I can't help it

Actually isn't the point of a lot of these clubs/societies is that members are sworn to secrecy? Nobody is likely to stick their head above the parapet and tell all!

Well, he was certainly in the Bullingdon Club, there's no doubt about that! Perhaps Ashcroft's 'informant' got the initiation rites confused...(accidentally, of course )

Laughing stock of the world. He needs to give evidence that he never belonged to these clubs.

There's no evidence that DC was a member of that club. No one's said he definitely was, although a couple have said he definitely wasn't!

I think the story isn't running on is because we've heard it's like before and it's not a huge surprise that DC was a member of the PG Society. It certainly fits with my perception of him.

Somewhere between bestiality and necrophilia? Bestiphilia? Wurstiphilia?

I think it is only bestiality if the animal is still alive, elegran.

It's hardly shocking.

Not like he raped someone.

And another reason is probably because most people think "Daft bugger" of Cameron and "what a rotten bastard" of His Nibs, the lord, and cease to be interested in something that isn't actually very interesting anyway.

The reason this story hasn't 'run and run' is likely because it is so much probably unsubstantiated rubbish, that other papers and media don't want to get done for libel/ slander, and quite rightly too.

Neither would anyone I know - at least I don't think so.

I have no idea whether he did or didn't stick it in the mouth of a dead pig - what I said was that I don't imagine he shagged or fucked the dead pig, which was in Devorgilla's post. That would be bestiality and is on a plane further down the scale of eurgghh than what is alleged. There is no need to label a foolish undergraduate as a pervert who gets his rocks off from a chunk of cold meat with glaring eyes and ferocious teeth.

The salient points to me are

1) whether Ashcroft can substantiate such a damaging rumour with a confirmation by someone who was actually there at the time,

2) and (if it was true and could be confirmed) why he concealed it when Cameron was rising up the political ladder, only to reveal it as he was about to step off?

As he seems to have been after political advancement himself, it does appear that he was keeping a potentially juicy bit of leverage for his own ends - I do hope that he is hoist with his own petard and his own past is investigated thoroughly.

Every man I know has a penis, but I am pretty sure none of them would stick it in the mouth of a dead pig.

Good post Elegran. Why does everyone get so excited about a penis? I thought most men came with one and if you occasionally read Mumsnet you will come across mums who never thought they would have to say to their sons" don't do that dear"

I still think that it is no co-incidence that this book was not published when DC was on the up and could be useful to Ashcroft's career, but after he has said he will step down in the foreseeable future, so that his potential sponsorship is ended. That says more to me about Ashcroft than it does about Cameron - does anyone really think less of Cameron for not giving in to any bullying demands, whatever inanities may or may not have gone on when they were young and green in judgment?

If Ashcroft had been given a politically powerful post, and the media had connected this with his "vast" donations - then he and DC would have had reputations even more sullied!

Did he or didn't he? I find it very surprising that those posters who are most insistent on demanding statistics before they will accept that others have incidentally observed a lot over years of work are ready to believe every word of an unsubstantiated libel (for that is what it is) in a book by a disappointed hopeful politician known (allegedly, apparently, ostensibly) to be a nasty piece of work.

Whatever happened to "innocent until proved guilty"? Has it become "Throw enough mud and some will stick"? Or perhaps "To divert attention from your own faults, chuck in some lurid allegations"?

Eloethan

You send mixed messages re the Clegg story.

As for 'pig gate'. what informant! Please tell me I want to know, sooner rather than later.

As you state nobody knows if this even happened! (that's where the problem lies)

Yes Ashcroft has given 'vast' sums of money to the Conservatives, as do the Unions and Independant donors give to Labour/Lib Dems/ SNP/ UKIP etc. etc. It's how politics works! As long as donations are open to scrutiny it works. Who remembers the John Mills saga giving Labour shares as opposed to cash! Pandoras Box !

As for David Cameron and 'his rather unsavoury close associates'. that is another Pandoras Box that I could open but it would belong to another 'ongoing' thread wouldn't it.

POGS I am aware that Clegg said he didn't veto it but maybe he has his own reasons for denying it.

As for Pig Gate, we don't even know if this happened (although, if it didn't, Ashcroft or his informant has a very bizarre imagination).

What we do know is that Ashcroft gave vast amounts of money to the Conservative Party with, according to DC, no suggestion that such donations would ensure him a role in government. If such an "understanding" had not been indicated or implied, why is Ashcroft so angry that he would go to the lengths of sullying his own reputation by admitting to what is, in effect, engaging in corrupt practices?

Not for the first time, it would appear that DC has - or has had - some rather unsavoury close associates.

Yes - evidence is a word often bandied about on GN

Correct Elegran.

I find it amazing the so called 'teller of tales' has not been outed by either Ashroft or Oakeshott to substantiate their story. I won't say 'alleged' as that trivialises the harm done and to be honest is down right bloody cowardly.

I am not saying proof isn't out there but until proof this happened surfaces then it deserves to be no more than gutter talk but sadly the kangaroo court and faceless wonders will revel in such a story. That's life I suppose it happens time and time again .

Whoever the supposed 'teller of tales' is he must be very worried as either Ashcroft or Oakshott will be feeling the back lash and as sure as shit flies off a shovel they will name him eventually. If they don't they will be perceived as being no more than liars to those who like to see evidence before making decisions. To others there will always be truth behind the lack of proof. No smoke without fire brigade.

I just wish the evidence if it is there would come out sooner rather than later .

how can you square that comment when it is the Daily Mail 'running and running' extracts from Ashcroft's book ? I don't follow your logic

Me neither!

I haven't read it btw

Ashcroft is a nasty piece of work anyway - allegedly, apparently, ostensibly.
I am more concerned that he had so much input into a political party than I am about any high jinks at university.

I have never read any accusation that he was either shagging or fucking the dead pig - what Ashcroft wrote was that he "inserted a private part of his anatomy" into a dead pig's mouth. To shag or fuck it, the said bit of anatomy would have to be rigid.

Even assuming that a cold and ugly pig corpse could be erotic enough to rouse it to phallic status, all those concerned would have been so convulsed with hysterical laughter as to be incapable.

Re the serialisation of extracts of Ashcroft's book. It must have been too good to pass on.

POGS I called Sam that because it seems to be her nickname on the comments section of the DM and whilst I agree the DM will write about right wing politicians (e.g. MPs' expenses), I don't recall seeing such a negative campaign against DC. Maybe this is the start of finding his replacement.

Devorgrilla

Your post19.34. You said

"I am amazed how quickly the story seems to be dying. If had been JC and not DC I think it would have 'run and run'. Couldn't be the influence of the Tory Press could it"

Sorry but I understand the prejudice some posters have of anything right wing/right wing press but how can you square that comment when it is the Daily Mail 'running and running' extracts from Ashcroft's book ? I don't follow your logic.

Wilma

You also seem to think the Daily Mail does not as a general rule write any negative stories re Cameron and as you call her (for some reason) 'the sainted Sam Cam'. The Daily Mail has very often wrote negatively of Cameron, right wing politicians etc. Perhaps the only thing anybody has 'attacked' Sam Cam for has been connected to her job because there is nothing else to write about. .

There isn't much censorship on here, Devorgilla. You could have said 'fucked' without any problem.

No evidence that DC was even in that society though - unless of course you know different.

Eloethan.

Your post 12.40 You posted:-

"I believe Ashcroft claims that Cameron wanted to appoint him but Clegg had vetoed it"

You are wrong, Nick Clegg has said he did not veto Cameron appointing Ashcroft.