Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

BorisWatch

So... everyone jumps on and disagrees with "newspaper reporting facts" ... but nobody disagrees that Red Ken did more damage to London than Hitler.

Thanks for the confirmation.

I must totally disagree with you about Livingscum and the damage he did. yes he did a fuck load of damage but please remember that some of us remember the London Docklands Development Corporation and they really did do more damage than the Luftwaffe.
 
In all honesty, the two-legged disaster that is Ken Livingstone can be summarised in three words... "Congestion Charge, Olympics".
The congestion charge was hardly a disaster by anyone's reckoning and you haven't the faintest idea whether the Olympics will be a disaster or not yet.

Not that any of the above has anything to do with this thread.
 
Why can't the ken haters start their own thread instead of derailing these ones all the time?

If they built it no-one would go. I don't think any of them support Boris, but they can only validate their weird anti-Ken world view by trolling any other threads.
 
The congestion charge was hardly a disaster by anyone's reckoning and you haven't the faintest idea whether the Olympics will be a disaster or not yet.

Not that any of the above has anything to do with this thread.

The congestion charge has been a disaster, at least for anyone who drives in London it is. As someone whose bus journey to work goes along New Kent Road and Tower Bridge Road, everyone goes round there instead of cutting through London on any of the other bridges, so all the congestion is there instead of being spread out - and people won't divert off because of having to pay £8 for the privilege of another tax on motorists.

http://www.timeout.com/london/features/3916/Ken_Livingstone_on_trial.html?cpage=3&ccat=5
"The Congestion Charge has damaged business in central London. In 2004, John Lewis calculated that the Charge had resulted in a 5.52 per cent drop in sales at its Oxford Street store. The £16 billion needed to fund Crossrail means that at least three other major projects are likely to be put on ice, including the extension of the Croydon tram link to Crystal Palace and the proposed Docklands Light Railway route linking Barking Riverside and Dagenham. London’s fares continue to be the most expensive in the world. And, of course, many Londoners have still not forgiven Livingstone for ditching the beloved Routemaster buses in 2005.

Our jury’s verdict ‘The Mayor is no expert on transport and it is a socialist dream that does not work. His policies have failed singularly.’"


http://www.liebreich.com/LDC/HTML/Olympics/London/London01.html

"The Olympics has already been stated as way over the original budget - and Ken admitted to lying about the costs to get the thing here in the first place.

When the costs were examined by the Treasury, they had to be revised upwards. Ove Arup now claim the costs will be nearer to £3.6 billion. The Government now thinks £5.2 billion might be the right answer for the costs, and the shortfall would be £2.6 billion, to be funded from a combination of central government, a precept on London Council Tax and a special Lottery game."

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/04/24/cheek_by_jowell_undermines_gra.html

"No offence to the minister but to pick one figure that particularly incensed the PAC, the budget for the Olympic Delivery Authority was originally put at £16m. It is now running at £570m. The fact that Jowell "meant well" does not really cover it. "

What has it got to do with the discussion? It shows that dear Ken, so beloved to some people around here, has left a terrible mess in those two things alone, never mind all the sleaze and corruption that's still being unravelled, for Boris to take over.

Ken lied about the costs of the olympics, and who's going to be the one in office whilst all this mess is sorted out? Boris. Who's going to get the blame for a mess he inherited when it all goes tits up in 2012? Boris.

There was a picture of Ken in the free paper this evening, with a face like a bulldog licking piss off a nettle. He still hasn't got over the fact that he failed and there's no amount of spin he can put on it to get over the fact he lost.
 
If they built it no-one would go. I don't think any of them support Boris, but they can only validate their weird anti-Ken world view by trolling any other threads.

I think what you mean are the Ken supporters are very militant in their views, whereas the Boris supporters are not only outnumbered here due to the nature of this site and its general poster demographic, but also there would be so much insults being thrown instead of addressing the points raised that it would very soon become completely worthless because of all the distractors.
 
I think what you mean are the Ken supporters are very militant in their views, whereas the Boris supporters are not only outnumbered here due to the nature of this site and its general poster demographic, but also there would be so much insults being thrown instead of addressing the points raised that it would very soon become completely worthless because of all the distractors.

"I'd like my kneejerk factionalism with a side-order of persecution complex, please."
 
If they built it no-one would go. I don't think any of them support Boris, but they can only validate their weird anti-Ken world view by trolling any other threads.

quite :D

I think that would be an exceptionally good idea, speaking personally.

So delete all the guff and keep this thread what the Op asked for 'boris watch' would make sense no? :cool:

Thought this place was for debate not just a pro Ken circle jerk :confused:

This place or this thread?

I mean it clearly states boris watch in the OP, what part of that don't you understand?

Is there anything in this opening post that's pro ken?

Post up examples of Boris's buffoonery here.

I'll start with his announcement of another U Turn on his promise of a permanent memorial to World War II tactical commander Sir Keith Park on the 4th plinth at Trafalgar Square.

Speaking on BBC London TV, Boris toffed: "If he had my way I'd rename Hyde Park 'Keith Park'."

Yah. Rly.
No there isn't, you seem to come on all of the Boris threads and slag Ken off and I don't understand why you do it.

No-one's saying ken's a fucking angel, but this thread and all the others aren't about him they're about Boris. :confused:
 
I think that would be an exceptionally good idea, speaking personally.

I have started a very moderate pro Boris thread and it got totally trolled by posters just parroting the KL propaganda line. A challenge is good but repeating 'ken good boris bad' at every opportunity isn't a challenge its the province of the desparately deluded and disruptive. Why then should pro Boris or indeed pro change comments be banned from threads such as this when when no action at all was taken (indeed no complaint was made by myself) against several vociferous posters screaming pro ken propaganda on threads that have the temerity to question the idea that KL deserved to run London in perpetuity.
 
I have started a very moderate pro Boris thread and it got totally trolled by posters just parroting the KL propaganda line. A challenge is good but repeating 'ken good boris bad' at every opportunity isn't a challenge its the province of the desparately deluded and disruptive. Why then should pro Boris or indeed pro change comments be banned from threads such as this when when no action at all was taken (indeed no complaint was made by myself) against several vociferous posters screaming pro ken propaganda on threads that have the temerity to question the idea that KL deserved to run London in perpetuity.

Your pro-Boris stuff seems to be uniformly based on attacking Livingstone, and even when people don't say anything about Ken but attack Boris your response has been pretty much always to call them Ken supporters, and attack Ken. It really puzzles me how you don't see this.
 
Your pro-Boris stuff seems to be uniformly based on attacking Livingstone, and even when people don't say anything about Ken but attack Boris your response has been pretty much always to call them Ken supporters, and attack Ken. It really puzzles me how you don't see this.

There is also another fact that people are forgetting.

We have 8 years of things that Ken has done.

We've only had one month of Boris, so whether good or bad, there isn't so much to talk about.

Much of the anti-Boris stuff being peddled here is purely reactionary - such as the alcohol ban will "take away the rights of the common person to drink on the tube", or the ending of the oil deal with a well known dictator as "removing cheap travel for the unemployed" - without the ability of hindsight to be able to look back and see how what Boris did in 4 years time has improved things for London.
 
Your pro-Boris stuff seems to be uniformly based on attacking Livingstone, and even when people don't say anything about Ken but attack Boris your response has been pretty much always to call them Ken supporters, and attack Ken. It really puzzles me how you don't see this.

Thats because many of us saw the need for change, saw the faults inherent in Livingstones rule and voted for a change. Sadly, the only electable alternative was Boris Johnson.
 
Thats because many of us saw the need for change, saw the faults inherent in Livingstones rule and voted for a change. Sadly, the only electable alternative was Boris Johnson.

This is a bit disingenuous. You have repeatedly argued for Boris based on a tiny amount of thinking he's any good and a vast quantity of hating Ken, which is a coherent position certainly (if perhaps incorrect). However, you then typified and continue to typify everyone who says that Boris is a wanker as rabid Ken supporters, and brought and continue to bring up Ken whenever anyone criticises Boris, regardless of whether they mention Ken or not. You're doing it right now.
 
This is a bit disingenuous. You have repeatedly argued for Boris based on a tiny amount of thinking he's any good and a vast quantity of hating Ken, which is a coherent position certainly (if perhaps incorrect). However, you then typified and continue to typify everyone who says that Boris is a wanker as rabid Ken supporters, and brought and continue to bring up Ken whenever anyone criticises Boris, regardless of whether they mention Ken or not. You're doing it right now.

Thank gawd you said that. I started a similar post before a sudden bout of 'cantbearsedwiththis' struck. Well said.
 
So you concede you're a trolling tosser then?

Not at all.

My feelings on some issues just happen to be more in line with Boris than Ken. It's as simple as that.

Sure, it may be a minority round here ... but that doesn't mean I can't share my views.
 
There is also another fact that people are forgetting.

We have 8 years of things that Ken has done.

We've only had one month of Boris, so whether good or bad, there isn't so much to talk about.

The latter paet is true, but this is still a thread about Boris, not Ken.

Much of the anti-Boris stuff being peddled here is purely reactionary - such as the alcohol ban will "take away the rights of the common person to drink on the tube", or the ending of the oil deal with a well known dictator as "removing cheap travel for the unemployed" - without the ability of hindsight to be able to look back and see how what Boris did in 4 years time has improved things for London.

You are aware that Chavez was democratically elected, yes?
 
BTW, is anyone going to answer my question? What's that £450,000 changeover money actually being spent on? A solid gold name-plate for Boris's door?
 
BTW, is anyone going to answer my question? What's that £450,000 changeover money actually being spent on? A solid gold name-plate for Boris's door?

I would say that, compared to this little escapade that Ken had planned (April 08, http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...he+real+joker+-+Boris+or+the+Mayor/article.do), a nameplate would probably be a better deal - and a lower carbon footprint.

"TfL is driving two double-decker buses overland to Beijing this summer, at a cost of £450,000, to "showcase the London transport system". How fitting that Ken's London should be " showcased" by a pointlessly extravagant PR gesture."

Boris has, thankfully, put a stop to this (http://www.thelondondailynews.com/ken’s-beijing-booted-p-702.html) but it's still going to cost about half of that because of what's already been paid out - no doubt before Boris even started.
 
As was Saddam Hussein, Pervez Musharraf, Robert Mugabe, and probably plenty more I've forgotten about.

You have a point to make?

Very few people would consider them democratically elected. Chavez was.

I would say that, compared to this little escapade that Ken had planned (April 08, http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...he+real+joker+-+Boris+or+the+Mayor/article.do), a nameplate would probably be a better deal - and a lower carbon footprint.

"TfL is driving two double-decker buses overland to Beijing this summer, at a cost of £450,000, to "showcase the London transport system". How fitting that Ken's London should be " showcased" by a pointlessly extravagant PR gesture."

Boris has, thankfully, put a stop to this (http://www.thelondondailynews.com/ken’s-beijing-booted-p-702.html) but it's still going to cost about half of that because of what's already been paid out - no doubt before Boris even started.

So I ask a simple question about something that's happening under Boris's regime, and you respond by taking the opportunity to slag off Ken?

Why can't you just answer the question?
 
Back
Top Bottom