3 Ukrainian Rent Boys, a Firebomb & Starmer’s Back Door: The Old Bailey Bombshell They’re BANNING

Let's start with the last point first, because, well, it tickles my fancy if it doesn't tickle yours. You know this only from the mother of all talk shows, because no British newspaper or broadcaster has told you that tomorrow morning, in the Old Bailey itself, no less, three Ukrainian rent boys will face charges connecting them to the arsoning of the British Prime Minister. Will we discover what these men held against Kirstein, why his back door was so ineluctably attractive to them that they had to firebomb it. Two back doors, two vehicles, neither of which they should have, on the face of it,

anything to do with, any knowledge of. I mean, how do you find out the former residence of the British Prime Minister? How do you find out his former vehicle? Unless you've been in it, of course, in the past. That can happen to the best of us. Now, these men plead not guilty, and they are entitled to a fair trial, and I hope that they get it. They may be entirely innocent, as they claim with their not guilty plea of these heinous arsoning

offenses, the kind of thing that turns the stomach of plain-minded folk like me. It may be that these men have been falsely accused but they have pleaded not guilty for a reason and that is so that their side of the story can be aired in court. The bare-faced truth must be told. That's the principle of British justice, isn't it? Justice is blind, isn't it? The scales of justice cannot be weighed according to the status of one part, one person to the case. So what we're going to find out? Well in ordinary times

everybody would know everything there was to know short of prejudicing their trial about these three Ukrainian rent boys. mean, there can't be that many Ukrainian rentboys in London. That three of them allegedly formed a concert party to firebomb the premises and the automobiles of a sitting British Prime Minister is an extraordinary story by any standards, but not by the standards of the British media, who plainly lack the moral fibre to deep dive into this story, or they have been ordered secretly by the government not to report.

Now there's a thing called a de-notice in Britain, which an official of the Ministry of Defence, no less, comes along and hands you physically a notice, after which you may not publish anything on a story, uh, at pain of imprisonment yourself. Now, if anybody came along to me and handed me a denotice, I'd be showing it to you on the camera right now because, hey, I believe in freedom of the press. I believe in freedom of speech. No matter who it's for, no matter who it's against, it's the only way we can do things, you know. If we allow the state

to regulate what stories we're allowed to know, then we'll end up knowing far less than we need to know. We need to know in order to judge the wisdom of the people who are ruling us. And the loser in that will be us, all of us, the public interest. So if they had given me a, all of us, the public interest. So if they had given me a denotice in the public interest, I would have told you everything about it.

But let me assume for a moment that there is no denotice and that there is merely a conspiracy in the British media to ignore a story as big as this one. In ordinary times, as I say, with any other victim, we'd know everything about these three individuals. We'd know where they were living, why they were living in London. We'd know what they had been doing in London. The interviews would be in the can of their former customers, clients. People would testify as

to their massage skills, as to their male modelling attributes. We'd know lots about them. Sure, stuff might have been asterisked, might have been pixelated. They might not have shown you the full, ugly truth, but you'd know far more than nothing, which is what you precisely know unless you have been watching the mother of all talk shows, and to be fair, one or two outlets on Twitter. That's if Elon Musk doesn't get to it first.

My own feeling is that these men have a personal grudge against Keir Starmer. It may be that they acted, if they did act, out of that personal grudge. And I don't know about you, but I'm rather keen to know what that personal grudge might be. Because I want to know what kind of man our Prime Minister is. Although I'm beginning to get quite a clear idea about that, as are you. He's the type of Prime Minister that thinks it was a good idea to wreck his entire premiership and the entire future of his party just to get the paragon of moral virtue, Peter

Mandelson, back into public life. Mandelson sacked twice from two different Labour cabinets and thought to be in such disgrace that he could only hang around with the dodgiest of lobbyists. But Starmer was determined to get him back and I'm rather keen to know why. Was it cash?

Well, he did meet with Palantir, with Peter Mandelson and we only know that because of social media. He didn't declare it as he was under the ministerial code perfectly obliged to do. Not entitled to do, he was obliged to do and he has not done it. He met Palantir and its sinister boss with the sinister Peter Mandelson and didn't tell anyone about it. That is grounds for dismissal as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in and of itself. But when you lie to Parliament

that the vetting process for Peter Mandelson was perfectly normal and had been passed, if not with flying colours, had definitely been passed, then that's an automatic sacking offence or a resignation offence, as we as former members of the British Parliament like me, well know, is the formulation, the gentlemanly formulation that the British normally use. It's a resignation matter if you are found to have lied to the British Parliament.

Well, we've already found that Keir Starmer lied multiple times on the Peter Mandelson affair, and that's another reason why he should no longer be the Prime Minister. But there are many, many others. Dan Hodges, I think it was, in the Daily Mail, the biggest selling British newspaper today makes the point that Keir Starmer is so otherworldly he has no idea how universally loathed he is. He can read the polls I'm sure, he can already read that he is the most unpopular British Prime Minister of all

time, but he appears to think that his Labour members of Parliament are loyally behind him. Well, I'm here to tell you that they are not, and that we will have a new Prime Minister right after the local government elections on the 10th of May. And good riddance, Keir Starmer, you were bad rubbish, and we will all be well rid of you. As to the outcome of the trial, well, who knows what it will be. Who knows if it will even happen.

Who knows if an offer they can't refuse will be made to the Ukrainian rent boys to avoid Who knows if an offer they can't refuse will be made to the Ukrainian rent boys to avoid what could be a highly embarrassing interlude.