Parliamentary Porn Privileges.

was your job in public office?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/91920/WORLD-EXCLUSIVE-Jacqui-Smith-put-adult-films-on-expenses


Nothing new here, as one former labour home secretary confessed to using tax payers cash to view inappropriate material

dustybin 01 Dec 17 09:59 Joined: 29 Dec 08 | Topic/replies: 14,280 | Blogger: dustybin's blog

There’s a due process if people don’t agree with it, it’s called libel / slander.
If he’s lying then sue

He is like david cameron with his pig allegations.....too busy to sue

I remember, and she was rightly lambasted for it.

For people to suggest that the question shouldnt be asked about the appropriateness of the allegations based on the fact the plod need to button it miss the point completely.

Its the people who need to decide on whether its acceptable, not a couple of high ranking coppers with their heads together with politicians.

should the questions have been asked at time of discovery?

as for it being acceptable, it hasnt yet been proved

weve lately had all sorts of people sacked,ridiculed,publicly shamed for touching bums,calling people luv,darling etc,etc but now politicans,media pundits hitting the airwaves saying its ok in works time to spend hour upon hour watching near the knuckle porn,yet people get crucified for having page 3 on their locker door,yet again the luvies and snowflakes getting their morals and knickers in a twist at the same time

I agree with Jack, no way should a policeman profit from confidential information involving police investigative work. It's not even a policeman's evidence to sell, it's the states/ours. Shirley it must be illegal?

media pundits hitting the airwaves saying its ok in works time to spend hour upon hour watching near the knuckle porn

Who was this?
Surely its for the employers to decide on whether that is acceptable.

The whole of parliament must be riddled with viruses by now

The IT network probably isn't in great shape either

pixie
If the evidence is wrong then it gets called out in court.
To say the state/public own the evidence while not acknowledging the fact the politicians are answerable to the public is wrong.

No it's not, it's two entirely different issues! What's wrong with you?

Whats wrong with me?

If, and I say IF it is found that somebody in public office is spending time on the expense of the taxpayer viewing porn, you think its a problem with me that the public should form an opinion on that?

Incidentally, I have no problem with an individual accessing porn, and as mentioned from the start they are allegations.

Its rather funny how people who call others snowflakes etc and show conservative opinions dont understand the very ideology which I assume they follow.

Conservatism isnt about w4nking at work.

I'm sure there are far more important and worthier causes for you to get on your high horse about. One of them being how a policeman can profit from selling sensitive material gained in public office that isn't his/hers to sell. But hayho, let's get our knickers in a twist because a person in public office is watching legal porn when perhaps he should be working. Yawn.

What it's all got to do with  'conservatism', God only knows!

Or rather you dont know, which was rather my point.

Conservatism is an ideology based on a mentality, as apposed to liberalism.

Akin to having looser moral climate under liberalism (On Liberty - Stuart Mil et al) apposed to the conservative being polemic with the views of Dr. William Acton 'reads of them the pleasures and nothing of the penalties, of the sexual indulgencies'

Are you drunk?

They are famous works that contributed to the shaping of society.

Always wondered why Green had an arched back. His missus bears a striking resemblance to Keith Barron, so the excessive onanism at work should probably be forgiven.

you can tell civil servants are green as grass,engineer on nights at our place shall we say used to relieve himself over the laptop,unbeknowns he was caught in full flow[ no pun ]on webcam one night, needless to say the lads breaks suddenly stretched from 20.to 40 mins dinner half hour became dinner hour and basically a jolly good time was had by all.

I remember the case of th boyfriend of some woman who turned out to have been f0cking the pet dog while she was at work.

She found out because he recorded himself doing it and unknown to him the ipad uploaded it to the cloud and down onto her device and she hit the roof.
He went to jail for it too as he should

So even if he DID look at some filth (I've no idea why any intelligent person would look at dirty images on a work computer in an office when logged in), it was run of the mill stuff? And despite the media shouting out about "thousands" of images implying a huge amount of it, the guy on the TV just said that was thumbnails.

It's a matter between the parliamentary IT dept and what passes for HR for politicians, from 10 years ago, and nothing can be proved so it all just unprobavable accusations over a trivial matter and mud slinging.

I don't get why this the main story on all the news. Bored of Trump Tweets? The same news that gives no coverage to the latest convictions of mass r-pe gangs in the North of England! And we know why that is.

If he wants to enjoy a woman being dominated and degraded by a group of fellows he just need to attend cabinet meetings.

Dont worry JC  its nearly time for your daily fix , its Seven o clock its channel 4 its Snowy time

whilst ignoring gangs expressing their cultural history and needs they also ignore Fylde v Wigan  - how do I know which way to bet
as Roma comes in for first bet of the day
enjoy your news overload

JC
The friends of DG came out in response to the allegations and said it was a smear campaign and against political privilege.
They also dont know the truth either, but suggesting that politicians and those in and around parliament afford the luxury of privilege is nothing more than a cover up, considering, as I noted the MPs were the ones who decided to sacrifice the liberty of the public only when they themselves were given assurances that only the prime minister can determine whether they can be investigated.

Two ex-coppers have come out and said there was porn, and all the defenders can cry about is that protocol wasnt respected.
Well IF it turns out to be true, isnt it in the publics interest to know that those trusted with responsibility are wasting public time?
Time is a waste of money just as expenses were.

3-1 to Roma Moisk they were about 1-5 werent they must have been a heavy bet old boy , wigan -1 handicap i think 4-5  365

yes I know I am watching it
it was for very little return in amount of cash but a shoe in really
putting a lot on for that  but better than psg the other night at 1.07

next up napoli

ps so A guy looks at some porn 

meanwhile the eu propaganda machine groans on

and another immigrant gets in by marrying - you couldn't make it up - establishment  ramming the propaganda down your throats and half the country in an orgasm of royaltyitis

Apparently Davis has threatened to resign if action is taken against Green.
Maybe its true Brexit negs aint going so well, they certainly sheepish over this 50bn that wasnt mentioned at referenduum time.

Is Boris still whistling or choking?

I think any man who has looked at a woman and had lustful thoughts should be immediately stripped etc........

Funny how times change ! Watching porn is a big scandal Meanwhile there was John Major hammering Edwina Currie over a desk

If it were a man Viewing Gay Porn would the BBC be covering it ?

Many do watch it.

"Thousands of images" is very puzzling to me. Why would anybody keep thousands of images of anything? You couldn't possibly look at them all.

Do you reckon it might just be a few redtube films (technically "thousands" of images) and the media is spinning it to make it sound worse?

how many 'honest' fine gentle persons of the press indulge I wonder

In a recent survey didn't journos come out the least respected etc??

The reason he says there are lots of images is they are thumbnails, if they do exist he means he went through his cache and found thumbnails.
Our media, all of whom act like 1990s sunday tabloids these days, are saying thousands of images sounds as if to indicate someone spent days individually viewing and saving pictures, and they are enjoying trying to bring down another Tory minister during Brexit ..

In fact I mock the conspiracy nuts on here but the way there has been wierd leaks and things like this coming up and anti Brexit media are hounding ministers out ... you do wonder. More likely there's something in that theory than "moon landings faked".

So there would be thousands of porn images on virtually every man's computer by that reasoning then? The media really are despicable if that is the case JC.

It is thumbnails. Try and catch the interview on the news, he says they are thumbnails TWICE in the interview but the reporters are then not repeating that part of it.

Look at the news headline on the BBC for this:
"Damian Green computer p*rn claims: 'Thousands' of images viewed"
That is a clear distortion. Go to say a newspaper website. If you visit say the dailymail online you will deposit 100s of thumbnails in seconds.
Of course if you scrolled down the page you will then have viewed 100s of images, even in peripheral vision.

The wording I heard gives a clue - he has never downloaded or viewed porn in his office (or along those lines) .... economical with the truth and all that bullshit.

No smoke without fire, this is the May camp against the Brexiteer camp.

This "allegation" was originally raised years ago, when there was bad blood between the two. It might have been verifiable then by looking at the computer or logs on the network. But nobody seemed to care then and it was forgotten about.

WHY is it suddenly being not only raised again now, but actually a much bigger thing being made of it this time, when it's opportune to do so by opponents and there is now pretty much zero chance of proving guilt or innocence? And it's not even that big a thing but it's getting huge coverage, it was given vast coverage on the TV news earlier on BBC EU 1. Makes you wonder. More actions to destabilise May and the Tories to prevent Brexit? Stranger things have happened.

i suspect other mps are into porn and if green falls because of it others will tumble too

davies seems determined to prevent his loss

its crazy to raise it now and not then.

that nice mr junker and barnier wouldn't even look at a woman. nudge nudge

The most worrying aspect of this is, what if one of the young boys in the office saw the porn on the computer !

You have to wonder at the motive of the ex detective in making this public knowledge.

Interesting. There was a Labour MP who got into trouble as p0rn was bought on her expenses during the Expenses Scandal. It was Smith, who was the one who authorised the controversial raid on Green's office in the first place.!

Oh now the last leg are covering it.

Jc
You are correct to assume that the porn activities mentioned are more likely the cache or cookies etc of visiting sites. Porn sites.
If it transpires to be true then you don’t go to such places ‘excessively’ and on parliamentary time to assess the virtues of a well taken photo, you go for titilation.

You have somewhat answered your own question as to why this is exploding all over again; because he has denied it that’s why and the ex coppers are adamant he did do it.
So this goes to the heart of integrity as well as the question as to whether it is deemed appropriate use of ones time in public office.

The ex coppers at one stage said they couldn't be certain it was him.

....and that it was on a computer of his (actually two including the laptop) while he was signed in and between emails sent by him to other people.

What gets me is the fact those of us who don’t know use proper vernacular, like ‘if’ since we can’t possibly know, yet his supports say ‘he didnt’
How can they possibly know this, are they party to the evidence?

People are also being very convenient with the allegations of smear.
Do those suggesting this is a dirty trick against him not remember why they took his computers in the first place?
They took them because of leaks of confidential information against the last government and his office was believed to be involved.....it ended with a junior member of his team being fired I believe.
Err um.

It’s not clear from the reporting who the ‘official’ who was sacked was in relation to Green, but I understand it was Green who released the document.

I just looked at 1000 porn images without ****

if I was at work I'd have to lock the door , an put calls on hold

I just hope they have a decent connection ... I would hate to think of my elected representative having to watch a thick wad of juice flying through the air towards  pretty face like he was watching it through a stroboscope

Too many smokescreens here, can't the disclosure can be looked at as a matter of course? Isn't the main issue integrity especially from someone in such a senior position? Green calls allegations "categorically untrue" and now his integrity has been questioned.

The "issue here" is (if it's true) people given powers to grab someones computer for one reason, finding legal stuff on it but legal stuff that's a bit "dirty", having a big fall out with that person, then a decade later going to the media to talk about they dirty stuff to try and smear and bring down the person they fell out with. When it can't be "proved" to be untrue so the mud will stick. Even the left wing press are seeing and saying that, senior ex people are saying that, even if some chit chatters obviosuly can't!

If this was a politician of any party I'd feel the same way. Anyone with any sense must see what is dangerous and wrong here.

The second issue is the way the BBC are so obviously trying to manipulate events, this, "man might have surfed some legal pron at work 10 years ago" got about 5 minutes coverage last night, as part of their campaign to weaken May and stop/weaken Brexit. The arrogant BBC have lost it, it's only a couple weeks since they went completely over the top on that tax leak trying deliberately to damage people and royalty, just because they can.

Anyone with any sense must see that there's more than one issue, each to be resolved individually no matter how much noise is made to deflect away from the one that doesn't suit

If its not true, sue.
Just like Johnathon Aitken did.

If it falls to me to start a fight to cut out the cancer of bent and twisted journalism in our country with the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play, so be it. I am ready for the fight. The fight against falsehood and those who peddle it. My fight begins today. Thank you and good afternoon.

The people have a right to know how those in office behave, without a contrived barrier and implicit dealings.

Jonathan

It seems most weeks people are crying to the media and ruining peoples' careers.

All quite immature, pathetic and should be illegal.

This is just another tier of the division between those who seek power over others being in another place of privilidge and why the people can not relate to them in parliament.
The ordinary person would have been out on their ear if this were true, yet the crying fowl is about the process undertaken in this case.

The protocol deems the commission would determine the outcome....MPs marking their own homework.
As Ive said Ive no idea regarding guilt, but this isnt actually about one person, this is about the instiution.

foul

institution

Tories want the Snoopers Charter allowing all sorts of agencies access to everyone's internet browsing history.

Unless this policeman is brought to justice for leaking this information how can anyone be sure their own private legal but potentially embarrassing browsing habits will not be revealed?

The potential for blackmail is huge.

The ex policeman should serve time in jail for what he has done

watching near the knuckle porn on a works computer, in works time at the taxpayers expense,whilst hinting at sexual relationship in a return for a job ,for a young journo ,might not be illegal ,but if true sure as hell shouldnt let you within a million miles of Westminster,however the info was aquire

aren't men terrible ?

It's ok , I don't care what he hinted to the journalist as long as she was over 18 or what he looked at on his computer as long as it was legal it has nothing to do with us

theres countless celebs who,ve lost their jobs.been suspended lately for far less might give you an argument, even 2 suicides

exactly , that's true
The whole thing is becoming ridiculous and completely mad
Ok heshouldn't have been looking at porn , if he was
A small word to would have been enough and that should have been the end of it

that's the point he lied about point 1,so probably lied about 2 and 3,as they say its never the initial offence but the cover up,s lies that gets them in the end
no 2 to the pm is potentially a serial liar when his backs against the wall

he will go sooner rather later

Well it's no wonder that this country is a shambles when we are worrying about this sort of nonsense

Did he tell lies to the pm , so what she is telling lies also , I tell lies elsewhere
not here in front of myself

it's the nature of the lie that is important , if someone  asks do you watch porn tell them no
What's wrong with that ?

Anyone sensible if they didn't want you to tell lies shouldn't ask you the question

And yes the post above about how with vast powers for everyone and their dog to trawl through everyone's internet history the scope for abuse and blackmail and political misuse is so huge it could reach the moon to allow us to climb up and inspect the footprints of Apollo missions! I thought that long before this as it's obvious. You give people big power there is scope to abuse this. It's the exact situation we're talking about here, but the guy wanting to hurt someone doesn't even need to leave their office.

JC
They will look back in a couple of generations and refer to 2016 as the date liberty died, because that was the time the bill was passed that will get amended in future as algorithms and machine learning is added so that data raping systems turn the humans into commodities. It will go down in history.
All the while those tasked with deciding the fate of others are themselves immune to scrutiny and have a dictum of self regulation.

Before the expenses scandal it was common knowledge that MPs claimed to excess as part of the perks of the job. The MPs had ample opportunity to bring their own actions into account but they never did...until the public decided it was too much.
If it wasnt for public opinion MPs would still be claiming egregious expenses.

I for one dont have anything against DG any more than any other individual who play politic to manipulate an outcome, they are all machiavellian, but where else can the public opinion be canvassed as to the acceptability of the actions of those in power unless light is shone on those that are tasked to decide on our behalf?

I'm against the snooper charter unless it has huge controls, e.g. data is very securely held and only a court order is allowed to access it. But that will never happen so you'll just have, as has happened before, things like journalists paying people to get dirt on people, and so on. And anyway, the bad guys will just work round it so it'll just be used to harass people.

It's a huge disaster just waiting to happen, and they can't say they weren't warned.

There was an interesting program repeated the other day about a UK genius who after ww2 went to the US and was involved in what was things like early data mining. Perhaps, as you say, they might start treating their own people as the enemy .. perhaps already have.

I see this as a digital doomsday event, you only need to look at the first 'smart city' in China to see what dystopian ramifications lay ahead where the state watches everything you do. So how can it be right that those who forced this upon us get to hide behind protocol thats heavily in their favour?

This isnt about left and right wing agendas, MPs on both sides supported the bill when they were given the assurances that they would be treated differently.

It's not left right as LAbour were as bad if not worse, they were the ones behind ID cards and all the snooping behind that, if anything getting Labour out has at least delayed the snooper state.

Well there maybe value to that point, but its still unconscionable that the Tories fought against the communications act until they got into power and then miraculously about turned.

As it happens I think the internet is a very dangerous thing and it should be censored if possible and it can be possible as we see in China
It is becoming a great force for evil in the world today
So it is not the case that it should not be monitored and very strict censorship should apply

So I think the Internet should be changed , what can be watched on it should be censored ..
And I think that it is nobodies business this mp was or was not watching porn now
That is easy to understand .

Regulate it , stop access to violent images etc ,
If we don't then society and people will suffer and it will be almost impossible to create a free and safe and happy society
Nothing will change for good , only bad , if it continues as it is

Its not about him accessing porn (if he did) its about whether he did while at work.
Theres a disparity of opinion between those who think he did and have said so and himself and his collegues who say he didnt.
Well all we are saying is let it run its course because it could be the tip of the iceberg.

either way its developing regardless of what people on here think.

Even if he did access porn at work it would not be illegal.

The fact that an ex-policeman claimed this from evidence is a total disgrace.

We now have a situation where the likes of the food standards agency have access to internet history.

What happens if someone from there decides to leak someone's legal internet surfing habits?

With the amount of hacking and leaking going on the Snoopers Charter needs to be cancelled before the end of the Jan 18th consultation.

Write to your MPs. Do what you can folkes.

Not one sided

A disclosure

B "categorically untrue"

both need to be looked into

It's impossible to prove what is being said.
If Green sticks to his story that he is not guilty where does the inquiry go?

LOL here we go again trying to defend the undefencible ,poor old Nadine the brainless jungle celeb tells the whole world mp,s give anyone interns,tea lady, tom cobbley and all their log in details ,password and access to their work computers,emails and any information on them ,queue 659 other mp,s flooding the airwaVES WITHIN THE HOUR CALLING HER A LIAR, even if its true

If what they found was legal then they should shut their mouthhs and stay out of citizens lives. It's an internal matter ...

most of the expenses scandal was legal you arnt really suggesting we should have ignored it and just moved on

Not at all 1TP, Im just saying that it was an internal matter involving something that didn't concern the police as no law was broken. They should butt out and go find some real criminals instead of subverting justice.

if they wanted to be whistleblowers they should have done it in 2008

The were still coppers in 2008, think that would have been their pension kaput among other things.

About time too!

He's gone...........misleading information (politician speak for I lied).........always best with Politicians to assume Guilty until proven innocent.