View Full Version : Cameron's days are numbered
tiger woods
11-Jul-11, 21:35
David Cameron's days seem numbered. Coulson's gonna bring him down. [lol]:lol:
David Cameron's days seem numbered. Coulson's gonna bring him down. [lol]:lol:
Yep. Aprox. 1460 (in this government anyway).[lol]
The government are in power for 5 years. They've had only about 15 months so far.
But please stop picking on poor David. He's a really really nice man and he doesn't deserve to be hung out to dry
The government are in power for 5 years. They've had only about 15 months so far.
But please stop picking on poor David. He's a really really nice man and he doesn't deserve to be hung out to dry
I'll tell you what makes me sick. The cowardice shown by Milliband in his approach to the NOTW scandal and the proposed takeover of BSKYB. The sick way he is trying to be on the side of the people against Newscorp and its intentions. The Govs. hands have been tied by legislation introduced by the last (idiots) Labour administration! Prior to this the Gov. could order an enquiry into any take over, but now can only refere to the Competition Commission under a very narrow set of circumstances. As it happens, today, by withdrawing its offer to spin of Sky News, Newscorp actually triggered a set of circumstances that allowed the immediate referral.
How nice to know that my brother in law's party can count on you Ducati
Dave's good good friends that he can rely on in Caithness
David Cameron's days seem numbered. Coulson's gonna bring him down. [lol]:lol:
Wanna bet?
How nice to know that my brother in law's party can count on you Ducati
Dave's good good friends that he can rely on in Caithness
Yes, he has my address for the kick backs :eek:
How nice to know that my brother in law's party can count on you Ducati
Dave's good good friends that he can rely on in Caithness
You never mention your Sister. Is she a fan?
My husband's sister is the person who is married to a Tory MP with good prospects.
We get invited to their dinner table (I get asked in order to load the dishwasher and wash lettuce etc)
At the last one, Sam Cam came and helped out, as did David- I do admire himfor being prepared to roll uphis sleeves and save the Le Creuset from ruining the Smeg
I do admire himfor being prepared to roll uphis sleeves and save the Le Creuset from ruining the SmegDon't let him near the BBQ though.
I'll tell you what makes me sick. The cowardice shown by Milliband in his approach to the NOTW scandal and the proposed takeover of BSKYB. The sick way he is trying to be on the side of the people against Newscorp and its intentions. The Govs. hands have been tied by legislation introduced by the last (idiots) Labour administration! Prior to this the Gov. could order an enquiry into any take over, but now can only refere to the Competition Commission under a very narrow set of circumstances. As it happens, today, by withdrawing its offer to spin of Sky News, Newscorp actually triggered a set of circumstances that allowed the immediate referral.
I can see why you would think that and from where your standing your right. :lol:
David Cameron's probably safe enough although he has got some loose ends to tie up. It's fantastic theatre and this afternoons session in parliament was classic. This is a big moment in our social history. I'm excited about the future for the first time in years. ;)
Maybe DC should stick to washing dishes and leave running a country to someone with better judgement!
tiger woods
12-Jul-11, 11:14
The government are in power for 5 years. They've had only about 15 months so far.
But please stop picking on poor David. He's a really really nice man and he doesn't deserve to be hung out to dry
He lied to parliament and to the British public regarding knowledge of Coulson's affairs at the NotW. He asked if there were reasons why he should not employ him and was given information concerning Coulson and his connections with known criminals who were jailed for conspiracy and corruption. This was prior to becoming Prime Minister. He was later reminded of this by Paddy Ashdown and his chum Nick Clegg when he took up office at No.10. He has decieved the public and Parliament and is now involved in covering-up his poor judgement in employing Coulson by continuing to lie about it.
