tonyh29 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 There were no members of the public at the gates at the end of Downing Street? At all? Peter linked a story that refers to witnesses .. the account from the police I read said along the lines of "we are exploring that there may have been witnesses " it also referred to CCTV footage and what not ... interestingly those witnesses haven't come forward , though I can appreciate that for security reasons the cctv footage may not be made public I'm just surprised with the high profile nature of this instance those witnesses haven't come forward either to plod or to The sun for their pieces of silver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 In fairly sure it has been established that no members of the public were present ??? Im unaware of any coming forward at least Of course equally one could also say who gives a monkeys about what a political commentator says, I like Andrew Neil but lets face it he's no Stephen Fry when it comes to telling the public how to think , so like I say there was no real clamour for him to resign , unless of course we discount everyone whose opinion doesn't count which seems to be the view you are putting forward .. If you don't think a police officer fabricating evidence and selling it to a tabloid is a big deal then that is your prerogative , personally I find it a little worrying ... That is a pretty strong thing to be publishing (and people "like" it) as correct me if I am wrong but no charges have been made nor has anyone been found guilty of what you are claiming. I see you are on a "crusade" now against Stephen Fry, interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 ...you'd have to be utterly struggling and bonkers as a party to put Boris in charge of internal party discipline. So when does he start? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Oh wasn't suggesting there is any way back for him , it was more my initial comment that he may have survived without the "pleb" side of it that i'm interested in .. Blandy sorta agrees that he shouldn't have lost his job for swearing at plod which is where I was coming from , The swearing and actual incident whilst not ideal I think he could have survived , the us and them , out of touch and so forth was (imo) what ultimately cost him his job ... without doubt his actions stoked the fire , others then poured paraffin over him and lit the safety matches ... maybe goes back to my Who not What gripe , had it been Boris I imagine he would still be chief whip for example But Boris said that people should be arrested for swearing at the police? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 So when does he start? If Tony's right, shortly after the next election when they boot Cameron out as leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Oh Tony what a massive mistake you have made (again). So there was me mentioning the old Free Vote thing and saying how Cameron is not leading either his party or parliament and you then try and quote a few Labour members as some sort of counter argument, when reality is they are saying just that. I will maintain and you have failed to show any evidence to the contrary that many within the Tory party still maintain a homophobic bias with their views on Gay marriage. If not why is the media littered with stories about dissension from within the party membership? As you say classic own goal, ut I suppose when you realise that it was you who scored it then maybe you will take a bit more time before you start to celebrate next time :-) the point you missed is that the same media are littered about dissent within your party , indeed you type gay vote into google and the first story it reports back is "labour split over gay marriage " The word is that 2 shadow cabinet members threatened to resign if the whip was forced on this vote so Ed had to back down and offer a free vote ... on religious freedom How is Ed giving a free vote any less homophobic than Dave offering his party a free vote ? now had you said that the Tory party seem more divided than Labour on this matter it would have been a different matter , but you didn't say that , you suggested that it was only one party that had any homophobic tendencies and that is why your argument was weak and ultimately lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 If Tony's right, shortly after the next election when they boot Cameron out as leader. I hear plans are already under way for forming his cabinet as well 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted December 18, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 18, 2012 The Tory party seem more divided than Labour on this matter. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Tony please stop you are not helping yourself at all now. Firstly, "my party"? - I am not nor have I ever been a member of a political party. Second are you sure that the media is "littered" with dissent from within Labour? As you pointed out Milliband is calling for a free vote? I can't see how that is exactly a party that is is disarray regarding this. On the other hand there are many many stories in mainstream media that talk about the issues that Cameron faces from within the Tory party membership. There have been talks about not renewing memberships, lost votes, no mandate etc etc. As said Cameron has made a complete mess of giving out a clear view, but I suppose we can mention Stephen Fry and it will go away? :-) You say that "the word is" re shadow cabinet members, interesting that this "word" is only coming from sources that are typically supportive of the Tory party. Coincidence or Stephen Fry?- Your use of Google was funny especially as the article you allude to was from the Telegraph and was followed by numerous others talking about Cameron's handling of this and the Tory party view. I fail to understand your homophobic question, and I think that was you getting ahead of yourself in a desire to try and claw something back. The point was that many within the Tory party are anti-Gay marriage. You may not like that fact, but it certainly seems that way. Cameron is struggling to bring any sort of order or leadership to both his party or the whole parliamentary process re this, but you fail to accept that. The Tory party is not a party that is traditional supporters of Gay rights as the web site - http://mygayvote.co.uk/ - shows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I hear plans are already under way for forming his cabinet as well For the avoidance of doubt my 'like' was for the joke not the idea of a cabinet of Borises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Bernard Hogan-Howe, the commissioner of the Metropolitan police, has been talking... Here. That's rather enigmatic of him. Is this part of the story more about the politics within the police now, i.e. top brass v federation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 The Tory party seem more divided than Labour on this matter. not denying that ... but that wasn't what Drat said ... which was why I thought I'd point out to him the divisions within his party on the subject as he appeared unaware of them At Shadow Cabinet this morning; mince pies, mulled wine(alcohol free) but no surprise visitor from the Palace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20768345 It seems that the news that this Gvmt has made it easier to sack people is lost under a lot of "news" re Mitchell. How Swinson can claim that this was to aid workers is laughable at best and insulting at worst. Typical Tory policy, shamefully supported by the Lib Dems (if they were not dead already have just taken another bullet just in case). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 not denying that ... but that wasn't what Drat said ... which was why I thought I'd point out to him the divisions within his party on the subject as he appeared unaware of them At Shadow Cabinet this morning; mince pies, mulled wine(alcohol free) but no surprise visitor from the Palace. Will someone please phone one of the emergency services to save Tony from this drowning. I never said there was no difference of views within Labour as you well know, nor is it "my" party, but I suspect that was you being a cheeky scamp again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted December 18, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 18, 2012 .. Blandy sorta agrees that he shouldn't have lost his job for swearing at plod which is where I was coming from... I think I said at the time, that I don't think swearing at a copper should mean someone loses their job (as in their livelihood). I don't have any issue at all with him losing his role, but staying as an MP. That's fair enough, IMO. The man's clearly a prize tube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Queenie giving Osborne a bit of a hard time about the gold today ... he looked a bit uncomfortable when he answered Lucky Gordon wasn't there she probably would have had him taken off to the tower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Peter linked a story that refers to witnesses .. the account from the police I read said along the lines of "we are exploring that there may have been witnesses " it also referred to CCTV footage and what not ... interestingly those witnesses haven't come forward , though I can appreciate that for security reasons the cctv footage may not be made public seems the cctv footage is coming out after all :-) It is understood Channel 4 will show the CCTV recording of Mitchell's encounter with the armed officers when he was refused permission to wheel his bike through the main gates. The recording, which is silent, is understood to show Mitchell exchanging words with the officers. But it is understood there are no signs of an angry confrontation in the recording, which reportedly shows that Mitchell wheeled his bike through the side gate when officers declined to allow him to use the main entrance. curiously it seems now that it was John Randall, the Conservative deputy chief whip who reported the police officers account to Downing Street ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 seems the cctv footage is coming out after all :-) curiously it seems now that it was John Randall, the Conservative deputy chief whip who reported the police officers account to Downing Street ..... Footage now on C4 main page, here, can't seem to link to it direct. The main thing it shows is that there were one or two passers-by at intervals, not the several members of the public looking visibly shocked as in the police log. Though since they've completely obscured the faces of the passers-by, it's impossible to see whether any of them seemed to notice the exchange and if so what their reaction was. C4 also suggest the conversation didn't take place for long enough to contain all the things claimed by the police, but they didn't actually tell us how long it takes for those words to be said and compared it with the visible evidence of the time the two parties were close enough to be speaking to each other. Perhaps someone else will do it. The new information is that the copper now arrested had presented himself to be a member of the public, e-mailing Randall as his constituent, and it has only just been discovered that he's police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Fuller version of C4 piece now available here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Carl Maxim @carlmaxim PLEBGATE LATEST: Andrew Mitchell now at Downing Street gates demanding the police let him through so that he can tender his unresignation. twr1 @twr1 Andrew Mitchell should have presented the Queen with some, "know your f****** place" mats ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts