Here we go again...

[Pirahna]

If you Google "examples of boris johnson lies" you won't be short of well researched material.

No doubt I would too but why would I want to do that?

Might as well Google “ the Earth is flat”. Get just as many results, if not more.

If you search on the Internet "the Earth is flat", you'll get a load of crackpots telling you it is (I'm guessing, I haven't actually done it). I did search for Boris Johnsons lies and there is a wealth of material, as you well know.

I've wasted enough of my eveing on this now, I'm reading "Ghosts of Spain" by Giles Tremlett. Although written twenty years ago it makes interesting reading for a Spanish newbie like myself.

[Screwdriver]

If you search on the Internet "the Earth is flat", you'll get a load of crackpots telling you it is (I'm guessing, I haven't actually done it). I did search for Boris Johnsons lies and there is a wealth of material, as you well know.

No I haven't or at least I hadn't. So just for you I literally Googled just that. Found "50 lies by the daily Mirror". A bastion of impartiality. Somewhat ironic that "fifty lies by the daily Mirror" would probably just about account for the front page...

Anyhow, I got to "14. When he called gay men 'tank-topped bumboys'" and realised just how much I miss him already.

The rest of that "fifty lies" was fluff and gossip mostly from when he was a journalist ffs.

[mangocrazy]

I love this sort of rhetoric. Boris gets booted out of office by nefarious means and people hesitate to face the truth which is that he was ousted on a technicality.

We did not expect the entire government to shut down in the middle of a pandemic did we? The whole thing was a mismanaged shit show due to the vagaries of censorship, fake science and a money minded asset management firm masquerading as a pharmaceutical company. That is, a global shit show. Other than a bare handful of nations who were able to ignore the money grabbing enforced inoculation.

Sweden springs to mind, the rape capital of Europe did well (except for the rape) but otherwise rather chillingly, it's the dictatorships/communist countries which can easily mange situations like this. So if we lived in an authoritarian country like South Korea, we'd be better off...

Track and trace anyone?

Anyhow, we needed an operating government and they needed to be in the office. During that period, there were meetings of more than one person, less than 2m apart (ffs). Someone nabbed a picture of Boris with a bottle and he was fucked. Doesn't matter what the truth is, the BBC would put on some poor fucker who lost his mum, dad, all his siblings then died horribly without even being able to visit himself in hospital etc. Then Cue endless Pictures of a single incident involving Boris and the infamous bottle.

It is the worst kind of political shenanigans which landed us a useless standby PM and an equally useless unelectable toad, Sunak, selected effectively by the WEF.

Boris was PM because he was and is POPULAR. Other than the obvious problem with Labour being a shower of cunts and Lib Dims being even worse, the entire political system is the same on all sides and a bit of a sham. It hardly matters which party is in power these days since most of the policies are specifically designed to support global corporate interests.

So I'd much rather watch Boris bumble about while the powers that be get ever richer than I would watch an obvious WEF puppet like Sunak or (god forbid!) Starmer hold the reins while the powers that be get ever richer. At least he's funny.

As an opinion piece, it's fairly well written (albeit verging on a rant), but is entirely fact-free. It clearly highlights your deep interest in conspiracy theories, but provides zero actual support for them (you know, verified incidents,dates, times etc.) And I'm supposed to believe this collection of hopes, wishes, beliefs and dreams instead of the evidence of the Privileges Committee?

Let's just say I'll get back to you on that one...

[Yorick]

I love this sort of rhetoric. Boris gets booted out of office by nefarious means and people hesitate to face the truth which is that he was ousted on a technicality.

We did not expect the entire government to shut down in the middle of a pandemic did we? The whole thing was a mismanaged shit show due to the vagaries of censorship, fake science and a money minded asset management firm masquerading as a pharmaceutical company. That is, a global shit show. Other than a bare handful of nations who were able to ignore the money grabbing enforced inoculation.

Sweden springs to mind, the rape capital of Europe did well (except for the rape) but otherwise rather chillingly, it's the dictatorships/communist countries which can easily mange situations like this. So if we lived in an authoritarian country like South Korea, we'd be better off...

Track and trace anyone?

Anyhow, we needed an operating government and they needed to be in the office. During that period, there were meetings of more than one person, less than 2m apart (ffs). Someone nabbed a picture of Boris with a bottle and he was fucked. Doesn't matter what the truth is, the BBC would put on some poor fucker who lost his mum, dad, all his siblings then died horribly without even being able to visit himself in hospital etc. Then Cue endless Pictures of a single incident involving Boris and the infamous bottle.

It is the worst kind of political shenanigans which landed us a useless standby PM and an equally useless unelectable toad, Sunak, selected effectively by the WEF.

