Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

Damian Green sacked.

13

Comments

  • Options

    Carter said:

    I used to think politicians, whilst being lying , philandering parasites were intelligent people.

    Now, I hate the phrase people use "If I'd have done that I'd have been sacked" because it's usually bollocks.

    However, I've seen more people removed from the payroll at my place for the misuse of a work computer than for anything else over the last 20 years. And I don't work in an industry dominated by geniuses, nor is my laptop paid for by people's income tax, nor have I ever been so moronic as to look at anything that could get me in a situation that could lead to me answering questions about something like "why have you got 10,000 hours of Hungarian dwarf porn on your work laptop"

    What a fucking dickhead, what an utter idiot and one that proves to me how disconnected this bloke is from the real world when surely even a chimp would know not to do anything deviant on a work tool.

    Then there is the issue of the copper doing this search under a law that exists to prevent terrorism and then deciding to keep hold of the evidence from what was effectively a private job. This also calls into question whether or not this smut was planted on Greens PC.

    He denies downloading or viewing the porn on his computer. Have you reason to believe there is evidence that proves 100% that he is lying?
    The 2nd policeman sho went to the BBC last month said that the images were on Damien Greens computer,that was in his room, which was locked when he wasn't in there. It was also found that the browsing history was "sandwiched" between emails that Damian Green had been receiving & replying to at the time. I think in the realms of "reasonable doubt" that if I was on a jury, I would have no qualms of finding him guilty. No-one can ever be 100% sure, but the evidence (as the policeman gave it) was pretty damning.
    A number of MPs have confirmed that they share their user ID and passwords with the staff who work in their office.
    It’s a plausible if unsatisfactory excuse which is convenient for him. However the police officers who broke the news have stated that the pornographic browsing element of the computer interrogations conducted found that porn sites were visited between the sending and confirmed receipt of e mails. It was also conducted in a private sole use office which was locked when not used by DG.

    I certainly have a lot of respect for the balls of the individual on Greens staff who obviously let himself into that office. Plonked himself down into the bosses chair and set about knocking one out. Tidied himself up and hid the evidence from his Minister. Quite a smooth operator. It’s a shame we don’t know his identity. He would make an ideal Brexit lead and being a wanker would fit right in.

    I do feel that Damian Green is jinxed though. How on earth did his private e mail address get onto the Ashley Maddison data base ? The office wanking mole really did have it in for his boss.

    If only Sherlock Holmes was available to come up with another theory.



    His e.mail address appearing on the leaked Ashley Maddison files is no one's business except his and his wife's. Unless you were a creepy religious judgemental prick, or the editor of the Sun, why would anyone want to comment and speculate about the sex life of a minister or MP in this day and age?z

    Do you really think you have the right to judge and comment on whether another citizen has sex with someone other than his wife or whether he indulges in masturbation?
  • Options
    Old Bill finally got their man, a politician telling porkies - surely not
  • Options

    Two separate issues here.

    One is the extremely questionable actions by the police officers in releasing confidential information regarding the contents of Greens House of Commons computer gained under an official enquiry. They should be investigated and if appropriate be taken before the courts.

    Two is the fact that regardless of how the information came into the public domain it is there. You can’t put that genie back into the bottle. Green as is his absolute right has continued to deny viewing the porn. It’s certain that we will never know the truth behind that. What is certain though is that the Deputy Prime Minister lied that he had knowledge of the porn on his computer. Twice. He is a liar.

    It is not appropriate for a minister of state to be a proven liar when looking to protect his image.

    He could very easily have said I knew about the allegations but as I deny the images were viewed by me I don’t think it’s important. He didn’t. For reasons only he knows he looked to deceive his parliamentary colleagues and the nation.

    On that basis he had to go. He is a liar.

    The fact that they are all liars when it suits is neither here nor there. He lied to protect his image.

