|
Post by notoriousnobbi on Mar 13, 2024 19:45:29 GMT
By the way, knowing a bit more about Hester now - besides from the momentary scandal - let me say just this: he is a very dubious person! Does he make you want to hate all men of ethnic Irish origin? Or just the ones who happen to be Tory donors? Just because I say that Hester is at least a dubious person is not enough to make me "HATE" him - also I won't regard him as a symbolic person for a certain category of people. I didn't pay attention to what his origin (or his religion or his age or his colour or ... ) is. It's not important for me. I didn't expect him to be Irish, as that name "Hester" sounds in fact German-like, it could be a normal German surname. The thing that is important is that he is a Tory donor. That doesn't make him symbolic for all Tory donors. It's more other's reaction to him: Tory politicians REACTIONS to Tory donors is what might be the real deal here - and what might be repeated... My opinion regarding his "shadiness" is based on his behaviour towards his employees >> www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/11/strict-rules-at-tory-donor-frank-hester-firm-tpp(I know what's usual and what is not, I did work in that sector for a long time. Having said that, there still might be a lot of cultural differences between Germany and the UK I don't get) His CV is sort of explained here >> www.theguardian.com/society/2024/mar/11/frank-hester-computer-programmer-who-made-fortune-from-public-sector-contractsand this is enough information to be aware of complex dependencies - it's not ANY donor as Once a government has decided for a bigger software, it cannot easily throw it away - there are big dependencies. Ask SAP users see above. And for me the main story is NOT whether he is racist or not. It's asking for a person to be shot!!! An example: If You would find a remark in my old Brexit thread about Nigel Farage that he should be shot at - You certainly would be appalled. I also do not like using the expression "punchable face" (I hope I never did, but I'm not sure) as it IMPLIES violence. It's not unusual for secret agents, journalists, bankers, think tankers, politicians, ... to make a dossier about a person who might one day gain importance (and if it's only to be able to quickly write a RIP article) . These dossiers also do certainly contain kompromat (in case there is any).
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Mar 14, 2024 8:39:12 GMT
Having said that, there still might be a lot of cultural differences between Germany and the UK I don't get) There are. The expression "(s)he should be taken out and shot" was quite common in the past - perhaps not so much these days and pretty tasteless in context after what happened to Jo Cox, but nobody (apart from Diane Abbot, it seems) believes that he is actually advocating for this to happen. That's why the media are focused entirely on his alleged racism WRT his reference to 'black women' instead - I think even they realise that spinning the whole 'shooting' remark into an overt threat and declaring him a danger to society would be a bit too much of a hard sell, even among the pliable British public. Besides which, doesn't an accusation of racism push everybody's buttons these days? Anyway that's by the by. The fact remains that he is no more important now than he was five years ago, and no matter what you think about him, if he hadn't been a Tory donor this story would never have seen the light of day. If you think there's any question that the Guardian deliberately sat on it in order to try and time its release to extract the maximum levels of indignation and self-righteous humbuggery from the public in an election year, then you are just as deluded as they are. I sincerely hope that the Tories don't submit to all the emotional blackmail and hand the money back, but since Rishi Sunak has now categorically stated that they won't, it wouldn't surprise me in the least bit if they do.
|
|
|
Post by notoriousnobbi on Mar 14, 2024 10:51:42 GMT
Having said that, there still might be a lot of cultural differences between Germany and the UK I don't get) There are. The expression "(s)he should be taken out and shot" was quite common in the past So what does the expression mean? And does it mean I can use punchable face?
But back to the problem of Tory donors. There should be far more investigations on how big the circle of donors is and how different their interests are. This is not only about corruption - it's also about something else. If we assume that donors have a big influence on politics then we have to question whether it's them who are the reason why the Tories are - for several years now - unable to form a consensus on post-brexit politics. One might assume that the different Tory factions are a try to bundle some Tory donor interests - but their infighting tells us that there is no step forward. So Tory donors might try to influence ministers and secretaries directly instead. But with the heavy rotation this also is not working. I hope you had a least a look at the summary of the report I did link to lately as it confirms the malaise I try to describe the whole time. But let's take the Tory donor question even one step further. We can assume that once Labour is in power we will have to face the problem of different wishes of Labour donors, too. And some of the classic Tory donors will switch to Labour to keep their influence on government, contributing even more to the confusion. I'm repeating myself but - all the knowledge gathered by reporting on Brexit so far will be also important to analyze Labour's handling of Brexit policies in the future.
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Mar 14, 2024 11:32:22 GMT
So what does the expression mean? Something similar to "(s)he should be crucified", or "(s)he should be hung out to dry", or any number of other commonly-used phrases that obliquely refer to some long-abandoned form of capital punishment but used nowadays to express disapproval of somebody's deeds or actions, that a small minority of our brave new touchy-feely woke society nowadays might choose to take offence by (but only if they are uttered by Tory donors, of course). And I couldn't care less if you use the term 'punchable face' or not.
There are plenty of regulations concerning donations to political parties, no shortage of scandals and allegations in the past where these have been bent or breached, and I have absolutely no interest in discussing this with you on this thread, which is about a completely different topic. Stop trying to hijack threads, please.
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Mar 15, 2024 11:04:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mowlick on Mar 15, 2024 13:15:16 GMT
I'm repeating myself ....
Indeed you are
And will
|
|