I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
Another set of crossover bets bite the dust? Strange how those who had polling ejaculation during the three days of the PB Hodge crossover orgasm have now gone quiet again on polling crossovers.
Was there actually a crossover with YouGov? I only remember a tie.
Another set of crossover bets bite the dust? Strange how those who had polling ejaculation during the three days of the PB Hodge crossover orgasm have now gone quiet again on polling crossovers.
When did the model simulations predict CrossBack? They must have. Surely.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
PB Tories make big play about civil liberties. For them if the State listens in to your conversations or voicemails - it is terrible. If the Murdoch empire does it however, it doesn't matter. Just because the dirty old b*gger supports the Tories !
What utter hypocrisy ?
The dirty old b*gger has supported Labour over more years and more elections than he has the Conservatives...
However, I would say that at the outset (2011) Labour (well Gordon Brown and his "Forces From Hell") did politicize this very badly and that has probably made this more partisan than it should be.
But as far as hacking goes, I can only speak for myself when I say that I just don't think phone hacking of celebrity voice mail messages is a big deal. It's not something I can get upset and excited about - That was the case in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009,2010, 2011 (I was shocked about Milly Dowler) 2012,2013 and 2014. My opinion has remained broadly the same whoever has been in power and whoever the dirty b*gger has been supporting.
For me, the hacking of phone messages by journalists looking to see who Jude Law or Prezza or Steve Coogan are sh*gging is a civil matter, no more, no less.
Intrusion is intrusion. If you grew famous, for whatever reason, and someone hacked your phone would you hold the same view?
Personally, if someone wants to listen to my voice mail I wouldn't give a toss. "Can you get some milk on your way home?", "Give us a ring when you get a chance", "Free for a pint Tuesday?" is the sort of stuff they would hear and good luck to them. Likewise I wouldn't care who reads my emails. I never write anything in an email that I wouldn't put on a postcard because I have always assumed emails are not confidential. The postman can read my postcards, the ISP, network manager and God knows who else can read my emails.
If people want to believe that something they say or write in a public medium is somehow private then they are stupid.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
PB Tories make big play about civil liberties. For them if the State listens in to your conversations or voicemails - it is terrible. If the Murdoch empire does it however, it doesn't matter. Just because the dirty old b*gger supports the Tories !
What utter hypocrisy ?
The dirty old b*gger has supported Labour over more years and more elections than he has the Conservatives...
However, I would say that at the outset (2011) Labour (well Gordon Brown and his "Forces From Hell") did politicize this very badly and that has probably made this more partisan than it should be.
But as far as hacking goes, I can only speak for myself when I say that I just don't think phone hacking of celebrity voice mail messages is a big deal. It's not something I can get upset and excited about - That was the case in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009,2010, 2011 (I was shocked about Milly Dowler) 2012,2013 and 2014. My opinion has remained broadly the same whoever has been in power and whoever the dirty b*gger has been supporting.
For me, the hacking of phone messages by journalists looking to see who Jude Law or Prezza or Steve Coogan are sh*gging is a civil matter, no more, no less.
Intrusion is intrusion. If you grew famous, for whatever reason, and someone hacked your phone would you hold the same view?
Why would one be famous - what behaviour would make one famous? Some people are famous for being famous and would be upset if you were not hacking their phone. If anyone is worried about phone hacking they can take whatever security measures might be necessary with their phone. A password for instance. if people do not want theor rubbish searched through then they can shred their paperwork. The central claim that the NOTW deleted voicemails from the Dowler phone was shown to be false.
Another set of crossover bets bite the dust? Strange how those who had polling ejaculation during the three days of the PB Hodge crossover orgasm have now gone quiet again on polling crossovers.
Was there actually a crossover with YouGov? I only remember a tie.
Yes there was 1 tie.
Around the time of the Euros Labour definitely dipped, and the greens were higher than normal I think.
from the way this thread has drifted off topic, I would guess the Coulson /Cameron story will have little interest for anyone except diehead Labour supporters, who will keep on and on about it until they look even more out of touch than they do now. And I say that as someone who doesn't support the Conservatives.
Thing is how does any party run with this while supporting blanket spying by the state.
Well that is quite simply double standards. And your argument is very, very thin. Say your main talent was acting, you were poor at other things at school but drama was a real strength. You go on to the stage, because that's where you have the skills. You succeed. Have you then chosen to be famous? In any event, the idea that just because someone is well known they don't deserve the legal protections others expect is risible.
I have said before that I do not believe in press regulation. But phone hacking is illegal, and so it should be.
I think there are two separate points here.
The first for me is clear cut. Phone hacking is illegal and it doesn't matter who the victims were the people responsible should be prosecuted and, if found guilty, punished according to the law.
The second point is whether personally I have any sympathy for the celebs who were some of the victims. In that case my answer is no. Many celebrities live by the media and feed them all sorts of private information, using the media as a means of free promotion. For many of them probably the only thing worse than having been a victim of these dodgy practices would be to have not been a victim of them.
Until someone posted it up yesterday I had not heard of Dempster's rules on gossip - that he would not print gossip on anyone who had not already contacted him themselves with gossip about themselves or someone else. After that they were clearly playing the game themselves and were fair game. That seems a reasonable position to take. There are celebrities out there who seem to value their privacy and don't enter the fray, but most of them actively encourage intrusion into their private lives and it seems hypocritical of them to moan when stuff then gets printed about them.
