excellent point Thornfield ...
maybe someone should consider checking with "The Charity Commission" who register and regulate charities in England and Wales, to ensure that the public can support charities with confidence.
This could be considered to be a breach of the rules they are supposed to abide by !!! and certainly not necessarily the best use of funds.
The people who donated money to this charity might not have expected their money to be used for this.
I also would have thought Keith Vaz have more than enough of his own money to use for what is a personal issue, judging by his big house in London and general lifestyle. >:(
Realistically he had no option anyway and from now on this escapade should be of no interest to anyone. I hope the press drop it as I cannot imagine what kind of state his wife is in.
Having read the responses and recent posts, I'd like to withdraw that statement.
Having read the responses and recent posts, I'd like to withdraw that statement.
Oooops.
Yeah, I would normally feel very sorry for any wife/kids caught up in a mess like this but in the case of Keith Vaz he needs the book and more thrown at him by whoever can.
I also would have thought Keith Vaz have more than enough of his own money to use for what is a personal issue, judging by his big house in London and general lifestyle. >:(
He was only a solicitor before becoming a MP and his parents do not seem particularly wealthy. There have been various allegations about him going back many years, a new fresh one this morning.
He was only a solicitor before becoming a MP and his parents do not seem particularly wealthy. There have been various allegations about him going back many years, a new fresh one this morning.
He has a huge property in London, though.
Most people would have to sell their homes to fund such an expensive lawsuit. Why shouldn't he?
Solicitor's make a lot more money than many of us, espcially if they work in the captial. My dad was one.
Having read the responses and recent posts, I'd like to withdraw that statement.
Oooops.
It's fine. You've probably only seen the spin put out and not read the real story behind this. Sadly we've got the usual tactics of bigot being used to try and close down discussion. It'll be the race card next.
In my experience a lot of men have an attraction to adolescents or teenagers. While heterosexual men may shrug off their attractions as natural and the objects of their affection as young women rather than children, they will assume that homosexual men have this attraction too, but because homosexuality makes them uncomfortable and they wish to vilify it, they will much more readily define the real or imagined teenagers as children, whether or not they are over legal age, consenting, etc.
You only have to look at the difference between how Bill Wyman and Jonathan King are viewed by ordinary people and indeed the law, to see what I am saying. It's willfully naive not to have picked up on it.
Yes, that is incredibly unfair and the double standards in that utterly stinks! Sometimes society has such double standards.
It's fine. You've probably only seen the spin put out and not read the real story behind this. Sadly we've got the usual tactics of bigot being used to try and close down discussion. It'll be the race card next.
The BBC seem determined to avoid covering the story. The other day they decided it was more relevant to the British public to air a story about gun crime in Chicago than cover the Keith Vaz scandal. I wonder why? >:(
You really can't see the problem? Most people don't have a problem with people being gay. He took these men to a hotel in Mayfair owned by a multi millionaire Indian businessman, and used the restaurant and rooms for free. Why was that businessman effectively giving him gifts that would have amounted to thousands of pounds? Then he got a £400,000 loan for a flat he used for sex which he has not explained the source of, or whether he has actually paid it back. Neither are registered in the Register of Member's Interests in Parliament. The payment of these prostitutes was also made by his aide, who happens to be a young Romanian man, working for him for at least 6 years as an aide and a London coordinator of his Diabetes charity. That man is highly likely to have been paid with public money.
Thank you. Those on here using this as an opportunity to accuse 'a lot of' heterosexuals of being bigoted should please take their sexuality equality crusade elsewhere.
Gay or straight this idiot is quite rightly being called to account given his unrelenting scrutiny of others, but more to the point it's becoming clear that his work has most likely been compromised by endless dodgy dealings not to talk of potential misappropriation of funds. Are we supposed to turn a blind eye so as not to offend certain people? Grubby so 'n' so.
The BBC seem determined to avoid covering the story. The other day they decided it was more relevant to the British public to air a story about gun crime in Chicago than cover the Keith Vaz scandal. I wonder why? >:(
There's been a lot of coverage on the BBC, both radio and TV, and some presenters have been taking great pleasure in doing so,
Thank you. Those on here using this as an opportunity to accuse 'a lot of' heterosexuals of being bigoted should please take their sexuality equality crusade elsewhere.
I'll carry on giving my opinion on the broader issues and pointing out what I see, if it's all the same to you, because that's what interests me. And you can carry on obsessing over the minutiae of the private life and career of someone you don't like, if you want to.
Thank you. Those on here using this as an opportunity to accuse 'a lot of' heterosexuals of being bigoted should please take their sexuality equality crusade elsewhere.
Gay or straight this idiot is quite rightly being called to account given his unrelenting scrutiny of others, but more to the point it's becoming clear that his work has most likely been compromised by endless dodgy dealings not to talk of potential misappropriation of funds. Are we supposed to turn a blind eye so as not to offend certain people? Grubby so 'n' so.
Or bisexual? If he still loves his wife in a sexual sense, he'll probably be bisexual if anything happened with them male prostitutes.
...And you can carry on obsessing over the minutiae of the private life and career of someone you don't like, if you want to.
Given you were up at the crack of dawn to continue your crusade - and that you have more posts on here than I have! - I'd say you're more likely to be obsessing over this than I am...
Given you were up at the crack of dawn to continue your crusade - and that you have more posts on here than I have! - I'd say you're more likely to be obsessing over this than I am...
I don't care a jot about the particular individual involved or the implications for his career - I care about the wider issues that I've already discussed: the insidious linking of gay sex and sex with children, and the idea that it is somehow possible to find an impartial chair for a committee discussing the law on prostitution.
I just resent being told to take my opinions elsewhere, as this is a discussion forum after all. And why do you think I made an effort to be 'up at the crack of dawn'? I don't necessarily keep your hours, so this is just an assumption.
Comments
I also would have thought Keith Vaz have more than enough of his own money to use for what is a personal issue, judging by his big house in London and general lifestyle. >:(
Having read the responses and recent posts, I'd like to withdraw that statement.
Oooops.
Yeah, I would normally feel very sorry for any wife/kids caught up in a mess like this but in the case of Keith Vaz he needs the book and more thrown at him by whoever can.
He was only a solicitor before becoming a MP and his parents do not seem particularly wealthy. There have been various allegations about him going back many years, a new fresh one this morning.
He has a huge property in London, though.
Most people would have to sell their homes to fund such an expensive lawsuit. Why shouldn't he?
Solicitor's make a lot more money than many of us, espcially if they work in the captial. My dad was one.
Feel sorry for his children they must be going through hell.
It's fine. You've probably only seen the spin put out and not read the real story behind this. Sadly we've got the usual tactics of bigot being used to try and close down discussion. It'll be the race card next.
Yes, that is incredibly unfair and the double standards in that utterly stinks! Sometimes society has such double standards.
Plenty of very homophobic people think like that, unfortunately. Groups like the WBC and the people who post on Stormfront.
The BBC seem determined to avoid covering the story. The other day they decided it was more relevant to the British public to air a story about gun crime in Chicago than cover the Keith Vaz scandal. I wonder why? >:(
Gay or straight this idiot is quite rightly being called to account given his unrelenting scrutiny of others, but more to the point it's becoming clear that his work has most likely been compromised by endless dodgy dealings not to talk of potential misappropriation of funds. Are we supposed to turn a blind eye so as not to offend certain people?
There's been a lot of coverage on the BBC, both radio and TV, and some presenters have been taking great pleasure in doing so,
I'll carry on giving my opinion on the broader issues and pointing out what I see, if it's all the same to you, because that's what interests me. And you can carry on obsessing over the minutiae of the private life and career of someone you don't like, if you want to.
Or bisexual? If he still loves his wife in a sexual sense, he'll probably be bisexual if anything happened with them male prostitutes.
I don't care a jot about the particular individual involved or the implications for his career - I care about the wider issues that I've already discussed: the insidious linking of gay sex and sex with children, and the idea that it is somehow possible to find an impartial chair for a committee discussing the law on prostitution.
I just resent being told to take my opinions elsewhere, as this is a discussion forum after all. And why do you think I made an effort to be 'up at the crack of dawn'? I don't necessarily keep your hours, so this is just an assumption.
Met Police considers claim Keith Vaz broke law