snowychap Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 All this bullshit about Coulson not being guilty until proven innocent Regardless of what we may all think or think we know ... I'd still prefer to live in a society that does actually wait until a court has convicted before passing judgement .... True we all know OJ did it but at least he got the right to buy a jury to prove his innocence , surely Coulsen deserves the same right ? Coulson shouldn't have to prove his innocence. It is up to prosecutors, &c. to prove his guilt. What is not in question is that a lot of these things happened or that Coulson himself resigned from his position because of the conviction of Goodman (and possibly Mulcaire). That Coulson was found to have presided over a culture of bullying (link) is the case and that one of the senior managers was found to have lied to the tribunal (seems to be starting to sound familiar) is reported fact, too. What also seems less and less in question (though it hasn't been proven in a court but that doesn't stop it from being correct) is that the story that he and others settled on was more than an incorrect appraisal of the situation but a tangled web of deceit. To concentrate on the strictly criminal aspect (I accept that it might actually be the case that Coulson is unable to be convicted of anything even if he has either acted criminally himself or been responsible for the criminal acts of others) and use that as part of a defence of him, though more especially for the actions of those who placed their trust in him, took him to the heart of government and are trying to bluff their way through it, is pretty poor. Edit: Too much of 'also'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 So that applies to your constant statements about war crimes, about cash for honours, etc etc - and all of the other things that the Tory party and its supporters in the media liked to throw at the Labour party? At least be consistent with your stance on the bigger issue. I've always said Blair should stand trial for war crimes Trial being the key word There is a very obvious attempt here by the main players to deflect from the issues what exactly are the issues ? other than that Murdoch switched allegiance and upset you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 grauniad"]Police forces in England and Wales plan to lose 34,100 officers and staff over the next four years, amid fresh evidence that the cuts will trigger a rise in property crime. The first reliable estimate by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary is far higher than previous forecasts of 28,000 made by police staff organisations. Sir Denis O'Connor, HM chief inspector of constabulary, said the reduction in officers and staff being planned was the largest the police had faced in more than two generations. HMIC says the 43 police forces plan to cut 16,200 officers, 1,800 police community support officers and 16,100 police staff – a reduction of 14% in the workforce. The reduction in uniformed police officers represents 11% of the 140,000 constables in the country. A research paper published alongside the HMIC report will infuriate Home Office ministers who have been arguing there is no direct link between falling police numbers and levels of crime. The paper contradicts this by saying recent research using more robust methodologies has demonstrated a link and that a 10% fall in officers could lead to a 3% rise in property crime. So how can the govt cut police numbers and yet remain confident levels of crime won't rise. Well that's where the big society comes in, and the privatisation of street-level policing. And once again the legislation to enable this was handily put in place by the previous tory govt. securityRus"]Victoria's Business Improvement District is building on the success of its ‘safe and secure’ initiatives by funding a Community Safety Accreditation Scheme. Brian Sims reports. Community Safety Accreditation Schemes (CSAS) are a Home Office initiative enabling the chief of police for each force area to designate limited but targeted police powers to employees of non-police organisations who contribute towards community safety. In London’s Victoria, 15 security officers from Ultimate Security Services will now be accredited with limited powers under the Police Reform Act 2002. This move has been extremely well received by the business community in SW1 and is actively enhancing the police service’s initiative for a safer Victoria. The initiative promises to establish and promote a safer, more secure environment for businesses, visitors and residents within the Victoria CSAS zone. In reality, the work of accredited staff will complement the efforts of both the Metropolitan Police Service and the British Transport Police in reducing local crime and occurrences of anti-social behaviour. Under the terms of the Victoria CSAS, the Met has agreed to designate the following police powers to Ultimate Security Services: * power to request a name and address for fixed penalty notices and offences that cause injury, alarm and distress to another person, or damage to (or the loss of) another’s property * power to request the name and address of a person who has committed an offence of begging * power to request the name and address of a person acting in an anti-social manner * power to request a person to stop drinking in a designated public place and to confiscate and dispose of alcohol being consumed within a designated public place * power to confiscate alcohol from a person under the age of 18 years * power to confiscate cigarettes and tobacco products from a person under the age of 16 years * power to stop pedal cycles where the accredited person has reason to believe that a person has committed the offence of riding on the footpath So after the plastic bobby (community support) we have the enhanced security guard; bestowed powers despite the minimal levels of vetting or training. A positive breeding ground for the next power mental levy bellfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 23, 2011 Moderator Share Posted July 23, 2011 From the Grauniad's live blog: Ian Katz writes: Downing Street has been under pressure to explain why the former News of the World editor was not subjected to so-called "developed vetting", the high security checking process most previous No 10 press secretaries have undergone. Both Coulson's successor and his former deputy, Gabby Bertin, are undergoing developed vetting. A Whitehall source said the decision not to subject Coulson to developed vetting was taken by Jeremy Heywood, the Downing Street permanent secretary. The source said it was decided that, as director of communications, Coulson did not need access to highly secret material and that developed vetting was a costly, unnecessary expense. How stupid do they think us? He didn't need vetting, but his deputy did? His successor does? This was decided by a civil servant, not by Cameron? The deputy and successor are being vetted NOW, not at the time they were appointed - horse, bolted, stable door, obviously. But it's slightly different to the implied "he didn't, but they did" question - they ALL should have been at the time of their appointments. As to why none of them were....the "expense" thing is utter drivel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAFC2000 Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 Are there actually any David Cameron Fans in here....