John Hemming and his love'rs cat

[NooNews]

His mistresses kitten got stolen by his wife

Is this the same John Hemming who likes posting on MN?

I think even in JH's personal case phoning the NOTW and nominating himself for 'love rat of the year' because 'you've got to laugh at something' effectively scuppered any claim to privacy. Or being taken seriously.

JimmyS talks the usual rubbish.

mathanxiety claims that i "nominated" myself. Which is not true.

It is true that at the moment neither my wife or myself have served divorce proceedings on the other. What will happen is not clear.

I am not going to comment as to the views of my adult children. That is up to them they may wish to and they may not. I am not going to raise the issue with them (one has already commented elsewhere on the internet).

That makes the presumption that I have not talked today at length to all the people concerned.

OMG - just what I feared has happened and the buckethead has crawled out from under his stone.

To accuse me of putting adults before children.....words fail me - I have spent far too long arguing with JH that the child's needs must come first and he takes on board any sob story that he is told by the birthparents. Oh why am I bothering - he is totally impervious to anything rational.

JimmyS - I'm sure you realise JH thinks anyone who disagrees with him is talking rubbish. Would love to hear more about JH's claim that the govt want people to abandon their children.....wonder as a Lib MP what his stance would be on this. Notice he hasn't answered your point about the Pullen case but that's to be expected. He never answers points or criticism of him, just makes odd random posts.

Mathanxiety you are right - he did enter himself for the Love Rat of the Year, or maybe it was one of the 26 women he claims to have had relationships with?

Right JH I think even you can see that everyone on this thread has seen you for what you are so why don't you go away and start doing MP work rather than faffing about on MN. I've never seen another MP on here - how is it you have the time to post your nonsense - no don't answer - just go away.

jh must be the first person I've read of that actually had to go to the NOTW rather than them hacking into his voicemails.

"JimmyS talks the usual rubbish."

Well there's an intelligent response.

"I am not going to comment as to the views of my adult children."

Or your own apparently.

"Would love to hear more about JH's claim that the govt want people to abandon their children....."

The full quote ("I am not sure myself that the Government are right to regret that fewer babies are abandoned at birth. I would think that it would be better if they were not abandoned. However, that is the government's view.") can be found here: johnhemming.blogspot.com/2011/09/adoption-figures-reports.html.

I really do think his plea for privacy takes the biscuit.

Mathanxiety you are right - he did enter himself for the Love Rat of the Year,
or maybe it was one of the 26 women he claims to have had relationships with?

Neither of these are true statements. However, I understand that you don't care about truth.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CAT?

amazing though that you allow this information about you to be published (which you claim to be untrue) yet you never contest any of it?

And one does have to wonder what exactly an mp is doing on a parenting forum day and night - or is it that no-one else takes you seriously elsewhere?

and more to the oint - just how quickly you respond to posts that involve you - just how much time do you lurk here at the taxpayer's expense? (not that you're working now but you're online plenty enough during the day...

good question. (LeBOF)

On JimmyS. It takes quite a while to get children adopted if there is any parental involvment. Hence those adopted before the age of 12 months tend to be those abandoned at birth.

Do you remember being served casserole around that time?

amazing though that you allow this information about you to be published (which you claim to be untrue) yet you never contest any of it?

I contest it by saying it is not true. I am not bothered enough to contest it any further.

Here is an example
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-15137307

In which it says:
Mr Hemming, of Moseley, Birmingham, denied reports he had 26 mistresses while he was married.

He said: "I've always told people that's not actually true and yet that keeps on being reported."

LeBOF - I am pretty certain that my wife was not a direct cause of the kitten's death (if indeed it is dead).

just how quickly you respond to posts that involve you
JFGI

"Hence those adopted before the age of 12 months tend to be those abandoned at birth."

I understand that government wants abandoned children to be adopted. You however claim government wants them to be abandoned in the first place. You know perfectly well this claim is absurd but you know equally well that it's the sort of nonsense your tinfoil hatted acolytes will swallow as gospel.

so how many mistresses did you have?

I mean if we're correcting misconceptions here then why not just be upfront about it?

It's obviously common knowledge that you had at least one (she had your child after all, so pretty impossible to deny that one), but you can't possibly expect people to believe that was it if the claim was that there was 26?

JimmyS - clearly you don't understand reductio ad absurdum. I shall have to simply abandon you to your ignorance.

Sorry.

wannaBe. I am sorry I am a bit of traditionalist. I believe that people should have evidence to make their claims.

So have you not asked your wife what happened to the cat?

I have a good idea as to what happened to the cat (viz it was put through a fence in B11).