FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > 7 police forces: criminal investigation of 10+ Tory MPS
7 police forces: criminal investigation of 10+ Tory MPS
Jump to: Newest in thread
Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix..."
Ya kiddin? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?"
Nope.
Tabloid fodder - never been printed, except in Private Eye |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"you notice this has been kept OFF the BBC untill after the local elections whilst the antisemitism hysteria has been given blanket coverage ?
agenda ?  "
rather than crying "oh my god the sky has fallen in!!!" it might be a idea to look at the actual story behind the headline...
this investigation has actually been going on since the last election (if you didn't know that might be more to do with your choice of news outlet!)
what HAS happened today is that 7 of the forces involved have asked for 1 yr extensions to be able to continue the investigations which may lead to possible charges.......
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
"
Indeed. It stinks.
Didn't he make some kind of joke about the bbc the other day also?
Impartiality of a news service drives him mad, does it?
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/04/bbc-john-whittingdale-impartiality |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
"
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?
Nope.
Tabloid fodder - never been printed, except in Private Eye"
It has |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?"
probably because
a) he is single
b) he met her thru match.com
c) he had no idea of her profession.. and when he did they ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side....
so what you are saying in effect is that no one is entitled to any private life
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?"
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?
Nope.
Tabloid fodder - never been printed, except in Private Eye"
They had a stab at in on(guess)C4 a few weeks ago.
Dare I mention Goldsmith and shamelessly sdtoking islamophobis with the ridiculous rubbish about Khan sharing platforms with 'terrorist sympathisers', and sending letters to people in London with Sikh, Hindu surnames alleging that Khan might tax family jewellery.
Same old Tories. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?
probably because
a) he is single
b) he met her thru match.com
c) he had no idea of her profession.. and when he did they ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side....
so what you are saying in effect is that no one is entitled to any private life "
"He had no idea of her profession"
So why did he try to cover up the story?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson "
He was doing cultural research |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?
probably because
a) he is single
b) he met her thru match.com
c) he had no idea of her profession.. and when he did they ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side....
so what you are saying in effect is that no one is entitled to any private life
"He had no idea of her profession"
So why did he try to cover up the story?
"
thats the point.... "he" never did.... the newspapers were the ones who decided it wasn't in the public interest.... he never put out any injunctions....
if there were mp's on here having meets... and they were single, would that be in the public interest as well?
so where do we then draw the line with public interest? anyone famous? doctors? lawyers? teachers? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"so what you are saying in effect is that no one is entitled to any private life
Of course not - I'm just drawing attention to the curious silence of the press on the matter.
Don't ya think?
I thought it had been in all the papers weeks ago
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?
probably because
a) he is single
b) he met her thru match.com
c) he had no idea of her profession.. and when he did they ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side....
so what you are saying in effect is that no one is entitled to any private life
"
It has nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with the fact that as Culture Secretary he regulates the press(and has powers to do so).
It was him who gavea soft soaping post Levinson voluntary code for the press which he 'urged' them to sign up to.
He could have been harder on them.
To whit: the press have been sitting on it for months and months. WOnder why they didn't decide to publish it.
Even 'Hacked Off' had a go at why there has been this seeming complicity: they see it as WELL dodge that they haven't published it because of the link between him and regulation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?
probably because
a) he is single
b) he met her thru match.com
c) he had no idea of her profession.. and when he did they ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side....
so what you are saying in effect is that no one is entitled to any private life
"He had no idea of her profession"
So why did he try to cover up the story?
thats the point.... "he" never did.... the newspapers were the ones who decided it wasn't in the public interest.... he never put out any injunctions....
if there were mp's on here having meets... and they were single, would that be in the public interest as well?
so where do we then draw the line with public interest? anyone famous? doctors? lawyers? teachers?"
...ummm...
"One senior source associated with a major tabloid newspaper said they believed the story had been withheld for ‘political’ rather than editorial reasons because of Whittingdale’s significant influence over legislation related to the media.
Other internal correspondence from The Independent claimed that the paper could demonstrate that Whittingdale failed to declare a trip paid for by MTV to the company’s annual music awards to the Register of Members Interests. However, Whittingdale did declare the trip on previous occasions, when Ms. King did not attend." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson "
.
That's nothing, wait till the 911 28 redacted pages get released!!.
.
.
You know Tony Blair is on record being threatened by bandar bin sultan over the alyamama arms deal being investigated by the serious crime squad....
That's right, a sitting prime minster openly told by a foreigner in downing Street, drop the case or I can't guarantee there won't be another 7/7 bombing...
And Blair's response was... Yeah OK |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"you notice this has been kept OFF the BBC untill after the local elections whilst the antisemitism hysteria has been given blanket coverage ?
agenda ?
rather than crying "oh my god the sky has fallen in!!!" it might be a idea to look at the actual story behind the headline...
this investigation has actually been going on since the last election (if you didn't know that might be more to do with your choice of news outlet!)
what HAS happened today is that 7 of the forces involved have asked for 1 yr extensions to be able to continue the investigations which may lead to possible charges.......
"
Another conspiracy theory busted. Fuck. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix...
Ya kiddin?
probably because
a) he is single
b) he met her thru match.com
c) he had no idea of her profession.. and when he did they ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side....
so what you are saying in effect is that no one is entitled to any private life
"He had no idea of her profession"
So why did he try to cover up the story?
thats the point.... "he" never did.... the newspapers were the ones who decided it wasn't in the public interest.... he never put out any injunctions....
if there were mp's on here having meets... and they were single, would that be in the public interest as well?
so where do we then draw the line with public interest? anyone famous? doctors? lawyers? teachers?"
It has more to do with his position and the suppression of the story than his, or anyone else's, right to privacy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"you notice this has been kept OFF the BBC untill after the local elections whilst the antisemitism hysteria has been given blanket coverage ?
agenda ?
rather than crying "oh my god the sky has fallen in!!!" it might be a idea to look at the actual story behind the headline...
this investigation has actually been going on since the last election (if you didn't know that might be more to do with your choice of news outlet!)
what HAS happened today is that 7 of the forces involved have asked for 1 yr extensions to be able to continue the investigations which may lead to possible charges.......
Another conspiracy theory busted. Fuck. "
.
Don't worry I introduced an even better one |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It is all old news, it's all been published, there is no real scandal here, the accounting system was possibly abused, same as expenses may still be getting abused, some people said some stuff some of which is pre public life that is not PC. and a single man met and had sex with someone from a dating website.
It is mostly white noise not news. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It is all old news, it's all been published, there is no real scandal here, the accounting system was possibly abused, same as expenses may still be getting abused, some people said some stuff some of which is pre public life that is not PC. and a single man met and had sex with someone from a dating website.
It is mostly white noise not news. "
Yep, no story here...
"We can also reveal that while she was involved with Whittingdale, Ms. King was also involved in a relationship with a member of the London underworld, who has a previous firearms conviction. Whittingdale’s relationships with prostitutes are said to be well known in the London underworld and could potentially leave him exposed to blackmail considering his senior position in the Government. While there is no evidence or suggestion that Ms. King ever attempted to blackmail Whittingdale, what is clear is that information about their relationship and movements was regularly conveyed to the press and other parties.
In particular, information about her visits to Parliament and the Royal Sports Ball, which raises serious questions event security and Whittingdale’s judgment in bringing Ms. King to highly secure locations and events, and also with entrusting her with sensitive information. A senior Labour MP confirmed that he had seen Whittingdale with a prostitute at the House of Commons, although was unaware if it was Ms. King. When pressed on how he was aware of this, he told Byline that she was giving out business cards to other MP’s.
[...]
These revelations mean that David Cameron has questions to answer on whether he knew of Whittingdale’s relationship with prostitutes when he appointed him Culture Secretary in May 2015.
John Whittingdale has questions to answer over whether the possession of this story by a number of media publications ever influenced his political actions as Culture Secretary and when he was Chair of the Culture, Media and Sports Committee. In September 2011, then Liberal Democrat MP Adrian Sanders stated that Whittingdale had warned MP’s against calling Rebekah Brooks to testify before the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, because of the risk of their personal lives being investigated." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
Even 'Hacked Off' had a go at why there has been this seeming complicity: they see it as WELL dodge that they haven't published it because of the link between him and regulation."
i would normally agree with "hacked off"..... on this one i don't! I think this time they are out to embarrass him and i think that is petty and beneath them......
there are a lot of celebrity stories out there that i don't believe are in the public interest...
if someone claims to be whiter than white... and claims never to have cheated on their spouse, only to then find they are/have cheated... then that can be classed as public interest because they have publicly lied....
so lets go back
a) "x" is single
b) "x" meets "y" thru match.com
c) "x" has no idea of "y" profession..