He lied to parliament and to the British public regarding knowledge of Coulson's affairs at the NotW. He asked if there were reasons why he should not employ him and was given information concerning Coulson and his connections with known criminals who were jailed for conspiracy and corruption. This was prior to becoming Prime Minister. He was later reminded of this by Paddy Ashdown and his chum Nick Clegg when he took up office at No.10. He has decieved the public and Parliament and is now involved in covering-up his poor judgement in employing Coulson by continuing to lie about it.
Yawn - Storm in a teacup..
tiger woods
12-Jul-11, 11:33
Yawn - Storm in a teacup..
You happy with a liar leading the country? What else has he or will he lie about in the future?
NickInTheNorth
12-Jul-11, 11:33
Yawn - Storm in a teacup..
Prime Minister's lying to Parliament is never a storm in a teacup. It is an extremely serious matter, no matter how inconsequential the subject.
The only problem with bringing Dave down is the fact that he will be replaced by another Tory Git!!!!!
C3.......:eek:[disgust][disgust]
Mr cameron knew exactly what he was hiring, a criminal and one of murdochs right hand persons, oh and of course why was he employed in the first place, to guarantee them the next election,and murdochs support,
all eh tory grandees pleaded with cameron not to hire him, surefire winner or not, wonder why they would do that,,,
maybe they knew something we the public are only finding out now,,
And lying to parlament is a very serious offence,,well it is in any decent democracy.
Some of the reasons given by the main players in this pantomime may be unconvincing but because it's possible they are only incompitant, you canna call them liars. It's an unfolding drama of the complexities, to one degree or another, we all have to put up with in our daily lives. What a novel and it's only in the second chapter. It going to be a thick book.
I can call him what i want , its my opinion ,if he dont like it he can sue me, lol
:) Im just glad this stuff is finally coming out, its a disgrace to this country, and the people in it,,
tiger woods
12-Jul-11, 12:58
Some of the reasons given by the main players in this pantomime may be unconvincing but because it's possible they are only incompitant, you canna call them liars. It's an unfolding drama of the complexities, to one degree or another, we all have to put up with in our daily lives. What a novel and it's only in the second chapter. It going to be a thick book.
Stating that he was unaware of any reason why he should not employ Coulson is not incompetence, it's lying. He was well advised by many people at the time, but chose to ignore it. Stating that he was never advised of any concerns re Coulson is a conspiracy to cover-up.
Is this what we want from a Prime Minister?
He says he made his decision in good judgement even though he had been told about some of the baggage Mr Coulsen carried with him. He gave him a second chance and the guy became his friend. Its his judgement that's in the dock. Not his character.
Stating that he was unaware of any reason why he should not employ Coulson is not incompetence, it's lying. He was well advised by many people at the time, but chose to ignore it. Stating that he was never advised of any concerns re Coulson is a conspiracy to cover-up.
Is this what we want from a Prime Minister?
E orgers are stating opinions as facts....again:roll: Not even their own opinions, but those of a thoroughly discredited press.
Anyone who reads a newspaper from now on, for any reason but entertainment is an idiot!
Mr Cameron said Mr Coulson had resigned as News of the World editor when he found out about the "bad things" that had happened, and added that he did not think Mr Coulson should be punished twice.
He had given the former editor "a second chance" when he had appointed him, adding that Mr Coulson had done a "very good job" for the government and for the country,
qoute from wavy davy himself last year,,
i wonder what the bad things were that mr cameron and mr coulson discussed last year ,,,
tonkatojo
12-Jul-11, 13:32
Prime Minister's lying to Parliament is never a storm in a teacup. It is an extremely serious matter, no matter how inconsequential the subject.
Unless your a tory.
i wonder what the bad things were that mr cameron and mr coulson discussed last year ,,,
Andy Coulson was editor of the NOTW when the royal correspondent and a private detective were sent to jail for hacking members of the royal family. Andy Coulson took responsibility as the boss at the time but denied that he knew about the hacking. David Cameron believed him and so far hes not been found guilty of it.
