Jump to content

More Tory lies


aussieh

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 27.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • The Mighty Thor

    1572

  • Victorian

    1476

  • JudyJudyJudy

    1381

  • Cade

    1176

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Has anyone remotely suggested that her actions should have no consequences?    No.

 

His actions also have consequences.    He's almost certain to find that out soon.     He's as much as admitted he went too far.    He'll be disciplined and will be very lucky to avoid prosecution.

 

:spoton:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

Why is that then?

 

Because your argument is based solely on sentiment.    Legally the guy has gone too far and he knows it.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also...

 

The 'she would have been stoned to death in Saudi Arabia / she would have been sent to the Kamchatka uranium mines in Russia' argument is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
5 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Also...

 

The 'she would have been stoned to death in Saudi Arabia / she would have been sent to the Kamchatka uranium mines in Russia' argument is irrelevant.

I've not argued that. I don't think his actions were excessive. Would have done the same myself regardless of the gender of the protestor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trapper John McIntyre
6 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Also...

 

The 'she would have been stoned to death in Saudi Arabia / she would have been sent to the Kamchatka uranium mines in Russia' argument is irrelevant.

Well thats explained it then. What this guy did was only a little less extreme than stoning or being sent to shovel salt and shit in Siberia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
Just now, John Findlay said:

I've not argued that. I don't think his actions were excessive. Would have done the same myself regardless of the gender of the protestor.

Even at your age:teeth:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see he is doubling down saying that he acted in instinct and feared assault.

He knew there were climate change protests (with their track record of assassinating people) which had been going on in the room for some time without any hint of a physical assault (my understanding from what I've read) and when somebody walked past him, he reacted in an overly aggressive manner.

If he genuinely thought there was a chance of assault from someone who was armed why grab her neck.

Personally I think he was annoyed at the disruption and personal anger rather than any sense of protecting himself or others was the prime motivation. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

 

No that's way off the mark.    He had no right to employ the force he did.    He had a hold of her by the neck ffs.     

 

He probably had a case to prevent her going further and to even restrain her if she resisted until the police arrived,    but absolutely no business to force march her by the neck.     

 

Having spent many years dealing with twats on doors of clubs etc thats not really any force at all. From the wee video clip you can’t even see if he’s holding her by the neck or guiding her. To say its force marching is bollox. 

 

 

Much as Id love to say he’s a dick for how he handled her I think its nothing , she should be the one in the shit not him and that goes against every single political urge I have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
19 minutes ago, Costanza said:

I see he is doubling down saying that he acted in instinct and feared assault.

He knew there were climate change protests (with their track record of assassinating people) which had been going on in the room for some time without any hint of a physical assault (my understanding from what I've read) and when somebody walked past him, he reacted in an overly aggressive manner.

If he genuinely thought there was a chance of assault from someone who was armed why grab her neck.

Personally I think he was annoyed at the disruption and personal anger rather than any sense of protecting himself or others was the prime motivation. 

 

 

I'm sure it was.

However, until the police get the protestors under more "control" then I'm not surprised.

these are private events, and if you swan around them mouthing off and upsetting people who have every right to be there and you don't, well, eventually something will happen.

Either a protestor will start tipping tables/throwing milk shakes around and generally spoiling an event ( hunt protestors do similar) or perhaps we could all go around to their house during a childrens party and start chanting and shouting and refusing to leave?

The logical end point is the law tightens to ensure protests are agreed in advance , and are kept to, say 200metres from any event- to protect the protestors of course.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you touch someone, its assault. He wasn't "citizen arresting her", he was hoying her oot!

 

I dont think it was overly rough but the fact remains that (as far as I know) he is not a police officer and he put his hand on her despite her not showing any physical aggression or having any weapons.

 

He should have left it for security/police.

 

I think that clears up any grey areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

I'm sure it was.

However, until the police get the protestors under more "control" then I'm not surprised.

these are private events, and if you swan around them mouthing off and upsetting people who have every right to be there and you don't, well, eventually something will happen.

Either a protestor will start tipping tables/throwing milk shakes around and generally spoiling an event ( hunt protestors do similar) or perhaps we could all go around to their house during a childrens party and start chanting and shouting and refusing to leave?

The logical end point is the law tightens to ensure protests are agreed in advance , and are kept to, say 200metres from any event- to protect the protestors of course.

 

Nobody has a right to act like him whether it's a private function or not. He could have stood in front of her, to block her path. He shoved her against a pillar and grabbed her by the neck.  If I was her husband I'd feck him right up.

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pans Jambo said:

If you touch someone, its assault. He wasn't "citizen arresting her", he was hoying her oot!

 

I dont think it was overly rough but the fact remains that (as far as I know) he is not a police officer and he put his hand on her despite her not showing any physical aggression or having any weapons.

 

He should have left it for security/police.

 

I think that clears up any grey areas.

The security did act like him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Costanza said:

I see he is doubling down saying that he acted in instinct and feared assault.

He knew there were climate change protests (with their track record of assassinating people) which had been going on in the room for some time without any hint of a physical assault (my understanding from what I've read) and when somebody walked past him, he reacted in an overly aggressive manner.

If he genuinely thought there was a chance of assault from someone who was armed why grab her neck.

Personally I think he was annoyed at the disruption and personal anger rather than any sense of protecting himself or others was the prime motivation. 

 

 

His excuses as I just said to a friend are awful sounds more like people telling him what to say (instinct - fair enough , the rest ?) but there is no way that is excessive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
6 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

If you touch someone, its assault. He wasn't "citizen arresting her", he was hoying her oot!

 

I dont think it was overly rough but the fact remains that (as far as I know) he is not a police officer and he put his hand on her despite her not showing any physical aggression or having any weapons.

 

He should have left it for security/police.

 

I think that clears up any grey areas.

Trust me it isint. I speak from first hand experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pans Jambo said:

If you touch someone, its assault. He wasn't "citizen arresting her", he was hoying her oot!

 

I dont think it was overly rough but the fact remains that (as far as I know) he is not a police officer and he put his hand on her despite her not showing any physical aggression or having any weapons.

 

He should have left it for security/police.

 

I think that clears up any grey areas.

Naaa , thats where its bollox , Iv not had an SIA badge in 5years now yet i’v restrained and launched people when needed. There is a way to do it and he did that safely and securely without danger to her or threat to him. 

 

Bit in bold - You have no idea what her intention was , iv seen someone walk up to someone calmly without visible sign of aggressiveness or weapon and do damage. In todays climate you can’t go by ahhh she looked peaceful. If she was peaceful she wouldn’t be there....

 

Security and police - yes and no - you should but its not always that easy or simple. Strip it all back and you have to ask if she was a guest - how she was a guest if she wasn’t how did she even get that far. I’d of lost the plot at my staff if they had allowed a random not on the guest list to get in the room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, doctor jambo said:

I think this country has lot its feckin mind.

 

"assault" - eh , no. She was behaving like a rude twat, and deserved to be huckled whether male/female/unicorn.

Private do. Someone rocks up at your wedding and behaves like that they get pretty much the same from security/guests- if they are lucky!

Russia- she'd be jagged in the neck and off to Siberia.

Spain and france- batons to the head

US- shot/sprayed/flattened

UK- not much then screams assault and tries to cost someone their job.

Equality should mean she would be treated as a man would- so she should be delighted she is not being discriminated against! 

Hate to say it but I agree with you for once 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo

Think we have all gone soft in the head.

 

Protestor on the roof of a train station- 6 hours talking him down whilst the city grinds to a halt

Airports closed by hippies chained to a railing

Streets shut by some dafty lying in the street and nobody can move them in case they are accused of assault

dafties running around private functions causing mayhem and nobody can eject them.

If the daft buddie cannot look at herself and think "I deserved that" then she is a reprobate.

She was trying to provoke a reaction- well she got one, now f-off

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

Think we have all gone soft in the head.

 

Protestor on the roof of a train station- 6 hours talking him down whilst the city grinds to a halt

Airports closed by hippies chained to a railing

Streets shut by some dafty lying in the street and nobody can move them in case they are accused of assault

dafties running around private functions causing mayhem and nobody can eject them.

If the daft buddie cannot look at herself and think "I deserved that" then she is a reprobate.

She was trying to provoke a reaction- well she got one, now f-off

 

 

Spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

Think we have all gone soft in the head.

 

Protestor on the roof of a train station- 6 hours talking him down whilst the city grinds to a halt

Airports closed by hippies chained to a railing

Streets shut by some dafty lying in the street and nobody can move them in case they are accused of assault

dafties running around private functions causing mayhem and nobody can eject them.

If the daft buddie cannot look at herself and think "I deserved that" then she is a reprobate.

She was trying to provoke a reaction- well she got one, now f-off

 

Agreed with you earlier before I had seen the full video,  would like to take that agreement back now as the force used was totally over the top

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn

As ever, it’s nuanced - she had no right to protest there. He had no right to manhandle her like that. He should apologise but he doesn’t need to resign (even though he’s a blatant bell-end).

 

Give it 24 hours and the Daily Mail will do a hatchet job on this girl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Agreed with you earlier before I had seen the full video,  would like to take that agreement back now as the force used was totally over the top

You got a link to the full video. The one on bbc is only one iv seen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
7 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Owen Jones has launched a petition :facepalm:

The correct thing to do by way of protest

 

3 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Agreed with you earlier before I had seen the full video,  would like to take that agreement back now as the force used was totally over the top

Perhaps Kendall jenner should have offered him  a Pepsi?

You provoke someone , sometimes they react in a way you don't expect.

Until the law protects people such as MP's who are going about their lawful business from agitators then these incidents will occur.

MP's need protected from idiots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SectionDJambo

They’re now reporting that the protesters got in by being let in a side door by someone already inside.

The security seems to have been very poor and the protesters could have been carrying anything, due to not having to go through the checks at the front door.

The guy who “assaulted” the woman is a male Tory, which is maybe the reason that some people think he should be charged by the police and sacked. Like them or hate them, Tory politicians, as well as all others, have the right to go about their lives without being put in a position of not being sure if someone coming towards them is planning to do them harm. 

Equally, protesters should be able to air their views without being violently treated. But in this age of terrorism and general “I can do what I want” behaviour, common sense dictates that someone should consider how others may react to an unclear situation that they suddenly find themselves in.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SectionDJambo said:

They’re now reporting that the protesters got in by being let in a side door by someone already inside.

The security seems to have been very poor and the protesters could have been carrying anything, due to not having to go through the checks at the front door.

The guy who “assaulted” the woman is a male Tory, which is maybe the reason that some people think he should be charged by the police and sacked. Like them or hate them, Tory politicians, as well as all others, have the right to go about their lives without being put in a position of not being sure if someone coming towards them is planning to do them harm. 

Equally, protesters should be able to air their views without being violently treated. But in this age of terrorism and general “I can do what I want” behaviour, common sense dictates that someone should consider how others may react to an unclear situation that they suddenly find themselves in.

 

 

Far to sensible a post.  :getout:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SectionDJambo said:

They’re now reporting that the protesters got in by being let in a side door by someone already inside.

The security seems to have been very poor and the protesters could have been carrying anything, due to not having to go through the checks at the front door.

The guy who “assaulted” the woman is a male Tory, which is maybe the reason that some people think he should be charged by the police and sacked. Like them or hate them, Tory politicians, as well as all others, have the right to go about their lives without being put in a position of not being sure if someone coming towards them is planning to do them harm. 

Equally, protesters should be able to air their views without being violently treated. But in this age of terrorism and general “I can do what I want” behaviour, common sense dictates that someone should consider how others may react to an unclear situation that they suddenly find themselves in.

 

 

It was a Greenpeace protestor.  No need to go full John Smeaton on her!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SectionDJambo
2 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

It was a Greenpeace protestor.  No need to go full John Smeaton on her!

I’ve not seen the complete footage. Did they make it clear who they were before moving into the main area of guests?

Surely any nutter could shout out that they are Greenpeace people just to get closer to a target.

If that had been in some foreign countries, they wouldn’t have just been manhandled back out. The right to protest in the UK should come with responsibility from those protesting as well as restraint from security people. It’s not a one way street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
6 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

It was a Greenpeace protestor.  No need to go full John Smeaton on her!

HOw do you separate the peaceful bam, from the seriously disturbed bam?

