Brexit

[towny44]

Claim over Boris Johnson's behaviour 'deeply concerning' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49877508

Do me a favour. This allegedly happened almost twenty years ago and she's only bring it up now.

Well Michael Fallon's 'incident' with Julia Hartley Brewer happened almost 20 years ago and he thought fit to resign.

Fallon admitted this, as well as several other incidents, took place, Boris denies it, could that be the difference?

[Ray Scully]

Well guys, your nothing if not consistent

[johnds]

She has had twenty years to make this allegation.
Am I to believe that the fact that she made it on the first day of the Conservative Conference is just a mysterious co-incidence.
Lots of things that might or could have happened twenty years ago might have been laughed off then but certainly can't now.
No doubt Boris isn't lily white where his love life is concerned but that's a private matter or maybe tittle tattle. What interests me
is that he is the only party leader who is trying to comply with the expressed will of the publc unlike all the others who are conspiring to see it ignored.

This morning's "interview" by BBC TV of Said Javed was a disgrace. Ostensibly he was there to talk about his spending plans but
over ten minutes were spent at the outset on the same old same old. Allegations denied by the P.M. the term "surrender" etc etc
When Said Javed turned the tables on her and asked her about John McDonald's well reported statements about mudering Mrs Thatcher
or lynching Esther McVey or Jeremy Corbyn's support of the IRA she was completely disinterested. Eventually we did get a few minutes about the spending plans.

[towny44]

Well guys, your nothing if not consistent

Surely you didn't expect anything else.
Can I ask you one question though Ray, are you not the least bit suspicious about the timing of this claim?

[Stephen]

She has had twenty years to make this allegation.
Am I to believe that the fact that she made it on the first day of the Conservative Conference is just a mysterious co-incidence.
Lots of things that might or could have happened twenty years ago might have been laughed off then but certainly can't now.
No doubt Boris isn't lily white where his love life is concerned but that's a private matter or maybe tittle tattle. What interests me
is that he is the only party leader who is trying to comply with the expressed will of the publc unlike all the others who are conspiring to see it ignored.

Exactly John. Pathetic and desperate really isn't it. She must have been really traumatised these last nineteen years after allegedly having her knee rubbed. I think we can safely say everyone one will be giving HER a wide berth come the Christmas MP's bash.



This morning's "interview" by BBC TV of Said Javed was a disgrace. Ostensibly he was there to talk about his spending plans but
over ten minutes were spent at the outset on the same old same old. Allegations denied by the P.M. the term "surrender" etc etc
When Said Javed turned the tables on her and asked her about John McDonald's well reported statements about mudering Mrs Thatcher
or lynching Esther McVey or Jeremy Corbyn's support of the IRA she was completely disinterested. Eventually we did get a few minutes about the spending plans.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I find it really depressing all the efforts the opposition parties are now making to thwart Bojo's attempts to deliver Brexit.

If only they'd put half the effort into working together to honour the result of the referendum over the past three years we'd have been out by now and any short term turbulence would have passed.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Am I to believe that the fact that she made it on the first day of the Conservative Conference is just a mysterious co-incidence.

The same sort of coincidence as the mother of Cecil Parkinson's illegitimate child choosing the same moment years ago.

If the incident did happen she should have either slapped his face or reported it at the time, when there was half a chance of witnesses one way or the other to confirm the truth of the matter. Right now it's one person's word against another.

[Stephen]

Yes, I saw that interview as well John. Not at all interested in Brexit was she, just sensationalism over something of nothing. So he said the word 'Humbug' Oh my god , how terrible, shoot me now.

There obviously isn't much else going on in the world if this is all they can report about. I could understand it if he told them to 'F' off.

[Gill W]

Well guys, your nothing if not consistent

Depressingly consistent.

It's no surprise that they would rather believe Johnson, a known liar, rather than a respected journalist.

No surprise that they brush it off because it happened 20 years ago.

