Skip to content

Why isn’t Sunak being examined in the way Philip Schofield is?

Because Rishi isn’t thought to have been having an affair?

27 thoughts on “Umm”

  1. Peter Tatchell: Schofield ‘trashing’ has ‘more than whiff of homophobia’

    It was always about access to boys, wasn’t it?

    “Homophobia” is just another one of Chesterton’s railings.

  2. A whiff of Homophobia???

    He was treated with bloody kid gloves, hailed as a hero, stunning and brave. Even his catamite allegedly received a hefty payment for something or other which definitely wasn’t an NDA.

    Imagine instead he was caught regularly shagging a girl one third his age who he’d “known” since she was 15 and then leaving his wife and kids. I doubt if Ant and Dec would be piping up to applaud his bravery or if the bbc would be interviewing him as the days most important news story on “Today”.

  3. Examined to the same degree of assiduousness and fascination which which Murphy conducts his daily stool inspection?

    You can never take the auditor out of retired accountants.

  4. Slightly off topic, but about discrimination.
    I embrace this wholeheartedly.
    Anglo-Saxons aren’t real, Cambridge tells students in effort to fight ‘nationalism’
    University aims to ‘dismantle the basis of myths of nationalism’ by explaining that Anglo-Saxons were not a distinct ethnic group.

    The department’s approach also aims to show that there were never “coherent” Scottish, Irish and Welsh ethnic identities with ancient roots.

    Follow the logic here. So it’s not necessary to recognise there’s anything can be called a Jock, Mick or Sheepshagger culture. Or those abortions of national languages. We don’t have to acknowledge Pikeys have “Traveller” needs. They all are British just like us.
    Further, if English doesn’t exist, then the Ni**ers & Pa*is can’t be discriminated against on racial grounds because if whites don’t have a race, how can they? Black Lives truly do not matter.
    More I read it, better it sounded.

  5. Dennis, Noting The Bright Light Emanating From Ely

    You can never take the auditor out of retired accountants.

    He certainly wasn’t an auditor, was barely an accountant, and isn’t so much retired as he is unemployed and unemployable.

    If he’s inspecting his stool, it’s because it’s the sort of thing he can relate to.

  6. @ bis
    Interesting thesis. So how long does it take for a group of people isolated from other groups by physical barriers (e.g. the sea or high mountains) and/or warfare and deep mutual suspicion (the two tend to reinforce each other) to become ethnically distinct? It’s possible that 600 years is not enough, but I’ve long understood that the Angles, Saxons and Jutes were distinct ethnic groupings before they invaded Britain?
    I think that there has been some scientific analysis of DNA that will show that the “woke” claims are wrong. I *know* that there are firms claiming to identifythe source of individuals’ DNAs and this would not be possible if the ethnic groups were not distinguishable.
    The DNA analysis of remains at Vindiolanda claims to identify the original homes of the legionnaires buried there – that would be a bit difficult if the groups were not ethnically distinct.
    Let’s hear it for the frizzy-haired Irish and the red-headed Nigerians!!!

  7. @ Dennis
    He was primarily a “tax adviser”.
    One of the things you surely regret missing is the schadenfreude among us (then) youngsters in the City of London when several firms of “tax advisers” went bust/closed down and thousands (yes, literally thousands) of tax-avoidance parasites were thrown out of work by “Big 5” and other Accountants after Geoffrey Howe’s first budget

  8. @ Steve
    Allegedly they are the same as Arabs …
    Honestly – I have been exposed to a claim that Hebrews are “Habiru” a subset of Arabs from South-east Arabia!

  9. The idea that the various pirate boats that attacked Roman Britain had crews who were purely Angles, purely Saxons, or purely Jutes is pretty silly. The idea that those crews, and their successors, then settled in distinctive places and kept themselves to themselves is potty. But since the ancient DNA chaps claim to be able to distinguish the German invaders from the Romano-Britons pretty clearly then you want a term for them. I call them “Germans” and their language Insular West Germanic. Nobody else does.

    “Anglo-Saxon”, a later term used to distinguish the Saxons who lived in what became England from those still on the Continent, more or less does as a label; it seems mad to change it now, especially if the reason is just wokeness rather than a search for precision.

    Of course they didn’t call themselves that. In fact one historian I’ve read remarked that there is no record of any individual German invader or settlor of the period ever referring to himself as a Saxon. “Saxon” started as their enemies’ name for them.

    The legendary founders of Wessex had British names suggesting that the crews of the pirate boats weren’t even all Germans. Why would they be if some pirate mob found themselves a superior skipper who happened to be British? Or a British freebooter recruited a crew who were principally German?

