Wednesday, September 20, 2006


I see that Simon Moores has craftily taken the opportunity allow his readers to take yet another cheap and uninformed shot at the Goverment. Under the heading 'Clangers' he writes:-
What do you think of a fine or even two years in jail for not having a bicycle bell?
Another soft target for law-enforcement perhaps?
This has arisen as a result of an article in one of the Tory party house journals,

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Of course his readers have leapt on the bandwagon claiming or assuming that this is a new law and is somehow linked to a soft line on child sex offenders, rapists and murderers. As far as I know it has ALWAYS been an offence not to have a means of warning on your bicycle and to try and pretend that this is another law to allow soft targets to be met is just one more in a long line of corruption of the facts. It is in fact the very type of spin that Dr Moores and his readers allege they have had enough of.
One rule for Tories and another for the rest of us ??


James Maskell said...

Another criticism of the Tories without being equally critical of Labour for what it has done.

Wheres the balance?

Observer said...

Are you referring to the same balance that is shown on Thanet Life?

James Maskell said...

Those who dont like the Conservatives are free to post on Thanet Life as long as they dont break the rules. The rules arent that much different from the rules you have for this blog. If people break the rules, do you not think its fair to ban them and put restrictions in place? Cllr David Green put restrictions in when he felt people were breaking the rules and being abusive.

One Voice In Thanet said...

Mr Maskell, you are deluding yourself. Hard-hitting, and "close to home" criticism of the Tories is NOT accepted on Thanet Life. If it gets too strong, steps are taken to block the comments. As someone else has commented on my blog, the bias on Thanet Life is such that many who don't hold pro-Tory views simply don't visit the blog any more. It has become little more than a propaganda vehicle for your Party in East Kent.

Your own performance over Revolutiongate exemplifies the point. You claim to believe local councillors should be held to account, yet will ask nothing about the actions of Members Ezekiel, Bayford and Spencer on the TCDT Board. Your excuse - you don't know enough about the subject. Asking questions is how you find out more. But of course you have a potential candidacy to consider, don't you?

Cllr David Green said...

I've read with interest your comments on my difficulties with the administration at TDC.

You will appreciate that I need to be a little cautious in my comments.

It is not my desire to be seen as an innocent martyr in this, I am fully aware of political realities at the Council. My comments are in the public domain for all to judge. Unlike many, I always publish in my own name.

There is no doubt, in my mind, that this was an attempt, if not to silence me, to persuade me to curb my critical comments of the Council. The Council administration had three options, to report me to the Standards Board, (in which case I am sure it would have been dismissed), to express dislike of what I was saying publically (not something the Officers could do, but I'm sure the members of the other political party could do so, and have done so in the past), or to invite me to discuss my concerns. ( although this later would seem the most sensible, it is not the culture of TDC, indeed, officers are actively discouraged from discussing policy with all but the ruling group members.)

That they chose none of these, but intead chose to "suggest that I was in danger of referal to the Standards Board" was a attempt to bully. At the school I work, we always advise anyone being bullied to tell everyone they can find, what is happening to them. Hence my approach to this.

I have now had a chance to discuss the situation both with professional advisors and with my colleagues in the TDC Labour Group. I have received reassuring support from both. It is my intention to resume activities as before.

Incidently, I enjoy your blog tremendously, keep it up! Having tried myself, I admire your ability to write entertainingly about serious topics.

Observer said...

Thank you for your kind comments,,
and I look forward to reading a resurected>

Chris Wells said...

In many ways David Green is right. Either you report or you dont, you certainly dont bluster and and bluff and then do nothing. I suspect the publicity has caught the council oficers a little off guard. However, I still believe David should be made to account for some of his wilder ramblings and from that point of view the officers have my sympathy trying to identify what to do. The standards board is there to sort that out wether we like the idea or not. If the council do not now report David and make him account its all going to look very silly, and perhaps more importantly will simply all happen again at some point in the future.

DrMoores said...

What absolute rubbish.. The headline was taken from Kent on Sunday.. I don't read or receive any "Tory in-house rags". Only one person has ever been excluded from Thanet Life in all the hundreds of thousands of visits and that's you! I wonder why.

Observer said...

Ah Ha !
I think I have hit an open wound there,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

and I wasnt aware that I had been excluded, if I have it must have been for pointing out the very obvious Tory bias on your Blog.

One Voice In Thanet said...

Dr Moores, I believe we need to get a few things sorted. I am the person you have excluded from your blog. I posted as "anonymous" and then briefly used the name "Labour Supporter". I am now registered as "One Voice In Thanet" and have my own blog - Thanetonian.

Observer is an entirely different person - but clearly someone you are equally keen to insult.

I ceased to use "Labour Supporter" after your disgraceful post about how you would use comments made by me to seek to discredit Labour at the next local elections - which proves your bias and your intentions behind Thanet Life if they needed proving. I shall be pursuing that on my own blog.

I hope that clarifies things for you.