David Cameron.

Ask not what you can do for your country but what your country can do for you.

£7 million, ker-ching. Sleaze-bag, good for nothing, piece of garbage.
 
As for as the gravy train of parliament and the establishment this is peanuts. Lobbying,directorships etc are the reason most of them are there.
 
Shandypants said:
You can, its very easy. He went to Eton, consequently has had all the right connections all his life, born into privilege to rule over us plebs. That's the system he's an idiot, but the working voters who vote for the likes of him are bigger idiots.
Click to expand...
I’d like to be a £7 million pound idiot.
 
Shandypants said:
You can, its very easy. He went to Eton, consequently has had all the right connections all his life, born into privilege to rule over us plebs. That's the system he's an idiot, but the working voters who vote for the likes of him are bigger idiots.
Click to expand...
Condescending t...t!!
 
I Can’t predict the future Shandypants. I will vote how I see fit at the time....it’s called democratic choice. Hindsight may prove an incorrect decision. I can respect your right to an opinion but I cannot respect your reference to me as an idiot. Nothing whatsoever to do with acceptance of the truth.
 
Yet another old boys network individual who got in to politics because it was something to do.

What do Cameron or Johnston actually believe in?
 
Politicans believe in whatever policy will enhance their careers and make them and their friends richer
which is usually at the cost of the British public.
 
Shandypants said:
I wasn't a fan of Tony Blair, I always found him a slimey git but looking back he was top drawer compared to these two.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be a fan of Blair either but if Labour are serious about getting in to power it might be an idea to get rid of Starmer and put Blair back in.

Blair was on telly only the other week explaining that Labour must appeal to people who previously voted Tory if they are to gain power and must adopt policies in line with that.

All very simplistic but to be honest, I'm not sure Starmer understands that.
 
Shandypants said:
I wasn't a fan of Tony Blair, I always found him a slimey git but looking back he was top drawer compared to these two.
Click to expand...
Tony Blair is a very wealthy man. Keir Starmer is a Sir. Can you honestly say these are labour people? Keir Starmer has lost touch with reality.
 
tangerine.com said:
Tony Blair is a very wealthy man. Keir Starmer is a Sir. Can you honestly say these are labour people? Keir Starmer has lost touch with reality.
Click to expand...
Winston Churchill was a paid up member of the Labour Party for 10 years till he came over to the right side.
 
tangerine.com said:
Tony Blair is a very wealthy man. Keir Starmer is a Sir. Can you honestly say these are labour people? Keir Starmer has lost touch with reality.
Click to expand...
Just because you are wealthy doesn't mean you don't believe in a fair society, higher taxes and better public services. I would have thought anyone with a shred of decency would believe in that.
 
No he was never a Labour MP but he paid his subs as a member of the Labour Party same as Joe Bloggs bus driver etc.
 
Memphisboy said:
He’s not allowed to work then after he’s left office? Also think you’ll find Blair has pocketed a lot more than 7 million.
Click to expand...
Your question is a rhetorical way of saying that he is allowed to work after leaving office. Answer, yes. Is he allowed to use his Parliamentary position to advantage a private company in which he has shares? No. Should he be using that preferential position to benefit a company that is behaving secretively against the interests of its investors? No.
 
I said when he called the ref that he was on a win-win. A stay vote and he'd be back in control of the party, a leave and he'd make a fortune from speeches in the US and books.

He's a creep.
 
Reading the comments on here is certainly interesting, how anyone can make excuses for either Cameron or Blair is beyond me. Both I'm all right Jack, sod you politicians, up to their necks in controversy and sleaze.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Your question is a rhetorical way of saying that he is allowed to work after leaving office. Answer, yes. Is he allowed to use his Parliamentary position to advantage a private company in which he has shares? No. Should he be using that preferential position to benefit a company that is behaving secretively against the interests of its investors? No.
Click to expand...
He is no longer in Parliament which is why he thinks he can get away with it. No need to declare interests or extra-Parliamentary income anymore. Even the parliamentary committee said he had not broken any rules though he had been unwise. But he has proven to be a sleazy fecker taking Greensill’s cash without even bothering to check on its dodgy, rather incompetent business practices.

“What, what, eh fellah, you want to borrow £350 million (of other investors’ money) with repayment security based on the non-existent collateral of fictitious invoices from companies which have never ever been your customers? Fine, fine, old chap, as long as I collect my 10% non-refundable commission, what, eh ! Spiffing ! The government will carry the can. What’s that, the whole caboodle has gone down the toilet ? Shame, still, I’m out of here. ”
 
Last edited:
Archibald Knox said:
He is no longer in Parliament which is why he thinks he can get away with it. No need to declare interests or extra-Parliamentary income anymore. Even the parliamentary committee said he had not broken any rules though he had been unwise. But he has proven to be a sleazy fecker taking Greensill’s cash without even bothering to check on its dodgy, rather incompetent business practices.

“What, what, eh fellah, you want to borrow £350 million (of other investors’ money) with repayment based on the non-existent collateral of fictitious invoices from companies which have never ever been your customers? Fine, fine, old chap, as long as I collect my 10% non-refundable commission, what, eh ! Spiffing ! The government will carry the can. What’s that, the whole caboodle has gone down the toilet ? Shame, still, I’m out of here. ”
Click to expand...
What’s that, the whole caboodle has gone down the toilet ? Shame, still, I’m out of here.

See also, Brexit.
 
Surely what Cameron was doing is 'criminal'?
Isn't it against the law to try to use Parliament as a way to increase your assets?
 
Davepick said:
Surely what Cameron was doing is 'criminal'?
Isn't it against the law to try to use Parliament as a way to increase your assets?
Click to expand...
He wasn’t using Parliament as such. He was using his political contacts to pressure (“lobby”) government ministers to do him a favour and look favourably on his employer and give it multi-million loans or grants. Anyone can do that, it may be sleazy but it’s not illegal. This is how the old boy network functions - the current ministers were expected to look after Cameron just as they expect their successors to look after them. It’s ingrained from Eton, Oxbridge and thereafter. And nothing is written down so proving corruption is not easy.
 
Last edited:
Churchill was always a Liberal, just fell out with them over NI so stropped across the floor, he was never a Tory really.
 
But Churchill started out as a Tory, ratted to become a Liberal and then reratted to be a Tory again. I would not call his actions and attitudes during the General Strike of 1926 that of a Liberal. And that’s without considering his First World War decisions in which he happily sacrificed thousands of the working class. Better to describe him as an imperialist running dog of capitalism since that was his overriding dogma.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top