New Labour’s Irrational Adoration of Thatcher 566

When Michael Crick embarrassed Theresa May by quizzing her on her non-existent opposition to apartheid as she visited Mandela’s old cell, the response of New Labour was to defend May by claiming the Tories had opposed apartheid all along. Progress and Labour Friends of Israel rushed immediately to the defence of the person they truly adore, who sits higher still in their Pantheon than Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. They rushed to defend the memory of Margaret Thatcher.

Ex-Labour MP Tom Harris and Blair’s former Political Director John McTernan (who now write for the Tory Spectator and Telegraph) led the suicide charge of the Labour Thatcherites.

The person here quoted with approval is Paul Staines, aka Guido Fawkes, far right blogger who has stated that he never wore a “Hang Nelson Mandela” badge personally, but used to hang out with people who did.

Blair-loving ex-MP Tom Harris went one further by claiming that Jeremy Corbyn’s own anti-apartheid opposition was connected to a “rape-cult”, a stupefying bit of “guilt by association” propaganda.

Here we have Liz Kendall supporter and occasional Guardian columnist Sarah Hayward – possibly the most obscure individual to get themselves a blue tick on Twitter, as though she were worth impersonating – making the absolutely ludicrous claim that when arrested, Corbyn was supporting Thatcher’s anti-apartheid policy.

I could go on, but for a last example here is Blairite house journal the New Statesman, pretending to wrap a scholarly respectability around the Thatcher revisionism. It is worth noting that the Blairites repeatedly call in evidence the claims by another right-wing Blairite and former Ambassador in Pretoria, Lord Renwick (who resigned from the Labour Whip when Blair ceased to be Prime Minister). Renwick wrote an entirely tendentious and self-serving book on his and Thatcher’s “role in ending apartheid”.

The truth is not hard to find. Professor Patrick Salmon, the FCO’s official historian, last year published the monumental volume of official documents “The Challenge of Apartheid”. It details with mounds of evidence Thatcher’s stern resistance to any sanctions against apartheid and, repeatedly, her insistence that the ANC was “a terrorist organisation”. Here is a quote from Salmon’s synthesis of Thatcher’s views from the official history (I can’t give a page number as I received the final draft, as standard FCO practice as I feature in the book, and I quote from the draft):

“Mrs Thatcher was relentlessly hostile to all those who sought to overthrow the apartheid regime by force or undermine it through economic sanctions. The ANC was unacceptable not only because of its association with communism… but above all because of its refusal to renounce the use of violence… which inevitably meant that she regarded it as a terrorist organisation of the same stamp as the PLO or the IRA. Mrs Thatcher adamantly opposed the imposition of further economic sanctions…

South Africa’s role as a bulwark of the West against Soviet expansion was not just a rhetorical ploy but was believed implicitly by Ronald Reagan as well as by Mrs Thatcher.”

I was, to my intense frustration, banned from communicating with the ANC. Professor Salmon details at great length the sharp disagreement between Thatcher and Geoffrey Howe, Malcolm Rifkind and Lynda Chalker over South Africa. There were indeed genuinely anti-apartheid Tories. But Thatcher was not one of them. All of her instincts on this were with the pro-Apartheid right of the party, as Salmon notes explicitly.

In real life, Thatcher was not a dictator. She had to carry her Cabinet with her. Her relationship with Howe in particular was crucial to her political base, as illustrated by the fact that he more than anybody precipitated her ultimate political downfall. It is true that Thatcher did in private meetings tell P W Botha to release Mandela – but that was at Howe’s insistence, not of her own volition.

Thatcher’s 1984 meeting with P W Botha at Chequers is worth noting. There was a massive demonstration against it, on which I took part just before joining the FCO, as did Jeremy Corbyn, Peter Hain and children of both Geoffrey Howe and our then Ambassador to South Africa. At this meeting Thatcher’s briefing provided by the FCO was to call for Mandela’s release. But she did not do so in the official meetings. A minute from her Private Secretary Charles Powell (brother of Blair’s Chief of Staff) claimed that Thatcher had pressed Botha to release Mandela in a private conversation over canapes with no witnesses. It is fair to say the nature of this “pressing”, if it happened, was ever after a subject of some scepticism in the FCO. If anyone knows what the South African records say…

For two years I, among other responsibilities, wrote briefings, speeches and parliamentary answers on South Africa, cleared them through FCO ministers before being sent over to No. 10, where they would get “toned down” by Charles Powell to reflect Thatcher’s views. I cherish my first ever conversation with Powell. I called Number 10 to discuss a draft, and asked;

“Hello, is that Charles Powell?”.
“Actually, it’s Pole”, he replied.
“Oh I am sorry”, I said in genuine innocence, “It’s spelt Powell in my directory”.

I had not yet got used to posh twats.

The truth is very easy to discover, and it is not what the Blairites now claim in their deluded Thatcher worship. Sir Patrick Wright, former Head of the Diplomatic Service, was absolutely correct in observing that Thatcher supported a “Whites-only” state:

It should be noted this comes from Patrick Wright’s diary written at the time, and not a subsequent self-serving account. I can confirm it is absolutely true, from my position as the South Africa (Political) desk officer 1984-6.

What Thatcher favoured was P W Botha’s “Bantustans” or “Homelands policy”, under which an ethnically defined, whites only state possessing all of South Africa’s wealthy cities and ports and the best mineral and agricultural resources, would exist alongside a number of impoverished “independent states” housing different tribes, from which a low paid workforce could commute daily to white areas (or live there temporarily under passes). That was the planned endgame of apartheid, and a number of such “states” were created – South Africa actually declared four “Bantustans” as independent countries. Thatcher hankered after their recognition, particularly Boputhatswana.

The “Homelands policy” is of course identical to the “two state solution” which the neo-cons propose for Palestine, with an apartheid ethnically defined Israel holding all the main resources next to impoverished pockets of Palestinians in an “independent state” commuting in to provide a cheap labour force.

Not only does Patrick Wright affirm in his diaries Thatcher’s support for the “Homelands Policy”, Professor Salmon confirms it too “Mrs Thatcher was talking about a return to pre-1910 South Africa, with a white mini-state partitioned from their neighbouring black states”.

Last year I published more on my recollections of my own role at that period.

As a final rebuke to Thatcher’s New Labour acolytes, I quote Peter Hain:

[Hain] criticised Norman Tebbit, a minister under Margaret Thatcher, and Charles Moore, her biographer, for trying to rewrite history.

“If Nelson Mandela can forgive his oppressors without forgetting their crimes, who am I not to do the same to our opponents in the long decades of the anti-apartheid struggle,” he added.

“But it really does stick in the craw when Lord Tebbit, Charles Moore and others similar tried over recent days to claim that their complicity with apartheid – and that’s what I think it was – somehow brought about its end. Even, to my utter incredulity, when Lord Tebbit told BBC World, in a debate with me, that they had brought about Mandela’s freedom. I know for a fact that Nelson Mandela did not think so.”

But there is a question here of great urgency today. Why do New Labour leap in to deny what Hain called the Tories “craven indulgence of apartheid”, to defend Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May, and to criticise Jeremy Corbyn for his anti-apartheid activity?

Together with reaction to the quitting the party of Frank Field, an open Thatcher and Enoch Powell reminder, I conclude that the Blairite MPs would prefer to be led by Margaret Thatcher or Theresa May than Jeremy Corbyn. Their psychology is deeply troubling:

I support Scottish Independence, so I am in a different position to voters in England. But, despite the fact large numbers of my friends have joined the Labour Party to support Jeremy Corbyn, I could not vote Labour in most of England. Could I advise somebody to vote for Wes Streeting, John Mann, Jess Phillips, Stephen Kinnock or their ilk? No, under no circumstances.

Labour party members need to bite the bullet on reselection. Being a Labour MP cannot be a sinecure granted for life irrespective of behaviour. The party is plainly dysfunctional, and it is so because the large majority of MPs are totally removed from the views of the membership. There are only two ways to resolve this. Either the MPs will have to leave parliament or the members will have to leave the party. There is no coherent party at present.

The Blairite Labour MPs have painted themselves into a corner by their decision to brand Jeremy Corbyn as personally a racist and an anti-semite. If I was in a party led by a racist and anti-semite, I would leave the party. The idea that they can continue as members of parliament for the party while expressing such views about the leader is a nonsense. But they do not wish to leave, because they would lose their comfy jobs. All of the right wing Labour MPs realise they would never win an election on their own account, without Labour Party support. It would be hilarious if not so serious, that they claim Frank Field can resign the Labour whip but this does not mean leave the party, and that he must still be the Labour Party candidate at the next election!

Their hope is twofold. Firstly, that the charges of anti-semitism against Corbyn will be widely believed and lead to a drastic drop in public support which will force Corbyn out. This is not happening. The public realise that the charges of anti-semitism are false and based on a definition of the word which simply means critic of Israel. Other than the normal polling malaise which follows any split in a party, there is no drastic plunge in support for Labour of the kind which would definitely follow if the public thought the party were led by an anti-semite.

To put it another way, either 40% of the public are anti-semites, or the public do not take these accusations seriously.

The Blairites other hope is that, by the Labour Party adopting the IHRA’s malicious definition of anti-semitism as embracing criticism of Israel, they will manage through legal action to force Jeremy Corbyn’s expulsion from the Labour Party. This attempt to use the British Establishment to circumvent party democracy is extraordinary.

By bringing things to this pitch, the Blairites have made compromise impossible. Either Corbyn and most of the members will have to go, or the Blairite MPs will.

Something must give. That is why I urge everybody who is in the Labour Party to take action today to push for mandatory reselection of MPs. The matter is urgent, and no party can resist the united force of its members for long.


Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received. It will always be free to view and free to copy and reuse articles anywhere. I do not have advertising or sponsorship or backing from any organisation or person. Much less than 1% of readers give financial support so yours will help – select a sum from the dropdown box, from £2 a month. No particular level of output is guaranteed as there is just one of me writing and researching and I am only human!

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

566 thoughts on “New Labour’s Irrational Adoration of Thatcher

1 3 4 5 6
  • Jeremn

    Met statement, something odd?

    Our rationale for linking the two investigations is primarily based on the following four facts:
    •Firstly, our own analysis, and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in the Hague, has confirmed that the same type of Novichok was used in both cases. [this is not a fact, OPCW said it was what Porton Down said, ie a Novichok or from that family]
    •Third, the manner in which the bottle and packaging has been adapted makes it a perfect cover for smuggling the weapon into the country, and a perfect delivery method for the attack against the Skripal’s front door. [wasn’t it sealed in plastic when it was found?]

    Those pictures the Met released — have the Russians changed coats during their short stay? Who brings two different coats for a weekend?

    • Doodlebug

      “Those pictures the Met released”, and which bear no resemblance whatsoever to that advertised initially as being of interest, i.e., a man and a blonde haired woman, who could not have been Sergei Skripal and his daughter (who was not blonde) but my well have been Charlie Rowley accompanied by Dawn Sturgess.

      You can bet the farm on the Met. not wishing to place the Amesbury duo anywhere near the site of the Skripal incident at the time.

  • Clive p

    Two more questions.
    1. According to the police the 2 travel to Salisbury on the Sunday morning and paint stuff on the door handle in broad daylight with the Skripals in the house and neighbours around. Since they were in Salisbury on Saturday why did they not stay the night and do the work in the dark?
    2. Since they went to Heathrow direct where is their luggage in the photos supposedly taken in Salisbury?

    • Sean Lamb

      Night would have been a bit problematic because Sergei’s car was seen at 09:30 the same morning – so he must have left the house and then returned to it before leaving for lunch.

      So the Russkies have to paint the doorhandle some time between 10:00 and 13:00

  • Jeremn

    Looks like they suspected the Russians in May when they searched the hotel room (4 May). But did not go public with pictures? The families of Dawn and Charlie might be upset by that.

  • What's going on?

    The UK government has made such a stuff up of whatever is going on with the Salisbury case, you would be forgiven for thinking that they actually want people to suspect something is amiss!

    • Kerch'eee Kerch'ee Coup

      I’ve often wondered if the whole Skirpal affair was setup to gauge the gullibility of the British/English public. If for al the hints and nudges, they still have an 80% inert reading for the general public and 95% for Parliament, then they know they can proceed with another White Helmets'(mendaciously dubbedSyran civil defence workers by the BBC) chemical
      attack in Idlib. May then rushes in where even Cameron wavered.

