Vaz was very close to Janner and in parliament described powerful paedophile evidence against Janner as a “wicked and cowardly attack.” He lost a ministerial position for corrupt handling of billionaire passport applications.
But what he did in private with consenting adults is his own business, and there is a bad tendency to conflate homosexuality with paedophilia in much social media comment today. Nor is he a hypocrite – had he been an opponent of prostitution the story would have public interest in exposing hypocrisy. But as he supports liberalisation he is not a hypocrite, and as entitled to express his view on prostitution in parliament as he is his view on supermarkets, which he also uses.
(It has been pointed out to me that he is a hypocrite in that he has claimed in parliament not to know what poppers are. I accept this correction).
I dislike Vaz very much, have for years, for his politics and practice in public office. But not for his private life which there was no real public interest in revealing today. It is yet more prurient tittle tattle from our pathetic media. The most disgraceful thing in today’s story is that he keeps his whisky in the fridge, which is well nigh unforgiveable.
I entirely agree, apart from your unnecessarily dragging Janner into it, which is bound to raise an eyebrow or three.
Vaz is a nasty piece of work, and I say that knowing and caring nothing nothing of his sexuality. However your allegations of his treatment of whisky are extremely defamatory, and I hope you will retract them.
Brilliant Vronsky
“there is a bad tendency to conflate homosexuality with paedophilia” + “Vaz was very close to Janner” = snide hypocrisy
Not at all, Craig is merely dealing with the crap that’s been thrown around on social media this morning and the insinuation in the mirror.
You’ve gone off half cocked
Very true
I’m sure a few weeks ago he announced support for Jeremy Corbyn or at least he condemned the actions against him. Maybe everything else he did was acceptable to parliament and the Labour right, except that?
I haven’t been able to find a link to support your assertion that Vaz supported Corbyn.
According to the Daily Mail…
“Mr Vaz, a member of the party’s NEC, played a key role in shoring up Mr Corbyn when he faced a coup against him by moderates in July.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3772784/Let-s-party-started-Married-Labour-statesman-Keith-Vaz-met-male-prostitutes-London-flat-wanted-man-drugs.html
I’m not sure if that’s true or not?
Yes I saw that too, subsequently, but still no direct report as evidence os such a key role or it’s outcome.
Anyone recollect when Vaz was confronted with some tough questions of some reporters, about some of his shady dealings; he suddenly took bad and was hospitalised for a fortnight, and only came out when the brouhaha had died down?
The business of private life, somehow is now the issue!!!
Neo Labour party has been barring paid up registered voters from voting for their activities in their private lives; those who live by sword etc. fully applies.
Hello Craig – whats your take on the transition in Uzbekistan, after that lovely guy Karirov has passed on up to “heaven”?
Edward
Vaz was chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, so I do think it’s in the public interest to learn that he likes cavorting with male prostitutes and taking (legal) drugs.
I’d hate to think what they must be trying to pin on Saint Jeremy.
Oh, and according to the Daily Mail, Vaz also offered to buy a class A drug for one of the prostitutes.
Perhaps illegal arms dealing. Supplying ammo for Hamas’s pea-shooters and spud guns from his allotment, or something like that.
Mods, I have 2 comments that have been swallowed up–could you please correct this? Thanks.
Off-topic, but sticking with Labour’s fortunes, Craig do have any background on this character, Reg Race?
“Saving Labour? The secretive battle to oust Jeremy Corbyn”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37262869
Sorry, Craig, but for me, TRUST is the issue..
MPs are elected on exactly that, TRUST, and if his wife, who he purports to love and care about, can’t trust him, how could those he’s never met and doesn’t care about ??
If he lied to his wife, why would he tell US the truth ???
If his marriage vows mean nothing to him, how about his path to parliament ??
What promise or oath IS sacrosanct to him ??
Politicians are SUPPOSED to be the BEST of us…..
Oath* to Parliament
absolute nonsense. Churchill, Gladstone, Lloyd George, Aneurin Bevan, Harold Wilson all adulterers. Adult consensual sex nothing whatsoever to do with politics.
How do they know his wife doesn’t know or even condone, a man of his age and back ground has a lot preventing him from coming out publicly
Oh dear, Craig, you’re not coming up with that nonsense about Wilson and Marcia Williams, are you?
It’s on the same level as all that talk about Wilson resigning in 1976 because some scandal was about to break and/or he was being blackmailed by the security services.
All fevered rubbish.
The really sad thing about people like you is that you talk about things that happened 40 years ago as though they are still relevant today.