Boris was PM because he was and is POPULAR. Other than the obvious problem with Labour being a shower of cunts and Lib Dims being even worse, the entire political system is the same on all sides and a bit of a sham. It hardly matters which party is in power these days since most of the policies are specifically designed to support global corporate interests.

So I'd much rather watch Boris bumble about while the powers that be get ever richer than I would watch an obvious WEF puppet like Sunak or (god forbid!) Starmer hold the reins while the powers that be get ever richer. At least he's funny.

As an opinion piece, it's fairly well written (albeit verging on a rant), but is entirely fact-free. It clearly highlights your deep interest in conspiracy theories, but provides zero actual support for them (you know, verified incidents,dates, times etc.) And I'm supposed to believe this collection of hopes, wishes, beliefs and dreams instead of the evidence of the Privileges Committee?

Let's just say I'll get back to you on that one...

[Screwdriver]

As an opinion piece, it's fairly well written (albeit verging on a rant), but is entirely fact-free. It clearly highlights your deep interest in conspiracy theories, but provides zero actual support for them (you know, verified incidents,dates, times etc.) And I'm supposed to believe this collection of hopes, wishes, beliefs and dreams instead of the evidence of the Privileges Committee?

Let's just say I'll get back to you on that one...

Yes there's a ton of cop in there but fact free?

We did not expect the entire government to shut down in the middle of a pandemic did we? That is my opinion but framed as a question to highlight the difficulty of following the "stay at home" guidelines when the government did not stay at home.

C*VID pandemic, lockdown, compulsory inoculations = shit show. No one is going to argue that's not self evidently true surely.

I won't go too far through the list but on just this point: massive censorship of any dissenting views and even shutting down the views expressed by the British Medical Journal (who dared to question the so called test procedure for thePfizer jabs). If we can't agree there was a ton of censorship then it's probably not worth going much further...

As a side note, it has only recently come to light just how deeply embedded state officials were into big tech. Telling Facebook, Twitter, YouTube etc just what they could and couldn't say.

Pfizer do not make drugs. They are an asset management company specialising in buying up technology developments, drug companies and patents then monetising them to the extreme. They pretty much drive the entire mainstream media in the US being by far the biggest "supporter' and "advertiser" for all of the main media outlets. I would not be surprised if most people are not aware of this. But it is true.

Is Sweden (esp. Malmo) the "rape capitol of Europe"? OK you got me. I don't know and while it is really bad, ALL rape is bad, there's just too much apologist nonsense like "yeah but in Sweden even sex without consent is called rape". I mean, what else do you call it! So I'm not going to pursue that particular "claim", I'd rather hope it wasn't true to be honest...

[Screwdriver]

Why don't you just fuck off.

If you have nothing sensible to say just go and have another wank. Give yourself a treat.

[Yorick]

Why don't you just fuck off.

If you have nothing sensible to say just go and have another wank. Give yourself a treat.

I was replying to Mangoman. Private conversation


Run along and play nicely

[wheelnut]

The "partygate" affair would be a good place to start. We can pick apart all of the outrageous lies from the left wing propaganda machine and see what shed of truth there may be.

The only issue with that statement is that it wasn’t the ‘left wing propoganda machine’ that did for Boris, it was pretty much his own party.

[DefTrap]

I won't go too far through the list but on just this point: massive censorship of any dissenting views and even shutting down the views expressed by the British Medical Journal (who dared to question the so called test procedure for thePfizer jabs). If we can't agree there was a ton of censorship then it's probably not worth going much further...

This sort of claim doesn't really hold much water. The BMJ publishes loads of papers on covid - with all sorts of conclusions - you've chosen to highlight some that have negative connotations and conclude that because they're not being shouted from the rooftops that that is censorship.

But if you really believe the media, politicians, scientists are being manipulated by dark powers from an endlessly variable guiding hand, then there's no persuading you.

Oh look we're off the topic of the OP, again, and onto your favourite subject ...

[Screwdriver]

The "partygate" affair would be a good place to start. We can pick apart all of the outrageous lies from the left wing propaganda machine and see what shed of truth there may be.

The only issue with that statement is that it wasn’t the ‘left wing propoganda machine’ that did for Boris, it was pretty much his own party.

That is true of course but do you remember just how long and how often that "story" was kept going?

I did ask a question earlier which got lost in the noise I suppose. Given that Boris is an enormously popular figure and (I submit) would almost certainly lead the Tories into another election victory, why has he been unceremoniously dumped by his own party? Who do "they" suppose will be the successor? What is the plan and who is pulling the strings?

