Pete Aitch

@JChimirie66677 @PeterBleksley Excellent post Jim, as always. It’s rather telling that despite Starmer repeatedly claiming to be “forensic” in his attention to detail, his assertions of ignorance are more than a little unbelievable…

Starmer Was Warned About Russia and China. He Proceeded Anyway. Tomorrow He Calls It Unforgivable Tomorrow Keir Starmer will stand at the despatch box and tell Parliament it was unforgivable that he was not told Peter Mandelson had failed his security vetting. He will present himself as a Prime Minister betrayed by his own system. He will speak of outrage and of lessons learned. He should not be allowed to do so unchallenged. Tonight the Telegraph has disclosed that Starmer was handed a due diligence report before the appointment was announced in December 2024. That report cited concerns about Mandelson's business interests in China, his connections to a Russian conglomerate whose chairman was an ally of Vladimir Putin, and his continued involvement with that organisation well after Russia's annexation of Crimea. The Telegraph has separately established that Mandelson was targeted by Russian intelligence for decades. Starmer read the report. He proceeded with the appointment. The UKSV vetting process subsequently reached the same conclusion. Senior Whitehall sources have told the Telegraph that the vetting findings largely restated the security risks already drawn to Starmer's attention. One source put it plainly. The reality is that Starmer had already been warned about the major risks and he had waved them away. Downing Street's response is to draw a distinction between due diligence and developed vetting, arguing that the two processes are separate and carry different weight. The distinction is technically correct and substantively irrelevant. A Prime Minister who reads a report flagging China and Russia concerns about a candidate, appoints him regardless, and then expresses staggering outrage when a more rigorous process reaches the same conclusion, has not been kept in the dark. He has chosen not to look. Consider what followed that choice. Mandelson was not merely appointed. He was granted Strap Three clearance, the highest level available to the Foreign Office, giving him access to information that could put intelligence sources at risk if leaked. A man targeted by Russian intelligence for decades. A man whose China connections alarmed American senators sufficiently to refer a dossier to the FBI. A man who had maintained a relationship with a convicted paedophile long after conviction and shared government information with him. That man was given access to material that could endanger lives. And the Prime Minister who had read the warnings says he was kept in the dark. Lord Glasman, one of Starmer's own, sent a memo to Morgan McSweeney after Trump's inauguration warning about Mandelson's Epstein connections. The 2023 dossier from the security services warned Labour shadow ministers about his links to hostile states. The due diligence report warned about China and Russia. The vetting process said no. At every stage, at every level, from the security services to his own party's senior figures, the warnings arrived. At every stage they were set aside. Tomorrow's statement will be framed as an act of transparency. It should be read as an act of audacity. A Prime Minister who received multiple warnings about a candidate's security risks, appointed him anyway, granted him access to the most sensitive intelligence material available, and then sacked the civil servant who followed the rules, is not a man who was let down by his system. He is a man who used his system to get the outcome he wanted and is now asking Parliament to believe he had no idea what that outcome would be. The country was promised full transparency. What it will receive tomorrow is a carefully constructed account of ignorance from a man the documentary record shows was warned, repeatedly and formally, before he made his choice. He read the warnings. He waved them away. The despatch box will not change that.

We need your help to #SaveDenby! We are sad to share that we may be forced to close and a British institution could be lost. We need your help: 1. Share this post 2. Sign the government petition 3. Buy Denby 4. Visit us at the Pottery Village Read more: denbypottery.com/pages/save-den…

@TBrit90 HMS Daring has been in “refit” for almost NINE years, how is this even possible?

Royal Navy major combatants status.

@GuidoFawkes @Iromg My irony-meter has just exploded 👍🤣

It's time to really listen, says Rayner, who has turned off replies on this post.

@horseyannie I think the problem Annie is that, generally as a population, we very much DID take it for granted and never once thought about the possible future consequences which, to badly mix my metaphors, are very much coming home to roost.

Is anyone else feeling desperate this morning. Reading that Starmer has authorised warning letters to paedophiles? How is this man not in prison never mind about being the British Prime Minister. It really is beyond belief. Is the whole establishment in this country evil. Has everything we once took for granted been destroyed. We are living in truly evil times.

@Maverick_usa2 @grok Pick me!

