Mantis Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I fail see how understanding an action more than another makes said action less bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Its quite simple isn't it really. If I walk into the street now and : a.) start talking down to and swearing at a Policeman for do nothing more than his job or b.) am attacked and in self defence smack the person attacking me in chops It should go with out saying but seems not for one or two posters but the vast majority of people would say in the first instance I am bang out of order and in the second instance fair play to you I'd like to think I have enough about me to do the same. The first instance in terms of my actions would be far worse. In fact they are simply incomparable as one is me attacking someone and the other is me defending myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Tony will want to keep bringing up the Prescott incident from a few years back as some sort of justification for any behavior by Tory members. Despite it having little to no relevance to the point being raised. On the ConDem's good to see Clegg digging a few more feet for his political grave today. That man really has got a one way ticket to Political Dignitas for himself and his party. When the inevitable comes and Cameron's leadership is challenged from within the Tory party, what will Clegg do then? No doubt retire on a decent pension leaving behind a political party that was once a credible third voice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 People can understand Prescot's reaction to physical provocation, people can't understand Mitchell's reaction to being asked to follow the current security regime. I remember i used to get the 5:38am train into London when i worked there , needless to say there was nobody around to renew my monthly ticket , so the guard did it on the train every month like clockwork , more than one guard , more than one train .... then one month the guard came around said you can't renew it on the train , it's never been allowed and I've done this job for xxx number of years and can assure you nobody has ever been allowed to do it ... you can imagine it was somewhat frustrating that I knew 100% he was wrong and that something I had done for 7 months or more was stopped Ok , I didn't go postal on the man and f and blind at him but he was being a cock and incredibly annoying with it , to the point that when he tried to issue me with a penalty fare I was just about ready to explode Now the first report I read at the time said Mitchell had cycled out the gates every day for Lord knows how long and then plod stopped him .... possibly being met by plod telling him he couldn't and that nobody ever did , could just tip someone over the edge in a William Foster type manner ? It's all hypothetical of course , to a degree we don't know exactly what happened but I actually think people would have sympathy with someone losing it when met with a jobsworth , unless he's a Tory of course .. I suspect there have even been rants in VT about encountering such jobsworths like I say purely hypothetical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Its quite simple isn't it really. If I walk into the street now and : a.) start talking down to and swearing at a Policeman for do nothing more than his job or b.) am attacked and in self defence smack the person attacking me in chops It should go with out saying but seems not for one or two posters but the vast majority of people would say in the first instance I am bang out of order and in the second instance fair play to you I'd like to think I have enough about me to do the same. The first instance in terms of my actions would be far worse. And by attacked specifically you mean get an egg thrown at you. It was hardly self defence either as the person that threw the egg clearly wasn't going to do anything else to him. I'm not defending the egg thrower by the way, just saying that it can hardly be called self defence and personally I see punching someone else in the face after having an egg thrown at them as worse than swearing at someone for no reason, regardless of how much I'm sure that I would've done the same thing as Prescott. I do wonder though, if the situations were reversed and it was a Conservative MP getting egged and punching someone and a Labour MP swearing at a police officer if people's views would be different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Its quite simple isn't it really. If I walk into the street now and : a.) start talking down to and swearing at a Policeman for do nothing more than his job or b.) am attacked and in self defence smack the person attacking me in chops It should go with out saying but seems not for one or two posters but the vast majority of people would say in the first instance I am bang out of order and in the second instance fair play to you I'd like to think I have enough about me to do the same. The first instance in terms of my actions would be far worse. Sigh ..it was about fit and proper behaviour of someone holding public office however , I think in the first instance the vast majority would have waited for the full story before jumping to the defence of the police on a football forum without hearing both sides of the story In a Mitchell showing his true colours type way it's interesting to see you suggest that only someone with "enough about them" would go in fists first .. bet Gandhi wishes he had come to you for advise first out of interest , a few other politicians have been egged , foam pie'd etc over the years ... how many of them retaliated , sorry used self defence , and punched their assailant ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Tony that is the most desperate attempt to justify his actions I have read yet. Mitchell has history The fact that so many within the Tory party wanted him out also shows that there was a lot more to this story than he tried to bluff. How you can continue to try and justify his actions as being acceptable is smiley miley time Didn't a certain Tory darling Boris say that people who swear and rant at police officers (not plod please) should be arrested? Just put it down as a massive Own Goal by one of the Tory leadership while you can 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Tony will want to keep bringing up the Prescott incident from a few years back as some sort of justification for any behavior by Tory members. Despite it having little to no relevance to the point being raised. On the ConDem's good to see Clegg digging a few more feet for his political grave today. That man really has got a one way ticket to Political Dignitas for himself and his party. When the inevitable comes and Cameron's leadership is challenged from within the Tory party, what will Clegg do then? No doubt retire on a decent pension leaving behind a political party that was once a credible third voice. sigh and a bit sad really (edit , should just qualify i'm not calling the poster sad , it was more that a few of us had suggested we try and rise above this type of post and keep the thread away from meltdown) if your not going to bother reading what i've been saying why bother commenting ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Mitchell had cycled out the gates every day for Lord knows how long and then pled stopped him .... Is a pled someone who's a cross between a plod and a pleb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Tony that is the most desperate attempt to justify his actions I have read yet. Mitchell has history The fact that so many within the Tory party wanted him out also shows that there was a lot more to this story than he tried to bluff. How you can continue to try and justify his actions as being acceptable is smiley miley time Didn't a certain Tory darling Boris say that people who swear and rant at police officers (not plod please) should be arrested? Just put it down as a massive Own Goal by one of the Tory leadership while you can So now you want to quote Boris ..priceless Swearing at a policeman shouldn't be a crime (within reason I guess i should add) , a judge even ruled as such ( though I believe another judge ruled otherwise ) ... Boris can offer an opinion but that doesn't make him correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 out of interest , a few other politicians have been egged , foam pie'd etc over the years ... how many of them retaliated , sorry used self defence , and punched their assailant ? It is rare for egging to take place within arm's reach, so the issue of physical retaliation doesn't arise. It's normally not possible. As for foam pies, the most recent example ended with kung fu queen Wendy leaping in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Is a pled someone who's a cross between a plod and a pleb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Why is it priceless? I am sure that on many occasion, you and fellow Tory supporters have lauded Boris as a leader in the making. The point (as you well know) is that Boris publicly stated that anti-social behavior should not be tolerated. Mitchell was guilty of that anti-social behavious, shame that on Boris's "turf" he didn't follow through with the repercussions he suggested? :-) Mitchell was guilty as charged, another member of the cabinet and part of the Tory party inner circle that has had to resign because of their actions. End of really ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 out of interest , a few other politicians have been egged , foam pie'd etc over the years ... how many of them retaliated , sorry used self defence , and punched their assailant ? As you said earlier we are going around in circles here but I'm happy to get dizzy with you. I'd say that very few, if any I can think of, have had an egg **** at them from a matter of inches and had there assailant with in arms, or fists length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Look at the thrower's mullet. He deserved punching, egg or not. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Look at the thrower's mullet. He deserved punching, egg or not. Careful what your saying in here. Tonyh was his stylist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I think Chris Waddle got there before me 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Stuff David Cameron Forgot to Say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 It's also an example of the ignorance and lack of understanding I mentioned before. Because... Because if you look at the Starbucks UK accounts, you'll see that on sales of £400m, the company lost £4m. And that loss is BEFORE any transfer pricing arrangements, such as the royalty and interest charges. The reality is that Starbucks grew too quickly in the UK and it entered stupid bidding wars with other chains, eg Coffee Republic and Costa for expensive retail units in prime locations. You need to look behind headlines from people like UK Uncut and that idiot Richard Murphy and analyse the actual facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Because if you look at the Starbucks UK accounts, you'll see that on sales of £400m, the company lost £4m. And that loss is BEFORE any transfer pricing arrangements, such as the royalty and interest charges. The reality is that Starbucks grew too quickly in the UK and it entered stupid bidding wars with other chains, eg Coffee Republic and Costa for expensive retail units in prime locations. You need to look behind headlines from people like UK Uncut and that idiot Richard Murphy and analyse the actual facts. Where can we view these accounts? I'm guessing they are in clear detail, nothing hidden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts