WELL, YOU JUST NEVER KNOW WHEN AN ELECTION IS GOING TO HAPPEN OUT OF THE BLUE, DO YOU?

SO, BE PREPARED

aelection

I just saw this on Twitter. A Conservative supporter is sent a begging letter by Conservative Campaign Headquarters (remember, we used to get them under the name Peregrine).  Anyway, the line before the sign off reads: “We are finalising our election plans now, David…”

But, wait. It was only today that the Conservatives had their debate in parliament and only yesterday that the Cabinet agreed to put it to parliament, or so we are told.

So, how can they possibly be finalising their plans? Surely they couldn’t have planned a general election since yesterday’s announcement and be putting the final touches to it within 24 hours?

Oh, and on the subject of the Tory election campaign, it seems that those being questioned by the police over their involvement in the election fraud from two years ago will be allowed to stand as candidates this time.

I suppose the Tory press will have very little to say about that. Imagine if some other party had tried to pull that stunt?

amay1
I love it when the Mail talks dirty.
amay
A riddle rolled up in a mystery inside an enigma: that’s Tess (as opposed to Tass!!!).

 

Dear Daily Mail (et al)

Letter from Munguin

aimm

You see, this is how it works.

You write things. People read them. Some of them understand, or misunderstand, them.

Most intelligent people don’t actually believe anything you write. We know it’s all about headlines that grab attention and make you money. As Stuart Campbell, a proper journalist, has said on many occasions, people rarely get beyond the first few paragraphs of any story. So, it is easy to keep yourself legal by rubbishing your headline in paragraph 12, continued on page 17.

Indeed, these days, most people only see the headline as they pass them in the supermarket, so there is absolutely no danger of them seeing the truth on page 17.

But there are people who believe the crap in your headlines. The crap you have written.

These headlines have been telling people for years that all that ails the UK can be summed up in one word. “Foreigners”. ‘Coming over here taking our jobs, taking our women or men, taking our houses, our school places, our social security, our hospital beds, being criminals and rapists, etc.

You’ve preached a message of HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE…

aimm2

And now, after a particularly vicious campaign against anyone or thing foreign, in order to achieve the catastrophe that is Brexit, you feign horror that British people, quite possibly influenced by your vile lying headlines, have attacked a 17-year-old asylum seeker, leaving him for dead, while other British people stood by and watched and did nothing. And why would they? They’ve been reading your headlines for years. They probably believe that this lad is the source of all their woes. Probably a criminal, a rapist and that he’s depriving decent English people of their health service.

And you, Daily Mail, have the audacity to make of it a front page headline with the judgement “SAVAGES”, so you can sell more papers.

Of course, we realise that you have never actually in so many words encouraged people to beat up foreigners. Goodness, no. You’re a bit more subtle than that.

But what you have taught some of the hard of thinking is to HATE foreigners. To BLAME foreigners. And while you have been blaming them, and not the policies of the great Brtish Government for all that ails this country (undoubtedly the real problem), you have encouraged attitudes which have filtered down to the thugs and resulted in this atrocity, and many others.

Once you infect some people’s heads with an impression, however idiotic and ridiculous, it is almost impossible to get rid of it. Ask the family of the Polish man who was killed for being Polish and still being here after Brexit. As the family of Jo Cox, who was killed because she supported the EU. To attempt to infect people’s minds with lies on a daily basis is irresponsible and frankly criminal.

So well done, Daily Mail and your friends at the Daily Express, the Star and the Sun.

To be honest, though, I imagine that most of your readers are more interested in who Charlie’s been bonking (it’s his good looks that do it, obviously). Remember the old adage, ‘when the mistress becomes the wife she leaves a vacancy’. And there’s nothing like a royal story to fill an empty mind.

You’re a shameful blot on a noble profession.

Regards

Munguin

AND SO THE CAMPAIGN BEGINS…

 

1
A stinging rebuke? Well, that’s it. No referendum then.

 

So, Theresa May is to reject Nicola’s timetable for a referendum in Scotland because it might undermine her chaotic mess of a Brexit. Really!!

I imagine that she’s given this a lot of thought and weighed up the consequences… or maybe not.

 

111
Mrs May’s starting pistol for triggering A50

 

Still, as you can see, all is OK with the world because Willie is on holiday yet again, and having high jinks with some blondes. Well, nice work if you can get it, Wills, and you can get it if your dad happened to be the Duke of Rothsay, and at least his probably was.

 

11
Do they know it was in the manifestos of the Greens and the SNP, which, by the way, won a majority of the seats in parliament?

 

I see that the judges have been forgotten in the Scottish edition, and the SNP are now the enemy of the people. I’m not sure who reads the Daily Mail, although I know that a lot of people do, but  I guess they will lap this up with the vinegar that they drink for breakfast to keep them sour enough to get them through another miserable day in the 1950s.

I’m wondering if they have taken into consideration just how many promises were broken in the aftermath of that first referendum, most particularly the one about being thrown out of the EU if we left the UK. I wonder too if they listened to the First Minister’s speech today. Maybe the Scottish accent made it difficult for Daily Mail types in London to understand what she was saying, or maybe they just zoned out and wrote up the story that their readers want to read.

