Old Codger

Food for thought!

@gough_judith @Neccccy Absolutely, 😁

@old_codger53 @Neccccy Agreed but a nice idea.

🚨 RUMOURS IN WESTMINSTER THAT STARMER COULD CALL A SNAP GENERAL ELECTION TO SAVE BEING MADE TO RESIGN AFTER MAY 8th AND STAY AS PM?

@IfindWankers I think if that happened, she would change her mind very quickly.

This COLOSSAL wanker says she'll feel "safer" on an island filled with Muslim men rather than an island filled with white patriotic British men! The wanktardedness is strong with this one!

@JamesMelville Some think he should be behind bars, I believe.

Based on what happened in Iraq, Tony Blair should be nowhere near the front of political discourse. But he still is. The orchestrator of so many problems continues to offer ‘solutions’ that will create even more problems. Tony Blair is not the solution. He’s part of the problem.

@RupertLowe10 Quick question, are Judges ever held accountable for their decisions? Is there a body (over seeing authority) that reviews their decisions?

This Nigerian man successfully fought a deportation on human rights grounds. He has just been jailed for 17 years for dragging a young woman into woods and assaulting her. He was already on bail for another rape allegation. The BBC reports he has a "fascination" for forced sexual abuse. "He grabbed her by the mouth and forced her into woods, where he carried out a violent rape." Why wasn't he deported before his latest crime? Read this... From the BBC - "The judge at the immigration tribunal in 2024 said the matter was "finely balanced", arguing the offence Oladele had committed was "very serious" and that there was "a strong public interest in deporting and excluding foreign criminals, especially one who has committed a frightening and public assault". But the fact that Oladele would be "a complete outsider should he relocate to Nigeria" and that he had a "developed private life having grown up in the United Kingdom" outweighed the public interest in deporting him.' The judge said he posed 'exceptionally high risk of harm to young women'. What the hell are we doing to ourselves? Honestly? Two words. Death penalty. Restore Britain would give the British people a say if they want savage animals like this put to death.

@Keir_Starmer Sorry don’t believe you, no trust!

Before the war in Iran I made clear: it is only fair that we have a windfall tax when energy companies make windfall profits, so we can help families with the cost of living. The Tories, Reform, SNP all oppose it. Only this Labour government stands up for working people.

@ToonDazza @elonmusk 👍

Man must be shadow banned - has Starmer told @elonmusk to silence The Jackal….. Drop me a note so I know you’re there…

@madleftworld @JChimirie66677 You would think so, wouldn’t you? Let’s see what this week’s thrilling instalment brings!

@old_codger53 @JChimirie66677 They can't stumble to another, everything is catching up

The Undeclared Meeting. The Shared Client. The £750 Million Contract There is a moment in this affair when the accumulating details stop looking like coincidence and start looking like something else entirely. Sunday's revelation about the Palantir meeting may be that moment. On February 27 2025, Keir Starmer and Peter Mandelson visited Palantir's headquarters in Washington. Eleven defence personnel attended alongside Britain's defence attaché to the United States. A presentation was given. A tour followed. The Ministry of Defence described it as a meeting. Downing Street says it was not a meeting and therefore required no declaration under the ministerial code. Both positions are on the public record and only one of them can be accurate. The meeting was not logged in Starmer's transparency returns, while other engagements from the same trip were. Breaking the ministerial code is widely regarded as a resignation offence. Set aside the semantic argument about what constitutes a meeting. Focus on what was present in that room. Starmer. Mandelson. Defence officials. And the executives of a technology company that was, at the time, a registered client of Global Counsel, the lobbying firm Mandelson co-founded and in which he held a 24 percent stake while serving as Britain's ambassador to the United States. Global Counsel had been hired by Palantir in 2018 specifically to help procure UK government contracts. Mandelson retained his shareholding when appointed ambassador. The connection between Global Counsel and Palantir was reportedly absent from his vetting. Later in 2025, Palantir won a five year £750 million contract with the Ministry of Defence. Its MoD contract had already tripled in size without due process or competition. Palantir also holds a £330 million NHS contract and a total of 34 contracts with public sector bodies. The question Alex Burghart has put publicly is the right one. Who arranged the meeting, what was discussed, and what did Global Counsel's client stand to gain? A third question deserves equal prominence. Did Starmer know, when he visited Palantir's headquarters with Mandelson at his side, that Palantir was a registered client of the firm in which his ambassador held a substantial financial interest? Downing Street has declined to confirm whether Mandelson was directly involved in arranging the visit. The government says there are robust processes in place to ensure contracts are awarded fairly. Palantir says its latest MoD contract was first discussed before Mandelson became ambassador and signed more than three months after he was sacked. Both statements may be technically accurate. Neither addresses the central problem. A British ambassador with a direct financial interest in a lobbying firm facilitated a meeting between the Prime Minister and that firm's defence contractor client. The meeting was not declared. No minutes were taken. The contractor subsequently won a contract worth three quarters of a billion pounds. Each element of that sequence has an innocent explanation available to it. The combination does not. A man whose financial interests were supposed to be held in a blind trust while he served as the Crown's representative in Washington was present at an undeclared meeting between his Prime Minister and his lobbying firm's most significant defence client. Whether that constitutes a conflict of interest is not a complicated question. Whether it constitutes something worse is now a matter for Scotland Yard, which has been asked to widen its investigation into Mandelson to include the Palantir meeting. Starmer is already facing a privileges committee referral for misleading Parliament. His own Cabinet Office chief has contradicted his account of the vetting process. A senior government source says the wheels have stopped turning. The Palantir meeting was not declared. The contract was awarded. The question of who benefited and who knew is not going away.

