Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 4)

[Vanden Saab]

IforB said:

Vanden Saab said:

IforB said:

Is that it?

"It is not embarrassing for Johnson as he didn't really pick Grayling."

Yeah right. The press have been talking about it for weeks in those terms and if it was inaccurate, then why did no. 10 not ask them to change that?

As a piece of dissemblement, that is stretching it massively!

Can you point out any other situations where speculation on an appointment has been denied?

Care to explain why Julian Lewis has had the whip removed?

For working with opposition parties for his own advantage apparently... Did some other MPs not get kicked out for the same reason last year?

[IforB]

gooner1 said:

IforB said:

Vanden Saab said:

IforB said:

Is that it?

"It is not embarrassing for Johnson as he didn't really pick Grayling."

Yeah right. The press have been talking about it for weeks in those terms and if it was inaccurate, then why did no. 10 not ask them to change that?

As a piece of dissemblement, that is stretching it massively!

Can you point out any other situations where speculation on an appointment has been denied?

Care to explain why Julian Lewis has had the whip removed?

Can you, just the facts not speculation?

It needs no speculation. The facts are thus.

The Government put forward 5 names for the committee. One of those names was Lewis.

Lewis votes for himself. The 4 opposition members also vote for him. The 4 other Tory picks vote for Grayling.

Lewis wins 5-4

Despite him being a Tory and subject to the whip (and of course no.10 had no preference for the chair and absolutely didn't mind about who it was.according to the speculation of some on here) they have now decided to remove the whip and basically boot him out of the parliamentary party.

Thems the facts.

They are damning.

[gooner1]

IforB said:

gooner1 said:

IforB said:

Vanden Saab said:

IforB said:

Is that it?

"It is not embarrassing for Johnson as he didn't really pick Grayling."

Yeah right. The press have been talking about it for weeks in those terms and if it was inaccurate, then why did no. 10 not ask them to change that?

As a piece of dissemblement, that is stretching it massively!

Can you point out any other situations where speculation on an appointment has been denied?

Care to explain why Julian Lewis has had the whip removed?

Can you, just the facts not speculation?

It needs no speculation. The facts are thus.

The Government put forward 5 names for the committee. One of those names was Lewis.

Lewis votes for himself. The 4 opposition members also vote for him. The 4 other Tory picks vote for Grayling.

Lewis wins 5-4

Despite him being a Tory and subject to the whip (and of course no.10 had no preference for the chair and absolutely didn't mind about who it was.according to the speculation of some on here) they have now decided to remove the whip and basically boot him out of the parliamentary party.

Thems the facts.

They are damning.

Why has the whip been removed and Lewis been booted out of the parliamentary party?
I understand what has happened, it’s the facts as to the why I asked for.

[citizensm1th]

More importantly that tory party squabbling will he team up with the opposition members to release the report on Russian election tampering?

[IforB]

Vanden Saab said:

IforB said:

Vanden Saab said:

IforB said:

Is that it?

"It is not embarrassing for Johnson as he didn't really pick Grayling."

Yeah right. The press have been talking about it for weeks in those terms and if it was inaccurate, then why did no. 10 not ask them to change that?

As a piece of dissemblement, that is stretching it massively!

Can you point out any other situations where speculation on an appointment has been denied?

Care to explain why Julian Lewis has had the whip removed?

For working with opposition parties for his own advantage apparently... Did some other MPs not get kicked out for the same reason last year?

Ah yes. We all know that doing the right thing and following your own code of ethics is unacceptable under Johnson's regime.

I have to say though that Lewis has properly kicked his own party in the nuts here. I have no idea why and he must have known he would get a reaction.

It shows the dissatisfaction within the party when even people who must be relatively well favoured are willing to turn on the Government in such a public and embarrassing way.

I am gob smacked by it.

[IforB]

gooner1 said:

Why has the whip been removed and Lewis been booted out of the parliamentary party?
I understand what has happened, it’s the facts as to the why I asked for.

Ask Johnson. I have no idea.

I am just laughing my head off at it.

[Zirconia]

citizensm1th said:

More importantly that tory party squabbling will he team up with the opposition members to release the report on Russian election tampering?

Meeting tomorrow apparently. Boho just kicked him in the unmentionables. Going to be interesting tomorrow.

[Vanden Saab]

IforB said:

It needs no speculation. The facts are thus.

The Government put forward 5 names for the committee. One of those names was Lewis.

