' difference between the threads.

I find it quite amazing that a man who has dedicated his life to equality and fairness is targeted by these people in such a vile way while a serial liar and over-privileged Bulligdon boy is lauded misunderstood and harmless.

But this thread is about the blonde bullshitter so we should keep Corbyn off it.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 09:57 AM

You know damn well it's not the threads about Corbyn that are the problem,
but the mudcatter who started them, and his [+ 1 or 3 cronies] obvious intentions.

If a more sensible mudcatter started a Corbyn thread - even an anti Corbyn thread,
from a more objective starting point,
that thread would most likely survive for many days robust debate
without need for drastic mod intervention...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 09:55 AM

No it isn't pretty obvious and you two need to belt up about it. What's pretty obvious is that threads get shut down because of unpleasantness, negativity and, especially, attacks such as yours on moderators, who actually seem to take little interest in the minutiae of UK politics and who are in any case frequently at serious odds with those here you accuse them of siding with. It is well within your gift to restart closed topics with new threads. It happens all the time. Start a new Corbyn thread with the appropriate demeanour and it'll run quite nicely. There, I've probably said enough now to get this one closed. I'll know who to blame.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Stanron
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 09:45 AM

Nothing, or next to nothing, in last nights press previews and todays news about Boris. Both filled with the pictures of Jeremy Corbyn holding a wreath.

Two threads on Corbyn withdrawn from Mudcat and two threads on Boris allowed. It's pretty obvious isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 09:23 AM

I think I'll call it a day with the BS section for a while.
There are two current threads (comments within last 3 days) about Boris Johnson, but the discussion about Jeremy Corbyn seems to have been removed.
It appears that the majority (within this section), left-wing, viewpoint is the only one that counts here.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 08:21 AM

I just felt like adding my voice to those expressing concern about Boris Johnson's 'dog whistle' references to the burka, and to agree with Dave the Gnome about Johnson's contact with Steve Bannon and the like. Not least because of Bannon's praise for scum like Tommy Robinson. It's all one story: Johnson's plan for power, and if this means ignoring rules set by a toothless watchdog to avoid people profiting from ministerial positions, then it seems plain that it isn't much of an issue for Johnson.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 05:35 AM

I very much doubt he will be sanctioned at all. In the current political circus it seems that those who lie and cheat are rewarded instead. As I think I pointed out on one of the other threads he is in contact with the same team that brought Trump to power. I do hope we are not daft enough to continue down that road but it is a worry that so many, including some on here, cannot see the damage he is causing.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 05:30 AM

I think the alleged non-story was the bit about breaching ministerial rules, Jim, not burqagate...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 05:18 AM

Anyway back to the subject.

Johnson was in clear breach of Parliamentarian procedures when he contracted after 3 days to write for the Telegraph without seeking the advice (there you go Nigel) of the relevant advisory committee.

This is in conjunction with his other, to my mind gross, errors of judgement. I wonder what, if any, sanctions he will face.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 05:07 AM

Please don't fellers - closing this thread as well would be another feather
Claiming the denigrating of Musslim women by describing them as "leytter boxes" and "bank robbers" as a "non story" while flouncing off because he can't continue to smear probably one of the most principles British politicians around says everything that needs to be said
Please leave it there
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 04:56 AM

I did notice it was timed so it would stay for as long as possible before the moderation team are up and able to anything about about the slur on them. Typical really.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 04:44 AM

We can live in hope Steve, we've been shown how to do it on the Brexit threads!

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 04:36 AM

Don't rush back please.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Aug 18 - 01:25 AM

Carry on discussing a non-story about a Tory, but no discussion allowed on the other story that has wall to wall coverage and has gone international!
The forum withers before our eyes while the mods openly side with the gang of nasties driving decent people away.

I am giving myself a break from all the abuse and personal attack that flourishes here now.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 04:41 PM

Yes my parents thought Michael Foot was pretty hot stuff.

You have to be bloody ingenious to square all the competing threads in the Labour Party. They are all so self righteous. So utterly convinced of their own moral probity and everyone who disagrees being total bastards, and moral stinkers.

As for the right wing media giving JC a hard time. What exactly did you expect? Which planet did you inhabit where everyone in Fleet Street was fair and open minded?

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 10:59 AM

"at least he may be the best of a bad bunch..."
As most of "the bad bunch" in the Labour Party are those who most resemble the Tories - they called themselves 'New Labour'
Jim Car

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 09:41 AM

Nigel - life aint perfect... at least he may be the best of a bad bunch...

Them poor tories have to suffer the prospect of Boris.. the worst of a badder bunch...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 09:34 AM

From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:27 AM
He came pretty close last time, against all odds, against all predictions and in the face of utter vilification by the Tories and their media lackeys. And there isn't a Labour shit fit to take over from him. There are plenty of non-qualifying Labour shits, of course. Name your candidate, Al.

So Corbyn is the best of a bad bunch? That must really worry labour supporters.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:35 AM

Incidentally, this is not a non-story. It came out when the letterbox/bank robber fiasco came out, but was overshadowed by the far more sensational burqagate. I had a vehement argument with my dad about it well over a week ago, and there was an exchange of views about it on Radio 4 as I was "zooming" up the M6 last week. As far as the mass media are concerned, Boris bashing Muslim women is far more delicious and mileage-filled than dull and rather arcane stuff about ministerial codes, etc. Perhaps Keith didn't notice.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:31 AM

I'm not entirely convinced about Corbyn, but I could probably say that about any Labour leader...
and we're not exactly spoiled for choice amongst the current crop...