    I agree 100% with everything you have written in that post. But in addition I could not give a shit if he downloaded or viewed legal porn on his computer. As far as I am aware he does not promote himself as some sort of evangelical Christian politician. It is completely trivial compared to police mishandling of data recovered in the course of an investigation.
    He shouldn't be fiddling with porn on his work computer. What legal activity he does on his own time with his own equipment is his business.

    Regardless of that, he shouldn't have lied, and it was a stupid lie. Once he lied, I've no problem with the copper calling him out on it irrespective
    of how the information was obtained.
  • Options

    Carter said:

    I used to think politicians, whilst being lying , philandering parasites were intelligent people.

    Now, I hate the phrase people use "If I'd have done that I'd have been sacked" because it's usually bollocks.

    However, I've seen more people removed from the payroll at my place for the misuse of a work computer than for anything else over the last 20 years. And I don't work in an industry dominated by geniuses, nor is my laptop paid for by people's income tax, nor have I ever been so moronic as to look at anything that could get me in a situation that could lead to me answering questions about something like "why have you got 10,000 hours of Hungarian dwarf porn on your work laptop"

    What a fucking dickhead, what an utter idiot and one that proves to me how disconnected this bloke is from the real world when surely even a chimp would know not to do anything deviant on a work tool.

    Then there is the issue of the copper doing this search under a law that exists to prevent terrorism and then deciding to keep hold of the evidence from what was effectively a private job. This also calls into question whether or not this smut was planted on Greens PC.

    He denies downloading or viewing the porn on his computer. Have you reason to believe there is evidence that proves 100% that he is lying?
    The 2nd policeman sho went to the BBC last month said that the images were on Damien Greens computer,that was in his room, which was locked when he wasn't in there. It was also found that the browsing history was "sandwiched" between emails that Damian Green had been receiving & replying to at the time. I think in the realms of "reasonable doubt" that if I was on a jury, I would have no qualms of finding him guilty. No-one can ever be 100% sure, but the evidence (as the policeman gave it) was pretty damning.
    A number of MPs have confirmed that they share their user ID and passwords with the staff who work in their office.
    So, Green works on his emails, passed the computer over to someone else for a bit of porn surfing, takes it back and continues with his emails? And the three bears.
  • Options

    Carter said:

    I used to think politicians, whilst being lying , philandering parasites were intelligent people.

    Now, I hate the phrase people use "If I'd have done that I'd have been sacked" because it's usually bollocks.

    However, I've seen more people removed from the payroll at my place for the misuse of a work computer than for anything else over the last 20 years. And I don't work in an industry dominated by geniuses, nor is my laptop paid for by people's income tax, nor have I ever been so moronic as to look at anything that could get me in a situation that could lead to me answering questions about something like "why have you got 10,000 hours of Hungarian dwarf porn on your work laptop"

    What a fucking dickhead, what an utter idiot and one that proves to me how disconnected this bloke is from the real world when surely even a chimp would know not to do anything deviant on a work tool.

    Then there is the issue of the copper doing this search under a law that exists to prevent terrorism and then deciding to keep hold of the evidence from what was effectively a private job. This also calls into question whether or not this smut was planted on Greens PC.

    He denies downloading or viewing the porn on his computer. Have you reason to believe there is evidence that proves 100% that he is lying?
    The 2nd policeman sho went to the BBC last month said that the images were on Damien Greens computer,that was in his room, which was locked when he wasn't in there. It was also found that the browsing history was "sandwiched" between emails that Damian Green had been receiving & replying to at the time. I think in the realms of "reasonable doubt" that if I was on a jury, I would have no qualms of finding him guilty. No-one can ever be 100% sure, but the evidence (as the policeman gave it) was pretty damning.
    A number of MPs have confirmed that they share their user ID and passwords with the staff who work in their office.
    It’s a plausible if unsatisfactory excuse which is convenient for him. However the police officers who broke the news have stated that the pornographic browsing element of the computer interrogations conducted found that porn sites were visited between the sending and confirmed receipt of e mails. It was also conducted in a private sole use office which was locked when not used by DG.

    I certainly have a lot of respect for the balls of the individual on Greens staff who obviously let himself into that office. Plonked himself down into the bosses chair and set about knocking one out. Tidied himself up and hid the evidence from his Minister. Quite a smooth operator. It’s a shame we don’t know his identity. He would make an ideal Brexit lead and being a wanker would fit right in.

    I do feel that Damian Green is jinxed though. How on earth did his private e mail address get onto the Ashley Maddison data base ? The office wanking mole really did have it in for his boss.

    If only Sherlock Holmes was available to come up with another theory.



    His e.mail address appearing on the leaked Ashley Maddison files is no one's business except his and his wife's. Unless you were a creepy religious judgemental prick, or the editor of the Sun, why would anyone want to comment and speculate about the sex life of a minister or MP in this day and age?z

    Do you really think you have the right to judge and comment on whether another citizen has sex with someone other than his wife or whether he indulges in masturbation?
    Absolutely I don’t. What it does inform me of though is that Damian Green does indulge or at least would like to indulge or even perhaps thought of indulging. Which guides my thoughts towards my possibly erroneous opinion that he’s quite capable or even likely to have downloaded and looked at porn. As I have already said I don’t have a issue with that other than it was wrong for him to have done so on a work computer. In many jobs it would be a sackable offence.

    The fact he denies having done so is fine. It does mean though that he is a risk enough not to hold high office. For his denial to be true he would have to have passed on his password which of course is illegal.

  • Options

    Carter said:

    I used to think politicians, whilst being lying , philandering parasites were intelligent people.

    Now, I hate the phrase people use "If I'd have done that I'd have been sacked" because it's usually bollocks.

    However, I've seen more people removed from the payroll at my place for the misuse of a work computer than for anything else over the last 20 years. And I don't work in an industry dominated by geniuses, nor is my laptop paid for by people's income tax, nor have I ever been so moronic as to look at anything that could get me in a situation that could lead to me answering questions about something like "why have you got 10,000 hours of Hungarian dwarf porn on your work laptop"

    What a fucking dickhead, what an utter idiot and one that proves to me how disconnected this bloke is from the real world when surely even a chimp would know not to do anything deviant on a work tool.

    Then there is the issue of the copper doing this search under a law that exists to prevent terrorism and then deciding to keep hold of the evidence from what was effectively a private job. This also calls into question whether or not this smut was planted on Greens PC.

    He denies downloading or viewing the porn on his computer. Have you reason to believe there is evidence that proves 100% that he is lying?
    The 2nd policeman sho went to the BBC last month said that the images were on Damien Greens computer,that was in his room, which was locked when he wasn't in there. It was also found that the browsing history was "sandwiched" between emails that Damian Green had been receiving & replying to at the time. I think in the realms of "reasonable doubt" that if I was on a jury, I would have no qualms of finding him guilty. No-one can ever be 100% sure, but the evidence (as the policeman gave it) was pretty damning.
    A number of MPs have confirmed that they share their user ID and passwords with the staff who work in their office.
    It’s a plausible if unsatisfactory excuse which is convenient for him. However the police officers who broke the news have stated that the pornographic browsing element of the computer interrogations conducted found that porn sites were visited between the sending and confirmed receipt of e mails. It was also conducted in a private sole use office which was locked when not used by DG.

    I certainly have a lot of respect for the balls of the individual on Greens staff who obviously let himself into that office. Plonked himself down into the bosses chair and set about knocking one out. Tidied himself up and hid the evidence from his Minister. Quite a smooth operator. It’s a shame we don’t know his identity. He would make an ideal Brexit lead and being a wanker would fit right in.

    I do feel that Damian Green is jinxed though. How on earth did his private e mail address get onto the Ashley Maddison data base ? The office wanking mole really did have it in for his boss.

    If only Sherlock Holmes was available to come up with another theory.



    His e.mail address appearing on the leaked Ashley Maddison files is no one's business except his and his wife's. Unless you were a creepy religious judgemental prick, or the editor of the Sun, why would anyone want to comment and speculate about the sex life of a minister or MP in this day and age?z

    Do you really think you have the right to judge and comment on whether another citizen has sex with someone other than his wife or whether he indulges in masturbation?
    That on its own is of course his business. What the post which you quoted was pointing out, though, was the implausibility of someone pretending to be Green to sign up to a website from a work computer (and I would expect that website, like many others, to send an email requiring confirmation which would require access to Green's email account) and someone other than Green using Green's very own computer to access porn.
  • Options
    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.
  • Options
    how can ex-plod take 'evidence' home when they leave?
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    Not sure where religious views come into in?

    He was caught lying to parliament. That the lie related to porn is just titillation for the tabloids
  • Options
    edited December 2017

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.

  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    I'm not a computing expert, but is it possible that someone can 'insert' search history into someone else's computer, possibly if they're on the same network? Or if a virus is caught on a computer it could do something similar?
  • Options
    cafctom said:

    I'm not a computing expert, but is it possible that someone can 'insert' search history into someone else's computer, possibly if they're on the same network? Or if a virus is caught on a computer it could do something similar?

    I suppose anything is possible in the IT world. However, it is extremely, extremely unlikely & the most obvious is the most obvious. If you look hard enough you can convince yourself of almost anything - the JFK assassination & the 911 terror attacks show this.
  • Options
    edited December 2017

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    A sin ?

  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    Creepy, like his behaviour around women? After all, that is why this is in the public domain and public interest.
  • Options
    And ironically he will need another laptop to carry out his work as an MP, with same access to the Parliamentary Estates Network and possibly other Government departments.

    I'm finding it a bit difficult to understand how he/a.n.other got this porn on the laptop.
    Having worked for Government agencies I've always found their hardware/software very well locked down.

    Where there's a will I suppose....
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    Curious as to why you keep making this about religion - literally none of the people you have argued with have made even a passing reference to it, yet you seem determined to argue against it.
  • Options
    edited December 2017

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    Curious as to why you keep making this about religion - literally none of the people you have argued with have made even a passing reference to it, yet you seem determined to argue against it.
    People have decided to judge him because he may have viewed porn and he was registered on an adultery website. He lied about the police originally confronting him about the porn on his computer 10 years ago so he had to resign. No arguments there. But there is a puritanical hypocritical condemnation of the man because he may have watched porn (some of it from people I have been in Browns with). So what is the basis of this tone if it is not based on some deep seated religious beliefs that some people are not even aware they have? What is the non religious basis of judging a man engaged in a perfectly legal activity? And I am not talking about the fact he should not have been viewing the porn on a work place computer.
  • Options
    I don't think anyone on here have castigate DG for viewing porn - some may have said that he shouldn't be doing it during working hours, or on HM Government equipment, but the vast majority have said that he had to go because he lied & tried to cover it up. If he had said, in 2008 & now, that Yes, I have viewed porn on my PC, then he may have got a reprimand but not the sack. He lied then & he has continue to lie about it ever since.
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    Curious as to why you keep making this about religion - literally none of the people you have argued with have made even a passing reference to it, yet you seem determined to argue against it.
    People have decided to judge him because he may have viewed porn and he was registered on an adultery website. He lied about the police originally confronting him about the porn on his computer 10 years ago so he had to resign. No arguments there. But there is a puritanical hypocritical condemnation of the man because he may have watched porn (some of it from people I have been in Browns with). So what is the basis of this tone if it is not based on some deep seated religious beliefs that some people are not even aware they have? What is the non religious basis of judging a man engaged in a perfectly legal activity? And I am not talking about the fact he should not have been viewing the porn on a work place computer.
    But that's the point, he was viewing porn on a work computer, at what point would the location of the viewing matter to you? On the bus? Sitting in a cafe?
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    Curious as to why you keep making this about religion - literally none of the people you have argued with have made even a passing reference to it, yet you seem determined to argue against it.
    People have decided to judge him because he may have viewed porn and he was registered on an adultery website. He lied about the police originally confronting him about the porn on his computer 10 years ago so he had to resign. No arguments there. But there is a puritanical hypocritical condemnation of the man because he may have watched porn (some of it from people I have been in Browns with). So what is the basis of this tone if it is not based on some deep seated religious beliefs that some people are not even aware they have? What is the non religious basis of judging a man engaged in a perfectly legal activity? And I am not talking about the fact he should not have been viewing the porn on a work place computer.
    But that's the point, he was viewing porn on a work computer, at what point would the location of the viewing matter to you? On the bus? Sitting in a cafe?
    Your point is totally irrelevant. I was answering the question posed by a couple of posters as to why I was banging on about religion when no one explicitly cited religious reasons for judging him for watching legal porn. I am trying to understand what are the non religious reasons to judge a man who chooses to watch legal porn in private?