[wheelnut]

That is true of course but do you remember just how long and how often that "story" was kept going?

I did ask a question earlier which got lost in the noise I suppose. Given that Boris is an enormously popular figure and (I submit) would almost certainly lead the Tories into another election victory, why has he been unceremoniously dumped by his own party? Who do "they" suppose will be the successor? What is the plan and who is pulling the strings?

Perhaps the party has, on the whole, (belatedly) recognised that he’s the emperor’s new clothes, and that having him anywhere near the top of the party is a long term bad idea.

Who’s pulling the strings? Same as always, whichever Tory faction is the best at in-fighting at the time. Plus, to a lesser extent, the 1922 committee.

[Screwdriver]

Perhaps the party has, on the whole, (belatedly) recognised that he’s the emperor’s new clothes, and that having him anywhere near the top of the party is a long term bad idea.

Who’s pulling the strings? Same as always, whichever Tory faction is the best at in-fighting at the time. Plus, to a lesser extent, the 1922 committee.

Well I don't trust Sunak for a heartbeat. He wasn't elected, he was installed. Then there was some confusion over the release of communications, Boris was like "yeah fuckit, here you go" and Sunak did everything he could to stop it. Then there's a ridiculous report over the most trivial issue and our most popular PM in years is effectively kicked out of office on a technicality.

So once again, we vote someone in, they decide to kick them out. I can't help feeling it is related to Brexit and there is pressure to drag the UK back into the clutches of the European Union.

Whether having Boris as PM is "a bad idea" is a telling question. Bad for who....

[wheelnut]

Well I don't trust Sunak for a heartbeat. He wasn't elected, he was installed. Then there was some confusion over the release of communications, Boris was like "yeah fuckit, here you go" and Sunak did everything he could to stop it. Then there's a ridiculous report over the most trivial issue and our most popular PM in years is effectively kicked out of office on a technicality.

I’m not a fan of Sunak either, but for different reasons. I think he’s capable enough, I’m just not a fan of his policies. I also think he’s pretty detached from ‘normal life’.

Also, I’d rather a government be competent rather than popular. We desperately need a period of quiet competence at the moment. Not something Boris can bring to the table, regardless of how ‘popular’ he is. Plus I’m not sure he is that popular any more. He’s been found out.

So once again, we vote someone in, they decide to kick them out. I can't help feeling it is related to Brexit and there is pressure to drag the UK back into the clutches of the European Union.

Whether having Boris as PM is "a bad idea" is a telling question. Bad for who....

We vote for the party here, not the person. In fact we vote for local MP. The party decides on its leader.

[Yambo]

Well I don't trust Sunak for a heartbeat. He wasn't elected, he was installed.

Sunak is PM for exactly the same reason and following the same process as Johnson was. Sure, Johnson won a general election whilst PM but he became PM by being installed as leader of the Conservative Party who just happened to be in government at the time.

The Conservatives could just as easily win a general election whilst Sunak is PM and if that was to happen, there would be no material differences about their status.

I don't trust Sunak either but then I didn't trust Johnson. To be honest, I don't see many politicians in Parliament that I do trust and of those that might be worthy I'll reserve judgement until they stand up and show their mettle.

[irie]

I honestly think he doesn't know right from wrong. He lies constantly but doesn't see that at wrong.

He made a big thing about birthday cakes and wine at work being good.

But folk couldn't visit their dying family members in hospital.

He can't see the problem, so there isn't one.

He can't see the problem because he's a narcissist (by definition amoral).

[Screwdriver]

Well I don't trust Sunak for a heartbeat. He wasn't elected, he was installed. Then there was some confusion over the release of communications, Boris was like "yeah fuckit, here you go" and Sunak did everything he could to stop it. Then there's a ridiculous report over the most trivial issue and our most popular PM in years is effectively kicked out of office on a technicality.

I’m not a fan of Sunak either, but for different reasons. I think he’s capable enough, I’m just not a fan of his policies. I also think he’s pretty detached from ‘normal life’.

Also, I’d rather a government be competent rather than popular. We desperately need a period of quiet competence at the moment. Not something Boris can bring to the table, regardless of how ‘popular’ he is. Plus I’m not sure he is that popular any more. He’s been found out.

So once again, we vote someone in, they decide to kick them out. I can't help feeling it is related to Brexit and there is pressure to drag the UK back into the clutches of the European Union.

Whether having Boris as PM is "a bad idea" is a telling question. Bad for who....

We vote for the party here, not the person. In fact we vote for local MP. The party decides on its leader.

I think we are saying the same thing just from a different viewpoint.

