Pritti, Posh dominatrix. she'll lock you down

124678

Comments

  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,459
    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    TheBigBean said:

    The Guardian's analysis of BoJo's decision. The civil service don't come out of it smelling of roses.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/20/how-boris-johnson-found-grounds-to-ignore-priti-patel-bullying-verdict

    As predicted by some on this thread.

    Others will ignore it as I doesn't suit their agenda (even if its in the Guardian :smile: )
    What, the 'workplace bullying is unacceptable' agenda?
    I see you are ignoring what has been pointed out...
    What am I supposed to have ignored? Not defending the Home Office at all. Their recent record is appalling.
    See the link that BB posted for starters.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 12,674
    Stevo_666 said:

    And to get it back on topic, she is quite hot :)

    Is that 'hot' as in curry? 😉

    C'mon then the Waynes, start flagging away at what is a joke. Blxxdy gammon flavoured snowflakes.
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,736
    Pross said:

    DeVlaeminck said:

    I haven't seen anyone say it's ok Pross (maybe if I read back I would) and hopefully nobody thinks that. It's more an issue of whether it's a resignation issue when the report found (according to the summary released) that:

    a) she'd had no feedback about her behaviour.

    b) she wasn't aware of the impact of her behaviour.

    c) some of her frustrations had foundation .

    Given the importance of the job for the uk and the fact (whatever our opinions) that her boss must think she's the best person there is to do it (otherwise he'd use this opportunity to let her go) I just think it falls short of requiring resignation.

    I know people will call BS in her changing or on her not realising her behaviour was out of order but I'm only going in what is in the public domain.

    Re. the senior member of staff bit - I think arguably it is worse for someone in a less powerful position maybe without the financial security and experience of a senior civil servant. I suspect if her bullying had been confined to lower level targets we'd never have heard of it. That's not to say bullying is ever ok though and I suspect most people have experienced some level of bullying at some time in their life.

    Well John80 thinks people in the top 10% of earners should be up to "having a few f**KS thrown at them" and from your own comments whilst you don't say bullying is acceptable you seem to think that even if she has bullied people she should keep her job as long as Boris thinks she's the best candidate. Notwithstanding any thoughts on what it says of out country's politicians if she is genuinely the best candidate if she has abused her position and bullied her staff (which it seems a comprehensive report has said is the case) there needs to be a sanction.
    I don't "seem to think" I've stated very clearly that if you accept the summary of the report released then the issue can be dealt with without her resignation.

    Nobody is saying it's ok to ignore it but there are enough caveats in the summary for an apology and some education to be sufficient sanction.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,736
    pblakeney said:

    rjsterry said:



    a) she'd had no feedback about her behaviour.

    b) she wasn't aware of the impact of her behaviour.

    c) some of her frustrations had foundation .

    Just listened to last night's BBC podcast Newscast. Someone on there addressed a), b) and c) in an official capacity directly in person. Said person wasn't invited to give evidence funnily enough.
    To claim innocence is downright lying.
    As I say I'm commenting on what was released in the summary - if that is not an accurate reflection of the truth my opinion might be different.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,479
    DeVlaeminck said:

    Pross said:

    DeVlaeminck said:

    I haven't seen anyone say it's ok Pross (maybe if I read back I would) and hopefully nobody thinks that. It's more an issue of whether it's a resignation issue when the report found (according to the summary released) that:

    a) she'd had no feedback about her behaviour.

    b) she wasn't aware of the impact of her behaviour.

    c) some of her frustrations had foundation .

    Given the importance of the job for the uk and the fact (whatever our opinions) that her boss must think she's the best person there is to do it (otherwise he'd use this opportunity to let her go) I just think it falls short of requiring resignation.

    I know people will call BS in her changing or on her not realising her behaviour was out of order but I'm only going in what is in the public domain.

    Re. the senior member of staff bit - I think arguably it is worse for someone in a less powerful position maybe without the financial security and experience of a senior civil servant. I suspect if her bullying had been confined to lower level targets we'd never have heard of it. That's not to say bullying is ever ok though and I suspect most people have experienced some level of bullying at some time in their life.

    Well John80 thinks people in the top 10% of earners should be up to "having a few f**KS thrown at them" and from your own comments whilst you don't say bullying is acceptable you seem to think that even if she has bullied people she should keep her job as long as Boris thinks she's the best candidate. Notwithstanding any thoughts on what it says of out country's politicians if she is genuinely the best candidate if she has abused her position and bullied her staff (which it seems a comprehensive report has said is the case) there needs to be a sanction.
    I don't "seem to think" I've stated very clearly that if you accept the summary of the report released then the issue can be dealt with without her resignation.

    Nobody is saying it's ok to ignore it but there are enough caveats in the summary for an apology and some education to be sufficient sanction.
    So why did the person who produced the report feel the need to resign?
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,738
    DeVlaeminck said:

    pblakeney said:

    rjsterry said:



    a) she'd had no feedback about her behaviour.

    b) she wasn't aware of the impact of her behaviour.

    c) some of her frustrations had foundation .

    Just listened to last night's BBC podcast Newscast. Someone on there addressed a), b) and c) in an official capacity directly in person. Said person wasn't invited to give evidence funnily enough.
    To claim innocence is downright lying.
    As I say I'm commenting on what was released in the summary - if that is not an accurate reflection of the truth my opinion might be different.
    See Brian's post on Page 3.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • mrb123
    mrb123 Posts: 4,612

    Lovely smile. Shame she's built like a chest of drawers.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,628
    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    TheBigBean said:

    The Guardian's analysis of BoJo's decision. The civil service don't come out of it smelling of roses.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/20/how-boris-johnson-found-grounds-to-ignore-priti-patel-bullying-verdict

    As predicted by some on this thread.

    Others will ignore it as I doesn't suit their agenda (even if its in the Guardian :smile: )
    What, the 'workplace bullying is unacceptable' agenda?
    I see you are ignoring what has been pointed out...
    What am I supposed to have ignored? Not defending the Home Office at all. Their recent record is appalling.
    See the link that BB posted for starters.
    I did and agree with his point. As you can see immediately above.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 18,931
    edited November 2020
    john80 said:

    Patel will be dealing with civil servants that will be in the top 10% of earners on a day to day basis. If these guys can't handle having a few fucks being thrown at them I do have to question what their career is going to be like if they can't make it to their pension

    The flip side of course is that Patel seems incapable of managing her team without shouting and swearing.

    Seems like a basic competence issue.








    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,224
    But at least she's good at her job.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,738
    kingstongraham said:

    But at least she's good at her job.

    If the benchmark is her boss then....
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Some people are going to be conflicted...

  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,297
    You really do struggle with the concept that two wrongs don't make a right
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,479
    coopster_the_1st said:

    Some people are going to be conflicted...

    Why would it leave anyone conflicted? If she has faced racism and misogyny that's unacceptable but it still doesn't excuse her using her position to bully others.
  • webboo
    webboo Posts: 6,087
    So after you have been found guilty of bullying. You then mention the abuse you have been subject too.
    It never crossed her mind to mention it before. It being the worst she had ever experienced.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,586
    edited November 2020
    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Lol at the “two sides” chat.

    What on Earth do you think the independent inquiry was doing?

    Next up, the two sides of Paul Gadd 🙄

    Regardless of what evidence is put in here, you've already made up your mind anyway and got your pitchfork & burning torch out. Totally predictable.
    Lol independent inquiry makes it clear what if is, breach of ministerial code, head of civil service resigns over her bad conduct, but nah mate, someone on the bike forum posted something so I gotta listen.


    In case it isn’t obvious the result of the independent inquiry isn’t one side of the argument. It is the conclusion of it. Don’t be so thick.
    _
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,586
    edited November 2020
    Remind me what specifically did the head of the civil service quit over?

    Briefing against the home office to the press in retaliation for him calling out her bullying.

    So what does she go and do?
    _
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,736
    Pross said:

    DeVlaeminck said:

    Pross said:

    DeVlaeminck said:

    I haven't seen anyone say it's ok Pross (maybe if I read back I would) and hopefully nobody thinks that. It's more an issue of whether it's a resignation issue when the report found (according to the summary released) that:

    a) she'd had no feedback about her behaviour.

    b) she wasn't aware of the impact of her behaviour.

    c) some of her frustrations had foundation .

    Given the importance of the job for the uk and the fact (whatever our opinions) that her boss must think she's the best person there is to do it (otherwise he'd use this opportunity to let her go) I just think it falls short of requiring resignation.

    I know people will call BS in her changing or on her not realising her behaviour was out of order but I'm only going in what is in the public domain.

    Re. the senior member of staff bit - I think arguably it is worse for someone in a less powerful position maybe without the financial security and experience of a senior civil servant. I suspect if her bullying had been confined to lower level targets we'd never have heard of it. That's not to say bullying is ever ok though and I suspect most people have experienced some level of bullying at some time in their life.

    Well John80 thinks people in the top 10% of earners should be up to "having a few f**KS thrown at them" and from your own comments whilst you don't say bullying is acceptable you seem to think that even if she has bullied people she should keep her job as long as Boris thinks she's the best candidate. Notwithstanding any thoughts on what it says of out country's politicians if she is genuinely the best candidate if she has abused her position and bullied her staff (which it seems a comprehensive report has said is the case) there needs to be a sanction.
    I don't "seem to think" I've stated very clearly that if you accept the summary of the report released then the issue can be dealt with without her resignation.

    Nobody is saying it's ok to ignore it but there are enough caveats in the summary for an apology and some education to be sufficient sanction.
    So why did the person who produced the report feel the need to resign?
    Well no doubt he feels Boris allowing Patel to remain in post undermines his authority.

    I can't argue that he doesn't feel that just as you can't argue Boris doesn't feel that on balance she should remain in the job.


    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,738
    mrb123 said:


    Lovely smile. Shame she's built like a chest of drawers.

    Not sure that is a smile. More like "I've got something on you..."
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,224
    This can't be right.


  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    kingstongraham said:

    This can't be right.


    I agree on there being a lack of competence with the stopping of the Channel illegal immigrants. I would not fire Priti if it is her department that is the root of this department.

    It definitely feels as if she is having to fight a number of vipers in the nest who are out to undermine her.
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    She's not gonna sleep with you, Coop.
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,628
    Pross said:

    coopster_the_1st said:

    Some people are going to be conflicted...

    Why would it leave anyone conflicted? If she has faced racism and misogyny that's unacceptable but it still doesn't excuse her using her position to bully others.
    Pretty clear implication in Tom Newton-Dunn's tweet is that the "source" is not entirely credible. Let's see if anything further emerges.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,224
    I for one am shocked that the home office could be perceived as indifferent to any racism.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,586
    kingstongraham said:

    This can't be right.


    Why take all the heat of keeping her on to get rid of her a week later?
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,628
    rick_chasey said:

    kingstongraham said:

    This can't be right.


    Why take all the heat of keeping her on to get rid of her a week later?
    Johnson's ego.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,866
    rjsterry said:

    rick_chasey said:

    kingstongraham said:

    This can't be right.


    Why take all the heat of keeping her on to get rid of her a week later?
    Johnson's ego.
    In fairness I can see the logic in not firing people as the media and opposition get a taste for blood. Also once you fire the first one you establish a benchmark.

    This Govt seems to have moved on from the above to not firing people being a goal in itself.

    Whilst we aren’t allowed to say that Brexiteers are a bunch of thickos there does seem to be a clear correlation between thicko/incompetent MPs and their faith in Brexit. This means the the current Cabinet is as good as it will get and the alternatives are considerably worse.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,459
    edited November 2020
    orraloon said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    And to get it back on topic, she is quite hot :)

    Is that 'hot' as in curry? 😉

    C'mon then the Waynes, start flagging away at what is a joke. Blxxdy gammon flavoured snowflakes.
    Have a like 'Loon - this was started as a fun thread I think, not yet another centre leftie whingey bollox thread so you're just getting it back on topic :)
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,459
    mrb123 said:


    Lovely smile. Shame she's built like a chest of drawers.

    Thats more like it - back on topic.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,479
    When the inexplicable crushes thread was running on here and someone created the explicable crushes as an alternative I said the real opposite would be attractive people who do nothing for you. Patel falls into that category for me. Quite good looking on the outside but comes across as very ugly on the inside.

Categories