    To address your specific point, I think it is inappropriate for someone to watch porn on a bus or in a cafe or in any public place where it might be inadvertently viewed by an under age person or by a person who, for what ever reason, finds pornagraphic material offensive and has every right to not to be subjected to it in a public place. To watch porn in a public place is rude, uncivil and deserves opprobrium.
  • Options
    edited December 2017

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    Curious as to why you keep making this about religion - literally none of the people you have argued with have made even a passing reference to it, yet you seem determined to argue against it.
    People have decided to judge him because he may have viewed porn and he was registered on an adultery website. He lied about the police originally confronting him about the porn on his computer 10 years ago so he had to resign. No arguments there. But there is a puritanical hypocritical condemnation of the man because he may have watched porn (some of it from people I have been in Browns with). So what is the basis of this tone if it is not based on some deep seated religious beliefs that some people are not even aware they have? What is the non religious basis of judging a man engaged in a perfectly legal activity? And I am not talking about the fact he should not have been viewing the porn on a work place computer.
    But that's the point, he was viewing porn on a work computer, at what point would the location of the viewing matter to you? On the bus? Sitting in a cafe?
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    Curious as to why you keep making this about religion - literally none of the people you have argued with have made even a passing reference to it, yet you seem determined to argue against it.
    People have decided to judge him because he may have viewed porn and he was registered on an adultery website. He lied about the police originally confronting him about the porn on his computer 10 years ago so he had to resign. No arguments there. But there is a puritanical hypocritical condemnation of the man because he may have watched porn (some of it from people I have been in Browns with). So what is the basis of this tone if it is not based on some deep seated religious beliefs that some people are not even aware they have? What is the non religious basis of judging a man engaged in a perfectly legal activity? And I am not talking about the fact he should not have been viewing the porn on a work place computer.
    But that's the point, he was viewing porn on a work computer, at what point would the location of the viewing matter to you? On the bus? Sitting in a cafe?
    Your point is totally irrelevant. I was answering the question posed by a couple of posters as to why I was banging on about religion when no one explicitly cited religious reasons for judging him for watching legal porn. I am trying to understand what are the non religious reasons to judge a man who chooses to watch legal porn in private?

    To address your specific point, I think it is inappropriate for someone to watch porn on a bus or in a cafe or in any public place where it might be inadvertently viewed by an under age person or by a person who, for what ever reason, finds pornagraphic material offensive and has every right to not to be subjected to it in a public place. To watch porn in a public place is rude, uncivil and deserves opprobrium.
    Like an office, you mean?
  • Options

    I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words.

    It’s wrong and a disciplinary issue to access non work related sites for most employees these days. Certainly was in the NHS. The huge difference is that whilst accessing eg. Charlton Life on a work computer would be deemed as a breach of the policy it wouldn’t really be embarrassing as such other than getting caught. Looking at porn has a lot more significance and I’m willing to bet would be viewed by colleagues in a completely different way to logging on to read the latest musings by Fiiish and Prague.

    It was obviously embarrassing enough for Damian Green to flatly deny it when all credible and available evidence points to him as having done so.

    I couldn’t give a flying fuck what he does in his personal life. What my finding out that he views porn on his computer whilst at work in his private office and discovering that he registered for a sex contact website and that he acted inappropriately towards the journalist daughter of a family friend does inform my personal opinion of the man.

    As humans we do risk assessments of people all the time based on what we know and our perceptions of the person. It’s not creepy to form a view based on that information. It’s human nature.


    You say you couldn't give a flying fuck about his personal life but you felt it was ok to comment on the fact that his name was on the Ashton Maddison files? There is a contradiction there surely?

    Judging a man on the way he conducts his private sex life and whether or not he watches porn is creepy. Sanctimonious. And sad.
    Do you view a lot of porn at work by any chance ? :wink:
    Why do you want to know? Do you think it is a sin? Do you want to offer up some prayers for me?
    Curious as to why you keep making this about religion - literally none of the people you have argued with have made even a passing reference to it, yet you seem determined to argue against it.
    People have decided to judge him because he may have viewed porn and he was registered on an adultery website. He lied about the police originally confronting him about the porn on his computer 10 years ago so he had to resign. No arguments there. But there is a puritanical hypocritical condemnation of the man because he may have watched porn (some of it from people I have been in Browns with). So what is the basis of this tone if it is not based on some deep seated religious beliefs that some people are not even aware they have? What is the non religious basis of judging a man engaged in a perfectly legal activity? And I am not talking about the fact he should not have been viewing the porn on a work place computer.
    But that's the point, he was viewing porn on a work computer, at what point would the location of the viewing matter to you? On the bus? Sitting in a cafe?
    Your point is totally irrelevant. I was answering the question posed by a couple of posters as to why I was banging on about religion when no one explicitly cited religious reasons for judging him for watching legal porn. I am trying to understand what are the non religious reasons to judge a man who chooses to watch legal porn in private?

    To address your specific point, I think it is inappropriate for someone to watch porn on a bus or in a cafe or in any public place where it might be inadvertently viewed by an under age person or by a person who, for what ever reason, finds pornagraphic material offensive and has every right to not to be subjected to it in a public place. To watch porn in a public place is rude, uncivil and deserves opprobrium.
    Like an office, you mean?
    So a private office equates to a public place? You are incredibly dense at times.
  • Options
    @Red_in_SE8

    I refer you to this post of yours: "I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words."

    I've just re-read this thread. I didn't see any reference, apart from yours, to Green being called out for watching porn. Everyone who has condemned what he did has mentioned his alleged use of his Government PC, the possibility he's given his ID and password to one or more of his staff, and, most importantly, his lying.

    There may be an issue of society at large having a problem with someone watching sexual activity on the internet, for which I think we can thank the gutter press, but that is not present in this thread.
  • Options
    edited December 2017

    @Red_in_SE8

    I refer you to this post of yours: "I am pretty certain that if he was found to be viewing CL or any other football forum on his work computer no one here would have a problem. The fact that people adopt such highminded jihadist religious views on another man's private life is creepy beyond words."

    I've just re-read this thread. I didn't see any reference, apart from yours, to Green being called out for watching porn. Everyone who has condemned what he did has mentioned his alleged use of his Government PC, the possibility he's given his ID and password to one or more of his staff, and, most importantly, his lying.

    There may be an issue of society at large having a problem with someone watching sexual activity on the internet, for which I think we can thank the gutter press, but that is not present in this thread.

    It is judgemental tone I have picked up. Just had a quick review of the thread and see no reason to change my mind on that.

    The main issue I have, which seems to be getting lost, is an ex police officer making public confidential private data about a public official that is nobody's business. If the ex police officer thought strongly about a public official watching porn on a work computer then he should have alerted the employer and let the employer deal with it. But even if he did that it would be a gross mis handling of evidence and abuse of power. Of all the misdemeanours committed by various people connected to this case this is the really serious one. If it is allowed to go unpunished then we are on a very dangerous and slippery slope when it comes to one of the fundamental tenets of our civil liberties and one of the things that distinguishes our society from police or religious states.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!