More socio-political blather

[Stuart M]

who was that women (rock star ??) who grab that female reporters hair a few yrs back at an airport

That was Bjork - around the time she released 'It's Oh So Quiet', a song I hate dancing to.

Rep please for shoehorning dancing into this thread

[LMC]

Rep please for shoehorning dancing into this thread

OK, even if you are skating round the topic.

[Barry Shnikov]

How about the subset, all comments intended to serve no purpose other than make Jews (in particular) feel uncomfortable. Isn't that racism?

Yep. But can there be comments that make jewish people uncomfortable which are nevertheless not racist?

Was he doorstopped with an impertinent question to raise his ire and provoke a rebuke, or was it an innocuous question not worthy of Panorama? How about you choose one and stick to it?I don't speak either for or on behalf of the Board.

I don't think they're mutually incompatible. It isn't my thesis that the guy was there to rile Ken Livingstone specifically, there's been nothing I've seen to suggest that. But what was his purpose in hanging around outside the party? Seems to have been pretty close to 'papping'.

[Barry Shnikov]

In (P & O European Ferries (Dover) Ltd (1991) 93 Cr App R 72) Mr Justice Turner ruled that a company may be properly indicted for manslaughter. That case however, ended in the acquittal of the defendant company because the Crown could not show that a 'controlling mind' had been grossly negligent.

Yes, that was the Herald of Free Enterprise, wasn't it? But if I remember criminal law (howk ptui!) on the CPE, there had been no successful prosecutions except where the deceased was an employee - is that right.

there are a number of smaller cases, its not on the statute books the draft bill sept 2005 went to me for consulation but like all labour promises its gone down the pecking order

And certainly there should be a process by which those whose management style and/or failure to supervise their employees leads to the death of persons at the hands of the corporation which they manage.

[El Salsero Gringo]

Yep. But can there be comments that make jewish people uncomfortable which are nevertheless not racist?

Don't know - that's too theoretical for me.

[under par]

Yep. But can there be comments that make jewish people uncomfortable which are nevertheless not racist?

How about! " I've just put itching powder down your trousers"

Now that comment would make jewish people uncomfortable (well everyone really!)

Not too theoeretical after all and no racism either!

[Andy McGregor]

How about! " I've just put itching powder down your trousers"

Now that comment would make jewish people uncomfortable (well everyone really!)

Not too theoeretical after all and no racism either!

So, if the conversation had gone this way,

Finegold: "Mr Livingstone, Evening Standard — someone's just put itching powder down my trousers"
Livingstone: "How awful for you. Have you thought of having treatment?"

.. we wouldn't be having this conversation.

One thing we all seem to have taken as read is that doorstepping reporters are unwelcome. However, this is not always the case. When a politician has got something to say he can't wait to tell the press. They both need each other in a parasitic symbiosis. But is it a true symbiotic relationship where each depends on the other? My guess is that politicians would get along fine without the press but the reverse is not true.

[under par]

So, if the conversation had gone this way,
.. we wouldn't be having this conversation.

.

Come on Andy I thought this thread had deteriorated to answering specifics of others posts not the general topic of the thread.

Re read my post and you will find that I have infact answered Barrys question, totally unrelated as it is to the thread

So don't come all high and mighty with me, or misquote me, or take my comments out of context or anything at all really!

I'm doing my bit .......only 53 to go now lads.....keep up the good work

[Andy McGregor]

Come on Andy I thought this thread had deteriorated to answering specifics of others posts not the general topic of the thread.

Re read my post and you will find that I have infact answered Barrys question, totally unrelated as it is to the thread

So don't come all high and mighty with me, or misquote me, or take my comments out of context or anything at all really!

I'm doing my bit .......only 53 to go now lads.....keep up the good work

I think we've rather run out of steam. We sort of agree with each other - except that ESG is totally wrong, nothing new there though. In fact, we have an, until now unspoken, agreement that we will disagree with each other, even if we actually agree with what the other is saying. At least I think that's what it must be because ESG's arguments are often so weak he can't really believe them at all

[El Salsero Gringo]

ESG's arguments are often so weak

Then why, time and again, are you incapable of arguing with them...? ()

[Andy McGregor]

Then why, time and again, are you incapable of arguing with them...? ()

Shooting fish in a barrel is never much sport



Who agreed to this silly 200 thing? Quick, somebody find something else about Mr Livingstone or the Standard that we can disagree about.

[El Salsero Gringo]

Shooting fish in a barrel is never much sport

[stewart38]

...and I'd like to welcome Barry back to the floor. 200 posts in next to no time, now he's back.

Her goes

Ahem. (adjusts tie)

No such offence as corporate manslaughter.

My Lord I think we have established this is not a credible witness

Yes, that was the Herald of Free Enterprise, wasn't it? But if I remember criminal law (howk ptui!) on the CPE, there had been no successful prosecutions except where the deceased was an employee - is that right.
.

I move to have the case dismissed ie KL has no case to answer, before we reach 200 ,who will second me ??

[El Salsero Gringo]

I move to have the case dismissed ie KL has no case to answer, before we reach 200 ,who will second me ??

You're absolutely right, Stewart. Not even I can blame Ken Livingstone for the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster.

[Barry Shnikov]

Re read my post and you will find that I have infact answered Barrys question, totally unrelated as it is to the thread

Whose post was totally unrelated to the thread? Yours or mine?

[Barry Shnikov]

You're absolutely right, Stewart. Not even I can blame Ken Livingstone for the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster.

Huh. Last time I respond to one of your appeals for help.

[David Bailey]

With all the fuss over Tessa "5 mortages" Jowell, I've kind of changed my mind - it does seem unfair that Ken - an elected representative with a personal electorate of several million - can be suspended by a quango, but Jowell - with a personal electorate of, well, about 20 at the moment, I guess - can be cleared simply by Blair saying "Oh, she's all right".

Surely all elected representatives should be judged in the same way? When all's said and done, all Ken is guilty of is being a tw&t and refusing to apologise for it. I don't believe anyone's ever suggested he has even a hint of sleaze attached to him.

[El Salsero Gringo]

With all the fuss over Tessa "5 mortages" Jowell, I've kind of changed my mind - it does seem unfair that Ken - an elected representative with a personal electorate of several million - can be suspended by a quango, but Jowell - with a personal electorate of, well, about 20 at the moment, I guess - can be cleared simply by Blair saying "Oh, she's all right".

Surely all elected representatives should be judged in the same way? When all's said and done, all Ken is guilty of is being a tw&t and refusing to apologise for it. I don't believe anyone's ever suggested he has even a hint of sleaze attached to him.

This is another bit of the argument about how Ken's been 'done wrong' that I don't agree with.

Suppose I get a parking ticket. Right, I say, I shouldn't have had the ticket because I'm above such things. So I'm not going to pay.

So the penalty doubles, then I get a summons for non-payment, judgement is issued against me, with costs, I still don't pay, the bailiffs come round etc etc and let's suppose that in the end because I refuse at each stage to pay that I'm made bankrupt and I lose my house, my job, whatever (OK, technically that might not be possible, but I think you understand what I mean).

Then I go to the press and complain about how awful it is that I've lost my home and my job over a parking ticket, the penalty is disproportionate, people do far worse things than park on a yellow line and get away with it etc etc. Do I deserve sympathy? None whatsoever - because the penalty hasn't resulted from the parking ticket in the first place - that was just a £50 fine. The penalty is deserved because of failure to accept and deal with the situation when it arose.

[David Bailey]

This is another bit of the argument about how Ken's been 'done wrong' that I don't agree with.

{snip example}

I didn't say "he's been done wrong", I still think he's basically in attack / smear mode, when he should be apologising and just getting on with his flippin' job - and I'll be incensed if it turns out that he's wasting public money on his High Court challenge...

But that said, it's an interesting contrast between the two situations, don't you think?

And, motives aside, I think it is an interesting fact - I certainly was quite surprised at it - that the Standards board has the power to suspend the Mayor of London, but can't even comment on behaviour of an MP - they're both elected representatives, surely they should be treated consistently?

Certainly, Jowell's also brought politics (more) into disrepute - whether as much as or less than KL, who knows, but at least to a degree.

(How many more now?)

[El Salsero Gringo]

But that said, it's an interesting contrast between the two situations, don't you think?

And, motives aside, I think it is an interesting fact - I certainly was quite surprised at it - that the Standards board has the power to suspend the Mayor of London, but can't even comment on behaviour of an MP - they're both elected representatives, surely they should be treated consistently?

Certainly, Jowell's also brought politics (more) into disrepute - whether as much as or less than KL, who knows, but at least to a degree.

(How many more now?)

There are lots of interesting contrasts in all sorts of situations, but I'm very wary of trying to use them to justify one outcome over another (not saying that's what you were doing though). I suspect that the real reason the committee can't comment on MPs is because MPs see themselves consistently and arbitrarily above any kind of process that gets imposed on others.