NewLabour's anti-wog minister, Mr Phil Hobbit,
is treated to some Nepalese Fast food. April 2009.
Phil Woolass, like Jacqui Schmidt, was emblematic of the Brown government - useless, out of his depth and seedy, famously claiming reimbursement from us for nappies, pantyliners and tampons. Brown, the paranoid snot-munching lunatic, surrounded himself, as far as possible, with incompetents whom he could bully and who by dint of their worthlessness would be unlikely to challenge his doomed, maniacal leadership. In and out of office Woollass was a brazen lying fuckpig, a fact confirmed, today, when an electoral court revoked his membership of the Commons and overturned the election result in his Oldham seat, instituting a new election. The court found that the horrible, grinning little turd had lied about his ShitEating rival for the seat, emails disclosing that Woollass and his team had in fact, published untrue and inflammatory remarks, that he fought a 'dirty and dishonest' campaign full of 'lies, smears and totally false allegations.' Proper NewLabour, in fact.
Clever Phil listens as Patsy tells him what, henceforth, will be govament policy regarding wog soldiers. Yes, we was always gonna do that very thing, whatever it is.
As with all the so-called professions, MPs' crimes are adjudicated upon internally and it falls to the smug prick, Mr Tiny Speaker, to ratify this decision and call a by-election. Had you or I behaved so rottenly, so corruptly, so dishonestly, we might be facing a rather more rigourous prosecution, Slimy Phil's being barred from the Commons for three years seems a puny response to such a serious matter, along the lines of Well, I paid the money back as soon as I was found out, so that's that (D. Cameron, 2009)
Never mind, we must look forward ro Phil being on the This Week studio sofa next week, trousering another grand of our money and then on any of the celebrity rehabilitation quiz shows, Y'know, think Neil and Christine Hamilton. Maybe he can join the mad, shameless, old cow, Widdecombe, on Virgins Go Dancing, or whatever it is. What is for sure is that his job loss will be as nothong compared to the millions now facing poverty thanks to he and his jumped cronies. Anybody tells you It's a great personal tragedy for Phil and his family, just punch them hard in the mouth; it'll be alright.
Never mind, we must look forward ro Phil being on the This Week studio sofa next week, trousering another grand of our money and then on any of the celebrity rehabilitation quiz shows, Y'know, think Neil and Christine Hamilton. Maybe he can join the mad, shameless, old cow, Widdecombe, on Virgins Go Dancing, or whatever it is. What is for sure is that his job loss will be as nothong compared to the millions now facing poverty thanks to he and his jumped cronies. Anybody tells you It's a great personal tragedy for Phil and his family, just punch them hard in the mouth; it'll be alright.
29 comments:
"Anybody tells you It's a great personal tragedy for Phil and his family, just punch them hard in the mouth; it'll be alright."
Poetry.
Patsy's finest hour.
Open palm to the nose Mr Ishmael. Fist in the mouth risks breaking yer knuckles.
Also, simply best not to consort with the kind of arsehole who would harbour such a notion in the first place. We must do our utmost not to anthropomorphise the politicians - particularly the Satanists from Labour's last government.
For clarity - by 'harbour such notions' I refer to the kind of half-witted jackass who would feel a germ of sympathy for such vile arseholes as Woolas, Gordon Brown or (Jacqui) Smith. Not those who would harbour the notion of busting their face wide open. That's only human.
This man was part of a government that falsified intelligence on Iraq in order to rig a war. They practically suspended Habeas Corpus. They ended the 'right to silence', they ended the principle of 'double jeopardy', they were 90% down the road to compulsory ID cards, they were raiding their political opponents offices, they burned all the fucking money buying votes.
5bn quid squandered in Brown's constituency - a contract deliberately worded so that it would actually cost more money to build one Aircraft Carrier than two if you please - more jobs = more votes in Brown's constituency. For Brown. Fucking hell.
To the point where we now have zero Aircraft carriers because there's no spare money to repair or extend the life of the one we've got. Which, seeing as we'll be doing without any at all for the next ten years kind of begs the question of whether we need any at all again ever. And if so then why do we scarp the only one we've got at the minute?
Too bad every other constituency didn't warrant 5bn quid squandered on it as such a priority eh? 650 x 5bn = 3.25 trillion quid. Expensive votes those Fife Labour votes.
What a shower of economy destroying cunts. 5bn quid squandered just so Brown could claim 65K a year in perpetuity. Jesus Christ. It would have been cheaper to just bung Brown a couple of million quid in 1997. Ten million even. Just buy the idiot off. Just like we pay the unemployed to watch daytime TV instead of robbing us in our homes.
Yeah, yeah - I know - rewarding failure. But now we still have to pay him only now we're over a barrel for 5bn quid. 1000bn quid if you include the increased debt he ran up outside his own constituency. Which,of course, we must.
Is the world on it's head. Does it make more sense to just buy Labour politicians off immediately on election. Here mate - here's a million quid if you just fuck off and never set foot in the HoC. Tell you what - call it ten million. Just fuck off.
Bizzarely it would be much cheaper. Just buy 'em off. Cut out the years of idiocy whereby they attempt to justify their 65K and, in doing so, end up costing much more than 65K. About 100,000 times more on average.
Egregious little shit. And that's being kind. Ms. Lumley filleted him, bless her. My old man soldiered with the Ghurkas - had Kukris which had been presented to him, which some bastard took from my aged Mum's house to "be valued"; thought them the scariest and finest soldiers in the world.
What you said the other day. Mr. Ishamel, about one's natural left leaning forbears form history; the Tolpuddle Martyrs, the Rochdale Co-op, movement - these bastards, these Woolass bastards, betrayed that legacy so comprehensively, I've ended up hating them more than the Tories, and indeed, have extended the latter all sorts of graces I wouldn't now afford Labour, simply because they are not Labour.
Only to be spurned, but oh, the joy of not having the cunt Brown in your face all the time is still blissful.
Woolas is, was!!, and vile little fucker. I saw him on the Brillo PMQs thing once. Grim-faced swine had a madder smile taped to the front of his gob than McDoom has ever sported. Nasty, vile little runt. 649 to go.
I do not believe the aircraft carrier bollocks, Mr jgms2. It cannot be true and if it is considered to be true, it must be contestable. "Excuse me, you twat, I am the United Fucking Kingdom and I have changed my mind and I want just the one aircraft carrier, please. Do you want the job or don't you?" There is something nasty lurking in there.
Mr jgm2s aircraft carrier paragraph is correct, the public position of HMG is that Ark Royal be scrapped immediately and that, in some years, one of her successors be put into limited service, with no 'planes, and the other be mothballed.
There is a perfectly legitimate if unpleasant argument, mr elby, which can be made about Ghurka rights which is that they are mercenaries and entitled only to wages, never mind pensions and rights to UK resettlement, harsh but valid, UK citizenship has never been the mercenaries' automatic reward, why should it become so because Joanna Lumley wants it? It is not my argument but it is an argument which could have been deployed; that Woollass et al were too stupid, too frightened to do so is par for the course. A vile little fucker is right, poisonous, cowardly and stupid, NewLabour to a tee.
For the benefit of Mr jmg2's education, it is not the unemployed who rob him in his home, it is the burglars. Easy mistake to make, I suppose: one is forced into grovelling to arsehole clerks precisely because he chooses not to be a criminal, and the other is, well, a criminal.
I'm assuming Mr jmg2 made his comment through woeful ignorance, for anyone who would conflate the unemployed with the criminals for the purpose of self-righteous indignation at his tax bill would be someone else who would deserve a hearty smack in the gob.
That someone so venal and crapulent as Woolas got to hold one of the most important positions in this country is the perfect epitome of every betrayal, every self-serving, corrupt and treacherous act of the party masquerading under the label of Labour. And, as Mr Elby says, to find oneself loathing the party of one's natural political instincts more than the alternative, is testimony indeed to the depths to which a once great movement has sunk.
To those Labour canvassers in 1997 who reassured me that once Blair was in power he would return to the true values of the party, and who were met with hollow laughter, I wish you had been right, but not all of us were fooled. But even I have been surprised by the scale and depth of the betrayal
Mr Edgar,
I was making a general observation that one of the primary reasons we pay folk to be unemployed is so that they don't get so desperate as to come and rob us in our homes. I accept of course that burglars come from all walks of life. Mechanics, bank managers, Police officers, bricklayers, window-cleaners, and, even, occasionally, the unemployed and those on disability benefit.
You are quite right of course. The gentleman (or woman, or transgendered person or lesbian, gay or bisexual or visually impaired, deaf, dumb, blind, lame, halt, Muslim, Hindu, 'person of colour....'who burgles your house is, of course, a burglar.
However - it is a point, universally acknowledged on these blogs, that one of the main reasons for bunging the unemployed (or the fucking muppets ticking boxes in a hospital near you) money is because if you don't then they'll be driven to desperate means in order to survive. Save your punches for those who truly deserve them. The ones who destroyed the UK economy even as they proclaimed they'd 'abolished boom and bust' while they quadrupled the national debt. Don't hurt your knuckles. Use a golf club. Better still do as that Muslim bird attempted to do.
I wasn't saying, Mr I, that Mr jgm2 was incorrect; he very accurately described what we are supposed to swallow. I am saying that I do not believe the fuckers are telling us the truth. A shocking thought, I know.
What is it which they are hiding, then, or misdconstruing?
It cannot be true. Nobody - even the most cynical - would make a bargain where one aircraft carrier built and one cancelled was more expensive than two built. It is just silly and I do not believe it. Penalty clauses are just not like that.
Therefore we must look elsewhere for our reason. I will put my life on the line and guess that in due course the frogs will buy/lease/borrow/beg the other carrier - maybe get it in return for crap aircraft to furnish the two. It is a stitch-up.
Think about it. It is just stupid.
"OK, I will pay for the one carrier and I will pay you the labour cost of the cancelled second plus ten percent for your trouble." The yard gets the labour money so no jobs are lost, and a profit and it is just a few squillion cheaper than the terms apparently agreed. A fool could negotiate that drunk in the dark. I do not believe it. It is a euro defence force by stealth lie.
Well, if we'll swallow what we have so far, we'll certainy swallow HMS Entente Cordiale.
Just watching Scottish Secretary Moore being questioned rather lamely by a committee. No, he says, the contracts for the carriers were all entirely proper, in good faith; man's a cunt, mind.
Mr Ishmael et al, without sight of the contracts I have to depend on the word of HMG that that is how the contracts have been worded. Cheaper to build two than one. And it may be that we have some back deal contract with the French whereby we sell 'em/lease 'em one so we had better have one to sell 'em otherwise we'll be in the hole for even more money. But that would be pure speculation.
The more obvious and simple explanation however is likely to be the correct one. That Brown wanted to ensure his perpetual re-election by ensuring a decade or more of well-paid jobs pouring money into his local economy. And how better to do that than with (y)our money? Better to have ten years work than five years work too. SO better to rig the contract to make it 'cheaper' to provide ten years work than five years work. Deliberately write the contract to favour your constituents. It's the right thing to do.
I remember the tendering process for this contract. Thales - the French outfit - back in 2003- tendered to design and build the two aircraft carriers for 2.8bn quid for the pair. In French shipyards mind you. BAe wanted more. So Brown came up with some compromise whereby BAe would build the boats (at greater cost) in the UK ie his constituency but to the French design. Since then the price has been creeping up. 2.8bn. 4bn. 5bn.
The simplest explanation is the more likely. Brown engineered this contract to provide ten years of work in his constituency and buy Labour votes. And damn the cost to the rest of us.
jgm2 is correct on the aircraft carriers; as ever, it is down to that fuck-faced cunt Brown, and was done as a vote buyer for one of the Glasgow by-elections. Despite the fact that it totally illegal to do so, as we know Brown and Lord Slither sprayed our money all over marginal constituencies before the election; and that is why, children, thanks to the ArchIdiot Brown, we will have two aircraft carriers that would have cost more to cancel than to build, and will not be able to actually carry aircraft for some years.
The Icelanders are prosecuting the PM who fucked them over; why can't we do the same? Or at least, shove the cunt in some stocks and hurl dog shit at him all day long.
What I meant to add, regarding Labour's betrayal of everyone and everything, is that at least the Tories are what they are. Better the devil you know than the one that pretends to be your very own devil. Thus, Thatcher had principles; yes, they stank (though the ageing process has brought me to recognise that she had a good and strong line on the matter of 'personal responsibility' - indeed, her much reviled "no such thing as society" speech is in fact a speech on the matter of personal responsibility) - but they were principles. Labour are utterly unprincipled in every matter and aspect of their being.
So the Coalition regardless of how one perceives them could do England a HUGE favour by finally answering the West Lothian question, and thus disappearing these bastard Scottish socialists from the English political scene.
Please.
Thank you for the clarification, mr jmg2. The acknowledgement you talk about, though, is not universal, for I do not recognise it and I have been coming here, intermittently, for a year or so.
An at least equally popular view is that, if you starve the unemployed, they will be driven into work. No politician I have ever heard has suggested cutting benefits so that the unemployed will be forced to burgle our homes.
Unemployment benefit is paid, not to stop people from murdering us in our beds, but because it is the decent thing to do, given the assumption that most unempolyed are decent people who are suffering considerable inconvenience. But, perhaps, you don't accept the validity of that assumption.
This is my view, and always has been: the fact that I was recently unemployed for 2 years and am now back in work again hasn't changed it.
I am asked to believe that probably the most experienced naval power in the history of the world cannot competently order an aircraft carrier or two? Well, being a public purchase the contract and tender documents should be out there somewhere. I shall look.
The only flaw in your analysis, Mr jgm2, is that the jocks of Kirkcaldy would elect a dung beetle if it was a labour dung beetle. Brown has no need to rig that. A Glasgow bye-election is though easier to believe. What a cunt the man was.
It is universal with me, mr edgar, that unemployment does not happen by accident but that is a wicked economic lever pressed, generally, by the unaccountable rich, supported by their stooges in MediaMinstes, Wall Street and all the other shitholes; that the real thieves are in pinstripes, burgling us remotely. That many have grown feckless after the application of such short-sighted and heartless policies was always predictable, that there is a benefits dependency culture in what politicians shamelessly call sink estates is, with due respect to mr elby, largely attributable to Whisky Maggie's Get Rich Quick spivvery and her squandering of North Sea Oil revenues on dole payments. There is also the matter that her spin, her Murdoch-sponsored wickedness permitted, ushered in the arch criminals Tony and Imelda, the Gang of Four, in fact, and now this empty headed charlatan poltroon, Cocaine Dave, of Eton, a gobshiteing PR man. That Labour made itself more Thatcherite than Thatcher should please the old lady - rather more than do her children, at any rate. And that so many are led by the nose into blaming the poor for the crimes of the rich is something which, hereabouts, we bitterly regret.
It was primarily, mr elby, as servants of the banks, that Mr Brown and Mr Balls, in opposition, greased their path to power and right up to the last they remained so, tipping billions of our pounds into the pockets of bonus-greedy fraudulent barrowboys; a fleet, even, of aircraft carriers is, I suggest, on the scales of larceny, neither here nor there.
Cheaper to build two than cancel one? Not my idea of a BOGOF.
Anyway, you are all on the wrong track through being rational. The reason Brown signed is not to do with rationality but by having his ego polished by two companies at once.
BAe says Aye, they'll be putting up statues to you in Kirkaldy. Thales says You will be, 'ow you say, an 'ero of the Republique, you don't want to let Monseiur Blair get ahead, you must be, 'ow you say, Saviour Le Monde and what with the hypnotic hum of appreciation and the lights and diamonds he can see glittering out of his remaining eye, the pen needs very little guidance. If absolutely necessary, Lord Slither can whisper I will always love you best and this will really stuff Cameron.
The End of the Affair is quite important. This Woolas thing is quite murky - to be caught bang to rights shows that his office wasn't looked after. I'm not gonna whinge about pork barrel projects - Jocks building ships is good stuff. So what, we don't have an aircraft carrier? Is that really a problem? Let the cunts fight amongst themselves. Sure, protect British interests but....the bank account can be stronger than the jet. If they're gonna be fighting anyway - why get in the way.
I have thought long and hard about Jock independence Mr Elby and it's a bit off a 2 way thing. It'd obviously box Torydom in for a good stretch but it would also damage Shengen negotiations on bilateral agreements with the EU. It would seem inevitable that if Jockland went independent 1 of the first things it'd do is join the Euro and that's proper scary.
Yes, mrs woar, of course, rationality, an entirely inapproprate approach to our governing chimps, with their attendant vanity photographers, their opportunistic families and in the case of Tony and Imelda, their valour.
You could not make it up. Apparently there is something called the "Aircraft Carrier Alliance". What be that, you ask?
"The ACA is an innovative alliance between industry and the Ministry of Defence that was founded to transform the way in which large scale projects such as the Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carriers are produced and ultimately delivered. The QE Class is one of the largest engineering projects currently being undertaken in the UK and as such it was going to take more than one organisation to deliver it. In order to ensure that the project delivered the best value for money and the best ships possible to the UK Armed Forces, the Alliance was formed in such a way as to ensure that all partners took collective responsibility and ownership of the project and would ultimately ensure that each would share in both risk and reward.
My italics... They have "best" where they clearly needed to be honest and use "worst". I tell you what we'll do. Instead of competing against each other, let's put in a joint bid - twice as high as it need be, of course - and carve up the dosh between us. We might even be able to con the MoD onto it. Then they'll be fucked.
Continues... "The Aircraft Carrier Team was originally formed in 2003 and was made up of Thales UK, BAE Systems and the Ministry of Defence. Babcock and VT Group joined in 2005, creating the Aircraft Carrier Alliance and the memorandum of understanding for the actual contract was signed the following year. Since then, VT Group has sold its ship building operation to BAE Systems and the remaining support and training part of the business has been bought out by Babcock resulting in three industry members of the ACA.
Working together, the ACA’s collective culture is one of an uncompromising commitment to trust, collaboration, innovation and mutual support with all decisions taken on a best for project basis."
A musical chairs adventure for mutual fucking enrichment is the name of the game, an uncompromising commitment to massive profits more like, a collective culture of fucking corruption. If I did that I would be in jail. Unbelievably stupid and naive.
Aside from anything else, mr dtp, it should properly be the subject of a (UK) nation-wide debate and referendum and not just for Salmond's celtic brownshirts to filibuster and gerrymander and bamboozle about.
More people should visit Scotland, it really is the best part of England, despite the fact that its minority govament is there - in my case and many others' - simply as a result of a national revulsion at the coalition of Jack McConnell and Smirking Jim Wallace and abuses its position disgracefully; it is rather like the so-called UK coalition, nobody but nobody voted for its policies;, its assumption of power is questionable and its days numbered.
There is no majority appetite here for independence and many see the illogicality and unfairness of the West Lothian Question; the Barnett Formula is another matter, it was promulgated to ensure that despite a widely separated population, public services were as far as possible uniform across the UK - it simply costs more to get stuff and staff around Scotland's huge landscape; it should not be used by Salmond, or any of them, to score political points.
I think it is a problem, not having an aircraft carrier. the UK owes its wealth and standing and survival to the Royal Navy, to disembowel it on the altar of unnecessary cuts is just cheap shit, from cheap shitsters.
ps I have answered your query about Damien Rice, me hearty.
Yeah, quite accurate about lezzies in response to Damien Rice but it's also cannabis centre of the world too.
It's a bit irritating being a Tory sometimes in that there is ABSOLUTELY FUCK ALL ELECTORAL MATHS involved in retaining Scotland but it's just one of those things if Labour want to create a fiefdom and their people let it then i'm already programmed to shout until i'm blue in the face so there's not much doing.
I like this TEA party movement not because I give a shit about the Yanky, buddy could you spare us a $600 billion bond crap, but because it was quick and semi-spirited. That's gotta be a good thing. People getting angry and doing stuff?
" ... and in the case of Tony and Imelda, their valour." Mr Ishmael: it is good to be back.
Yes, people getting angry and doing stuff is better than people not gdtting angry and doing nothing and if it rattles the cages of those BigHair, BigTeeth, I'm4Hire, intern-banging, goldplated LearJet arsehole Senators and Congressmen and women then it'll be a minor cause fucking celebre. That they are stupid, vengeful, racist, misguided, Bible-thumping, gaybashing imbecile sonsafuckingbitches being manipulated by Murdoch and a platoon of dangerous right-wing loonies just makes me hesitate a little. You know my views on Uncle Sam's murderous Empire and I doubt if an orchestrated apparently populist movement such as this intends any good to its fellow citizens or the rest of the world.
Good to see you, mr edgar.
Post a Comment