Even if it happened 20 years ago, it still matters. It probably matters more, as this man is now PM

I doubt if any of them can imagine (or even make the effort to imagine) what it's like for a young woman to be on the wrong end of unwanted sexual attentions of an older man who is in a position of authority over her, and the reasons she would keep quiet about it, and the courage it would take to make a public statement about it, even years later.

Now, I expect there will be doubling down on the comments on the forum - that will be true consistency.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Well guys, your nothing if not consistent

Depressingly consistent.

It's no surprise that they would rather believe Johnson, a known liar, rather than a respected journalist.

Gill you're as depressingly consistent as anyone else here.

I'm not making a judgement on who is telling the truth. I am suggesting that a complaint at the time, however hard, would have allowed chance for a proper investigation, rather than speculation either way.

Just put yourself in the position of being accused of something that happened 20 years ago. Could you even remember whether or not you did it? Let alone try to find witnesses to prove a negative - that you didn't?

You've set yourself up in other issues here, whether it is the referendum itself or the prorogation of Parliament, as an upholder of the law. That is admirable. But the law in this country is innocent until proven guilty. Whether he lied about something else or not, Boris is entitled to that presumption in this case.

Yes sexual harassment is wrong - even if the standards of 20 years back were different from today. But that doesn't mean that anyone making allegations is entitled to be automatically believed. Because tragically there's more than one man whose life has been ruined by false allegations of this and worse.

Please let's stick with the facts. One of which is, like it or not, getting the courage to come up with such an allegation, right now, is deeply suspicious. If the allegation is true, and she has kept it to herself for whatever reason for 20 years, why not wait until 1st November? To raise it now, rightly or wrongly raises suspicion that the timing is political.

[Ray Scully]

I find it really depressing all the efforts the opposition parties are now making to thwart Bojo's attempts to deliver Brexit.

If only they'd put half the effort into working together to honour the result of the referendum over the past three years we'd have been out by now and any short term turbulence would have passed.

[Ray Scully]

Well guys, your nothing if not consistent

Surely you didn't expect anything else.
Can I ask you one question though Ray, are you not the least bit suspicious about the timing of this claim?

Deeply suspicious, as I am about the motives of many of the Leave or Remain protagonists

[Mervyn and Trish]

Well guys, your nothing if not consistent

Depressingly consistent.

It's no surprise that they would rather believe Johnson, a known liar, rather than a respected journalist.

Gill you're as depressingly consistent as anyone else here.

I'm not making a judgement on who is...…. etc

I would add that my suspicions are greater because she has chosen to write about this in a national newspaper, rather than make a complaint to the police. Surely the latter would have been less traumatic if the action is purely personal?

[Gill W]

Well guys, your nothing if not consistent

Depressingly consistent.

It's no surprise that they would rather believe Johnson, a known liar, rather than a respected journalist.

Gill you're as depressingly consistent as anyone else here.

I'm not making a judgement on who is telling the truth. I am suggesting that a complaint at the time, however hard, would have allowed chance for a proper investigation, rather than speculation either way.

Just put yourself in the position of being accused of something that happened 20 years ago. Could you even remember whether or not you did it? Let alone try to find witnesses to prove a negative - that you didn't?

You've set yourself up in other issues here, whether it is the referendum itself or the prorogation of Parliament, as an upholder of the law. That is admirable. But the law in this country is innocent until proven guilty. Whether he lied about something else or not, Boris is entitled to that presumption in this case.

Yes sexual harassment is wrong - even if the standards of 20 years back were different from today. But that doesn't mean that anyone making allegations is entitled to be automatically believed. Because tragically there's more than one man whose life has been ruined by false allegations of this and worse.

Please let's stick with the facts. One of which is, like it or not, getting the courage to come up with such an allegation, right now, is deeply suspicious. If the allegation is true, and she has kept it to herself for whatever reason for 20 years, why not wait until 1st November? To raise it now, rightly or wrongly raises suspicion that the timing is political.

