This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Matov 26 Jun 21 8.42am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Interesting twist this morning on where did that picture come from. It is now being alleged it is a spy camera if so who planted it and why.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 26 Jun 21 8.53am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Matov
I'm not sure what is happening. I find myself agreeing with Matov's political posts. I feel slightly grubby, but a tad relieved that I thought I was the only one that had 'sussed' politics.
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Eden Eagle Kent 26 Jun 21 8.57am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by DanH
Genuine question to any of you lot that voted for them. Do you care if any of them have any morals whatsoever? Edited by DanH (25 Jun 2021 10.15pm) I voted Conservative at the last election fearing that the alternative was going to be worse - what a mistake that was I absolutely loathe Johnson/Hancock/any Tory MP now - they are serial liars, completely incompetent, mass corruption in feeding contracts to their mates/donors. The hypocrisy is off the scale - G7/UEFA/Ascot/ CV rules do not apply however for for the rest of us wear your masks/social distance - #imdone. Unfortunately there is no effective opposition now so I am politically homeless. If you get the chance look at the Peter Stefanovic video on Twitter of Johnson lying multiple times in the HoC - never covered on any Uk mainstream media…
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
daven Hailsham 26 Jun 21 8.59am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Interesting twist this morning on where did that picture come from. It is now being alleged it is a spy camera if so who planted it and why. Without knowing the details, I find it difficult to believe that they would have behaved like that if there was obvious cctv. So if it was a spy camera then whoever planted it must have known that they use the room for their activities, therefore it must have been a regular thing.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
JRW2 Dulwich 26 Jun 21 10.03am | |
---|---|
I was amused - as was the Any Questions audience last night - to hear that dissembling waste of space Robert Jenrick (Housing Minister) defending Hancock, pointing out, with reference to the pandemic, that he was "on the job"!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
sickboy Deal or Croydon 26 Jun 21 10.10am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
Both Boris and Hancock are not what you'd call 'lookers'. In fact wearing masks was an improvement, for them both. Just makes me wonder at what women will do for (public) money Strange as it is, women seem to find Boris sexy.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Matov 26 Jun 21 10.25am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
I'm not sure what is happening. I find myself agreeing with Matov's political posts. I feel slightly grubby, but a tad relieved that I thought I was the only one that had 'sussed' politics. LOL. Not sure if I am flattered or insulted by this. This story though is becoming about far more than some tawdry affair. Interesting spin being put out this morning. This photograph apparently has come from a ceiling camera. Number 10 are putting out that there is no need for an inquiry into the leak because they know who did it. Key to it all is this camera and who installed it because my understanding is that this not standard practice. So it's either a foreign agency, a newspaper or else somebody from within the department itself. In terms of some dodgy goings-on by the FSB or similar, then I think we can discount that. Hancock's remit is solely domestic and the point of such actions would be to blackmail, not sell to the Sun for release on a Friday (and yes, I am boring about the day but it is crucial in my opinion). Makes little if any sense. Hancock is a dead man walking anyway in terms of politics so I cannot imagine any fiendish foreign spy chief giving a flying f***. Meaning it could be the newspapers. I am sure they would have no hesitation in planting such a camera but the downsides of being exposed are massive. Not only would they piss of the Government but people like MI5 and the Police, who are tasked with preventing this kind of crap, would have them on the top of their s*** lists. If it is a free-lancer then, once again, a ton of crap would be heading their way. Just cannot see that either. Leaving somebody in the department. Which is the official spin. And whose identity they know. Now could it be somebody in the pay/thrall of the Labour party? Not sure what the pay-off would be. Hancock is a t***, of that there is no doubt. If anything, him being caught in this kind of sting actually gives him a bit of glamour in many peoples eyes. Once again, Labour knows he is a dead man walking and being able to hold him up, time and time again, to the public gaze actually suits them. Better to have him still in office than out. My theory is this. Hancock wants out but does not want to go based on how he reacted to Covid. So he stages this 'scandal'. Goes to BJ, offers his resignation. But BJ refuses to accept it and warns him they know it is all a fit-up. Might have even been expecting this. Wants him in office for a little bit longer so that even more s*** can be hung around his neck. Hence the spin this morning as a warning to him. Play the game or we make you look even more of a t*** than you are already. Hancock therefore has to stay in situ. Of course, it's possible I am reading to much into this all and really should have better things to do with my time but this all stinks. And once again, the Friday bit. This is a Sunday splash. Not what you put out when most people are just looking forward to the weekend. Break the story on the Friday, resign, bow out of the public gaze for six months and then return, with a tell-all book and a speaking tour and so on. Wheels within wheels within wheels. But the key is that camera. It should not have been there.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 26 Jun 21 10.42am | |
---|---|
The camera, and the timing of the release. And the fact the CCTV was timed and dated.
