Coffee House

Julian Assange is a narcissist and a nut. But if America comes for him we should take his side

19 August 2014

5:33 PM

19 August 2014

5:33 PM

This is an extract from Hugo Rifkind’s column in this week’s Spectator, out on Thursday


Poor Julian Assange. Call me a contrarian but I’m genuinely starting to feel sorry for the guy. He’s just made such a mess of his life, hasn’t he? And with such promise. Only a few short years ago he was the world’s most prominent anti-everything activist, with hair like an indie guitarist, feted and worshipped wherever you might find hot Scandinavian revolutionaries, smug old men who work for ‘theguardian’ and Jemima Khan. Now he’s a hermit with hair like Noel Edmonds who lives in a cupboard. It’s a hell of a fall.

Most crushingly, he’s become a figure of fun. Perhaps you noticed him holding a press conference last week, to announce that he might soon leave the Ecuadorian embassy but probably wouldn’t, or something. Journalists did, and Twitter resounded with their hoots of derision. This chump! Remember him? What, does he have a book out?

[Alt-Text]


As it happens, yes. He does have a book out. But nobody will care. There was a time, not so long ago, when British media was in awe of Assange, broadsided by scoop after scoop from sources we couldn’t get near, via methods we couldn’t comprehend.

Yet the Assange show got old, long ago. Those who worked with him he turned upon. Those who merely watched him have observed a sketchy relationship with the truth that makes even the most dubious tabloid hack look like a priest with his hand on a Bible. So often has he shouted the words ‘house arrest’ and ‘detention without trial’ that he possibly even believes them. But nobody else does. Assange has had no trial because he refuses to go to Sweden, where any trial would be. He’s under house arrest in the Ecuadorian embassy only because he himself refuses to leave it. A ‘siege’, his people call it, perhaps while touching themselves intimately. They claim that Britain has spent £7 million on keeping him there. But Britain isn’t keeping him there. He is.

He has taken the rhetoric of the truly dispossessed and persecuted, and made himself into a blasphemy of it. His fear, he says, is not of trial in Sweden (he is wanted for questioning on allegations of sex offences) but of subsequent extradition to the United States. This may even be true; almost certainly he’d be out in Sweden by now even if he’d been found guilty and been banged up for it. But his demands are absurd.

He wants America to rule out charging him over Wikileaks; Sweden to question him here instead of there; Britain to let him board a flight to Ecuador. He claims half the time to be a champion of those for whom oppression means violence and brutality. To him, it means not rearranging your legal system to his maximum convenience. He may of course be guilty of nothing in Sweden whatsoever. But he is wholly guilty, here and now, of being a right royal pain in the arse.

The terrible irony, of course, is that many journalists are poised to swing behind Assange, and have been for years. The big Wikileaks disclosures were brutal, callous exercises in journalism; the very definition of great publishing power exercised without any responsibility at all. Yet that makes him a nasty and stupid journalist of a novel sort, not a criminal or a spy. And as all hacks know, once you start banging hacks up for being stupid and nasty — well, where will it end?

Assange is a blinkered zealot, a conspiracy theorist, a narcissist and a nut. He has the politics of a teenage boy who has read too much Chomsky (which is any ­Chomsky). But he is not a stupid man, and there remain few people who understand the frontiers of digital freedom with such precision. He got there backwards, I think, hacking not for liberty, but preaching liberty to justify his hacking. Yet in the end that doesn’t really matter. Possibly he will never go to Sweden and probably, if he does, America will never come calling for his scalp. Yet if America ever does, it’s worth remembering that his unpleasantness, irresponsibility, ego, mendacity and even his alleged sexual proclivities shouldn’t change which side we ought to be on. We just have to hope he doesn’t enjoy it too much.


More Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 15 issues delivered for just £15, with full web and app access. Join us.



Show comments
  • Jimmy Regan

    Assange is a vile rapist and should be extradited to face his victims – send armed police into the Embassy of the piss-pot coutry he is hiding in and drag the filthy pervert out and send him to Sweden on the next flight !

  • Arbed121

    Speaking of “the politics of a teenage boy”, can you ask your dad Malcolm to get GCHQ to stop spying on innocent public citizens (all of them, globally)? I understand it’s your dad who’s in charge of overseeing the rampant illegality of our secret services’ behaviour on behalf of us all (He heads up the UK Intelligence Services Committee, doesn’t he, your dad Malcolm?).

    Oh, hold on, your dislike of Assange wouldn’t have anything to do with your dad’s job, would it? I just thought of that…

  • The Masked Marvel

    He’s a declared enemy of the US, Hugo, who has openly stated his desire to harm the country. He broke laws in his attempts to do it. He is not a journalist, in whatever heroic, “Speak Truth To Power” manner you imagine here. Even if you agree with Assange on many issues, he didn’t break the law merely in order to report the truth. He did it to cause harm, and not just to the US. There’s a difference, and it’s disturbing that an experienced journalist such as yourself doesn’t see it.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      “He’s a declared enemy of the US”
      Well, the US does top the “World`s Most Hated Country” list, so I guess a lot of people fall into that category. Sad really, the US just wants to be loved, but goes out of its way to ensure it`s hated.

      • The Masked Marvel

        Irrelevant. The point is about St. Julian’s reasons for his actions. It ain’t “journalism”, which Hugo’s blind loyalty to his profession is causing him to get wrong.

  • Peter Stroud

    Silly article, about a very silly man.

  • Sean L

    Just rubbish from start to finish. And what qualifies you to say that about Chomsky? You’ve read *all* Chomsky, have you? Whatever his politics, as a linguist his opposition to behaviourism if anything puts him with the conservatives against the radicals.

  • Bobby Mac

    Yes, a truly cheap and idiotic piece of journalism. Give me Assange over Rifkind any day.

  • Fergus Pickering

    I don’t feel at all sorry for him. He is an arsehole. And if the Americans want him, they can have him.

    • GUBU

      …and Edmonds. They can have him too. Anyone who dyes their hair and beard different colours deserves to be deported.

    • Bruce Lewis

      The Americans have only two words for a Brit like you: “our poodle.”

      • Fergus Pickering

        I know many Americans but none of them has ever called me that. Do you know any Americans or does your position depend on total ignorance?

        • Inverted Meniscus

          It depends on total ignorance Fergus and you are right, Assange is a total arsehole.

          • Fergus Pickering

            Thank you. I thought I was alone in this opinion.

            • Stephen Morris

              Narcissistic, paranoid, arsehole would be a more complete description of Assange. The Australian hard left is full of such people. I speak as an Australian centrist.

              • Fergus Pickering

                Good God! Is the bugger Australian? How awful for you. I had heard the Australia was riddled with the most dreadful lefties.

    • Roger Hudson

      But America has enough arseholes already.

      • Fergus Pickering

        Then they won’t want him, will they?

  • WFB56

    £7 million to keep him here? If that is remotely close to being correct than the Home Secretary should resign. Let him go to another country as quickly as possible; at his own cost.

  • Mike

    Sweden is virtually a police state when it comes to freedom of speech and especially criticizing Islam as many have found to their cost. If you think the UK is bad when it comes to anti-jewish hate crimes whilst pandering to Islam, think again, Sweden is much much worse. No wonder Assange refuses to go to a country that collaborated with the Nazis in WWII, made a fortune selling them munitions and now bans freedom of speech on religion. Would you trust them not to sell you out ?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il1Gy6AvYXs

    • Fergus Pickering

      Sweden is virtually a police state/ Would you like to reconsider that ridiculous statement. Where are the secret plice, the dawn raids, the imprisonments without trial for ever. Where are te gulags? I long to know.

      • Gregory Mason

        Dawn raids. Violence against those who the Left disagrees with.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJ55KyNrO6A

        You don’t need a secret police or gulag to run a police state. Funnily enough you only need the police, the hint is in the name.

        • Fergus Pickering

          We have policemen. Ergo we are a police stste.

          • Gregory Mason

            It’s the manner in which the police are used. Do they enforce political doctrine? Yes. When the police cease to be servants of the people but of the government the seeds of a police state have been sown.

            • Fergus Pickering

              All policemen do as you suggest. Who pays their salaries after all? They know o which side their bread is buttered.

              • Gregory Mason

                Yes they do, much to our future sorrow. The foundations for a police state have begun to be laid in our country as well. Whether one arises is unknown at this point but given the general propensity of government to rarely give back powers back to the people once they are taken it is certainly a possibility for the future.

                This was not always the case and need not be the case. The police should be run locally for the benefit of the local population because it improves their efficiency and accountability. A police run by central government is just asking for trouble.

                • Fergus Pickering

                  I thnk you may be right there. The plice in my youth were the protection for the middle class against the lower orders.

      • Mike

        Just google this and all will be revealed about Swedens laws that makes criticism of a religion a hate crime.

        http://pamelageller.com/2014/04/sharia-sweden-new-law-criminalizes-criticism-islam.html/

        • Fergus Pickering

          Uhuh! Neverthelwss… police state?

  • swatnan

    You’d have expected to have tunnelled his way out and be on a packet to Bolivia or Equador by now, like in Shawshank. Or, if he has their citizenship and gets himself elected as President, then perhaps he could get diplomatic immunity, like Pinochet.
    Or, better still, just let our Police enter and drag him out.

  • Newcombe

    Assange is a blinkered zealot, a conspiracy theorist, a narcissist and a nut That about sums up the entire Lefty brigade, all BBC/Guardian and their readership.

    • https://twitter.com/ronwordwelder Ron Wordwelder

      “a conspiracy theorist” – yeah, the “officia” 9/11 conspiracy theory

    • Inverted Meniscus

      And every member of the Labour Party.

  • cartimandua

    He should have taken his lumps in Sweden. He could then have stayed there.

    • Bruce Lewis

      No, he couldn’t have; Sweden would have caved to the American CIA.

  • Radford_NG

    I would have thought the Swedes,especially Swedes women,would have more to concern them these days;with all the advantages of multiculture-ism.Amongst less fiesty postings there is the archive of Pamela Geller (who is banned from Britain ).

    http://www.pamelageller.com/category/sweden-jihad/

    • Mike

      Even more so than the UK, hate crimes in Sweden are biased in favour of Islam.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    “Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by Spectator Blogs.”
    What’s all this crap, Specie? Truth hurts, huh?

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    I suppose I should be more sympathetic to those plods outside the Ecuadorian embassy, 24/7, summer and winter, day and night, all weathers. Wasting police time just doesn’t come close.
    However, I keep getting this vision of Julian sitting on the embassy balcony, feet up, sipping a gin and tonic, flicking peanuts at the two plods on the pavement below.
    In politically over correct police state UK that would probably be construed as assault or even cruelty to dumb animals.

    • Radford_NG

      Whilst the police have the right to set their own operational priorities,the public have the right to comment on these;as do their political representatives,such as Boris Johnson.Has nobody in the Met area anything to say about the £millions spent on this project and the waste of man power?

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    The movie “Zero Dark Thirty” was on the box last night. Included clip of an Obama broadcast saying, “We do not torture”. Sure Barack. Contrasted with scenes of water boarding, suspension of detainees for extended periods, 96-hour sleep deprivation, locked in a coffin-sized box… So when that suicide bomber wasted CIA operatives at Bagram you were almost rooting for the “bad” guys. In fact the line between good guys and bad guys has become so blurred I became confused. Would be so much easier if the CIA just wore black hats and sported a moustache. Except the women, obviously.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    At last, an article on Julian Assange’s press conference from the Ecuadorian Embassy. Only an hour-long live broadcast on BBC and CNN. You can hardly describe CNN as over liberal.
    I was beginning to think I’d imagined the whole thing and needed to change my pharmacist.

    • mohdanga

      “You can hardly describe CNN as over liberal.”
      You’re joking, right??

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        It`s a double negative. Irony glands need a recharge?

  • CraigStrachan

    It’s Sweden that is asking for his extradition, not the US. If the US were ever to do so, it’s highly likely – given the famously lopsided extradition treaty agreed by Blair – that Assange would ultimately find himself in an American courtroom.

    The good news is that he would have significant and strong defences available to him against any charge involving “espionage”.

    • Mike

      Sweden has form on selling out just as they did when they got into bed with the Nazis. I wouldn’t trust their legal system !

      • Fergus Pickering

        The Nazis? That is rather long ago. And they had good company. Norway, France, Switzerland.. Everybody but us really.

  • Sean Lamb

    No one should underestimate the ability of the intelligence agencies to play havoc with someone’s sanity and their ability to make sensible choices when they turn their mind to it.

    • Liz

      They can’t even run an IT project so don’t get carried away.

  • you_kid

    Lovely piece – every society, no matter what stage of their development, will require its own Nelson Mandela in order to retain focus from time to time. Some get a Nelson M, others are stuck with a Julian A.

  • ScaaarBeeek

    Another frivolous report from another shallow writer from another NWO mouthpiece.

    Julian Assange has done very well. His deteriorating physical condition is a symbol of his valiance against the sinister forces running the world. He has uncovered some of the most disturbing corruption in the highest echelons of the most trusted public institutions.

    And all this writer can think of commenting on is Assange’s likely state of depression?, And without considering why?

    Then, this writer goes all big on us. He offers moral support if the Swedes render Mr. Assange to America on US government demand!

    What all great politically correct minds fail to see is this. If Julian Assange is rendered, vocal support will not stop the Americans. (Or the Swedes grovelling to them.) It will not mitigate the effect of the next 60 years in a three by eight cell.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Anyone that can *iss off Wicked Uncle Sam to this extent over a period of some four years gets my vote.

  • Mrs Josephine Hyde-Hartley

    It makes you wonder if he wonts a ” reset” button/plug..like the one our DWP is apparently pushing/pulling, as if to thwart proper democratic scrutiny.

  • http://batman-news.com The Commentator

    The real issue has nothing to do with Assange. The scandal behind this story is that the UK and most EU countries allow their citizens to be extradited to a country with one of the worst human rights records in the free world and that manages a 90% conviction rate because no one dares to plead not guilty, even when they are. Once again Russia shows us the way – no Russian can be extradited to stand trial in another country. Sounds like a vote winner to me.

    • Frank

      Sorry, Sweden has one of the worst human rights records in the free world???? Are you insane, or just extremely stupid?

      • rolandfleming

        Think The Commentator is referring to the USA.

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          Aka, the United States of Torture.

  • Liz

    He seems to have overlooked the fact that the biggest oppression across the globe is men’s of women.

    • ScaaarBeeek

      You’ve hit on why governments like feminists. One of the many stupid claims coming from feminists is that men are oppressing women, when in fact its governments who have historically oppressed both men and women. What feminists do is get governments off the hook They are shooting themselves and everybody with them in the foot.

      • Liz

        Historically men have oppressed women and currently too. And Julian Assange and his fanboys continue to do so.

      • Fergus Pickering

        Do not all muslim governments oppress women? Or do they not count as governments?

        • ScaaarBeeek

          I’m talking about WESTERN governments. The denigration of men is ongoing in the mainstream media. From the education to the legal system you are at a disadvantage if you are a man. Girls are encouraged into higher education but not boys. Fathers are routinely pulled away from their families, to not only their distress but their children’s as well. Politicians and media never cease telling us the same old lies about domestic violence, when the findings of credible researchers show that women are at least as violent in relationships. The definition of rape gets broader, so that eventually any sexual contact can be deemed to be rape.

          This is feminism, government based on feminist nonsense.

          Why? Because throughout history the people who have fought tyrants and oppressive regimes have been men.

          So the solution for modern government is to emasculate men.

          We are moving closer to a police state. Thousands of new laws have been enacted in recent decades, sentences expanded and police powers strengthened.

          Only men with a true male nature will fight this ugly development. Women WON’T. They are by nature more docile than men.

          Julian Assange is one who it fighting the New World Order we are sinking into.

          • Fergus Pickering

            If I were you I would go and punch the wife.Deeply satisfying.

            • ScaaarBeeek

              You are already sounding like a feminist when everything has gone over his or her head.

      • https://twitter.com/ronwordwelder Ron Wordwelder

        Yep, men v women, black vs white, Christian v Muslim v atheist…. the man loves divide-and-rule, his best weapon.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      “… is the oppression of women by men.” Was that what you were trying to say?

  • zeuszeus00
  • zeuszeus00

    I think that the behaviour of Sweden, the United Kingdom and Australia in the case of Julian Assange has been atrocious. I have long since given up on the United States of America which officially engages in torture and has lost the key for Manning’s cell. As I understand it, Julian Assange is a political asylee. Should not the UK provide him with “safe passage” to Ecuador? My wife is Swedish, so I know all about the nonsense which has been going on in Sweden.

    • McRobbie

      Amazing..so sweden should not pursue claims of sexual misconduct by assange for …why??? Of all the countries in the world sweden is the one I would place highest for having a trustworthy and honest legal system. Assange is a wimp and a coward and trying to avoid justice and that can only be for one reason..he believes he’s guilty.