What an exceptionally nasty article. I'd always thought of Nick Davies as a tenacious and honest investigative journalist, if rather one-sided, but clearly that was over-generous.
Another set of crossover bets bite the dust? Strange how those who had polling ejaculation during the three days of the PB Hodge crossover orgasm have now gone quiet again on polling crossovers.
When did the model simulations predict CrossBack? They must have. Surely.
The latest Lambert and Butler simulation (Pony Juice derivative)
South End on Sea maximum - 4 million traction runs
Chance of a Tory majority - 345% Chance of Tory highest number of seats - 4235% Chance of Labour most seats - 0% Chance of Labour majority - -324%
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
PB Tories make big play about civil liberties. For them if the State listens in to your conversations or voicemails - it is terrible. If the Murdoch empire does it however, it doesn't matter. Just because the dirty old b*gger supports the Tories !
What utter hypocrisy ?
The dirty old b*gger has supported Labour over more years and more elections than he has the Conservatives...
However, I would say that at the outset (2011) Labour (well Gordon Brown and his "Forces From Hell") did politicize this very badly and that has probably made this more partisan than it should be.
But as far as hacking goes, I can only speak for myself when I say that I just don't think phone hacking of celebrity voice mail messages is a big deal. It's not something I can get upset and excited about - That was the case in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009,2010, 2011 (I was shocked about Milly Dowler) 2012,2013 and 2014. My opinion has remained broadly the same whoever has been in power and whoever the dirty b*gger has been supporting.
For me, the hacking of phone messages by journalists looking to see who Jude Law or Prezza or Steve Coogan are sh*gging is a civil matter, no more, no less.
Intrusion is intrusion. If you grew famous, for whatever reason, and someone hacked your phone would you hold the same view?
Personally, if someone wants to listen to my voice mail I wouldn't give a toss. "Can you get some milk on your way home?", "Give us a ring when you get a chance", "Free for a pint Tuesday?" is the sort of stuff they would hear and good luck to them. Likewise I wouldn't care who reads my emails. I never write anything in an email that I wouldn't put on a postcard because I have always assumed emails are not confidential. The postman can read my postcards, the ISP, network manager and God knows who else can read my emails.
If people want to believe that something they say or write in a public medium is somehow private then they are stupid.
That's dangerously close to saying "if you have got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear".
Let private lives remain private. There are extreme examples where press subterfuge is justified but that sleb x is having gay threesomes or sleb y is taking cocaine are not in that category.
Wolverhampton... plenty of Islamic discussion I reckon
Nuttall and Nawaz telling it how it is while Soubry looks horrified and pretends to be appalled at the "discrimination" against millions of peace loving assimilated muslims is my prediction
Actually, to their discredit, it actually seems that some PBTories are quite consistent in their views. They seem to be happy with both the State and the press hacking into our conversations. Certainly people like Nabavi have spent a lot of time defending the mass trawling of emails and facebook that is now routinely done by the State.
What unmitigated garbage. I have never defended the state hacking into conversations. I have certainly never defended the press doing so.
I would be grateful if you would not misrepresent me.
You have had several - in fact many - exchanges with Socrates and I when you have indeed defended State hacking of conversations and have expressed disbelief that anyone would think it wrong.
You have not been misrepresented so stop trying to rewrite history now that it has caught you out.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
You have had several - in fact many - exchanges with Socrates and I when you have indeed defended State hacking of conversations
Really? In that case, you will have no trouble finding one and quoting it. Just one where I have defended the state listening to conversations, or reading the content of emails, without a warrant will be sufficient.
Off you go. Come back when you've found one, or when you are ready to apologise.
Edit: Oh, and you also need to justify your smear that I defended hacking by the press. You'll find it hard.
So far every model predicts a slightly different outcome, these range from Labour majority to Tory majority. On that basis you may as well ask actual models to forecast the outcome. Cindy Crawford is long on Tories largest party, while Kate Moss is backing the Reds to take Croydon and squeak home with a tiny majority.
Mr Mike P - your blatantly pointless and partisan and unfounded and repetitive post are boorish. lets take it as read - you don't like Cameron. I've got news for hyou - I don't like Miliband and labour, And I'll give you a reason - whenever they have been in power they have left an economic mess for the tories to clear up.
So far every model predicts a slightly different outcome, these range from Labour majority to Tory majority. On that basis you may as well ask actual models to forecast the outcome. Cindy Crawford is long on Tories largest party, while Kate Moss is backing the Reds to take Croydon and squeak home with a tiny majority.
Cindy Crawford?! Retro! Child of the early 90s, eh?
So far every model predicts a slightly different outcome, these range from Labour majority to Tory majority. On that basis you may as well ask actual models to forecast the outcome. Cindy Crawford is long on Tories largest party, while Kate Moss is backing the Reds to take Croydon and squeak home with a tiny majority.
I read the first few words of that and nearly fell off the chair. Something tells me there will be some major changes to them closer to the election to make sure they get as close to the election result as possible.(In other words, they will check at the polls say and tweak accordingly).
That's dangerously close to saying "if you have got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear".
