Andy Coulson

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
I think people have answered the question, it seams that if the answer is not in line with your thinking, you cant except it
The man was employed on the basis of his qualifications to do his job and not on what crime the media may think he has committed, that seams perfectly correct thing to do.
Now, im off to church

I'm sorry Blue but that is still the answer to a question I didn't ask....I asked for your opinion on what this says about Mr Camerons judgement I asked very clearly and I have asked repeatedly you and G have refused to answer....What am I then to make of this repeated evasion...why is it such a difficult distinction for you and G to grasp ???
I do apologise to the question master! I do not necessarily feel that your assumption of there only being a yes or a no answer to certain questions to be incorrect.
I am saying, he must have felt his judgement to be the correct one, as I was not at the interview or privy to coulsons CV and interview, how can I tell if there was some one better qualified for the job. If there was an applicant better qualified than Coulson, then yes it was a bad decision, if he was the best qualified then it was a correct decision. I have made that quite plain several time now.
Are you suggesting that as an employer David should discriminate against some one who is best qualified for the job because of an presumption of others? That at very best would be immoral and possibly against many discrimination laws. Or are some forms of discrimination OK in your eyes?

23 Jan 2011

Cameron CHOSE to appoint an individual who had admitted responsibility for widespread illegal activity in the course of running his business. Does that sway your opinion at all?

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Cameron CHOSE to appoint an individual who had admitted responsibility for widespread illegal activity in the course of running his business. Does that sway your opinion at all?

I far as I have read, he has denied any involvement, the person responsible has been dealt with. All that remain are allegations
Coulson has always maintained that he did not know that phone hacking was taking place when he was editor of the News of the World. Coulson has not moved from that position in his statement today.

23 Jan 2011

G you haven't answered MY question ....you have several times answered the question you would like me to have asked,do you see the difference ???
Blue I asked your opinion on Camerons judgement not what you thought his opinion of his judgement might be,do you see the difference??
As I said blind faith is a terrible thing....I'm pleased it isn't one of the failings of the left
Given that we are all so convinced by the soundness of Daves judgement in giving Andy the job..given that he is a man of principle who refuses to listen to the gutter press when making appointments...
Do you believe that Dave showed a lack of moral fibre and failed to stand by his principles when he accepted Andy's 'resignation' without defending him or should he have stood by his judgement in givng Andy the job and refused the 'resignation'???
I know that's really two questions but you must forgive me.....I am as they say on tenterhooks my breath is indeed bated

23 Jan 2011

Yes blue but "not knowing" excuses neither fault nor blame in this instance. It was his job to know and to have the necessary controls in place to identify any illegal acts and to make sure they weren't happening. He has admitted that he failed in both aspects. Further speculation is unnecessary.

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Yes blue but "not knowing" excuses neither fault nor blame in this instance. It was his job to know and to have the necessary controls in place to identify any illegal acts and to make sure they weren't happening. He has admitted that he failed in both aspects. Further speculation is unnecessary.

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Yes but there is a line between the buck stopping and 700 grown ups shouting "but a big boy did it and ran away sir". Methinks they are all doing the latter. I for one dont want the buggers to get away with it.

23 Jan 2011

Here's a link about another innocent Tory scion of the press :twisted: :twisted:

23 Jan 2011

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPSSSS!!! my bad he got 6 1/2 years

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Bluefish2009
Yes blue but "not knowing" excuses neither fault nor blame in this instance. It was his job to know and to have the necessary controls in place to identify any illegal acts and to make sure they weren't happening. He has admitted that he failed in both aspects. Further speculation is unnecessary.

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Yes but there is a line between the buck stopping and 700 grown ups shouting "but a big boy did it and ran away sir". Methinks they are all doing the latter. I for one dont want the buggers to get away with it.

Quote by Bluefish2009
Ahh, the fall guy, that's the modern world we live in, he was at the helm

Quote by Bluefish2009
Even if we except this Ben, he was at the helm! That is where the buck stops in my view

I mean really Blue,Really ?

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Yes blue but "not knowing" excuses neither fault nor blame in this instance. It was his job to know and to have the necessary controls in place to identify any illegal acts and to make sure they weren't happening. He has admitted that he failed in both aspects. Further speculation is unnecessary.

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Yes but there is a line between the buck stopping and 700 grown ups shouting "but a big boy did it and ran away sir". Methinks they are all doing the latter. I for one dont want the buggers to get away with it.

Quote by Bluefish2009
Ahh, the fall guy, that's the modern world we live in, he was at the helm

Quote by Bluefish2009
Even if we except this Ben, he was at the helm! That is where the buck stops in my view

I mean really Blue,Really ?
What are you saying?

23 Jan 2011

*remains poker faced and enigmatic*

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
*remains poker faced and enigmatic*

:thumbup:
Blair stood in front of us telling lies, his own policy's wink

Andy Coulson did not dunno

as far as I can tell some one else tapped the phones not him, he did not put his name to a phone tapping policy as far as we are all aware

23 Jan 2011

*allows digging to continue*
*also notes second question has been neatly ignored*

23 Jan 2011

since we're now in the business of quotes....
how about this one?
So then, I can see how you got your name now... "staggers back from the abyss"
Perhaps the street lighting is quite good where you live? Maybe not so much "staggers" back but limps back as the fiends down the Woodseats Palace have pissed all over you too?

Quote by staggers
I know of one member not far from this keyboard who is thinking that the membership fee would be better spent in the pub, where I can at least hear some imaginative insults

Give them another try Staggs; I know the price of barley has increased the price of a pint recently but listening to Benny crooning over a glass of gin must surely be sufficient compensation for that :grin:

23 Jan 2011

Quote by GnV
since we're now in the business of quotes....
how about this one?
So then, I can see how you got your name now... "staggers back from the abyss"
Perhaps the street lighting is quite good where you live? Maybe not so much "staggers" back but limps back as the fiends down the Woodseats Palace have pissed all over you too?
I know of one member not far from this keyboard who is thinking that the membership fee would be better spent in the pub, where I can at least hear some imaginative insults

Give them another try Staggs; I know the price of barley has increased the price of a pint recently but listening to Benny crooning over a glass of gin must surely be sufficient compensation for that :grin:
G why would I make your life easy ???I'll come and go as I please thank you.
Sorry if I keep asking inconvenient questions that you have no answer to, but you know, you can't have it your own way forever....others may wish to sit at your feet and listen to the pontifications from on high...but I've never been a fan of authority figures...especially self appointed ones
So do you have anything to add to this debate or are you just going to keep wishing I was elsewhere ??

23 Jan 2011

Oh and btw we'll have no casting aspersions on the good folk of Woodseats and their Palace thank you very much

23 Jan 2011

I like everyone else here am in no position to make demands .... I have asked repeatedly, true...but demand?? and who has answered the question??....please include quote with any response

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
*allows digging to continue*
*also notes second question has been neatly ignored*

:doh:

:sleeping:

23 Jan 2011

Staggs, old chap - your questions are not inconvenient just reminiscent of a nagging ache in my bowels usually corrected by a good dump!
I notice that, since you have taken your bat home on this thread, you've opened another one. rolleyes

23 Jan 2011

OOOOOOOOOOOpppps!! no qoutes here then ....who'd have thunk it
speaking of reminiscent.....why on earth do I keep thinking of Mike and Bernie Winters or Cannon and Ball???

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
OOOOOOOOOOOpppps!! no qoutes here then ....who'd have thunk it
speaking of reminiscent.....why on earth do I keep thinking of Mike and Bernie Winters or Cannon and Ball???

First album I ever bought with birthday money as a child

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
OOOOOOOOOOOpppps!! no qoutes here then ....who'd have thunk it
speaking of reminiscent.....why on earth do I keep thinking of Mike and Bernie Winters or Cannon and Ball???

Hang on, I think I might have it, did they work for the Tories? dunno

23 Jan 2011

Oh bollocks look what I just found

Quote by GnV
There is nothing wrong in the PM's judgement. He was the best man for the job and may well have just fallen on his sword for the better good like the immediate past Chief Secretary to the Treasury (David Laws MP) did amid certain breaking news about expenses claims.

G I apologise.....I fail to see your logic, but I apologise for missing your answer.
I do wonder however, if you really believe that Dave having failed to take circumstances into account in the appointment, displayed sound judgement. But I really don't expect an answer to that one.

23 Jan 2011

Quote by flower411
Oh bollocks look what I just found

There is nothing wrong in the PM's judgement. He was the best man for the job and may well have just fallen on his sword for the better good like the immediate past Chief Secretary to the Treasury (David Laws MP) did amid certain breaking news about expenses claims.

G I apologise.....I fail to see your logic, but I apologise for missing your answer.
I do wonder however, if you really believe that Dave having failed to take circumstances into account in the appointment, displayed sound judgement. But I really don't expect an answer to that one.
Fuck me !!!! Which bit of that answer didn`t you understand ?
I understood it perfectly....if you're questioning my not seeing it what can I say, I missed it several times....as I said I had looked
If you're questioning the above response to it, I think it speaks for itself

23 Jan 2011

Staggers,
Whilst all governments are hit by resignations either ministerial, agencies or advisors, I agree that this current Coalition government, with the Tories keeping a tight leash on their Lib Dem puppy, does seem rather prone to them since they came to power less than 10 months ago.
e.g.
- Jim Gamble quits as Head of CEOP (Child Expoitation & Online Protection)
- David Laws
- Andy Coulson
- Lord Young
- Andrew Parsons (Cameron appointed personal photographer) *
- Nicky Woodhouse (Cameron appointed film-maker & website producer) *
* understand technically resigned as PM appointed civil servants and transferred to Conservative Party funded roles
Plus the Facebook group calling for Theresa May's resignation as equality minister over her voting record on Gay rights, his former shadow work and pensions minister Chris Grayling being 'demoted' for backing a B+B turning away gay couples, former shadow defence minister Julian Lewis saying 'gay sex was dangerous', and an election candidate Philip Lardner suspended for saying homosexuality was 'not normal'.
As party leader, in opposition leading up to the election and since, there certainly seems to be a judgment issue when appointing people or dealing with appointments

23 Jan 2011

Quote by GnV
There is nothing wrong in the PM's judgement. He was the best man for the job and may well have just fallen on his sword for the better good like the immediate past Chief Secretary to the Treasury (David Laws MP) did amid certain breaking news about expenses claims.

Andy Coulson took the job as communications director of the Conservative party in July of 2007 having resigned from the News of the World in January of the same year...his resignation effectively prevented a full inquiry into the phone tapping affair by the PCC leaving Clive Goodman the papers royal correspondent to carry the can and receive the custodial sentence (there still hasn't been a full inquiry into the affair)..This alone should have been enough to set alarm bells ringing in central office....but no-one seemed to worry too much about it and Andy got the job.....this alone would suggest a lack of judgement on the part of both the Tories and their leader.....to employ a man with Coulsons well publicised history would seem to be on a par with re-appointing David Blunkett or Peter Mandelson were always going to be questions asked and skeletons have a habit of jumping from closets.
A 2008 employment tribunal upheld claims of bullying in the workplace brought against him and one of unfair dismissal by Matt Driscoll a senior sports writer...”We find the behaviour to have been a consistent pattern of bullying behaviour”...Coulson was singled out for making bullying remarks to Driscoll by e-mail....the paper was ordered to pay a substantial amount to Driscoll.....still no alarm bells ,by this time I assume central offices heads are firmly planted in the sand or up their arses (you choose)
And still Andy stays on to become the highest paid special adviser to the UK government
So Flower you think I've misunderstood G ….I haven't misunderstood anything...I missed the answer in the thread,I had read it several times but I'm afraid it failed to register.
My point was and is....given the above evidence to the contrary, how can anyone in all honesty say that Andy Coulson was a good choice for the job he was given....the appointment surely shows monumentally poor judgement on behalf of everyone concerned....that he eventually fell on his sword (or as is more likely was pushed onto it) does nothing to correct the error that ANYONE with any kind of savvy wouldn't have given him the job in the first place.
I am suitably contrite ...I missed G's answer....I pointed out my error
I will no doubt hear a great deal about this in the near future...it will no doubt be used as an excuse for many things.
The point I've made in the main body of this post remains a valid one

23 Jan 2011

Is it possible, that the Tories believed, that what he had to offer the party, outweigh the risks dunno

23 Jan 2011

Quote by Bluefish2009
Is it possible, that the Tories believed, that what he had to offer the party, outweigh the risks

It is entirely possible that this was the case Blue ......but he must really have had a lot to offer...and I would be more than a little curious to know what

24 Jan 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Is it possible, that the Tories believed, that what he had to offer the party, outweigh the risks

It is entirely possible that this was the case Blue ......but he must really have had a lot to offer...and I would be more than a little curious to know what
I imagine one thing would have been some very good contacts within papers who may be swayed into write favourable articals :dunno:

24 Jan 2011

Or more likely some dirt---forgive me some cynicism.