This prick

User avatar
Orange Cola
Posts: 2232
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:56 pm

This prick

Post by Orange Cola »

Here clicky. There is a time and a place for a personal crusade in your career and it only takes half a brain cell to realise there are things much larger than your own agenda. Things that irk me are this completely unit was informed of the topic well before hand - as is the process - and didn't even bother to take the opportunity to gain a full understanding of the issue, they just left it and by the sounds of it ignored it, and then after all that opportunity objected on the day of the races. It makes a mockery of their own integrity on their personal crusade and their professional status which expects them to learn as much as possible to make an informed choice when voting on such issues. Pot calling kettle black or what.

I hope he's sacked. That's my personal opinion of course but really, this topic has been discussed for years and is long over due coming into law so where's this arse hole had his head all that time? When he's being reported as not knowing the issue he was objecting to I'm not surprised he's failed to come out and explain himself when all the parties and chief whips got behind it and spoke to each individual MP well before the vote. This cunt should have done the homework he's paid to do and decided that just for once something was actually bigger than his little crusade. Which is a fraction of the level of intelligence we expect from people in his position.

He's let himself down, he's let his party down (I don't really care about either of those but someone will), most importantly he's let victims down. He's fucked it up. He's really fucked it up. And I bet he gets away with this.
Last edited by Orange Cola on Sat Jun 16, 2018 10:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mustang GT 5.0 V8 -- Jaguar F-Pace
User avatar
unzippy
Posts: 892
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:02 pm

Re: This prick

Post by unzippy »

I'm not defending him but least he turned up, where are the rest of the useless fuckers?
The Evo forum really is a shadow of its former self. I remember when the internet was for the elite and now they seem to let any spastic on

IaFG Down Under Division
User avatar
NotoriousREV
Posts: 6437
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:14 pm

Re: This prick

Post by NotoriousREV »

unzippy wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:20 am I'm not defending him but least he turned up, where are the rest of the useless fuckers?
Fridays are traditionally when MPs return to their constituency hence why this bell cheese only does this on Fridays.
Middle-aged Dirtbag
User avatar
JLv3.0
Posts: 4784
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:42 am

Re: This prick

Post by JLv3.0 »

What possible benefit could he attain from obstructing such a commonsensical bill getting passed?
User avatar
unzippy
Posts: 892
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:02 pm

Re: This prick

Post by unzippy »

JLv3.0 wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:54 am What possible benefit could he attain from obstructing such a commonsensical bill getting passed?
He said he did it for "procedural reasons":

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rting-bill
The Evo forum really is a shadow of its former self. I remember when the internet was for the elite and now they seem to let any spastic on

IaFG Down Under Division
User avatar
JLv3.0
Posts: 4784
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:42 am

Re: This prick

Post by JLv3.0 »

Hmm. I'd suggest the time and the place to take a strong stance of procedural box-ticking was not then and there. He is indeed the end of a bell.
User avatar
Rich B
Posts: 9621
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:22 pm
Currently Driving: M2 Competition

Re: This prick

Post by Rich B »

So he objected so that a law wouldn’t be just passed without being properly debated.

Itseems like this ones a no brainier, but it’s probably not a bad idea to give a chance to hear any actual objections in a debate before actually making it law - just in case.
User avatar
Carlos
Posts: 2176
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:38 am

Re: This prick

Post by Carlos »

Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:13 am So he objected so that a law wouldn’t be just passed without being properly debated.

Itseems like this ones a no brainier, but it’s probably not a bad idea to give a chance to hear any actual objections in a debate before actually making it law - just in case.
He didn't know what upskirting was :roll:
speedingfine
Posts: 2179
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: This prick

Post by speedingfine »

Apparently he campaigned against turning one of the Commons bars into a crèche :roll:

So much of the arcane, stupid procedures of the two houses need binning, this is just one example.
User avatar
Rich B
Posts: 9621
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:22 pm
Currently Driving: M2 Competition

Re: This prick

Post by Rich B »

Carlos wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:23 am
Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:13 am So he objected so that a law wouldn’t be just passed without being properly debated.