Let private lives remain private. There are extreme examples where press subterfuge is justified but that sleb x is having gay threesomes or sleb y is taking cocaine are not in that category.
No Mr. Bob, it is not saying if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. It is saying public documents are public. If someone puts confidential or sensitive stuff into a medium that can be read or otherwise accessed without their permission or a legal warrant then that person is stupid. Would someone write about the intimate details of their sex life on postcard?
You have had several - in fact many - exchanges with Socrates and I when you have indeed defended State hacking of conversations
Really? In that case, you will have no trouble finding one and quoting it. Just one where I have defended the state listening to conversations, or reading the content of emails, without a warrant will be sufficient.
Off you go. Come back when you've found one, or when you are ready to apologise.
I am not going to bother wasting my time digging through old threads to find conversations that everyone has seen already.
Your hypocrisy is nauseating and somewhat surprising given how often you have come on here defending government snooping.
All I will have to do is wait for the next time we have the debate on the snoopers charter and see if you are foolish enough to make any comment. You would be advised to keep your head down as I we will be very happy to point out your denials at that point.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
PB Tory is mainly used as a derogatory term, by the same posters so fond of using the banned 'Herd'.
Mr Mike P - your blatantly pointless and partisan and unfounded and repetitive post are boorish. lets take it as read - you don't like Cameron. I've got news for hyou - I don't like Miliband and labour, And I'll give you a reason - whenever they have been in power they have left an economic mess for the tories to clear up.
Mr Flightpath,
Thank hyou.
Cameron and his criminal friend / former employee Coulson, I'll be glad to see the back of them.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
You seem to have a problem differentiating a person's behaviour from their identity. Until you learn to separate the two you will continue to be confused and believe you are having "Kafka-esque" conversations.
That's dangerously close to saying "if you have got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear".
Let private lives remain private. There are extreme examples where press subterfuge is justified but that sleb x is having gay threesomes or sleb y is taking cocaine are not in that category.
No Mr. Bob, it is not saying if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. It is saying public documents are public. If someone puts confidential or sensitive stuff into a medium that can be read or otherwise accessed without their permission or a legal warrant then that person is stupid. Would someone write about the intimate details of their sex life on postcard?
The reason phone hacking worked was because a) few people knew that you had to change your password and b) they rarely listened to voicemails. The messages were from other people - saucy messages etc etc. If a girl called you up and left a breathless voicemail on your phone, and you didn't bother to check it, you would be at risk.
In any event, I don't happen to agree that even emails are fair game. Are risqué love letters fair game? I - sentimentalist that I am - still have some from old girlfriends. I can't see why they should be anyone else's business than mine. My mother brought me up that you should never read something unless it's addressed to you, and that strikes me as decent principle, whatever the medium.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
Next the PBTories will be telling us they're floating voters.
They fool no-one who reads the comments, I don't know why they bother!
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
Are you still a Liberal or did you vote Tory last time? Anyway, I've never grasped why it matters so much. The term Leftie is thrown around daily, but is very rarely complained about, and rightly so. It's just easy shorthand.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
Next the PBTories will be telling us they're floating voters.
They fool no-one who reads the comments, I don't know why they bother!
I suspect that is because of the basic decency and honesty of them. The objective is to inform debate and convince others of the content of the ideas and ideals they put forward. They are happy to leave the mendacious tactics of fooling people to their less principled opponents.
In any event, I don't happen to agree that even emails are fair game. Are risqué love letters fair game? I - sentimentalist that I am - still have some from old girlfriends. I can't see why they should be anyone else's business than mine. My mother brought me up that you should never read something unless it's addressed to you, and that strikes me as decent principle, whatever the medium.
They are definitely not fair game in law. Until the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the legal position in respect of emails was rather unclear, but that Act removed any doubt and made it a criminal offence to hack into emails (and, as we now know, voicemails, although that wasn't really considered very much at the time). There have been successful prosecutions of people who have looked at emails, such as this well-known case:
In practice, though, Hurst is right in the sense that emails are generally sent in plain text and pass through a series of third-party computers where, technically but not legally, they could easily be read. So, to protect yourself, you should assume they are vulnerable.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
Are you still a Liberal or did you vote Tory last time? Anyway, I've never grasped why it matters so much. The term Leftie is thrown around daily, but is very rarely complained about, and rightly so. It's just easy shorthand.
PB Tory is shorthand for "herd" which was a derogatory term on here. Tory without the PB is completely different
In any event, I don't happen to agree that even emails are fair game. Are risqué love letters fair game? I - sentimentalist that I am - still have some from old girlfriends. I can't see why they should be anyone else's business than mine. My mother brought me up that you should never read something unless it's addressed to you, and that strikes me as decent principle, whatever the medium.
They are definitely not fair game in law. Until the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the legal position in respect of emails was rather unclear, but that Act removed any doubt and made it a criminal offence to hack into emails (and, as we now know, voicemails, although that wasn't really considered very much at the time). There have been successful prosecutions of people who have looked at emails, such as this well-known case:
In practice, though, Hurst is right in the sense that emails are generally sent in plain text and pass through a series of third-party computers where, technically but not legally, they could easily be read. So, to protect yourself, you should assume they are vulnerable.
