- This topic has 2,377 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 14 hours, 22 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
“All I can remember about Solzhenitsyn is that he escaped to the west to escape the corruption in Russia only to then start slagging the west off, too.’
Yes, he did. Much to the visible annoyance of the Reagan administration. But he wasn’t entirely wrong, by any means.
Maybe he lost the plot a little bit towards the end but that doesn’t in any way detract from his achievements as a writer, which tower over what most other writers in his lifetime managed to produce. His Nobel Prize in 1970 was fully deserved.
“One Day In The Life Of Ivan Denisovich” is the best introduction to his work, which is short enough to read in an afternoon.
“Finally, are we really supposed to believe that the Royal Family had no idea what the Andrew formerly known as Prince was up to? I find it hard to believe that a relatively senior Royal could keep all of that hidden.”
I have wondered about that myself. Perhaps I am being sentimental and too trusting in thinking the late Queen did know the full extent of his behaviour. However, I do think she rather indulged and spoilt him, which might help to explain his arrogant attitude. I suspect his father and elder brother had more idea what he was up to. I also reckon it is William and Kate who forced the King to take action against him when he seemed to be dithering.
“Several women MPs who made speeches in the Commons yesterday were intensely annoyed to the point of (justifiably) boiling over”.
I noticed that too, so fair play to them.
“I feel sorry for Starmer”.
I wouldn’t go as far as saying I feel sorry for him. But I agree with the view alluded to earlier that he is trying to do a job to which he is clearly unsuited. He is a lawyer and a civil servant, not a politician. He doesn’t seem to have any political antennae and keeps making stupid mistakes.
I was surprised he made it to the end of yesterday but I honestly don’t see how he can last much longer. Hills have him as 2/7 to be gone this year.
I know anything read online should be viewed with scepticism but I do wonder if there is some truth in the view that his exit is being engineered to before the local elections. Or before the court case with the three young Ukrainian men in April.
I am not commenting on some of the wilder rumours around the case but it is a fact that three people who seemed to be well acquainted with Starmer’s former addresses and vehicles are due to stand trial. In the crazy times we are in, who knows what may come to light when their case is heard?
Agreed, I don’t believe Starmer is a bad person. His heart is probably in the right place but he comes across as politically naive. It’s unforced error after unforced error. Not helped by being surrounded by the likes of the odious McSweeney. I do tire of the endless double standards from the media though, yes this government is little better than recent Conservative ones but that’s the point. Things are little better or worse for most people but the media is being absolutely hysterical.
“It is not a question of if he goes but when.”
This line always makes me laugh, especially when it comes from supposedly serious political commentators
Is dear old Polly Toynbee a serious political commentator?
To be fair, the header is probably the work of a sub and the actual article is sound enough
“Now you be a good boy and do what Trumpy tells you and you will be OK. The first thing I would like is to meet your King so I can boast of being the only US President to have this honor twice. Then I expect you to support me at all times.”
All went well until Starmer could not support Trump taking over Greenland. So it was revenge time and the Epstein papers were released.
This may seem far fetched, but this is how power works. Manipulating the media is just part of the process. Countries will have to become sovereign and independent; the Carney way is the only way forward.
After Keir Starmer apologised to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein for believing Mandelson’s “lies” and appointing him as the UK’s ambassador to the US, one survivor gave her reaction.
Speaking last night, Marina Lacerda told BBC’s Newsnight, “I have to commend him for going on national television and admitting he was wrong and apologising to us. I think that’s a huge step, right.
You have also people here in America that have not even tried to apologise to us. So I have to commend him for that.”Thanks Mike. I didn’t watch Newsnight. Keir does apologise for things but people seem to look on that as weakness. Sadly.
Is his apology sincere or is he just trying to save his job?
Silly boy Keir. Gone by Monday?
He can apologise as much as he wants but it doesn’t alter the fact that appointing Mandelson was an inexplicably stupid and indefensible thing to do. He can’t evade the consequences of his decision with a few words or by whining about not being told by the security services (which I don’t believe anyway, he must have been told).
His admission in Parliament that he went ahead and appointed Mandelson despite knowing he had still been on friendly terms with Epstein even after his conviction finishes him. There is no coming back.
My guess is he will limp on to the by-election at the end of the month, which Labour looks set to lose (as big as 17/2 with the bookmakers to hold a seat which has been Labour for years). By then, I expect the mood of Labour MPs to be mutinous, especially as he will be open to accusations of ensuring Labour lost the seat by blocking Burnham. And if Labour loses the seat to Reform, I think he will be ousted the next day.
It is not as if Mandelson didn’t have form:
If Starmer has to go for this, and he doesn’t go himself, who takes his place?
A leadership challenge needs a minimum of 80 MPs to back them and I’m not seeing who and how at the minute.A piece from an article in politico.eu below has similar sentiments…
Keir Starmer faces the lingering threat of a Labour leadership challenge this year — but many of his MP critics are not sure how to do it.
Challengers need 80 fellow MPs to back them in order to trigger a contest, but the exact process is “concerningly vague” and “muddy,” one Labour official said.
They added: “Everyone is fumbling around in the dark, hoping that they get enough momentum that it’s overwhelming and carries them over the line.”
A second Labour official said: “I would assume that 95 percent of MPs don’t actually understand how this works, hence there are widespread fantasies about being able to have a coronation.”
I don’t believe anyone will have to trigger a challenge. Starmer’s position is so weak and untenable, he will eventually resign.
Much chin-wagging and plotting this weekend I expect
Meanwhile the back room boys’ club (yawn) seems to be sinking further into the cesspit
No idea how a leadership challenge works but I’ve little doubt that 80 MPs could be found to support it
They could but do they go now or after the council elections , anyone with sense will go latter
Pick 3 on Saturday champion 2025/2026
Starmer should bin Morgan McSweeney as his Chief of Staff.
If it weren’t for the witch hunt from the RWNJ media, there would be no pressure for Starmer to resign; Bozo did far worse, but where was the witch hunt then?
Yes, Bozo was far far worse. What demonstrates what is going on is just one thing – Andrew and Mandelson are exposed, but NO high powered person in the USA has been mentioned. It should be obvious to everyone that what we are witnessing is nasty vicious politics. All designed to ensure we remain subservient to the USA.
The news media and their backers have been out to get Starmer since (failed) donkeygate. When you think of how many times MP’s like Patel and Braverman were sacked because of their political transgression ( not to mention Johnson who did so many awful things it’s easy to forget most of them…and unfortunately most of the electorate already have). Given that nobody’s perfect and everyone makes mistakes I doubt if you’d find a more honest politician than Starmer. Shame on his own party if they do turn on him after giving them such huge majority in parliament. If they do throw him out I’ll leave the party but unfortunately, now I’m annoyed with Ed Davey, don’t like Polanskis policies and lack of economic knowledge and would rather gauge my eyes out than vote Reform, I don’t know where that takes me…..Monster raving looneys perhaps?(who did actually have some pretty sound policies)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.