Yes but Coulson is guilty, and was guilty long before he went to tory hq,, what i am saying is cameron was well informed but not proven about exactly what was going on at the NOTW, but chose to turn a blind eye for the big prize of government,
yee go to bed with the devil and,,,,
Andy Coulsons not been found guilty and that's why we need to be more aware of how important due process is. If you think someones guilty before they are ever tried its unlikely anything they say will mean anything. This affair should make that obvious. Just try listening to what people are saying not what the press are speculating about.
If anyone's telling lies about their involvement in this affair eventually it'll come out. There's 2 public inquiries likely to happen and a legal case is under way as well as select committees to face in the halls of Westminster.
What i think on this matter is irrelevant,,it counts for nothing in this democracy,,
and i only read the groat and courier,,and any info i get is from the bbc and parliment debates where they need to be very careful what they say.
oh and try telling that to the families that have been involved in this affair, are they guilty of anything, i think not, but mr coulson and murdoch and co seemed to find playing with their lives nothing more than a game.
me thinks Tommy Sheridan will just be getting out as coulson passes him on the way in.
sorry gleeber im a bit of a ranter when it comes to tabloid journalists and politicians, turds the majority of them are.
tiger woods
12-Jul-11, 17:07
Andy Coulson was editor of the NOTW when the royal correspondent and a private detective were sent to jail for hacking members of the royal family. Andy Coulson took responsibility as the boss at the time but denied that he knew about the hacking. David Cameron believed him and so far hes not been found guilty of it.
Cameron believed him when no one else did, what does that tell you about Cameron's judgement. Coulson 'resigned' again because he knew what was coming.
Do you really believe that Cameron didn't ask Coulson in the beginning and in the end what his involvement was? If he didn't, he shouldn't be running a bath let alone the country.
Yes but Coulson is guilty,
Blimey with judges like you we could save a fortune on lawyers, jurers, them blokes in wigs 'an all that malarky :eek:
tiger woods
12-Jul-11, 17:26
He says he made his decision in good judgement even though he had been told about some of the baggage Mr Coulsen carried with him. He gave him a second chance and the guy became his friend. Its his judgement that's in the dock. Not his character.
A Prime Minister with poor judgement is dangerous.
A Prime Minister with poor judgement is dangerous.
Yep. they could start illegal wars n stuff.
It's all speculation and unless you have concise details of exactly what was known by Coulson - he was interrogated by a Select Committee.. Give up this knee-jerk reaction of; "Ah got the Tory blighter" - stop reading the bloody papers - they are not real you know!.. Oh yea, forgot he's a Conservatives devil, so get the git..
IF at the end of all this nonsense Dave is found wanting, he should resign (and, as has been said you'll just get another Tory)
Yep. they could start illegal wars n stuff.
Thought that was a Labour bloke - thought THEY did not lie?
NickInTheNorth
12-Jul-11, 18:41
It's all speculation and unless you have concise details of exactly what was known by Coulson - he was interrogated by a Select Committee.. Give up this knee-jerk reaction of; "Ah got the Tory blighter" - stop reading the bloody papers - they are not real you know!.. Oh yea, forgot he's a Conservatives devil, so get the git..
IF at the end of all this nonsense Dave is found wanting, he should resign (and, as has been said you'll just get another Tory)
Sorry to disagree bekisman, but I think the point of this one is not the guilt or innocence of Coulson.
Rather the thing that could, and in my opinion should, bring Cameron down is the simple fact that he has lied on camera about something fairly fundamental in this whole sordid affair.
Was Cameron given any specific warnings about the problems that were likely to follow Coulson to Downing Street?
We have an editor of what is seen as a fairly decent newspaper, and a well known, but no longer ambitious politician, amongst others stating very publicly that they gave warnings to Cameron. I can't really think of any reason for either of those people to lie about the matter.
So why did Cameron feel the need to tell lies about it?
If he can lie about that what else will he lie about?
As I said in an earlier post, it is his Lewinsky moment. Telling a lie about something that in many respects does not matter, but the telling of which will haunt the rest of his time as Prime Minister.
tiger woods
12-Jul-11, 19:16
It's all speculation and unless you have concise details of exactly what was known by Coulson - he was interrogated by a Select Committee.. Give up this knee-jerk reaction of; "Ah got the Tory blighter" - stop reading the bloody papers - they are not real you know!.. Oh yea, forgot he's a Conservatives devil, so get the git..
IF at the end of all this nonsense Dave is found wanting, he should resign (and, as has been said you'll just get another Tory)
An email was sent to Cameron's private secretary (Llewellen) regarding Coulson's relationship with a convicted private detective (Reece) who was actually in prison at the time for corruption and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Coulson actually contacted him whilst he was in prison at the same time he was Cameron's and the Tories communications officer. Why did Cameron not quiz him about this?
An email was sent to Cameron's private secretary (Llewellen) regarding Coulson's relationship with a convicted private detective (Reece) who was actually in prison at the time for corruption and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Coulson actually contacted him whilst he was in prison at the same time he was Cameron's and the Tories communications officer. Why did Cameron not quiz him about this?
As Beks says. It is a storm in a teacup. The very worst thing about it is it is such a distraction from the important stuff that is going on in the world and in Britain. I don't think I have seen any news coverage from Lybia in two weeks. Lets face it. If it wasnt about someones rival newspaper it would have disappeared by now.
I was watching Keith Vass's commitee hearings today and the explanation for the failure of the initial police enquiry to turn up the more recent revelations is, at the time, there were much more important investigations going on. There had been bomb mayhem in London with the threat of more. As far as they (The Met) were concerned, it was about a few nobs and celebrities privacy being infringed. Noboby died and two people went to jail. They called it a result!
tiger woods
12-Jul-11, 20:45
As Beks says. It is a storm in a teacup. The very worst thing about it is it is such a distraction from the important stuff that is going on in the world and in Britain. I don't think I have seen any news coverage from Lybia in two weeks. Lets face it. If it wasnt about someones rival newspaper it would have disappeared by now.
I was watching Keith Vass's commitee hearings today and the explanation for the failure of the initial police enquiry to turn up the more recent revelations is, at the time, there were much more important investigations going on. There had been bomb mayhem in London with the threat of more. As far as they (The Met) were concerned, it was about a few nobs and celebrities privacy being infringed. Noboby died and two people went to jail. They called it a result!
It's a bit more than nobs and celebs now though.
Mr and Mrs Dowler, families of dead servicemen, 7/7 bombing victims and the royal family would disagree that this is just a storm in a tea cup. All the police needed to do was look through the Mulcaire evidence and they would have seen the depth of the problem. All this at the time when Murdoch was changing from supporting Labour to supporting the Tories. Could this be Cameron's 'inconvenient truth?'
It's a bit more than nobs and celebs now though.
Mr and Mrs Dowler, families of dead servicemen, 7/7 bombing victims and the royal family would disagree that this is just a storm in a tea cup. All the police needed to do was look through the Mulcaire evidence and they would have seen the depth of the problem. All this at the time when Murdoch was changing from supporting Labour to supporting the Tories. Could this be Cameron's 'inconvenient truth?'
Still don't see it as of earth shattering importance myself. (Although I do sympathies with victims of crime and wars families. They have no blame in this and the ever more lurid revelations, on a daily basis, do nothing I'm sure to console them). It is no surprise to me that the press are incompetent, immoral and lazy. I learned this from personal experience. I've not bought a newspaper for 30 years or more, I urge you to do the same.
I will just repeat what I said before-stop picking on David- he isn't the sharpest tool in the box and just because a journalisthung him out to dry doesn't mean people shouldn't love him. I do. Any man prepared towash pots without rubber gloves is a star in my eyes
Any man prepared towash pots without rubber gloves is a star in my eyes
I'm your man then Bagpuss, never mind old Dave. I am prepared to wash pots in scolding hot water without yellow gloves, dry them and put them away and I wont rob the poor and sick.......Unlike Our Dave!!!!!!
