That cat Mandelson appears to have used up all of his nine lives with some very serious jail time on the cards. The randy Windsor formerly known as Prince must be seriously quaking in his boots too, as more and more of the Epstein files are released. In the Andrew Lownie book "Entitled", a Palace insider is quoted as saying if it ever becomes public knowledge what the Royal Family (Including the late queen) knew about it they would be finished as an institution.
Either way, when the dust settles they will have been heavily damaged by the whole business. And I can't see any way Starmer will survive this, probably to the benefit of his party.
|
If only jail time were a real possibility.
Legal commentary suggests that Misconduct in Public Office is a difficult offence to charge and an even more difficult one to convict. Police investigations framed around political events - see partygate - often get in a mess too.
A M-W is another kettle of fish. His Mother doted on him and wouldn't see his actions as any more than high jinks.
I think it's William who made his father grow a spine and sack off the former prince.
|
Probably somewhat controversially, and putting aside what a massive sleazebag he is, I'm not clear what Andrew did which was illegal. at least under UK law.
What is surprising me now is the range of VIPs involved, and we're only hearing about those we know of. I'm sure there are hundreds of others.
Also the money sloshing round in these circles - him paying $11k dollars to fly Fergie and daughter over to see him, and dishing out dosh to Mandy. I suppose to true millionaires it's pocket money.
|
>> Probably somewhat controversially, and putting aside what a massive sleazebag he is, I'm not clear
>> what Andrew did which was illegal. at least under UK law.
If Virginia Roberts had been trafficked was sex with her truly consensual?
|
>> >> Probably somewhat controversially, and putting aside what a massive sleazebag he is, I'm not
>> clear
>> >> what Andrew did which was illegal. at least under UK law.
>>
>> If Virginia Roberts had been trafficked was sex with her truly consensual?
>>
If she was trafficked then sex would not have been consensual and therefore would have been rape.
|
There's an "if" there.
So "if" she was, did Andrew know (yes, I know we expect he did but it feels we're starting to scrabble round for something to pin on him already! :-) )
However, again being somewhat controversial, I know we now believe that 18 is too young to choose, and she likely was being exploited etc etc but I believe it's a fact that some people historically have willingly and knowingly sold themselves for sex (or even given it away), and some of those go on to regret it later (in a different, more enlightened maybe, age), and a small handful of those, in that later more enlightened age, see opportunity there (which is a generalised comment and not relating to this matter).
NB I will shortly stop defending this stance here because I believe what has happened is really fairly indefensible in a moral way but I was thinking of the legality. But there are still plenty of men who pay for sexual services all around the world, and plenty of women offering them.
|
<< I will shortly stop defending this stance here because I believe what has happened is really fairly indefensible in a moral way but I was thinking of the legality. But there are still plenty of men who pay for sexual services all around the world, and plenty of women offering them. >>
I have steered clear of this thread so far, but I can't help feeling that there is an awful lot of holier-than-thou in the general public. As the good book says, 'Let him that is without sin cast the first stone' ?
What does change with time is the particular offence that people think the most heinous. 100+ years ago Edward VII had various liaisons but doesn't seem to have been made to suffer in the way A M-W is being made to. Perhaps it's just a reflection of how the public sees the offender ? Mandy isn't very well-liked, nor Andrew. Not now, anyhow.
|
>>
>> But there are still plenty of men who pay for sexual services all around the
>> world, and plenty of women offering them. >>
>>
>> I have steered clear of this thread so far, but I can't help feeling that
>> there is an awful lot of holier-than-thou in the general public. As the good book
>> says, 'Let him that is without sin cast the first stone' ?
>>
>>
>>
The allegations surrounding Andrew are a bit more serious than paying for sex. Taking advantage of vulnerable young girls who have been trafficked around the world to provide pleasure for the rich and famous puts things in a different league. And then there are the cases of passing confidential trade information to a rather dubious character for the financial advantage of both of them.
|
>> The allegations surrounding Andrew are a bit more serious than paying for sex.
That.
Exactly.
Heirs and Princes had easy access to 'good time girls' for ever.
Recruited and trafficked like Epstein's hareem was on a different level.
|
>>
>> Also the money sloshing round in these circles - him paying $11k dollars to fly
>> Fergie and daughter over to see him,
>>
why o why ? In the entire sordid affair, that trio of munters could get the job as under studies in Macbeth, Scene 1, Act 1.
No make up required.
|
>>If only jail time were a real possibility.
He may plead guilty to breaching the OSA hoping for a 2yr stretch.
If it goes to court we'll see the real level of collusion in public and he's risking 8-10yrs I expect.
|
>> He may plead guilty to breaching the OSA hoping for a 2yr stretch.
Is there a realistic source that says Official Secrets Act charges are available?
Not saying you're wrong but even with an ear to the legal press etc I've not seen it.
Everything I've seen relates to the Common Law offence of Misconduct in Public Office. The legal commentators say that's difficult to pursue/convict.
There's legislation in Parliament to define it as a Statutory Offence but even if that were passed and in force next week it wouldn't be applicable. Mandy would be charged under provisions in force at the time of the alleged offending.
|
>> Everything I've seen relates to the Common Law offence of Misconduct in Public Office. The
>> legal commentators say that's difficult to pursue/convict.
Think thats the best they can get him for, and he will probably be disqualified from public office at worse. It also suits the establishment to slap him on the wrist and bury his memory from public gaze and scruitiny.
|
|
You need to be a certain age to 'get' the thread title....
|
>> You need to be a certain age to 'get' the thread title....
"10cc’s "I'm Mandy Fly Me" (1976) was inspired by a National Airlines ad campaign featuring a stewardess saying, "I'm Cindy, fly me," which had sexual undertones. The song uses this imagery to contrast rich-poor divides, exploring themes of escapism, hallucination, and desperate fantasies of love or rescue. "
I'm cindy fly me
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp5xUjq9rIM
I'm Mandy fly me 10cc
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cZ7Jq-sE8U
|
>> "10cc’s "I'm Mandy Fly Me" (1976) was inspired by a National Airlines ad campaign featuring
>> a stewardess saying, "I'm Cindy, fly me,"
My memory was playing tricks; it had the National Airlines cabin crew member as Mandy.
|
|
Nothing to do with Rice-Davies then?
|
>> You need to be a certain age to 'get' the thread title....
>>
Everyone here is of a certain age...;-)
|
I will still defend Starmer as a decent man but he has ballsed up massively here.
Apart from the fact that Mandelson's association with Epstein was well known, he had shown himself twice to have behaved corruptly and also shown himself to have zero self-awareness with his self-lauding "third man" autobiography. As if that wasn't enough to disqualify him, he even looked shifty. And the experienced Ambassador Mandelson replaced had not as far as I know put a foot wrong in her 5 year tenure. Perhaps she had expressed a wish to move on.
I don't want Starmer to go as there is no obviously better successor, but he might have put himself beyond rehabilitation with this.
My biggest concern is that Labour's self-destruct compulsion will lead to a Reform win, which IMO would be a proper disaster. Fortunately Reform seems to be poisoning itself with the importation of failed and corrupt Tories.
Meanwhile, as Starmer faces calls to resign for bad taste in Ambassadors, Trump who is genuinely stupid, malign, and should be in a strait jacket, continues to be enabled. I suppose we should be grateful we have not gone the same way as the US. Yet.
|
>> Meanwhile, as Starmer faces calls to resign for bad taste in Ambassadors,
Actually using Mandy as a lean on trump, could well have been a stroke of genious. Mandy was smarmy and smooth, knew how to talk to him, and could probably have manipulated him because Trump liked him. And who knows may even have had some Epstein secret dirt on Trump that only the two knew about.
Of course it all blew apart as no-one knew the true extent of Mandy's shenanigans. ( I cant get the picture of mandy in his budgie smugglers out of my head )
>> suppose we should be grateful we have not gone the same way as the US.
>> Yet.
We are on our way. As are many other countries.
|
>>using Mandy as a lean on trump, could well have been a stroke of genius
Probably true! Trump just laps up insincerity.
|
|
Well, my question arising from the unduly excessive column inches and TV time devoted to this sordid topic is.......would Andy Mow merit inclusion in the Guiness B of R for the most amount of money spent on the least amount of sexual pleasure?
|
|
Mr Grey he ain’t, that’s for sure :-P
|
|
Seems this morning that its given the PM is gone, only a matter of time. Several names being thrown about to replace him.
|
>> Seems this morning that its given the PM is gone, only a matter of time.
Marr on LBC thinks he'll last another fortnight max.
