[Closed] Tory MP calls police plebs

Perhaps but my question was genuine, what else is being ignored/dropped down the broadcast schedules or put a few pages further back in the papers, due to this one growwing legs and running?

*Also I am going to have to use that Donald Sutherland picture at least once a week on some STW thread or another with a caption to suit the topic from now on... Sorry but there are just too many possibilities.

If I shouted at a copper that they were a ****ing moron, amongst other things, in a completely unprovoked* verbal assault, then yes, I reckon you could safely bank on a night in the cells

* if we obviously discount a monstrous sense of entitlement

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/24/pleb-jobe-tories-flashman-thinking ]THIS[/url] is the whole point of the outburst Gorehound. Its what it symbolises. The message it sends out. Not least in its choice of vocabulary

the guy behaved like a tit and got caught out

the police trying to fight the governments cuts and ultimate sell off of their service leaked to the press

mitchell tried to bullshit his way out of it, this made the press & public more interested
cameron leapt to his defense without fully appreciating that the guy had lied and the damage to the tory image

so it runs and runs..........

Last time Call-me-Dave leapt to someones defense like this, it was Andy Coulson

That went well. I expect this one to go much the same way

So, is this officially named Plebgate?
It's gotta be. There can be no better name.

Gategate?

Plebgategate?

[quote=binners said]Last time Call-me-Dave leapt to someones defense like this, it was Andy Coulson
That went well. I expect this one to go much the same way

It was Jeremy Hunt actually 🙂

I think we need to consider some Combo's

"DuckhouseCashforquestionsPlebGate.... Gate"

loum - Member

no I don't think he should be sacked without proof

Out of interest, what would you consider a satisfactory level of proof for an incident like this?

For the record, I'm not saying he should be sacked, I'm just curious about what you consider constitutes sufficient "proof".

Well, I can only speak for myself and not for CMD of course, or what would constitute proof if this went legal.

But if it were a decision within my power to make, I would suggest a corroborating third party statement (preferably from a non SO6 source) or CCTV (find it hard to believe that none exists in that area and especially around points of access) or some such independent source.

Not sure I would be entirely happy with just the officer's statement as it leaves the whole matter a tit for tat argument.

In the meantime I would be getting all Malcolm Tucker on him behind closed doors however.

Lovely bit of pr for CMD & the gang.

 

rogerthecat - Member

If you had read the post rather than leaping with such glee to beat me with the "Erni Stick of Self Righteous Indignation" you would have seen that I did mention it was reported on R4 this morning.

Yes I read did your post and concluded that if Miliband had indeed called for a full Parliamentary Inquiry then other news providers would have covered it - it would be quite an important development.

But I could find none so asked you if you had a link, a perfectly reasonable request which hardly warrants personal insults from you.

Although I'm starting to understand why someone like you might not have an issue with a senior politician telling a public servant [i]"Best you learn your ****ing place....You’re ****ing plebs"[/i].

rogerthecat - Member

Again if you had done me the courtesy of reading my post before leaping to conclusions like a political gazelle, you would have noticed that I had not called for him to be sacked anywhere in my post.

Perhaps it's you who needs to read posts before commenting. I did not jump to conclusions, I asked you questions - do you understand the significance of a question mark ? as in : ❓

I said : [i]"what "inaction" ? Do you think Cameron should have sacked Mitchell ?"[/i] in response to your statement that "[i]CMD's inaction speaks volumes.[/i]" You are now claiming that by inaction you meant that Cameron hadn't condemned Mitchell behaviour, which is obviously complete bollox.

But then I suppose people like you just make it up as you go long, so I guess I can hardly expect to hear a coherent argument.

In the meantime I would be getting all Malcolm Tucker on him behind closed doors however.

Yes indeed 😀 , but he [i]is[/i] the Tucker figure for the Conservative Party at the moment. Who would you get to go all Malcolm Tucker on Malcolm Tucker?

oooohhhhhh bbbbiiiiinnnneeeerrrrrrssss

[img] [/img]

In the meantime I would be getting all Malcolm Tucker on him behind closed doors however.
Yes indeed , but he is the Tucker figure for the Conservative Party at the moment. Who would you get to go all Malcolm Tucker on Malcolm Tucker?

Ernie probably. 😀

I despise all politicans equally so you could say an unbiased view here 🙂
If I spoke to a policeman like that I would expect to be arrested, although TBF to the officer involved to arrest a chief whip for a fairly minor offence could mean BIG repercussions, I don't think many would have. Shame really as that would have been a great story.
He should have been arrested. He wasn't so really it should be forgotten about. Apart from the fact he is a (famous?) politician and publicy lying. But don't all politicians lie anyway?
So basically us plebs can certainly expect to be arrested in the same situation but the lying cheating two faced *****s that rule us can say whatever they like to any pleb, be he in uniform or not. Then if they are found out just deny it, like they deny everything else. Barstewards all of them.

don't all politicians lie anyway

@Ernesto I appear to owe you an unreserved apology as I seem to have caused you some upset.

It may be a consequence of my upbringing but I found your initial response to my post to be a little brusque and of a tone that felt aggressive in the context of other posts in this thread and not, as you have now pointed out, a polite request. I was brought up to use terms such as please, thank you, would you mind, do you have, etc as they are a not confrontational in the written form and seldom misconstrued.

I clearly misunderstood and I chose to poke a little fun at you rather than respond in kind.

Now that you have explained that it was not your intent to be confrontational but merely inquisitive, I would be happy to find some links as you requested, here they are:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09/25/263406/probe-urged-into-insult-to-uk-police/

This is a referral to the Parliamentary Standards Committee and may have been included in the news item: http://www.politicus.org.uk/news/labour-mp-refers-andrew-mitchell-to-parliamentary-standards-commissioner_649

Covered here in the Torygraph : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9564688/David-Cameron-accused-of-cover-up-over-Andrew-Mitchell-police-rant.html

FT; http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b2df76d2-0662-11e2-abdb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz27Va0hclt

And, from the Independent:

Labour MP Bill Esterson has written to the parliamentary commissioner for standards, Sir John Lyon, demanding he investigate whether Mr Mitchell broke the MPs' code of conduct.

Mr Esterson said: "David Cameron is showing himself too weak to sort this out. He is refusing to detail what happened and refusing to ask for the Cabinet Secretary to investigate.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-backs-andrew-mitchell-over-police-row-8166963.html

And the news report I heard on the BBC this morning. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01mvy0c/Today_24_09_2012/

Once again, many apologies - love and hugs, Me xxx

I can see that you didn't fully read my post rogerthecat, if you had, you would have noticed that I was fully aware that a referral to the parliamentary commissioner for standards had been made to see whether Mitchall broke the MP's code of conduct. I don't think that's quite the same as a full Parliamentary Inquiry.

Here's my previous post and I've underlined the relevant text :

ernie_lynch - Member

Have you got a link which reports that Miliband is demanding a "full Parliamentary Enquiry" ? I can't find any news provider which is carrying that story.

Certainly the Police Federation has been leading the calls for an inquiry into the behaviour of the Chief Whip, which Labour has supported, and there has been a [u]request to the parliamentary commissioner for standards to investigate whether Mitchall broke the MP's code of conduct[/u]. But I can't see any references to Miliband calling for a "full Parliamentary Enquiry"

Posted 11 hours ago #

So you're more familiar with the gates protocol in downing St than a member of the police specifically detailed with the protection of the residents and visitors to Downing St then?

I never said I did, it's a simple case of when I had the pleasure(?) of visting said address about 3 years ago we were told that the right hand pedestrian gate was for dignitaries, the left for visitors & the main gates for vehicular access. The left hand gate is where the Police Security booth is stuated.

There are even gates you go through to get to the main gates.

[img] http://anmblog.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c565553ef016767f8a34e970b-pi [/img]

right hand pedestrian gate was for [s]dignitaries[/s] toffs, the left for [s]visitors[/s] plebs

So was AM asked to use the toffgate or the plebgate?

Let's not lose sight of the security issue. The big gate is for big things, not for big egos.

😀 @ DONK

Courtesy of b3ta dot com. Useful for Strava maybe?

[url= ]May offend[/url]

Edit - sorry i meant to URL that!

I called a policeman all soets of naughty words once. He failed to arrest me which in retrospect was a shame the ****ing bent ****.

[img] [/img]

Let's not lose sight of the security issue. The big gate is for big things, not for big egos.

Whereas I thought the [i]pedestrian[/i] gate was for pedestrians, and the [i]vehicle[/i] gate was for, erm, vehicles.

As for the security issue, I'm sure that, on the off chance that there was a team of suicide bombers waiting in a van outside, on the off chance someone would open the gate for them, then the **** off big lump of road that goes up and down would slow them down a bit

[img] [/img]