This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Keith Vaz
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 kent675  Bromley, Kent 06 Sep 16 1.56pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Don't think I have ever been so happy to hear about the demise and exposure of an MP as much as this odious worm. Fingers crossed Diane Abbott is next.
Four wheels drives the body - Two wheels drives the soul |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Stuk Top half 06 Sep 16 2.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Sedlescombe
Isn't that his electorate's job at a GE? There is nothing illegal here that I am aware of Nothing illegal by a very fine margin and who knows what else they've still got on him? I reckon there might be one or two issues with the MP's code of conduct at least.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| matt_himself Matataland 06 Sep 16 2.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
alkyl nitrites aren't untested substances. Drugs aren't good, but they are a real problem, that the UK has failed to do anything real to benefit people who don't want to use them or the people who do want to use them, or those who have problems with them. Meanwhile, gangs, criminal networks and organised crime has been earning billions annually from the illegal trade. That's before you even get to the misery and suffering created by prohibition across the world (like Colombia, Brazil, Mexico). Drugs aren't good. Prohibition however is very good for crime. There is no point continuing this because neither of us will budge. You have your crazy hippie ideals, I stand for order. Let's leave it there. Back to Keith Vaz, wonder what he said to his wife when she found out?
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 06 Sep 16 2.33pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by matt_himself
For some reason I envisage something akin to 'Clive's Excuses' from Monkey Dust...
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| bubble wrap Carparks in South East London 06 Sep 16 2.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Michaelawt85
Dancuzak is an absolute joke and that ex wife of his.. Would, probably could if i ever bump into her.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Michaelawt85 Bexley 06 Sep 16 2.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by bubble wrap
Would, probably could if i ever bump into her. She doesn't seem the full shilling.. hope you don't have a pet rabbit
When I was a young girl my Mother said to me.. You listen here kid you're CPFC |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| chris123 hove actually 06 Sep 16 2.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by matt_himself
There is no point continuing this because neither of us will budge. You have your crazy hippie ideals, I stand for order. Let's leave it there. Back to Keith Vaz, wonder what he said to his wife when she found out? That bloody washing machine salesman again!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Sedlescombe Sedlescombe 06 Sep 16 3.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Nothing illegal by a very fine margin and who knows what else they've still got on him? I reckon there might be one or two issues with the MP's code of conduct at least. It may be that the papers have held something back. That tends to be the way they keep the story going. We can discuss any illegality after it is revealed rather than assuming it has taken place. I don't blame the paper and his wife and electorate can act on their feelings. However I don't see this has anything to do with his job. Their is no evidence of (political) hypocrisy that I am aware of. I am not sure he should even have resigned from chairing the Select Committee
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 06 Sep 16 3.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Sedlescombe
It may be that the papers have held something back. That tends to be the way they keep the story going. We can discuss any illegality after it is revealed rather than assuming it has taken place. I don't blame the paper and his wife and electorate can act on their feelings. However I don't see this has anything to do with his job. Their is no evidence of (political) hypocrisy that I am aware of. I am not sure he should even have resigned from chairing the Select Committee Other than the committee looking into the legalities of prostitution and the use of poppers, deciding against making them illegal, then subsequently finding out the chairman is a user?
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Sedlescombe Sedlescombe 06 Sep 16 3.54pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Other than the committee looking into the legalities of prostitution and the use of poppers, deciding against making them illegal, then subsequently finding out the chairman is a user? That is a fair observation but where does the logic of "conflict of interest" stop. There will be MPs who have children. Are they allowed to speak (or chair committee's) on childcare. If an MP has a medical condition - For example the MP with Cerebral Palsy. MP's over 65 and pensions policy There are many examples of this for what is a Legal activity. Indeed it might not be a bad idea for MP's pontificating on drug policy to have at least tried poppers.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 06 Sep 16 3.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Other than the committee looking into the legalities of prostitution and the use of poppers, deciding against making them illegal, then subsequently finding out the chairman is a user? Oddly I don't think that's necessarily a 'bad thing' per se. If your going to have a committee looking into prostitution or drug legalisation, you do need people with experience on 'the other' side. The chairman, ideally, should be someone who is neither pro or anti though. However, we have a political tendency to accept a chair person who has a 'strong moral stance' that's in line with the government policy, which is in no way any worse than having someone who might be 'pro-change'. But in an ideal world, you want someone who is not really in possession of a strong moral stance. That said, commitees and specialist advisors tend to be just ignored if they don't line up to the government 'stance' (David Nutt springs to mind).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 06 Sep 16 4.03pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Sedlescombe
I think if you have any policy, it needs to be defined in a manner that's pragmatic. Consequently, MP's are the last people that ever look at pragmatic solutions and approaches, because they're looking more at their next election campaign. Governments and MP's are notorious poor at dealing with issues that might be difficult to sell to the public, but ultimately could be pragmatic solutions to social problems. We've been pursuing a policy on prisons and policing that runs contrary to all evidence of rehabilitation and crime control initiatives for decades.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.