Antics of Old Men and Old Newspapers

[benji]

Some topical posting.....

Should I be concerned with the antics of a 68 year old when he has been involved in something that hurts no one (apart from himself), does not directly affect me nor does he have any effect/influence what-so-ever over my life?

If the answer is yes then should I be pleased/thankful that papers such as the News of the World are concernered enough to ensure that I am informed?

Personally I couldn't care less what he gets up to - it did not result in harm to anyone (apart from himself). I also think that it is a poor line of defense from the News of the Screws.......(interesting article on page 4 of Private Eye today)

[_Ju_]

Consenting adults. Each to their own. It's no ones business.

[changilass]

Might help if I knew what you were talking about lol, any chance of providing a link for those of us too tight to buy a paper.

[Anne x]

Might help if I knew what you were talking about lol, any chance of providing a link for those of us too tight to buy a paper.


think its possibly about Max Mosley the ex Formula 1 boss but just guessing changi

[golach]

Some topical posting.....

Should I be concerned with the antics of a 68 year old when he has been involved in something that hurts no one (apart from himself), does not directly affect me nor does he have any effect/influence what-so-ever over my life?
I am 68 years old, and I have never taken part in anything that would cause me pain. (I have a very low pain threshold) :~(
So benji, I hope you were not refering to me, and if so, I am glad that I have no direct influence over you. [lol]

[Buttercup]

Some topical posting.....

Should I be concerned with the antics of a 68 year old when he has been involved in something that hurts no one (apart from himself), does not directly affect me nor does he have any effect/influence what-so-ever over my life?

If the answer is yes then should I be pleased/thankful that papers such as the News of the World are concernered enough to ensure that I am informed?

Personally I couldn't care less what he gets up to - it did not result in harm to anyone (apart from himself). I also think that it is a poor line of defense from the News of the Screws.......(interesting article on page 4 of Private Eye today)


Of no interst to me but then again your statement/question (apart from the 68 year old bit) could apply to most "news" articles within the papers.[lol]

[skinnydog]

I think that the NOTW has a right in the public interest to reveal the antics of public figures like Max "the spank" Mosley.
He is dealing with a sport that generates millions a year from TV, advertising and ticket sales, the fact is that he has been lying to his wife and family for over 40 years so it puts doubt on his caracter being a fit and proper person to be the figure head for international motorsport.
I will agree that the Nazi stuff should not have been reported as it was a fabrication.

[benji]

...for those of you who are lucky enough to have missed this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7523034.stm

[benji]

I think that the NOTW has a right in the public interest to reveal the antics of public figures like Max "the spank" Mosley.
He is dealing with a sport that generates millions a year from TV, advertising and ticket sales, the fact is that he has been lying to his wife and family for over 40 years so it puts doubt on his caracter being a fit and proper person to be the figure head for international motorsport.
I will agree that the Nazi stuff should not have been reported as it was a fabrication.

Do we know that his wife didn't have any incling what-so-ever? Why does the situtaion question his character?

[skinnydog]

As he lied to his wife for 40 years not telling her about the hookers and S+M stuff.
Maybe he did tell his wife about the S+M stuff but she was a bit thick and thought it was all harmless fun at Marks and Spencer!

[pat]

Whatever he and others get up to in their lives - as long as it is legal and the people concerned are consenting it is nobody elses business.

Anything to sell a newspaper.

When the authors of these lurid stories are likely to be on the front pages of the papers for some illegal thing they have done they then do their best to stop their illegal activities coming to light, the writers certainly live and work with double standards.

If they can find a bit of rubbish they try toblow it up out of all proportion - anything to sell papers and make more money syndicating the rubbish.

[scorrie]

Consenting adults. Each to their own. It's no ones business.

True. To paraphrase an old saying "If you can't beat them, BEAT them" ;)

[northener]

It's lovely to see the tabloids squealing about 'freedom of the press' again[lol]

You cannot hope to bribe or twist
thank God! The British journalist.

But, seeing what the man will do
unbribed, there's no occasion to.

Humbert Wolfe ( i think).

I think i may have posted this on a thread some time ago - but i'm too addled to remember that far back. Apologies for any repetition.

[magtomich]

Surely what one gets up to in their private life should have nothing to do with anyone.

[Melancholy Man]

Although, when they're the son of the leader of the British Union of Fascists and, despite being 68 years old and married, appear to partake of kinky Nazi themed sex games with dolly birds, we members of the public are entitled to have our opinions about their suitability for presidency of an international sporting body. Once which wouldn't think twice about banning a sportsman for a minor drug offence.

Oh, stop panicking! This is all accepted fact. His position, not being able to disprove it, was that it had invaded his privacy. At least he's learn from Tommy Sheridan that it may not be good to claim it was a lie unless he can absolutely prove so.

[northener]

Although, when they're the son of the leader of the British Union of Fascists and, despite being 68 years old and married, appear to partake of kinky Nazi themed sex games with dolly birds, we members of the public are entitled to have our opinions about their suitability for presidency of an international sporting body. Once which wouldn't think twice about banning a sportsman for a minor drug offence............

.

What his fathers politics were is nobody's business but his own. Even is he is himself a fascist (proof would be nice?) - so what?

Kinky Nazi sex games? Not illegal.
Relevance to being head of International Sporting Body? None whatsoever.

Married? So what? Who are we to morally judge someone who is not breaking the law?

We are not talking about someone who holds a position that nations futures or peoples lives depend on.
It's governing body for atheletes running around, throwing things and making money. So it is not 'in the public interest' - as the tabloids would have us believe. Period.

Banning drug users from sport? Absolutely within his rights to do it. That's what he's there for. I don't recall any atheletes being banned for shagging their way around Europe though........

[Melancholy Man]

Kinky Nazi sex games? Not illegal.

Although, when he is the son of the principle British Nazi sympathizer (and whose mother told Sue Lawley on Desert Island Discs that the Holocaust was disputed), doubts can certainly be raised as to whether he is truly aware of the significance or, even, using his association for tasteless personal gratification.

He should not be punished/judged for his father's actions, and he hasn't been. His family, largely returned to a privileged life far better than that his father would have seen inflicted on the wrong social or political classes or ethnic groups. Anyone remember Not the Nine O'Clock News' take on pa's obituaries?


Married? So what? Who are we to morally judge someone who is not breaking the law?

Quite easily. Morals are separate from the law. And, here's the rub, he aimed to cultivate an image of a respectable barrister and family man and influential figure, free from the worries which concern millions of individuals who have none of that. And he also wants the option for kinky sex games. He wanted his cake and to eat it. Do we honestly think such opportunities would present themselves to a nondescript drag racer who came into a few bob after a dodgy insurance payout?

Jade Goody, hardly a role-model for the working classes I hasten to add, got none of that, and no option for legal redress. Then there is the actual matter of the British systems of libel which are throwbacks to a time when all the media were controlled by just a handful of men, and protection of the individual was vital. Not today's mass media in which, unless the false allegation is really offensive, redress can be easily sought.

Again, comment has not been passed on the truth or not of the case. Just that his privacy was invaded. And he gets £60,000, which he hardly needs, for this? There's a CCTV camera pointing in the direction of my window. Can I claim my privacy is being invaded? No.


Banning drug users from sport? Absolutely within his rights to do it.

What is the difference? It doesn't affect others, just some nebulous concept of honour in sport and examples to the young. Just that they don't apply to the nabob chiefs who make hefty packets whilst cultivating images of respectable family men.


That's what he's there for.

He's there to represent the FIA, which a lot of associates have decided was tarnished. Which I guess would be why he'd want to keep it quiet whilst drawing the salary. If it were true of course.

[hotrod4]

Although, when they're the son of the leader of the British Union of Fascists and, despite being 68 years old and married, appear to partake of kinky Nazi themed sex games with dolly birds, .

But wasnt the reason he sued was because he held his hands up(unhandcuffed of course)and admitted to "having relations with those women" but it had nothing to do with nazi's at all?, he sued them because (for a change) TNOW made up that bit to sell papers.
If i am still able to dance the light fandango as well as him when i am 68, i can barely wait!!! ;)

[northener]

Sorry MM but the whole of your last post is based merely on your own personal moral stance. And, to use your term, there is definitely the rub!

Tackling this in no particular order:

Regarding use of drugs and the idea of a simply 'nebulous honour', you're way off the mark there.
The rules are clearly laid down on performance enhancing drugs - note 'performance enhancing'. The use of these will artificially promote the athelete into a position that may have been unattainable without them. This will then bring the rewards and riches due the victor. Note the word riches....
So that is somewhat different to romping around with a few tarts....which just gets you into trouble with the righteous.