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
DanH SW2 26 Jun 21 10.52am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Matov
LOL. Not sure if I am flattered or insulted by this. This story though is becoming about far more than some tawdry affair. Interesting spin being put out this morning. This photograph apparently has come from a ceiling camera. Number 10 are putting out that there is no need for an inquiry into the leak because they know who did it. Key to it all is this camera and who installed it because my understanding is that this not standard practice. So it's either a foreign agency, a newspaper or else somebody from within the department itself. In terms of some dodgy goings-on by the FSB or similar, then I think we can discount that. Hancock's remit is solely domestic and the point of such actions would be to blackmail, not sell to the Sun for release on a Friday (and yes, I am boring about the day but it is crucial in my opinion). Makes little if any sense. Hancock is a dead man walking anyway in terms of politics so I cannot imagine any fiendish foreign spy chief giving a flying f***. Meaning it could be the newspapers. I am sure they would have no hesitation in planting such a camera but the downsides of being exposed are massive. Not only would they piss of the Government but people like MI5 and the Police, who are tasked with preventing this kind of crap, would have them on the top of their s*** lists. If it is a free-lancer then, once again, a ton of crap would be heading their way. Just cannot see that either. Leaving somebody in the department. Which is the official spin. And whose identity they know. Now could it be somebody in the pay/thrall of the Labour party? Not sure what the pay-off would be. Hancock is a t***, of that there is no doubt. If anything, him being caught in this kind of sting actually gives him a bit of glamour in many peoples eyes. Once again, Labour knows he is a dead man walking and being able to hold him up, time and time again, to the public gaze actually suits them. Better to have him still in office than out. My theory is this. Hancock wants out but does not want to go based on how he reacted to Covid. So he stages this 'scandal'. Goes to BJ, offers his resignation. But BJ refuses to accept it and warns him they know it is all a fit-up. Might have even been expecting this. Wants him in office for a little bit longer so that even more s*** can be hung around his neck. Hence the spin this morning as a warning to him. Play the game or we make you look even more of a t*** than you are already. Hancock therefore has to stay in situ. Of course, it's possible I am reading to much into this all and really should have better things to do with my time but this all stinks. And once again, the Friday bit. This is a Sunday splash. Not what you put out when most people are just looking forward to the weekend. Break the story on the Friday, resign, bow out of the public gaze for six months and then return, with a tell-all book and a speaking tour and so on. Wheels within wheels within wheels. But the key is that camera. It should not have been there. Be flattered and insulted. Like being aroused but feeling grubby. I think you‘re on to something.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 26 Jun 21 10.59am | |
---|---|
It could still be a Russian Spy agency, demonstrating how easily they can get the honey trap working.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 26 Jun 21 11.07am | |
---|---|
More likely a disgruntled civil servant or advisor goes to the tabloids and they supply the camera?
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Matov 26 Jun 21 11.33am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
More likely a disgruntled civil servant or advisor goes to the tabloids and they supply the camera? Possible but then it's just your common or garden expose and almost always released on a Sunday. Especially if it's money that matters or you are doing it at the behest of another political party. You want it out on Sunday because that way it sets the agenda for the week. If it's Labour then you would probably save it up for after the forthcoming by-election. Divert attention away from that possible defeat. And for what? It's a tawdry affair. With a woman he has known his entire adult life. Nah. Scandalous yes, but on a scale of 1 to 10? Not even a classical 'honey trap'. Especially with the kind of real crap that probably exists on Hancock that you could access if you worked close enough to actually install that kind of camera. Plus Number 10 are spinning it that they know already who leaked the photograph. Hancock HAS to go after this. There is zero justification for him remaining in office beyond the fact that BJ wants him there to pin more s*** on him that truly matters. Having an affair is trifling to these people. Froth. Barely worth a mention. Sure, us plebs get worked up about it but for them, its merely a distraction. Nothing else. What destroys politicians is the machinations around how the affair is exposed or attempts to cover up. Clinton never got in trouble for what he did but rather because he lied about it. And it did him no harm. People are far more forgiving of adultery than we are willing to accept. Hence why I believe Hancock has orchestrated this entire debacle.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.