Dave and PH Double Standards

[Fittster]

Well Dave is looking like a pretty weak PM to me but he's getting an awfully easy time on PH.

First off we have him failing to support the UK's largest company as it comes under sustained political attack and then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

So is PH still on honeymoon with CMD?

[hornetrider]

ABGB

[Fittster]

hornetrider said:

ABGB

Call me Tony?

We seem to have a Tony Blair clone in power, except this one has blue ties. I feel that they could swap parties without having to adjust their personal ideologies.

[HiRich]

By the "largest UK company" do you mean the one that's 40% US-owned, has had it coming for a decade of safety failings traceable directly to the CEO, looks to be standing with the smoking gun on Deepwater, and is embroiled in a series of lobbying and bribery scandals?

Sorry if I'm waving that union flag less than enthusiastically.

[Countdown]

I think the ConDems are doing OK so far

For example I hear that the ISA is going to be reviewed. Anybody who deals with Child protection / Safeguarding issues will sympathise about the amount of hoops we currently have to jump through.

Re: BP - you can take it either way. FWIW I think we (the UK) have taken the mature and sensible step, and not resorted to making stupid jingoistic comments.

Re : Bloody Sunday - it was a mess all round. If this brings closure then so be it.

[eldar]

Fittster said:

Well Dave is looking like a pretty weak PM to me but he's getting an awfully easy time on PH.

First off we have him failing to support the UK's largest company as it comes under sustained political attack and then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

So is PH still on honeymoon with CMD?

Minor points, though, compared to wrecking pensions, the economy and society. I'd give him 7/10 based on 5 weeks, rather than Broons -2/10 or Blairs 5/10 based on a longer baseline.

[Dr Phibes]

Fittster said:

Well Dave is looking like a pretty weak PM to me but he's getting an awfully easy time on PH.

First off we have him failing to support the UK's largest company as it comes under sustained political attack and then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

So is PH still on honeymoon with CMD?

Because he and the govt have a hell of a job on their hands cleaning up the mess left after years of apocalyptic buffoonery created by a bunch of incompetent left wing hand wringing co*k suckers clinging to an outdated political ideology that only them and idiots believed would be good for the country.

Anyone would be a plus after the last 13 years.

[Fittster]

HiRich said:

By the "largest UK company" do you mean the one that's 40% US-owned, has had it coming for a decade of safety failings traceable directly to the CEO, looks to be standing with the smoking gun on Deepwater, and is embroiled in a series of lobbying and bribery scandals?

Sorry if I'm waving that union flag less than enthusiastically.

So if you think BP has been a badly run company surely only a foolish PM would appoint the man who ran BP from 1995 to 2007 as part of his government?

Edited by Fittster on Tuesday 15th June 19:23

[Dr Phibes]

Fittster said:

HiRich said:

By the "largest UK company" do you mean the one that's 40% US-owned, has had it coming for a decade of safety failings traceable directly to the CEO, looks to be standing with the smoking gun on Deepwater, and is embroiled in a series of lobbying and bribery scandals?

Sorry if I'm waving that union flag less than enthusiastically.

So if you think BP has been a badly run company surely only a foolish PM would appoint the man who ran BP from 1995 to 2007 as part of his government?

Edited by Fittster on Tuesday 15th June 19:23

Better than appointing a man twice previously made to resign due to dodgy dealings

[dilbert]

Fittster said:

Well Dave is looking like a pretty weak PM to me but he's getting an awfully easy time on PH.

First off we have him failing to support the UK's largest company as it comes under sustained political attack and then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

So is PH still on honeymoon with CMD?

As far as I understand it, BP is in this mess because it is not supporting engineering properly. By contracting out it's operation to the lowest bidder, there's no oversight and no comprehensive strategy or backup plan in case of disaster. It's like running a nuclear reactor on a shoestring, and then extending it's lifespan not knowing if the thing is worn out or not.

BP isn't a UK company in a definite sense.

Then there's the actions of the Army. They might have been wrong. Certainly today it is politically expedient to think that way. I think that the apology will bring more benefit in co-operation and mutual harmony, than it will damage the Army. As I understand it, the events were largely allowed to get out of hand under the responsibility of one Army general.

As for slavery, and expulsions, well TBH that was an awful long time ago. Moreover, it's not like it was a UK only policy - let alone the policy of one British man with a remit to act on behalf of the nation. At the end of the day, that's the way the Army works (or at least it did).

Slavery and expulsions were about the differences of civilised vs uncivilised countries. Even Africa has mobile phone networks now.

Would it make sense for the Egyptians to apologise for the treatment of those who built the Pyramids? That's probably not the best example, but you get my drift.

Edited by dilbert on Tuesday 15th June 20:28

[AndrewW-G]

Fittster said:

then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

Are you aware that the reason Cameron has appologised, is because the report into "Bloody Sunday" has only just been released?

Had the report that had taken 12 years to complete, been finished / published a few months ago, then the politician currently undergoing phyciatric evaluation and treatment in Edinburgh would have been the person to appologise . . . . . . . . . . . Do you think that the very same mentaly unstable fruit loop, should still be Pm ?

[Fittster]

AndrewW-G said:

Fittster said:

then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

Are you aware that the reason Cameron has appologised, is because the report into "Bloody Sunday" has only just been released?

Had the report that had taken 12 years to complete, been finished / published a few months ago, then the politician currently undergoing phyciatric evaluation and treatment in Edinburgh would have been the person to appologise . . . . . . . . . . . Do you think that the very same mentaly unstable fruit loop, should still be Pm ?

I don't think the monkey in charge makes the slightest difference. CMD's actions are no different to those that would have been made by Blair or Brown.

[ewenm]

Is it not just a case of giving Cameron some time to do stuff? I'd be more disappointed about people deciding he's a crap PM based on 1 month in office.

[Dr Phibes]

ewenm said:

Is it not just a case of giving Cameron some time to do stuff? I'd be more disappointed about people deciding he's a crap PM based on 1 month in office.

Only myopic bitter socialists or benefit dependant lazy scroungers would base they rants after one month in office.

[lenny007]

Fittster said:

AndrewW-G said:

Fittster said:

then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

Are you aware that the reason Cameron has appologised, is because the report into "Bloody Sunday" has only just been released?

Had the report that had taken 12 years to complete, been finished / published a few months ago, then the politician currently undergoing phyciatric evaluation and treatment in Edinburgh would have been the person to appologise . . . . . . . . . . . Do you think that the very same mentaly unstable fruit loop, should still be Pm ?

I don't think the monkey in charge makes the slightest difference. CMD's actions are no different to those that would have been made by Blair or Brown.

Make your mind up - either he's weak or he's doing what any prime minister would do in the situation.

Or are you just fishing for a change?

[Fittster]

lenny007 said:

Fittster said:

AndrewW-G said:

Fittster said:

then apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972. When Tony Blair apologized for events before he was PM PH was apoplectic with rage.

Are you aware that the reason Cameron has appologised, is because the report into "Bloody Sunday" has only just been released?

Had the report that had taken 12 years to complete, been finished / published a few months ago, then the politician currently undergoing phyciatric evaluation and treatment in Edinburgh would have been the person to appologise . . . . . . . . . . . Do you think that the very same mentaly unstable fruit loop, should still be Pm ?

I don't think the monkey in charge makes the slightest difference. CMD's actions are no different to those that would have been made by Blair or Brown.

Make your mind up - either he's weak or he's doing what any prime minister would do in the situation.

Or are you just fishing for a change?

He's weak and he's doing what his predecessors did, not what any PM would do.

My point is that the change of PM has made no difference and it's hypocritical of PH not to recognise that.

[F i F]

If you read any of my posts and threads up to the election you will have realised that I am rather incensed by what Call Me Dave has done.

He basically lost a sure fire win election, except that Winky and Cleggy both lost it more than he did.

So thankfully we got Labour out of office and I pledged to myself to give him aa chance.

Long term he is still a dead man walking as I predicted for both him and Winky. One down one to go.

I think things have proved to be far far worse than anyone thought in their worst nightmares.

BP, jury out on that tbh, it may prove that he has been far more statesmanlike than Barry Obummer, who is a finger pointy chav.

Bloody Sunday, I think there was nothing else he could do. It's right, the Army killed a number of innocent people after discipline broke down and orders were ignored in a very difficult time for both sides. Having said that Saville has cherry picked evidence, that is also clear. Who told him to do that?

Edited later to add

fittster said:

My point is that the change of PM has made no difference and it's hypocritical of PH not to recognise that.

That is exactly what a number of us were repeatedly banging on about BEFORE the farking election.
What do you want us to say? Told you so.
He is a tosser imo, but I'm giving him a chance to sort out an unholy mess. I might, after all be wrong in my opinions, reckon I'm not but willing to accept it as a possibility and giving the coalition a chance.

Thanks, bye.

Edited by F i F on Tuesday 15th June 23:31

[Trommel]

Fittster said:

apologies for the deeds of British Army in the early 1972

Get real - what else could happen?

[OnTheOverrun]

Given the contents of the enquiry and the importance of putting the troubles permanently into history, I can see no other option for Cameron to apologise as any other PM from any other party would also have to do.

As for BP, I can't see any point stooping to Obama's level of desperate PR stunts, especially when the failures were that of US subcontractors employed by BP. Obama doesn't like the British and nothing we can say will stop him playing the nationalism card to Americans to try to look like he's in control.

[Dunk76]

OnTheOverrun said:

Given the contents of the enquiry and the importance of putting the troubles permanently into history, I can see no other option for Cameron to apologise as any other PM from any other party would also have to do.

As for BP, I can't see any point stooping to Obama's level of desperate PR stunts, especially when the failures were that of US subcontractors employed by BP. Obama doesn't like the British and nothing we can say will stop him playing the nationalism card to Americans to try to look like he's in control.

In addition, Obama's popularity is seriously flagging; he's seeking to gain popularity, and shouty finger waving at foreign corporations will help... just ask Toyota.

Regards Cameron - I think he's doing okay, bearing in mind he's hamstrung by the double whammy of a coalition and an empty public wallet.

Apologising for Bloody Sunday is correct - as was Brown's apology to those Children sent off to the colonies in the 1950s, but unlike Brown's stupid apology for slavery.