He's not a career politician. He ran a successful law practice and then held a senior civil service post before being elected to the Commons in middle age. He's unlikely to have money worries and I don't think he's addicted to the trappings of power.
Contributor on drive time radio on Saturday said politics at PM level is a performative; he seems to see it more as administration.
Frankly, if I was in his shoes, I'd throw in the towel now.
|
Yeah he is toast. Its now a matter for the labour party to chose a suitable candidate, and manage the transition in a way that causes least damage to the party.
|
"Its now a matter for the labour party to chose a suitable candidate"
Perhaps they could ask the Conservatives for advice as they do it every year or two.
|
Much as I have no time for Starmer, I was hoping for a period of stability for the country. Chopping and changing constantly does no one any favours.
Been interesting listening to various podcasts and interviews about Mandelson and just how the whole set up works at that level. As Lewis Goodall succinctly put it, it’s because of who he was and his history, that’s why he got the job. That was the level needed to work with.
I don’t know who will get the PM job, and I’m not too up on the Labour personalities, but I really can’t stand Lammy. Comes across as a smarmy, no morals type of person.
|
I think he was always going to struggle, I never thought much of him tbh. Always came across as an over promoted middle manager. He seemed to have no politcal skills, no vision and little ability to communicate.
I'm sure he could have made a career in politics, but further down the good chain as a pps or similar.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Mon 9 Feb 26 at 13:25
|
|
Choice seems to be Wes and Angie though you never know whether the Home Sec might chuck her hat in the ring.
|
|
Apparently nandy and haigh are also interested in joining in.
|
|
If you are going to go, now is the time to do it, while mandy is fresh in the press, you could really trash him and lump all the blame on him.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 9 Feb 26 at 14:40
|
>> I think he was always going to struggle, I never thought much of him tbh.
>> Always came across as an over promoted middle manager. He seemed to have no politcal
>> skills, no vision and little ability to communicate.
>>
>> I'm sure he could have made a career in politics, but further down the good
>> chain as a pps or similar.
>>
A friends son is a lawyer and had dealings with Starmer when he was DDP. He had a very poor opinion of him.
|
I don't think he'll go. I don't think he should.
Even Farage IIRC said Mandelson was a good appointment, probably because he was such a Machiavellian creature. Now of course they are all being wise after the event.
Consider also that, disregarding the insider trading which came out as news to everybody, the people with a beef here should be the Americans, to whom he he our Ambassador. Nobody presumably thinks Mandy was a paedo, just crooked. But he's saint compared to their president who is showing no sign of resigning or being pressured to do so by the invertebrates and crooks enabling him.
|
>> I don't think he'll go. I don't think he should.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
He's toast. Labour MP's realise they can't win an election with a deeply unpopular leader and whether it's days or weeks he'll be gone before spring.
No good citing Trump, however bad he is has no bearing on Starmers future.
|
>> people with a beef here should be the Americans, to whom he he our Ambassador.
>> Nobody presumably thinks Mandy was a paedo, just crooked. But he's saint compared to their
>> president who is showing no sign of resigning or being pressured to do so by
>> the invertebrates and crooks enabling him.
Its got nothing to do with Trump or the yanks, and using that is seen by everyone as an irrelevance. This is the culmination of many u-turns, poor management of the team, The mandy thing is just a huge example of continued lack of due diligence, and awareness. He cant survive, the party is no longer convinced, and the electorate is bemused. If Labour want to win a second term (and they should given the two alternatives) they need to get this sorted now. Pity cos he had a handle on Trump.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 9 Feb 26 at 21:05
|
There won't be an election for 3 years. It doesn't follow that if Starmer hangs on now, he has to fight the GE.
There needs to be a successor and there isn't. Rayner is not fully rehabilitated, I'd guess Streeting doesn't want it yet. Phillips won't do it. Etc. etc. The socialist worker lot will still be there causing trouble. If Starmer can hang on, get some unpopular stuff done and take the flak, the prospects are better for a successor. Especially if there is some economic recovery.
There's also time to develop candidates such as Burnham or, deep breath, Milliband D.
An election now would just make things worse especially if it ends up with a twerp like Burgon winning.
I might be freewheeling a bit here but most of the people tweeting he's toast are just grinding their axes.
|
>> There won't be an election for 3 years. It doesn't follow that if Starmer hangs
>> on now, he has to fight the GE.
>>
>> There needs to be a successor and there isn't.
