Boris Johnson has apologised for attending a “bring your own booze” gathering in the garden of No. 10 during the U.K.’s first lockdown in May 2020. Speaking in the Commons just before Prime Minister’s Questions amidst calls for him to resign, the PM acknowledged public “rage” over the incident but said he believed it was a work event, with the Downing Street garden being an extension of the office. Here is the Prime Minister’s apology in full, courtesy of the Telegraph.
Mr Speaker, I want to apologise.
I know that millions of people across this country have made extraordinary sacrifices over the last 18 months.
I know the anguish that they have been through, unable to mourn their relatives, unable to live their lives as they want or to do the things they love.
And I know the rage they feel with me or with the Government I lead when they think that in Downing Street itself, the rules are not being properly followed by the people who make the rules.
And though I cannot anticipate the conclusions of the current inquiry, I have learned enough to know that there were things we simply did not get right.
And I must take responsibility.
Number 10 is a big department with the garden as an extension of the office, which has been in constant use because of the role of fresh air in stopping the virus.
And when I went into that garden, just after six on May 20th, 2020, to thank groups and staff before going back into my office 25 minutes later, to continue working, I believed implicitly that this was a work event.
But Mr Speaker, with hindsight, I should have sent everyone back inside.
I should have found some other way to thank them.
And I should have recognised that even if it could be said technically to fall within the guidance, there would be millions and millions of people who simply would not see it that way.
People who suffered terribly, people who are forbidden from meeting loved ones at all, inside or outside, and to them and to this House I offer my heartfelt apologies.
And all I ask is that Sue Gray be allowed to complete her inquiry into that day and several others so that the full facts can be established.
It may be that it could technically count as a work event – although the barrister Adam King doesn’t think so – and there was also a (convenient) exemption for Crown buildings that may apply. So it may well be that the gathering didn’t technically break the rules and Sue Gray will exonerate him on this.
However, it’s not just about the letter of the law. How it looks matters – even if technically within the rules, everyone knows a party when they see one. And they also know that they weren’t allowed to go to one or hold one at the time.
While seemingly a minor misdemeanour in the grand scheme of things, along with the other lockdown gatherings in Downing Street it is undoubtedly damaging to the Prime Minister. People are angry because they observed the rules themselves, sometimes at great personal cost.
It’s worth noting that Boris may be more likely to survive this because he got the big Omicron call right and resisted (or was compelled by sceptical Cabinet colleagues to resist) the calls to impose additional Covid restrictions last month.
One potential plus is that, assuming it doesn’t finish him off, it means Boris will be even less able to impose similar restrictions again. A successor may not have such difficulty, however – and some of his possible successors (e.g. Michael Gove) would have fewer qualms about doing so.
Stop Press: Scottish Conservative Leader Douglas Ross has called for Boris to resign, saying his position “is no longer tenable”. Ross is the most senior member of the PM’s own party publicly to call for him to go, though an unnamed senior MP told Sky News‘s Sam Coates earlier in the day that Boris’s apology would be “too little, too late” and MP Sir Roger Gale has called Boris “politically a dead man walking”. Will Wragg, the Vice-Chairman of the influential 1922 Committee of Tory backbenchers has also called on him to “do the right thing” and quit. Boris is certainly in the most trouble he’s yet faced.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
As long as they replace him with someone more libertarian.
Whoever replaces him will only be there if approved from much higher up.
Perpetual injections and vaccine passports are the order of the day and the globalists intend to get their way.
The outgoing Swedish PM was reasonably libertarian as is DeSantis in Florida.
Someone like them would be preferable so the Global Elites plan can be at best delayed for as long as possible.
I don’t see anyone like that amongst the plausible leadership contenders within the “Conservative” Party hierarchy. I do see some far worse than Johnson.
Nor imo is there (yet) any sufficient groundswell of recognition of the sheer scale of the covid panic response catastrophe to drive a turn to non-panicker figures outside the core group of contenders.
Do you?
I suspect Mark… unlike Arden, Draghi, Macron, Morrison and Trudeau… Bozo hasn’t been keeping up with the “agenda…”
Hence the back-stabbings…
Johnson could however go full on – YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH rogue – and simply return us all in England to status old normal, no restrictions whatsoever just back to partying like it was 2019….
Nah… that’s science fiction sadly… we all know what’s rolling here… and the powerful vested interests…
“Johnson could however go full on – YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH rogue – and simply return us all in England to status old normal, no restrictions whatsoever just back to partying like it was 2019….”
I wish he would, but I ain’t holding my breath.
Mind you, he had the chance to do that in March 2020, and at least go down swinging and finish up a Churchillian hero on the right side of history, but he flubbed that opportunity.
He’s just a fallible human being imo, and unworthy of any respect.
Boris Johnson wants to ditch masks and working from home at end of January – Mirror Online this is his get out of jail card. The bottom line is people given a choice don’t want lockdown-whatever they say publicly.
Boris has resisted the “experts” twice. First with freedom day in July (50-100k cases anyone?) and then Christmas (a million cases by NYE).
It seems that the majority of online commentors are of the view that imposing random meaningless rules is good, but breaking random meaningless rules is bad. They will be happy with more random meaningless rules providing evidence of politicos breaking them doesn’t appear. They are fscking full on Stockholm Syndrome cretins
Yes it could have been so different but he’s allowed the wrong side of history to be chosen for him , either because he’s a fully signed up member of the new normal technocracy global agenda or simply because he doesn’t appear to really believe in anything other than himself . Remember that he penned two Telegraph Brexit articles, one for and against,he doesn’t even seem to know what he himself thinks.That’s why he wobbles all over the place,he can’t even apologise with any conviction.
“Ve’ll have you und your loved vons digit-alley locked down for ever com tventy thirty…”
All the libertarian politicians are on the back benches and that is why they are there and not in the government.
We know that they have to have backing from the Global Elite to be able to rise into government. Anyone off script is destroyed.
It would be nice if a libertarian, popular and charismatic person came to the fore but in this instance I am a GlassHalfEmpty.
Bob Seely (Tory, isle of wight) interviewed on GB news last night, extremely well informed and argued very comprehensively that ICL/Ferguson should be called to account for the flawed modelling data which has been proven to be so incredibly wrong. VERY impressive.
Yes he was 10/10
Would love to see the Tories really throw the “experts” under the bus.
Agree! I don’t either. There is probably more talent on the Dimchester Rovers substitute bench that in the cabinet. Please God though it won’t be Gove!
There is no one.
The MSM are pushing Sunak which mens Sunak is the globalist no.1 choice.
Oh please not Sunak – I only ever heard him once make a speech and he sounded just like Tony Blair – that was enough for me – I never listened to him again.
And to have to hear him say “Mithter Thpeaker” constantly would grind on anybody.
Is he perchance related to Violet Elizabeth Bott?
‘Just William’…! That takes me back 55+ years!!!
These people only get to where they are by being stooges.
No place for Iggy, unfortunately.
I wish it could be Steve Baker
Delays to the plans of the Davos Deviants are not an option because these plans will result in the death of humanity.
I don’t understand why people downvote posts talking about globalists and the new world order. I can only assume that it is out of ignorance and personal incredulity. These people should probably wake up.
They downvote, but dont engage. Says it all really.
MrTea’s post has -5, mine has -5, it’s clearly the same 5 people. Would be interesting to hear what those cowards have to say.
Providing, that is, they can speak and aren’t just downtick-bots.
Bots.
As ever he bottled it
Please come and join our friendly peaceful events.
Saturday 15th January 5pm
Silent lighted walk behind one simple sign
“No More Lockdown”
Bring torches, candles and other lights
Meet Corner of Castle Hill & High St,
Windsor SL4 1PQ
Stand in the Park Sundays 10am make friends, ignore the madness & keep sane
Wokingham – Howard Palmer Gardens Cockpit Path car park Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
They won’t. These days only politicians who have the support of the globalists and support them in return get to be Prime Minister.
The 21st century political class only have one ideology.
They’re after him precisely to put in someone LESS libertarian.
The G7 circus pissed all over the rules when they came to Cornwall last year. For some reason that was ok.
This is a good old fashioned mob war, initiated by the pro-vax, pro-vax passport, pro-Davos elements within the UK establishment.
Nobody is saying Boris Johnson is a saint, but anyone who think anyone gunning for him actually gives a monkeys about the broken rules is naive beyond redemption.
106, I believe mostly Conservative MP’svoted against vaccine passports and more lockdowns, cornering Johnson, so the chances are he’ll be replaced by a Gobalist puppet, who won’t be cornered,.they’ll elect another Globalist stooge who isn’t compromised yet, stick with him, not ideal but the best choice at the moment.
No election coming up for a long time.
The Conservative leadership election will be like May’s, Parliamentary party only, remember?
It’s the lesser poison chalice I think.
What Boris should have said was: “Mr Speaker, I want to apologise for being a hypocritical, lying a*sehole. He’s only sorry because he got caught.
He didn’t appear to be AT ALL sorry on Monday evening when he was interviewed about the party [lets call it what it was] by an ITN reporter and he laughed when he was questioned about it. That sickened and disgusted me and flagged up the arrogance and complacency for all to see.
He likely got the email – we have all read it – ‘bring your own booze does” NOT connote a “work event” and if, when he attended it, it was apparent to him that it was not a work event he should have told them all to go home and absented himself from it. It is his office and grounds after all.
And why should there be any kind of convenient excuse in the Covid Act which would allow govt/civil servants to get away with doing what the rest of us were expressly forbidden from doing on penalty of breaking the law and being fined?
But all of that is beside the point.
It is not the fact that this party was the ONLY ONE of its kind. How many now have come to light? all spread across the premises of senior members of the conservative party, including the PM (is it 3 times now?) and two of those when the “pandemic” was supposed to be at its height with the most deadly and transmissible diseases in circulation. We were all being told “Hands Face Space” and yet none of these diktats were followed at the parties.
That is because they knew that what they were telling us to worry ourselves into a frenzy about, wasn’t that worrying really. That’s what the parties are screaming from the rooftops for all to hear, and yet, has anyone in MSM made this link yet?
The point is that THERE WAS NO RISK TO ANYBODY FROM THOSE
PARTIES BECAUSE LOCKDOWN WAS ENTIRELY BASED ON LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES.
Quite. The complaint shouldn’t be ‘they broke the rules’, it should be ‘this demonstrates that the rules should never have been imposed, and they knew that’.
Exactly.
Erm, Annie, that WAS the point of my post. The parties just identified that for everyone if they were not already aware of that and yet MSM is targeting the ‘hypocrisy’, as opposed to the evidence of the con.
Apparently the booze came from Tesco [at least they weren’t raiding the Downing St cellars for the good stuff] and PM was seen circulating and gladhanding people – what happened to all that elbow bumping?
Ditto for Cummings eye test, 2020’s incidents of politicos travelling by train while infected (real or test? who knows), Ferguson’s and Handcock’s infringements. Covid has always been a political event, and the health of the hoi polloi a distance 10,000,000th. Fear has been deliberately used to advance a political agenda.
I agree with the entire substance of your post, but on this one point, if I can clarify as someone who has worked in governement, whether he know what the event was before he came could have depended on where the email was sent. The Prime Minister would have more than one email address, and only one of them would actually get directly to the Prime Minister (to be honest direct messaging instead of email might be the only way). All the other email accounts would be managed by underlyings.
I don’t know, of course, but I’m not convinced that a party invite that went out to over 100 people would have gone to the account which the PM reads personally. Actually, I highly doubt it. What this means is that the message would have gone to an underlying and then relayed to the PM verbally or in writing. It is most certainly possible that he had the impression it was work event.
This is just some additional detail in case it’s interesting to people following this closely.
Personally, I want the guillotines to be oiled up and ready for the bloodbath of this whole evil lot that has willfully perpetrated this catastrophe upon us!
I believe Neil Oliver and GBNews has called this out.
He’s only sorry because he got caught.
Exactly, my only worry though is the last time he got caught-out when papers were full of stories about Christmas partys at Downing Street, he went for the dead cat strategy and tried to deflect public attention by scaring people about omnicron and imposed mask mandates in shops again.
Lets hope he doesn’t opt for the dead cat strategy again.
He didn’t opt for a dead cat strategy to deflect attention. It is completely the other way around.
They attacked him with the party revelations to force the Omicron over-reaction.
FFS, that video is a year old. These emails now are 18 months old. Why now? To knee-cap BJ. Obviously!!
‘I’m sorry I’ve been seen as the domestic abuser I am, or at least I’m sorry I’ve been rumbled’, said Kim Jong Johnson.
Old saying springs to mind – tangled web we weave when we seek to deceive. Imagine some breezy comments a coming. Plus – stop the nonsense of him being a lesser of evils, thus keeping him in office. Gove a successor? Zero chance as for many in Tory party now. Simply keeping chipping away folks as you have right on your side.
If it is a choice between corrupt and incompetent/weak, or corrupt and efficient/ruthless, then I’d rather stick with the incompetent option.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive!
But when we’ve practiced for a bit,
We make a decent job of it.
At least it keeps the high court ruling of the awarding of covid PPE contracts out of the news 😉
Law-breaking government!
Who’d thunk it?
https://goodlawproject.org/update/high-court-vip-lane-ppe-unlawful/
I like the way the judge concluded that the awarding of the contracts was illegal but they probably would have got them anyway??
I don’t
It’s a genuinely tricky one.
On the one hand, he’s the man responsible for caving in to panic in March 2020. He was in office, the buck stops with him. There should be no forgetting that fact, and no forgiveness – he failed in his leadership responsibility, and was responsible for the greatest peacetime policy error ever inflicted on this nation..
On that basis, we should support any opportunity to hound him out of office.
On the other hand, all the alternatives to Johnson are probably at least no better, and many likely far worse, as far as covid panicker incompetence is concerned.
Principle says sack the bastard. Pragmatism says hold on a moment.
My principles say sack all 100 attendees, they were all adults and all broke the ‘spirit of the rules’ if not the rules themselves.
I don’t think so, because the issue is not breaking the rules (which we all here presumably did – certainly I did regularly – because the rules were literally stupid and arguably evil).
The issue is breaking the rules whilst pushing covid panic on the rest of us. I don’t know how many of the attendees were in that position – the only one I do know for certain was in that position is Johnson himself.
If the issue isnt breaking the rules why were so many fines handed out at that time to people doing alot less than these? Police were presumably present as they always are at downing street and chose to turn a blind eye.
This isn’t or shouldn’t be about getting rid of one man it should be about bringing down the whole rotten edifice.
I would rather sack everyone who abided by the rules. I’m on the side of the rule-breakers.
“Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.”
― Douglas Bader
Indeed. My concern is that there’s a calculated campaign to replace him with someone that’s more likely to impose the measures (lockdowns, more restrictions on unvaxed, more jab mandates etc) required by the elites that are orchestrating all this. Compared to most other nations leaders he appears almost liberal!
Depressingly true.
Using that reasoning, Hitler would have been better left in place if some hypothetical alternative would have murdered even more people had Hitler been ousted from power halfway into his reign of terror and the hypothetical alternative taken his place.
That’s an odious sort of pragmatism. By his actions and the actions of his regime, Johnson/the regime has forfeited all legitimacy. Speculation regarding what might come after is irrelevant to the fundamental issue, which is that this regime has unlawfully and wilfully harmed and killed some of its citizens in order to ostensibly save some other of its citizens. This regime has committed atrocities againat its own people, and ought to be punished accordingly.
All pragmatism is odious. It’s just also sensible in many cases.
Bringing down Johnson isn’t going to do any real damage to the regime. The regime continues with another figurehead. The Hitler comparison (as usual) is not really apt.
(I’m not saying you can’t make a strong case for bringing him down on principle. Clearly, you can. As I pointed out, it’s just a genuinely difficult choice because you can make a strong case either way, imo).
‘All pragmatism is odious. It’s just also sensible in many cases.’
Except it’s not in this case. Crimes against humanity needs to be punished appropriately.
‘Bringing down Johnson isn’t going to do any real damage to the regime. The regime continues with another figurehead. The Hitler comparison (as usual) is not really apt.’
The Hitler comparison is indeed apt since it illuatrates the absurdity of this ‘pragmatic’ approach. The point is that crimes against humanity needs to be punished regardless of what might come after in terms of a hypothetical ‘more extreme’ future leader/regime.
“Except it’s not in this case. Crimes against humanity needs to be punished appropriately.”
But sacking him for not being sufficiently zealous as to believe in his own nonsense is not “punished appropriately”.
If there were an opportunity to do that (punish him appropriately) I would absolutely support it. In fact, I’d tie the knot myself.
“The point is that crimes against humanity needs to be punished regardless of what might come after in terms of a hypothetical ‘more extreme’ future leader/regime.“
The issue here is not punishment for the crimes of covid panic – that’s not on the table.
The issue is will things be better for us if he is replaced as PM by another of the covid panickers guilty of the same crimes, or will they be worse.
I see your point. Allow me to offer an analogy.
Let’s say we have two firms, or ‘gangs,’ one from Battersea and the other from Tooting. Big Barry runs the Battersea firm, Toothless Terry runs the Tooting firm. Barry’s mob is the dominant firm. They’re running south London. Terry’s mob would be dominant if only they had the support from the south London ‘families’. Bottom line is they are both horrible, nasty firms.