they go out on a few dates,
d) "x" finds out what "y" does for a living......
e) when he does "x"ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side.... by "x" or "y"
so lets say "x" is....... erm.... diamond joe
does the "glastonbury advertiser" have the right to publish that story claiming its in the public interest?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Even 'Hacked Off' had a go at why there has been this seeming complicity: they see it as WELL dodge that they haven't published it because of the link between him and regulation.
i would normally agree with "hacked off"..... on this one i don't! I think this time they are out to embarrass him and i think that is petty and beneath them......
there are a lot of celebrity stories out there that i don't believe are in the public interest...
if someone claims to be whiter than white... and claims never to have cheated on their spouse, only to then find they are/have cheated... then that can be classed as public interest because they have publicly lied....
so lets go back
a) "x" is single
b) "x" meets "y" thru match.com
c) "x" has no idea of "y" profession..
they go out on a few dates,
d) "x" finds out what "y" does for a living......
e) when he does "x"ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side.... by "x" or "y"
so lets say "x" is....... erm.... diamond joe
does the "glastonbury advertiser" have the right to publish that story claiming its in the public interest?
"
It's the 'western daily press' my man |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Even 'Hacked Off' had a go at why there has been this seeming complicity: they see it as WELL dodge that they haven't published it because of the link between him and regulation.
i would normally agree with "hacked off"..... on this one i don't! I think this time they are out to embarrass him and i think that is petty and beneath them......
there are a lot of celebrity stories out there that i don't believe are in the public interest...
if someone claims to be whiter than white... and claims never to have cheated on their spouse, only to then find they are/have cheated... then that can be classed as public interest because they have publicly lied....
so lets go back
a) "x" is single
b) "x" meets "y" thru match.com
c) "x" has no idea of "y" profession..
they go out on a few dates,
d) "x" finds out what "y" does for a living......
e) when he does "x"ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side.... by "x" or "y"
so lets say "x" is....... erm.... diamond joe
does the "glastonbury advertiser" have the right to publish that story claiming its in the public interest?
"
But I'm not the Culture Secretary having a relationship with a dominatrix whilst simultaneously looking at how the findings of the Levinson Inquiry might be applied to the press.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
But I'm not the Culture Secretary having a relationship with a dominatrix whilst simultaneously looking at how the findings of the Levinson Inquiry might be applied to the press.
"
but you never answered the question.... does the "fictional" castle cary observer have the right to publish what you did under the public interest....
unless you are now saying you have more right to a private life then they do.......  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson .
That's nothing, wait till the 911 28 redacted pages get released!!.
.
.
You know Tony Blair is on record being threatened by bandar bin sultan over the alyamama arms deal being investigated by the serious crime squad....
That's right, a sitting prime minster openly told by a foreigner in downing Street, drop the case or I can't guarantee there won't be another 7/7 bombing...
And Blair's response was... Yeah OK"
.
Aha yeah, here it is.
.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/15/bae.armstrade |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson .
That's nothing, wait till the 911 28 redacted pages get released!!.
.
.
You know Tony Blair is on record being threatened by bandar bin sultan over the alyamama arms deal being investigated by the serious crime squad....
That's right, a sitting prime minster openly told by a foreigner in downing Street, drop the case or I can't guarantee there won't be another 7/7 bombing...
And Blair's response was... Yeah OK.
Aha yeah, here it is.
.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/15/bae.armstrade"
Goodness you lefties clutch at straws.
Firstly that contract is government to government meaning that the bribes were facilitated by the UK government which is embarrassing.
Secondly, anyone that isn't a tree hugging hippy should be down on their knees thanking the government for securing our oil supply for 40 years by doing the deal.
Thirdly, the deal isn't illegal and nor were the bribes at the time. The legislation that would make it illegal today came into force about twenty years after this deal was done! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?"
I can see the headlines on the red tops now.....
"Single man dates single woman Shocker!" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
But I'm not the Culture Secretary having a relationship with a dominatrix whilst simultaneously looking at how the findings of the Levinson Inquiry might be applied to the press.
but you never answered the question.... does the "fictional" castle cary observer have the right to publish what you did under the public interest....
unless you are now saying you have more right to a private life then they do....... "
You're comparing apples and oranges - I'm concerned by the way in which the press has *not* covered the story and why, not the allegations that another MP got his end away.
I don;t see how I fit into this... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
"
This was mentioned on RT news on the George Galloway Sputnik programme a few months ago when he interviewed Nigel Farage. Reason it was brought up was because it seems the Tories cheated, broke the law and overspent on the election campaign in South Thanet where a tory narrowly beat Farage into 2nd place. Galloway asked Farage why he was not following this up himself, Farage said he will let the police and the electoral commission handle it and he is too busy campaigning in the EU referendum for anything else to distract him. Now it turns out the tories may have cheated and overspent in dozens of seats in the general election. I hope the police investigate every case thoroughly and if found guilty those tory MP's should be disqualified from their positions.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Even 'Hacked Off' had a go at why there has been this seeming complicity: they see it as WELL dodge that they haven't published it because of the link between him and regulation.
i would normally agree with "hacked off"..... on this one i don't! I think this time they are out to embarrass him and i think that is petty and beneath them......
there are a lot of celebrity stories out there that i don't believe are in the public interest...
if someone claims to be whiter than white... and claims never to have cheated on their spouse, only to then find they are/have cheated... then that can be classed as public interest because they have publicly lied....
so lets go back
a) "x" is single
b) "x" meets "y" thru match.com
c) "x" has no idea of "y" profession..
they go out on a few dates,
d) "x" finds out what "y" does for a living......
e) when he does "x"ended their relationship
that is not disputed on any side.... by "x" or "y"
so lets say "x" is....... erm.... diamond joe
does the "glastonbury advertiser" have the right to publish that story claiming its in the public interest?
"
Those types of story are intrusive and hurtful and the public has NO interest in them(or shouldn't, if it wasn't for the unethical/hypocritical tabloids feeding the masses' desire to read salacious details of people in 'public' life's personal lives).
It's thh question of WHY it wasn't published when the press have known about it for so long.
ANybody else and they would have.
Celebrity/ political indiscretions and broadcasting it nationally is part of what keeps them afloat.
I agreed with you about Hacked Off at first. However, I feel that they have a point on this one. A massive one which can't be dismissed as irrelevent(or even hypocritical, when you consider the context). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson .
That's nothing, wait till the 911 28 redacted pages get released!!.
.
.
You know Tony Blair is on record being threatened by bandar bin sultan over the alyamama arms deal being investigated by the serious crime squad....
That's right, a sitting prime minster openly told by a foreigner in downing Street, drop the case or I can't guarantee there won't be another 7/7 bombing...
And Blair's response was... Yeah OK.
Aha yeah, here it is.
.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/15/bae.armstrade
Goodness you lefties clutch at straws.
Firstly that contract is government to government meaning that the bribes were facilitated by the UK government which is embarrassing.
Secondly, anyone that isn't a tree hugging hippy should be down on their knees thanking the government for securing our oil supply for 40 years by doing the deal.
Thirdly, the deal isn't illegal and nor were the bribes at the time. The legislation that would make it illegal today came into force about twenty years after this deal was done! "
.
Lefties? .
We didn't need to secure an oil supply, we were a net exporter until 2000!, failing that, well you can always buy oil on the open market... Like every fucker else, because that's what we did, sold it on the open market I mean, well that's what we're told, I mean one oil tanker a day full of crude oil, who knows where it went!.
Dodgy deal aside, there's the Saudi government official threatening us with terrorism, there's direct implications of terrorist money being run from Saudi via the Pakistani government, there's direct evidence of Pakistani secret service financing of terrorism.
And then there's the 28 pages of 911 they couldn't publish.. Which government do you think is in there?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We all remember this story...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3175484/Pictured-Moment-disgraced-Lord-caught-snorting-cocaine-200-night-prostitute-sordid-romp-Peer-resigns-faces-police-probe-claim-300-day-allowance.html |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We all remember this story...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3175484/Pictured-Moment-disgraced-Lord-caught-snorting-cocaine-200-night-prostitute-sordid-romp-Peer-resigns-faces-police-probe-claim-300-day-allowance.html"
(my first thought was 'lightweight' but whatever...)
Considering it was enough to bring his career to an end, it's curious that there's barely been a trickle of interest in Whittingdale.
?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson .
That's nothing, wait till the 911 28 redacted pages get released!!.
.
.
You know Tony Blair is on record being threatened by bandar bin sultan over the alyamama arms deal being investigated by the serious crime squad....
That's right, a sitting prime minster openly told by a foreigner in downing Street, drop the case or I can't guarantee there won't be another 7/7 bombing...
And Blair's response was... Yeah OK.