Lewis votes for himself. The 4 opposition members also vote for him. The 4 other Tory picks vote for Grayling.

Lewis wins 5-4

Despite him being a Tory and subject to the whip (and of course no.10 had no preference for the chair and absolutely didn't mind about who it was.according to the speculation of some on here) they have now decided to remove the whip and basically boot him out of the parliamentary party.

Thems the facts.

They are damning.

Apart from the real fact that voting for the chair is by secret ballot of course in which case your 'facts' are utter bks

[IforB]

Vanden Saab said:

IforB said:

It needs no speculation. The facts are thus.

The Government put forward 5 names for the committee. One of those names was Lewis.

Lewis votes for himself. The 4 opposition members also vote for him. The 4 other Tory picks vote for Grayling.

Lewis wins 5-4

Despite him being a Tory and subject to the whip (and of course no.10 had no preference for the chair and absolutely didn't mind about who it was.according to the speculation of some on here) they have now decided to remove the whip and basically boot him out of the parliamentary party.

Thems the facts.

They are damning.

Apart from the real fact that voting for the chair is by secret ballot of course in which case your 'facts' are utter bks

Errr. Righto.

So you think that more Tories voted for Lewis and not for Grayling? Blimey.

9 members. 5 are/were Tories. 2 Labour MP's. 1 Labour peer. 1 SNP MP.

It is a majority vote.

It is either a 5-4 vote which is bad as there was one Tory dissenter or it was even worse.

[gooner1]

IforB said:

Ask Johnson. I have no idea.

I am just laughing my head off at it.

So the answer to my first question is “ Ask Johnson. I have no idea.”
Ta.

[IforB]

gooner1 said:

IforB said:

Ask Johnson. I have no idea.

I am just laughing my head off at it.

So the answer to my first question is “ Ask Johnson. I have no idea.”
Ta.

Is this the Johnson school of ignoring something blatantly obvious because it is uncomfortable?

Seems like it to me.

When in trouble try and distract. Your dear leader has just been kicked in the pods by a member of his own party.

Any chance of this report that they have sat on being redacted or delayed have just been blown out of the water.

He must be fuming and must be worried hence the reaction of booting him out.

Mind you, that is a stupid tactical move too, as now he has even less control over the chair of this committee and guaranteed that he'll be annoyed.

This is a funny day for those of us who don't fall for the cult of Johnson.

[Vanden Saab]

IforB said:

gooner1 said:

IforB said:

Ask Johnson. I have no idea.

I am just laughing my head off at it.

So the answer to my first question is “ Ask Johnson. I have no idea.”
Ta.

Is this the Johnson school of ignoring something blatantly obvious because it is uncomfortable?

Seems like it to me.

When in trouble try and distract. Your dear leader has just been kicked in the pods by a member of his own party.

Any chance of this report that they have sat on being redacted or delayed have just been blown out of the water.

He must be fuming and must be worried hence the reaction of booting him out.

Mind you, that is a stupid tactical move too, as now he has even less control over the chair of this committee and guaranteed that he'll be annoyed.

This is a funny day for those of us who don't fall for the cult of Johnson.

It is just like the good old Brexit days, time and time again you get all excited over an assumed 'mistake' by Boris or the publication of something you are convinced is a 'smoking gun' only to have your hopes dashed time and time again. Remember Yellowhammer ...

[jakesmith]

IforB said:

What experience are you bringing to the party that helps the discussion?

Well, from reading your very nice life history it is apparent that I am at least 25 years younger than you if not more however a key leaning that I have made, in life and especially from using anonymous forums, is to make points that stand on their merit rather than attempting to bolster them or browbeat people by making unverifiable statements about knowledge, learning, experience, education etc. I will hapilly admit you seem to have considerable expertise in some technical areas, but that doesn't give you a complete and clear understanding of a massively complex highly dynamic global issue that doesn't really relate to your area of proven expertise, and not to the level where you call people 'children' etc for disagreeing with you.

Anything I say relating to my life experience, career, qualifications, can be derided, ignored or rejected and rightly so.

Better to let a point speak for itself or ask a good question I say. And if you want anyone to take you seriously (not a top concern of mine thankfully as many will know), then don't expect people to take what you say at face value just because you say you are more experienced than them. In fact the best posters on here are those who strip their ego out and can concisely explain a flaw in a perspective or an alternative view. Few & far between TBH.

[IforB]

Vanden Saab said:

It is just like the good old Brexit days, time and time again you get all excited over an assumed 'mistake' by Boris or the publication of something you are convinced is a 'smoking gun' only to have your hopes dashed time and time again. Remember Yellowhammer ...

Oh this is funny. No matter how you attempt to say it isn't, it just is.

This is embarrassing and it needs to be no more than that. It won't change the world, but by goodness it has given me a giggle this evening.

[gooner1]

IforB said:

gooner1 said:

IforB said:

Ask Johnson. I have no idea.

I am just laughing my head off at it.

So the answer to my first question is “ Ask Johnson. I have no idea.”
Ta.

Is this the Johnson school of ignoring something blatantly obvious because it is uncomfortable?

Seems like it to me.

When in trouble try and distract. Your dear leader has just been kicked in the pods by a member of his own party.

Any chance of this report that they have sat on being redacted or delayed have just been blown out of the


He must be fuming and must be worried hence the reaction of booting him out.

Mind you, that is a stupid tactical move too, as now he has even less control over the chair of this committee and guaranteed that he'll be annoyed.

This is a funny day for those of us who don't fall for the cult of Johnson.

The only person attempting to distract here is yourself mate.
You were asked a straight question, and gave nothing like a straight answer.

And now you are attempting to hide your discomfort behind the obligatory

[soupdragon1]

gooner1 said:

IforB said:

gooner1 said:

IforB said:

Vanden Saab said:

IforB said:

Is that it?

"It is not embarrassing for Johnson as he didn't really pick Grayling."

Yeah right. The press have been talking about it for weeks in those terms and if it was inaccurate, then why did no. 10 not ask them to change that?

As a piece of dissemblement, that is stretching it massively!

Can you point out any other situations where speculation on an appointment has been denied?

Care to explain why Julian Lewis has had the whip removed?

Can you, just the facts not speculation?

It needs no speculation. The facts are thus.

The Government put forward 5 names for the committee. One of those names was Lewis.

Lewis votes for himself. The 4 opposition members also vote for him. The 4 other Tory picks vote for Grayling.

Lewis wins 5-4

Despite him being a Tory and subject to the whip (and of course no.10 had no preference for the chair and absolutely didn't mind about who it was.according to the speculation of some on here) they have now decided to remove the whip and basically boot him out of the parliamentary party.

Thems the facts.

They are damning.

Why has the whip been removed and Lewis been booted out of the parliamentary party?
I understand what has happened, it’s the facts as to the why I asked for.

Let's turn it round a little.

Why do you think it has happened? IforB logic stacks up well, without being proven as fact. Let's hear your counter argument and we'll see which seems the most logical explanation?

[IforB]

jakesmith said:

IforB said:

What experience are you bringing to the party that helps the discussion?

Well, from reading your very nice life history it is apparent that I am at least 25 years younger than you if not more however a key leaning that I have made, in life and especially from using anonymous forums, is to make points that stand on their merit rather than attempting to bolster them or browbeat people by making unverifiable statements about knowledge, learning, experience, education etc. I will hapilly admit you seem to have considerable expertise in some technical areas, but that doesn't give you a complete and clear understanding of a massively complex highly dynamic global issue that doesn't really relate to your area of proven expertise, and not to the level where you call people 'children' etc for disagreeing with you.

Anything I say relating to my life experience, career, qualifications, can be derided, ignored or rejected and rightly so.

Better to let a point speak for itself or ask a good question I say. And if you want anyone to take you seriously (not a top concern of mine thankfully as many will know), then don't expect people to take what you say at face value just because you say you are more experienced than them. In fact the best posters on here are those who strip their ego out and can concisely explain a flaw in a perspective or an alternative view. Few & far between TBH.

I'm 42 BTW Jake.

Now, points on forums mean naff all without understanding the people making them.

The reason PH was so successful was that it was populated by passionate and knowledgeable people who loved TVR's.

Another forum I was on for years was PPRUNE. The Professional Pilots Rumour Network. When it kicked off as an email chain of scurrilous rumour, before moving to a forum, it was comprised solely of people we all knew and whilst we hid behind screen names, we all knew that the people who were involved knew exactly what they were talking about. I worked with Danny Fyne who started it and it was quite a ride for him.

Unfortunately, times change and these sites grew and grew and the people involved changed. The signal to noise ratio changed rapidly.

PH and PPRUNE are both very different since they were bought out and became brands under much larger organisations rather than Ted and Danny's babies.

When you get posters who are actually expert in a field, then it is usually a good idea, as it is in life in general, to listen.
Unfortunately, expert opinion is in short supply on this board at times and this thread is a prime example of why.

When people who do actually use knowledge and understanding, folk like you shout them down because their expert opinion clashes with your beliefs. Do not confuse your belief with fact, it is the same as arguing about religion. There is zero proof God of any kind exists, yet a large percentage of the world population are utterly convinced it is true.

It is a common mindset and one of the major failings of the human psyche. We like to believe we are right and dislike having our opinions and therefore our ego challenged.

You are a case in point (along with others of course) where you continually mistake your opinion for fact or reality. I bear you no I'll will, but you treat every post as if it is a personal challenge.

That is why web forums are so rubbish today compared to the early days. The noise and shouting down of knowledge is the norm. The same as it is in real life.

As for an anonymous Web name. Some of us don't bother with crap...

[IforB]

gooner1 said:

The only person attempting to distract here is yourself mate.
You were asked a straight question, and gave nothing like a straight answer.

And now you are attempting to hide your discomfort behind the obligatory

Ah yes. Time for the funny meme.

Good oh!

[jakesmith]

IforB said:

I'm 42 BTW Jake.

Tough paper-round

IforB said:

Now, points on forums mean naff all without understanding the people making them.

You don't write in a style that makes people want to understand you, you are arrogant and patronising. I doubt I am alone. It is the most un-engaging personal style.

IforB said:

When you get posters who are actually expert in a field, then it is usually a good idea, as it is in life in general, to listen.
Unfortunately, expert opinion is in short supply on this board at times and this thread is a prime example of why.

If the topic was aviation , I would listen to you. Being an expert on aviation does not make you an epidemologist or an expert in politics. In all likelihood I am better educated than you in the field of politics but I would never be so arrogant as to state this as a reason to listen to me and have never mentioned it before on this forum because it carries no weight. I live or die on the strength of my arguements (when I'm not having a bit of banter) ad fully accept that I frequently fall flat. It's called 'humility'. Quite how you can be so pompous to at 42 is beyond me.

IforB said:

When people who do actually use knowledge and understanding, folk like you shout them down because their expert opinion clashes with your beliefs. Do not confuse your belief with fact, it is the same as arguing about religion. There is zero proof God of any kind exists, yet a large percentage of the world population are utterly convinced it is true.

It is a common mindset and one of the major failings of the human psyche. We like to believe we are right and dislike having our opinions and therefore our ego challenged.

You are a case in point (along with others of course) where you continually mistake your opinion for fact or reality. I bear you no I'll will, but you treat every post as if it is a personal challenge.

Show me one post I have made where I have stated opinion as a fact or where I have shouted down an (actual) expert opinion on the topic in hand. Again, your expertise in aviation does not make you an expert in all topics that you chose to engage in, and I do not accept you as an expert just because you say you are. You are very short on knowledge of relevant history and facts.

IforB said:

That is why web forums are so rubbish today compared to the early days. The noise and shouting down of knowledge is the norm. The same as it is in real life.
As for an anonymous Web name. Some of us don't bother with crap...

And I would say that people like you make it rubbish, and your pathetic attempt to slur me by saying I had obviously been drinking (when I hadn't) and your last last sentence (which makes no sense at all) is an example of why.

[Tuna]

IforB said:

When you get posters who are actually expert in a field, then it is usually a good idea, as it is in life in general, to listen.
Unfortunately, expert opinion is in short supply on this board at times and this thread is a prime example of why.

You are mistaking specialist knowledge for general intelligence. I've worked with some of the smartest people on the planet - from the leading cancer expert who used to tape his wife's glasses on top of his own so he could "see better", to the billionaire who had never heard of Baywatch. Being an expert in your field (or even multiple fields - we all have careers that go in various directions) does not make you any more astute than the next guy when it comes to areas outside your expertise. If anything it tends towards over confidence as experts are used to being "the guy who's right".

A heavy reliance on "don't you know who I am" suggests that not only are you trying to shout down people who disagree with you, but you're also rather insecure. If you are genuinely an expert in a subject, you should be able to communicate your expertise without brow-beating people. Explaining why things are a certain way, the history behind it and the arguments and counter arguments is not only a better way to show and share your expertise - it's polite. Ranting about how much smarter you are than those around you is not.