The police can’t get Barry for his more heinous crimes, but they can get him on a lesser charge. But if they take Barry out of the picture, whoever takes over running south London, whether it be someone equally if not more horrible from within Barry’s own firm, or whether a ‘snap election’ of all the south London ‘families’ is held and the undoubtedly more evil Terry from the Tooting firm gets ‘elected’ and he becomes the dominant leader, either way they’re likely to cause even more harm and death than Barry.
Now, what do the police do? Do they drop the lesser charge and keep the villainous, murderous Barry in place so that he can inflict even more pain and death on society just to avoid a hypothetical worse scenario, or do they get him off the street so he cannot continue his reign of terror, hope that they can build a future case against him on the more serious matters, and deal with whatever the new firm brings?*
Such a pragmatic approach would be utterly weak and odious, contrary to what is morally and lawfully correct. The point is that the odious Johnson needs to go, full stop. In the fullness of time he will be dealt with. In the meantime we need this criminal out of office so he cannot cause more harm.
Of course, we need to substitute ‘police’ for ‘the people,’ and I’m advocating Johnson resign, so the analogy is somewhat strained.
I agree.
Similarly, I would vote Conservative (even now), if it meant keeping Labour away from the rudder.
I would not be voting for the Conservatives – I would be voting against Labour.
I despise what the govt has done. But if Labour were in place ….
Jeez, you would actually vote this tyrannical regime back into office. There really is no hope for this country.
If it were between Labour and Conservative, definitely. I would vote against Labour. No question.
Would Labour have been less tyrannical?
I think Labour, Green, Conservatives, Liberals, are each useless and I would not vote for any if them.
I think, although theoretically correct, your view is far too simplistic. Of course these people need to be punished accordingly – nobody would dispute that – the question is how. The how is based around the current ‘leaders’ of nations, and how they can be either toppled or be prepared to go against the grain. The hypothetical part of your argument needs to be balanced against real-world probability – what is the likelihood of getting someone less liberal, and more willing to follow the plan, than Johnson? I would say pretty high. If you look around the rest of Europe you can see Johnson is playing it slightly different at the moment, and the chance of him being replaced with a minister who is going to be more aligned with the elitist plans are high. That’s not a forward step then (not for us anyway), so this balances on a knife edge – we don’t have the luxury of cherry-picking who would replace him and that’s Mark’s point I think.
You can only play the cards you’re dealt. And the fact is we’re incredibly lucky to have Johnson as our card. If you don’t think so, go try your luck in Wales Scotland, either side of the Irish border or, quite frankly anywhere else in the whole world bar England.
Speaking from Gulag Wales, you’re right.
It’s a choice between the diabolical and the merely loathsome. I’ll swaps you Dungford for Bozo any day.
The Johnson regime is playing the long game. Boil us too quickly, and we might jump out of the pan.
‘[W]hat is the likelihood of getting someone less liberal, and more willing to follow the plan, than Johnson? I would say pretty high. If you look around the rest of Europe you can see Johnson is playing it slightly different at the moment…’
Johnson’s not liberal, nor is he a ‘libertarian’. That’s all nonsense. The reason Johnson seems more liberal than others is because he has been backed into a corner by events within his own party, including the revolt from around 100 Tory MPs, Lord Frost’s resignation, and, of course, his party’s own disregard for its stupid rules. He’s temporarily hamstrung, but don’t fget too cosy. The dust will settle and he’ll be revitalised.
‘…and the chance of him being replaced with a minister who is going to be more aligned with the elitist plans are high. That’s not a forward step then (not for us anyway), so this balances on a knife edge – we don’t have the luxury of cherry-picking who would replace him and that’s Mark’s point I think.’
Again, this odious pragmatism misses the point. We need the criminal gone from office. That he has committed atrocities against his own citizens is a concrete fact. Talk of ‘sparing’ him based on what might come in his place is simply weak pragmatism, and is morally repugnant.
“Johnson’s not liberal, nor is he a ‘libertarian’. That’s all nonsense”
I never said he was liberal, I said we might get someone who is less liberal – even the illiberal have degrees of liberalism.
“Again, this odious pragmatism misses the point”
It’s not ‘odious’ if that same pragmatism can stop this thing from spiralling further. Things don’t just turn out perfectly because you will them to do so.
“Talk of ‘sparing’ him based on what might come in his place is simply weak pragmatism, and is morally repugnant.”
See above.
With all due respect your view seems incredibly naive and smacks of a lack of real-world experience. To stop what is happening worldwide we have limited options, the main ones being 1) overthrow our government 2) have people in positions of power that are not onboard with the agenda. 1) will cost many lives and may still not result in what you want, 2) is likely a short-term fix only. What will not happen is your fairy-tale hope that one instance of doing the right thing will solve the worlds problems.
So, what do you find most ‘odious’ and ‘morally repugnant’, the loss of potentially millions of lives with no net gain, or hoping for steady healthy change brought on by this experience and what people now know? As I said before, this whole thing is on a knife-edge and replacing Johnson with someone more in keeping with Macron will push the whole thing over that edge. Your personal ideals don’t change that.
Now, after saying all that, I’m not saying that removing Johnson is definitely a bad thing, what I’m saying is I think there’s a high likelihood that it’ll be a bad thing. Be careful what you wish for.
‘It’s not ‘odious’ if that same pragmatism can stop this thing from spiralling further. Things don’t just turn out perfectly because you will them to do so.’
1. Yes, it’s odious for it advocates keeping a murderer in place because a hypothetical more prolific murderer might take his place. That’s weak pragmatism and is morally repugnant.
2. Where did I make the argument that ‘things [will] turn out perfectly’ on my view?
‘With all due respect your view seems incredibly naive and smacks of a lack of real-world experience.’
With all due respect, that’s an empty assertion.
‘To stop what is happening worldwide we have limited options, the main ones being 1) overthrow our government 2) have people in positions of power that are not onboard with the agenda. 1) will cost many lives and may still not result in what you want, 2) is likely a short-term fix only. What will not happen is your fairy-tale hope that one instance of doing the right thing will solve the worlds problems.’
Aunt Sally. Are you being deliberately obtuse? Where did I suggest or even hint that Johnson going would ‘solve the world’s problems’?
Speaking of fairytales, you’re fabricating your own story here.
‘So, what do you find most ‘odious’ and ‘morally repugnant’, the loss of potentially millions of lives with no net gain, or hoping for steady healthy change brought on by this experience and what people now know? As I said before, this whole thing is on a knife-edge and replacing Johnson with someone more in keeping with Macron will push the whole thing over that edge. Your personal ideals don’t change that.’
You’re still confused. What is odious/morally repugnant is advocating that a murderer be allowed to stay in office because you think his successor might be a more prolific murderer. Such pragmatism defies morality. You lose all moral ground with such an approach.
‘Be careful what you wish for.’
I agree that what would replace him would very likely be worse, but that’s not the point. The point is that there is a chance a known murderer is deprived of further opportunities to murder and cause harm. This is morally preferable than the known murderer keeping his place in order that a hypothetical more prolific murderer be kept out.
Well argued.
No, there’s a 100% probability that a murderer would be replaced by another murderer who would more effectively carry out his or her orders.
Regardless, the argument stands. There is no moral justification for leaving a murderous dictator in power to continue his campaign of terror if you have a chance to get rid of him.
Nope, replacing an incompetent murderer with a competent one is insanity.
And I really can’t see how it can be the moral choice.
1. There’s nothing ‘incompetent’ about this murderer and his regime when it comes to psychological warfare, propaganda and killing. It’s been utterly efficient and ruthless in these areas.
2. Please present your non-pragmatic moral argument for abandoning justice and the rule of law in favour of keeping a known murderer in power based on the hypothetical notion that his successor will be a more prolific murderer.
1) So why are they trying to get rid of him?
And the experience of the English has clearly been less painful than the experience of the “Celts”, let alone of people on the continent.
2) You seriously believe that the replacement of Johnson by the people behind this evil because they’re not happy with his performance represents justice and the rule of law?
‘So why are they trying to get rid of him?’
Why are who trying to ‘get rid of him’?
‘And the experience of the English has clearly been less painful than the experience of the “Celts”, let alone of people on the continent.’
And? How does that address my argument?
‘You seriously believe that the replacement of Johnson by the people behind this evil because they’re not happy with his performance represents justice and the rule of law?’
Come again?
1. Please present your evidence that Johnson is being replaced ‘by the people behind this evil’. Document your claim.
2. Regardless, that’s not my point. Again, I’m saying that Johnson being ousted from office would represent justice.
But let’s rewind. You have not presented an argument. Again, please present your non-pragmatic moral argument for abandoning justice and the rule of law in favour of keeping a known murderer in power based on the hypothetical notion that his successor will be a more prolific murderer.
Does one murderer get a continual free pass as long as there is always a more prolific murderer waiting in the wings?
“Why are who trying to ‘get rid of him’?”
The people whose orders politicians are following, clearly.
“And? How does that address my argument?”
You claimed they’d been “utterly efficient and ruthless”. I pointed out that they hadn’t.
“Document your claim”
Stuff is being revealed now that could have been revealed 20 months ago. A rational person would wonder why. Only an idiot would expect the people behind this to put in writing what they’re up to.
“Johnson being ousted from office would represent justice.”
I think our definitions of justice are very different. It would mean him leaving an office he clearly doesn’t enjoy and getting his financial rewards earlier than would otherwise be the case.
“please present your non-pragmatic moral argument for abandoning justice and the rule of law”
I haven’t argued for those.
Justice and the rule of law would involve Johnson, the rest of the cabinet and many civil servants being prosecuted for combinations of murder, manslaughter, treason, corruption, crimes against humanity and so on.
His removal as PM would just represent a rearrangement of assets.
“Does one murderer get a continual free pass”
How am I arguing for that?
It’s past 8. I need to cook my dinner.
‘The people whose orders politicians are following, clearly.’
How do you know they are trying to get rid of him? You don’t. You’re just guessing.
‘You claimed they’d been “utterly efficient and ruthless”. I pointed out that they hadn’t.’
Yes, they have. They have hypnotised a nation through fear and propaganda, coerced the people into locking themselves away, shunning their loved ones, their friends and fellow man, turned citizen against citizen, and killed countless people. Saying ‘the experience of the English has clearly been less painful than the experience of the “Celts”’ a) is absurd and callous, and b) doesn’t undermine my point about the regime’s ruthlessness and efficiency. If you want to argue that ‘efficiency’ is measured by comparative numbers then, again, feel free to provide an actual argument.
‘Stuff is being revealed now that could have been revealed 20 months ago. A rational person would wonder why. Only an idiot would expect the people behind this to put in writing what they’re up to.’
You wrote:
‘You seriously believe that the replacement of Johnson by the people behind this evil because they’re not happy with his performance represents justice and the rule of law?’
This assumes that Johnson is being replaced by the people behind this evil so please present your evidence for this claim. That’s how this works. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I try not to make claims I cannot substantiate.
‘I think our definitions of justice are very different.’
Clearly. It is just and proper for a murderer to be ousted from office.
‘I haven’t argued for those.’
That’s what your position entails.
‘Justice and the rule of law would involve Johnson, the rest of the cabinet and many civil servants being prosecuted for combinations of murder, manslaughter, treason, corruption, crimes against humanity and so on.’
Indeed. And absent such justice, a lesser form of justice would also involve Johnson being ousted from office.
‘His removal as PM would just represent a rearrangement of assets.’
So what? How does that detract from his guilt?
‘How am I arguing for that?‘
That’s the logical conclusion of your argument. Your argument hinges on the fact that a worse dictator is waiting in the wings, therefore Johnson must not be ousted from office despite him being a criminal/murderer. So, on that logic, Johnson could theoretically get a continual free pass long as there is always a more prolific murderer waiting in the wings. That’s what your argument is reduced to, a logical absurdity.
But is it entirely hypothetical, and without any basis in experience/reality?
To say that a worse scenario is hypothetical, must mean that the opposite exists hypothetically I think. And that is not what we are faced with – so I don’t think it’s fair. I think things are weighted, and not entirely hypothetical in our current predicament.
I’m merely using ‘hypothetical’ to mean uncertain. I’m not saying you don’t have good reason to believe this.
Of course. But if you think you stand a good chance of ending up with someone worse, is it morally ok to let more people be murdered – just to do the ‘right thing’ by getting rid of the less sadistic murderer?
I think it would be great if Bozo was kicked out. He does not deserve to be our Prime Minister. But what are the odds of getting a real human replacement – really? What are odds of being worse off?
As things stand, would you say that while we are governed by absolute gits, we are (for the moment) better off than if we were living in Australia, Austria, Italy, France etc (and even Scotland and Wales)?
I think we all agree that the govt are utterly, utterly contemptible; that they are guilty of real crimes, and have utterly failed us.
The difficult thing is that you rely on the use of a hypothetically worse replacement. Well, hypothetically, anything is possible – so that is not a fair position. Because, while hypothetically anything is possible ….. what, actually, is on the table?
So, it could be said, that given what we do know, and with the limited options available to us at this time – it would be morally indefensible (crazy, actually) to have your tormenters replaced if you have no reason to expect that their replacements would be no less evil, yet in all probability, they would be significantly worse.
Hypothetical is unfair, becuse I don’t think things are entirely hypothetical. If they were, then that’s a different kettle of fish.
Again, you misunderstand my use of ‘hypothetical’, but regardless, it’s largely unrelated to my actual argument. It’s merely describing the position I’ve been challenging.
This is our reality.
Ideally, of course, you are completely correct. Unfortunately, we only have limited options available to us.
I would love there to be decent, viable alternatives to vote for. I have voted for fringe alternatives, and also voted ‘none of the above’. But, the thought of a Labour govt is very concerning to me, and I would vote Conservative (purely as a vote against Labour) every time if it’s a contest between the two.
So you would vote to be continually punched in the face as opposed to being continually punched in the guts. Clownworld 101.
Well, if I personally, absolutely, can not stop someone from hurting me, then I would choose the lesser violence.
Sure, if there was an alternative to both, I would want that. But this is the problem – this depends on there being an alternative at the time. If there is a clear contest between just Labour and Conservatives, then yes, they are both useless, and ultimately detrimental to me and everyone else in the country, but yes, I would vote against Labour – precisely because I believe I (and the rest of us) would suffer worse under them.
‘[T]he thought of a Labour govt is very concerning to me, and I would vote Conservative (purely as a vote against Labour) every time if it’s a contest between the two.’
This is very confused. You’d still be voting for the Tories, not merely against Labour. Could you explain why you think it is a moral good to vote for one totalitarian, murderous dictatorship in order to keep out another totalitarian, murderous dictatorship because, hypothetically, the former will be less murderous than the latter?
Leaving aside the fact that the hypothetical is just that, you’re still willingly voting for the murder of citizens. Again, a pragmatic explanation won’t do, because there is nothing compelling you vote for the murder of anyone. You can withhold your vote from both parties, indeed, that would be the only morally good action in that scenario.
This is very confused. You’d still be voting for the Tories, not merely against Labour.
No. I am not voting for Conservatives, in that I believe in them, and therefore want to see them ‘win’. I am making use of the only mechanism available to me to try and deny what I see as the greater threat from taking hold. How is that confused? Am I unique in this?
‘No. I am not voting for Conservatives, in that I believe in them, and therefore want to see them ‘win’. I am making use of the only mechanism available to me to try and deny what I see as the greater threat from taking hold. How is that confused? Am I unique in this?’
I understand you don’t like the Tories, but you are still voting for them in the sense that you want them to get into power instead of Labour. And yes, in that sense, you most certainly want them to win.
Now back to the crucial part which you failed to address. Could you explain why you think it is a moral good to vote for one totalitarian, murderous dictatorship in order to keep out another totalitarian, murderous dictatorship because, hypothetically, the former will be less murderous than the latter?
A pragmatic argument fails here, because there is nothing compelling you to vote for the murder of anyone. You can withhold your vote altogether. That would be the only morally good action in that scenario.
So, given these conditions, why is it a moral good to vote for a totalitarian, murderous dictatorship? Why is it a moral good to vote for the certain death of many of your fellow citizens?
If anything, in terms of personal credibility, there is now no room for the PM to go for any more removal of freedoms and liberties as he has shown time after time he cannot abide by the rules so he has no business making rules for other people to follow – ergo on that reasoning it is better for us if he stays, but elite might not want that as he is no good to them
You’re correct and you expose the evil futility of pragmatism.
Oh I see, none of this was planned. He is basically a good man who simply panicked and made an error – much like all the other UN/WEF captured leaders who are attempting to hound, beat and starve the ideologically non-compliant into submission.
How did he cave in to panic if he was at the very forefront of creating panic?
Furthermore, if he caved in to panic, why was he throwing parties when such behaviour was supposed to pose a serious danger to all involved?
Sorry, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Our enemy want Johnson out to be replaced by an even worse socio/psychopath who will fully implement the DS wishes.
It’s the rules themselves which were criminal. His attendance at the party was the only thing he got right – by accident.
He needs to tell the gullible it was all bollocks.
Absolutely right. He should apologise for the rules being imposed in the first place, not for this nonsense story.
It looks very much engineered outrage to get rid of Johnson. Why? Hardly a defense of Johnson, but it strikes me as unlikely that he will be replaced with someone more open to a return to normality and the rule of law. This ‘revelation’ comes just as the UK is breaking away from crazy Europe’s doubling down on the now evidently pointless vaxxes and sinister vaxports, already openly being used for something completely different.
His getting the boot may turn out to make things significantly worse.
I think the ‘next one’ will have to dismantle it all, psychologically it will be hard to go on ‘in the same old style’ after his departure.
Yes they have decided Johnson has served his purpose and now need a clean pair of hands to carry the deception forward.
The Johnson regime murdered thousands in care homes, hundreds in design-to-fail hydroxychorequine trials, thousands with experimental injections and hundreds of thousands over the next twenty years with lockdowns – but the public are raging about a party.
We are being trolled.
THIS IS A DEMONSTRATION OF RAW POWER AS EXERCISED THROUGH THEIR MEDIA.
So essentially a weak tyrant is preferable to a strong tyrant.
He should not kept in place for fear of someone worse. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Another way of looking at it is that we all declare that the rest of our lives are a ‘work event’ and therefore we are exempt from the restrictions.
Ha ha good one.
Wouldn’t it be great if he went for broke, came out denouncing the entire over-reaction as an imposition by the establishment who he has tried to fight every step of the way and failed but that he’s had enough, to hell with technocratic bullies, to hell with restrictions, the “pandemic” is over, call an election and roll the dice.
He won’t because he has no balls really, but wouldn’t it be great…
It wouldn’t be great, because the public would vote for whoever is promising the hardest lockdown.
I fear you may be right, they are so brainwashed
That is what is so worrying. And that is the reason why, whenever there is coup, the new rulers sieze the media buildings. Our media was captured decades ago.
He would go down an absolute legend if he reversed tack on everything and spilt the beans with inside knowledge.
Sadly he was a lazy, incompetent, fool, not the ‘prisoner of number 10’ battling in good faith against evil cabalistas.
Westminster’s become a cesspit of lies and fudging…
https://twitter.com/THEJamesWhale/status/1481198561945690115?s=20
Vaccine Passports introduced in the summer, mask mandates back in place since Xmas…and worst of all leaky non-immunizing jabs… and economy destroying lockdowns…from 2021.
These achieved what exactly?
You what, now?
Ye daft bint, you dinnae ken ye were at a piss-up for 100 folk?
She can barely keep a straight face. Thank you, lady, that one speech has done more to show what a complete farce the whole corona pantomime has been from start to finish. No deadly virus, just a deadly “health care” service and a genocidal government. I vote we get that Roumanian MEP in as care taker prime minister while the rest of this shower of lying spivs and profiteers are rounded up and put behind bars. Tower of London should have few spare dungeons available.
Fantastic depiction of a modern Blairite MP, whether Labour or “Conservative”.
Many a true word…..
I’m assuming that was some kind of parody – if it wasn’t then we are in a hell of a lot more trouble than I thought we were.
no, its ok. Just googled her, and it IS a parody, Phew, for a minute there it was so close to the real thing I thought it WAS the real thing.
LMAO now
This kompromat has been around for over 18 months so who gains by the release of it now?
Gove through his chum, Dom?
‘[W]hen I went into that garden, just after six on May 20th, 2020, to thank groups and staff before going back into my office 25 minutes later, to continue working, I believed implicitly that this was a work event.’
Bollocks. You are a liar and a coward! Odious little man.
You do realise you are getting angry over a pantomime?
OF COURSE, he’s an odious little man, but no more so than he was last week, before this very public attempt on his political life was perpetrated, by whichever of his political adversaries has orchestrated this.
So you agree with me? I’m angry because of the crimes committed against our people and people everywhere. I’m angry because countless people have been murdered, had their lives ruined, lost their loved ones, their jobs, because of the monstrous decrees of regimes everywhere.
Most of the last two years has been a poxy pantomime. You assume I am suddenly angry. It’s not this latest pantomime that ‘gets me’ angry, rather it is the fact that we have yet another absurd, insulting situation added to the campaign of terror.
I agree those things are definitely the ones to get angry at.
I guess the only point of disagreement is that I resist getting angry over this NOW because I see it not only for the game that it is, but a game played by people that I consider to be far more dangerous than Johnson.
The spotlight on the obscene hypocrisy, the very well planted story about the parent dying alone at the very same time the party is going on, it’s all so orchestrated to extract maximum outrage, I refuse to get drawn into it and play their grotesque game by getting angry about it. It’s what they are looking for and I refuse to give it to them.
Fair enough. It’s important to remember that our side getting angry does not mean we grant the cultist’s position that it was wrong to mix with others. We can be outraged at this story given the harm this regime caused others with the arbitrary decrees it itself chose to ignore, but this doesn’t equate to ‘joining’ the other side.
We should be angry given what Johnson and his mob put our people through. That is a righteous anger.
I think the anger plays right into the hands of the people trying to depose Johnson. It’s the entire play. Sitr up outrage, make the Tories get rid of Johnson and get in someone far less liberal.
It’s not a coincidence that both revelations dredged up from over a year ago came first when the government was resisting Plan B and then when the government is planning to end Plan B.
As if everyone in the conservative party, the labour party, the civil service, the media and on and on didn’t know about these events until now.
They just show time and again how gullible and how easy to manipulate the public is.
It’s a valid point, and I understand your concerns, my friend.
This was the key quote IMHO: “Number 10 is a big department with the garden as an extension of the office which has been in constant use because of the role of fresh air in stopping the virus…”. So if they knew this back then, why was everyone locked in doors? Why were garden/park/seaside meetings broken up and people fined?
The truth is that these restrictions were bollocks then are bollocks now and always will be bollocks. That are preposterous, carping media are on his case now is no excuse whatsoever for not demanding evidence from Bozo, Whitty, Valence and all back then.
Yes. My bollocks detector has been bleeping madly for quite some time now. Gets quite worrying at times – I think I should get someone in, like some kind of engineer maybe, to look at it.
Your bollocks detector has served you well. Don’t fix what isn’t broken.
good advice – visit from engineer cancelled!
I managed to use this event to help a covidian realise he was been fooled.
I carefully explained to him that this happened at the height of the first lockdown when everyone was supposed to be in mortal fear.
If Boris and his chums were happy to have a 100+ piss up at no.10 then it proves they were not afraid of any virus killing them and that they were not afraid of taking a deadly virus home to their loved ones.
The covidian I was talking to seemed to understand this, I think his anger at the situation overwhelmed his usual fear response and allowed his critical thinking skills to operate for the first time in a long time.
Use this opportunity to wake up a covidian today.
Ha ha! It feels extremely disappointing to wake up Covidians with this superficial nonsense though doesn’t it? Oh well, we are dealing with babes in the woods I suppose.
I have tried it countless times with an elderly rellie who is terrified for her life of covid, such a good job has been done on her by the government and BBC etc. Unfortunately it didn’t work.
Some people, 2 years down the line, just cannot be helped. If they can’t see it now they will never see it.
Also tried it with someone I know who works in NHS. Didn’t land with them either.
Brain dead, brainwashed. They will never recover now.
Is it the end for the most lamentably piss poor PM in British political history?
We’ve suffered corruption and meglomania, Blair.
We’ve suffered corruption and paedophilia, Heath (allegedly). We’ve suffered a PM in the pay of the KGB, Wilson (allegedly). We’ve suffered a prime minister that tried to frustrate the biggest mandate in British political history, May.
But we’ve never had such a cretin, who to make matters worse, would appear to be in the pocket of Evil malevolance in the guise of the WEF!
Read, “A nation can survive it’s fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within”
Taylor Caldwell.
A pillar of iron.
Yet the twats that make up the UK voting public will still vote Tory/Labour in their millions at the next GE.
I still don’t get it. The supposed press room leak of Alegra Stratton joking about the restrictions could not have been pre-Christmas, because the refurbished press room didn’t look like that until March the following year.
It would have been trivial for Boris to point this out, and it’s not like he would have forgotten because it was his baby, and in his bloody house.
Why did Boris not point this out?
I was also pretty sceptical about the Matt Hancock affair, that seemed a convenient exit for him when questions were starting to be raised about his sanctioning and facilitating care home genocide with Midazolam. I can’t put my finger on any particular smoking gun, but it seemed too stage managed. Security operations inside the halls of power don’t just get leaked to the press, and with no consequences or investigation.
Is Boris orchestrating a similar stage managed exit?
Whatever it is, I think that the politics of this country are a lot more theatrical than most would be willing to admit, in the same way match fixing runs rampant in professional sports. It’s more like WWE wrestling than a functioning democracy.
It’s orchestrated, but I do not think we have ever seen the conductor.
I too think he is trying to engineer an exit [as was the MH exit also engineered – altho that now seems odd as he is desperately trying to engineer a comeback] which began with the Peppa pig stuff and then the endless news about parties, and now more news about parties. Can’t work out now what is going on but you can bet your bottom dollar something is.
Maybe Mr Toad should stay in office a few more months to lead us out of this mess.
Then he will at least have a few crumbs of a defence case to set against the rest of the shitshow he presided over
Boris has taken part in a truly colossal fraud as part of a globalist coup intended to impose a digital ID social credit dressed up as a covid/vaccine passport.
