Hoons next??

[The Gorilla]

Campbell resigns!!
One down 2 to go.

Will Hoon do the honorouble thing or be pushed to save the Bliar??:D

[BEagle]

Do I sniff the aroma of a no-confidence vote and a demand for a General Election, perchance?

Memo to B.Liar: "Full opposite foot and control column centrally forward until your spin stops. Then $od off!"

[FFP]

So get Labour out. What's the alternative ?

I think it's even scarier . . . . . . . . .

Don't get me wrong. I'm no New Labour groupie but there seems to be little else out there.

At the end of the day (besides getting dark) it would mean that we'd be slagging some other Defence Secretary off in six months time.

Us being the cynics we are or them being less than perfect ?

[The Gorilla]

FFP

I don't know, you know there are some good guys and gals out there in the labour party. Admittedly mostly on the very back benches!!

Perhaps we could have a girlie in charge this time. Have we ever had a girlie Defence Secretary??

Let's be honest, she couldn't make any more of a mess than all the tw@ts we have had since sleepy fred!!

:ok:

[FFP]

Maybe so, but I feel that with the office comes politics (funny old thing !!) which means we won't/can't get the type of leadership we would all like.

Or maybe the position changes people. Who knows. . . . .

[whowhenwhy]

Having got rid of the leader of his country and then been faced with a bunch of blithering idiots, his one time supporters, who couldn't recognize a decent decision if it slapped them heartily in the face, a man called Cromwell took his troops into Parliament and declared martial law. Bring on the revolution!:ok:

[BEagle]

Watch out for the dudes in shades in black Vauxhall Omegas, whowhenwhy........

[Scud-U-Like]

If our political masters abuse their power (hardly a new phenomenon), it is because our dog's breakfast of a constitution allows them to do so. The Prime Minister is de facto president and the only real check on his or her power (apart from a general election or an all-out backbench or Cabinet revolt) is the media. Is it any wonder, therefore, that government becomes obsessed with presentation? Hoon is no better or worse than his predecessors in the job.

As for martial law, all that does is replace a bunch of competing political egos with a bunch of competing military egos. And we all know what happens when military egos compete, don't we, boys and girls?

[whowhenwhy]

Hmmm, I wonder who that is at the door? Oh dear, lots of people in sunglasses with false ingratiating smiles and ridiculous sweeping hand gestures! What can I do? Oh I know, I'll mention the fact that I'm a personal friend of Carol Caplin. Hold on!

Yep, that did the trick, they left some incense burners and departed muttering something about their next appoinment being with Buff. Don't know who they were talking about though. :E

[M134]

Anyone know the number of ex mil MP's?

[lightbob]

Try this link (if it worked) to Patrick Mercer, ex-WFR . http://www.politicallinks.co.uk/politics2/BIOG/MP_BIOGS/bio.asp?id=0418

[Regie Mental]

What bugs me is the constant reference to Buff-hoon and others as 'former barristers', as if this makes them some kind of superbeing.

The reason is that any barrister worth his salt wouldn't become an MP, they simply wouldn't take such a huge pay cut! Waht we need are people who have lived a little and had successful careers, not second rate lawyers who make second rate politicians.

:uhoh:

[Reichman]

M134 touched on something. Wouldn't it be better to have a Defence Secretary who had done some sort of military service in any capacity? Just a thought.

[whowhenwhy]

Is it me, or are we stepping towards saying that government really should be for the people, by the people. Intelligent, landed, moneyed and experienced people doing the job. You know, like we used to before the current (last 30-40 years worth) lot who seem to believe that you can have a 'career' in politics. Maybe we could introduce some dis-incentives like, for instance, MPs don't get a wage. They have a certain capped allowance each year for expenses. For those with jobs in Government those allowances could be increased somewhat to account for their increased need to base themselves in the capital. Just an idea??? :hmm:

[xyz_pilot]

Why should you "ban" poor people from being an MP

[steamchicken]

Labour annual conference, coming up in October - just after the Hutton 2nd pass and in time for the report. Watch this space....(noting that he's desperately trying to make up to the unions...)

[whowhenwhy]

Sorry, didn't mean to suggest that we should'ban' the poor, I simply included a list of possible criteria. I know a lot of 'poor' people who are incredibly intelligent. Many of them are junior ranks within the forces!! Of course at the other end of the spectrum you have people who are poor because they own huge big leaky castles!

[short&shapeless]

Why should you "ban" poor people from being an MP
Well XYZ, it would have kept that pr@t of a Deputy PM out for a start:D

[A Civilian]

Maybe we should pick income band that people need to reach before they can vote. How about a nice round figure like £40,000 a year.


A Civilian: Offical prat correspondent.

[Kwasi_Mensa]

And Gordon Brown is smiling all along.....

[Archimedes]

Mr Hoon is in serious bother now:

This (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3096034.stm) suggests that he will be accused of 'misleading' fellow MPs.

Lying to the electorate is one thing, but being mendacious to your fellow parliamentarians is a totally different matter....

[RubiC Cube]

Do you mean the "Self Defence Secretary"?

[The Gorilla]

My money is on Hoon going before bonfire night and Blair before the new year!!

:ok:

[tony draper]

Ah, but who will replace him?, could be one of those New Labour Blair Babes, they don't even have the decency to look guilty when they are spouting lies from every orifice.

[moggie]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3098456.stm

The link takes you to the BBC report on the Intelligence and Security Committee findings re: the dodgy dossier. Quotes are from the BBC report (itself quoting the ISC report).

The report says there was no political interference in the publication of the dossier by the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) from government media chief Alastair Campbell "or anyone else".

But it says the way the claim that Iraq could launch weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes was presented in the dossier was "unhelpful to an understanding of this issue".

The report also says the document failed to make it clear that Saddam Hussein's regime was not considered a "current or imminent threat to mainland UK".

Well, as I see it that last paragraph makes it official - our MPs have removed the legal justification for us going to war with Iraq (I say "legal", not "moral").

Does that make Mr Bliar a war criminal?

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Mr H. The report indicates that the Committee were "disturbed" by your actions/inactions. If the same was written about many of us, I feel we may be seeking alternative employment by now.

Do the honourable thing.

[The Gorilla]

Whipping Boy

To "do the honourable thing" unfortunately requires the individual(s) to have honour in the first place.

Indeed it is fast becoming obvious that honour is not present at any level within the MOD main building. That includes Military and Civil servants.

The Chiefs of Staff have a duty to ensure that our Armed Forces DO NOTHING that is illegal. They have stood by and watched this fiasco unfold. I for one, refuse to believe that the CDS and his staff were not aware that the case for war was being overstated. They must have seen the intelligence material.

When the dust of the Hutton Inquiry settles we can get back to asking them all the most important and unanswered question of all.

Where are the WMD's? You know, that ones that were supposed to be available for use within 45 minutes!!!!!


:confused: