Monday 27 July 2015


Mr Sewel in his Lordly costume... Note the hat...
It has been suggested that the Sun on Sunday yesterday, and the Sun today, reporting that Mr Sewel, the Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords has been caught in a sting, snorting cocaine, going with prostitutes, and wearing a bra, was motivated by party political revenge for the revelations that ex-Tory grandees from the Thatcher era, were indeed involved in child molestation and possibly murder in their murky pasts.


Let's be honest about this, taking cocaine is illegal (although as Niko points out on his blog, it's maybe something the Tories wouldn't be overly keen to make a big fuss the video shows). 

I'm not sure what the law in England says about prostitutes, but I suspect that it's probably not legal to pay for sex. So there. He broke the law on two counts. 

As far as I remember there is nothing illegal about wearing a bra, no matter how silly it makes you look. We are told that he was unflattering in his comments about Tony Blair and David Cameron. Well, find me someone who's not... and, at least for the moment, that is still not against English law. (It never will be a crime in Scots Law.)
Another get up and another hat...goodness he does like dressing up.

On the other hand, the revelations that the Cabinet Office has been hiding papers which confirm a list of deviants in the Cabinet of Mrs Thatcher, and in the Establishment that surrounded her, is a very much more important and worrying thing...not least for the fact that people knew about it at the time and have done ever since and they did nothing, hid the papers, and lauded the miscreants plying them with highly paid jobs and titles. Although, I admit, the word 'miscreants' is such an understatement that it sounds ridiculous. 

By comparison a little old man from the middle reaches of the Establishment who snorts cocaine and who has to pay for sex is as of nothing. 

Of course, it's unfortunate, but utterly typical of what we're continually discovering about the UK Establishment, that the head of a committee on probity in one of the houses of parliament is rather less than squeaky clean when it comes to probity himself. 

But we're used to that sort of thing by now, and in the end, he has done no one but himslef any harm.
Or dressing down...
On balance I preferred the ones with the silly hats.

I don't know, or much care, whether he will face prosecution for drug taking or paying for sex. What I do know is that he has lost an £80,000 a year job, and will almost certainly have to retire from the House of Lords, although I understand there is no mechanism for relieving him of the title. Into the bargain he must know that hundreds of thousands of us all over the UK have been falling about laughing at the pictures, and will never hear his name or see his face again without a fit of giggling.

But, no one at all, or at least no one sane, will ever be laughing at what some of Thatcher's cabinet and its friends were up to.

No comparison.


  1. Glasgow Working ClassJuly 27, 2015 8:50 pm

    He did have the privalage that most benefit seekers do not have. Sign in and get your money on a plate and enjoy the Members Bar while screwing the working class.

    1. Indeed... but now he doesn't. His sanction is being sacked from an £80k + job...


      I'm not sure if he got his £300 a day on top of that.... But he'll have lost that too.

  2. I wonder if his missus has seen the Sun over the last few days?

    I'm not thinking his return to his *ahem* castle will have gone without some *cough* interesting words being said! LOL

    1. One probably doesn't read the Sun at Castle Sewel, but I'm thinking she knows nonetheless.

      Ooops..... she'll be locking up her bras!

    2. It's been days since I saw the sun up here!

    3. LOL...yeah... its like that all over Scotland CH...

  3. tris

    you really should post this on your blog

    the right wing media demonise mylord and yet covered up for
    George Osborne this needs to be out there whilst the public
    interest is high.

    Do your civic duty

    1. Well, I didn't put it up in deference to you Niko, seeing it's on your site...but I linked to it.

      If you like I'll put it up here...

      Let me know. I can add it.

    2. tris

      well done it needs to be seen and my blog is a bit of the beaten track
      as am I lol

    3. OK done... Thanks

  4. I was thinking the same thing, at leat he was with consenting adults and not venerable children.


    1. Exactly...

      What he does is his business, but when you make the law for others you should try to keep it, specially if you're the guardian of standards!!!!

  5. I tend to think Lord (ahem) Sewel got his marching orders yesterday more for what he said than what he did. Now you may rubbish Alex Salmond with impunity but the Prime Minister, gosh no, tut tut. I imagine he has lost considerably more than just his seat in the Member of Parliament's retirement home and is placeman position. He will not be welcome in those places he wanted to be like on Boards etc any more.
    Good riddance, another one bites the dust. I bet nothing is done about George Gideon Osborne.

    1. I guess it's a risk you take. If you are favoured nothing much happens to you, but if you are like Sewel, not very popular, you can be toast in a few short minutes.