But of course that’s the plan, isn’t it, in our new fascist world.
Keep putting up the surveillance cameras.
Rob
I believe it was Craig who brought all these things which happened 40 (and more) years ago into the conversation (his post at 15h54, above).
Therefore you should address your rebuke to Craig (if you dare).
Gladstone is thought to have entertained prostitutes privately but it is thought that he may have tried to bring them to the mercy of the lord and give up their wanton ways.
On the other hand such a fascination with the salvation of prostitutes seems psychologically ‘curious’ and suggests a conflicted complex personality wrt to sex (to be fair not an uncommon situation).
Of course we wil never know what actually went on. It is entirely possible that no conventional client related business went on between gladstone and his targets for righteousness.
Churchill of course had no limits to his entitlements.
Also of course Harold Wilson, but a general observation of human relations is that it is astonshingly difficult to hide a romantic connection. I have frequently been astonished over the years how, especially within work situations, and despite huge pains taken to avoid revealing anything, people conducting affairs are ‘sussed out’. I have found the women especially are incredibly aware of the infinitesimally small nuances of behaviour that indicate that shagging is afoot. IOW if it was ‘suspected’ it is probably correct. So although it is ‘fevered speculation’ it is also a bloody good bet.
Craig forgot John Major and Edwina. Blair and Wendy?(although not in office).
“Politicians are SUPPOSED to be the BEST of us…”
That’s a cracker, where did you learn it?
they are all played by MI5- and therefore we are too.
What are poopers?
hmm I think that was an amusing automatic spelling thingy but might have been just me
Come on Craig, you know Poopers is now the official term for the PLP 😉 a Freudian slip!
So Vaz has stood down from the Home Affairs Select Committee, over his personal affairs. It’s a bit of a non story really. A Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Express bread and butter story.
One could make a case that the press are more concerned, about selling sleaze than they are about real journalism. I guess, sales outweigh truths, every time.
Well said Craig.
Vaz was very quick to intimate the race card too when questions didn’t go to his way of liking I am told.
“Poppers” I think Craig. Poopers suggests something entirely more scatalogical.
question is who wanted him out of the way now? undoubtedly his activities were known to others and intel.
The sting against Vaz was done weeks ago. The timing of the release of these ‘revelations’ (originally by the Sunday Mirror, I believe) should perhaps be questioned.
That’s why Owen-whats-his-name’s train crash in the Guardian this weekend is relevant (the comments are hilarious) …
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/03/labour-or-nothing-owen-smith
“The sting against Vaz was done weeks ago. ”
Not really, maybe 2-3 weeks ago.
maybe its not about him at all Craig, there is some other story behind this and he had to go somehow. What better than the usual treatment.
That is how they like politicians in the UK, those with secrets, easy to manipulate and take down when they become a liability. Not clean proponents such as Corbyn, or Caroline Lucas, you can’t control or force them, to resign.
Vaz has spent years professing to be an honest man whilst publicly hammering those in public service that have made mistakes , I could not care about his use of prostitutes but if your an honest man why call yourself Jim?
The fact that Vaz was very concerned about the cost of the police investigation into child sex allegations against Ted Heath or that he was working as a solicitor for Richmond Council during the period when the Elm Guest House was being used to rape children should also have no bearing on your opinion of him.
There’s no hard evidence that Vaz was involved in the ongoing Westminster child sex abuse scandal. All I will say is that we now have yet another prime minister who is directly involved in covering it all up. Theresa *cue the psycho music* May.
As in the USA, the corruption in the UK is quite blatant, yet a large number of egits still vote for these criminal a-holes.
Now that the weight of a certain personal pressure in the way of sorting out certain documents (I hate paperwork!) is lifted, I can comment more freely and sensibly on this incident or series thereof.
I am shocked that a man like Vaz who on the face of it has everything going for him would (a) have the urge to indulge in this kind of sex and drugs (I would’ve forgiven him if there were also rock-n-roll, but sadly I don’t think much of the mans aesthetics.), and (b) would err so seriously in his judgment believing he could get away with it, right under our noses. On the latter point, he still believes he can get away with it, for all he has done is stand down from his Chairmanship position. These kind of highly (relative to their backgrounds) successful people who fool themselves into thinking that they can indeed get away with it are too-clever-by-half. Other examples of such smart-asses are Nick Leeson who started as a copy-boy and rose to be a hard-hitting dealer who eventually brought Baring Bros down. And, Rajat Gupta CEO of Mckinsey who is now languishing in jail.