Maybe you don’t understand what it’s like to be a young woman who has received unwanted sexual harassment, gropes and other inappropriate touching from an older man, particularly on in a position of authority.

It’s very easy to say it should have been reported - but, young women in this situation can feel shame, embarrassment, feel it’s their fault, feel they won’t be believed, just want to put it out of their mind - especially when the perpetrator is a man in authority. There’s all sorts of reasons why nothing is said.

Personally, if I had been accused of doing something immoral or illegal 20 years ago, I would remember if I had actually done it - that sort of thing would weigh heavily on my conscience.

At this point it comes down to who you believe.

Do you believe one party - the one who
Prorogued Parliament unlawfully
Lied to the Queen about it
Has questions hanging over him regarding misconduct in public office when he was London mayor.
Lied about his affair with Petronella Wyatt and was sacked from Michael Howard’s shadow cabinet.

Or the one who is a respected journalist.

It’s a no brainier for me.

In interest to see how bad Johnson has to get before any Brexiters on this thread will criticise him.

He’s already prorogued Parliament unlawfully, but that’s not bad enough. How far will he go before he’s finally called out

[david63]

He’s already prorogued Parliament unlawfully,

But not illegally

[oldbluefox]

I'm just wondering when all of the aeroplanes will stop flying to Europe and when all of the banks relocated there. Have I missed it? Indeed that's what my Remainer friends warned me would happen.

[towny44]

He’s already prorogued Parliament unlawfully,

But not illegally

But that's only one each at present, high court made the correct decision then the supreme court made it one each, maybe we should go for best of 3?

[Mervyn and Trish]

At this point it comes down to who you believe..
It’s a no brainier for me.

It's a no brainer for me too.

I believe in trial by court. Not trial by media.

[oldbluefox]

Since the media struggle to know the difference between 'fewer' and 'less' is it any wonder they struggle to know the difference between 'unlawful' and 'illegal'. Mind you a goodly proportion of our MPs don't know the difference either.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Since the media struggle to know the difference between 'fewer' and 'less' is it any wonder they struggle to know the difference between 'unlawful' and 'illegal'. Mind you a goodly proportion of our MPs don't know the difference either.

A lot of our MPs struggle to understand that 52 is a bigger number than 48!

[oldbluefox]

Brexit.jpg

[Ray Scully]

I'm just wondering when all of the aeroplanes will stop flying to Europe and when all of the banks relocated there. Have I missed it? Indeed that's what my Remainer friends warned me would happen.

OBF your problem you are too impatient, it will come if/when we leave

[oldbluefox]

I'm just wondering when all of the aeroplanes will stop flying to Europe and when all of the banks relocated there. Have I missed it? Indeed that's what my Remainer friends warned me would happen.

OBF your problem you are too impatient, it will come if/when we leave

.........................and pigs might fly!

[Ray Scully]

I'm just wondering when all of the aeroplanes will stop flying to Europe and when all of the banks relocated there. Have I missed it? Indeed that's what my Remainer friends warned me would happen.

OBF your problem you are too impatient, it will come if/when we leave

.........................and pigs might fly!

to replace the aircraft? now that is pushing things even for a Brexiteer

[johnds]

Might it be worth remembering that when Boris Johnson acted unlawfully he did so after seeking legal advice which was that his proposed actions WERE lawful.

Are we not then shooting the messenger when the real culprits (if any) were those who advised him incorrectly.

He is not a lawyer he is a layman in that regard. Lawyers are supposed to know the law and the rest of us to accept their advice.

If the "aggreived" woman had gone to the privately to the police at any time in the past twenty years her story might have had more gravitas

But no she opted to make a public accusation in her first column in a National newspaper on the eve of the Conservative Party conference.

A newspaper that the previous week had issued more stories intended to smear the Prime Minister

Makes her story slightly less believable as far as I am concerned.

Now the completely unfounded smear that some how he will gain financially from Brexit

What is next week's story - he swallowed a live goldfish ??

We need to get Brexit done after over three years and then we can start bickering over a trade agreement