The jabs themselves are clearly dangerous whilst the economic harm Boris has caused is intended to wreck our monetary system so as to justify the new central bank digital currency.
The extra distressing part is that most other Tories not to mention Labour would have rammed the scheme down our throats sooner, harder and longer than Boris has (so far).
Isnt it pathetic that we have the distinct possibility of a PM being hounded out of office because he stood 1.5m away from someone with a glass of wine in his hand, and yet his position was never in question while he presided over catastrophic policy decision after catastrophic policy decision that killed thousands, bankrupted 10s of thousands and wrecked the education of millions.
Truly the vast majority of people in this country are idiots if they think a party is more important than a 2 year government lead disaster. Im almost tempted to say they deserve what they get if they cant make a simple judgement as to what is and isnt important, but sadly I cant opt out of their stupidity.
So spot on!
Yep spot on. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people are idiots – and thats how they will get away with these crimes. We even have people on here saying they will vote this murderous regime back into office “if it keeps Labour out”. As Littlejohn says, you just cant make it up.
The party is merely the pretext, though.
Obviously most of the people who want him out are:
Labour/Green etc supporters
People who just dislike him
People who support rival candidates for PM
People who think his handling of covid was a disaster because of the panic overreaction
People who think his handling of covid was a disaster because he should have panicked harder (!)
who all want him out anyway and see this as just another pretext.
Perhaps there are a few who genuinely just see this particular incident as determining their view of him as PM, but it seems unlikely there are many of them.
Exactly, and also I would add this tells us they knew Covid wasn’t the plague. They knew it was highly unlikely to carry off healthy people, especially of their age. Had it really been a life threatening illness that was indescriminate, they wouldn’t have even been in the same building – let alone partying in the garden.
Yes, in a nutshell this is it. Well said.
As long as he lifts restrictions in a fortnight Johnson will have a stay of execution. Then I expect him to begin a campaign to blame Cummings, Gove etc for the disaster that was the lockdown policy. That is his route out of this mess and the one I still expect him to take.
I agree.
in a way I don’t mind if he does. he can blame whitty, vallance, ferguson etc for lying to him about ‘the science’
the science actually existed in the 2011 pandemic response plan they threw away
lockdown was a never tried before idea of a collection of half-witted public health morons who somehow got listened to
We’ll find out soon enough if that is how this pantomime has been scripted.
They will never ever acknowledge wrongdoing. It doesnt work like that. They can literally get away with murder simple because they are all in on it and there is no one to hold them to account.
If he brings in more restrictions or extends the current ones, then he is instant toast.
When Boris does finally go it will be noted that he is soon living a lifestyle far in excess of anything that his known assets and income can account for.
The pharma companies, Bill Gates and others will be sure to pay Boris for the service he has rendered.
a lot of people will come out of this pandemic richer than they went in. maybe a windfall tax would be in order
Johnson (not Boris) reminds me of the cowardly Lion from the Wizard of Oz. I wish he would just f**k off! In fact I wish the whole Cabinet would.
He’s certainly not the Wizard!
Wizard’s sleez(v)e (freudian improvement there)
Yawn, another desperate attempt by Cummings et al. to depose BoJo and re-establish the agenda before Davos 2022
Are you actually defending bozo? Do you really think he’s your saviour & somehow if we keep him around, shit won’t get any worse?
I remember what I was doing that week, it was the week of my 40th birthday and one of the first days I was “allowed” out for any reason as opposed to essential reasons.
I rode to the coast and sat on a bench alone, looked out to sea contemplating walking forward and not stopping.
The lowest point in my life, relationship destroyed by lockdown (and my anger at the illogicality and corruptness of it all plus the subsequent deep depression) and with the future looking worse and worse for anyone who valued freedom, while these clowns were getting pissed, lovely.
I’m glad that you decided not to do that Paul.
I would imagine that there are plenty of us on here who would empathise.
I have frequently thought to myself that I kind of half envy all the people just trundling around like ants, “complying with the rules” because they are for the greater good and to keep everyone safe, completely oblivious to all the fraud and corruption and with no idea of what the end goal of all of this.
It has been much harder to cope with it with eyes wide open and knowing how futile and harmful it has all been. So you have my full sympathy.
I agree with you fully. Sometimes I wish I was just a brainwashed fool. My life would certainly be easier.
Our day will come, Paul.
When someone says sorry but, it’s not an apology!
I have a vast volume of experience of this & therefore am an expert. My wife who is never wrong (in her mind) & her apologies never hold any value because they’re always qualified with a yeah but, which always actually resolve her of any responsibility. She hasn’t made an unreserved apology in 35 years.
But even if bozos apology was sincere, it has no meaning unless you believe covie corona discriminates between work & socializing. There can be no excuse for his latest middle finger to his rules.
He was just reading out a script that a focus group had prepared for him. A robot could have done that.
Key thing is that the deadly virus didn’t stop Johnson and mates meeting for beer. Or Pantsdown Ferguson and Hanky Panky Hancock nipping out to shag their mistresses.
Given the unprecedented restrictions on life and liberty that these people are responsible for hypocrisy is WAY down the scale of things for which they should all be brought before a court.
I would like him gone.
BUT, have the 1922 now got him by the short and curlys? If so they might stop him going for net zero. If so its worth keeping a puppet in the seat , but one step out of place and its off with his head.
i loathe him because of lockdown
but is there anyone to replace him?
maybe better keeping him with the backbenchers holding a tight leash
Indeed, just one drastic letter short of the number needed to pull the pin out of the grenade and one false move… will be interesting to see how that pans out in the next couple of months and the climbdowns they can manage to extract if that is the way this plays out. Well spotted Peyrole!
The Global Blob wants Boris out because he has been slow to forcibly jab us. Javid or some other globalist tool will be installed and will do it. This is not to say that Boris isn’t a twat, and a liar, because of course he is. But that is hardly the point.
It doesn’t matter what he thought it was. He clearly wasn’t afraid of covid and that’s the important point.
You can tell it’s important because absolutely no one in the media has mentioned it.
FFS people stop defending bozo as if somehow he’s better than rest he isn’t, orders are passed from above it doesn’t matter whose in no10 the same agenda will be pushed. It doesn’t matter if he stays or goes.
He is worse than the rest and that’s why we need him in place. Let him fuck up the orders from above.
I chuckle at the thought that his incompetence is an asset in the struggle against the globalist cabal!
He only makes himself look like a twat, problem is his bumbling incompetent persona is actually a good cover for nefarious activity.
If there’s an agenda for whatever, it makes no difference if he stays or goes, it’s still gonna happen.
His actions to me demonstrate that despite his psychopathy, he actually is a bumbling incompetent. Look at countries like Italy, Austria, Slovakia, the Netherlands. Does their public realise that Omicron is a mild coof? Not really because they have been locked down and terrorised over winter. Because out of cowardice, the pig dictator hesitated to lockdown, besides a mostly ignorable “plan B”, he has let the majority of the British public start to see the scam for the first time. The seeds of doubt have been sown and that is hopefully irreversible. That’s thanks to his incompetence. In the absence of a potential replacement with integrity and moral strength, let him continue making missteps. Let me make it clear, I hate his guts and I would do things I had never though I was capable of if I was locked in a room with him. But the pragmatic route is to hope he stays where he is.
Bozo can
1 – apologise for lockdowns
2 – blame everyone else
3 – introduce a law which gives the death penalty for supporting lockdowns
4 – apply that law retrospectively (as they did at Nuremberg I)
“3 – introduce a law which gives the death penalty for supporting lockdowns
4 – apply that law retrospectively (as they did at Nuremberg I)”
Well he could try, but for victor’s justice you first need a victory with “unconditional surrender”, and those who pushed for the covid panic are still in place to vote down any such measures.
Gove would have lockdown for five million years and Keir Starmer would scream that Gove hasn’t gone far enough.
“ anger and grief at the sacrifices they made during the strict lockdowns he imposed.”
Where there are sacrifices, it stands to reason there is a collector of sacrifices.
“Yet the test should be so simple: just listen to any prophet and if you hear him speak of sacrifice – run. Run faster than from a plague. It stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there’s someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master.
But if you ever hear a man telling you that you must be happy, that it’s your natural right, that your first duty is to yourself – that will be the man who has nothing to gain from you. But let him come and you’ll scream your empty heads off, howling that he’s a selfish monster.”
He’s a dishonest unprincipled sack of ****. However we should be under no doubt that this ‘party’ campaign is being driven by Gove. And he’s doing it because this is the last chance for the Zero Covid lunatics. Every day that Loathsome Johnson stays in place weakens the Zero Covid agenda. He’s vile, but the alternative is far worse, and it’s the alternative who is driving these stories.
^^^^^
THIS
It does smell so much of Gove and the chum who rescued his career, Cummings.
The backstabber and key zealot in chief.
What a bunch of chancers, charlatans, and thieves they all are.
Ye Gods, what a choice of alternatives to Mr Toad!
So a work meeting for 100 boozers would have been covvie safe, would it?
odd that, when you think of the fact that vaxx passports mean I can sit all day in a coffee shop without presenting a danger to anyone, but cannot so much as put one toe in the door of licensed premises of any kind and I become some kind of dangerous covid spreader.
Perhaps I should now write to my devolved govt and point out to them the preventive powers of booze!!!! and that they have got it all wrong and PM says so.
What chance the replacement is one of ‘our’ rebels?
If so, who? Brady?
Ideal
As if it was only Pfeffel de Fat Fuk who was partying. Do we really believe the privileged Notting Hill Labour camp were sitting at home alone twiddling their thumbs?
Or that the corrupt journalists who are running a mock weren’t getting together to celebrate 50th birthday parties (*cough* Kay Burley *cough*).
The only reason I don’t see the scientists flouting their rules is because they’re usually very antisocial people anyway, with the exception of Prof Pantsdown.
It’s blatantly obvious this is a campaign to install someone who will crush us with restrictions and jabs.
Approach with caution….
Even Whitty’s imaginary friend didn’t visit him.
“I believed implicitly that this was a work event.”
So work at No10 is always a byo affair?
It indicates he never does any work. Which indicates the past 2 years would have been even worse if he had done.
The general principle of good government:
Don’t just do something, stand there.
Johnson has been fairly slapdash so far, guidelines have been his thing. It has depended on what Council you have, whether the rules are supported rigorously or not, not down to Johnson. They knew Covid was never a danger, I’ve worn a lanyard to go inside places and never caught anything.
The Right Dishonourable Boris Johnson is a pathological liar and will only ever apologise when he has been caught out (and apologies from those that lie constantly are meaningless). Boris lacks all integrity and any modicum of morality. If the Conservative Party does not remove him then it’s curtains for them. Let’s hope for a liberal-conservative replacement or things could get a lot worse than they already are (and I fear that could be part of the plan).
Signs of sociopathy are continued lying and thinking rules apply to others but not you.
yeah the keep him in place as lesser of evils strategy will only work so long as Tories aren’t being harmed in the electoral polls. With council elections in months, unless I’m wrong, then there could be more of an impetus to get rid of him and a clean broom in place
… and he still brought a Secret Santa present to a work meeting? What?
Boris lied on the floor of Commons.
Jack Profumo did too, and willingly resigned because he knew he’d done so. Not a day in his life went by that he didn’t feel remorse for the disgrace he’d brought on himself. He devoted the rest of his life to penance at Toynbee Hall.
Boris never will, not in any form, but that’s not the problem.
The problem is cultural.
Profumo’s and Churchill’s generations understood honor. Today’s doesn’t. It’s wrapped up in “celebrity-ism”. Boris and Donald go to prove it.
“Great” Britain no longer is, and the idea of re-making America without changing its libertine culture is just as fraudulent.
(I wager that half the commenters on this blog only remember the Guardian’s obituary for Jack Profumo — not the Telegraph’s. … Damn you.)
The outrage at this is misdirected. Yes, Boris broke his own rules, but they are rules that the government had no business making in the first place. The ire should be directed against the whole sham and at the government acting ultra vires by imposing this tyranny.
The smirking git .I really dont care what he says he is still a Cnut Pig Dictator and should be admiring the view from a lamppost ASAP…
I don’t have a problem with someone partying. They probably realised that, based on their risk profiles, the party wasn’t a big deal.
The problem was that they had imposed rules on the country that didn’t make sense.
I just do what most sensible people do in these mad times. If the rules don’t pass the sniff test for common sense then ignore them. Just, try and avoid getting fined, arrested, jailed or screamed at in the streets for doing so.
As pointed out in that last sentence, rejoicing over Mr Toad’s discomfiture is premature. There are plenty of total shits waiting to succeed him, with a knapsack of initial ‘credibility’.
All that has happened is that the Tories have put him (using these leaks) into a position where pulling the plug is easy when judged appropriate.
He’s a congenial liar. Don’t you mean ‘congenital liar?’
No, he’s very nice about it.
The Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation never misses a chance to defend Johnson. This is a sure sign that Johnson is not who he claims to be.
When you have BBC reporters like Rachel Schraer on your side, you are neither a British Conservative nor a British patriot. Schraer touts herself as a senior reporter for BBC News with the specialist remit of covering health and disinformation.
Below is a screenshot of a tweet by Schraer. To see what a vile creature she is, take a look at the first eleven words of this tweet: “I debunked the idea vitamin D is a miracle Covid cure …”
“Debunked”, “Vitamin D”, “Covid”? This is a blatant psychological ploy to instil in the reader’s minds that vitamin D has negligible advantages in regards to protecting them against Covid.
This is not just immoral. It’s criminal for Schraer to use her position of influence to suggest to impressionable people that vitamin D is of no consequence in defending them against the COVID-19 virus.
Here’s a link to a clinical trial which shows vitamin D to protect against being infected with viruses:
There are 48 words in Schraer’s tweet, and this would be too long of a read for the majority of Twitter users – especially the type of users that follow BBC vermin like Schraer. There’s copious amounts of evidence to the very short attention spans of many cyberspace citizens.
We’ve all seen the texts, essays, articles, etc., which have “this is a 4- or 2- or 6-minute read” just under the introductory title. Then there’s the many news and blog sites that put a bullet-pointed compendiary at the beginning of their articles in an attempt to concisely sum-up in a 2-minute read what they are putting across in the main article.
Many cyberspace bozos can only stretch as far as ingesting a text that is no longer than a dozen words.
I suspect that halfwitted Schraer is far from being clever enough to be capable of utilising or understanding sly psychology wording such as is used in her tweets. I’d wager the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation has professional propagandists that instructs this senior reporter in how to word and lay out her tweets and other articles she purports to create.
I said Schraer is halfwitted? Take a look at the profile picture she uses on Twitter. It’s puerile and denotes the mentality of that type of internet troll with a personality disorder that sits in his/her bedroom all day everyday looking online for something to get agitated about.
Tie this in with the way Schraer can’t be bothered to use full stops in her tweets. And how she couldn’t even be bothered to use the correct spacing in the email address she displays in her twitter profile.
There are no if’s or but’s, Schraer is thick and dumb. In her twitter profile she asks people to send her things to investigate and to send details about these “things” to this email address: rachel.schraer@bbc.co.uk.
This woman is a fool. So, perhaps she should investigate how fools get to be senior reporters for the UK’s national broadcaster. As for Johnson, with senior reporters like the halfwitted Schraer, he’s on the pig’s back.
The halfwit with the bullhorn ⇓⇓
Will Jones, whoever replaces Boris Johnson will continue to follow the Agenda.
I don’t hate what he has done but the hypocrisy grates.
THIS is what we all should have been doing.
Yes, when some petty jobsworth stops us from doing something we can’t do much about it, but when I hear educated professionals – who can read, who know there’s exemptions that they could have got around- whining that they couldn’t see their elderly parents in lockdown when they all lived in their own homes and isn’t Boris awful blah! I think they are prats and if they were my children I ‘d disown them and ask where did I go wrong in raising children who cared more for some abstract ‘greater good’ than me.
But the stay home holier than thou pious types get off on self-sacrifice. I loathe the lot of them.
This ties in with the recent gaslighting “walkback” in the media IMO.
It gives people an irrelevant focus for their “rage”, a useless rage outlet to let off steam.
Does eveybody feel better now Boris has been called a naughty boy…
He is a person who was in the right place at the right time to deal with Brexit. We all knew Boris, what he was and was not. Why do we feign surprise and anger when he acts with such predictability. Bring him down, nail him to a cross……….nothing has changed.
I don’t want Boris to apologise for having a few beers in a garden with his mates. It shows, clearly, that he and his government never believed the abusive restrictions imposed on us were necessary or proportionate: he should apologise for that abuse.
The clubhouse is rotten and needs burning down.
The thing with “rage” is that it is often inchoate, or worse, impotent. I am not filled with rage, Prime Minister, but fury. And believe me, as we approach the first anniversary of my 87-year-old mother’s sad and lonely death, I know exactly where to direct it.
As I said yesterday, I don’t care that Johnson went to a party, or that Hancock groped his mistress in his office, or that Ferguson’s bit on the side made a “booty call” to him; all while the rest of us were being locked up, locked down, and beaten over the head with fear porn. Yes, it was all gross hypocrisy, but what really bugs me is that while they were doing these things, they were not the least bit afraid.
Not afraid of being caught (at least not immediately), not afraid of being ill, not afraid of catching covid, not afraid of taking it home, not afraid of passing it on to anyone. And not afraid of troubling the sainted NHS either.
Not afraid. Not afraid because they knew there was no reason to be afraid, despite what they told the rest of us.
That is what Johnson and co should apologise for. They terrified and conned the British people, ruined lives and businesses, and took no responsibility for their actions. We need justice for that.
Spot on! This government, with Johnson at its head unleashed a psychological war of terror on the British people. The damage that this did and continues to do is incalculable and unforgivable. Taxi for Johnson and all his cronies in the Nudge Unit as well as SAGE. Next step legal action to bring them to account.
Number 10 is a big department with the garden as an extension of the office, which has been in constant use because of the role of fresh air in stopping the virus.
Ahhh, fresh air you say? Good environment you say? Hmm, weren’t we largely confined to quarters? Wasn’t being out in the open a naughty thing to be doing outside your alloted exercise period?
Drones deployed by the plod in national parks etc.
This is all very confusing to a pleb such as me.
City parks were closed so that you couldn’t exercise or – heaven forbid – ‘gather’ in the fresh air. People sitting on a beach constituted a ‘major incident’. Children’s playgrounds were padlocked. Wankok threatened to lock everybody up 24/7 if anybody attempted to spend more than thirty minutes a day outside their homes.
Hypocrisy is the compliment vice pays to virtue.
Or so I’ve been told by some French guy.
La Rochefoucauld. He knew a thing or two.
Not only should Johnson go, but also the fellow clowns at the ‘party’. This is rank hypocrisy and disregard for the general public, the very people whose taxes would have funded this soiree…
Could we now encourager les autres, Bozo?
When Johnson goes, it will be more crappy soap opera. I predict that it will play out with Johnson in the 1945 Churchill role; the saviour of the nation and warrior sans pareil, ousted by an ungrateful nation and leftist elements. Pathos, bathos and loads of hankies required.
I disagree, because he did nothing and deserves nothing.
Watched the speech in catchup on YouTube. Two words, really:
Absolutely pathetic.
OK. Three words: add ‘cringeworthy’.
Not all MP’s are Globalist puppets it would seem, well said madam.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1481277683329814535
Why print an image of the actress faking severe Covid?
“Things can only get better” for us sceptics and bloody lousy for the political classes…The Labour Party used the song as a theme during the party’s successful campaign in the general election of 1997.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/scientists-believed-covid-leaked-from-wuhan-lab-but-feared-debate-could-hurt-international-harmony/ar-AASG7l3?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/bbc-fury-absolutely-disgraceful-viewers-fume-at-biased-reporting-of-boris-s-party/ar-AASGXZX?ocid=msedgntp
and a bit off-topic does anyone in or near Birmingham want a Freebie…
https://nationalrunningshowbirmingham.seetickets.com/event/national-running-show-birmingham/nec/1528137?OfferCode=LATEST
So: it’s back to the old chestnut: cock-up or conspiracy?
My take is that Lord Tyrannus was just a Nero figure: he was personally lazy, incompetent, and work-shy. So it WASN’T cock-up: because he left government on auto-pilot with civil servants and underlings. He had virtually no input or interest is the ‘pandemic’. He honestly doesn’t know what’s been going on – nor does he care. He didn’t ‘make mistakes’ so much as never do anything at all.
Was it a conspiracy we witnessed, then? To the extent that a normal PM would have ignored or steered the country away from creeps like Gates, Schwab, etc. – the fact that the lockdowns and other policies were enacted suggests the PM’s laziness was NOT operative in AVOIDING the globalists machinations. Those policies seeped in through channels such as contracts, back-handers, and naive junior staff scrambling for ‘approaches’.
In short: Tyrannus FAILED at cock-up and he FAILED at conspiracy.
De facto, we witnessed both – BY DEFAULT.
Will the pig dictator be apologising for not following the well researched and documented national procedures for dealing with a viral pandemic?
These procedures were ignored and thrown in the bin by Doris and co, created hysteria, panic and fear as they made up “regulations” on the fly. The international and national procedures don’t mention lockdowns, mass vaccination (as the procedures knew you cannot just knock out a vaccine for a virus), anti social distancing etc.
I wont be holding my breath for any apology on this fiasco.
These people in Cabinet Office are going to be the best informed on the impact of Covid and the effectiveness of protections in the country.
If I really thought that going to a maskless knees-up would risk me dying a horrible death, then I certainly would not turn up. And yet they all did.
Either they all want to commit suicide, OR they are well aware that the advice and direction that they give is untrue, and they were not in any real danger.
I wonder why no newspaper wants to mention this bit of logical reasoning?
Dodgy Geezer you have hit the nail on the head. At the time the government was telling us that if we dared to meet up with other people for anything other than an essential purpose then Covid was certain to strike us all dead. So as you say either they were all suicidal or knew or (as we lockdown sceptics all suspected) that what they were spouting at the time was total bollocks. In which case they should be rapidly brought to book for the untold damage they have done to this country.
Those in power are never punished for their wrong doings…..they are always, always rewarded and rewarded heavily. This country has been truly corrupted since joining a socialist political project controlled by ex nazis and the American Globalists
The grotesque hypocrisy is the lesser issue. They didn’t believe in the medical value of the perverted behaviours they were imposing on everyone else. The Lockdown was performative.
And the booze. I think we are governed by drug addicts and alcoholics. Whoever gets to bring their own booze to a work meeting…..I thought there were laws now about drinking at work. It seems to me there has and always will be one rule for the elite socialist cabal and another for those who pay for their lifestyles.
Don’t be a fool & get distracted from the main point this proves : that they knew all along that it wasn’t dangerous . That’s the revelation here . They knew people wouldn’t be dropping dead like flies . They knew
Better the devil you know imo.
Apart from the rule-breaking/bending, it demonstrates that Johnson and Chums were LYING when they repeatedly told us that we had to remain isolated in order to keep safe and protect our loved ones. They knew the virus was only deadly to a tiny percentage of very elderly and already sick people. If they really thought associating with groups of other people was so risky to their own pampered, privileged lives they’d never have done it.
Thousands of people will remember precisely what they were doing ….. or more importantly NOT ALLOWED TO DO on 20 May 2020.
He won’t do the decent thing; he doesn’t understand the meaning of the word. The 1922 are going to have to dispose of him.
Prof Neil Ferguson, Dominic Cummings and Matt Hancock did far worse and they were all lockdown zealots. Hypocricy appears to be a modern political trait as is the fear of getting found out. If Boris has to go it should be because he locked the nation down without good reason. That is and remains his and indeed the entire political class’s main crime against the population. Will we ever get an apology for that?
If it was a business meeting how come Boris’ squeeze was in attendance? Where is the formal agenda and the minutes?….every business meeting I ever attended had minutes…..and no wives/husbands or girl/boyfriends in attendance.
Hmmm, this whole shenanigans this past two years has been so convoluted a part of me wonders whether the partying scenarios and constant ‘naughty boy’ activities are Boris’ only way of showing us the ‘virus’ is no big deal; in which case, pretty clever of him. But I know I’m being the eternal optimist.
Boris could rescue himself and the Conservative Party AND the country AND even the world if he did the following:
That is enough to be going on with. Cancellation of HS2, IR35, Green rip offs, Woke infiltration and so forth can wait. For a bit, but not long.
Why do people keep mis-spelling Wanker as Boris?
Can we have an appropriate spelling for BBC journalists? I am sitting in a cafe being forced to listen to BBC News 24, 20 mins on Boris, 10 mins on NHS backlog ( which they caused themselves) and now the BBC is banging on about the loss of Van Tam. Good riddance I say but when did actual news coverage become redundant? It is clearly just a branch of showbusiness the down market variety I mean.
Boris is a liar and unfit to be PM. He is also unfit on other counts such as his subservience to the globalists and imposition of policies derived from their “green” nonsense. We need rid.
Gut reaction is that Boris deserves all that is coming to him but, at the same time, I have this gnawing fear that this comment in the DM may possibly be of more relevance:
“It is quite clear the ‘Party Scandal’ is a political hatchet job cooked up to get rid of Boris. They want rid of Boris because he is not following the script with regard to Covid-19 restrictions. 1 – this party was nearly 2 years ago. How come we are hearing about it now if 100 people attended? 2 – it comes out less than 1 week after Boris states we will have to live with the virus and lays out a plan to return to normal despite almost every other nation (including Wales and Scotland) moving to continue restrictions”
Looking at the variance between England’s approach and that of other countries, despite clear evidence that the virus is in retreat, I cannot shake the feeling that maybe Boris was resisting as much as possible while those really in control have no intention of allowing us to think we are returning to ‘normal’.
I agree – I’ve voiced that concern myself, why now? However its looking like the Plandemic is coming to an end for now, unless they manufacture another one!
“The World Health Organization said in a statement that a vaccination strategy based on repeated booster doses of the original COVID-19 vaccines is unlikely to be appropriate or sustainable.
Recognizing the inability of the shots to stop the spread, the U.N. health agency said future vaccines against COVID-19 must “be more effective in protection against infection thus lowering community transmission.”
The eyes have it.