The milk shake thrower from the right winger knife madman?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The organiser should have provided better security.    SWAT team and the Parachute Regiment not required... just the ability to screen access.

Edited by Victorian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
4 minutes ago, SectionDJambo said:

I’ve not seen the complete footage. Did they make it clear who they were before moving into the main area of guests?

Surely any nutter could shout out that they are Greenpeace people just to get closer to a target.

If that had been in some foreign countries, they wouldn’t have just been manhandled back out. The right to protest in the UK should come with responsibility from those protesting as well as restraint from security people. It’s not a one way street.

Quite.

Its the same passive principals that allow the moped gangs immunity from arrest,

and travellers to pitch in public parks and private ground and the council cannot move them .

certain groups become untouchable.

the rights of law abiding citizens appear to come a poor second .

You want to go on holiday?

Sorry, swampy has shut down an airport and we are negotiating for a week to have him unchain himself from a runway- we cannot violate his right to behave like a fud. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

HOw do you separate the peaceful bam, from the seriously disturbed bam?

The milk shake thrower from the right winger knife madman?

 

 

Grab them by the neck obviously, that always restricts arm movement...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
3 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Grab them by the neck obviously, that always restricts arm movement...

all public servants should be equipped with tazers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
1 minute ago, Boris said:

Braw. When do I get mine????

Next round of pay negotiations- you can either have another 1%, or a tazer.

 

I'm going for the tazer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

The correct thing to do by way of protest

 

Perhaps Kendall jenner should have offered him  a Pepsi?

You provoke someone , sometimes they react in a way you don't expect.

Until the law protects people such as MP's who are going about their lawful business from agitators then these incidents will occur.

MP's need protected from idiots.

How was he provoked?  How did she stop him escaping, exactly. And I would doubt anything Tory MPs do at these gigs are lawful.

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
12 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

How was he provoked?  How did she stop him escaping, exactly. And I would doubt anything Tory MPs do at these gigs are lawful.

You don't think that what she was doing was provocative?

And the Torys were listening to a speaker, the pig-head-penetration happens later

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

You don't think that what she was doing was provocative?

And the Torys were listening to a speaker, the pig-head-penetration happens later

Dawn Butler shouting for his job , political point scoring everywhere ****ing joke. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

You don't think that what she was doing was provocative?

And the Torys were listening to a speaker, the pig-head-penetration happens later

No, but you must be easily provoked. Someone walking past, especially a woman, doesn't really get me reaching for a machete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tory MP for Brecon and Radnorshire, Chris Davies, has lost his seat after being hit with a recall petition.

He has been found guilty of multiple fraudulent expenses claims.

There will now be a by-election in the seat.

Libdems are best placed to take the seat from the Tories.

 

:levein_interesting:

 

 

Edited by Cade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SectionDJambo said:

They’re now reporting that the protesters got in by being let in a side door by someone already inside.

The security seems to have been very poor and the protesters could have been carrying anything, due to not having to go through the checks at the front door.

The guy who “assaulted” the woman is a male Tory, which is maybe the reason that some people think he should be charged by the police and sacked. Like them or hate them, Tory politicians, as well as all others, have the right to go about their lives without being put in a position of not being sure if someone coming towards them is planning to do them harm. 

Equally, protesters should be able to air their views without being violently treated. But in this age of terrorism and general “I can do what I want” behaviour, common sense dictates that someone should consider how others may react to an unclear situation that they suddenly find themselves in.

 

Equally it is the unionists supporting his actions. As for what happened, a lady in a red dress was walking beside his table and he jumped up, pushed her into a pillar then grabbed her by the neck and pushed her out, continuing when a lady tried to intervene to get her out. At no time did she approach him, talk to him or assault him with a lipstick 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Victorian said:

The organiser should have provided better security.    SWAT team and the Parachute Regiment not required... just the ability to screen access.

It's like the scene in Fight Club.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate the Tories as much as the next sane person, but what he done wasn't that bad.

 

With all the brouhaha about equality, would it have been the same response if it was a male protester?

 

How could anyone be sure of the protesters intentions?

 

Did they break the law by gaining entry?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SpruceBringsteen

Oaft. The "IT'S ACTUALLY QUALITY TO LEATHER WOMEN" lads are having some day. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...