When scottish labour comes out and says go, then you have to think your own party is telling you something. When there's 5/6 MPs out gathering support, you have to think how long does he really have?
He's not going to be here at Xmas is he?
|
I think he thinks he will. But he'll need to do.a better job iof leading and doing stuff or he won't see Christmas in the job.
Mandy is not a resigning job. Where Starmer is now is under a pile of pressure built up over 18 months of very patchy progress and a poor narrative. Mandy is just a focus for pressure. The pressure that matters is that from within. If he can control that, as he has done since becoming leader, he will survive for a while.He can safely ignore the Daily Mail and even the Reform followers for now. But he does need to be thinking about succession and how to achieve it.
I don't think he is personally ambitious beyond the normal. He will at least consider what he thinks is best for country and party, in what order I don't know. I'm making up my own story here of course, he hasn't confided in me.
.
|
>> I might be freewheeling a bit here but most of the people tweeting he's toast
>> are just grinding their axes.
Not on here by me. He did well in slapping the looney left down, hes done well in handling trump,
BUT
Last 12 months he has been floundering, U-turns, business's screwed by extra costs, he is losing his grip, now the Mandy debacle, and there is a chance that Farage might scrape in next term if the Labour party continues to thrash about. He has become a libility and the party needs the next three years in a stable state.
|
|
No, I didn't mean you. I was thinking of Kuenssberg, Chris Mason etc.
|
Constitutionally he's unassailable; no need for an election until 2029.
But if he cannot extract himself from the muddle of the last 18 months, or be extracted by colleagues, then the Party in Westminster will do him in.
Last summer's Welfare reforms as they related to PIP are a case in point.
I'm in no doubt there is a problem. The number claiming is going up and those in relative youth are driving the numbers. The Mobility element, as a key to Motability cars is being abused. Not because it's too easy to get but because the system to assess claims has stopped working.
The Cabinet seemed to say, from the blue, we're going to take steps x, y and z to change eligibility.
As it is PIP is pretty big in Constituency casework. Changes on that scale were not in the Manifesto and it looked as though LAbour had donned the contents of the Tories wardrobe.
If you want do, or even need to, do something on that scale the politics need to be worked with MPs. That didn't happen.
Backbenchers need to be lead; not just told how high to jump.
He has to learn how to do politics; it's hard work not just 'admin'.
WFA had similar defects as did other policies.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 9 Feb 26 at 23:58
|
>> WFA had similar defects as did other policies.
I don't think it was from the blue at all, they weren't major in the sense of cutting back on PIP but just tryin to reduce the rate its increasing. If the back benchers think that's a big deal then they/the country has really big problems.
>>
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 10 Feb 26 at 11:28
|
>> I don't think it was from the blue at all, they weren't major in the
>> sense of cutting back on PIP but just tryin to reduce the rate its increasing.
>> If the back benchers think that's a big deal then they/the country has really big
>> problems.
As far as I can tell it affected reviews as well as new claims.
The need to score 4 points on at least one activity alone was a big change; it would remove a lot of people. PIP is a gateway benefit for other stuff including access to Carer's Allowance and easements from the bedroom tax.
Without a carer and a Motability car there will be people for whom work becomes impossible.
The 'big deal for backbenchers' and consequent opposition was based on what they know of their constituents via casework and their postbag. It wasn't rebellion for the sake of it.
What they're doing now, a review led by a minister who knows his stuff - Stephen Timms - is likely to produce a more rational and acceptable outcome. Starmer's failure to press the flesh with his troops is a major issue, another limb of his inability to perform politics.
In the meantime they could throw some resource at improving the Medical Assessment Process and Decision Making so the current rules are more firmly
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 10 Feb 26 at 10:48
|
>> I don't think it was from the blue at all, they weren't major in the
>> sense of cutting back on PIP but just tryin to reduce the rate its increasing.
From my perspective the four points thing was massive and way beyond curtailing growth.
At present you can get 8 points - Standard Rate Daily Living - on a mix of, say, needing prompting to both prepare and eat food, supervision prompting or assistance with therapies, needing help washing or getting in and out of a shower and struggling to manage money.
Was out last night with a bunch of Welfare Rights people including one whose son (25) has Diabetes T1 overlaid with pretty severe Autism/Adhd and other MH issues. Can't manage to prepare food or to take meals without prompting. Regular Diabetic seizures - blue light stuff.
She and her husband cannot holiday together becuase he won't manage on his own.
It'd be a hard job to get 4 points under a single activity.
MPs see that clearly too.
Starmer/Kendall might have acheived something if they'd rolled the pitch. Just adopting something very close to what Mel 'a bit bluesy' Stride wanted when the Tories were in power.
At the end of the day we differ here which is fine.
|
At the end of the day we differ here which is fine.
>>
>>
>>
Noted, I'm going on an ifs yt video. With the proposed changes with inflation it was a 1-2% cut from the budget. The ifs seem pretty even handed and know that they are talking about i think.
We'll see what this minister comes up with and presents to the next PM, then if the backbenchers will let the next PM try and dab the brakes.
|
>> Noted, I'm going on an ifs yt video.
Could you link?
|
I think this was the podcast i watched.
ifs.org.uk/articles/why-government-reforming-health-related-benefits
Although the info is summarised below in the graphic, that hopefully works. Under the plan spending on welfare spending on working age adults would rise from 48bn to 70bn without it would be 75bn by 2030. Obviously pip is just a part of that number but it's a pretty big increase even with the cuts that got binned.
www.bbc.com/news/live/c0jqjl9vg47t
|
>> Constitutionally he's unassailable; no need for an election until 2029.
>>
>> But if he cannot extract himself from the muddle of the last 18 months, or
>> be extracted by colleagues, then the Party in Westminster will do him in.
The Lib Dems, Greens, maybe even the Tories should take a breath and work out where their interests lie. Rebellious Labour MPs too for that matter.
Starmer was always going to be unpopular, not being a reincarnation of the pied piper of Hamelin combined with Winston Churchill, but the extreme and widespread hatred is largely media, and social media, confected.
The official opposition and even competing progressive parties see this as a useful bandwagon perhaps, as if what's bad for Labour must be good for them.
It isn't. Replacing Starmer, who at least earned a mandate, with even a competent leader chosen only by Labour members and MPs - supposing one could be found - would immediately be met with demands for a general election. Not least by the MP for Clacton. And the Russian and MAGA sponsored bots would be redeployed against the new PM.
The other progressive parties, if they can't actually get behind Labour policies, should at least let Labour get on with it and frame their objections constructively. Otherwise they are only abetting the far right and doing Garage's work for him and they'll end up in a desperate fight with Fascism.
|
M may have been appointed by S having considered the balance of risk - known past indiscretions vs a proven capacity for developing relationships with key individuals in the US.
S should have admitted having made the wrong judgement when he fired him. Blaming M for lying to him to deflect criticism is weakness. As a senior lawyer and politician he should be completely aware that characters like M are at best economical with the truth.
His inability to provide effective leadership over the last 18 months is obvious. U turns are acceptable where circumstances materially change, but most have arisen from either poor judgment or internal party resistance.
He needs to go. The only question is when and who succeeds him. I expect the by-election and local elections in May will be dire - any aspiring PM may have 3 months to get their campaign together leaving Starmer to carry the can for a likely massive defeat.
|
My criticism of Starmer is not party political. Although sitting slightly right of centre, Labour with a huge majority have 3+ years to go.
I would rather our government were lead by one who can communicate a clear vision, and the resolve and leadership skills to deliver.
|
>>
>> He needs to go. The only question is when and who succeeds him.
No, the question is "and then what?"
See above. We will have a new, 'unelected' PM and the chaos will continue.
The local elections are a write off, whatever. If we must have a new Labour leader, let her have a fresh start.
|
|
Anyway, enough of Starmer. I'm more interested in the identity of the former PM who has a threesome with Epstein and Maxwell. I'm sure no one here is foolish enough to name names, but I have my idea ;-)
|
>> I'm more interested in the identity of the former PM who
>> has a threesome with Epstein and Maxwell.
I thought that was joke until I googled.
Given Maxwell is in her mid sixties then the scope is limited....
|
>> Given Maxwell is in her mid sixties then the scope is limited....
But 10 or 20 years ago ???
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 11 Feb 26 at 11:25
|
>> But 10 or 20 years ago ???
My point is that it's almost certainly somebody after Thatcher.
|
It doesn't follow that the PM in question was PM at the time, presumably, which would make it more believable. Although it was reported hearsay and I wouldn't credit it.