      As I said, I'm not bothered about him snorting coke or going with prostitutes and I've never heard anyone say something nice about Cameron, or for that matter Warmonger Blair, but you set yourself up for a fall if you are pontificating about behavioural standards to everyone else... and up to your neck in sleaze

  6. A former Labour peer who was convicted of trying to burn down an Edinburgh hotel and spent time in jail as a consequence,is,as far as I know still collecting his £300 a day plus expenses (Man in a Suitcase for those of my vintage).
    Sewel might be evicted from the club if he decides to start cheering and clapping during debates but otherwise,he can do what he likes and still get "paid".

    1. Yea. I'm not sure how it is that you can be an arsonist or perjure yourself in the courts (Archer) and get to go back in there, and all this bloke did was snort some charlie and go with some prostitutes.

  7. Hi Munguin your honour (and Tris). I sent you both an email recently and was wondering if either of yous had received it (or even if your email address is still the same)?


  8. OOPS!

    I think I'll just leave these here for you Tris.

    1. Thanks Arbroath. Much appreciated. I've passed them on to Mark.

      I suspected that there was some protocol to be followed.

    2. Absolutely Tris and you can be damned sure Fluffy ignored all the protocol going regarding Friday's wee visit!

  9. Sex between consenting adults + recreational drug use and the entire "best in the world" UKOK media goes into overdrive. Child rape + recreational sadism and it's the sound of silence from the entire msm. Tacit complicity.

    Some questions I'd like to hear from SNP parliamentarians.

    Will the Prime Minister explain what measures his government have been taken to ensure the safety of children visiting the Houses of Parliament?

    Has the Prime Minister taken steps to ensure that the Conservative and Labour MP's who are currently under investigation for sexual offences against children have no access to parliamentary visitors who are under the age of consent ?

    Gloves off boots on.

    1. Completely agree JJ (wherever you are)! that it is a bizarre overplay of this, when so little has been said about CSA by those and such as those.

      Absolutely agree with the questions you ask.

      Can I suggest you put them to your local MP, from whichever party, and get him or her to demand answers.

      The notion that this is all something that happened only in the days of Tahtcher, is a little bit far fetched.

    2. Sod the boots. I just wish my local gun shop would hurry up modifying my Barratt M107 sniper's rifle. I can then sit back 2 miles and take these horrible disgusting excuses for human beings without them knowing anything about the pain heading their way! LOL

    3. Ewwww. Remind me never to get on the wrong side of you!

    4. Ha Ha Ha!

      As if you or his grand magnificence himself could ever do that! LOL

    5. Certainly won't now!!!

  10. it's the mindset of the public that I can't work out. When and where did we learn such deference for the 'authority' of the establishment?
    The apparent disgust, then 'it' always happening, they all do it and cover for each other' acceptance just doesn't fit together.
    Just because bank robberies have been going on for a long time doesn't stop us expecting the criminals should go to prison.
    If others from Thatcher's cabinet and associates involved are brought to trial, there should be a parallel prosecution of those who colluded to cover it up.
    If £7billion can be spent on Westminster repairs then the cost of trials and investigations should be of little consequence.

    1. I couldn't agree more, Brian.

      Of course this kind of thing has always gone on, and presumably still goes on (although I'd imagine they are being a bit careful now that the public is on to them thanks to the net).

      That doesn't and can't make it right.

      The thing is that even when there was a very strict moral code for everyone in the country, the nobs could always get away with it. Whether it was adultery, homosexuality, or assaults on minors, what was utterly forbidden for the rest of the population, was hidden by the toffs.

      Keeping it quiet was collusion. Clearly Thatcher was guilty of that. She knew about her ministers and advisers and she did nothing, [presumably because it gave her some hold over them. Do as you are told or we will release the dirty secrets we have on you... Or possibly because her ministers were at the bottom end of what was going on, and tales could be told on people far higher up the food chain.

      The fact that so many people at the BBC now say they knew about Saville... people like Rantzen for heaven's sake, but they said nothing... Unbelievable, and her made a dame for services to children.

      If these people had spoken out how many young lives would not have been ruined...or ended?

      As for spending £7 billion on Westminster...

      I say take a wrecking ball to it and give them a new utility place.

      They have no need of all that grandeur. That's what we have the Saxe-Cobergs for.

    2. The problem with people like Saville is that he had power, and senior contacts to maintain that power. Given the revelations about Thatcher's colleagues, and other political figures, it makes me wonder if Saville was protected because he himself knew about what the politicians were up to.

      Think about a large company (or any company for that matter). When something erm, happens between two colleagues, everyone knows within a short space of time. Saville with his contacts would surely have known what was happening. He may not have been actively linked to such activities, but if he did know, then these political figures would use their influence to protect Saville in order to protect themselves. If that makes sense.