Aha yeah, here it is.
.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/15/bae.armstrade
Goodness you lefties clutch at straws.
Firstly that contract is government to government meaning that the bribes were facilitated by the UK government which is embarrassing.
Secondly, anyone that isn't a tree hugging hippy should be down on their knees thanking the government for securing our oil supply for 40 years by doing the deal.
Thirdly, the deal isn't illegal and nor were the bribes at the time. The legislation that would make it illegal today came into force about twenty years after this deal was done! .
Lefties? .
We didn't need to secure an oil supply, we were a net exporter until 2000!, failing that, well you can always buy oil on the open market... Like every fucker else, because that's what we did, sold it on the open market I mean, well that's what we're told, I mean one oil tanker a day full of crude oil, who knows where it went!.
Dodgy deal aside, there's the Saudi government official threatening us with terrorism, there's direct implications of terrorist money being run from Saudi via the Pakistani government, there's direct evidence of Pakistani secret service financing of terrorism.
And then there's the 28 pages of 911 they couldn't publish.. Which government do you think is in there??"
Plus we lefties(and the rest of the nation..)owned quite a bit of oil in the North Sea until a certain Tory government sold it all off.
Plus our own energy company.
And water.
Oh 'eck.
Well. At least are supplies are more secure now, and our bills haven't been increasing by ridiculous amounts each year.
Phew! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We all remember this story...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3175484/Pictured-Moment-disgraced-Lord-caught-snorting-cocaine-200-night-prostitute-sordid-romp-Peer-resigns-faces-police-probe-claim-300-day-allowance.html"
He had phoned prostitutes knowing they were prostitutes and set up a prostitute meeting with them in that story.
John Whittingdale met this woman on the match thingy not allowed to post links com website, he did not know she was a dominatrix. When he did find out she was a dominatrix he ended the relationship. The two stories are not comparable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We all remember this story...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3175484/Pictured-Moment-disgraced-Lord-caught-snorting-cocaine-200-night-prostitute-sordid-romp-Peer-resigns-faces-police-probe-claim-300-day-allowance.html
He had phoned prostitutes knowing they were prostitutes and set up a prostitute meeting with them in that story.
John Whittingdale met this woman on the match thingy not allowed to post links com website, he did not know she was a dominatrix. When he did find out she was a dominatrix he ended the relationship. The two stories are not comparable. "
I'm saying the press treatment of the two stories stand in stark opposition |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Just for the record, I was aware of the investigation into alleged irregularities with budgets on the election campaigns - this has been widely reported.
Also the Whitting thingy whoever, has also been widely reported in the press (I heard he was strapped for cash)
So, no conspiracies as far as I'm concerned |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whittingdale’s relationship has been an open secret in Westminster and Fleet Street circles, and major tabloid and broadsheet papers including the Mail on Sunday and The Independent have undertaken extensive investigations and written stories, only to have the stories abandoned at the last minute.
The Editor of The Independent, Amol Rajan decided in October that he had made the decision to not run the story on ‘editorial grounds’.
The previous day, Rajan had met with Whittingdale and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre at the Society of Editors Conference in October 2015.
When Whittingdale delivered his keynote address, he stated that he was minded not to implement a major recommendation of the Leveson inquiry and passed by Parliament as part of the Courts and Crimes Act...
Draw your own conclusions.
What's wrong with a single bloke seeing a dominatrix and what's newsworthy about it?
LOL - when he's the Culture Secretary and she's involved in prostitution, I think it's relevant.
He'd be hung out to dry - but for the fact of Levinson .
That's nothing, wait till the 911 28 redacted pages get released!!.
.
.
You know Tony Blair is on record being threatened by bandar bin sultan over the alyamama arms deal being investigated by the serious crime squad....
That's right, a sitting prime minster openly told by a foreigner in downing Street, drop the case or I can't guarantee there won't be another 7/7 bombing...
And Blair's response was... Yeah OK.
Aha yeah, here it is.
.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/15/bae.armstrade
Goodness you lefties clutch at straws.
Firstly that contract is government to government meaning that the bribes were facilitated by the UK government which is embarrassing.
Secondly, anyone that isn't a tree hugging hippy should be down on their knees thanking the government for securing our oil supply for 40 years by doing the deal.
Thirdly, the deal isn't illegal and nor were the bribes at the time. The legislation that would make it illegal today came into force about twenty years after this deal was done! .
Lefties? .
We didn't need to secure an oil supply, we were a net exporter until 2000!, failing that, well you can always buy oil on the open market... Like every fucker else, because that's what we did, sold it on the open market I mean, well that's what we're told, I mean one oil tanker a day full of crude oil, who knows where it went!.
Dodgy deal aside, there's the Saudi government official threatening us with terrorism, there's direct implications of terrorist money being run from Saudi via the Pakistani government, there's direct evidence of Pakistani secret service financing of terrorism.
And then there's the 28 pages of 911 they couldn't publish.. Which government do you think is in there??
Plus we lefties(and the rest of the nation..)owned quite a bit of oil in the North Sea until a certain Tory government sold it all off.
Plus our own energy company.
And water.
Oh 'eck.
Well. At least are supplies are more secure now, and our bills haven't been increasing by ridiculous amounts each year.
Phew!"
The problems with the energy market are nothing to do with public / private ownership - they are the ridiculous regulations artificially splitting generation and retail that enforce an oligopoly!
We've had fantastic oil prices for Al-Yamamah well below market rates and you should all be grateful save for the green party loons who want to run our cars on cow fart. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
News stories are nearly always connected with behind the scenes news stories?.
Some bright spark came out with the usual.. Oh yeah the Saudis, tell me something we don't know!.
Well all that told me is that he's never read the 911 commissions report.. The Saudis and the Pakistanis are implicated all the way through the 400 and odd pages, it's not a secret... Your not redacting 28 pages on Saudi involvement when you've spent 400 pages friggin implicating them!!.
.
.
Those 28 pages are going to get released and the government that's named has been busy with a counter offensive recently |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
But I'm not the Culture Secretary having a relationship with a dominatrix whilst simultaneously looking at how the findings of the Levinson Inquiry might be applied to the press.
but you never answered the question.... does the "fictional" castle cary observer have the right to publish what you did under the public interest....
unless you are now saying you have more right to a private life then they do.......
You're comparing apples and oranges - I'm concerned by the way in which the press has *not* covered the story and why, not the allegations that another MP got his end away.
I don;t see how I fit into this..."
so basically you want to embarrass him because his choice of woman on match.com was bad.... 
the reason i picked you... is that you were the most vocal at the time of writing, but if it was you that had been on an online dating site... and unknowingly chosen a lady who did something you had no idea of....
do the papers have a right to embarrass you?
and thats what it comes down to... and that is why i disagree with hacked off on this occasion.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
But I'm not the Culture Secretary having a relationship with a dominatrix whilst simultaneously looking at how the findings of the Levinson Inquiry might be applied to the press.
but you never answered the question.... does the "fictional" castle cary observer have the right to publish what you did under the public interest....
unless you are now saying you have more right to a private life then they do.......
You're comparing apples and oranges - I'm concerned by the way in which the press has *not* covered the story and why, not the allegations that another MP got his end away.
I don;t see how I fit into this...
so basically you want to embarrass him because his choice of woman on match.com was bad....
the reason i picked you... is that you were the most vocal at the time of writing, but if it was you that had been on an online dating site... and unknowingly chosen a lady who did something you had no idea of....
do the papers have a right to embarrass you?
and thats what it comes down to... and that is why i disagree with hacked off on this occasion...."
No... it has nothing to do with his tastes in bed-partner and everything to do with his status as the man who will decided how the press is governed.
That's the story - or rather the lack of it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
"
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
No... it has nothing to do with his tastes in bed-partner and everything to do with his status as the man who will decided how the press is governed.
That's the story - or rather the lack of it. "
and that's why he doesn't deserve a private life..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign ."
Even though it is against the law and is cheating other candidates out of their seats? (If found guilty).
The Tories only have a slim majority in government, dozens are being investigated, if they are disqualified and lose their seats the tories wouldn't have a majority. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign .
Even though it is against the law and is cheating other candidates out of their seats? (If found guilty).
The Tories only have a slim majority in government, dozens are being investigated, if they are disqualified and lose their seats the tories wouldn't have a majority. "
Maybe we'll have another hung parliament - I'd actually like that, previous government was far better when the lib dems held back the crazies in the Tory party. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign ."
if that amount was exceeded and concealed as looks the case then that is breaking the law concerning expenditure..
or are certain laws to be ignored if one is a political party and in Government..? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign .
if that amount was exceeded and concealed as looks the case then that is breaking the law concerning expenditure..
or are certain laws to be ignored if one is a political party and in Government..?"
We do it for international law so why not domestic? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign .
if that amount was exceeded and concealed as looks the case then that is breaking the law concerning expenditure..
or are certain laws to be ignored if one is a political party and in Government..?
We do it for international law so why not domestic? "
it still doesn't make it right, but you know that.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign .
if that amount was exceeded and concealed as looks the case then that is breaking the law concerning expenditure..
or are certain laws to be ignored if one is a political party and in Government..?
We do it for international law so why not domestic?
it still doesn't make it right, but you know that.."
As I say, I'd be delighted if the tories lost their majority |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Regarding potentially breaking the law on spending caps for the elections last year.
Well done Channel 4 News.
Could this be linked to them wanting to privatise C4 News?
Any thoughts?
. An investigation is only an investigation ..It is hardly world braking news. It would only be of any significance if anyone was prosecuted and found to be guilty .
Everyone is innocent unto proved guilty and I cannot see too many people getting too excited about how much was spent on an election campaign .
if that amount was exceeded and concealed as looks the case then that is breaking the law concerning expenditure..
or are certain laws to be ignored if one is a political party and in Government..?"
. The laws apply to all parties . However everyone is innocent unto proved guilty in a Court of Law . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"I'm interested in why the press (excepting Private Eye) really haven't picked up on the Culture Secretary, John Wittingdale's, relationship with a dominatrix..."
Why is that news?Stories like that are not newsworthy
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No... it has nothing to do with his tastes in bed-partner and everything to do with his status as the man who will decided how the press is governed.
That's the story - or rather the lack of it.
and that's why he doesn't deserve a private life....."
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
Not sure I agree with that... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
"
no because if anyone had been "x" then i hope the would not find it in the public interest....
I don't care is "x" is _iamondjoe or george clooney, or hugh grant, or this MP......
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
no because if anyone had been "x" then i hope the would not find it in the public interest....
I don't care is "x" is _iamondjoe or george clooney, or hugh grant, or this MP......
"
Not even if that MP was a government minister with powers over the press who then pulled the story because of backroom deals?
No story there?
Really?
? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
no because if anyone had been "x" then i hope the would not find it in the public interest....
I don't care is "x" is _iamondjoe or george clooney, or hugh grant, or this MP......
Not even if that MP was a government minister with powers over the press who then pulled the story because of backroom deals?
No story there?
Really?
?"
.
I'm with you, I don't know what the fuck this lot are going on about!!! It's a clear case of conflict of interest.
Max Mosley got his s&m published all over the front page and all he did was run formulae 1...
If you want a private life where you can fuck weird people get a job in banking |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
no because if anyone had been "x" then i hope the would not find it in the public interest....
I don't care is "x" is _iamondjoe or george clooney, or hugh grant, or this MP......
Not even if that MP was a government minister with powers over the press who then pulled the story because of backroom deals?
No story there?
Really?
?.
I'm with you, I don't know what the fuck this lot are going on about!!! It's a clear case of conflict of interest.
Max Mosley got his s&m published all over the front page and all he did was run formulae 1...
If you want a private life where you can fuck weird people get a job in banking"
As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
no because if anyone had been "x" then i hope the would not find it in the public interest....
I don't care is "x" is _iamondjoe or george clooney, or hugh grant, or this MP......
Not even if that MP was a government minister with powers over the press who then pulled the story because of backroom deals?
No story there?
Really?
?.
I'm with you, I don't know what the fuck this lot are going on about!!! It's a clear case of conflict of interest.
Max Mosley got his s&m published all over the front page and all he did was run formulae 1...
If you want a private life where you can fuck weird people get a job in banking
As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway"
.
Not me obviously.... I'm too busy with getting cars to run on cow farts  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
no because if anyone had been "x" then i hope the would not find it in the public interest....
I don't care is "x" is _iamondjoe or george clooney, or hugh grant, or this MP......
Not even if that MP was a government minister with powers over the press who then pulled the story because of backroom deals?
No story there?
Really?
?.
I'm with you, I don't know what the fuck this lot are going on about!!! It's a clear case of conflict of interest.
Max Mosley got his s&m published all over the front page and all he did was run formulae 1...
If you want a private life where you can fuck weird people get a job in banking
As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway"
Papers are dying (a change from the C.20th) but they still can set the news agenda... and yet curiously, the Beeb didn't break the story either... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Because the press are self-censoring in deference to his power?
no because if anyone had been "x" then i hope the would not find it in the public interest....
I don't care is "x" is _iamondjoe or george clooney, or hugh grant, or this MP......
Not even if that MP was a government minister with powers over the press who then pulled the story because of backroom deals?
No story there?
Really?
?.
I'm with you, I don't know what the fuck this lot are going on about!!! It's a clear case of conflict of interest.
Max Mosley got his s&m published all over the front page and all he did was run formulae 1...
If you want a private life where you can fuck weird people get a job in banking
As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway
Papers are dying (a change from the C.20th) but they still can set the news agenda... and yet curiously, the Beeb didn't break the story either..."
Spooky music plays in background |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway
Papers are dying (a change from the C.20th) but they still can set the news agenda... and yet curiously, the Beeb didn't break the story either...
Spooky music plays in background "
I'm just saying it's curious. Don;t you think? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway
Papers are dying (a change from the C.20th) but they still can set the news agenda... and yet curiously, the Beeb didn't break the story either...
Spooky music plays in background
I'm just saying it's curious. Don;t you think?"
Joe..... Its seeps time |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway
Papers are dying (a change from the C.20th) but they still can set the news agenda... and yet curiously, the Beeb didn't break the story either...
Spooky music plays in background
I'm just saying it's curious. Don;t you think?"
In the grand scheme of things it's right up there with Paris Hilton for things I don't care about. Nobody reads papers anymore, half these news companie won't exist in 10 years whether they are regulated or not. So I don't care about the enquiry, the story itself is pretty non factor.
The only beneficiaries of this will be match.com because of the brilliant advertising that it has dominatrix female members. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway
Papers are dying (a change from the C.20th) but they still can set the news agenda... and yet curiously, the Beeb didn't break the story either...
Spooky music plays in background
I'm just saying it's curious. Don;t you think?
In the grand scheme of things it's right up there with Paris Hilton for things I don't care about. Nobody reads papers anymore, half these news companie won't exist in 10 years whether they are regulated or not. So I don't care about the enquiry, the story itself is pretty non factor.
The only beneficiaries of this will be match.com because of the brilliant advertising that it has dominatrix female members. "
When i saw her photo in the news i thought "Fuck yes, i'd date her!"  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As if anyone still reads newspapers anyway
Papers are dying (a change from the C.20th) but they still can set the news agenda... and yet curiously, the Beeb didn't break the story either...
Spooky music plays in background
I'm just saying it's curious. Don;t you think?
In the grand scheme of things it's right up there with Paris Hilton for things I don't care about. Nobody reads papers anymore, half these news companie won't exist in 10 years whether they are regulated or not. So I don't care about the enquiry, the story itself is pretty non factor.
The only beneficiaries of this will be match.com because of the brilliant advertising that it has dominatrix female members.
When i saw her photo in the news i thought "Fuck yes, i'd date her!" "
But how many thought fuck yes I'd date him |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
I tell you what I find sad... If the person had been on for example a Dom site, and this is what he had actively sort after from the beginning... Then you have a story
That is what you and the likes of hacked of are trying to make it sound like
But we know that is not what happened here... He went on a dating site and went on a few dates with a woman who he did not know what her profession was...
Should he have asked.... Sure!
There was a thread started by a woman a few days ago about guys that were pretending to be firemen..... What would be the difference
It feels like you are trying to embarrass the man just for the sake that you can.... Does that make it worthy of public interest.. For me no!
It could be used as a cautionary tale of online dating... But we know that is not what hacked off are using this for
Embarrassing someone out of revenge is not a good look and undoes a lot of the good work they don't |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I tell you what I find sad... If the person had been on for example a Dom site, and this is what he had actively sort after from the beginning... Then you have a story
That is what you and the likes of hacked of are trying to make it sound like
But we know that is not what happened here... He went on a dating site and went on a few dates with a woman who he did not know what her profession was...
Should he have asked.... Sure!
There was a thread started by a woman a few days ago about guys that were pretending to be firemen..... What would be the difference
It feels like you are trying to embarrass the man just for the sake that you can.... Does that make it worthy of public interest.. For me no!
It could be used as a cautionary tale of online dating... But we know that is not what hacked off are using this for
Embarrassing someone out of revenge is not a good look and undoes a lot of the good work they don't "
Have to say i agree with you on this Fabio, the newspapers knew about the story and it was the newspapers who decided not to run with the story, because single man dates single woman is a non story. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
