SevenRivers Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 I'm not claiming it. Do your self a quick google and find out why he's nicknamed 'thrasher'. It's not exactly a secret. This'll get you started http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/profile-andrew-thrasher-mitchell-the-ruthless-disciplinarian-8218920.html ---------- Post added 20-12-2012 at 22:51 ---------- Yes I did. And he did have those ambitions. That's not exactly a secret either. Some people don't like strong characters, that's just a natural consequence of having a strong character. The guy finds himself in a spot of bother and in the media, then as if by magic out from the woodwork crawl a handful of people with their own anecdotes, all entirely without their own axe to grind and no grievance with him themselves whatsoever Westminster politics is not a harmonious place where all people of the same stripes get along swimmingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Yes I did. And he did have those ambitions. That's not exactly a secret either. So he's not exactly following the conventional model to achieve them. Making enemies in your own party on the scale suggested can't be a good strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 So he's not exactly following the conventional model to achieve them. Making enemies in your own party on the scale suggested can't be a good strategy. I know. He's kind of shot himself in the foot hasn't he. ---------- Post added 20-12-2012 at 23:13 ---------- Some people don't like strong characters, that's just a natural consequence of having a strong character. The guy finds himself in a spot of bother and in the media, then as if by magic out from the woodwork crawl a handful of people with their own anecdotes, all entirely without their own axe to grind and no grievance with him themselves whatsoever Westminster politics is not a harmonious place where all people of the same stripes get along swimmingly. Andrew Mitchell is a cute cuddly teddy bear, the friendliest man you could every wish to meet. There'. Is that what you want me to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 I know. He's kind of shot himself in the foot hasn't he. Perhaps. It's all besides the point though. He either said 'pleb' or he didn't. I don't know and neither do you. What is becoming clear now is that the two police officers gilded the lily in their accounts by inventing a crowd of bystanders and the idiotic email has had the effect of weakening their veracity in the eyes of most people although I agree that technically it doesn't. I suspect the sender did not do it off his own bat and that the bad English was deliberate. We now hear that a 23 year old has been arrested on suspicion of coercing the 52 year old. Very odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Perhaps. It's all besides the point though. He either said 'pleb' or he didn't. I don't know and neither do you. What is becoming clear now is that the two police officers gilded the lily in their accounts by inventing a crowd of bystanders and the idiotic email has had the effect of weakening their veracity in the eyes of most people although I agree that technically it doesn't. I suspect the sender did not do it off his own bat and that the bad English was deliberate. We now hear that a 23 year old has been arrested on suspicion of coercing the 52 year old. Very odd. I don't care if he said pleb or not. The fact is that in a number of key respects Mitchell's account and the police account are actually very consistent. The key point of contention is the precise language he used. The police didn't invent a crowd of bystanders. They said in the log book that 'several' members of the public were present. There are three other people (at least) in the CCTV who were outside the inner gate and remained relatively stationary for the whole event. I'm puzzled by the email. It's very, very odd. It looks possible there could be a conspiracy but we'll have to wait and see what the investigation yields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Glypta Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I'm no Tory but I don't think Andrew Mitchell should resign. He disputes that he used foul language against the policeman, but acknowledges that he shouldn't have called the policeman a "pleb". The body representing rank and file officers also weighed in and called his behaviour a disgrace. The same could be said of their treatment of the Home Secretary at their conference earlier in the year when she told them things they didn't want to hear. It's all very well for police representatives to demand respect and civility, but they must also give it to others - whether they hold public office or not. In light of recent developments you may well have hit on a significant point here. I suspect a lot of posters on this thread are going to look very foolish if it turns out that they were the tools of an elaborate stitch up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I don't care if he said pleb or not. The fact is that in a number of key respects Mitchell's account and the police account are actually very consistent. The key point of contention is the precise language he used. The police didn't invent a crowd of bystanders. They said in the log book that 'several' members of the public were present. There are three other people (at least) in the CCTV who were outside the inner gate and remained relatively stationary for the whole event. I'm puzzled by the email. It's very, very odd. It looks possible there could be a conspiracy but we'll have to wait and see what the investigation yields. You may not care whether or not he used the word 'pleb' but its alleged use was the clincher that swayed public opinion and forced him to resign. The initial account that was leaked to the Sun newspaper did not report its use and it only appeared when the full police logs came into the public domain. Was it added later at the behest of others, Hillsborough style? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I don't care if he said pleb or not. Both the Labour Eds made a huge play on him using that word..if it's found that he didn't then I think he's due a retraction from them..I reckon that's the word that made his departure inevitable..if he'd just been accused of swearing at them he'd still be in position... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I'm no Tory but I don't think Andrew Mitchell should resign. He disputes that he used foul language against the policeman, but acknowledges that he shouldn't have called the policeman a "pleb". You've got this completely about face. He admits that he swore but denies that he said 'pleb'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 The copper is getting stitched up by the establishment. No doubt whatsoever in my mind. Channel 4 News were the main investigators. As far removed from "the establishment" as you could get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now