Can I have Johnson in the sweepstake?
|
>> Can I have Johnson in the sweepstake?
Difficult to think of any other plausible candidate.
But still waters run deep and all that.
Truss as a left field suggestion?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 11 Feb 26 at 12:57
|
>> Truss as a left field suggestion?
Seriously? can you find two others who would, no matter the money on offer.
|
"Seriously? can you find two others who would, no matter the money on offer."
There's no accounting for taste. I have a friend who's had the hots for Truss for some years. I have made it clear I think his discernment is very unsophisticated. Or perhaps there's something kinky about it.
|
>> Seriously? can you find two others who would, no matter the money on offer.
Not my type at all but I do remember her doing PMQs and thinking is it cold in there....
|
>> >> Can I have Johnson in the sweepstake?
>>
>> Difficult to think of any other plausible candidate.
>>
>>
Boris became PM after Epstein's "Suicide", so assuming it was a serving Prime Minister that rules him out. I don't believe there is any record of him ever meeting Epstein and he is not mentioned in any of the files.
I'm thinking of a long serving PM myself.
|
The files released are so heavily redacted there may be several well known names yet to be exposed. There could be several million more files yet to emerge. Who knows??
All this is fertile ground for rumour, speculation and mischief making.
FWIW I assume there are several more UK senior public figures who had some sort of connection, although one should not presume guilt by association!!!
|
>> Can I have Johnson in the sweepstake?
Major's been known to 'dip his wick'.
|
|
No known link between Major and Epstein. Rupert Murdoch fell out with Tony Blair over the latter being "Over familiar" with Mrs Murdoch.
|
>> Rupert Murdoch fell out with Tony Blair over
>> the latter being "Over familiar" with Mrs Murdoch.
That's quite funny actually.
Which Mrs Murdoch....
|
Local elections now on.
The chief clown has done it again.
|
>> Local elections now on.
There may be more to it than prize winning incompetence.....
I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when the detail of these election postponements was being discussed. Possible they knew all along that they'd be on a sticky wicket if somebody well resourced challenged it by Judicial Review.
Piece on the radio this morning seemed to say that although most councils where elections were postponed were Labour they were in districts with small numbers of seats in play.
The bigger ones were Tory controlled shire counties where the whole council was up for election; larger number of seats.
Tories, being vulnerable to Reform in those places, were OK with stuff being kicked into the long grass.
Reform challenging the postponement was a curve ball.
Popcorn orderd for May!!
|
Further coverage suggests that the Minister, Steve Reid, might have been too outspoken about 'Zombie' Councils. His evident willingness to postpone meant that it could be said he was not approaching each Council's case dispassionately and on its particular facts.
Classic circumstances for losing Judicial Review.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 17 Feb 26 at 21:22
|
I thought today's news would be dominated by DJT's flip flopping over the Chagos or the new Cabinet Secretary.
Maybe not.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/feb/19/police-former-prince-andrew-mountbatten-windsor-sandringham
Misconduct in public office.
|
|
On his birthday too. Think candles are banned in a cell.
|
|
I wonder if they handcuffed him, which is standard procedure now with a prisoner.
|
>> I wonder if they handcuffed him, which is standard procedure now with a prisoner.
I think Ghislaine introduced him to those, should be used to it.
|
|
Royals get special treatment. Us commoners get hanged whereas royalty get beheaded. I would expect that a royal beheading would generate high bidding for the TV rights and for the advertising breaks. I can just imagine it on the TV at 6pm. "And now he has the hood put over his head. He lays his neck on the block. And now a word from our sponsor - Wilkinson's Sword."
|
|
Am I right in believing the last royal to be beheaded was Charles I?
|
|
"Wilkinson's Sword" - by Royal Appointment :-)
|
>> On his birthday too. Think candles are banned in a cell.
IIRC he's 66 today. Does he get a state pension?
|
Ai
UK prisoners generally do not receive the state pension while serving a custodial sentence, as payments are suspended upon conviction
|
|
Wonder if prince William has stopped laughing yet?
|
>> Wonder if prince William has stopped laughing yet?
I assume the King would have been 'tipped a wink' given A M-W was on his estate.
|
>> >> Wonder if prince William has stopped laughing yet?
>>
>> I assume the King would have been 'tipped a wink' given A M-W was on
>> his estate.
King and Palace not told about Andrew arrest in advance, BBC understands
published at 12:25
12:25
Breaking
Neither King Charles nor Buckingham Palace were informed in advance that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was to be arrested today, BBC News understands.
|
>> Breaking
>> Neither King Charles nor Buckingham Palace were informed in advance that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was to
>> be arrested today, BBC News understands.
Yeah, saw that subsequent to posting.
|
>> UK prisoners generally do not receive the state pension while serving a custodial sentence, as
>> payments are suspended upon conviction
But only upon conviction.
Even if he were remanded to custody he'd still get it though his NI history may be too spotty to qualify.
|
I guess that, as arrest means there are live proceedings, we need to be a tad careful with comments.
Yes I know there are only a handful of us but Stephen could be in trouble as publisher if it went titzup.
|
>> >> On his birthday too. Think candles are banned in a cell.
>>
>> IIRC he's 66 today. Does he get a state pension?
>>
What, do you think he's ever paid any NI?
|
>> What, do you think he's ever paid any NI?
I guess he might have whilst in the Navy?
|
>> >> What, do you think he's ever paid any NI?
>>
>> I guess he might have whilst in the Navy?
>>
Well he's not going to have 35 years paid contributions I shouldn't think. 66 years minus time in the Navy on the public tit = benefits scrounger.
|
>> On his birthday too.
>>
Was this deliberate - i.e. "sticking the knife in"
|
>> >> On his birthday too.
>> >>
>>
>> Was this deliberate - i.e. "sticking the knife in"
i doubt it very much
|
I understand that Andrew believed that the police officers were a troupe of strippergrams sent as a surprise party. He got arrested when he ripped off off one of the police woman's shirts!
(Credit to Only Fools and Horses)
|
|
Custody Sergeant requesting prints Andrew is another joke doing the rounds,
|
|
Allegedly pizzas have been ordered into Custody for his meals.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Thu 19 Feb 26 at 15:41
|
|
Released under investigation, from a Norfuk police station, Norwich I assume
|
>> Released under investigation, from a Norfuk police station, Norwich I assume
>>
Aylsham apparently.
|
|
I read Trumps Chagos flip was because we refused to let him use UK airbases in support of his Iran efforts.
|
>> I read Trumps Chagos flip was because we refused to let him use UK airbases in support of his Iran efforts.
Does that include Diego Garcia, which is a UK airbase?
|
|
Yes. If U.K. allows use of Diego Garcia and Fairford bases by US to conduct an illegal operation in breach of International Law the U.K. would be equally liable.
|
>> Yes. If U.K. allows use of Diego Garcia and Fairford bases by US to conduct
>> an illegal operation in breach of International Law the U.K. would be equally liable.
Yes it was refused a while back, hence the slow build of naval aviation assets in the gulf area. A carrier group is pretty vulnerable so a large amount of protection and planning is required.
|
>> Does that include Diego Garcia, which is a UK airbase?
Yes. Reports are that we've either overtly refused permission for Diego Garcia and Fairford or at least have not determined their requests.
Whether, post Chagos deal, the position would be different I suspect not. The base would be leased back to the UK and we'd still have a veto on its use.
EDIT cross post form CG explains why HMG are not saying 'go ahead'.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 20 Feb 26 at 10:19
|
DG is mainly used for their long range bombers, so B1, B2 and B52. They tend to keep them in the rear areas plus it's set up for them.
They could run them all the way from the US but that obviously has a knock on to how much they can do.
|
To summarise.
US attack on Iran would be in contravention of international law. For the UK to support such action would render the UK in breach of such law. I understand the principle.
The international community is therefore powerless to prevent the suppression of dissent so a violent, extreme and corrupt regime can remain in power by killing many thousands of civilians.
What the US hopes to achieve with their carrier groups is unclear - it seems unlikely destroying huge amounts of infrastructure (which they could do) will actually lead to regime change. It may just increase the resolve of the ayatollahs.
As often seems the case the law can be an ass. From the point of view of both the local civilian population and Middle East stability the actions of Trump seem well intentioned even if motivated by an oversized ego with yet another war he can “stop”.
|
|
The royal family have expressed their deepest regret at Andrew's car accident next week.
|
|
I thought they were going to send him on a state visit to Moscow to visit a famous window.
|
|
Incarcerated in The Tower, and then "disappeared". There is precedent with Princes (though not with those formerly known as... )
|
I'm Mandy, Fry Me - Bromptonaut