But he has grown on me more over the last few years since he became high profile and leader...

My wife and other leftyish educated women she knows of her age group think he is bloody marvellous...

So some folks are very keen to elect him...

But is that enough, when the likes of Keith's mindset and prejudices run the media...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:27 AM

He came pretty close last time, against all odds, against all predictions and in the face of utter vilification by the Tories and their media lackeys. And there isn't a Labour shit fit to take over from him. There are plenty of non-qualifying Labour shits, of course. Name your candidate, Al.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:16 AM

Politically Boris everything I hate. But he has the common touch. Even all this shite about the burqua. People are saying to themselves - well that's only what I've said.

When you attack him you actually add to his street value.

The best take down of Boris, I've heard so far came from Norman Tebbit. When the tories have to be their own opposition, we really are in the shit.

Quite frankly, I'm pissed off with hearing what a decent bloke Corbyn is. I'd rather have a shit who looked capable of winning an election, taking it from the tories.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:09 AM

"The difference is that this story never made it as a story, while the other is serious, widely reported,"

..and just who exactly is it deciding which news stories are prioritised and made headlines...



This is basic school media studies level news making analysis...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 07:54 AM

So I take it Nigel you are in favour of ignoring rules if you choose to do so.

How far are you prepared to take this, speeding, drink driving, streaking, assault ......................

No of course you are not, but you are prepared to say "it's only Boris" ............ That is hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 07:48 AM

to quote another bit of that opening link:
The committee advises ex-ministers on taking new jobs after they quit.
It does this based on rules aimed at avoiding the risk of a former minister "improperly exploiting privileged access to contacts in government" and the suspicion that a new job is "a reward for past favours".

Boris has already said he won't be exploiting information he received in his ministerial capacity. As for the new job being "a reward for past favours", he is just taking up where he left off when he became a minister, so hardly a new job, even if it did need a new contract.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 07:23 AM

You're aruging semantics yet again Nigel, advice/permission he didn't seek either which he should have done as all ex-ministers are obliged to do.

The debacle about Burkas in this instance is irrelevant, it is about him not following the correct procedures.

Basically putting up a two fingered salute to parliament and to the rest of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 07:20 AM

Sorry, Nigel, but you're nitpicking in order to defend him. The piece that Raggytash linked to makes it clear that he breached the ministerial code. He broke the rules. Put two fingers up to protocol. Any advice he would have received, had he asked as he should have, would have been along the lines of telling him not to go ahead.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 07:13 AM

From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 04:49 AM
That is exactly the point Nigel, he did not have permission from the Advisory Committee which was stated in the link in my original post.
In street parlance he put two fingers up to the rules which govern all ex-ministerial appointments.

Actually, your link says (in the words of The Advisory Committee on Business Appointments ) that he should have asked their advice, not their permission.
The article also makes clear that Boris referred himself to the committee on 26 July, two weeks before the burka article was published.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 07:09 AM

And he steadfastly maintains his dignity, unlike that dissembling mop-headed buffoon.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 06:36 AM

If Corbyn is as ruthless, unprincipled, corrupt, and incompetent a politican as Boris,
he's made a bloody good job of hiding it...

... and as flawed as he may be, at least Corbyn actually represents some positive alternative to the tories...

and is not just an interchangeable blairite tory-lite clone...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 06:23 AM

Boris a complete smeary bumhole.

Corbyn looks like he'd need directions to find his...

What a choice!

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 06:21 AM

I would ask:

If their neighbour was caught doing 120mph on the motorway would they go to court to defend him.

The answer of course would be an emphatical No, they would maintain that the neighbour had broken the law of the land and should be made the face the penalties laid down.

So, if they would not defend a neighbour who had broken the rules, why on earth do they do so when Johnson breaks the rules.

Simples really.

PS Steve, I have been told that this story about Johnson is old news because it goes back some days, the story about Corbyn goes back 4 years! Yet another example of the rank hypocrisy of some posters.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 05:36 AM

The sheer hypocrisy behind the repeated accusation that we're trying to smear Boris Johnson is made all the more laughable by the fact that the accuser has just started a desperate thread trying to smear Jeremy Corbyn via a pack of lies. Amazing.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 04:49 AM

That is exactly the point Nigel, he did not have permission from the Advisory Committee which was stated in the link in my original post.

In street parlance he put two fingers up to the rules which govern all ex-ministerial appointments.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 04:44 AM

If he needed permission he presumably already had it.
He was a regular columnist for the Telegraph before becoming a minister, and is just continuing that now that he's left his position.
As long as he doesn't use privileged information obtained as a minister I see no problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 04:30 AM

don't need to - Boris is perfectly adept at smearing himself...

Subject: RE: BS: Johnson flagrant breach of the rules
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 04:19 AM

The point is Big Al the ministerial rules laid down by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments state that ex ministers should wait at least 3 months before taking up such a position as Johnson did. (He had been earning £23,000 a month or £276,000 per annum from the Telegraph)

Johnson, as all with all other ministers, would/should have known this yet he took the role 3 days after resigning.

That is why the story has relevance. You, I, Joe Soap or Fred Bloggs have to abide by the rules laid down by the state or suffer the consequences, is Johnson any different.