Nepotism/Cronyism Watch

Don't think Sluffy could ever stay on level 1 if it involves Lusty 

Is Lusty the puppet or the puppeteer?

Either way, they need to get some sleep rather than post in the middle of the night as they tend to do. They might feel calmer, more forgiving and reasonable in the morning after a good night's sleep.

Can't believe the lengths Sluffy is prepared to go to in order to prove he is right on a site that he happily declares is of minor significance. What a waste of a life!

okocha wrote:Is Lusty the puppet or the puppeteer?

Either way, they need to get some sleep rather than post in the middle of the night as they tend to do. They might feel calmer, more forgiving and reasonable in the morning after a good night's sleep.

Can't believe the lengths Sluffy is prepared to go to in order to prove he is right on a site that he happily declares is of minor significance. What a waste of a life!

Hahaha!

My life, I'll waste it how I want thank you.

Some people waste theirs by posting as fake accounts on the internet, others spend theirs telling lies and trying their best to hide them by avoiding admitting they ever made a mistake about anything ever, I waste mine by reading factual stuff like Administrators and Liquidators reports on the club I've spent my life following.

I knew exactly where to look to reply as I did which took me about ten minutes to write - ten minutes I wont ever get back I agree - but worth it to me just to laugh at Wanderlust once more.

As for the times I post late, I'm awake at that hour due to my health - not through my choosing.

I suspect Wanderlust's reason is more to do with when his local shuts!

No wonder Sluffy can't sleep...

wanderlust wrote:No wonder Sluffy can't sleep...

Just hours ago...

wanderlust wrote: I would also be grateful if you would drop the personal attacks...

I see someone certainly practices what they preach...

See posts397 and 403 for context.

wanderlust wrote:See posts397 and 403 for context.

You do make me laugh.

You're one of those who loves to give it out but can't take it.

If you or anyone else thinks I'm a wanker - so what?

But you've just gone on line to search the internet for a picture of someone looking as though they are having a wank in bed.

It's one thing to think I am a wanker but you've just gone out of your way in your own real life to prove yourself one!

And you think that is the normal behaviour of a grown adult do you???

Yeah right.

Let's get real. Hit it....

Anyway getting back on topic, the Pandora Papers leak of the last two days underlines exactly what I'd said above a few days earlier...

Sluffy wrote:The point being if you've got that sort of money to begin with you don't need to have any ulterior motive behind their donation - what did Eddie get from his donation to the V and A an Egyptian mummy and a hoard of Roman coins or something perhaps?

Of course he didn't.

You are in a different world and think differently when you can afford to pay £50k just to meet Boris for afternoon tea a few times a year.

I mean really, if I wanted to do something corrupt and illegal and pay politicians to do my bidding do you think I would be meeting them at public tea party's that other people are attending, then make a donation to their party that will go on the public record???

Of course I wouldn't!

I'd do it in secret and pay the politicians - NOT their political party - by way of offshore and untraceable means.

I really despair of how naive and utterly stupid people are to believe such obvious bollocks as this.

Maugham and an army of investigative journalists have been trying to pin some shit about corruption and cronyism on the Tory government for getting on for the best part of TWO YEARS now.

What evidence has any of them found in all that time...

...sweet FA!!!

Full story here.

Pubes.

wanderlust wrote:Full story here.

Pubes.

???

Full story about what?

It isn't the full story of the Pandora Papers and it isn't a full story about what if anything the bloke got in return for contributing to the Tory party funding???

The bloke isn't linked to anything dodgy in this country as far as I'm aware and fwiw not been found to have done anything dodgy on a personal level as such?

The basic story as I can understand it was that a Swedish Company engineered a bribe by giving £200m worth of shares in their company to a daughter of a foreign 'dictator' and then proceeded to buy them back, with the aim of winning contracts from that country.

The bloke in question was employed to buy them back.

Doesn't mean he knew about the background to the bribe.

Fwiw though if I'd got involved in such, I think I would sense that something wasn't right and walk away.

He didn't and was paid half a million for his trouble.

The Swedish company found out what the bloke who set up the bribes was up to and have since pulled out of that area of the world and identified the £500k payment made to the facilitator of buying back the shares.

All this was done before the current revelations.

Maybe there's more to it but at this time it's just another one of those innuendos of someone donating to the Tory party must be guilty of corruption or cronyism.