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Are there actually any David Cameron Fans in here....? He is the least worst option for PM right now when compared with Nick "I still want to join the Euro" Clegg, or Ed "the big boys stole my lunch money" Miliband. That's not to say Cameron isn't a smug, arrogant word removed and slipperier than a greased pig. Observing quite how messed up things in the UK are at the moment is painful/shameful. If joe public can be persuaded to put down the TV remote for long enough then the seeds are being sown for a sea change in politics, but looking at the way other European countries are moving that may not necessarily be for the good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Okay George, today's message is: growth, creating jobs, stability, port in a storm. Repeat ad inf. Is Osborne actually a real person or is he one of those toy dolls where when one pulls a cord at its back, it just repeats the same preprogrammed message until it runs out of steam? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 or Ed "the big boys stole my lunch money then used it to buy the leadership for me so I'd do their bidding" Miliband Fixed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 i think i agree with awol on that but i still think all useless as each other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Okay George, today's message is: growth, creating jobs, stability, port in a storm. Repeat ad inf. Is Osborne actually a real person or is he one of those toy dolls where when one pulls a cord at its back, it just repeats the same preprogrammed message until it runs out of steam? it's weird that they have U-turned on just about every other policy but not on the economy ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 it's weird that they have U-turned on just about every other policy but not on the economy ... If that were demanded by a leader in the Mail/Sun. they'd be doing it tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Saw something that amused me: Osborne: By eliminating growth, I've abolished boom and bust Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAFC2000 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Are there actually any David Cameron Fans in here....? He is the least worst option for PM right now when compared with Nick "I still want to join the Euro" Clegg, or Ed "the big boys stole my lunch money" Miliband. That's not to say Cameron isn't a smug, arrogant word removed and slipperier than a greased pig. Observing quite how messed up things in the UK are at the moment is painful/shameful. If joe public can be persuaded to put down the TV remote for long enough then the seeds are being sown for a sea change in politics, but looking at the way other European countries are moving that may not necessarily be for the good. Least Worst Option for Prime Minister....are you seroius...? Or are you a multi millionaire or something...? Have you seen what he has done in terms of cuts to the most vulnerable in Society( Elderly, Disabled, Poorest, Pregnant mothers, people in hopsitals) What Cameron Knows about the average person, fairness and equality you can right on a grain of rice with a marker pen And you have the audacity to say there is not a better leader....! The deficit is being massively hyped and it typical Fits in nicely with the Torrie True Blue ideology. Those who voted Torrie are going to truely find out what a Torrie goverment is all about unless they are very wealthy...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAFC2000 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 i think i agree with awol on that but i still think all useless as each other some more than others...! Not every one would have done this! University Fees are now - 9 000. Public sector - pay freeze for 3 prob 5 years....! Schools - Limited money to be spent on the NHS and education. Banks not hit with high levi rates - as they are all friends with the prime minister. Growth Economy - Slowed right down, Dont expect any thing to change in the distant future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Those who voted Torrie are going to truely find out what a Torrie goverment is all about unless they are very wealthy...! What about those that voted Tory :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAFC2000 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Those who voted Torrie are going to truely find out what a Torrie goverment is all about unless they are very wealthy...! What about those that voted Tory :winkold: It depends what your ethics and Morals are I guess....! But I would love to know why you vote for them, its not really worth it unless you mega rich...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Funny that the Tory supporters are quiet again about the shocking figures on the economy. Also the number of times that Cameron et al had meetings with members of Murdoch empire when the whole BSkyB bid was happening. I thought the Royal Wedding was supposed to generate millions now its being blamed for poor performance. Makes a change from blaming the weather I suppose? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAFC2000 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 The spin doctors will be out in force soon...! But at least they have the The Sun to back them......oh wait....! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Also the number of times that Cameron et al had meetings with members of Murdoch empire when the whole BSkyB bid was happening. you do know that Ed meet Murdoch the same number of times as Osborne over the same period don't you :-) Makes a change from blaming the weather I suppose? interestingly the figures show us that Warm weather in April boosted spending on hotels and restaurants :-) The growth was in line what what economists expected ( and not the ones you spoke to who predicted interest rate rises in 2010 :winkold: ) ..personally i'd rather a growth even if it is a small one than Ed Balls in charge of the economy :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Makes a change from blaming the weather I suppose? :-) In all fairness Ian that was also blamed. Those few hot days we had in April. It really is no surprise that things aren't going too smoothly in terms of the economy given the incompetent prick we have as Chancellor. It was inevitable this would happen given how he has gone about tackling the deficit. The sad thing is that given he has no plan B, and is too arrogant to accept he is getting it badly wrong, then things will inevitably get a whole lot worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts