Mosley 'knows' who set him up

[PolePosition_1]

"Moral Clauses" are written into a lot of employment contracts World-Wide to protect the parent organization from being tarnished by employees ingaged in such actions.

The fact that Max finds it necessary to still be talking about "being caught" shows that his actions have brought "Disrepute" to the FIA !!!

It's NOT the HOW he was caught that matters to the public !!!

It's THAT he was caught involved in inegregious actions that tarishes the FIA's image.

Just a simple yes or no please mate. Do you you think that its right that being caught doing something perfectly legal, but not conformed to societies view of 'normal' should warrant his loss of professional reputation and job?

If 'moral clauses' are in his contract then fair enough, but as far as I'm aware they're not.

Why does him going on about being caught mean it brought FIA into disrupute? Could it be because he saw an invasion of his privacy, and wants justice?

[trumperZ06]

How about the fact that someone stooped so low as to try to sting him out of office ?
How do you feel about those folks ?

Seperate issue entirely... and not a reasonable defense for Max's activity.


It's the old... "Two Wrongs still don't make a Right" !!!

Max's actions has put the FIA in "Disrepute"...

Yes, Max was "caught"... but bottom line... his actions were egregious.

That is what the Public remembers... not the "HOW" (he was caught)

but what he was caught... "DOING" !!!

[trumperZ06]

I guess I should add a comment...

The fact that a "Witchhunt" caused Max to be caught is not good !!!

There is no moral justification for the "How" he was caught. Unfortunitely, this goes on... a search for incrininating evidence, and even entrapment is being done by governments, It now seems to be... common practice.

That still does not excuse Max's actions... and that is what the general public focuses on.

We are much more aware of the politics within F-1, and look beyond the press. John Q Public in most cases, only tunes in for the race, and generally doesn't read beyond the headlines.

[Bagwan]

Seperate issue entirely... and not a reasonable defense for Max's activity.


It's the old... "Two Wrongs still don't make a Right" !!!

Max's actions has put the FIA in "Disrepute"...

Yes, Max was "caught"... but bottom line... his actions were egregious.

That is what the Public remembers... not the "HOW" (he was caught)

but what he was caught... "DOING" !!!

I could agree with you if Max's FIA position had any juridisdiction over any sexual matters , but it does not .
I would not expect his actions are the norm , but these habits exist , and are not illegal .

Never has anyone linked his actions within the presidency to anything sexually depraved in any way , until now .
His habits have been so for many years , as we heard , and kept very secret .
This likely took a fair amount of effort in itself , and undoubtedly a lot of cash .

So , in those days , before the scandal broke , you didn't have any misgivings about his sexual activity , only about his governance .
This is because he took the necessary precautions .

Presumably , these precautions were still in place when the sting occurred .

It has been written that he had been warned that something was up , and failed to react .
Here may be his only real un-doing in the situation , as he may not have added extra security . On the other hand , he may have . We don't know .
Further to that thought , one must presume that one must entrust certain elements of such planning to others .
Those in the "industry" with which you are dealing , are generally trusted to supply the proper "employee" .

Max would make the order , and the agency would supply the goods .

And , one would think that the agency wouldn't likely change too often , as the risk of security breach heightens hugely if that were the case .

And , speaking of breach of security , how does one protect oneself against the national security agency ? MI5 was shown to be involved .



I think it was Ron Dennis who described F1 as the "pirannha club" .
This is just another example .

But , it's an example of going too far .



Remember this :
You never knew anything about this , and had no problem with it , until someone showed you the pictures .

And..........that wasn't Max .

[trumperZ06]

Baggie,

I do agree with you, Max likely took extra precautions, to avoid any public disclosure.

Taking your point that Max was hiding his sexually depraved activities...

seems to admit Max (while president of the FIA) was doing something inmoral,

which, if found out would be detrimental to the FIA's reputation.



So that brings us back to:

Today,

The problem is

John Q Public's perception of Max...

After his egregious sexual activities became common knowledge.



Max still is trying to deflect the public's attention away from his personal sexual activities...

by attempting to focus the press's attention on...


"Mosey knows who set him up" !!!

[ioan]

If 'moral clauses' are in his contract then fair enough, but as far as I'm aware they're not.

Ofcourse there are no moral clauses in his contract, he probably wrote his own contract and he is not as stupid as some would like to think he is.

I wonder if it was BE or RD?! I can't think of anyone else who had reasons to try to oust Max.

[ioan]

Max's actions has put the FIA in "Disrepute"...

That's wishful thinking. The FIA is doing very well and Max is again a public figure.

His detractors drummed a lot how he can't do his job anymore and other BS like that, but as soon as it was clear that there was nothing "Nazi" in his private business everyone forgot the whole story.

[ioan]

Today,

The problem is

John Q Public's perception of Max...

John Q doesn't even know who Max is, all he knows is that he can watch his favorite colored car go around a Tilke circuit for about 90 minutes every other Sunday.

John Q rarely even watches Qualifying, and more often than not he doesn't know what tires the cars use.
All he knows and cares about is the name of the driver, the color of the car and maybe the name of the team.
And if he manages to watch more than 50% of the boring fest he might even know who won the championship at the end of the season.

Max still is trying to deflect the public's attention away from his personal sexual activities...

There is nothing to deflect, in fact there was nothing to deflect already a few weeks after the NOTW article.

[Tazio]

Agree to all three

[trumperZ06]

Ioan, not again !!!

The average... John Q Public only tunes in for the race. He gets his information from the broadcasters who talk about the Headlines. Max's initial exposure was all over Speed TV, National News & Sports sites, and in the press.

: Max's sexual escapades were HEADLINES... and the NOTW web site broadcasts were viewed by millions.

The NAZI role playing... etc. were the HEADLINES.

Even Governments were commenting about Max's behavior.



Retractions to the News (if any) only came months later, and in many cases on the back pages, or as a footnote within a broadcast.

The "man in the street" wasn't following nor interested in ~ two month old F-1 politics. He remembers the sexual exposure... not Max's whining explainations about being "set-up in a sting opperation" that followed.

People on this site are far more informed & opinionated than the casual fan, who is the "bread & butter" for F-1 revenue.

: Max's actions have ruined his reputation. Many leaders and heads of foreign states will no longer meet with him, and his position in the FIA has tarnished it's image.