However, I am equally if not rather more greatly shocked by how blase the comments here are around this debauched man’s actions.
You see, this is what I say to you warriors, rebels and revolutionaries: you want to change the World, you want to change our society. We are society, you and me. What needs changing is our Inner world. As this case shows and it is not so unusual–like RoS says “this is a non-story”. The real story is that we are cracked-up human beings; neurotic, the only discussion is a matter of to what degree.
I am not interested in marginal, incremental change. I AM interested in us all playing in a different paradigm. That paradigm is of true (Universal) Intelligence. If we can tap into that zone through deep, profound self-awareness, THEN we are in a wholly different game. Then we can effortlessly move away from our present Type Zero Global Civilisation. It sounds like Rocket Science and given how convoluted our ‘Mind’ has become, it is pro-foundly so.
Interesting points. Do you think Vaz’s rather peculiar urges are all part of the personality that propelled him into high office in the first place? The rich – and powerful – are different to us. When it was supposedly revealed that Cameron had performed a sex act with a pig, it was treated by a collective “WTF??” by the masses, and an equally resounding “So? What’s the problem?” by the various Establishment stooges in general (such as “Anon1” and Habbabkuk, right here).
Yet the masses are actually considered to be lower forms of life, by those who think consider it simply high jinks to behave this way, Those in power and gifted with wealth can do no wrong, you see. That’s why there’s a knee-jerk reaction of defence whenever an Establishment figure is caught with his pants down like this.
“The rich – and powerful – are different to us.”
____________________
That little bit of profundity (OK, Glenn, I don’t really mean that) got its definitive answer – apparently – in an exchange between Hemingway and Scott Fitzgerald.
I can’t remember who started it off, but it went as follows:
X : The rich are different
Y : Yes, they have more money.
++++++++++++++++++++
Chump!
Habby, I wouldn’t be that ruthless or dismissive. First off, the little bit one has got to know about Glenn is that he is a grounded, considerate, healthy, rational and sensible individual. Although, when it comes to having fun, I am sure he is as capable as you and I of having fun! 😉
On the substance of your point, let me give you Apple as a recent example: one of being very rich and powerful and yet successfully and rather ruthlessly gaming the system to avoid paying taxes. Something an ordinary individual with a small, profitable business would not be able to do.
I wasn’t exactly making a point in the first place about the rich and powerful but thought I would extend the thesis. Perhaps it is true that the rich and powerful are ever more well-adjusted, carefree members of an utterly sick society.
PS Glenn, I shall revert to you further more specifically hopefully later in the day. Meantime, good wishes to you both and Habby hope you’re keeping up your long-distance swims!
Thanks, Alcyone – but not to worry. Habbabkuk is clearly unhappy at having returned from holiday, with the realisation that a long, dark winter is coming – classic post-holiday blues.
I don’t know about being more well-adjusted, as the rich and powerful simply not considering that rules should apply to themselves aswell. Because in so much of life, they do not – look at the Bullingdon Boys. They liked to smash up restaurants, commit arson, abuse people and carry on in a manner that would land people in jail. A lack of self-control, lack of decency, contempt for those not considered to be in their class?
Glenn
So the rich and powerful are all like the Bullingdon Boys?
Alcyone
No, he isn’t.
He is still pissed at me for rebuking him for shoddy thinking quite a while ago and he often flies off the handle to get into pointless spats with various regular “thinkers” on here.
+++++++++++++++
No really long ones this year but bags of still ongoing beach “work” – not sure, though, why Glenn keeps referring to the “end of my holidays”. Perhaps he’s just knee-jerking as per usual?
“not sure … why Glenn keeps referring to the “end of my holidays” “
I was simply trying to provide a kind excuse for your deeper than usual grouchiness, but it’s pointless trying to help out some people. Being “pissed” (as in annoyed) is an ugly Americanism – where did you pick up that corruption of our fine vernacular?
I’m concerned that you’re suffering from some persecution complex, Habbabkuk – not every pop at Establishment figures, rich oiks, tax-dodgers and money-grubbers on this board were aimed specifically at you. Just the people you work for.
Glenn
What effect do you believe your “pops” (as you call them) have? On here or in the real world?
Or are you just “popping” in order to keep in to the handful of regular “commenters” on here?
Habbabkuk, your speed-reading ability is impressive, but often causes you to miss important detail.
You would have noticed I referred to taking a pop at the Establishment on this board, not simply from myself, had you listened properly before replying.
