Forum menu
Bonus points if it's not the Sun article that all this was based on
You know it was a "sting" right? That Sun journalists interviewed him and filmed him saying it? It's not a quote from Facebook or Twitter or reporting that someone overheard him making the claim. The Sun's a scummy paper without a doubt, but they didn't have to work hard for this story.
But I forget, this Labour Govt are the only panto villains on this thread. Never mind that the Greens appear to have elected Widow T****y
Lots of people are not so thoughtful about the futures of their dependents.
And lots of non-hadicapped rich people will do whatever they can to dodge tax depriving the government of revenue which means less for the disabled that don't have the luxury of being rich.
Did you actually look at that graph which tells you all about about what the vast majority of people using trusts find attractive about them.
You don't need a trust to be thoughtful about the futures of your dependants unless your only idea of being thoughtful is avoiding tax to make them richer and thus the rest of the population poorer.
It would be nice to see the Labour government eliminating the financial advantes of trusts so the only reason for setting one up would be to manage the affairs of those unable to manage them themselves, and that with a compus mentis test to avoid abuses which leave mainly women unable to manage their own affairs on the death of a spouse.
You know it was a "sting" right? That Sun journalists interviewed him and filmed him saying it? It's not a quote from Facebook or Twitter or reporting that someone overheard him making the claim. The Sun's a scummy paper without a doubt, but they didn't have to work hard for this story.
It was a sting operation? Really?
But yes, I'm sure none of the quotes were taken out of context and he absolutely 'sold' a breast enlargement 'service' to as many women as he could. Afterall, we have loads of women claiming he tried to perform this service on them, don't we?
But yes, keeping focus on this burning issue is what you are after so I guess I should say, 'You're welcome' for continuing to discuss it and giving you exactly what you want.
So, you're welcome.
Although I should also thank you. Given the fact we're still discussing it shows that centrists are more than a little worried about Hypnoboobs' abilities to draw even more votes from a sinking Labour party. Which tickles me, at least.
So, thank you.
Anyway, I don't think I'm giving Polanski any more of the benefit of the doubt than I gave Starmer when he became leader.
Starmer then disappointed me time and time again so he can swivel.
Polanski will more than likely disappoint me at which point I will tell him to swivel.
However, is there a particular reason I should skip giving Polanski the benefit of the doubt and just jump straight to regarding him as a Pound Shop Starmer? Other than the fact the few remaining Labour supporters really really seem to be wishing he would just go away?
I voted Green last time and will do again even if I think Polanski is a poor choice of leader.
But it isn't their house. It belongs either all or 3/4 to the trust they set up to give the house to their son.
I would not be surprised if the running costs of the house are quite properly coming out the trust.
And where does that money come from? The trust won't generate any income - it's down to the parents to fund the upkeep of the house.
The money came from the compensation from the NHS. The trust should generate income. We don't know but there is no reason to believe the entire trust funds were used to buy the house. There is presumably part still invested and providing an income.
Then there is the fact her disabled son will be in receipt of benefits which are intendedto support his cost of living part of which is housing costs.
"widow t****y"?, rather pejorative is it not?
I thought hypnoboobs was a perfectly adequate nickname. Centrists clearly feel the need up the ante.
But I'm sure they're not worried...
Sure, 'Rachel from Accounts' is a searing (sneering?) insight that cuts to the heart of the centrists soul, while 'Hypno-boob' demonstrates that they're running scared. The cognitive dissonance is something to behold...
"widow t****y"?
Curious as to what the stars mean?
Sure, 'Rachel from Accounts' is a searing (sneering?)
She's chancellor of the exchequer and comes out with nonsense about the country needing to 'balance the books' and non-existent black holes. If she has a deep understanding of her subject area maybe she could do a more honest and better job of communicating it? As it stands a bloke who hypnotised women to be comfortable with the size of their breasts does a better job than Reeves at explaining how the nation's finances work.
But I forget, this Labour Govt are the only panto villains on this thread.
*Checks thread title*
Sure, 'Rachel from Accounts' is a searing (sneering?) insight that cuts to the heart of the centrists soul, while 'Hypno-boob' demonstrates that they're running scared. The cognitive dissonance is something to behold...
Well, to be fair, only one of those people have actually been given the chance to run the country's finances.
Remember what I was saying about giving people a chance to disappoint you first? So yes, it sounds like you and all the other Starmer apologist centrists are running scared.