Interesting perspective that we do in fact vote for the person at MP constituency level and yes, they happen to represent a particular party. That group of MPs collectively represent the power and authority of government. It's the Prime Ministers job to consolidate their authority and steer it in a particular direction based on policy (and election promises).

So the PM can't (usually) do whatever the fuck they want and we just need them to be a popular figurehead, representing our country. Boris is that guy for me. I can understand why that might not be the case for everyone, that's why we have a voting system and a democracy.

[Screwdriver]

Well I don't trust Sunak for a heartbeat. He wasn't elected, he was installed.

Sunak is PM for exactly the same reason and following the same process as Johnson was. Sure, Johnson won a general election whilst PM but he became PM by being installed as leader of the Conservative Party who just happened to be in government at the time.

The Conservatives could just as easily win a general election whilst Sunak is PM and if that was to happen, there would be no material differences about their status.

I don't trust Sunak either but then I didn't trust Johnson. To be honest, I don't see many politicians in Parliament that I do trust and of those that might be worthy I'll reserve judgement until they stand up and show their mettle.

So you're saying it's the same while also showing the differences. Boris became PM as the result of a general election, Sunak did not.

You then say that if the circumstances had been the same, they would be the same. Somewhat tautological so I can't argue with that except to say that Sunak was in fact not elected by the general populace and therefore is not our Prime Minister by the consent of the people.

[wheelnut]

So the PM can't (usually) do whatever the fuck they want and we just need them to be a popular figurehead, representing our country. Boris is that guy for me. I can understand why that might not be the case for everyone, that's why we have a voting system and a democracy.

That’s democracy for you. It’s not designed to make anyone happy, it’s designed to frustrate all sides, but not quite frustrated enough to start lobbing rocks at each other.

[Lutin]

The Lockdown parties scandal, the gift that keeps on giving - Michael Gove says sorry over Tory lockdown party video

The video published by the Mirror shows workers drinking and dancing at an event in London in December that year.

The housing secretary told the BBC the footage was "terrible" and would leave people feeling "extremely angry".

The Conservative Party said it had already taken disciplinary action over the event.

In the footage, one person is heard saying it is OK to film "as long as we don't stream that we're, like, bending the rules".

The paper says the video sheds new light on a gathering that police had previously looked into.

The event has been reported before, but only still photographs were published by the Daily Mirror. Although Mr Bailey was photographed surrounded by party workers in those images, he is not seen in this newly-obtained video.

And another by-election on the way - David Warburton quits as MP, triggering another by-election

An MP who was suspended from the Conservative Party over allegations of sexual misconduct has resigned.

David Warburton, who represents Somerton and Frome in Somerset, is the fourth MP in eight days to announce their resignation.

[Yambo]

Well I don't trust Sunak for a heartbeat. He wasn't elected, he was installed.

Sunak is PM for exactly the same reason and following the same process as Johnson was. Sure, Johnson won a general election whilst PM but he became PM by being installed as leader of the Conservative Party who just happened to be in government at the time.

The Conservatives could just as easily win a general election whilst Sunak is PM and if that was to happen, there would be no material differences about their status.

I don't trust Sunak either but then I didn't trust Johnson. To be honest, I don't see many politicians in Parliament that I do trust and of those that might be worthy I'll reserve judgement until they stand up and show their mettle.

So you're saying it's the same while also showing the differences. Boris became PM as the result of a general election, Sunak did not.

You then say that if the circumstances had been the same, they would be the same. Somewhat tautological so I can't argue with that except to say that Sunak was in fact not elected by the general populace and therefore is not our Prime Minister by the consent of the people.

Boris Johnson became Prime Minister on 23 July 2019 having beaten Jeremy Hunt in the Conservative Party leadership election following Teresa May's resignation.

Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister on 22 October 2022 having been unopposed in the Conservative Party leadership election following Liz Truss's resignation.

Both Johnson and Sunak became Prime Minister by virtue of being elected Leader of the Conservative Party which was in government at the time. Both were elected as Leader of the Conservative Party by Members of the Conservative Party.

As it is members of the Conservative Party who select their leader it can be argued that those members select the Prime Minister. Yes, Boris Johnson was Prime Minister when the Conservative Party 'won' the General Election but he was already Prime Minister having been installed as such by becoming leader of the Conservative Party. Rishi Sunak could also win a general election whilst Prime Minister, it would not change the fact that he was, like Johnson 'installed' prior to that election.

It's not difficult, especially when you understand that the Prime Minister of any government is usually the elected head of the political party that wins the most seats. There has never been a 'general' election for Prime Minister. I think the reigning Monarch can have a say but you and I can only do so indirectly, by electing a Member of Parliament that is a member of that particular party.