Itseems like this ones a no brainier, but it’s probably not a bad idea to give a chance to hear any actual objections in a debate before actually making it law - just in case.
He didn't know what upskirting was :roll:
from what I gather, it’s not the subject, it’s the passing laws without debate he objects to.
User avatar
Gavin
Posts: 1828
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm
Currently Driving: Skoda Superb, R56 Cooper S

Re: This prick

Post by Gavin »

One of the red tops had a dwarf pap on the payroll specifically for the "oops" upskirt shot years ago. :shock:
User avatar
JLv3.0
Posts: 4784
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:42 am

Re: This prick

Post by JLv3.0 »

Gavin wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:28 am One of the red tops had a dwarf pap on the payroll specifically for the "oops" upskirt shot years ago. :shock:
Any plans to release an English version of that post? 😂
User avatar
Rich B
Posts: 9621
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:22 pm
Currently Driving: M2 Competition

Re: This prick

Post by Rich B »

JLv3.0 wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:34 am
Gavin wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:28 am One of the red tops had a dwarf pap on the payroll specifically for the "oops" upskirt shot years ago. :shock:
Any plans to release an English version of that post? 😂
keep reading it, it works!
User avatar
NotoriousREV
Posts: 6437
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:14 pm

Re: This prick

Post by NotoriousREV »

JLv3.0 wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:34 am
Gavin wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:28 am One of the red tops had a dwarf pap on the payroll specifically for the "oops" upskirt shot years ago. :shock:
Any plans to release an English version of that post? 😂
A newspaper, that is published in tabloid format, employed an individual with dwarfism as a photographer specialising in taking unstaged celebrity photographs in public areas, specifically because he could attain low angle photographs which would capture flashes of underwear or other areas under the main garments of females under certain circumstances.
Middle-aged Dirtbag
User avatar
JLv3.0
Posts: 4784
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:42 am

Re: This prick

Post by JLv3.0 »

Ok got it now! Thanks Dave :lol:

The 'red top' and 'pap' threw me off but I'm back in the game now!
User avatar
Gavin
Posts: 1828
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm
Currently Driving: Skoda Superb, R56 Cooper S

Re: This prick

Post by Gavin »

It is how us young ones speak Grandad! :D
User avatar
Orange Cola
Posts: 2232
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:56 pm

Re: This prick

Post by Orange Cola »

Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:48 am
Carlos wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:23 am
Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:13 am So he objected so that a law wouldn’t be just passed without being properly debated.

Itseems like this ones a no brainier, but it’s probably not a bad idea to give a chance to hear any actual objections in a debate before actually making it law - just in case.
He didn't know what upskirting was :roll:
from what I gather, it’s not the subject, it’s the passing laws without debate he objects to.
Yes, that's his excuse but this is a topic that's been long debated in numerous political forums with an exceptionally high profile, relatively speaking. Clearly he's not aware of that which brings into question what the fuck he's actually doing for the money he gets paid. If he had even a vague idea of what was going on then he should have put his personal crusade to one side on just this one occasion and let it through.

I see it's going back through, hopefully it gets passed this time.
Mustang GT 5.0 V8 -- Jaguar F-Pace
User avatar
240PP
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:27 am
Currently Driving: A5 3.0 TDI, 987 S.

Re: This prick

Post by 240PP »

Doesn’t it already come under another crime? Surely it can’t be currently legal to take a snap up an unsuspecting female’s skirt?
User avatar
Orange Cola
Posts: 2232
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:56 pm

Re: This prick

Post by Orange Cola »

240PP wrote: Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:31 pm Doesn’t it already come under another crime? Surely it can’t be currently legal to take a snap up an unsuspecting female’s skirt?
It's not currently covered by law, hence trying to get it approved as a law. I think the technicality causing an issue is that the area in question is still "covered" by under wear, if the person was going commando then I believe it's covered by law.
Mustang GT 5.0 V8 -- Jaguar F-Pace
V8Granite
Posts: 3959
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:57 am

Re: This prick

Post by V8Granite »

Maybe he did it to this particular issue as it would gain him more of an audience for his issue with the voting?

I fear it backfired.

Dave!
Post Reply