@real_shirelass What, Venom is real? Wow

Another interesting ‘conspiracy theory’ states that MI6 and the government covered up the fact that there was ‘black goo’, which is a sentient fluid, an intelligent self aware liquid which was found within the Falkland Islands, and brought back to Britain during the Falkland war in the 1980s, where something went wrong when tested in the labs in England. Researchers say, that this is the biggest cover-up of our time, and not many people really do know about it except for heads of state and the Government. Interesting.

@Jenny_1884 If he turns up, 🤷‍♂️

PMQs has got to be worth a watch tomorrow 🍿 Don’t usually watch it but might make an exception just to see him squirm 🤣

@paulmasonnews Pretty sure that almost everyone had concerns over Mandelson. Never met him but wouldn’t have trusted him as far as I could throw him! If you were PM and you were appointing him, surely you would make absolutely certain he was totally above board - I bloody well would have!

The last media attempt to hound Starmer from office backfired and so will this one. People can see Mandelson was dodgy and the victims are owed a full inquiry. They can also see off-the-scale bias and click-farming by self-aggrandising lobby journalists paid more than the PM

@UKLabour Oh no, not trying to deflect from something else by any chance?

NEW: Fresh questions for the deputy leader of Reform after investigation reveals he failed to pay almost £100,000 in tax, benefitting his investment firm… …which then gave big donations to Reform UK. This isn’t going away.

@GBNEWS @LeilaniDowding No, no that can’t be true, shock horror!

Lord Mandelson paid millions by Chinese-military linked firm in new twist to security vetting scandal gbnews.com/politics/lord-…

@Jenny_1884 What a load of nonsense! The world has gone to hell in a handcart!

The NHS has ordered staff not to use the term “It’s raining cats & dogs” as it may offend foreigners. Tough If you don’t like it jog on is what I think The NHS needs to get back to concentrating on making people better & not being more concerned about offending people.

@ArchRose90 What, Mandelson failed his security vetting? First I’ve heard of that!

A preview of parliament tomorrow. MP: When did the Prime Minister know that Peter Mandelson failed his security vetting? PM: Let me be clear, I got the calls on Iran right, introduced breakfast clubs. Reform want division. I want a patriotic renewal in the national interest!

@CamillaTominey They really are lacking in intelligence, 1st class degree my backside - that should be checked.

Truly desperate stuff 🤦‍♀️ -I was asking you about the PM, not Tice -Tice tax claims are the subject of legal action -I asked Jenrick about Tice anyway -Anyone who has ever seen me interview Tice knows I’m far from a snowflake -The definition of a snowflake is a serving MP who posts this sort of hatstand and then switches off replies.

@PaulCoxComedy @CamillaTominey @GBNEWS Nowhere near power or sharp objects.

Just listened to the @CamillaTominey interview with Tom Hayes on @GBNEWS - genuinely incredible levels of denial and quite frankly cognitive dissonance. Extraordinary. If you get a chance do check it out. These people should be nowhere near power.

Prophetic, no?