"Morals are separate from the law. And, here's the rub, he aimed to cultivate an image of a respectable barrister and family man and influential figure, free from the worries which concern millions of individuals who have none of that. And he also wants the option for kinky sex games. He wanted his cake and to eat it. Do we honestly think such opportunities would present themselves to a nondescript drag racer who came into a few bob after a dodgy insurance payout?"

Exactly, morals are seperate from the law. I do not find his actions immoral. You do.
That's why we have the Law, if we are in dispute, the Law decides. The Law did decide and Muesli won. Good.
I find intrusion into any individuals' private life (providing they are not breaking the law or threatening someones safety or security) offensive and a gross invasion of privacy.
As for the comments about being "influential", "free from the worries of millions" and "having his cake and eating it" amongst others, I'm suprised MM, I never had you down a 'class war' throwback.....

"He's there to represent the FIA, which a lot of associates have decided was tarnished."

A lot of associates, my friend, but not the majority that you forget to mention who voted to keep him in. Proving that the FIA has it's head screwed on the right way round and won't be cowed by shrieking moralistic zealots.

[percy toboggan]

I'd be worried about any elderly relative who liked to be thrashed on the buttocks until they bled. I have never quite been able to understand those who enjoy such treatment,much less those who like to dole it out.

Were someone to offer to pay me to give them a severe thrashing I honestly think I would decline...unless I was skint.

Moreover, anyone wanting to beat my bum until it was red would get very short shrift indeed . I make my living via my bottom - sitting upon it - and such treatment could be considered a barrier to trade, not to mention the very height of indignity. One must have had a very strange upbringing indeed to relish such a pummelling.

That said, the old duffer should step down....it's time he put his feet up...or possibly, in his world, time to be tethered by the ankles, suspended upside down and flogged into his dotage. Just imagine, if things had gone differently in the nineteen forties this geezer could be in a position of real power now...maybe a Senior Politician , even a Law-Lord or High Court Judge.....mmm...maybe things might not have been so different!

[Melancholy Man]

Regarding use of drugs and the idea of a simply 'nebulous honour', you're way off the mark there.Not the use themselves, but the concept in which it's considered incontrovertible that it's beyond the pale. Under the current set-up, using a nasal spray at the wrong time can be considered "performance enhancing". And, once again, they direct affect only the sportsman. You and others, however, have made a moral decision that they shouldn't be allowed.

On balance, I don't think they should be, but I'm not deluding myself it's some sort of absolute or comparable to a sportsman actively fouling another competitor.


Exactly, morals are seperate from the law. I do not find his actions immoral.What Mosley gets up to behind closed doors is his own affair, as long as it ain't completely off the wall. However, if he wants to maintain a public image of upstanding member of the establishment *and* spank the cheeky girls... well... one or t'other. The nearest comparison with drugs in sports would have to be a sportsman who'd presented a squeaky-clean life or benefitted from the punishment of others, only to be found taking it himself. Then I'd approve of his censure not only because of the drug taking, but also because he's a lying git.


That's why we have the Law, if we are in dispute, the Law decides. The Law did decide and Muesli won. Good.Except this was not subject to levels of criminal investigation. It was libel law which *is* becoming seen as a national joke as plaintives whose case has the loosest link to the UK choose us because of the skewed priorities and ridiculous payouts. Mosley used this maligned system. He got £60,000 for a story which he didn't dispute was true


A lot of associates, my friend, but not the majority that you forget to mention who voted to keep him in.And enough were voting against him to give him sleepless nights. I wasn't aware that job descriptions these days including how much opportunity for sexual braggadocio the post-holder could derive.


As for the comments about being "influential", "free from the worries of millions" and "having his cake and eating it" amongst others, I'm suprised MM, I never had you down a 'class war' throwback.Class-war? Bunch of middle-class kids and SPGB holy fools playing at being radical! ;)

So, all the stuff I've said about the Chartists or judging on social position before race have passed you by? [lol]

[northener]

So, all the stuff I've said about the Chartists or judging on social position before race have passed you by? [lol]


Er...yes it did pass me by, I'm afraid. Please elaborate, old chap.