      • Agent Green

        Given the Russian assets in Syria, the surrounding region and in missile range I wouldn’t advise the West to anything rash.

  • David Clarke

    So the agents identified by UK & other intelligence agencies aren’t Russian at all? They mustn’t exist then!
    More sanctions at the UN Security coucil tomorrow then!

    This makes you wonder why idiots on this site are so keen to deny it even happened.

    Looks like the two spies will be shot at dawn to punish them for their incompetence and to send a message to the others at Russian “intelligence” so a win-win !

  • Merkin Scot

    “This makes you wonder why idiots on this site are so keen to deny it even happened.”
    I don’t think that is what is being said.
    People are asking for evidence and that evidence has been conspicuous by its absence.

    • Agent Green

      And luckily for the UK Government they won’t ever have to produce evidence as none of this will ever come to a court. They can just continue to make up whatever they want. Happy days!

  • Karl

    Presumably the GRU knows that the UK is saturated in CCTV coverage
    And yet apparently zero attempt by the alleged perpetrators to disguise themselves or avoid being filmed by CCTV.
    I wonder what their escape plan was had Sergei opened the door in the middle of the nerve agent application or a neighbour confronted them ?
    2 suspects on apparently on foot or at least without a means of transport; seems an incredibly risky venture.
    Perhaps I’ve seen too many spy films, but do state sponsored assassins usually travel on their home state passports, take direct flights to the target, and then back home ?
    And further use a means of assassination which can be directly tied back to their state.

    Putting it another way, if indeed the UK government’s claims are true, namely that these are the perpetrators, then it’s hard not to conclude that the Russian government (assuming it RU government sanctioned) wanted the UK to know it was them.

    And 2 males travelling with a bottle of woman’s perfume ? Hmmmm

    And did this really take 6 months ?
    They said they focused on Russians who had short stays in the UK around the time of the alleged poisoning.
    These 2 should have come up right away. And you’d think it wouldn’t have taken long to have spotted them on CCTV at the Salisbury train station once they had identified them from the airport arrival.
    Possibly a few weeks, maybe a month or 2, but 6 months ? Hmmmm

    • Tunde

      The GRU undoubtedly knows the UK is saturated with CCTV, but plotting a route to and from target that avoids CCTV takes an awful lot of reconnaissance. According to the govt narrative, they did an initial recce, which they replicated to target the next day. Perhaps the victims needed to be eliminated pronto hence this skeletal hit squad. The Israeli op in Dubai involved twenty + odd people. The Israeli op in Jordan against Khalid Meshaal involved 5 agents.
      Julia Skripal’s arrival to visit her father provided a means to surveil her and locate her father. Even with careful routing, their identities could still be elucidated by linking to other technical means (cf The assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh in Dubai).
      What I consider “sloppy” if you will, is the simultaneous travelling, simultaneous departures and the discarding of the agent in a public place. The fact that only two agents were identified seems to indicate that the perpetrators were certain of their target’s identification, location and security procedures. I think the trailing of the Skripals by DSC Bailey strongly suggests that HMG was actively monitoring Julia Skripal’s visit to her father. For what purpose I can only guess.
      I think the UKUSA partners have had this information for quite some time, hence the expulsions. IvIve always felt that the govt must have had something more substantial than they had released for such punitive expulsions to be carried out across some many “coalition” nations.

      • Sven Lystbak

        You refer to the Israely killing of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh in Dubai. If I am not mistaken the perpetrators were traveling on fake passports some of them even British if my memory serves me well.

        Maybe it will require a bit more work to make sure who is behind the Skripal case.

    • Piotr Berman

      … escape plan … had Sergei opened the door in the middle of the nerve agent application …

      At least in the first case, the “escape plan” was simplicity itself: hit him on the neck or otherwise knock him out, and silence Yulia in seconds A single trained martial artist could accomplish the hit skipping the “risk of a confrontation with a neighbor”. Unless Mr. Skripal was a judo or takwendo master himself during his agent years, in spite of having a desk job.

  • Tom

    It’s back to work for lazy May and her cronies and – how fortunate – it coincides with the unveiling of the Salisbury ‘suspects”. So we’ll have a week or two of Russia-bashing, with a little antisemitism and Brexit thrown in, and nothing whatever that benefits the British people. It’s hard work being a vassal prime minister for the Americans.

    • Sharp Ears

      We had all that garbage the other day about facial recognition. Many jobsworths sitting looking computer screens were shown. They were probably Crapita employees sending replies to BBC listeners’ and viewers’ complaints.

  • David Ferguson

    And… cue a chemical weapons attack by Butcher Assad on a hospital in Idlib packed full of women and children, with the aftermath filmed by our heroes the White Helmets.

    Coming your way in 3, 2 , 1…

      • Dennis Revell


        Yah, that France24 opinion is probably rubbish – story planted with France24 to give the Syrian authorities the same kind of confidence in their envisaged action that April Glaspie gave to Saddam Hussein prior to Iraq invading Kuwait for stealing Iraqi oil by slant drilling across the border – aided, of course, by American technicians – the Americans being shit-stirrers as ever.

        Of course, Saddam Hussein was also gung-ho about doing that as apparently the last time he’d met the shit-bag Emir of Kuwait, the latter hurled the most inexcusable insults at Hussein, that would have meant death at Hussein’s hands in any other less public less ‘diplomatic’ environment. Pity Hussein didn’t go for it anyway.


  • mike

    Indeed, Karl. And all timed to make the Maybot sound Prime Ministerial at PMQs. The only time she sounds as if she knows what she’s doing is when reading out a script in response to a specific event or development. Luckily for her, there have been many such events since she became PM.

    Corbyn is under constant attack, but she gets a pass every time from the corporate media and the state broadcaster. The media in this country is nothing more than an arm of the state.

  • Ron

    the british government are taking the people for fools on Skripal
    the british government are taking the people for fools on brexit
    the british government are taking the people for fools on the economy
    the british government are taking the people for fools on war
    the british government are taking the people for fools on the NHS
    the british government are taking the people for fools on democracy

    welcome to the british colonial dictatorship people – hope you like it – how long are you going to put up with it?

  • Mochyn69

    I don’t think even Kay Burleigh on Sky right now live from Salisbury believes this latest iteration of the fairy tale.

    Just so much nonsense.

      • N_

        @Sharp Ears – From the other thread, regarding the “possible Novichok attack on Heathrow” story involving Bruhn Newtech and the Danish connection: just a hunch, but I wonder whether there’s a link with the cult organisation Tvind. (Link: Media links Danish organisation to arms.)

        That story makes me think of a number of “exercises” and “games”, including e.g. playing by “paintballers” involving an “imaginary” terrorist attack on Waterloo railway station and various others that people can recall.

  • N_

    @What’s going on?

    The UK government has made such a stuff up of whatever is going on with the Salisbury case, you would be forgiven for thinking that they actually want people to suspect something is amiss!

    Broadly speaking, yes indeed, they may want that, if you consider the propaganda dynamic against a background where increasingly many people in Britain can’t do joined-up handwriting, can’t read the hands on a clock, and stare at their smartphones even to the point of endangering themselves in front of cars.

    Look at this piece of absolute bullshit from the British state broadcasting agency:

    The CPS is not applying to Russia for the extradition of the two men, as Russia does not extradite its own nationals.

    Russia has no such law or policy. It has extradited many of its citizens to foreign countries. You can read the Prosecutor General’s Office’s here.

    How many journalists are going to pick up on that? And how many people in the population are going to think “Hey, I remember the Litvinenko case. Didn’t Britain seek an extradition of a Russian citizen from Russia in that case? And anyway, if it’s the law in a foreign country that it can’t extradite one of its citizens, then why on earth would Britain request it?”

    • SA

      If I remember correctly, the UK government did ask the Russians to extradite the Litvinenko suspects but the Russians refused because no evidence was produced. Also recently Putin publicly said that there are other ways of doing this, such as kaving British judges in Moscom and he was also referring to cooperation with UK about Browder who is wanted for tax evasion . This wasa all turned down.

  • SA

    There is a contradiction in the narrative. Highly competent well trained ruthless GRU agents who bungled so badly leaving trails everywhere and getting recorded in various compromising places, and failing to eliminate thier target. The supposed method of smearing on doorknobs sounds so amateurish that if you wrote fiction using this, it would be rejected on basis of ridiculous infeasibility. Then comes the ‘military grade’ but also ‘high purity’ compound, an impossible contradiction, that sounds impressive to the ignorant, unless an agent is isolated from a test tube. Now we have two suspects that we did not even bother to ask the Russians to extradite but who knows, may happen to fall into the hands of interpol, or found somewhere in Syria. Can someone not write a better script?

    • Tunde

      Poor tradecraft/screw-ups happen. Ben Fogle, the killers of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh and the assassins behind the attempt on Khalid Meshaal, the agents accused of killing Yandabriyev in Qatar and the Iranians accused of bombing Bangkok in 2012 to name a few.
      The VX (?) used on Kim Jong-Nam in Malaysia was considered military grade. It’s potency was proven rather publicly.
      I think HMG’s disclosures will conveniently halt at providing details as to motive (Better to leave it as cold Russian revenge served to “traitors” narrative), which embarrassingly may reveal Skripal’s authorship of the Steele dossier.

  • Agent Green

    The current Skripal nonsense is just more idiocy from the UK Government.

    They have no evidence and have presented no evidence that anyone has even been poisoned or that any attack even took place. They are refusing to send the Russians full passport and fingerprint/biometric data for the individuals named.

    Conveniently none of this will ever come to court so the UK can just continue to make up whatever it likes and use it as tool with which to beat Russia with (more sanctions etc).

  • Sharp Ears

    Say not the Struggle nought Availeth
    By Arthur Hugh Clough (1819-1861)

    Say not the struggle nought availeth,
    The labour and the wounds are vain,
    The enemy faints not, nor faileth,
    And as things have been they remain.

    If hopes were dupes, fears may be liars;
    It may be, in yon smoke concealed,
    Your comrades chase e’en now the fliers,
    And, but for you, possess the field.

    For while the tired waves, vainly breaking
    Seem here no painful inch to gain,
    Far back through creeks and inlets making,
    Comes silent, flooding in, the main.

    And not by eastern windows only,
    When daylight comes, comes in the light,
    In front the sun climbs slow, how slowly,
    But westward, look, the land is bright.
    Never give up.

  • Rubber Duck

    So… apparently, we know enough to charge the suspects – but we think the names we have are false. So.. the arrest warrant and extradition stuff is just so much piffle anyway. So… doesn’t that mean that we don’t know who they are, other than they travelled from Russia and “looked a bit Russian”? If May knows they are ” GRU members” then presumably she knows the real names?? All May really seems to be saying is, “We have definative proof that A. Russianman and A. N . Otherrussianman were behind this”

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Blimey, I have been unbanned by John Ward of The Slog, after only about 5 weeks. This process normally takes about 5 years, but what he wrote yesterday, I thought was completely excellent, and I told him so. I wish I could write like that. It’s not just his writing skills and analyses. He actually used to meet these people on a regular basis, till he couldn’t stand them any more, and went to live in the South of France. I can understand that.

    He’s a good man, though I often disagree with him. He comes from Manchester, and moved down to London, a bit like me…but I was crap at playing football. We almost certainly went to the same gigs, both in Manchester and London, but I have never knowingly met him.

    “ANALYSIS: let’s stop illustrating the mess that is the EU, and start asking who is really running Brexit.”


  • Paddy Mahony

    As the door handle story is being maintained, why do the duck feeding boys or the ducks not get poisoned?
    And Zizzi garlic bread comes cut to bite size on a wood platter with no plates or knives and forks. So how did the Skripals not ingest novichok whilst eating it with their fingers?

  • Komodo

    Anyone know where I can get a 5.5ml spray bottle of Ricci Premier Jour, or a convincing knockoff…other than Russia? Doesn’t seem to be on sale this side of the ex-wall at all. My research also suggests that this is only a prestige item in Russia; here the price (of much larger containers) indicates that it’s not that exclusive. For what it’s worth.

    • BrianFujisan

      Seems you are Correct Komodo

      I had a search..Looks like they dont do a 5.5 bottle..but do a 3.4 ounce one

      good sluething dude

  • Doodlebug

    Meanwhile, the real story (with sincere and grateful thanks to ‘Sandra’ who has delivered up a number of very telling links on a previous thread, including these);

    If the good people of Salisbury were to witness any of this their running amok and shouting ‘Novichok’ would be perfectly understandable.

  • Sharp Ears

    Nice one Jeremy.

    ‘PMQs verdict: Jeremy Corbyn dances rings round May on Brexit
    The Labour leader made it look easy as he brushed off the PM’s barbs about antisemitism

    5 Sep 2018

    Theresa May started and finished her first PMQs appearance of the new season with references to Labour’s antisemitism row, while Jeremy Corbyn spent all of his questions on Brexit.

    The Labour leader, said May, should apologise for saying British Jewish people did not understand English irony. Corbyn said there was no place for racism in our society, and that included in the Conservative party.

    He wanted to know the odds of a no-deal Brexit and asked who was right: Liam Fox, who said he was unfazed by the prospect of no deal; Jeremy Hunt, who said it would be a huge geopolitical mistake; or Philip Hammond, who said it would slash growth by 8%? May said she agreed with the WTO boss who said a no-deal Brexit would not be a walk in the park, but it would not be the end of the world.’

    But why did he go along afterwards with her Skripal nonsense?

    • Dennis Revell


      “But why did he go along afterwards with her Skripal nonsense?”

      – Because not so deep down, Jeremy-The-Compromiser-Too-Far is a COWARD, who didn’t hesitate to shed all his previous anti-war, anti-establishment stances that he was once famous for as soon as he thought – probably mistakenly – that he could sniff the reins of power.

      Also an opportunistic liar as the BEST MP currently at Westminster revealed, the heroic Mhairi Black.

      Corbyn’s a fuck-up.


      • Sharp Ears

        So not a Labour voter then! Keep voting Tory then and see the total collapse of British society as it just about exist for the JAMS as Treeza referred to us. I have been reading about local authority lack of finance. One even says that there will be no road gritting in the event of a bad winter. Lovely. At least the potholes will be filled with snow and ice.

        Q Why do you have a link that leads to a dead end on Facebook?

        • Dennis Revell


          Boy, no shortage of presumptive idiots here;

          To make me vote “Labour”, a party I used to be a member of, pre-Blair that is, you would have to hold a gun to my head; if it was demanded that I vote Tory, I would hope to have the courage to say “pull the fucking trigger”.

          The UK is a SERIAL War-Criminal country, primarily I believe through the agency of one of its members, that is increasingly xenophobic, even racist, tiny minded, lowering IQ, dumb as fuck leeeeeetle inGRRRRland. I am therefore 100% fervently in favour of the SPLITTING ASUNDER of this despicable violent union – hence a Sassenach supporter of Scottish Independence, Irish Unification, even Welsh and Cornish, and territory north of the Mersey-Humber line independence.

          “Labour” under Tony Blair was the instigator of the last few decades of inGRRRLish war-criminality, beginning with the utterly unwarranted destruction of Yugoslavia – though that was better propagandized than later outrages through supporting the MURDEROUS sanctions and early and later attacks against Iraq (& Afghanistan).

          So, when the former President of the Stop-the-War Coalition and co-chair of CND became leader of Blair’s “Labour” Party, what did he do? Did he examine the voting record on the catastrophic atrocity against Iraq of all the 15 Shadow Cabinet members who happened to be MPs in 2003 that he inherited? I don’t know, but did he fire any of them from the Shadow Cabinet because they supported that atrocity hook line and sinker on all the relevant Parliamentary Divisions? NO HE DID NOT. – – –

          – – – Later some of these resigned or were fired but that had NOTHING to do with Iraq, but solely related to their backstabbing with regard to the leadership contest, and saying otherwise unacceptable things about Corbyn. FYI ALL 15 of these War-Criminal shits voted FOR the Iraq Atrocity. That once Corbyn thought he could sniff the reins of power, and would have the opportunity to genuflect weekly to Her Majesty the Chief Parasite, that he shed his previous apparently vehement anti-War stance is ABSOLUTELY proven because to this day, MORE THAN 50% of the Shadow Cabinet who were MPs back in 2003 voted FOR the Murderous War-Criminal destruction of Iraq. They, with the rest of the 15 they were a part of are fucking War-Criminals that Corbyn-The-Compromiser-Too-Far has absolutely NO problem hobknobbing with.

          Why don’t you toodle-off, along with any other presumptive bastards here and examine the voting record on Iraq of the person Corbyn picked as DEPUTY LEADER of the “Labour” Party, one utterly odious bastard name of Tom Watson, with whom I had some … er … interesting E-Mail exchanges with back in 2003 thereabouts – as indeed I also has some “fun” E-Mail exchanges with “Labour”‘s General Secretary David Triesman, now a Lord, OH MY, but in reality like Watson, and odious piece of fetid human excrement. Well, I’ve said enough so you KNOW how Watson, the DEPUTY LEADER of the “Labour” Party voted.

          Then there was Corbyn allowing a “free” vote on bombing Syria – something that is entirely within the purvue of the leader NOT to allow – of course some would have defied the whip – all the better to add to a deselection list. By allowing this free vote, Corbyn comes close himself to direct complicity in War Crimes; if he does become PM I’m sure he WILL join that club which now seems to have become a tradition. It’s unlikely he will, but if he does I’m pretty sure it will be AFTER the recommendations of the NHS destroying Naylor Report will have been more thoroughly and pretty irreversibly implemented, and he’s shown himself to be very flexible anyway on the War-Crimes thing – so not too difficult to beat him a little more into shape to go along with those.

          Then there’s CND – another time perhaps, just to say that if he’d put as much effort into pushing the resurgent Corbyn-caused membership into more forcefully pushing his alleged anti-nuke stance as he did in pushing them to help him maintain the leadership position, well, he didn’t, and now “Labour” supports having the Big Bullseye of these Apocalyptic obscenities located OUTSIDE of inGRRRland. Still I guess a few million Jocks are considered expendable, eh? I say that, btw, as a wannabe Jock, wanting a Jock passport.

          Then of course, as others have mentioned, is Corbyn going along with the “Russia did Salisbury novichok” bullshit.


          I reiterate, Corbyn-The-Compromiser-Too-Far is a vacillating weak and hypocritical coward. He is NO Aneurin Bevan, no Clement Attlee, CERTAINLY not as socialistic or even social minded as Mhairi Black, nor even the somewhat more vacillating somewhat dodgy Nicola Sturgeon. He is not fit to lick Alex Salmond’s boots.


        • Dennis Revell

          Sharp Ears asks:
          “Q Why do you have a link that leads to a dead end on Facebook?”

          Well, until you asked that I didn’t know that I did. I guess I might find out just how I annoyed those censoring bastards THIS TIME; but as Craig Murray and others who have had temporary or permanent bans imposed, you just usually get generic useless non-informational crap back from them about “violating terms of service”. Haven’t time to try to login to them now; more anon about that no doubt.

          May be I said something disparaging about Israel or the CIA that pissed them off (again).

          Well spotted though.

          Looks like folks will have to move to the (hopefully less censoring), and/or


        • Dennis Revell


          Just tried a quick login to my Fbook page – cursory examination indicates that it’s behaving normally as far as I can see.

          No ban/suspension (yet), though getting one any day wouldn’t surprise me – well, not again; I even made a test comment (that said ‘test’ 😉 )

          Prob. just a temporary glitch – I heard fbook was down for quite a while recently over significant portions of the planet.


  • Alyson

    Just as an aside – the novichok attacks occurred in the middle of Putin’s reelection. He was challenged to respond just when he was being congratulated on winning. He looked a lot more puzzled and annoyed than ‘my little goat’ did when a different event occurred, and a different president was filmed reacting to the news.

  • Wannabe whistleblower

    There must be at least 200 people in the know who can consign this tory government of liars to history overnight. Could be the helicopter pilot or even a technician inside Porton Down, a paid off mortgage is a necessity but the prize is great. 72 virgins in Paradise without having fired a weapon at satan.

1 3 4 5 6