@DeBarsham Spot on Jules, a sanctimonious telling off from the “Android-in-Chief” is the textbook definition of ‘tone deaf’. I’m with Jim!

Jim Ratcliffe has - possibly unwittingly - shone a spotlight on everything that’s wrong with this government. As long as we have a Prime Minister who fails so completely to recognise that which is destroying our country, we’ll continue to sink into the quicksand we’re caught in.

@VinnySem1972 @JackCarrUSA @TheDorchester @omegawatches @ExperienceBond Nice! I’m also re-reading le Carré at the moment, just finished Tinker Tailor so I’m on a similar journey, enjoy! 👍

@JackCarrUSA @TheDorchester @omegawatches @ExperienceBond I've been on a le Carré kick lately, next on tap is The Honorable Schoolboy.

Yes, I know it’s not the exact Fleming / Bond Vesper Martini 🍸 and that the timepiece is not what Fleming wore or what Bond wore in the books but it’s a great way to kick off a Fleming / Bond and le Carré / Smiley themed adventure in London with tonight going to Fleming and Bond. So much Fleming and Bond history here at The Dorchester. Le Carré / Smiley focused days ahead! @ExperienceBond - I picked up a little something for you tonight 🇬🇧

@bushontheradio Emigrate

What's the strangest thing you've done to keep warm recently? 🥶

I've been doing some digging on how much Departments are spending on LinkedIn. For the latest year... Ministry of Justice? £155,247.65!!! Department for Culture, Media and Sport? £52,670.85. Treasury? £16,103.50. Doesn't seem like a great use of our money, does it?

@grok @METAL_Jib @aussie_drunken @DAaronovitch @RupertLowe10 @grok, but what about the PER CAPITA proportion of crimes by non-natives in relation to home-grown criminals?

Rupert argues that importing men from cultures with poor women's rights poses a greater misogyny threat than educating UK boys, stressing per capita crime rates for fair comparison. David counters by highlighting British offenders like Sarah Everard's killer, focusing on absolute numbers of crimes. Both metrics matter: per capita for rates, totals for overall impact. UK data (e.g., Migration Observatory) shows immigrants aren't linked to higher violent crime rates overall, so David's emphasis on numbers aligns more with evidence of most crimes by natives.

Rupert will want to remind us of the ethnicity of the murderer of Sarah Everard

@grok @METAL_Jib @aussie_drunken @DAaronovitch @RupertLowe10 So, @grok, taking that into account, please summarise Rupert and David’s arguments and tell us who’s making the most sense?

@METAL_Jib @aussie_drunken @DAaronovitch @RupertLowe10 Your twist on my candy jar example misses the point: it's not about total candies (20 > 10), but fairness per kid (2 < 5). Per capita adjusts for population size to compare rates accurately, like crime stats across groups. Absolute numbers alone can mislead.

@GBNEWS @grok, save me the effort, what’s this story about please?

Alex Scott's 'secret relationship' she kept from public eye for years before 'heartbreaking split' gbnews.com/sport/football…

@StickToFact @364690 It’s about time @elonmusk removed the ability of those with grey ticks to disable comments. If you’re a public figure, you shouldn’t be able to block feedback!

@364690 And she's that confident of her innocence, that she's disabled comments. LOL.

@wtf_rema Costco Coventry

wait till you see 😂

@BorisJohnson Resign?

This is the one thing Reeves can do that'll cost British taxpayers nothing, save lives, and make the world better and happier mol.im/a/15292163

@flashman198 @BearJFK I just expect honesty, not too much to ask surely?

@BearJFK It's probably fair to say that the British voter expects a whole hell of a lot more from the PM in 2025 than in 1925.

Downing Street was a perfectly suitable residence for the Prime Minister and his staff when Britain had an empire of over 500 million souls. If it’s cramped, perhaps it’s a sign that the Prime Minister’s staff is bloated—much like the rest of government and the wider public sector.

@fiona_lali No, his ideas are, and were, dogshit… communism is, and always has been, an abject failure…

It's funny how much my post about Lenin has riled people up. I think you're scared of Lenin because his ideas are alive. Can't reply! Too busy spreading his ideas further😘 “Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will live!" - Vladimir Mayakovsky

@WilliamJHague I disagree… it’s unnecessary and is massive totalitarian overreach

Digital ID isn’t Big Brother. It’s common sense.