No smoke without fire.

Just look at the details of sleaze and corruption involving the government and Aquind being disclosed on Panorama right now.

And...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58711151

okocha wrote:No smoke without fire.

Just look at the details of sleaze and corruption involving the government and Aquind being disclosed on Panorama right now.

I watched it, what exactly did it prove?

They basically talked about three donners to the Conservatives, the first was the bloke I talked about above.

The second was the wife of a dodgy Russian.

And the third was about the dodgy Russians behind a proposed underwater pipeline deal.

There was absolutely nothing in the first two cases where you could even see any reason why they wanted something back in exchange for their donations.

At least some sort of case was made in the last of the three.

Fwiw the decision to agree the deal would be based on the best interests of the two country's that would have to pay for it - France and England - presumably both country's must have an interest in it and commissioned a feasibility study then put some sort of tenders out to build it - it's not like me turning up with a massive wodge of cash and saying to Macron and Boris, your country's probably don't want or need this but I'll make you rich if you let my company build this pipeline for millions/billions more than it is actually worth and I'm sure no one will question it at all.

I'm amazed at how some people are so stupid to believe this sort of shit.

Do people switch their brains off or something???

Should the Conservatives and other party's hand back what appears to be 'dirty' money - most definitely.

Are these donations leading to sleaze and corruption - well for all the smoke and bluster for the last two years not one person has yet come up with a smoking gun to prove anything.

No smoke without fire - think throw enough shit and some might stick -  more like.

I'm all for honesty and truth, I don't care which political party is in power - whoever they are, if they've acted corruptly - then prove it and send them to jail with the maximum sentence.

Until then don't believe all that you hear just because it fits in with your personal beliefs.

If there's all this sleaze and corruption about then why can't anyone find any hard evidence of it???

The latest instalment will unfold this afternoon after Boris backed a Leadsom-inspired bid to overturn the parliamentary Standards Committee's decision to suspend Owen Paterson for being paid over £100 grand to lobby ministers on behalf of two companies.
The Standards Committee found Paterson guilty of an "egregious breach of paid advocacy" but now Boris is questioning the independent committee's procedures - if not it's very existence.
Angela Rayner meanwhile, has accused the government of "wallowing in sleaze".
It seems as though when a Tory MP is found guilty of breaking the rules, they are prepared to use their ill-gotten (IMO) majority to change the rules they were found guilty of although the Daily Fail goes much further:

"The plan being considered by the plotting MPs would ultimately be to disband the Commons committee on standards and replace it with a new body"

Articles here, here and here.

So many examples now of Tories trying to rewrite rules/promises/treaties/policies that don't suit them. Those they fail to overturn, they simply ignore or ride roughshod over.

Getting a global reputation as untrustworthy. Shameful.

Guilty of an 'egregious case of paid advocacy' - aka a clear case of 'sleaze' - Tory solution to this? Change the process to give him a chance of avoiding punishment.

Would expect this sort of government behaviour in Russia or Turkey not here.

It's not the ones who get paid to lobby that worry me, immoral as it is. It's the ones in the private sector that get "private meetings" with the PM and/or his ministers that are the bigger concern. Like when Rupert Murdoch's son in law got 30 minutes with Boris to pass on his instructions.

As regards today's debacle it couldn't help but be noticed that in some quarters the traditional dog whistling was going on - in this case the suggestion that the Chair of the Standards committee was "anti - Brexit" i.e. not professional, impartial or capable of doing the job properly.

The other string they're trying to pull on is that somehow the allegations (aka getting caught) contributed to Paterson's wife's suicide (FFS!!!) although that has no relevance to his guilt. Appals me to think they could even contemplate using that as a means to ameliorate the severity of the crime in the public mind.

Anything but the fact that he took money to coerce the process of government.

Kwasi Kwarteng is fast becoming among the worst of the Tory charlatans. Despicable, blatant fabrications in his defence of the attempts to excuse a colleague found guilty of breaking parliamentary rules by an independent body that they themselves helped set up!

Even worse is this despotic act: Tory Angela Richardson was sacked as a ministerial aide following her decision to abstain on the crucial vote.

Today's newspaper headlines tell a story. My favourite is this:

...whilst Murdoch goes with the most pressing story of the day...