Pebble wrote: ↑24 Jan 2022, 8:47am
Will you all be accepting Sue Grey's report as fact, or will you only be accepting it if it confirms your own preconceived beliefs ?
The terms of reference for the investigation are being played.
Johnson's line will be "cleared of illegality so accept apology and move on"
Gray report does not have assessment of legal position in terms of reference, so this conclusion is inevitable.
Gray report is largely irrelevant in terms of Johnson's position: we already know from his own statements that he was clearly in breach of the rules as understood by the country at the time.
So, I'd absolutely accept facts of Gray report, but absolutely not accept Johnson interpretation of it.
Agreed.
"Fact" and "truth" aren't simple concepts. I'm not expecting any deliberate lies in what's produced. There may be important omissions. And the short form obviously can't be "the whole truth".
The inquiry was flawed from the start. And won't be the end of this.
Pebble wrote: ↑24 Jan 2022, 8:47am
Will you all be accepting Sue Grey's report as fact, or will you only be accepting it if it confirms your own preconceived beliefs ?
The terms of reference for the investigation are being played.
Johnson's line will be "cleared of illegality so accept apology and move on"
Gray report does not have assessment of legal position in terms of reference, so this conclusion is inevitable.
Gray report is largely irrelevant in terms of Johnson's position: we already know from his own statements that he was clearly in breach of the rules as understood by the country at the time.
So, I'd absolutely accept facts of Gray report, but absolutely not accept Johnson interpretation of it.
Agreed.
"Fact" and "truth" aren't simple concepts. I'm not expecting any deliberate lies in what's produced. There may be important omissions. And the short form obviously can't be "the whole truth".
The inquiry was flawed from the start. And won't be the end of this.
My nine-year old granddaughter was here playing games with me with the telly news on in the background. It's amazing what children pick up when they don't appear to be listening. Out of nowhere, she asked if Boris Johnson was still the prime minister: she'd heard on Newsround that he'd been accused of lying. Not an easy thing to explain to an inquisitive child.
thirdcrank wrote: ↑24 Jan 2022, 11:35am
My nine-year old granddaughter was here playing games with me with the telly news on in the background. It's amazing what children pick up when they don't appear to be listening. Out of nowhere, she asked if Boris Johnson was still the prime minister: she'd heard on Newsround that he'd been accused of lying. Not an easy thing to explain to an inquisitive child.
thirdcrank wrote: ↑24 Jan 2022, 11:35am
My nine-year old granddaughter was here playing games with me with the telly news on in the background. It's amazing what children pick up when they don't appear to be listening. Out of nowhere, she asked if Boris Johnson was still the prime minister: she'd heard on Newsround that he'd been accused of lying. Not an easy thing to explain to an inquisitive child.
Pebble wrote: ↑24 Jan 2022, 8:47am
Will you all be accepting Sue Grey's report as fact, or will you only be accepting it if it confirms your own preconceived beliefs ?
Her report will only be the facts Johnson allows.
I will accept the truth from an independent enquiry.
thirdcrank wrote: ↑24 Jan 2022, 11:35am
My nine-year old granddaughter was here playing games with me with the telly news on in the background. It's amazing what children pick up when they don't appear to be listening. Out of nowhere, she asked if Boris Johnson was still the prime minister: she'd heard on Newsround that he'd been accused of lying. Not an easy thing to explain to an inquisitive child.
A five year old speaks:
Psalms 8:2?
Jonathan
Psalm 8:2 indeed!
She also said "and he had to go to the naughty centre" how right she is,and a correct description of the House of Commons!
Last edited by reohn2 on 24 Jan 2022, 5:46pm, edited 1 time in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
I don't remember anything in the lockdown laws saying social get togethers/parties where you only attend for 10 mins were OK. Did I miss section in the rules?
Psamathe wrote: ↑24 Jan 2022, 8:02pm
I don't remember anything in the lockdown laws saying social get togethers/parties where you only attend for 10 mins were OK. Did I miss section in the rules?
Ian
Maybe that section was redacted to protect the public
I think the parties at no.10 are nothing compared to the crimes committed by this government forcing care homes to take in known covid-19 infected patients using the threat of funding being withdrawn if they refused. When he does get the boot I hope criminal proceedings start against him wrt to his treatment of care homes.
"As with all internal investigations, if during the course of the work any evidence emerges of behaviour that is potentially a criminal offence, the matter will be referred to the police and the Cabinet Office’s work may be paused."
Jdsk wrote: ↑25 Jan 2022, 10:38am"As with all internal investigations, if during the course of the work any evidence emerges of behaviour that is potentially a criminal offence, the matter will be referred to the police and the Cabinet Office’s work may be paused."
Jonathan
Met Police certainly took their time and dragged their feet and despite there being public confessions from the PM.
almost designed to give Johnson a bit longer to pressure MPs not to oust him. And Ms Dick seems to have a lot of political support from Conservatives (who allowed her extra time in post recently so there is a political element here ...)