Glass Box for Monday PM

Comments

Sign in or register to comment.

• Previous
• Next

• 1. At 3:37pm on 07 Sep 2009, billtheburger wrote:

  If the victims of IRA bombs want compensation from Libya for suppling SEMTEX do they also get compensation from the U.S. citizens and members of government that were allegedly supporters of the IRA and that paid for the SEMTEX?

  Complain about this comment

• 2. At 3:42pm on 07 Sep 2009, Dennis Junior wrote:

  Hi, Carolyn:
  
  Is the PM show going to do anything about the conviction in LONDON on the trans-atlantic plotters....
  
  =Dennis Junior=

  Complain about this comment

• 3. At 3:45pm on 07 Sep 2009, Dennis Junior wrote:

  Carolyn:
  
  In Msg 2: I forgot to put the correct name, Coverage of UK airline bomb plot case....
  
  =Dennis Junior=

  Complain about this comment

• 4. At 4:01pm on 07 Sep 2009, lucien desgai wrote:

  2 =DJ=
  I'd have thought that's very unlikely.

  Complain about this comment

• 5. At 4:01pm on 07 Sep 2009, Looternite wrote:

  #1 billtheburger
  Also compensation from the Irish Republic for providing sanctuary for these IRA terrorists.

  Complain about this comment

• 6. At 4:37pm on 07 Sep 2009, LionHeartedLion wrote:

  What about compensation for the 15 civilians, the ships, the sailors all destroyed by the 1986 US bombing of Libya - from of course, English airfields?
  
  The bombing, which killed a daughter of the President, was condemned by a UN resolution.
  
  Do you have the 'home base' military personel casualty numbers? They were VERY large indeed.

  Complain about this comment

• 7. At 4:59pm on 07 Sep 2009, U13789579 wrote:

  This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

• 8. At 5:34pm on 07 Sep 2009, Andy Williamson wrote:

  Your report about Tim Nicholson doesn't tell the full story.
  
  As reported this article in the Independent it's clear that Tim Nicholson was sacked, after making life difficult for a company which claimed in its marketing to be operating in an environmentally-friendly way, but in fact, its behaviour fell well short of that - as would have been very clear to him as an employee.
  
  Isn't the real story here, the fact that thousands, perhaps millions, of people working in both the public and private sector, are being forced to knowingly go along with marketing and PR that says one thing, when the reality of what happens is very different - or risk losing their job?
  
  

  In a written statement submitted to the hearing, and then in oral evidence, Mr Nicholson listed a series of examples where, he said, Grainger's practices were very different from its proclaimed environmental stance. One of his jobs, he said, was to try to establish a carbon management strategy for the company – which had been listed as a target in the annual report and accounts. But when he tried to work out the firm's carbon footprint to implement it, senior staff from the human resources and financial departments refused him the necessary data.
  
  Grainger's green policies would sometimes be shown to potential clients as part of a company package, he said, but the firm's executives would turn up at the meetings in "some of the most highly polluting cars on the road".

  
  
  He was apparently employed as Head of Sustainability. It sounds to me like he was sacked for doing his job a bit too well.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  Complain about this comment

• 9. At 5:40pm on 07 Sep 2009, capncapncapn wrote:

  Well if they start giving compensation out to victims families then the lawsuits from foreign countries for killings 'helped' by British made armaments and munitions would bankrupt this country...
  
  this is very petty behaviour from the Prime Minister once more, all because they asked Gadaffi not to make a spectacle of Megrahi's homecoming, and he ignored them, what the heck did Brown expect? The current Labour administration are incredibly stupid.

  Complain about this comment

• 10. At 5:52pm on 07 Sep 2009, funnyJoedunn wrote:

  I am a shyster and not a twitter!

  Complain about this comment

• 11. At 5:53pm on 07 Sep 2009, newlach wrote:

  The piece about the sacking of Tim Nicholson grabbed my attention. His beliefs, although not religious, were considered by the tribunal "cogent, serious and worthy of respect" and therefore certain legal protections against discrimination in employment were applicable. Most interesting point which I want to hear more about.

  Complain about this comment

• 12. At 5:54pm on 07 Sep 2009, bright-eyedwendym wrote:

  Thanks for the Mandy moment at election 'I'm a fighter not a quitter.'. Maybe the Tory party should just play that with visuals at the next campaign.

  Complain about this comment

• 13. At 5:57pm on 07 Sep 2009, capncapncapn wrote:

  re. 12.
  
  we can all be thankful he didn't say 'I'm a lover not a fighter' at least!

  Complain about this comment

• Previous
• Next

View these comments in RSS