Thanks Richard - I do, and I never tire of telling others not to write stuff down if they wish it to remain private. Yet it's a sorry state of affairs. Snooping is becoming close to being seen as okay. Yet few human relationships could thrive were were not able to converse on occasion in a way that excluded others.
I voted Liberal Democrat at the last opportunity, and have voted Conservative only once in my life, having voted for the following other parties in various elections: Labour, SDP, Liberal and Green at various times.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
Next the PBTories will be telling us they're floating voters.
They fool no-one who reads the comments, I don't know why they bother!
I suspect that is because of the basic decency and honesty of them. The objective is to inform debate and convince others of the content of the ideas and ideals they put forward. They are happy to leave the mendacious tactics of fooling people to their less principled opponents.
No it's not. It's a concerted attempt to add weight to their (Tory) views by pretending to be impartial.
Whereas UKIP posters are well-meaning firebrands and Labour posters are trolls. SNP or Green, god forbid. Lib Dem, meh, they're Lib Dems.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
Next the PBTories will be telling us they're floating voters.
They fool no-one who reads the comments, I don't know why they bother!
I suspect that is because of the basic decency and honesty of them. The objective is to inform debate and convince others of the content of the ideas and ideals they put forward. They are happy to leave the mendacious tactics of fooling people to their less principled opponents.
No it's not. It's a concerted attempt to add weight to their (Tory) views by pretending to be impartial.
Whereas UKIP posters are well-meaning firebrands and Labour posters are trolls. SNP or Green, god forbid. Lib Dem, meh, they're Lib Dems.
Look 2 posts down from this one of yours, and Bobafet is thanking Richard Nabavi for information.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
Been reading PB for ages. You're as Tory as they come. As are most on here.
Then your reading age is matched only by your IQ that is turn is as poor as your feeble trolling.
Yeah, suppose in fairness I do usually skip your posts.
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
There seems to be an odd culture on PB whereby Tories do not like to be called Tories. I had a Kafka-esque conversation once with Morris where he said he was planning to vote Tory, supported a Tory government, was rightwing, but objected to being called a Tory (not a PB Tory, just a Tory) This is fairly common.
Are you still a Liberal or did you vote Tory last time? Anyway, I've never grasped why it matters so much. The term Leftie is thrown around daily, but is very rarely complained about, and rightly so. It's just easy shorthand.
Tory is a tribal term, unlike Leftie. A lot of people with right wing views are not members of the Tory party, would never identify with it, and only vote for it because it comes slightly closer to representing their political views than the other parties. It doesn't make you a Tory.
I voted Liberal Democrat at the last opportunity, and have voted Conservative only once in my life, having voted for the following other parties in various elections: Labour, SDP, Liberal and Green at various times.
I am quite taken aback by the position most PBTories have taken on the Coulson conviction - Jack W being one honourable exception. Even the Nabavi who pretends to ride some kind of moral horse was purring with delight that the news would be buried with the World Cup, Cricket , Suarez etc.
It's kind of you to initially exonerate me but then you convict me as a "PB Tory".
Not guilty M'lud. I support the Coalition government but specifically neither whole individual party within it.
on PB I have been described as:
A faux leftie A Blairite idiot A troll A unionist moron (bonus point if you can guess the perpetrator) A champagne socialist A rich moaner A bullying Europhile A hubristic Londoner and A non-Londoner
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Given Ed Milli's outrage that Cameron employed someone later found to have committed a criminal offence, maybe he should be reminded that he himself appointed someone to his shadow front bench team who had very recently committed a serious breach of electoral law?
A faux leftie A Blairite idiot A troll A unionist moron (bonus point if you can guess the perpetrator) A champagne socialist A rich moaner A bullying Europhile A hubristic Londoner and A non-Londoner
Well, not the decision itself, but Cameron's response to it...
Iain Martin seems to think the Juncker deliberation is a very big deal. Make of that what you will.
That was the weirdest article I've read in ages. It warns of some terrible catastrophe, but says nothing about what is actually supposed to happen. The only explanation given is that Iain Martin thinks it will be catastrophic, and he's been reporting on the EU for very long time.
I suppose the article fits with Cameron's overall approach, demanding reforms in three years but refusing to tell the person writing the four-year plan what he actually wants reformed, and opposing the current candidate without being able to suggest anybody else.
A faux leftie A Blairite idiot A troll A unionist moron (bonus point if you can guess the perpetrator) A champagne socialist A rich moaner A bullying Europhile A hubristic Londoner and A non-Londoner
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Fair point. At least there are people on here though. Busier than it has been for a while, which is good.
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Bit annoying for us lefties though Mr Soon To Be MP, when we genuinely want an informed political debate / betting etc etc and all we find on PB is a load of Tories talking to each other.
It's like crawling inside Dan Hodges brain on here sometimes. Yurgh.
SeanT Previous thread China, in theory, arguably now has a more generous welfare system than the US and even some EU countries after it recently introduced a non-contributory minimum income for every Chinese citizen including the unemployed
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Bit annoying for us lefties though Mr Soon To Be MP, when we genuinely want an informed political debate / betting etc etc and all we find on PB is a load of Tories talking to each other.
It's like crawling inside Dan Hodges brain on here sometimes. Yurgh.