    Mind you, there is one potentially bogus bit in the name of that Cambridge department: “Celtic”. No classical writer referred to the inhabitants of the British Isles as Celtic and several said explicitly that they weren’t. It’s true that the languages that theirs evolved into are now said to be in the Celtic language group but that’s a plain different thing. No one calls the Jamaicans “English” because they happen to speak English.

  10. john77 – Studies show that the only people who are real people are ugly brown women at Cambridge.

  11. @ dearieme
    Not that silly if each was crewed by folk who trusted each other because they knew each other.
    Also the fairly ancient names referring to East Saxons, south Saxons, west Saxons (but no north saxons) and east Angles implies that groups of boats did pick different bits of coastline.
    I don’t know enough to dispute the rest of your post
    Re: your last paragraph – I have read that “Celtic” was a cultural grouping not a racial one.

  12. @john77 – “…physical barriers (e.g. the sea or …”

    The sea is not a physical barrier – it’s a connection. That’s why in ancient times settlements were so often on rivers and the coast – travel by water is hugely easier than overland without technology to build roads and vehicles. It’s only when the water gets very wide that it becomes a barrier – i.e. when it’s an ocean.

  13. @john77
    “So how long does it take for a group of people isolated from other groups to become ethnically distinct? ”
    According to superbly educated academics at Cambridge U, the concept is redundant & always has been. Bearded Albanian children are true sons (or daughters) of John Bull whilst they are still standing on the beach at Calais. So if you fancy clocking one of the tinted round the head with a cricket bat tonight, it’s in no way a racial attack. You were just driving to long leg.

  14. . whilst they are still standing on the beach at Calais
    I just realise how appallingly discriminatory that was. I can only humbly apologise.

    Whist they are renting out their younger sisters’ arses* in Tirana

    *Traditional culchewal custom, of course. Not at all effnik

  15. Theophrastus (2066)

    Does Murphy inspect his stools each day or is he just going through the motions?

  16. @ Charles
    “It’s a connection” – so why did people only cross into America from Asia before 1492?

  17. Sunak was responsible for Eat Out to Get Covid. People died as a result.

    Schofield was, I hope, merely unwise

    Jesus Christ – what a piece of complete and utter garbage. I’d rather give Putin a chair at a British university. How many have died thanks to the lockdown that he would prefer we are in still? Pure evil.

  18. bis. The great Mohammed Ali was an Albanian and thus a Brit. So no doubt Cassius Clay was as well?

    But that does explain British rule of Egypt. The Khedive was also a Brit!!

    V-P. I’d argue that Putin is undoubtedly superior to most of those chairing a British uni. When one considers the mess in Ukraine, this is certainly a trifle alarming.

  19. @ Van Patten
    The only benefit therefrom would be watching the contortions of the “woke” mob as they tried to simultaneously maintain their links with LGBTQ+ and their funding from Putin’s hardline anti-Gay Russia while he is actually in the UK

  20. Charles… Is that remark of yours based on “Sound Knowledge of the Theoretical Principles Involved”, or have you actually tried to cross actual rivers ( not even starting on the sea…) by either swimming or something simple, like a log or bark canoe?

    Just a curious cloggie who is positively intrigued by your notion.
    Especially since those “connections” claim 20-30 lives annually over here.
    Funnily enough almost always Foreigners who chose to muck around where we very much don’t, and have big signs out warning Tourists not to try.. Usually we can find the remains… eventually..

  21. It was the basis of the Viking raider lifestyle, Grikath. Why longships had flat bottoms for going up rivers. Your presumption is that travelling over land was easier. Mostly it was more difficult & dangerous. To travel over water you need a simple technological development. A boat. To do the same with same ease over land requires an entire infrastructure. The roads & the organisation to enable safe unimpeded travel on them.

  22. Oh, I know BiS… It’s more the “A river is not a barrier” bit I object against.

    It very much is, in many ways. Rivers aren’t tame, and in many ways more dangerous than the sea..

  23. @john77 – “so why did people only cross into America from Asia before 1492?”

    a) The Vikings are known to have made the corssing multiple times.
    b) If you read all the way to the end of what I said, you’ll find “It’s only when the water gets very wide that it becomes a barrier – i.e. when it’s an ocean.”. The Atlantic Ocean counts as an ocean.


    You obviously live in a very flat land. Compare the carrying capacity of a rickshaw (or any other human powered vehicle) with that of a rowing boat. Even allowing the rickshaw the advantages of modern bearings etc and a metalled road, the boat, which is an ancient technology) is far superior. Don’t confuse leisure use of water with commercial use.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *