I really don’t like Keith Vaz.
I don’t like his posturing, his jumping on every available bandwagon, his readiness to ruin the reputation of others and the glee with which he does it.
Which just happen to be exactly the same reasons why I don’t like the headlines regarding Vaz in the Mirror today.
Some would say ‘the oily little git had it coming to him’ – is that what we want? Retribution by newspaper headline?
Some would say ‘we rely on the papers to expose this hypocrisy’. Fair point – if only the inhabitants of Canary Wharf were as free of hypocrisy themselves! Ms Raccoon has spent a fair bit of time around the old Fleet Street and can assure readers that cocaine salesmen would go out of business without the solid repeat business from the denizens of those ivory towers – and as for their sexual habits…let’s not go there before breakfast.
They are paid by the public too, and judge morals on our behalf, so when they set up a newspaper prepared to carry stories on the sexual and drug relaxation methods used by those virtue signallers, I will accept that they are right to pay for the entrapment of politicians with unusual, though not illegal, choices for their Friday nights.
My main concern, as always, is for Mrs Vaz and the little Vaz’s. She also has done nothing wrong, and there is not a single reason in the world why she should have to wake up to those headlines this morning and explain to her children that this is how journalists pay their mortgages these days – by waiting for the euphemistically named ‘escorts’ to snare a customer with a modicum of celebrity and then beetle down to their offices with their smutty pictures of homosexual encounters and tales of drug taking.
‘Hey oop lads, we’ve caught a biggun here’ they cheer, and slide it into place alongside the pixelated medical pictures of the poor chap in Kenya with a grossly enlarged penis.
What do we know of Nick Dorman, the journalist responsible for this outbreak of journalistic outrage? How did he come by these escorts? Does he work alongside them on the QT? He could do for all we know.
Is this really what we ask of journalists? Really the media we want?
The argument against pornography is that it debases those who watch it; that it leaves them ‘jaded’ when it comes to boring ‘missionary’ sex – they want something more exotic. The same could be said of those who search for child sex images online, or who immerse themselves in the detail of tales of child abuse.
Is it any accident that Simon Danczuk has gone off the rails recently? Or that incidents of people searching for images of children online have increased tenfold? Or that chairmen of committee charged with looking into whether gay escorts should be paid end up being accused of hiring gay escorts?
Could it be that the national hysteria is infecting the very people who are most deeply immersed in it; that people who had never thought of doing ‘x’ or ‘y’ read constantly that this is what the rest of the world is doing and think ‘I wonder if it might be enjoyable’ as their fingers roam the keyboards? Is society actually creating the problem it is so concerned about?
So what if Vaz hired a gay escort. If he is bisexual, would you prefer that he go cruising on Clapham Common? Or perhaps you would like him to abandon his wife and children and ‘come out’ in time honoured fashion?
If evidence of his stated ‘hypocrisy’ is available to an editor, then surely a stiffly worded letter to the Prime Minister along with the evidence from a reputable newspaper would solve the problem of having a committee chairman that might be said to have a conflict of interest.
That of course, would not sell newspapers. Wouldn’t enable them to squeal with delight at the thought of offering their readers the chance to ‘listen’ to the illicit audio recording, or pore over the titillating picture of hands wandering in perfectly legal directions.
Nor would it give them the chance to destroy Mrs Vaz’ life and the peace of mind and happiness of their children.
Dear God; I never thought I would be writing in defence of anyone called Vaz – I simply cannot stand him. Not since the days when he roamed the corridors of the Court of Protection.
Mrs Vaz and the little Vaz’s are a different matter. Think of them as you chortle with delight.
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 11:26 am The real questions are who told Nick Dorman, and why?
Agree entirely as to the sentiments re some of the media scumbags that will sell anyone for anything, with no regard for the collateral damage inflicted on others either
- Lilith
September 4, 2016 at 11:29 am I will think of his wife and children. I hope she’s saying to him “You keep the Ealing flat, and I’ll have the other four properties” and her statement to the press is “He told me he always used a condom”
For me the delight in Vaz’s fall is more about the fall and less about the means: lord knows, people have tried to finger him for decades and it always blows up in their face.
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 11:40 am - Lilith
September 4, 2016 at 11:50 am I have asked myself this very question
- Lilith
September 4, 2016 at 12:16 pm Perhaps because there is something really shocking (not just sleazy)? He’s not the type to accept a brandy and revolver in the library after all. Some kind of damage limitation?
- Lilith
- Lilith
- Joe Public
September 4, 2016 at 12:57 pm
- Ho Hum
- David
September 4, 2016 at 11:36 am He is in the Labour Party, which certainly makes a change. It is normally Tory Wives, who marry, and have children, knowing their husbands are gay. Then when the news comes out that their husband, while walking late at night, next to Clapham Common, met a young man who offered him a lift. The Tory MP accidentally fell on the young man’s lap, when he was trying to put his seat belt on, and his trousers fell open during the struggle to untangle himself.
It is normally the long-suffering Tory Wife, who appears at the gate of the family home, with her husband, and supports his version of events. He did not know what was happening, he was set up by reporters, and he really is a straight, home and family man. Yes, the ‘Mrs Oscar Wilde’s’, are usually Tory Wives, but things are starting to change.
Brother Derek Slade, and Brother Derek Sawyer who set up a school for orphan boys in India had a charity ball in the UK supported by this man. Derek Slades arrest and imprisonment in the UK for child abuse was on the internet but attended the fund-raising ball regardless.
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 11:41 am I looked but couldn’t find it. So where was this cut and pasted from?
- David
September 4, 2016 at 12:05 pm Dalesdown Preparatory School
Through whistle-blowing Slade was investigated in 1983, and as a result of these investigations he resigned from St. George’s and moved to Dalesdown Preparatory School in Sussex.
In 1986, Slade was convicted of savagely beating boys at Dalesdown Preparatory School. He was jailed for three months at Chichester Crown Court. He appealed and his sentence was reduced to a conditional discharge.However he was not allowed to teach again.
- David
- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 1:05 pm Once again David, you conflate the issues of homosexuality and child abuse. Please, stop it.
- David
September 4, 2016 at 1:15 pm I was not trying to do that. The two are completely separate. I was pointing out that he does have a history of hypocrisy.
- David
- Ho Hum
- Jim McLean
September 4, 2016 at 11:45 am Spot on, as usual….
- JuliaM
September 4, 2016 at 11:55 am ‘Or perhaps you would like him to abandon his wife and children and ‘come out’ in time honoured fashion?’
That would be far more honest. Which is why I’d never expect it of a politician.
- Antisthenes
September 4, 2016 at 11:57 am I do not like the slimy toad either but I agree with every word you write. As for advertising the world that most do not know about it will of course arouse curiosity and other things too. That is the price we pay as technological progress allows the dissemination of much more information than was hitherto unavailable. We have advanced in so many ways which have brought us greater prosperity and a better standard of living. It has not been without harmful consequences leading to new problems needing new solutions but as always we will deal with them in our usual anguished way. The hypocrisy of Fleet street is something to regret but we cannot change it as our needs and the fact that few of us are without hypocrisies of our own we would probably not want to.
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 12:06 pm “if only the inhabitants of Canary Wharf were as free of hypocrisy themselves! ”
That’s irrelevant. The inhabitants of Canary Wharf aren’t legislating for the rest of us.
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 12:12 pm Hmmmm…. But they try to influence those who influence those who do
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 12:42 pm “No, but they seek to influence who legislates on our behalf.”
That may be so, but don’t you think it’s significant that even Vaz, he with the neck like the proverbial donkey’s b*****, has stepped down from the Commons chairman he chairs, at least temporarily – it is currently, or soon will be, adjudicating over the potential legalisation of prostitution -he clearly cannot chair the committee as regards those matters, as he has a horse in the race, as it were.
Now, seemingly he holds comparatively libertarian views on drugs and the sex trade, so he isn’t a filthy hypocrite of the type of old school Tory that David speaks of (preaching against vice among the lower orders, while all the time being filthy perverts themselves), but his position is not sustainable.
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 12:45 pm See my earlier replies to Steve below
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 12:52 pm “the Commons chairman he chairs” – christ, I seem be committing unintentional double entendres.
The Commons COMMITEE chairs was what I meant to type, obvs.
- Ho Hum
- tdf
- Ho Hum
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 12:15 pm Aaaaahhhh Anna …..now if only the Politicians policed themselves properly (by which I mean if they sell themselves as having integrity then ensuring integrity in their party) the likes of Vaz would probably never get a look in to Public Life.
Which raises questions as to why they do and yet more questions as to why they remain prominent in public life. The obvious answer though not necessarily the right one is that they are useful perhaps all the more so because of what I term their corruptability meaning in this context not their sexual predilictions but their broader lack of what one might term their personal integrity.
I suspect the Vaz exposure at this point in time (surely its not going to be claimed it is an out of charachter moment of madness) may not be unrelated to the struggles within the Labour Party.
His Wife and Children is another matter and a rather more complex matter where issues relating to private and public life get intertwined. Did the Wife know or suspect ? If so she made a concious decision to stay with him with all the good and bad things that might entail and mindful that in so doing she was potentially exposing her children …..something approaching an informed value judgement call for herself and those for whom she has responsibility.
I am not sure children should be a get out of jail free card for those that court publicity and as you know better than most we must deal with such legacy as our parents give us and make a fist of things …..that is fate…..unpleasant at times but purposive- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 12:28 pm So if I were an enraged Labour feminist, but with knowledge of the contents of, or some access to their whips office, how might I go about trying to discredit this?
Looking back with a few years now to reflect on it, the introduction of the raft of sexually repressive legislation in the early 2000s, mostly unheralded in the party manifestos issued around that time, had something of the same sort of dark arts to it
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 12:37 pm Sorry. Should have been slightly more clear in that Vaz also seemed to be supporting the non criminalisation of paying for sex, the sort of holy grail for feminists. Discrediting him and getting him out of the road, to get a replacement who, along with the others involved, would be too afraid to say the same, would be a masterstroke
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 1:07 pm @Ho Hum the sort of holy grail for feminists
Call me cynical Ho Hum but I would look to who gains power because he is discredited rather than what cause may be advanced.
- Fat Steve
- Ho Hum
- Ho Hum
- Misa
September 4, 2016 at 12:42 pm “Is society actually creating the problem it is so concerned about?”
I’m afraid so. I imagine this phenomenon has long been known. Does anyone know of a name for it?
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 12:56 pm a get out of jail free card for those that court publicity
or even a get out of the olive oil filled paddling pool free card ….Sacha Baron Cohen took the micky out of celebrities and their approach to children as a good accessory in his film Bruno (?)- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 1:08 pm Everything you say is true Anna. The thing I find amusing is that the story tries to be more salacious by adding the detail of (legal) poppers use. It’s like saying he had a post-coital cigarette and the nation should be even more horrified.
- Misa
September 4, 2016 at 2:18 pm windsock, according the the Guardian (I thought the Mirror had spelled it out, but can’t find it now):
“According to the paper, Vaz asked one of the men in a text message sent before the encounter to bring poppers, the sex-enhancing drug used by gay men that the government came close to banning in a law passed this year.
“Vaz argued in parliament that poppers should not be included in a list of substances banned by the Psychoactive Substances Act and in the paper he is quoted as telling the escorts that he did not use them himself.”
I suppose we should be thankful that legislators have some understanding of the matters on which they act. But does this not fit with the Mirror’s line on hypocrisy? I hell, I think I may have just defended the Mirror. What a tangle.
- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 3:06 pm I’m not sure that’s hypocrisy – he didn’t state his personal interest, (unlike Crispin Blunt… hell, I think I may have just praised a Tory. What a tangle), but he didn’t speak against it.(Hell, I think I may have just defended Vaz. What a tangle)
- windsock
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 2:22 pm @windsock It’s like saying he had a post-coital cigarette and the nation should be even more horrified
No doubt Vaz might agree with you privately but his public stance taken by him appears to be rather different
Hansard records reveal he (Keith Vaz) said: “The shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Lyn Brown), has said—this was a bit of shock for me after 28 years in this House—that Ministers have stood at the Dispatch Box having had poppers.
I fairness i cut and pasted the quote from hansard from a report on the Sun website whilst looking for some evidence of which wing of the Labour Party he supports.
From my researches it appears most likely whichever side rewards him the better ……his powerbase appears to be the Asian Community and one must speculate that Vaz might be thought capable of mobilising that constituency in the Labour Party Elections. Did he promise to so do and the other side got wind of it?
Just as an aside Anna his wife appears to be an active participant in some aspects of his public life and not merely a passive partner.- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 3:08 pm But he wasn’t speaking out against their use (at least, it doesn’t appear that way from that quote which is ambiguous at best)… And having listened to some of the stuff spouted at the Dispatch Box, maybe some of them were high on poppers at the time!
- Misa
September 4, 2016 at 3:11 pm This whole politics thing is complicated. I think we may be better out of it.
Yes, if he’d called for poppers to be banned, that would have been hypocritical. Erm…I need a drink.
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 3:17 pm @listened to some of the stuff spouted at the Dispatch Box, maybe some of them were high on poppers at the time!
No windsock better they were on Poppers at the time
- Misa
- windsock
- Misa
- English Pensioner
September 4, 2016 at 1:12 pm He will probably claim that it was all done in the interests of “research” as part of his job as Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee!
- Ye Olde Blockeded Dvarfe
September 4, 2016 at 2:28 pm Vaz is listed as a Roaming Catholic, which by any normal understanding will mean that when he married he took an oath to , among other things, ‘forsake all others’. An oath before his God. An oath more solemn, more dread even than any he took upon entering Parliament. If he is sleeping with anyone, consenting adult or not, animal, vegetable or mineral, besides his wife then he is an Oath Breaker. If he will break his word to his Wife, to his Church and to his God then what chance does Queenie Pooh’s have? Can Her Majesty really trust him to be will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her?
Yes I know I am living in the wrong Century.
Whether Vaz is a ‘hypocrite’ is almost as unimportant as his sexuality. He is a politician , ie he does and says that which is ‘politic’.
and yes I too feel sorry for Mrs Vaz, not because the sordid details of her husband’s adultery are click baited across the net, she married a politician (what on Earth possessed her?) but because he broke his word to her.- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 2:32 pm Fwiw, a prominent blogger with contacts in Westminster is saying openly that there is a lot more to this.
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 2:32 pm the sex-enhancing drug used by gay men …..quite wrong to classify Poppers as an aid only to Gay Sex (of which I have no knowledge)…… don’t ask how I know (blush !!!!)
- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 3:02 pm Poppers go great with music… ah, the memories of youthful hedonism!
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 3:06 pm Music is not my thing …..but my wife ……now thats another matter
- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 3:11 pm We’re getting dangerously close to TMI!
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 3:18 pm TMI ???
- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 3:27 pm Too Much Information…
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 3:37 pm Too Much Information I discover
No not confession time by me just an attempt on my part to dispel the notion that somehow there is only the stigma of casual gay sex associated with Poppers. The mention of Poppers in the context of the Vaz case would be wrongly perjorative in my opinion but for the fact that he appears to have been publicly rather sniffy about their use. I was picking up on your observation about a post coital cigarettte and trying to properly contextualise Poppers outside of paid or for that matter unpaid gay sex which as I see it is not so different from the old adage about the three best things in life …..a drink before and a cigarette after …..which pace windsock is not the preserve of the gay community.- windsock
September 4, 2016 at 3:41 pm “sniffy about their use”… I see what you did there!
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 4:00 pm Time now to fess up and it hurts…… really really hurts to so do……. possibly my best pun ever ……but regrettably unintentional
- Fat Steve
- windsock
- windsock
- Fat Steve
- windsock
- The Blocked Dwarf
September 4, 2016 at 3:29 pm At the risk of sounding like some doddering High Court Judge, when someone ( a female someone as it happens) first said something about using ‘poppers’ I thought, seriously, they were something akin to Coco Pops and I think i replied that I preferred a breakfast of coffee, cigarettes and Radio4 to ‘snap, crackle and pop’.
- macheath
September 5, 2016 at 9:39 am Music of all sorts; a venerable Oxbridge academic, back in the 1980s, used to extol the virtues of poppers as the perfect accompaniment to Haydn’s ‘Creation’ – the secret, he said, was always to inhale at the exact point that the word ‘crescendo’ appeared on the orchestral score.
- windsock
September 5, 2016 at 10:17 am “Music of all sorts”: Absolutely! Puccini, to Glass to electronic trance.
- windsock
- Fat Steve
- windsock
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 3:47 pm ‘Cruising’, starring Al Pacino (under-rated movie, actually) features a night club scene in a rough and ready gay night club in Manhattan where the all male patrons are briefly seen sniffing them.
And that’s pretty much all I know about poppers.
- Mudplugger
September 4, 2016 at 3:53 pm Whatever the rights and wrongs of the story’s presentation, and accepting the potential of collateral damage to innocents along the way, you can’t help but ejaculate a minor whoop of delight that someone has finally nailed the pompous, opportunist, oleaginous, slippery ‘Vaseline Vaz’. He’s managed to inculcate himself crassly into so many opportunities, usually dark-skin-based ones, and yet slither out of so many negatives over the years that you just knew, one fine day, he’d get his comeuppence. That say has come. Rejoice.
In his chosen trade of public life, it doesn’t matter that everything reported so far was entirely legal, it’s the morality angle which does for him. Ideally he should now be finished but, until there’s a stake through his heart (if he has one) and bulbs of garlic inserted into every orifice (which he may actually enjoy), then I’ll not be convinced. However, I expect it will take even the self-sainted Vaz somewhat more than three days to rise again…..
Of course, his sister is also an MP……- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 4:04 pm Your view Mudplugger coincides with the one Lawyer who I know who has had (quite extensive) dealings with him
- Mudplugger
September 4, 2016 at 9:35 pm There may be an edit needed on the earlier ‘entirely legal’ description.
I’ve not read the original report but, in the coverage on Ch4 News, it was claimed that Vaz had paid his two Eastern European ‘friends’ with funds from a ‘charity’ run by Vaz himself. Probably no surprise in that but, if it proves to be true, then a quite different net may soon be closing around him. It just gets better.
- Fat Steve
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 3:56 pm The answer as to why Vaz’s sexual preferences might only be leaked now might lie in this report of the Labour NEC meeting
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-national-executive-committee-nec-how-he-triumphed_uk_57856207e4b08078d6e765d3
About half way down one sees Vaz played a pretty central role in keeping Corbyn in the running.
Interesting to see that was a matter of surprise to some- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 3:59 pm “About half way down one sees Vaz played a pretty central role in keeping Corbyn in the running.”
But he is also mates with the fanatically anti-Corbyn Danczuk?
Hard to know where he really stands.
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 6:43 pm Having spent further time on the web I cannot (perhaps unsurprisingly) conclude any particular political conviction. held by Vaz
- Fat Steve
- Mudplugger
September 4, 2016 at 10:07 pm Another feasible reason as to ‘why now’ may lie in the old ‘cui bono’ direction.
It was announced only a day or two ago that the bereaved and distressed Janner family are planning to sue the Met – what better for the Met’s defence than to start by quickly eliminating one of the most vociferous Janner supporters, i.e. Mr Vaz. That’s one down and the rest will be feeling a tad jittery now.
So maybe the Met, using their Fleet Street channels, decided the time was right to release what they and many others have known for some time, but were hanging onto until its release-value could be optimised.
Of course, PC George Dixon would never have stooped so low…..
- tdf
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 4:03 pm @ Rolo Tamasi
September 4, 2016Of course we are.
But are you suggesting that those paid for to promote others’ agendas or just for personal gain, or those who would wish to impose theirs on others, should just be accepted without sceptism or challenge at least, and just straight rejection where necessary at best?
I have no problem with others judging people on lying, stealing, unfaithfulness, murdering, or behaving badly through covetousness, but otherwise who are you, or who am I, to tell someone else what they should do just because it offends my/your sensibilities?
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 5:25 pm Anna, are you prepared to elaborate on your comment ‘not since the days when he was roaming the Court of Protection’?
Did he have an official reason to be there, as a solicitor?
- tdf
- Alexander Baron
September 4, 2016 at 5:15 pm I have two words for Vaz: Harvey Proctor.
- Henry Wood
September 4, 2016 at 5:31 pm One positive thing to come out of all this is that we are highly unlikely to see a “Lord Vaz” anytime soon, especially when re-reading Geoff Hoon’s thank-you note to Vaz after his about face on the detention of alleged terrorists beyond 42 days.
Vaz has been completely spinning around for so long and on so many subjects he must surely have a repeat prescription for anti-vertigo drugs.- A Potted Plant
September 4, 2016 at 5:41 pm This was BRILLIANT, thank you!
Anna asked: “Is society actually creating the problem it is so concerned about?”, and my answer is – yes, of course, albeit unintentionally.
Every time there is a public health awareness campaign about a new drug of abuse, supported by saturation advertising or co-operating mass media reporting, that campaign inevitably alerts persons who enjoy abusing drugs recreationally to the existence of the new drug for the first time – and a portion of those persons will then seek it out and experiment with it, leading to a short-term increase in demand for and subsequent availability of that drug.I’ve been working on a piece about the probable social blowback from the original broadcast of the “Johnny Go Home” program. I have no doubts about the integrity and sincerity of the producers of that documentary and hold them blameless for any blowback effect, and I acknowledge that it alerted and educated many persons concerned with various aspects of child welfare – in the general population as well as professionals and politicians – about the problem of runaway youth being exploited for prostitution in Piccadilly on a more or less “mass” scale.
But, I think it also inevitably alerted many persons with more nefarious intentions, to the availability of “pretty boy” fare in Piccadilly, and taught them many lessons about how to find such “chicken”, where to look for them, how to approach them/pick them up , where to take them after, etc. I’m certain that this broadcast unintentionally led to an increase in predation in the short-term and also an increase in child sex tourism in the UK – as homegrown perverts would have shared this info with their pervert friends in the US, Australia, and on the Continent.It many even have indirectly led to a pretty boy being kidnapped off the London rail-lines by a tall young man with very blond hair, in 1979.
- Misa
September 5, 2016 at 5:20 am A Potted Plant, perhaps you could let us know when this appears. I would be most interested to read it.
- A Potted Plant
September 6, 2016 at 1:37 am @Misa – Many of my writings are only circulated privately, and this is likely to be one of those. But I will share a few things with you, here:
It wasn’t hard to document that, um, “potentially problematic” persons had taken a keen interest in that 1975 broadcast. There were both direct & indirect references to it by members of Albany Trust, for example, and you can find documentation for that on the “Bits of Books” blog.
Of particular concern to me, are some historic references to “Johnny’s” backstory. I’m not sure how explicit the documentary was about this backstory, but it was spelled out in some detail in the book the following year, apparently. The story goes – at ten years of age Johnny “falls in love” with a man in his twenties, (Eddy), who was himself a “veteran of the streets”, and they became a couple in all senses of that term. It was after Eddy’s arrest for stealing a motorbike that Johnny makes his way to London and Piccadilly. This was presumably the truth of the matter, and I wouldn’t have wanted the producers to hide it, if that is the case, but…
Such a scenario could have been dangerously reinforcing for a particular set of delusional rationalizations that some of us have become all too familiar with, through our research over the years. Although I don’t have quotations to prove it, it seems highly probable to me that some persons watching that broadcast or reading the book would have said to themselves: “This is real, a true story. This really happened, that means there really are men having such relationships with little ‘boyfriends’, and that means it really could happen for me”. Not to mention this line of thinking: “There, you see – if the laws allowed relationships between boys and men, Johnny and Eddy could have lived together and Johnny would never have ended up in Piccadilly”…
You understand?- Misa
September 6, 2016 at 10:23 am Thank you, A Potted Plant. I think there’s a danger that both documentary and fiction can make the unthinkable thinkable. Perhaps the power of documentary has greater potential in this regard. ‘Raising awareness’ – the mantra of many a do-gooder – can at the very least be a double-edged sword. I’m still not sure I quite understand the mechanisms at play, but you’ve given me food for thought.
- Misa
- A Potted Plant
- windsock
September 5, 2016 at 7:27 am “persons who enjoy abusing drugs recreationally” … just a comment: people who take drugs recreationally are not necessarily abusing them, themselves, or the law. Poppers are legal in UK – or do you think smokers are “abusing” tobacco?
Yes, all drugs can lead to problems (e.g. alcohol), but sensible people use drugs – and the clue is in the name! – recreationally.
Unfortunately, there are some for whom drugs become a career choice.
As a footnote, I do agree with your point “a portion of those persons will then seek it out and experiment with it, leading to a short-term increase in demand for and subsequent availability of that drug”. Two things – I remember in the 80s, reading in (I think) the NME (when it was good) about the crack epidemic sweeping black USA. An advertising specialist was quoted as saying if he wanted to market that substance, he could not have designed a better marketing campaign than the attention being given to it in the media.
Also, as a young, confused windsock, coming to terms with being gay and being told I was “homo” and “queer”, after seeing the documentary about “Playland” where men met teenagers and then the Picadilly “meat rack”, I wanted to go and check it out. Never did get up the nerve to do it n (which in retrospect, was a good thing).
- A Potted Plant
September 6, 2016 at 1:46 am @windsock – Here, we had Funland arcades rather than Playland, but the same activities were carried on. There was a Funland right next to the newspaper offices that we paperboys frequented, kitty-corner from the local homosexual stroll…
Thanks for your input about that, it is of interest and importance to me.
- A Potted Plant
- Ed P
September 5, 2016 at 11:05 am It was common knowledge even in the 70s – all my family and friends called it “Pick-a-Willy”
- Misa
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 5:52 pm @TPP
Are people really that impressionable? Some of my favourite rock/pop bands have written songs essentially glorifying heroin use, and I have never had the slightest inclination, on any occasion, to put a needle in my arm. Granted, that’s possibly because I’ve seen plenty of heroin addicts in Dublin, and their lifestyle is not to be envied.
- Bandini
September 4, 2016 at 10:12 pm I once had a sort of friend with similar musical tastes to mine (at that time, early Stones & also Keith Richard’s friend and fellow needle fiend, Gram Parsons). There’s no way of knowing if he’d have become a junkie/hard drug user if he hadn’t been listening to and idolising Richard/Parsons, but his life really WAS built around emulating his heroes.
His girlfriend (who I quite fancied) lost the use of an arm supposedly (and who knows what came next?). And he died in a bus-station toilet. He would have seen this as being noteworthy and quite romantic, I’m afraid, as pathetic as that sounds. I don’t think there’s any doubt that interests are awakened or prompted by that to which we are exposed in art, literature and most particularly in the blasted media – most people just don’t have the imagination to conjur up whatever inhabits their dreams & nightmares without a helping hand. Can’t see what can done about it, though.
- Bandini
- Owen
September 4, 2016 at 6:50 pm I share your doubts concerning the Mirror’s tactics in this instance, but I’m also aware how oddly willing the media have been to forgive Mr Vaz and forget his past misdemeanours and I wonder why it’s this time they’ve gone for the throat. I wouldn’t want to “debase” you by engaging in detailed discussion of the subject of child abuse so if I simply mention Vaz’s effussive Parliamentary support for his Leicester colleague Janner by way of guessing at one possible clue, perhaps Bandini would do the honours for both of us.
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 7:16 pm @Owen
Basically, to cut to the chase, you’ve already decided that Janner was a paedo, and you’re now trying to smear Vaz on the basis of guilt by assocation.
- Owen
September 5, 2016 at 10:18 am tdf, to cut back to where you took your short cut, Keith Vaz’s enthusiastic defence of his felllow Leiceester MP helped to close down the investigation into allegations of child abuse by Janner which the CPS now acknowledges could have led to charges being brought.
I wasn’t “trying to smear” Vaz, I was pointing to the Janner connection as a possible reason why the Mirror went ahead with the sting three weeks ago when the media had for so long failed to challenge Vaz’s suitability to chair the HASC. My first guess was that there might have been a connection with the effort by the Janner family to pressurise IICSA into abandoning its investigation of the institutions – social services, police, CPS, etc. – that failed to deal adequately with the allegations aganst Janner. Vaz should for some time now have been considering his position as chairman of HASC at least where IICSA-related matters were concerned but he has chosen not to acknowledge any possible conflict of interest.
Of course there are various other possible explanations which in the circumstances it’s better I leave to you to research.
- windsock
September 5, 2016 at 10:55 am You are misrepresenting what the Janner family are trying to do. They do not want “to pressurise IICSA into abandoning its investigation of the institutions – social services, police, CPS, etc.” They want the inquiry to abandon it’s trial of the facts into the allegations around Janner specifically, the only individual who has been targeted by the inquiry, who is dead, who won’t be able to answer and whose family will not be able to cross-examine the witness (es). They want that at least to be postponed until after civil court cases can be heard, in which cross examination can take place. At least, that is how I understand it.
- Owen
September 5, 2016 at 2:53 pm They wanted the trial of the facts to be abandoned. Failing that they want it postponed. Prevent or delay.
- windsock
September 5, 2016 at 3:07 pm Which is not what you said. But almost exactly sums up what I said..
- windsock
- Owen
- Bandini
September 5, 2016 at 10:56 am In what way did Vaz’s “enthusiastic defence” of Janner help to “close down the investigation”, Owen? Seriously, I realise you’re not alone in making this claim but I consider it baseless. Here is Jay Rayner in The Guardian trying unconvincingly to blame Vaz for his own failure to follow up a story:
“What happened next was crucial. There was a (failed) parliamentary attempt to change the Contempt of Court Act to protect people named during proceedings in the way Janner had been. During the debate, many MPs, including Ashby and Carlile, spoke up for him. Key was Vaz, MP for the neighbouring Leicestershire constituency, who clearly hadn’t been party to the rumours circulating in his home town. He said his dear friend had been the “victim of a cowardly and wicked attack”. That was it. The story was dead. The Independent on Sunday was not a paper to be cowed by pressure from above, but it was simpler than that. Clearly Janner was set up. I don’t even recall being taken off the story. It was just never spoken of again.”
Do me a favour! Pathetic. The all-powerful Vaz…
Maybe have a read of Gwyneth Dunwoody’s ‘enthusiastic defence’ of Janner (and the others, too):http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1991/dec/03/contempt-of-court
It’s not the case that the media have failed to challenge Vaz’s suitability for the HASC (or public life in general) – they have! It must be fairly dispiriting as a journo to see your efforts ignored by the electorate…
By the way, on the Janner case did you see the David Rose piece, and if so would you agree that the that original ’91 investigation – uncorroborated accusation from man seeking to defend Frank Beck – may have been even weaker than feared given the following:
“In his report on the Janner case, issued in January, Sir Richard Henriques said the CPS was ‘wrong’ not to charge the MP in 1991, arguing that there was enough evidence to provide a ‘realistic prospect of conviction’ for serious sexual offences. He said nothing about Tony’s false claims about Mrs Fitt.
Sir Richard criticised police for an ‘inefficient investigation’, and added that Tony’s claims should have been considered again in 2002 and 2007, when two others claimed Janner had sexually abused them. By then, Tony had been convicted.
Last week Sir Richard told The Mail on Sunday that he was aware of the false claims against Mrs Fitt, and agreed they ‘plainly should have figured in the 1991 charging decision’, and would have been disclosed to the defence if Janner had been charged.
However, he added that he believed they had, inexplicably, not been in the CPS file when it made its decision, and this was why he had not mentioned them. He was also aware of Tony’s later convictions.”
We shouldn’t have had to rely on Rose to dig up this information. Henriques should have included it.
- Bandini
September 5, 2016 at 12:11 pm Richard Bartholomew has an article covering the matter:
http://barthsnotes.com/2016/09/05/media-cite-greville-janner-allegations-as-relevant-to-keith-vaz-revelations/- Owen
September 5, 2016 at 12:57 pm OK, we’ll just have to wait and see how all this works out eventually.. My reference to Henriques lower down concerned your previous “analysis” of the observations in his reports, not these new ones.
- Sean Coleman
September 7, 2016 at 8:08 pm “However, he added that he believed they had, inexplicably, not been in the CPS file when it made its decision…”
That rang a bell.
See A2.4 Convictions Quashed
“… Had new evidence emerged in the previous few days? No. It was just that the DPP [Director of Public Prosecutions] had suddenly realised that Patricia Phelan should not have been called as a witness at all. The Office of the DPP had given this direction in 1997, though nevertheless, through inadvertence, she had been called. The staff of the DPP had not realised their mistake during the trial. The guilty verdict on 11 June had not jogged their memory, nor the article in The Star on 17 June, which named Ms. Phelan. Hugh Harnett’s setting out the undisclosed evidence on the date of sentencing had not caused them to search their memories. In fact one wonders if they would realise their mistake even today if Regina Walsh had not given that interview. Would Nora Wall still be in jail and would Pablo McCabe have died in prison rather than in freedom?”
The sentence was life and Nora Wall (a Catholic nun) was the first woman in Ireland to be convicted of rape. The interview in The Star was given by the ‘victim’, Regina Walsh, after the conviction, claiming that she had also been raped by a black man in Leicester Square and named Phelan as a witness (A2.2). Phelan’s name was recognized by a Kilkenny businessman who she had made a false accusation against some time earlier. This is like Danny Day’s story about being robbed of Olympic boxing success.
- Bandini
- windsock
- Owen
- Bandini
September 4, 2016 at 10:09 pm Owen, not too sure what you’re after or why you think I might be able to assist. I’m aware of the rumours regarding Vaz but they seem to have similar ‘backers’ to the Exaro-grade lunacy to which we’ve been exposed – pinch of salt and all that…
(The Mirror journo Dorman was, of course, the fearless truthseeker who worked with Exaro to bring us those tales of Nick’s which led to Op. Midland…)
Wasn’t Janner ‘effusively’ supported by all sides of the House? (And didn’t your hero Danczuk effusively applaud at the unveiling of ‘orrible old Cyril Smith’s plaque or summat?) Been a bit busy with a last-minute house move so can’t be bothered checking but that was certainly my impression. Don’t most professions behave in a similar way, protecting their fellow members? Teachers, police, JOURNALISTS, doctors, politicians… none of ’em have the greatest of track records when it comes to throwing out the bad apples but I doubt that in the case of the teachers, for example, it’s all because there is a secret shadowy plot to inflict sub-standard schooling on the nation’s kids. If you’re suggesting that one child absusing MP would rush to the defence of another I have to wonder why he’d wish to draw such attention to his own nefarious activities – keeping one’s head down might be the more sensible option, surely? Ah, but perhaps we are back to the idea of the ‘VIP Peadophile Network’ – of which I’ve yet to see much evidence.
For all Vaz’s many resignation-worthy activities I can’t help but mention that he was re-elected by the citizens of Leciester. God knows what they were thinking, but it’s easy to moan about the powerful protecting its own while overlooking the uncomfortable fact that he’s only where he is thanks to the ‘little people’ who had more than enough knowledge to boot him out – and never did.
Anyway, if he leaves the political realm can I suggest someone taps a spigot into his belly & perhaps he could redeem himself by solving the nation’s energy needs, an inexaustable supply of admittedly low-grade crude powering the turbines & smelting plants.
- Owen
September 5, 2016 at 10:46 am Bandini, Danczuk’s not my “hero” as you seem almost compulsively determined to depict him, but I still take my hat off to him for the brave and compassionate way he has spoken in Parliament on behalf of the victims of abuse, particularly in the November 2014 debate http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/backbench-business-committee/news/mps-debate-progress-of-the-historic-child-sex-abuse-inquiry/
Whatever indignities he may manage to embroil himself in, he commands my respect for that. I have to add, though, that I’m surprised to find him reported as emphasising the need to treat Vaz with compassion as he “struggles to come to terms with hs sexuality”, which doesn’t really seem to be the central issue.
- Bandini
September 5, 2016 at 11:21 am You seemed to treat Danczuk as you now complain Vaz treated Janner, Owen. You foolishly sought to deny that he was a liar (the non-existent Tory Cabinet member, remember?) when you knew that he was, and you did so as he was, you felt, useful to ‘the campaign’.
In other words, you made a calculated decision to overlook bad behaviour as you thought you’d get something in return – not personally, of course, but it’s all the same in the end.Since then we had the revelations that much of his ridiculous book – the one he didn’t write – consisted of made-up nonsense with not a shred of evidence behind it, sleazy tale after sleazy tale, and let’s not forget the ‘mistake’ he made in shoving his hand in the till & helping himself to a quantity of cash that had he been where a man of his slender talents ought to be – signing on – he’d be looking at a custodial sentence for benefit fraud. And still there are those who’ll sing his praises! Because he cares!
I have to admit to being surprised by your own surprise at Danczuk’s ‘compassion’ for Vaz. Like a battered wife endlessly going back for more of the same abuse, he commands your respect… astonishing.
- Owen
September 5, 2016 at 12:41 pm Bandini, you really are a thwarted melodramatist. To go over it all again, Danczuk referred to having been apparently warned off stirring up Janner issues by Edward Garnier, MP for the Leicestershire constituency of Market Harborough and Solicitor-General. As Solicitor-General Garnier was one of the two senior law officers who advised the cabinet. Yes, once again, I acknowledge that you’re right, Garnier was not a proper Tory cabinet minister, just a Tory senior law officer.
I don’t know whether Danczuk was mistaken or exaaggerating when he called him a cabinet minister, but I do know that de minimis non curat lex and the sort of camp mock indignation you foutinely conjure up is simply too ludicrous to take seriously. And yet there is a serious aspect to it as well, because of the act also includes those little spins and misreporting that characterise your quoting of sources like the Henriques report on the failings of the Leicestershire police inquiries following up the allegations against Janner. Hot air balloons in glass houses …
- Bandini
September 5, 2016 at 1:01 pm There is nothing mock about my indignation – I simply despise liars.
If you’re still in some doubt as to whether or not Danczuk was aware Garnier was not “a proper Tory cabinet minister” then you’re beyond help (and didn’t you feel a little sullied even typing that phrase?).“MPs will pay a heavy price for harbouring paedophiles in their midst.
As I was I was making my way from the House of Commons on Monday night after a late vote a Tory minister stepped out of the shadows to confront me. I’d never spoken to him before in my life but he blocked my way and ushered me to one side.”Stepped out of the bleeding shadows, he did! Simon said so!! Like Dracula or summat!!! For another payout from the press. The only reason you know it was Garnier is that a journalist did his job for once. (Garnier disputed Danczuk’s claims anyway, calling them “beyond contempt”.)
- Bandini
- Owen
- Bandini
September 5, 2016 at 11:25 am P.S. Gawd, I missed it, but now Danczuk was being “brave”?!? For God’s sake… the word has lost all meaning.
- Bandini
- tdf
September 6, 2016 at 8:02 pm @Bandini
“Ah, but perhaps we are back to the idea of the ‘VIP Paedophile Network’ – of which I’ve yet to see much evidence. ”
I’m with you on that. As far as I can see, such ‘VIP paedos’ as have and maybe still do exist seem to have operated mainly as lone offenders, with not a hell of a lot to directly connect them. I haven’t seen much to indicate that they even had knowledge of each other’s activities.
I am open to the idea of paedophile networks (whether VIP or otherwise) existing, not least because I’m aware of at least one example of such a network in the 1980s/early 1990s – I refer to the coterie of nonces who infiltrated Irish swim coaching in the 1980s (at least one of whom was a real psychopath, a truly nasty piece of work who was not only capable of abusing kids but also committing murder by arson to cover up for his crimes).
http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/we-wont-be-safe-if-my-sisters-killer-is-released-26893675.html
But the idea that there is or was a huge over-arching abuse conspiracy infiltrating the highest levels of the British (or Irish, for that matter) establishment, to me doesn’t pass the smell test. It would just implicate too many people.
- Owen
- tdf
- Fat Steve
September 4, 2016 at 7:08 pm Ho! Ho! Ho! Anyone remember this photo op that Vaz constructed
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/11/the-missing-million-are-we-undercounting-britains-immigrants/- GUY ROCKY
September 4, 2016 at 7:21 pm It seems that everyone in Politics is there because they are compromised (Just as UK column is always saying). The amount of paedos, gays and perverts in the House of Commons is far higher than in normal life. More proof that all these Politicians are controlled by the Deep State.
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 7:41 pm @GUY ROCKY
Can’t disagree. I haven’t a homophobic bone in my body (and neither do I wish to, lol), but the preponderance of queers in UK politics is obvious, remarkable, notable, and, quite frankly, deeply weird and odd – even allowing for the ‘public’ school backgrounds of a lot of them.
The statistics show only 1%-3% of the general male population are homos. Maybe add a few % to that to allow for the bisexuals. With females, if anything, less.
Why is it that so many homoqueers in the UK, and possibly also in some other western countries, go into politics? It’s a question a lot of people are asking right now, or if they’re not, maybe they should be.
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 8:08 pm If I were gay, practising or otherwise, and had grown up in a dimwitted world that talked about me in those terms, I could easily see why I might well be more inclined to go into politics than someone who had never had to deal with such, with a view of doing what I could to redress the balance
And after a lifetime of having to put up with that sort of nonsense, even if I were to have achieved some tangible moves to equality, I think that, even as a saint, it would be ever so tempting to then carry on until I had kicked every last bit of effluent out of those I had formerly perceived as my tormentors, even to the point where I then lost sight of my own lack of balance in the treatment of others
Just saying, like. Before Windsock is even less polite LOL
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 9:01 pm - Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 9:19 pm Anal sex.
Make its frequency, within heteronormative relationships, the same.
By compulsion, with mandatory monitoring
- tdf
September 4, 2016 at 9:37 pm @Ho Hum
I would grant that there is an element of hypocrisy about that practice. Gays are criticised and condemned for engaging in it, whereas heteros get off ‘scot-free’, as it were.
I don’t like it, I’ve no wish to either shag anyone up the arse, or take it that way either.
On the other hand, though:-
- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 9:54 pm It’s at times like this that I think that one good Honest John might have solved the problem of Bono for all time
- Bandini
September 4, 2016 at 10:27 pm Thanks for that warning, Ho Hum! Saved me from being ‘triggered’ by Bonio’s caterwauling once more!
TDF, spread yer musical wings, for God’s sake!- tdf
September 6, 2016 at 4:28 pm The lyrics to “Lady With the Spinning Head”, a U2 B-side, carry a thinly veiled to the practice of ’69’-ing – a practice both straight & homosexual couples can enjoy, if they are so minded.
As for broadening my musical horizons, try this (the link is entirely a Bono-free zone, I assure you):
- Bandini
September 6, 2016 at 4:57 pm Straight back atchya:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgYEv4VLZLY
There’s a naughtier version kicking around too – the rascals!- tdf
September 6, 2016 at 5:01 pm ^ I’d imagine they were barely out of their teens themselves when they penned that.
- tdf
September 6, 2016 at 5:04 pm ^ actually it seems not, it was from their 1992 album. So, yes, rather risque.
- Bandini
September 6, 2016 at 5:12 pm They supposedly brought an ‘underaged’ stripper over to film it. Probably just marketing.
- tdf
September 7, 2016 at 10:41 pm There were a couple of strippers/adult industry workers in a 1998 video of theirs, but fairly obviously not underage.
- tdf
September 7, 2016 at 10:44 pm Obligatory trigger warning: link below does, I’m afraid, feature the well-known Irish saint Bono. Bono at 20, though, before all the bulls*** came in. He talks, quite intelligently, about his musical influences, including Joy Division. Interesting as a period piece, if nothing else:
http://baldpunk.com/2010/04/25/bono-on-joy-division-and-martin-hannett-from-1980/
- Bandini
- tdf
- Bandini
- Ho Hum
- tdf
- Ho Hum
- tdf
- Mudplugger
September 4, 2016 at 9:28 pm Even though the ratio of gays in politics may indeed be greater than the national average, this is not the only career with that profile: the theatre, fashion, the BBC and many others have always attracted more gays than other professions. Maybe, after an early life of persecution and derision, those places were ones where they felt safer, clustered together in ‘gay ghetto’ workplaces – I suspect that, had I been facing the same level of general aggression, I may have taken the same path.
Fortunately, that is now changing and most have come to accept different sexualities as just part of the rich tapestry of life and, as that maturity progresses, maybe the ratios will then normalise and we can get back to attacking our politicians for their corruption and their manifold political incompetences, rather than just what they choose to do with their genitalia.- Ho Hum
September 4, 2016 at 9:33 pm Have an upvote….
- Ho Hum
- The Blocked Dwarf
September 5, 2016 at 12:31 am TDF, can you make your comment a bit more obnoxious? Maybe chuck in a couple of ‘arse bandits’ or ‘shirt lifters’ , a ‘bum boy’ might fit somewhere too ? Most of us, even those who share your views, left the term ‘homos’ in the ‘backs against the walls, lads!’ days of our secondary schoolings.
- windsock
September 5, 2016 at 7:16 am Thank you Ho Hum, Mudplugger and Blocked Dwarf… Nice to know there are decent people around who can address a juvenile state of mind appropriately.
- Ho Hum
- tdf
- mike fowle
September 4, 2016 at 7:29 pm It seems a long time ago that Telegraph leaders used to include a sentence to the effect that Keith Vaz, who at the time of writing is still a member of the Government….. If he has finally been nailed, I can only think Good.
- James
September 4, 2016 at 8:15 pm I appreciate the hurt and upset for his wife and family,but with regards to him,isn’t schadenfreude such a beautiful word.
- Tommy K
September 4, 2016 at 8:23 pm “Could it be that the national hysteria is infecting the very people who are most deeply immersed in it; that people who had never thought of doing ‘x’ or ‘y’ read constantly that this is what the rest of the world is doing and think ‘I wonder if it might be enjoyable’ as their fingers roam the keyboards? Is society actually creating the problem it is so concerned about?”
Although this is not the main thrust of this article, it is an astute observation and worthy of an article in its own right. Any chance, Anna?
I would also suggest that many of those who succumb to this temptation may do so because their judgment is compromised by less than perfect mental health. That is to say that draconian punishments, including extra-judicial humiliation, are being inflicted on people of otherwise good character whom we really ought to be helping rather than hurting.
- Carol42
September 5, 2016 at 2:50 am I thought that when the first child abuse panic started. I suspect quite a few who were inclined to be attracted to children would never have acted on their desires. Perhaps with magazines and pictures but the stigma of assaulting a child and the shame it brought acted as a deterrent. Then it must have seemed lots of men, mostly men, were doing so maybe it wasn’t quite so shameful and of course the Internet allowed far more access to ever harder child porn. So perhaps society has in part created or at least made worse these problems.
- Hadleigh Fan
September 5, 2016 at 9:14 am I remember from my childhood “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me”. Well, sometimes they do. But in a different way than physical assault. Frankly, being taunted with even the most unpleasant term must surely beat being thrown from a high building.
- windsock
September 5, 2016 at 9:39 am Neither should be an attractive option. And possibly, acceptance of one leads to acceptance of the other. To be honest, I don’t care what terms people use to describe my sexuality… it is the tone in which it is said. When one can determine playfulness or affection, then fine. But in my experience, those names have sometimes been followed by punches and kicks.
- The Blocked Dwarf
September 5, 2016 at 9:50 am Not a question of the gays who drink here being ‘hurt’ by the nasty man saying bad things and making them cry, I doubt Windy and the others give a flying coitus. I, and I suspect the others, felt that tdf was being gratuitously obnoxious for the sake of it- infact I wondered if it was the real tdf and not our double daily dose of Dick.
- Tommy K
September 5, 2016 at 9:50 pm If the taunting is vindictive and relentless enough, the target may be driven to throw themselves from a high building.
- windsock
- Alexander Baron
September 5, 2016 at 10:22 am Okay, not my finest effort, but if anyone can do better….
Keith Vaz
There was an MP named Keith Vaz,
Whose image was whiter than Daz,
‘Till a Sunday tabloid
In an instant destroyed
His career. Where to now – Alcatraz?- Mudplugger
September 5, 2016 at 12:09 pm On a musical note…
Leicester double-act, Janner and Vaz,
May have played something other than jazz.
But one leaves the stage
Just before the last page,
And now Vaz may well wish that he has.
- Mudplugger
- Fat Steve
September 5, 2016 at 10:56 am On the central point of your essay about Vaz/s wife and such sympathy that might reasonably be extended to her one wonders where on the sliding scale between gullible innocent and Lady Macbeth she actually falls and perhaps with that assessment synpathy might be properly measured. Generosity of Spirit and Compassion are fine virtues though should, I think, not be extended indiscriminately
- Mzungu
September 5, 2016 at 1:11 pm @Fat Steve, point taken for Mme Vaz, but there are still the kids, apparently…
- Fat Steve
September 5, 2016 at 1:47 pm @Mzunga
we must deal with such legacy as our parents give us and make a fist of things …..that is fate…..unpleasant at times but purposive.
Truth about ones’ Parents and acceptance of it and a realisation that ones own life is influenced but not defined by them is a necessary step to individuation …..not an easy journey always but hindered by lack of transparency though in an ideal world it is a private matter.
I commend Vyvyan Holland’s (the son of Oscar Wilde) book on his life or our Landlady’s own life story
- Fat Steve
- David
September 5, 2016 at 2:02 pm The Mail spoke to the occupants of the Uppingham Road house, a family who seemed unaware of any sale. They said they moved in two months ago and had a one-year tenancy, paying £750 a month via an agency. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3773595/Riddle-loan-let-shamed-Labour-MP-Keith-Vaz-pay-400k-cash-luxury-sex-flat.html
- Fat Steve
September 5, 2016 at 2:04 pm and Mzunga a quote from Vyvyan Holland
If I ever feel depressed, I contemplate my blessings one by one and say that I am a happy man, that I have no quarrels with fate, which has almost overwhelmed me at times, but which has, in the end, left me, as it were, washed up on the shores of time, in the warm sunlight”
I hope our Landlady might feel the same- The Blocked Dwarf
September 5, 2016 at 2:43 pm washed up on the shores of time, in the warm sunlight”
I hope our Landlady might feel the sameNot with Captain BoatGoat at the helm, she won’t be washing up anywhere along the Broads in the warm Norfolk rain, rather lounging on the Chaise Longue of time , a cuppa brought to her by CabinBoyToy and morphine patch firmly on her bum.
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Chromatistes
September 5, 2016 at 4:04 pm Keith Vaz,
Was caught with party poppers, male prostitutes and all that kind of jazz,
At bottom,
He got ’em!- binao
September 5, 2016 at 8:23 pm Quote: ‘I really don’t like Keith Vaz’.
Some decades ago I learned ‘It’s not you I don’t like, it’s what you do (or don’t do).’
The idea I guess being that unacceptable behaviour can be changed to something more tolerable.I don’t know Mr Vaz. All I’ve seen is his TV appearances, in particular in committee. I don’t really care if what he is alleged to have done is unlawful, a conflict of interest, hypocritical, or none of these things.
I think I’d find it very difficult to like Mr Vaz.
- AC
September 6, 2016 at 7:31 am I think it’s wrong to compare how journalists earn their living with MPs. I’m still paying Vaz’s salary – I don’t have to buy any newspapers if I don’t want to. I’ve been paying his salary all the time he was flipping his house, cheating on his expenses and sucking up to corrupt people. If it were any other MP who was having some sex on the side I’d agree with you but on balance I’m making an exception for Vaz. And while I feel for his wife I’m thinking she needs to know about his unsafe sex and he sure as hell wasn’t going to tell her. I hope he stays down this time but I’m betting he won’t go without a fight.
- The Hare
September 7, 2016 at 11:20 am It probably comes as no surprise, but I dont particularly like Mr Vaz either. As a general rule, I’d be inclined to agree with much of the sentiment of Anna’s article, but pragmatically, there always has to be exceptions to every rule, and in my opinion, Mr Vaz is that exception
Sadly there’s going to be collateral damage, and in the case of his wife, as an MP’s wife she knows the score and unfortunately will have to take the rough with the smooth (and if she’s got an ounce of common sense’s she’ll already discussing exactly what she’ll be taking from the marriage with her lawyers)
If these revelations rid British politics of the Keith Vaz it will be a price worth paying.
Why should having kids suddenly give someone a get out of jail free card ?
- The Hare
- jack savage
September 7, 2016 at 11:51 am Keith Vaz does not seem to have worried too much about the effect on his wife and children of his risky behaviour so I am afraid I am not going to either.
I am not proud of myself for enjoying his (possible) downfall.
However, I think we all ought to enjoy it while it lasts because I very much doubt whether we have seen the last of him.- Alexander Baron
September 8, 2016 at 6:36 pm Yvette Cooper considers bid to replace Keith Vaz
Read more at: http://www.pontefractandcastlefordexpress.co.uk/news/local-news/yvette-cooper-considers-bid-to-replace-keith-vaz-1-8114174Strange, I would have thought that was up to Mrs Vaz.
- dwmf
September 23, 2016 at 9:37 am This is the important bit that everybody seems to be forgetting. I have very little interest in where Vaz dips his wick or snorts up his nose. But we need to keep a very keen eye on where he dips his fingers – notably in the charity funds. I definitely think that the salacious details have been inflated, to obscure the embezzlement of the charity. If that is properly investigated, Vaz could well be going to jail.
- dwmf
September 23, 2016 at 9:45 am Interesting. I had not considered that. I did reckon that the execrable accusations against Ted Heath came from Janner’s supporters, specifically to muddy the waters. I also suspect that at the bottom of this muddy pond, sits a fat, evil toad called Tom Watson.
{ 149 comments… read them below or add one }