Defending the indefensible - another PM thread

[keano77]

So you agree with me. Johnson was not responsible for Starmer being harassed even though every media outlet jumped on the Boris bashing bandwagon.

Thanks, glad we got that straight.

[Sephiroth]

wtf is the matter with you?

where do you get off with a post like that - I said nothing of the sort

is it because I said "the MAIN aim was.." re next election - there can be more than one devastating effect/aim

Answer the points made instead of this nonsense

[keano77]

Okay, let me try and put it in the simplest terms I can for you.

Do you think Johnson was responsible for, or caused, Starmer to be harassed by a group of people the other night?

[Sephiroth]

Categorically yes

As has been pointed out, there is no record of Starmer being harrassed and called paedo prior to Johnson's comments

And again, acceptance that what he said was wrong is across the political spectrum, and not confined to this forum

And the reason people think it was wrong for him to say is because of the risks involved of something like the other night happening. Or worse

And for you - or anyone - to try and deny any link at all - is just grim

There are still people (no surprise if you are one of them) who think the events at the White House was nothing to do with Trump - but people in these elevated positions know how dog whistles work

[JohnL]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Okay, let me try and put it in the simplest terms

> I can for you.

>

> Do you think Johnson was responsible for, or

> caused, Starmer to be harassed by a group of

> people the other night?

YES

Because psychologically he was advised to do this before (it was pre-planned not spur of the moment) to associate in the minds of voters Starmer and Savile - this is what analysts are telling us and why Johnson won't apologise.

The people who harassed Starmer did exactly as planned but with more aggression.

[JohnL]

By the way nothing Johnson says at PMQs is spur of the moment - its storyboarded out beforehand and he delivers it as if spur of the moment.

[ianr]

JohnL wrote:

> Because psychologically he was advised to do

> this before (it was pre-planned not spur of

> the moment) to associate in the minds of voters

> Starmer and Savile - this is what analysts are

> telling us and why Johnson won't apologise.

Information sources please. I'd like to be able to judge the veracity, likeliness, etc of reports at first hand.

My own, rebuttable, presumption about Johnson's refusal to apologise further has been that it was probably based on previous experience of the other side blaming him as a departmental head for the actions of subordinates. I guess that ploughing through PMQs etc might well find some examples.

[keano77]

Unbelievable.

KK asked a reasonable question and the CORRECT answer is Boris?s slur was used by at least one of the protestors (among other insults) but the slur did not cause these protestors to get out of bed on Monday morning and decide to head to Westminster and wait around in the hope that Starmer might appear so they could call him paedo and shout Savile at him.

The protestors had better things to do involving all manner of conspiracy theories and it just so happened Starmer came along. It was opportunism.

In short, to say a categorical yes that Boris was responsible for, or caused, Starmer to be harassed is WRONG and deluded.

[diable rouge]

It's not just about ''blaming him as a departmental head for the actions of subordinates''.

What's upset many people ian is that Johnson knowingly wrongly smeared Starmer with the failure to prosecute Saville, and therefore the associated child sex aspect therein. That crossed a line of decency.

I don't recall anyone on 'the other side' ever criticising Johnson for the mistakes of underlings with similar repulsive overtures...

[keano77]

That crossed a line of decency?

Titter

[diable rouge]

Sorry to disappoint you keano, but I'm not in the public eye let alone the PM, so I, and anyone else on here for that matter, doesn't have to adhere to the high standards we expect of those that hold elected public office.

Anyway, shouldn't you be washing your socks tonight?...

[keano77]

Let?s just say I now understand why you might have taken exception to my asking you to take a grip, my onanistic friend with the wet socks.

Or am I now being offensive?

[diable rouge]

Plagiarism is never a good look...

[JohnL]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The protestors had better things to do involving

> all manner of conspiracy theories and it just so

> happened Starmer came along. It was opportunism.

>

> In short, to say a categorical yes that Boris was

> responsible for, or caused, Starmer to be harassed

> is WRONG and deluded.

Go to Telegram and check out what they've been talking about since Boris mentioned it.

"In one Telegram group, Hine appeared to share a video of herself at the protest where she claimed the Labour leader was ?told some truths?, spurring her users to claim ?police protecting the ultimate paedophile?."

https://inews.co.uk/news/boris-johnson-jimmy-savile-slur-far-right-telegram-conspiracy-groups-1448637

[KidKruger]

Propa Trumpian scenario.

Whistle and they come.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

The Savile thing is just another example of Johnson trying to say something outrageous and Google search exploding in an attempt to distract attention from his own misconduct. The fact that he's going as far as to give fuel to conspiracy theories (as opposed to just nonsense about making model buses for fun) shows how deep in trouble he thinks he is.

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Keano has a

> long long history (along with uncle) of not just

> being "right wing" but outright wrong and

> offensive. If people lose patience and call him on

> it that doesn't mean we drop the "mask of

> tolerance"

Yeah but you also don't get to play the civility card when you've just called someone a sock-wanker.

[JohnL]

Johnson and Truss are off to solve the Ukraine issue today anyway - even though the US networks seem to be ignoring them.

[wordsworth]

Reports are circulating that johnson has offered ?12m to the Met

[KidKruger]

🤣🤣🥊

[Seabag]

Huzzah Hezza

Tarzan still has balls

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/16/panic-boris-johnson-allies-brexit-unravelling-michael-heseltine

[Earl Aelfheah]

Anyone know when the Met are due to complete their investigation/ the Gray report drop?

[diable rouge]

Nope, last Friday there was a deadline for the 'suspects' to fill out a Met questionnaire, so presume they are now collating that info and cross-referencing with Sue Gray report and anything else they've unearthed.

Standby for the Tories next line of apologia...''now isn't the time to change leader because of the Russkis etc''...

[JohnL]

The Speaker shutdown both Imran Hussain (Labour) asking the PM about Islamophobia and the Caroline Lucas (Green) asking about Russian Interference today for criticising the PM at PMQs

He seems not to want criticism of the PM.

[diable rouge]

diable rouge Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Standby for the Tories next line of apologia...''now isn't the time to change leader because of the Russkis etc''...

This could be Defence Secretary Ben Wallace's ''Hold my beer'' moment...

[Seabag]

How is the PM doing?

Obvs the Sue report seems to have been kicked into the weeds

I do wonder does he think ?Phew, now this really IS a distraction!? whilst going on to promise himself not to toss it all up again