On the Greens, they have not helped themselves by making the largely anonymous Nathalie Bennett leader instead of Lucas, their only MP. The Greens did increase their MEPs by 1 this year so she could scrape home, especially with tactical voting Tories and LDs and she has distanced herself from the Green Council. But as Labour is now more leftwing than New Labour there may be less of a left of Labour protest vote, while the right of the Tories protest vote could elect Farage as UKIP's first MP
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Bit annoying for us lefties though Mr Soon To Be MP, when we genuinely want an informed political debate / betting etc etc and all we find on PB is a load of Tories talking to each other.
It's like crawling inside Dan Hodges brain on here sometimes. Yurgh.
Cameron is Crap.
David Cameron will Never Become Prime Minister by Winning a Majority.
The last General Election where a Governing party increased it's lead was 1983. Governing party (Conservatives) were 20 points ahead in the polls at this point, the left was also split.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Bit annoying for us lefties though Mr Soon To Be MP, when we genuinely want an informed political debate / betting etc etc and all we find on PB is a load of Tories talking to each other.
It's like crawling inside Dan Hodges brain on here sometimes. Yurgh.
Cameron is Crap.
David Cameron will Never Become Prime Minister by Winning a Majority.
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Bit annoying for us lefties though Mr Soon To Be MP, when we genuinely want an informed political debate / betting etc etc and all we find on PB is a load of Tories talking to each other.
It's like crawling inside Dan Hodges brain on here sometimes. Yurgh.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
You think he gives a crap? The whole shebang is about forcing a showdown with Europe in order to address the UKIP issue. Oooooooh, some nondescript polack swore about him and Merkels pants are on fire, that will damage him in the UK for sure
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
The EU needs to decide whether it wants an awkward Britain in the EU or not. Right now by default it seems to be deciding not. I'm not sure that's the choice it would make if it turned its mind to the problem actively.
Did I miss the "herd" accusations then banning? What is so wrong with "herd"?
Because it was brought up many moons ago by someone just like you, and used in a way similar to how you might use it, in order to elicit similar responses. How sad you're not the instigator, it might have earned you a footnote somewhere. C'est la vie
A bit peevish tonight! PB is at its least interesting when we tell each other (repeatedly) what we think about each other. Who cares what anonymous poster X thinks of anonymous poster Y?
Bit annoying for us lefties though Mr Soon To Be MP, when we genuinely want an informed political debate / betting etc etc and all we find on PB is a load of Tories talking to each other.
It's like crawling inside Dan Hodges brain on here sometimes. Yurgh.
I know. Welcome, anyway!
God yeah, it's terrible here. So much better when we get canvassing anecdotes that neatly fit the last YouGov (you know, the one that had a bigger Labour lead)
Did I miss the "herd" accusations then banning? What is so wrong with "herd"?
Because it was brought up many moons ago by someone just like you, and used in a way similar to how you might use it, in order to elicit similar responses. How sad you're not the instigator, it might have earned you a footnote somewhere. C'est la vie
Lol - Pouter is much more amusing than Tim ^_~. Tim's tips were pretty good though. But @TSE, Nabavi and Antifrank are better
Pulpstar Indeed, he will come to regret that, under FPTP best he can now probably do is another Coalition with the LDs, under AV with UKIP and Cleggite LDs preferences a Tory majority would be much more likely
SeanT Previous thread China, in theory, arguably now has a more generous welfare system than the US and even some EU countries after it recently introduced a non-contributory minimum income for every Chinese citizen including the unemployed
sensible bunch the Chinese
capitalists want all the money for themselves but capitalism requires people to have money to spend
Did I miss the "herd" accusations then banning? What is so wrong with "herd"?
Because it was brought up many moons ago by someone just like you, and used in a way similar to how you might use it, in order to elicit similar responses. How sad you're not the instigator, it might have earned you a footnote somewhere. C'est la vie
Lol - Pouter is much more amusing than Tim ^_~. Tim's tips were pretty good though. But @TSE, Nabavi and Antifrank are better
Yes, great tipster apart from when he ran away from bets on football because he hadn't got a clue what he was talking about. And a great raconteur aside from the occasional glaring nonsense about going out for a picnic with the family when 60 mph gales were blowing across the NW. Tips are always welcome but always DYOR. I'm more a consumer, Hoover up tips from the trustworthy and drop the odd one in, accepting the immediate opprobrium and the possibility of a double hit if I'm wrong. 2010/11 Ashes is my CV on here. Correct series score, correct outcome in the final three tests (the first two being correct but the wrong way round) correct on top batsman, despite his appalling form going into the series, and on top bowler, despite criticism that he couldn't do it with the duke ball down under.
Pulpstar Indeed, he will come to regret that, under FPTP best he can now probably do is another Coalition with the LDs, under AV with UKIP and Cleggite LDs preferences a Tory majority would be much more likely
Not so sure about that. Given the dislike apparent for coalition, the electorate may well find a way.... Although I'm still on Lab minority gvt as it stands.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
It's worse than that. Instead of trying to win something. he's decided it's easier to blame. As things stand, in the upcoming EC vote we will be in a minority of 1/2 against 27/26. Instead of analysing where the failures were and developing techniques to do better next time, he's decided to blame the 27/26 for...stuff.
