|LETTERS FROM LONDON
|REASONS TO BE CHEERFUL
28 October 2017
|Would You Be So Kind
Oh dear. Not British McCarthyism. Hints: “chilling”….“felt a chill down my spine".
So the answer is ‘yes’.
It was Conservative MP, government whip and resolute Brexiteer, Chris Heaton-
Harris, who requested kindness. OK. Not quite. H-H wrote to all vice-chancellors
of universities asking for the names of academics teaching about Brexit. Here’s
the kindness bit. He asked in the letter if they “would be so kind” as to give him
“the names of professors at your establishment who are involved in the teaching
of European affairs, with particular reference to Brexit”. He wanted details.
McCarthyism? Now what could possibly be wrong with that if you are a Tory?
And the responses? One vice-chancellor said: “He has written to me personally,
by name, asking me to give him the names of those who are giving classes
about the European Union and give evidence about exactly what they are
saying. I realised that his letter just asking for information appears so innocent
but is really so, so dangerous. Here is the first step to the thought police, the
political censor and Newspeak”. Hmmm…and give evidence about exactly what
they are saying”. Surely it’s unnecessary to add ‘be afraid, be very afraid'.
Professor Keith Featherstone, the head of the European Institute at the London
School of Economics (LSE), said: “the letter was clearly an implied threat. The
letter reflects a past of a McCarthyite nature. It smacks of asking: are you or
have you ever been in favour of Remain? There is clearly an implied threat that
universities will somehow be challenged for their bias.”
If you’re not enraged enough, Manchester University political scientist Rob Ford
said the letter was sinister because of its intent rather than content. This is
designed to send the message “we in Government are watching you”. Beyond
‘chilling’. 80 per cent of academics voted Remain.
But lecturer in international relations at De Montfort University, Dr Ben Whitham
took another view: “Of course you can access my recorded lectures. Just enrol
and pay £9,000 per year your party deems fair, like everyone else.” No word
Ah. Luxembourg comes out in defence of London. How kind.
In a speech at the London School of Economics Luxembourg’s finance minister,
Pierre Gramegna, is warning EU leaders that hurting the City of London would
switch its orientation towards of the Atlantic. Noooooo!
He urged the EU to ensure that the “number one financial centre in the world”
remains connected to Europe. Yes! He warned of trying to ‘punish’ the UK. No
worries. Brexit will do that.
Details? London ranks first in the Global Financial Centres Index. Luxemburg
ranks second in Europe and is eighteenth in the world. Among the companies to
recently relocate their headquarters from London to Luxembourg? Citibank, JP
Morgan, AIG, Lloyd’s, Hiscox, and Liberty Specialty.
Gramegna warned that business may not leave London alone, but Europe as
well. “I find that a balanced final agreement with the UK, specifically for financial
services, is in the interests of Europe itself.” So not quite so noble and self-
sacrificing. He also urged for less drama (ha) in the negotiations as “no deal”
would be bad for both sides.
I’m Sorry, So Sorry
Mikey is “sorry”. Not ‘So’ sorry, but sorry enough to “apologise unreservedly”,
as you do when twitter collectively attacks you.
The Environment Secretary was appearing on a 60th anniversary edition of the
BBC Today radio news said programme, aired before a live audience. Host
John Humphrys asked Mikey about the challenge of facing an interview on the
show. Fascinating already, right? Mikey replied: "Sometimes I think that coming
into the studio with you John is a bit like going into Harvey Weinstein's
Laughter and rapturous applause from the audience. Huh? Followed by former
Labour leader Lord Kinnock also appearing on the show, said: "John goes way
past groping...way past groping." "You just pray that you emerge with your
dignity intact," Mikey added. Ha ha ha. Did anyone notice if Kinnock was
wearing a #metoo button?
Not another ‘I’m sorry moment? Now we have The Mail On Sunday reporting
that married father of three, staunch Brexiteer, one of Liam Fox’s deputies,
International Trade Minister, ex-banker (we don’t like him already), Mark Garnier
has admitting asking Commons secretary, Caroline Edmonson, to buy sex toys
for him, calling her “sugar tits”. Yes. There was a witness. Thus the apology.
She said he gave her cash to buy two vibrators at a sex shop in Soho – and
stood outside the store while she bought them. And stood - or hung out outside
Garnier told her that one of the sex toys was for his wife, also called Caroline,
but probably not ‘sugar tits’, while the other was for a female assistant in his
Wyre Forest constituency office in the West Midlands. Uh oh.
Garnier: “I’m not going to deny it, because I’m not going to be dishonest. I’m
going to have to take it on the chin.” Not dishonest. Oh ha ha ha. On the chin?
He said: “Asking Ms Edmondson to buy sex toys in Soho was “good-humoured
high jinks and amusing conversation”. ‘High jinks’?
Well, not according to Ms Edmonson. Not rolling on the pavement laughing. She
called him a ‘s**t’. “He has lied. He suggested to me in a Commons bar one
evening that we went shopping for sex toys in Soho. The next day, he said,
“Come on, let’s do it.”
“He took me to Soho and gave me the money to buy two vibrators. He stood
outside the shop while I did. He said one was for his wife and the other was for a
woman who worked in his constituency office.”
She added: ‘Another time in the bar he said to me in the hearing of others, “You
are going nowhere, sugar tits. He was worried I was going to go off and work for
another MP. It was awful.” She is now Commons secretary to former Cabinet
Minister John Whittingdale.
So many creepy politicians, but who’s counting at this point? Possibly the all-
Ugly as Sin
Oh Woody. Not Woody again. Not that ‘sad’ ugly little man. While Woody was
feeling ‘sad’ for Weinstein, he was working on his latest (save us) film and what
could the theme be? Why it’s the very same one Woody has been fixatedly
obsessed with from day one. All right. Think about it. Have you ever seen a
photo of him as a baby, a kid, a teenager? I’m thinking he has always looked the
same and sorry, not pretty.
Lest we forget what WA said about Polanski. “He’s an artist, he’s a nice person,
he did something wrong and he paid for it.” How exactly, Woody? Not being able
to live in LA? Sad. “They (who are ‘they’?) are not happy unless he pays the
rest of his life. They would be happy if they could execute him in a firing squad.
Enough is enough.” Very, very ugly statutory rape of a 13-year-old, molesting a
10-year-old. Possibly they should.
As everybody knows, well, possibly not that cannibalistic tribe in the Brazilian
jungle, that Woody has been accused of numerous charges of sexual abuse. He
– erm – ‘dated’ his adopted daughter, Soon-Yi when she was a teenager and he
was – ew - 35. Let’s not mention those pornographic photos, shall we? But the
point; people knew, yet they just continuously have professed their undying love
for him and his curiously no-hands-on directorial ‘skills’. “Oh to work with
Woody. A dream come true. I am soooo lucky!” Really?
So, back to his latest film. According the New York Post’s Page Six, the film
“centres around a middle-aged man who is sleeping with a much younger
woman” along with a bunch of “young starlets,” one of whom is somewhere
between 15 and 21.
Woody. Go into rehab. Hmmm. Too late.