Mandleson gone within the week? His creepiness might be useful for the UK over in Trumpland, but his history with Epstein clearly bad for this government... the noise around this isn't going reduce while he's still in his post.
It was long known that he was a friend of Epstein and visitor to peado island, and twice "resigned" from Blair's government for scandals/corruption. He shouldn't have been any where near an official post. It is just another display of Starmers lack of morality that he was given a cushy reward "jobs for the boys" appointment for being part of the right wing cliché currently destroying labour.
I heard the slimy little shite Mandelson on the radio this morning.
He said blah, blah, regret being Epstein's pal, it went on too long, hindsight, nothing untoward that I saw, blah, blah.
But he's also said that he expects further 'embarrassing' stuff to emerge. So he's clearly hoping for some miracle. If he knows more could come out, he knows what it is. So if he actually wanted to be open and honest, he could. But like all his kind, he'll be hoping that as much as possible stays buried.
tarmers lack of morality that he was given a cushy reward "jobs for the boys" appointment for being part of the right wing cliché currently destroying labour.
fact is Mandelson was the best person for the job (which in itself says a lot about mandelson) , Trumps tariffs crippling the economy (and espeically the steel industry) would have been an open door for farage
And the current negotiations are about pharmaceuticals exports- UK exports to USA are worth £8bn, which is almost half of the uk exports and supports over 200,000 jobs- how many of those would you be willing to sacrifice?
I cant see Mandelson staying in post, after these revelations tho.
Trump may like him, in which case hes served his use to the UK and Starmer will have little choice but to ditch him, no matter how effective he is
I know you have to put your morals in the back seat to make a deal with Trump, but their are limits!
fact is Mandelson was the best person for the job
"fact" 🤣 🤣 🤣
Mandelson was never the best person for any job, he is a self serving liar who believes his own "brilliance" and doesn't give a flying **** about the costs to anyone and everyone else, exactly in the same mould as Cummings, he has always been a cancer in British politics.
The Mandelson thing is clearly about to blow-up in Starmer's face and will probably make the Rayner debacle go very quiet. The choices from Starmer are truly extraordinary. Mandelson actually comes with a sign saying 'dangerous goods'.
This is a man who resigned twice from the Labour cabinet for dodgy business scandals.
Blairite worms.
Can Labour get down to single digits in the polls? Are the grown-ups really in charge?
fact is Mandelson was the best person for the job
Only if you wanted him to have 3 strikes in a row.
Mandelson was never the best person for any job, he is a self serving liar who believes his own "brilliance" and doesn't give a flying **** about the costs to anyone and everyone else, exactly in the same mould as Cummings, he has always been a cancer in British politics.
which makes him the perfect person to negotiate with Trump, who else is more in tune with Trump (without going full farage)
It makes him the best person to get a deal that suits him and a small percentage of people and screws over the rest of us, that has always been his deal.
what this guy said...
https://bsky.app/profile/ajs1977.bsky.social/post/3lyi4xtphsk27
ive no doubt mandelson will go and will not be sad to see the back of him
Nope, that still just makes him a person more likely to sell the country out for his own gain than get a good deal for most of us.
1) I am very suspicious of the Rayner transactions but I also just don't understand trusts and how they work, and I don't understand her personal life (which is none of my business). If she really was advised by lawyers to do it this way based on her honestly describing the facts...then I don't see it as a firing offence...yet.
2) The hypnoboobs article in the Sun was not a sting. It was a puff piece that Polanski went along with entirely voluntarily. BruceWee and others have said they refuse to read any Sun article - if that is still the case then they literally don't know what they're talking about. But in any case Polanski is not in the UK government and he has his own perfectly good thread.
3) Mandelson is corrupt, duplicitous and should never be in public office anywhere for any reason. The ambassador doesn't get heavily involved in intergovernmental negotiations at all - that's a misunderstanding of the role. Starmer should never have appointed him, and should fire him today. You may as well get all the bad news out in one week.
Mandelson has to go asap. I’ve got a gut feeling Starmer isn’t far from breaking point either. Labour leadership contest by Christmas?
No way. Things are always rough in the first year of a new government in poor economic times.
What a car crash.
I get that Mandleson is a usefull tool for dealing with Trump - but at what cost? it really doesn't play well if it's looking like he's just as big of a pedophile/ rapist as trump.
It's just occured to me that Ernie hasn't posted for a while so I had a look at his profile and he just stopped three weeks back without a huff or a flounce or owt. A few possibilities sprung to mind:
Arrested at a demo: if so more power to your elbow, Ernie, it was no doubt a just cause.
Decided to get a life: enjoy it, Ernie
Ill: hope you get well soon.
Man down: 🙁
Croydon nuked: I think it would be in the papers
If you're reading this, all the best to you, Ernie.
No way. Things are always rough in the first year of a new government in poor economic times.
Woah ... Hang on it a bit.
It's within his power to try and fix that - and they're not even doing it remotely well. They're collapsing everything they touch.
He and Reeves are incapable of fixing anything economic because the fiscal rules will not allow it. Fiscal rules will box them in. I said well over a year ago it's impossible to grow the economy substantially with the tools they've chosen. Total impossibility. (Because the deficit at this point has to enlarge substantially to grow the economy.)
I get that Mandleson is a usefull tool for dealing with Trump -
He's not that - he's just a tool. Embarrassingly overrated. You would never employ a person with his history, credibility and judgment .Never in a million years.
You're not telling me there wasn't a better CV than his? Lmfao. Given the scope of the roll. It's like getting Hannibal Lecter to pick up your meat from the butchers and deliver it without eating the meat and you.
"Yum, Yum."
How much more shit do we have to endure with Starmer? Starmer is the grand-daddy of terrible judgment too.
They even lost Ian Dunt. This is a massive gift for the hardcore right - again.
https://bsky.app/profile/iandunt.bsky.social/post/3lyikbedepc2x
It's just occured to me that Ernie hasn't posted for a while so I had a look at his profile and he just stopped three weeks back without a huff or a flounce or owt. A few possibilities sprung to mind:
Arrested at a demo: if so more power to your elbow, Ernie, it was no doubt a just cause.
Decided to get a life: enjoy it, Ernie
Ill: hope you get well soon.
Man down: 🙁
Croydon nuked: I think it would be in the papers
If you're reading this, all the best to you, Ernie.
You know what I thought the same today.
For such a prolific poster.
Good post - covering bases.
It's just occured to me that Ernie hasn't posted for a while so I had a look at his profile and he just stopped three weeks back without a huff or a flounce or owt. A few possibilities sprung to mind:
Arrested at a demo: if so more power to your elbow, Ernie, it was no doubt a just cause.
Decided to get a life: enjoy it, Ernie
Ill: hope you get well soon.
Man down: 🙁
Croydon nuked: I think it would be in the papers
If you're reading this, all the best to you, Ernie.
You know what I thought the same today.
For such a prolific poster.
Good post - covering bases.
Yeah... as much as I disagree with him on some stuff, hope he's ok.
Two more options;
Banned
On holiday (a real holiday where you don't look a the internet)
The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has told private equity bosses that she plans to shut down more regulators across the UK as she attempts to drive growth across Britain’s subdued economy
Just double sigh.
She really does have the power to drive if she really wants to. But not like this.
Mandleson needs to be more like Rayner - learn to read the room & resign.
He's gone now.
He's gone.
Sacked.
"In light of new information."
Lmfao. He's hardly got a great track record across the board.
I remember someone on here getting excited that "the Mandy was back."
🤪
(Kelvin and I sat over the keyboard waiting.)
See ya Mandy. Starmer next. Lammy new PM
The damage is done. It's grist to the mill for the "they're all the same" mob. Any attempt to discuss Trump in the context of Epstein with prospective Reform voters can be countered easily with Lord Mandelson. I bet he won't lose his peerage.
Nice one, Keir.
👏
The damage is done. It's grist to the mill for the "they're all the same" mob
Labour are experts at handing this stuff out.
Labour's 2024-2025 timeline is going to look astonishing.
The Mandelson thing is all about the media revelling in their success getting rid of Rayner and saying "Right, who next".
Like wringing out a dishcloth. Give it a squeeze and water comes out. Squeeze it again and see if any more comes out. No reason to stop until it's dry.
Mandelson is a creep and needs to go. Should have been in the dustbin of history years ago
Should have been in the dustbin of history years ago
The fact he wasn't speaks volumes about the political establishment.
PS. Anyone else heard these rumours about Starmer and Ukrainian rentboys? Probably bollocks but would explain a lot. 😳
Why Ukrainian? That alone should make you more cynical and avoid spreading such nonsense.