Blame isn't something winners do. Blame is something losers do. It's the Germans' fault. Or the Swedes. Or the Italians. Or whatever, or whatever. Never Cameron's fault.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
It's worse than that. Instead of trying to win something. he's decided it's easier to blame. As things stand, in the upcoming EC vote we will be in a minority of 1/2 against 27/26. Instead of analysing where the failures were and developing techniques to do better next time, he's decided to blame the 27/26 for...stuff.
Blame isn't something winners do. Blame is something losers do. It's the Germans' fault. Or the Swedes. Or the Italians. Or whatever, or whatever. Never Cameron's fault.
The point is, he is making a stand against 'Europe'. Something that will do no harm amongst Tory and UKIP voters , or eurosceptic 'others'. Does no one else get this, seriously?
The EU needs to decide whether it wants an awkward Britain in the EU or not. Right now by default it seems to be deciding not. I'm not sure that's the choice it would make if it turned its mind to the problem actively.
It's not so much do they want UK in EU, it's more a case of do they want to do what is necessary to keep the UK in the EU - a subtly different concept.
You may remember a few days ago somebody on this board (Charles? Avery?) said Cameron's ambition was to reform the whole EU. I applauded the sentiment but found it implausible ("Christ, that's a big ask!"). Cameron has not developed the muscles necessary to influence a qualified majority in the EC, let alone the unanimity required for a treaty change. Cameron is not capable of carrying out the task he has set himself and the Juncker debacle only highlights this. Cameron is simply not competent.
Given Cameron's inability to persuade the EU28exUK to share his desires, and his reluctance to define what his desires are, there may be nothing that EU28exUK can do to satisfy him. Again, the Juncker debacle highlights this.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
The EU needs to decide whether it wants an awkward Britain in the EU or not. Right now by default it seems to be deciding not. I'm not sure that's the choice it would make if it turned its mind to the problem actively.
Disagree, it's basically Britain's call and there's nothing the other member states can do that would materially affect the outcome. Cameron would be warning of catastrophe no matter who they'd picked, the British haven't come up with any workable "renegotiation" proposals they could adopt even if they wanted to, and the difference between "all practical concessions" and "no concessions except face-saver" woud have a minimal effect on the likely result of a hyothetical referendum.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
You think he gives a crap? The whole shebang is about forcing a showdown with Europe in order to address the UKIP issue. Oooooooh, some nondescript polack swore about him and Merkels pants are on fire, that will damage him in the UK for sure
Merkel's pants aren't on fire, she's literally like "kein Drama"
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
It's worse than that. Instead of trying to win something. he's decided it's easier to blame. As things stand, in the upcoming EC vote we will be in a minority of 1/2 against 27/26. Instead of analysing where the failures were and developing techniques to do better next time, he's decided to blame the 27/26 for...stuff.
Blame isn't something winners do. Blame is something losers do. It's the Germans' fault. Or the Swedes. Or the Italians. Or whatever, or whatever. Never Cameron's fault.
The point is, he is making a stand against 'Europe'. Something that will do no harm amongst Tory and UKIP voters , or eurosceptic 'others'. Does no one else get this, seriously?
Sorry, yes, I'm not disputing your analysis of his motives. I am pointing out that he's failing to achieve what he wants to do and is substituting blame for achievement.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
The EU needs to decide whether it wants an awkward Britain in the EU or not. Right now by default it seems to be deciding not. I'm not sure that's the choice it would make if it turned its mind to the problem actively.
Disagree, it's basically Britain's call and there's nothing the other member states can do that would materially affect the outcome. Cameron would be warning of catastrophe no matter who they'd picked, the British haven't come up with any workable "renegotiation" proposals they could adopt even if they wanted to, and the difference between "all practical concessions" and "no concessions except face-saver" woud have a minimal effect on the likely result of a hyothetical referendum.
They're choosing to back a Commission president who is universally agreed to be crap and completely out of tune with the zeitgeist. That's a failing on the part of the others, not Britain, and strongly indicative that there's no will to reach a compromise to protect the interests of the Euro-outs. This is probably the moment when Britain decisively climbs on the exit ramp from the EU.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
It's worse than that. Instead of trying to win something. he's decided it's easier to blame. As things stand, in the upcoming EC vote we will be in a minority of 1/2 against 27/26. Instead of analysing where the failures were and developing techniques to do better next time, he's decided to blame the 27/26 for...stuff.
Blame isn't something winners do. Blame is something losers do. It's the Germans' fault. Or the Swedes. Or the Italians. Or whatever, or whatever. Never Cameron's fault.
The point is, he is making a stand against 'Europe'. Something that will do no harm amongst Tory and UKIP voters , or eurosceptic 'others'. Does no one else get this, seriously?
Sorry, yes, I'm not disputing your analysis of his motives. I am pointing out that he's failing to achieve what he wants to do and is substituting blame for achievement.
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
It's worse than that. Instead of trying to win something. he's decided it's easier to blame. As things stand, in the upcoming EC vote we will be in a minority of 1/2 against 27/26. Instead of analysing where the failures were and developing techniques to do better next time, he's decided to blame the 27/26 for...stuff.
Blame isn't something winners do. Blame is something losers do. It's the Germans' fault. Or the Swedes. Or the Italians. Or whatever, or whatever. Never Cameron's fault.
The point is, he is making a stand against 'Europe'. Something that will do no harm amongst Tory and UKIP voters , or eurosceptic 'others'. Does no one else get this, seriously?
