Jump to content
Complete France Forum

So what is wrong with being called a pleb


idun

Recommended Posts

I am from a working class background, that is what it is, I cannot change that. I haven't had a public school education and as far as the social structure goes, I am probably not very high up. I haven't got a problem with that.

So, I am probably a pleb, and if someone called me that, well, I wouldn't mind and I can think of worse things that one can call a person.

It is suggested that it is very insulting, but I rather like non swearing insults, too easy to eff and blind and doing that isn't very clever really.

Am I missing something. It isn't as if we don't think that most of the current cabinet are upper class whatevers, is that as insulting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Surely, in order to be insulted by being called a pleb, someone has to call you a pleb in the first place. If, on the other hand, you pretend to have been insulted by someone, and "pleb" is the best word you can come up with at short notice when you make the false allegation, then it's all academic anyway?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Idun, re your comment 'seem tis 'much ado about nothing', IMO of course!' do not think Mr Mitchell would agree with you.

The thick (as stated by the judge in kinder words) PC Rowlands must be looking forward to a large sum from his action against Mitchell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NickP"]It would seem that the abuse was F******* plebs, but then it appears that Tory MP's past and present are pretty good at being abusive to mere mortals,
[/quote]

And "F*******" isn't abusive but "pleb" is.  Will the policeman now sue the judge for inferring he was ... err ... from plebeian roots?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Clark Kent II"]

[quote user="NickP"]It would seem that the abuse was F******* plebs, but then it appears that Tory MP's past and present are pretty good at being abusive to mere mortals,

[/quote]

And "F*******" isn't abusive but "pleb" is.  Will the policeman now sue the judge for inferring he was ... err ... from plebeian roots?

[/quote]

I don't understand your first sentence, where did I say F******* wasn't abusive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NickP"][quote user="Clark Kent II"]

[quote user="NickP"]It would seem that the abuse was F******* plebs, but then it appears that Tory MP's past and present are pretty good at being abusive to mere mortals,
[/quote]

And "F*******" isn't abusive but "pleb" is.  Will the policeman now sue the judge for inferring he was ... err ... from plebeian roots?

[/quote]

I don't understand your first sentence, where did I say F******* wasn't abusive?
[/quote]

You didn't.

I was commenting on what appeared to be the mindset of the appellant police officer. He appeared to object to the "p" word rather than the "f" word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am finding it a bit difficult to feel sympathy for a policeman...supposedly a member of a profession in whom the public should have faith and trust...who was complicit in the original stitch-up of the politician concerned. To be honest, both sides are unworthy of any support or sympathy, however if the politician had called the policeman a lying (supply expletive of your choice) it might have been a pot/kettle situation, but at least it would have been accurate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing in question was the P word in this libel case..

If the judge believed it wasn't said Mitchell won, otherwise he lost. The characters and decency of each party was irrelevant.

The police as a whole lost a great deal of respect due to their activities in this case.

Politically the police are more important than Mitchell.

And so it was.

The 3 million quid to his (and the other side's) barristers will be picked up somewhere and everyone will be happy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is interesting that the judgement was made on the balance of probabilities that the judge seemed to think the policeman was too lacking in wit to think up the phrase........That doesn't say much about the people who are supposed to be guarding Downing Street.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bottom line is the PC was right all along...

Other PC's have lost their jobs because of other things like going to the press and lying about being there when they were not ... Mitchell;'s evidence it would appear was not matched by the CCTV the evidence of the PC in his written notes were accepted by the judge as accurate .....and the "pleb "PC as he it is believed he now WAS called has counter sued Mitchell for £200,000 damages for what he was put through by his accusation he fabricated the evidence . So now the rich man loses some of his riches and I hope the PC pays off his mortgage if he has one ......

Wooly.....No body seems to know ! It seems a strange word to use if he had served the time he was given to do .

This is from Services Forum :

This is what Wikipedia has to say, having first referred to him as a 'former UN peacekeeper':

''In February 1975, he was commissioned into the Royal Tank Regiment, serving in Cyprus during the 1970s. His commission was terminated in October 1975. He then transferred to the General List of the Territorial and Army Volunteer Reserve and was given seniority in his rank from 10 March 1975............ He resigned his British Army commission on 9 February 1977 after serving in the Royal Tank Regiment for eight months on a Short Service Commission.''
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oooh, just read some of Mitchells past comments to the police - shows him to believe he is a superior being and the police should treat him as a god. Also seems to have a similar vocabulary to yobs.

Examples highlighted to the Court include::

On an overseas trip he told his protection team that he wanted to go to Libya. The Inspector told him that it was not possible as it would breack international law. Mitchell replied 'That's a bit above your pay scale Mr Plod'

On another occasion he wanted to pass through the main gates but it was refused due to security reasons. Ian Duncan Smith arrived and drove through the gates and they allowed Mitchell through also. He allegedly said to the officer 'Bruce Smith, is it? You shall be hearing about this. Don't think you've heard the last of this - I'm going to make a complaint to the Commissioner'. The MP demanded full disciplinary proceedings to be brought against PC Smart. The officer said: 'During both my encounters with Mr Mitchell his behaviour was arrogant and rude'.

A security guard tried to stop him cycling thorugh Black Rods garden as it was being closed by shouting at him several times 'STOP'. When the guard caught up with him and he asked why he had not stopped Mitchell replied 'I'm an MP and I'm too important to stop for you. Stop being so aggressive, you little s***'.

What a thoroughly nice man!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...