      • zeuszeus00

        Listen carefully to what his lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, has to say here: http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/abcnewsbreakfast/video/201408/NBKm_AssangeLawyerONLINE_1908_1000k.mp4

        • MirthaTidville

          Lawyers are mouthpieces and say what they are paid to say. Assange I have no sympathy for, He is accused of serious sexual criminal offences and these allegations need to be tested in a court of law.What may or may not happen subsequently is of no concern, other than to those of lefty nutty views.

          Let us not forget that all Governments indulge in dirty tricks, its how the real world works. This toad, put peoples lives at risk, whilst pursuing his warped agenda.

          Wherever he rots I hope its for a long time

          • Gregory Mason

            He has not be charged.

            Innocent until proven guilty.

          • Inverted Meniscus

            Agreed. But not at the expense of UK taxpayers.

            • Jackthesmilingblack

              HMG put plods outside the embassy 24/7, year on year. Assange never asked for police protection. But we are dealing with a country that snatches back a board and lodging charge from the compensation of a wrongly convicted person. Punishing the innocent is a crime.

              • Inverted Meniscus

                Hopefully the loathsome little man will soon be extradited.

      • Bruce Lewis

        No, it’s because he assumes–for very good reason–that Sweden will cave to the American CIA.

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          Aka America`s “itch. But then so`s Britain.

      • brotherbaldrick

        Sweden is one of the most misandric countries on earth! Assange could rightly kiss his balls goodbye if he ever set foot in a Swedish court!

    • Andy

      Nonsense. Assange has had benefit of Law – his case has been heard by the Law Lords (Supreme Court).

      And the UK, along with most States, does not recognise the concept of ‘Diplomatic Asylum’, which is what Assange and Ecuador are engaged in, and for your information the concept is not supported by International Law nor by any treaty to which the United Kingdom is party.

      You will also find that the embassy of a state is not in law considered its territory (contrary to popular belief) but remains the territory of the host state, so in this case Assange has never set foot in Ecuador and has not left the United Kingdom. The fact that under treaties and UK Law the UK’s writ does not full run in the embassy makes no difference – Knightsbridge is not Ecuador. Furthermore Ecuador should never have granted Assange ‘asylum’ and should have requested that he leaves the embassy premises and surrenders to the UK authorities as soon as possible. Their actions are a clear breach of the territorial sovereignty of the United Kingdom.

      • zeuszeus00

        As I remember it, the UK Supreme Court Justices were not unanimous in their judgement. Lady Hale and Lord Mance would have allowed Julian Assange’s appeal. Further, the 5 to 2 judgement surprised many in the legal world. You should read this very carefully: http://www.headoflegal.com/2012/05/30/supreme-court-judgment-assange-v-swedish-judicial-authority/ Further, if what you say in your last two paragraphs is true, then be so good as to inform us all as to why no action has been taken. Why don’t you be honest and admit that this is a highly controversial case from many different points of view?!

        • Andy

          Whether Assange lost 7-0 or 5-2, he still lost his case. The appeal was dismissed. The subsequent changes in the Law have no effect on this case, because the law is applied as it then was, not as it is now.

          What I say in the last two paragraphs is exactly true. The concept of ‘Diplomatic Asylum’ has no basis in any treaty to which the UK is a part. It is known in Latin America under the Havana Convention on Political Asylum of 1928 and the Caracas Convention on Diplomatic Asylum of 1954, but the UK is not party to these conventions and nor are the majority of States. Why do you think silly Assange chose Ecuador ?

          To clarify the point there was, for example, a case in the early 1970s where an Egyptian Muslim man asked his English Christian wife to the Egyptian Embassy in London where he declared them divorced, as he can do under Sharia Law. According to you the husband was in Egypt rather than Mayfair, and so his actions were lawful under Egyptian Law. Wrong. The wife sued in the English Courts on the grounds that foreign embassies form part of the territory of the host State even though its jurisdiction within those premises is very limited. She won. And that is the view of the International Court of Justice.

          As to why no action has been taken then you must ask Ecuador as to why they have not respected the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom. The UK authorities have acted entirely correctly under International Law. Assange is going nowhere save to Wandsworth Prison and thence to Sweden.

          • zeuszeus00

            No, you are trying to mislead people into thinking that the Supreme Court judgement, not to mention the infamous “14 days” episode, was not controversial. It most certainly was. There were some who regarded the decision as a political decision rather than a legal judgement i,e, as an example of politicisation of the judiciary. There are also many who think that the decision to change the law was prompted by the present embarrassing impasse.

            If you are of the opinion that Ecuador has “not respected the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom” then why has no action been taken?

            Also, I predict that the new law (please remind us all what that says and how it would have applied to Julian Assange had it been in force at the time) will be applied retrospectively (in effect) to Julian Assange in recognition that his human rights have been violated by a combination of circumstances in which Sweden, the UK and Australia have shamelessly competed to comply with the wishes of the US, which last everyone knows is “secretly” preparing to charge Julian Assange following current Grand Jury proceedings. I also predict that Assange will win his current appeal in Sweden against a recent decision by a lower court not to drop the case. The Swedish prosecutor is coming under increasing pressure to drop her case and the reputation of Sweden around the world is being sullied to an intolerable degree. I have just returned from Sweden, so I know of the concerns in Sweden regarding lack of due process in this highly important case. (By the way, I think the law was changed in the UK because of widespread concerns at the highest levels of the judiciary in the UK and Europe that the reputation of the UK was being damaged by this extraordinary case, and that a repeat of this very serious farrago must never happen again i.e. that nobody in future can be extradited from one EU country to another just for questioning in the absence of a formal charge. Assange has crucially never been charged with any crime in the UK or Sweden.)

            So, in summary, Assange will not be going to Wandsworth Prison or to Sweden as you appear to wish.

            • Andy

              I’m not misleading anyone. Actually the one doing the misleading is you. The point considered by the Supreme Court was the exact meaning of the term ‘Judicial Authority’. In Assage’s case the Warrant had been issued by the Swedish Prosecuting Authority. Their Lordship, by a majority of 5-2, deemed that they did constitute a ‘Judicial Authority’ within the meaning of the Act and accepted practise. It is now a matter for Parliament to clarify what is meant by the term, but one notes that Parliament has not acted.

              As to the actions of Ecuador they have not respected their hosts, the United Kingdom. By treaty etc the UK is limited in what actions it can take. It could break off diplomatic relations with Ecuador and require all personnel to leave within a set period. They would enjoy safe passage: Assange would not and could be arrested. The UK has been very reasonable and has chosen not to escalate the matter, but it is incumbent on the government of Ecuador to resolve this matter in the only way it can be resolved – by Assage surrendering himself to the Metropolitan Police.

              What is or is not happening in Sweden is irrelevant. At the moment the EAW is valid and Assange should be in Wandsworth Prison before being sent to Sweden. And I hope when he leaves our shores he is never allowed to return. He is more trouble than he’s worth.

              • Bruce Lewis

                Are you in the employ of the American CIA?

                • SiMoebus

                  No, they are only a person who is looking at the issue rationally.

            • Inverted Meniscus

              Then what is the little arsehole doing in the Ecuadorian Embassy?

          • Bruce Lewis

            even though its jurisdiction within those premises is very limited.

            Your qualification answers the question as to why the British police have done nothing–and will do nothing, but allow Assange to continue his stay in the Ecuadorian embassy.

  • Curnonsky

    Assange would be greatly improved by a little waterboarding – especially since he is not fond of bathing, apparently.

    • Andy

      *Sends Bar of Soap*

    • you_kid

      Make it an official discipline with gold medals n’all the next time you host the Olympics, lad – you know, to send the right message, that knid of thing.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Could water boarding be made into a game show? “Who can hold out the longest?”

  • GraveDave

    The moderator doesn’t seem to like me very much. I wonder if it was because I dare mention

    s e x

    o f f e n c e s

    and government ministers in the same breath .

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      They aren’t too keep on whore, either. Although this word must occur in the Holy Bible many, many times. So don’t use the nickname for “Richard”.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      They aren’t too keep on whore, either. Although this word must occur in the Holy Bible many, many times. So don’t use the nickname for “Richard”.
      My comment about *ick Cheney outing a CIA asset also hit the cutting room floor. State controlled MSM just don’t come close.

    • MirthaTidville

      They also don`t like anyone knocking Dave either

  • Mike Power

    It comes down to comparing him with Noel Edmunds and even providing a photo, presumably for those Speccie readers who don’t have a clue who Edmunds is. Good grief, is this The Daily Mail or The Sun? How pathetic.

    • HookesLaw

      Yes my thoughts too. And of course we should lay on a red carpet to the aircraft theyt drag him to.

    • Newcombe

      And his hair looks nothing like Noel Edmunds’.

      • https://twitter.com/ronwordwelder Ron Wordwelder

        Indeed, and it looks the same as when he first became known

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here