I think everyone understands that is what he is trying to do. It's how many are thick enough to believe it's genuine and currently it seems like not many (although I haven't paid any attention to it so maybe it's had some effect).
They're choosing to back a Commission president who is universally agreed to be crap and completely out of tune with the zeitgeist..
* Number of people who think Juncker is crap: Cameron, the Tory party, the UK press * Number of people who think Juncker is not crap: the heads of government of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden; the Europarties EPP, PES and ALDE, and a majority of MEPs in the European Parliament
That's placing a greater burden on the word "universally" than it's reasonable to bear.
strongly indicative that there's no will to reach a compromise to protect the interests of the Euro-outs.
I strongly doubt at this point that there's anything the EU28exUK could offer the UK that would be acceptable to the UK and achievable in, say, a five-year timespan. Consider the Juncker clusterfuck. Three weeks ago, a nondescript Luxemburg politician. Now, after some Proper British Press Coverage That's The Envy Of The World, a smart feller like yourself can cheerfully type the words "universally agreed to be crap and completely out of tune with the zeitgeist" without noticing that it's complete horsefeathers. Given this level of vituperation, I doubt anything can be offered that won't be derided ("They've only offered their unborn daughters! EUROSCUM! We want the sons as well!")
Europe trembling as Cameron threatens unspecified "consequences" if he doesn't get his unspecified alternative candidate to help with his unspecified reforms.
The EU needs to decide whether it wants an awkward Britain in the EU or not. Right now by default it seems to be deciding not. I'm not sure that's the choice it would make if it turned its mind to the problem actively.
Disagree, it's basically Britain's call and there's nothing the other member states can do that would materially affect the outcome. Cameron would be warning of catastrophe no matter who they'd picked, the British haven't come up with any workable "renegotiation" proposals they could adopt even if they wanted to, and the difference between "all practical concessions" and "no concessions except face-saver" woud have a minimal effect on the likely result of a hyothetical referendum.
They're choosing to back a Commission president who is universally agreed to be crap and completely out of tune with the zeitgeist. That's a failing on the part of the others, not Britain, and strongly indicative that there's no will to reach a compromise to protect the interests of the Euro-outs. This is probably the moment when Britain decisively climbs on the exit ramp from the EU.
He's not universally agreed to be crap. Merkel rates the man - hence backing him for the EPP nomination - but had hoped to derail the process. The left-wing leaders would have preferred a left-wing leader and obviously can't endorse the man they just lost to enthusiastically, but they'd be happier with Juncker than pretty much any right-wing alternative.
If Britain is really going to jump onto the exit ramp over this, it would have just been a matter of time until they manufactured some other drama to exit over.
Comments
Apart from the few and far between betting posts I only usually stop at Mike, Bobafett and Isam's posts, and a few others that are not the usual stodgy Tory in-chatting sludge.
August 2015 with the Farron bounce, and a Labour minority administration exiting the honeymoon period ?
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/25/barnet-tories-confusion-regret-and-so-much-more
If people want to believe that something they say or write in a public medium is somehow private then they are stupid.
The central claim that the NOTW deleted voicemails from the Dowler phone was shown to be false.
Anna Soubry on QT tomorrow
Prezza, Nuttall, & Maajid Nawaz also
Around the time of the Euros Labour definitely dipped, and the greens were higher than normal I think.
Well that's my view. Risible or not. What else can I say...
At least Surbiton is now clear that it has nothing to do with politics or who Murdoch is supporting this week.
And with that, I big you farewell. x
The first for me is clear cut. Phone hacking is illegal and it doesn't matter who the victims were the people responsible should be prosecuted and, if found guilty, punished according to the law.
The second point is whether personally I have any sympathy for the celebs who were some of the victims. In that case my answer is no. Many celebrities live by the media and feed them all sorts of private information, using the media as a means of free promotion. For many of them probably the only thing worse than having been a victim of these dodgy practices would be to have not been a victim of them.
Until someone posted it up yesterday I had not heard of Dempster's rules on gossip - that he would not print gossip on anyone who had not already contacted him themselves with gossip about themselves or someone else. After that they were clearly playing the game themselves and were fair game. That seems a reasonable position to take. There are celebrities out there who seem to value their privacy and don't enter the fray, but most of them actively encourage intrusion into their private lives and it seems hypocritical of them to moan when stuff then gets printed about them.
South End on Sea maximum - 4 million traction runs
Chance of a Tory majority - 345%
Chance of Tory highest number of seats - 4235%
Chance of Labour most seats - 0%
Chance of Labour majority - -324%
Tory majority nailed on!
Let private lives remain private. There are extreme examples where press subterfuge is justified but that sleb x is having gay threesomes or sleb y is taking cocaine are not in that category.
Nuttall and Nawaz telling it how it is while Soubry looks horrified and pretends to be appalled at the "discrimination" against millions of peace loving assimilated muslims is my prediction
You have not been misrepresented so stop trying to rewrite history now that it has caught you out.
PB Tory is just a lazy term used by the feeble minded so as to not engage with the argument.
Off you go. Come back when you've found one, or when you are ready to apologise.
Edit: Oh, and you also need to justify your smear that I defended hacking by the press. You'll find it hard.
So far every model predicts a slightly different outcome, these range from Labour majority to Tory majority. On that basis you may as well ask actual models to forecast the outcome. Cindy Crawford is long on Tories largest party, while Kate Moss is backing the Reds to take Croydon and squeak home with a tiny majority.
lets take it as read - you don't like Cameron.
I've got news for hyou - I don't like Miliband and labour, And I'll give you a reason - whenever they have been in power they have left an economic mess for the tories to clear up.
Ed is crap is PM Every poll in June has Ed is crap is PM
Less than 10.5 months to go
Your hypocrisy is nauseating and somewhat surprising given how often you have come on here defending government snooping.
All I will have to do is wait for the next time we have the debate on the snoopers charter and see if you are foolish enough to make any comment. You would be advised to keep your head down as I we will be very happy to point out your denials at that point.
I'm a monkey red on that.
One was swapped for the other.
Thank hyou.
Cameron and his criminal friend / former employee Coulson, I'll be glad to see the back of them.
It is just lazy as a term and results from inability to argue a point,
In any event, I don't happen to agree that even emails are fair game. Are risqué love letters fair game? I - sentimentalist that I am - still have some from old girlfriends. I can't see why they should be anyone else's business than mine. My mother brought me up that you should never read something unless it's addressed to you, and that strikes me as decent principle, whatever the medium.
They fool no-one who reads the comments, I don't know why they bother!
http://www.out-law.com/page-6131
In practice, though, Hurst is right in the sense that emails are generally sent in plain text and pass through a series of third-party computers where, technically but not legally, they could easily be read. So, to protect yourself, you should assume they are vulnerable.
Ha ha. Yes. She's approaching 50 now, still looking good.
So not a Tory, PB or otherwise.
I have also been described as Leftie here also!
Whereas UKIP posters are well-meaning firebrands and Labour posters are trolls. SNP or Green, god forbid. Lib Dem, meh, they're Lib Dems.
A faux leftie
A Blairite idiot
A troll
A unionist moron (bonus point if you can guess the perpetrator)
A champagne socialist
A rich moaner
A bullying Europhile
A hubristic Londoner and
A non-Londoner
I suppose the article fits with Cameron's overall approach, demanding reforms in three years but refusing to tell the person writing the four-year plan what he actually wants reformed, and opposing the current candidate without being able to suggest anybody else.
It's like crawling inside Dan Hodges brain on here sometimes. Yurgh.
Please reveal your pearls of political wisdom, to inform our political debate Mr MikeP...
David Cameron will Never Become Prime Minister by Winning a Majority.
PB standard?
Will Dave get a Falklands war ?
However Cameron is PM by a coalition, so is definitely less crap than thou...
Oooooooh, some nondescript polack swore about him and Merkels pants are on fire, that will damage him in the UK for sure
capitalists want all the money for themselves but capitalism requires people to have money to spend
Tips are always welcome but always DYOR. I'm more a consumer, Hoover up tips from the trustworthy and drop the odd one in, accepting the immediate opprobrium and the possibility of a double hit if I'm wrong. 2010/11 Ashes is my CV on here. Correct series score, correct outcome in the final three tests (the first two being correct but the wrong way round) correct on top batsman, despite his appalling form going into the series, and on top bowler, despite criticism that he couldn't do it with the duke ball down under.
Although I'm still on Lab minority gvt as it stands.
Blame isn't something winners do. Blame is something losers do. It's the Germans' fault. Or the Swedes. Or the Italians. Or whatever, or whatever. Never Cameron's fault.
Does no one else get this, seriously?
You may remember a few days ago somebody on this board (Charles? Avery?) said Cameron's ambition was to reform the whole EU. I applauded the sentiment but found it implausible ("Christ, that's a big ask!"). Cameron has not developed the muscles necessary to influence a qualified majority in the EC, let alone the unanimity required for a treaty change. Cameron is not capable of carrying out the task he has set himself and the Juncker debacle only highlights this. Cameron is simply not competent.
Given Cameron's inability to persuade the EU28exUK to share his desires, and his reluctance to define what his desires are, there may be nothing that EU28exUK can do to satisfy him. Again, the Juncker debacle highlights this.
dyedwoolie If Cameron gets enough UKIP votes back to get largest party, another coalition with a weakened LDs looks inevitable. Night!
* Number of people who think Juncker is not crap: the heads of government of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden; the Europarties EPP, PES and ALDE, and a majority of MEPs in the European Parliament
That's placing a greater burden on the word "universally" than it's reasonable to bear. Yup, the 26 countries are out of step. Silly them, eh? I strongly doubt at this point that there's anything the EU28exUK could offer the UK that would be acceptable to the UK and achievable in, say, a five-year timespan. Consider the Juncker clusterfuck. Three weeks ago, a nondescript Luxemburg politician. Now, after some Proper British Press Coverage That's The Envy Of The World, a smart feller like yourself can cheerfully type the words "universally agreed to be crap and completely out of tune with the zeitgeist" without noticing that it's complete horsefeathers. Given this level of vituperation, I doubt anything can be offered that won't be derided ("They've only offered their unborn daughters! EUROSCUM! We want the sons as well!")
If Britain is really going to jump onto the exit ramp over this, it would have just been a matter of time until they manufactured some other drama to exit over.