The hate all day has been palpable. All over Twitter we are reading the most ridiculous nonsense about the speech, clearly from people who haven’t heard or read it, or who were too stupid to understand it.

 

1111
No, it’s not, apparently. Will you ever learn?

 

Kezia Dugdale has said that her Twitter feed is full of personal insults, but we know that despite a search of her timeline no one can find any of them. I’ve seen a few corkers about Nicola today, all too rude to put on this family blog.

Realise that the only people who will be impressed by someone calling an opponent a four letter word insult, are people who are already very very firmly on your side. The likelihood of changing anyone’s mind because of that kind of insult is minimal, and probably all in the wrong direction!

We need to win hearts, and mostly minds. We don’t do that by calling the first minister, or the prime minister, a slag. In both cases it is clearly untrue and does no one any credit, or indeed any good.

The SNP are now raising funds for the battle ahead. The campaign was launched this morning and had, the last time I looked, raised £160,000.

https://www.ref.scot/donate

Remember that we are up against the English Tories and their wodges of cash. We will need every halfpenny we can get.

*********

 

11111
Ah, the good old days of Empire are coming back. Rule Britannia, Britannia… tra la la

 

I was laughing at the fact that Mrs May told Nicola that politics wasn’t a game… This from the woman that made Boris Johnson Foreign Secretary and put Liam Fox in charge of something more important than buying some teacakes. Sheesh, she’s got some sense of humour, that one.

Talking of Johnson, I’m told he said today that he will vote in favour of a new royal yacht.

All you need to know about the Tories in 9 words. “Sod the NHS, let’s have a new royal yacht”.

GREAT BRITISH JUSTICE SYSTEM UNFIT FOR PURPOSE, SAYS GREAT BRITISH CHIP WRAPPER/CAT LITTER

According to the Mail, then,  the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, the one to which they, the Mail,  have been fighting to bring back power from Europe (decent British judges, applying decent British law, enacted by decent British elected parliament…. (try not to laugh at the back), using decent British values), is fundamentally corrupt and can’t be trusted to make a decision about the law of the United Kingdom and its constituent parts  regarding the right, under the legal systems operating therein, of the queen to enact the  necessary legislation to remove the UK from the EU.

They seem to have little sense of irony at the Mail. I wonder if the British government doesn’t get its way on this, will the Mail demand that the case be taken to the European Court? After all, they clearly have serious doubts about the integrity  of the UK’s own very most senior judges, and their abilities to distance themselves from their connections or private feelings when it comes to making judgements…and seriously, that bodes ill for justice in a newly independent UK.

No one is saying, of course, that the will of the people, as indicated in the referendum, should not be enacted. Article 50 should be enacted. The question is more technically about WHO enacts it. And in law that can be everything. Do something wrong at the beginning of the journey and it can invalidate everything you do thereafter.

If British/English/Scots/Irish laws say that use of the Royal Prerogative is illegal, then surely everything that follows from its use would be illegal. How embarrassing would that be?

Britain's Queen Elizabeth arrives at the Norman Porch of the Palace of Westminster for the State Opening of Parliament in London
Are you questioning my rights, Munguin?

As I see it, the first question is: Does the UK government, using whatever law it uses (English, I assume) have the right to invite the queen to use her powers under Royal Prerogative to initiate the Article 50 procedure, or must this be decided by the sovereign UK parliament?

 

The second question is: how is that right affected by different Scots and Irish law, and, given the results of the referendum in Scotland and NI, what rights, if any, do THEIR non-sovereign parliaments have to represent their will, and for it to be considered?

Of course, unlike some of you, I’m not a lawyer, so I’ll be very happy to stand corrected on any of that. I’d be interested in your thoughts.

Oh, and one last thing. The Daily Mail has just trashed the Supreme Court of the UK for being a pile of unelected (unlike the Daily Mail) Europhiles. Any judgement they make is bound to be biased. So, what happens if they agree with the government that the queen is entitled to make the decision and the Scotland and the Irish can like it or do the other thing? Will they still be a pile of unelected idiots, or will they suddenly have become sensible and sober upholders of the Great British legal system?

Will they still be a pile of unelected idiots, or will they suddenly have become sensible and sober upholders of the Great British legal system? It’s awfully complicated.

ERM, ISN’T STEALING STREET SIGNS…

…NOT JUST A CRIMINAL OFFENCE, BUT IN SOME CASES DOWNRIGHT DANGEROUS?

aaaa

Because it’s far more sensible to have £:s:p, yards: feet: inches, gallons: quarts: pints, tons: hundredweights and quarters,  stones: pounds: ounces. Obviously.

Still, the Daily Mail seems to think he’s a bit of a hero, and I bet the Daily Diana is fizzing it didn’t get the story first. It would probably recommend him to the queen for a knighthood.

a

Oh, yes, then there was this bloke who seems to be unaware of just how utterly ridiculous Boris Johnson is, not to mention David Davis and the unbelievably hapless idiot Liam Fox, and that they are all led by someone with the well-deserved nickname “Mayhem”.

Talk about zero diplomatic know-how or ability!

Really, Prof Tomkins, have a wee word with yourself, will you? At the moment you are a liability.