Your last sentence is a bit garbled, but I gather you accuse me of playing to the right-on elements here? Again, lack of attention to detail has let you down.
ok you made me laugh. that was quite good an of course is ‘bang on the money’ in some respects. Applying a pin in the balloon of implied phoney mysticism(differentness) about rich people is a good idea, but you’d have to agree that the expression of the psychological characteristics of people vary, and this expression certainly has a convoluted relationship to the amount of money they have access to. The money ‘amplifies’ behaviour, if you like.
Yeah, and where did this bugger Vaz get the four hundred thousand quid, in cash, to buy his “sex flat”?
Off topic but on theme for this blog from the wonderful Nick Cohen
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/vlad-corrupter-crisis-left/?_ga=1.168425895.723981225.1470170298
To be enjoyed with a class of good malt whisky, not from the fridge but with a drop of water.
A very nasty hatchet job on a man-Julian Assange- who is in real danger of being kidnapped and jailed by the US authorities.
Nick Cohen is beneath contempt: a poison pen mercenary never to be found on the underdog’s side, always putting his master’s thoughts into words.
Regarding this, for example, :
“… But when they are confronted with actual imperialism, when they see Russia send its armies to annex territory, their angry voices fall silent…”
When did Russia last send an army anywhere to annex territory?
The answer is that this has not occurred since the end of the Soviet Union-since when Russia ‘the Empire’ has given up enormous, unprecedented areas of territory, it being far smaller now than any Moscow/Petrograd ruled state has been since the C18th.
Nor under the Soviet Union did it occur. On the contrary the state succeeding the Empire began by ceding independence to wide areas, refusing to remain the ‘prison house of nations.’
This article will help put things into perspective:
https://off-guardian.org/2016/09/03/the-molotov-ribbentrop-pact-and-the-imperialist-propaganda/
When did Russia last send an army anywhere to annex territory?
Crimea, Eastern Ukraine. Chechenya, Georgia, Transdnistr, Syria – annexing territory on behalf of its puppets also counts.
“Nor under the Soviet Union did it occur. ”
No they were invited in to Prague and Budapest.
As I have oft-mentioned you never miss an opportunity to try to condemn Russia. Thankfully again your nonsense supersedes your credibility.
Crimea – the Russian army was already there
Eastern Ukraine – there is no evidence of Russian forces having been there since Poroshenko started his civil war. If there was Russia would admit it as they did with Syria.
Chechnya – The Beslan School Siege was perpetrated by Chechen warlords you clearly support and brought to an end by the Russian army.
Georgia – I thought your adorable US imposed puppet Mikheil Saakashvili (wanted in Georgia on corruption charges and now mayor of your adorable Odessa) was president of Georgia long after any involvement by Russian forces.
Transnistr – again no evidence of Russian presence.
Syria – Russia has admitted that it is targeting ISIS, Daesh and other rogue elements trying to overthrow the legitimate government.
Of course you don’t mind governments being overthrown: Ukraine, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and a whole host of others providing the US cavalry is leading the charge.
Finally look up the word ‘annex’ because you clearly do not understand its meaning.
Nick Cohen should learn the meaning of annex too. You clearly find him wonderful because he puts your ideas into more comprehensible prose. But he’s just as daft, and just as much a tool of mainstream media misinformation.
You are again confusing Russia and the Putin regime. I am a Russophile who loves the Russian people, their culture and my Russian family – I appreciate that your criticism of our government has made you a bitter and twisted Anglophobe, but some of us are capable of separating the good and bad in a country.
1 Crimea – yes it was on the bases it had under its agreement with the Ukrainians, but that agreement and the Budapest Accord did not allow it to go out and annex the Crimea – even Putin has acknowledged the existence of the little green men http://news.sky.com/story/putin-comes-clean-on-crimeas-little-green-men-10368423 – following this logic it would be ok to annex Cuba because it has a base at Guantanamo
2 Eastern Ukraine – Putin has already admitted the existence of Russian troops in Eastern Ukraine https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/17/vladimir-putin-admits-russian-military-presence-ukraine
Of course this may be somewhat hard to swallow for those such as yourself who cannot accept that the Soviet regime was responsible for the massacre at Katyn even after the Russian Government had made the evidence public.
3. Chechenya – the first and second Chechen wars were over before Beslan (which is in North Ossetia) in 2004 and atrocities were committed in Chechenya by Russian forces for many years before Beslan. It is a slur for which you should apologise if you have a shred of decency to say I in anyway support the terrorists who carried out Beslan or the various attacks in Moscow – I don’t and never have – it is possible to condemn the human rights abuses of both the Russian and the Chechens – just as it is possible to condemn those of the IDF and Hamas.
4 Georgia – look up Abhazia and Ossetia and see work out who the UN recognises as the legitimate government
5 Transdnistr – you are just demonstrating your ignorance – there have been Russian troops there since Lebed sent them there in the 1990s – although they do have trouble in getting home
http://www.eurasianet.org/node/73586
6 Syria – Putin has propped up the puppet Assad who has been the best recruiting sergeant for ISIS – if Assad had gone at the time of the Arab Spring then ISIS would not have stepped into the vacuum to the extent that they have
I understand what annex means – I am eternally grateful that the Red Army liberated Eastern Europe form the Nazis, which they did despite the leadership of your and Bevin’s pal Stalin, but that did not give them the right to occupy previously independent countries for over 50 years and impose their ideology. Ask those concerned and they will tell you it was annexation.
You have made absolutely no case for your lack of knowledge of the word annex.
“I am eternally grateful that the Red Army liberated Eastern Europe form the Nazis, which they did despite the leadership of your and Bevin’s pal Stalin, but that did not give them the right to occupy previously independent countries for over 50 years and impose their ideology.”
Stalin is dead. I never knew him. He has never been a pal of mine. Your gratitude to the Soviet Union (is that the country you love?) and its annexation of countries seems to be confused with the twenty-first century capitalist Russia which has restored these countries rights. Please explain.
Still no apology from the unspeakable for the Beslan slur – but then I suppose that is to be expected from the narrow minded who cannot acknowledge they are wrong about anything whatsoever. I am also still awaiting an apology for the racist attack you perpetrated while drunk – and for which you apologised to everyone bar its target. But I am not holding my breath – your sort have no conscience whatsoever.
The countries of Eastern Europe restored their own rights.
“.. Russia ‘the Empire’ has given up enormous, unprecedented areas of territory, it being far smaller now than any Moscow/Petrograd ruled state has been since the C18th”
___________________
Sure about that, Bev boy?
Could you remind us roughly when Russia expanded into the Caucasus, Siberia and the Central Asian republics?
Thanks in advance.
“Nick Cohen is beneath contempt: a poison pen mercenary never to be found on the underdog’s side, always putting his master’s thoughts into words.”
This is just not true – if you read his books and articles you will find he regularly argues the case for the low paid, immigrants and other underdogs. He was also far from uncritical of the Blair government.
I wait to see any criticism from you or Goss of the Putin regime.
Poluting a good malt whisky by diluting it with water is as reprehensible as storing said malt whisky in the fridge. (Shivers).
Vaz always came over as a smug, sanctimonious git; for that alone good riddance to him.
Craig
You’d better get your finger out and post on another topic because this one is going nowhere as far as on-topic “comments” are concerned. The troops are not interested in your humane view of this matter.
Now had you done a Quintin Hogg (speaking about John Profumo in the HoC) on him……….
🙂
LOL. You mean Craig getting pissed on by all and sundry. Need to take cover quick. Cowards.
More on Mr Vaz…
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5723/keith-vaz-prepares-to-campaign-to-be-next-commons-speaker
By the way, Exaro News, who were, apparently, at the forefront of the Westminster child abuse scandal, have been silenced since earlier this year.
But don’t worry, all you spooks, loons and psychos, there are still plenty of us on the case.
Yet again I will call for the arrest and prosecution of every single member of MI5, MI6 and all the other so-called looney ‘security services’, who serve no one other than the Establishment, and who suck on the tax payer’s teat like a leach.
As a fair-minded person, I will give the spooks an opportunity here to explain what they actually do…
Habba, my earlier post:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/09/keith-vaz/comment-page-1/#comment-622252
In otherwords, the UK security services would have been quite happy to have Mr Vaz as the Speaker of the House of Commons, despite/because of what they knew about him.
I’ll see you in court, old chap, but it won’t be under the corrupt law you placidly accept.
When you use the word loon, what meaning do you assign to it?
Are you suggesting that Rob is a marine bird, with a curious heart rending screech, to be found in, e.g. Canadian, lakes?
Or do you use it in the Aberdonian sense to signify a lad or young man?
A variation of which would seem to be ‘a person of low rank or occupation (esp in the phrase lord and loon)’?
Or are you suggesting that he is demented? In which case accusing him of being ‘pissed’ would seem to be lily gilding.
Vaz is a c*nt full stop. He’s been caught out (almost certainly by design), but he’s a c*nt all the same).
Oddly enough, ‘Do what though wilt is the whole of the law’, is NOT right (though of course, the ‘sh*tbag Devil’ does ‘rule this world’ – check Christ’s words , is ‘the Prince of this world’).
Some folks just can’t stick ‘Political Correctness’.
None of us is perfect, but if we step up to the plate and purport to represent the ‘people’, we are fair game. How many people would have voted for Vaz if they had known his ‘peculiarities’?
EXACTLY.
“Vaz is a c*nt full stop.”
Have you read the full story? Or just guessing?
If we are to have ‘Representatives’, they should be people of integrity. J Edgar Hoover was expert in ‘digging the dirt’ and holding it over his victims like a Damocletian Sword. A certain unnameable Middle Eastern ‘country’ has now taken over his forte, and perfected it.
They just ‘love’ ‘skeletons in the cupboard’, and if one is lucky enough not to have any, a ‘honey trap’ is just a Shekel away.
Why do US Congressmen and Senators, almost without exception, vote to give Monsanto their ‘DARK’ Act, Frackers their ‘green light’ to poison the water tables, ignore ‘Geoengineering’ Chemtrail poisoning of the Planet, ignore the traitorous ‘False Flags’ killing (or hoaxing) their citizens, and so forth?
If I were Jeremy, I think I’d get a Spetsnaz or Cuban bodyguard (as he’s incorruptible the ‘Evildoers’ will be tempted to use ‘alternative measures’).
I have just shouted “House!” after completing my conspiracy bingo card, thanks to this post. “Chemtrails” got me a full line.
It is not Mr Vazs’ sexuality or use of sex workers that bothers me. (The sex trade should be legalised and regulated for the benefit of all involved.) However, Mr Vaz was Chair of the Home Affairs Committee, responsible for monitoring the Police, Law Enforcement and sexual exploitation. Mr Vazs private life and his public persona seem to have issues. The sooner he resigns the better.
Er, No. Habbabkuk didn’t question RobG’s mental health. It was merely one of a list of examples of potentially personal information that RobG, who puts himself forward publicly, might still reasonably expect to remain private.
In this case I must defend both Vaz and Habbabkuk.
What’s of interest to the public and what’s in the public interest are different things. As so far reported, Vaz’s sex life might be of interest to newspaper readers but unless he’s broken the law or clearly compromised his public responsibilities then he has every right to his privacy.
Thank you, DavidH. That was exactly my point.
But the readers might be a little mystified by your welcome post because it refers to a post of mine (in response to a first post from Rob) which the Mods have seen fit to delete (while never of course deleting Rob’s repeated and monotonous ravings about coming after MI5/MI6 people and lining up people to be shot).
I suspect that if we were to look hard enough we would find RobG to be one of the protected species in a CITES annexes. 🙂
According to order-order.com he is alleged to be a nonce so nothing to do with his private life.
Cold you give us a brief and objective description of the “order-order.com website, please?
Thanks in advance.
It’s right up your street, Habb. I’ve often thought you write it.
But Quentin Letts is funnier…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3773578/Camp-Keith-fishy-old-sardine-QUENTIN-LETTS-Vaz-s-sordid-fall-grace-escort-texts-scandal.html
But it’s definitely one in the eye for Brexit. Without these qualified and hardworking Poles coming here to service our MP’s we will be facing a dire skills shortage, and the con-omy will crash. By the way, where DID Vaz get all that money?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3773595/Riddle-loan-let-shamed-Labour-MP-Keith-Vaz-pay-400k-cash-luxury-sex-flat.html
“Drawing down equity” simply means taking the money out of your bank account. Doesn’t it?
And I’m pretty sure you’re a regular reader of it, Baal.
No plagiarism, now! 🙂
I try to stay informed, as it saves incessantly bothering other posters with silly questions. And Staines, while no Dickens, is a good source for rabid rightwingery.
Plagiarism? From someone who never cites his sources, that’s pretty rich, even as a smirking sideways smear.
Hilarious.
I see The Telegraph is reporting Vaz MIGHT have used funds from someone linked to one of his charities to pay for this professional sexual encounter. And they are using such a valuable contribution to the public debate to publicize photos of Vaz cavorting with a rather less than beach body ready belly dancer at what looks like some office party.
If he did divert charity money that would be a more serious matter. But perhaps The Telegraph should first establish this was the case before reporting claims that it might have been the case…