Come and get me you Hussy!!!!
C3...... :roll:;):lol:
Still don't see it as of earth shattering importance myself.
It's going to keep the news flowing for a while to come. Just what they need. The media are slevering at the mouth in anticipation at what's going to happen next. It's unbelievable how much they were all entangled in it. Politicians, journalists, TV, police and all of it at the heart of Government. This is going to remove a lot of power from the media just like the MPs were shamed for the way they abused expenses. The cops are going to have to give themselves a shake too. Its going to be interesting to se how it develops.
Why don't we get back to proper 'reporting the news' rather than watching two reporters having a pre-rehearsed unsubstantiated blether of things that may have happened?
Why don't we get back to proper 'reporting the news' rather than watching two reporters having a pre-rehearsed unsubstantiated blether of things that may have happened?
I would prefer no popular print press, failing that, very heavy regulation. Bleating about freedom doesn't wash when the freedom is constantly abused in the persute of circulation. As an industry, it can't be trusted, does way more harm than good and perpetuates negative stereotypes, and ingrained negative attitudes.
Don't do much for trees either!
Newspapers main purpose is as a vehicle for advertising. This scews any possible independence of thought any journalist has. Between satisfying the advertisers need to hit as many of the target market as possible and the proprietors need for a reflection of their own values and attitudes, freedom of the press is a myth.
The above is my own opinion BTW :lol:
As an industry, it can't be trusted, does way more harm than good and perpetuates negative stereotypes, and ingrained negative attitudes.
I agree but I don't blame the newspapers. :lol:
tiger woods
13-Jul-11, 15:09
Cameron still squirming around answering what he did or did not know prior to hiring Coulson.
He also ducked the question as to whether his Private Secretary (Llewellen) did tell him about Coulson's connections, as well as what he is likely to do with Llewellen, if as he sugests Llewellen didn't tell him.
Cameron surely isn't seriously sugesting that information of this magnitude would not have been passed to him. If he is, he should sack Llewellen immediately. Why hasn't he? because he's toughing it out and covering it up.
Cameron still squirming around answering what he did or did not know prior to hiring Coulson.
He also ducked the question as to whether his Private Secretary (Llewellen) did tell him about Coulson's connections, as well as what he is likely to do with Llewellen, if as he sugests Llewellen didn't tell him.
Cameron surely isn't seriously sugesting that information of this magnitude would not have been passed to him. If he is, he should sack Llewellen immediately. Why hasn't he? because he's toughing it out and covering it up.
I saw PMQs too, he didn't duck the question he said no. Stop making stuff up!
I still believe David Cameron but he still has those loose ends to tie up.
tiger woods
13-Jul-11, 21:42
I saw PMQs too, he didn't duck the question he said no. Stop making stuff up!
Cameron replied that the information he recieved was basically the same as that which appeared in the Guardian newspaper and that there was no reason to change his decision for employing Coulson. The article in the Guardian was not the same as the content of the email which was sent to LLewellen, his Private Secetary. Cameron has yet to acknowledge the existence of that email or the fact that Llewellen did not inform him of it's contents. This will come out over the coming days as the focus of questioning centres around Cameron and Coulson.
Incidentally, the Guardian newspaper has apparently accused Cameron of deceiveing Parliament today during PMQ's. Tom Watson the Labour MP for West Bromwich, called for a point of order during a separate debate today and asked the speaker if he had any knowledge of the accusation which will apparently appear in tomorrows Guardian.
I do not make 'stuff up,' I merely say what I see and know, unless of course you are sugesting that an ever growing number of MP's are deceiveing Parliament by raising these questions.
Cameron replied that the information he recieved was basically the same as that which appeared in the Guardian newspaper and that there was no reason to change his decision for employing Coulson. The article in the Guardian was not the same as the content of the email which was sent to LLewellen, his Private Secetary. Cameron has yet to acknowledge the existence of that email or the fact that Llewellen did not inform him of it's contents. This will come out over the coming days as the focus of questioning centres around Cameron and Coulson.
Incidentally, the Guardian newspaper has apparently accused Cameron of deceiveing Parliament today during PMQ's. Tom Watson the Labour MP for West Bromwich, called for a point of order during a separate debate today and asked the speaker if he had any knowledge of the accusation which will apparently appear in tomorrows Guardian.
I do not make 'stuff up,' I merely say what I see and know, unless of course you are sugesting that an ever growing number of MP's are deceiveing Parliament by raising these questions.
I'll quote you in case you disappear.... again.
I don't often post here nowadays. My reasons are various.
Did you hope to start some debate? Intellectual or otherwise?
tiger woods
13-Jul-11, 22:32
I'll quote you in case you disappear.... again.
I don't often post here nowadays. My reasons are various.
Did you hope to start some debate? Intellectual or otherwise?
Read this.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jul/13/david-cameron-warning-andy-coulson
I was asking you a question. I don't require your guidance regarding which newspaper I read, thanks.
I was asking you a question. I don't require your guidance regarding which newspaper I read, thanks.
Hear Hear Moira, I do not need instructions on which newspaper to pay attention to. Only newspaper I would trust at the moment is 'e 'Groat.
tiger woods
13-Jul-11, 23:07
I was asking you a question. I don't require your guidance regarding which newspaper I read, thanks.
930 views and 54 replies sugests it's a debate and until you posted, it was a sensible debate.
tiger woods
13-Jul-11, 23:12
I was asking you a question. I don't require your guidance regarding which newspaper I read, thanks.
I detected a note of sincism in your tone so I pointed you in the direction of where some of the information I have discussed is coming from, just in case you also think I'm making this 'stuff up.'
NickInTheNorth
13-Jul-11, 23:13
for what it's worth I would have to agree with tiger woods, Cameron ducked the issue, would not address the warning directly at all. He placed himself in a hole at the press conference he called last week to discuss the "phone hacking" regarding Coulson, and has dug it a little deeper almost every day since.
Cameron replied that the information he recieved was basically the same as that which appeared in the Guardian newspaper and that there was no reason to change his decision for employing Coulson. The article in the Guardian was not the same as the content of the email which was sent to LLewellen, his Private Secetary. Cameron has yet to acknowledge the existence of that email or the fact that Llewellen did not inform him of it's contents. This will come out over the coming days as the focus of questioning centres around Cameron and Coulson.
Incidentally, the Guardian newspaper has apparently accused Cameron of deceiveing Parliament today during PMQ's. Tom Watson the Labour MP for West Bromwich, called for a point of order during a separate debate today and asked the speaker if he had any knowledge of the accusation which will apparently appear in tomorrows Guardian.
I do not make 'stuff up,' I merely say what I see and know, unless of course you are sugesting that an ever growing number of MP's are deceiveing Parliament by raising these questions.
Nope. The specific question was did LLewellen pass on a specific warning? The answer was no.
The views and the replies prove nothing. Are you suggesting (note the correct spelling) that I am not sensible?
tiger woods
13-Jul-11, 23:39
Nope. The specific question was did LLewellen pass on a specific warning? The answer was no.
You are indeed correct, he did state that Ed Llewellyn did not pass on this information, there in lies the conspiracy to cover-up.
He did though, duck the question as to what he has done regarding Ed Llewellyn. Surely you're not suggesting (correct spelling this time Moira) that this information was not serious enough to draw to the attention of the Prime Minister.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wckWfEvQb9M
tiger woods
13-Jul-11, 23:46
The views and the replies prove nothing. Are you suggesting (note the correct spelling) that I am not sensible?
The views prove that people are interested enough to read the posts and the replies prove that this is a debate. And yes, I am suggesting that you are not very sensible given your tone in your earlier post.
If you don't like what I say, don't read my posts.
The views prove that people are interested enough to read the posts and the replies prove that this is a debate. And yes, I am suggesting that you are not very sensible given your tone in your earlier post.
If you don't like what I say, don't read my posts.
OK, fair enough. I think you are a troll given your posting history. You're wrong about me BTW.....
tiger woods
14-Jul-11, 00:06
OK, fair enough. I think you are a troll given your posting history. You're wrong about me BTW.....
You're not going to drag me into making negative comments and incurring infractions in the process. Can I remind you that it was you who 'jumped in' and had a go at me first. Classic trolling IMHO.
Of course not. It would be all my fault if you'd been silent on these forums since the start of the year, wouldn't it?
tiger woods
14-Jul-11, 00:23
Of course not. It would be all my fault if you'd been silent on these forums since the start of the year, wouldn't it?
Do you want to debate the subject matter of this thread or do you want to discuss my posting history and the reasons why I've not posted for a few months?
Blazing Sporrans
14-Jul-11, 01:06
I've been following this thread as a debate until this ridiculous back-biting and bitching has started. And who cares whether someone can spell correctly or not? This has become childish and tiresome...
You are indeed correct, he did state that Ed Llewellyn did not pass on this information, there in lies the conspiracy to cover-up.
He did though, duck the question as to what he has done regarding Ed Llewellyn. Surely you're not suggesting (correct spelling this time Moira) that this information was not serious enough to draw to the attention of the Prime Minister.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wckWfEvQb9M
Thank you. I'm not suggesting anything. Nor am I speculating on what people thought at the time. I am waiting for real information to be available. Anything else is a pointless waste of time (although it will continue to sell newspapers). These ceased to be useful in my opinion when they stopped wrapping chips in them.[lol]
I think apart from the outbreak of backbiting that the politialallegiances and affiliations of the main protagonists is obvious- and this might actually have distracted us from the original message- is David living on borrowed time?
Following in the footsteps of Teflon Tony- possibly not-and the Coalition lives to fight another day (or 4 years) having redirected the venom of the nation in the direction of Rupert the Bad and his merry team of hacks
However- a final thought. David is a nice man- and I stress the word 'nice'. Mumsnet (a much more influential web forum than the org) absolutely love him. However lots of people on his front bench are much more ruthless - and he cannot keep on making U turns. ( You turn if you want- the lady's not for turning)
hard times still lie ahead. and ask not what the Coalition Government can do for you- what can you do for your Coalition?
tiger woods
15-Jul-11, 12:26
Back to the thrust of this debate, Cameron is asking us to accept that he knew nothing of the criminality surrounding Andy Coulson before inviting him into no.10. Here are the facts as I see them:
*Nick Clegg warned him that Coulson was trouble
*Lord Ashdown did the same
*Gordon Brown warned Nick Clegg about Coulson's criminality
*The Guardian newspaper sent two emails to Ed Llewellyn providing details of Coulson's connections with convicted criminals
*Speculation was rife in the media about how 'dodgy' Coulson was
*Large sections of the general public felt employing Coulson was a huge mistake
*MP's in the House of Commons asked Cameron about his chief communications director (Coulson) and his connections with criminals
*MP's in the House of Commons were asking Cameron about Coulson's involvement with the hacking scandal
*The select committee stated that they did not believe either Coulson or Brookes after they gave evidence into the hacking scandal
With all this, Cameron still asks us to accept that he was unaware of Coulson's misgivings, because Coulson assured him that he was entirely innocent, (turkeys rarely vote for Christmas.)
For what it's worth, here is what I think. Cameron was too close to News Corps after they switched their allegiance to the Conservatives. Dinner parties, Christmas dinners and social gatherings with the executives at News International made for a cosy relationship. When Cameron appointed Coulson he would have known Coulson's connection to the hacking scandal but gave him a 'second chance.' At this point Cameron would not have been too concerned as the scandal only concerned celebs and politicians. When the news broke about Milly Dowler's phone being hacked, as well as 7/7 victims and servicemen killed in action, Cameron had a decision to make. That decision was to effectively sack Coulson and 'round up the wagons' in order to protect himself. This was all done before the depth of the scandal was made public. He decided to 'tough it out' and now feels that he can't back down and thus is conspiring to 'cover-up' his poor judgement. Part of this 'cover-up' is to deceive Parliament as claimed by the Guardian Newspaper, which has always backed the Tories. For the Guardian to take this line with a Conservative Prime Minister, suggests that there is some evidence to support their claim.
For Gawd sake TW give it a rest, you have worn that record out, forget it and move on.
hard times still lie ahead. and ask not what the Coalition Government can do for you- what can you do for your Coalition?
OK, I will ask........What can I do for the Coalition?
There, I have done it, now what?
C3........:roll::roll:
tiger woods
15-Jul-11, 12:42
For Gawd sake TW give it a rest, you have worn that record out, forget it and move on.
Are you happy with a PM who acts in this way?
If we all just took things at face value (like you appear to) we would be in a pretty sorry state as a country. I'm not happy and have the right to say so. This is too serious a situation to just 'forget and move on.'
Are you happy with a PM who acts in this way?
If we all just took things at face value (like you appear to) we would be in a pretty sorry state as a country. I'm not happy and have the right to say so. This is too serious a situation to just 'forget and move on.'
I agree the whole thing looks dodgy and is. However there are more intriguing bones to get your dog into. Like how come the most senior member of the Met team investigating NOTW hacking retired and two months later is working for Murdoch?.
tiger woods
15-Jul-11, 18:14
I agree the whole thing looks dodgy and is. However there are more intriguing bones to get your dog into. Like how come the most senior member of the Met team investigating NOTW hacking retired and two months later is working for Murdoch?.
Corruption, sleaze and scandal from top to bottom. I believe (and hope) this is Cameron's Watergate. If we can't trust him with this, what can we trust him with?
Typical Tories, reverting to type and looking after the well healed, jobs for the boys. The rich are getting richer and the rest of us are suffering because of the mess they created. I along with most other people will have to put up with this, but I don't need to stay silent in the process.
Corruption, sleaze and scandal from top to bottom. I believe (and hope) this is Cameron's Watergate. If we can't trust him with this, what can we trust him with?
Typical Tories, reverting to type and looking after the well healed, jobs for the boys. The rich are getting richer and the rest of us are suffering because of the mess they created. I along with most other people will have to put up with this, but I don't need to stay silent in the process.Ah! "Typical Tories, reverting to type and looking after the well healed, jobs for the boys" I wondered how long that would take..
Do you want to debate the subject matter of this thread or do you want to discuss my posting history and the reasons why I've not posted for a few months?
This is not a debate. It's a case of you being bored, IMO :)
Corruption, sleaze and scandal from top to bottom. I believe (and hope) this is Cameron's Watergate. If we can't trust him with this, what can we trust him with?
Typical Tories, reverting to type and looking after the well healed, jobs for the boys. The rich are getting richer and the rest of us are suffering because of the mess they created. I along with most other people will have to put up with this, but I don't need to stay silent in the process.
Ooops! You seem to have slipped into a different thread or 10.
So one of the reporters who is suspected of doing the hacking of David Cameron's political opponents actually worked for the Conservative party prior to the general election. Back in 1972 President Nixon resigned before being impeached over Watergate, the similarities are compelling.
Ed Milliband sounded like a stuck record then suddenly shut up :eek:
tonkatojo
21-Jul-11, 10:03
Ed Milliband sounded like a stuck record then suddenly shut up :eek:
It would appear Jeremy Hunt Didn't read the script. LOL
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.