July 3rd, 2014

Dugher and Dougie Rearrange Deckchairs

Superficially it looks like Michael Dugher has been elbowed out to some degree as the party rearranges the deckchairs this afternoon. Wee Dougie has three brand new campaign deputies to work under him as chair of election strategy: Gloria De Piero will work with broadcasters, Jon Ashworth with candidates and Toby Perkins with the Parliamentary Labour Party. They all receive warm words from their new boss:

“Gloria, Toby, and Jonathan have all contributed significantly to our work in recent months and I’m pleased to now formalise their places within Labour’s election team. I’m delighted to appoint them to key roles as Labour gears up to fight the next General Election.”

A footnote to Labour’s announcement is that Dugher “will continue to oversee communications and will lead negotiations for Ed Miliband on the TV Leaders’ Debates”. And Dougie has no kind words to say about him either. Ouch…

Alternative Kremlinology is that Gloria, Toby and Jonathan are actually Dugher’s allies and that they will act as a buffer between him and Wee Dougie – given they are barely on civil terms. Dougie, according to this analysis, is now encircled by deputies who are loyal to Dugher. And the band plays on…


56 Comments

  1. 1
    Kulgan of Crydee says:

    Interesting that Glorio De Piero, Jon Ashworth & Toby Perkins are all East Midlands MPs. Must be because we are the best place in the country. ;o)

    Like

    • 7
      Andy Murray says:

      this blog is even shitter than I am

      Like

      • 12
        Mark Oaten (LibDem) says:

        Andy !

        Like

      • 18
        Alan Mullet says:

        I have an IQ of 130 but I’ve never heard of any of these people.

        Like

        • 38
          gildedtumbril says:

          I have an IQ of 160 but I am graciously modest. I have never heard of these creatures either. The sooner I am appraised of the scuttling of the ship the better.

          Like

          • Alas, Poor Albion says:

            An IQ of 160 oughta know the differenced between ‘appraised’ and ‘apprised’.

            Liked by 1 person

          • gildedtumbril says:

            I thank you for the correction. Mea culpa, my keyboard is possessed of a djinn. It causes me much trouble. You may have similar trouble with all these camel jockeys about.

            Like

          • gildedtumbril says:

            I also forgot to mention, a high IQ is no guarantee of intelligence. I am only semi-literate, at best.

            Like

          • RWG says:

            “..Gloria De Piero will work with broadcasters..”

            Shouldn’t that be “work on”, from the waist down?

            She didn’t get where she is today via intelligence, did she?

            Like

    • 9
      Hoo Flung Dung says:

      I always thought Gloria was in the election team

      Like

      • 13
        Anonymous is a semi-literate moron says:

        Presumably, that useless, vacant, hypocritical waste of space whose husband likes big, black, cocks doesn’t figure anywhere in all this? Hang on, though. Isn’t she supposed to be “Deputy PM?”

        Like

      • 19
        not enough said says:

        missing BBC body in the team. Are they broadcasters who need to be persuaded.

        Like

  2. 2
    Chuka ( you can call me Harrison ) Urmunneyaround says:

    ” I was only 24 owls from Tulsa “

    Liked by 1 person

  3. 3
    McPoison says:

    Where do I fit in ?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. 4
    England is becumin a ferd world cess-pit innit says:

    I will cease to consider myself English when next May, the Labour parteh’s client state propel this Marxist rat into No10.

    Professional benefits scroungers, public sector malingerers/zombies, immigrants/postal vote fraudsters, celts….these unstoppable hordes will condemn England to inevitable economic collapse.

    Like

    • 8
      Mad, Bad & Dangerous Gordon McRuin ( Member in absentia ) says:

      Who said history doesn’t repeat itself ?

      Like

      • 11
        England is becumin a ferd world cess-pit innit says:

        Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it

        The point is the vermin wot votes Labour have no comprehension of where the money to pay them comes from, or even that it has to be earned somehow

        Like

    • 14
      Anonymous is a semi-literate moron says:

      I think you’ll find it’s a PC offence to describe oneself as “English.” Careful, now!

      Liked by 1 person

  5. 5
    Kulgan of Crydee says:

    Just seen the story on Chuka Umuuna having pronunciation problems. A good job the rearrangement didn’t include a Worcester MP. ( http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2679274/Is-Labour-wooing-Wichita-Woman-Frontbencher-Chuka-Umunna-struggles-pronounce-Worcester-radio-gaffe.html )

    Like

    • 10
      John Bellingham says:

      If you are so clever, just try pronouncing Abakaliki, Abeokuta, Ogaminana, Nsukka
      Ogbomoso, Umuahia or Streatham Ice Arena.

      Like

  6. 6
    GF says:

    Liked by 1 person

  7. 15
    Sunday Sport says:

    Like

  8. 16
    Bergy Bits says:

    Actually Dougie rearranges the deck chairs while Dugher nudges the iceberg a little further to the left.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. 17

    @BW: Got your reply several threads back.

    Radical thought for you: What if some of the facts you (and many other folk) know are wrong ?

    I referred to dis-information being generally indicative of hostile intent.

    In political warfare, disinformation is placed either through or by journalists – depending on who the journalist is actually working for. That distinguishes grey from black propaganda. For propaganda to work it needs to come from a source perceived as authoritative and be perhaps credible.

    The criteria for credibility can be shifted through manipulation of public perception. Conspiracy theories are very bald exponents of that.

    Plenty of examples of that in the press, and indeed (if you read Havel…) books.

    Look again more carefully at this – and you may get what I mean.

    (Figure out the lighthouse in context…)

    Bet you still haven’t figured out the reasoning which proves beyond any reasonable doubt guilt on two counts above whilst plausible deniability remains.

    Some of the p’do stuff is very much in this category: Better to convict for that : Bright light obscures what is really going on.

    Vote UKIP :-D

    Like

    • 27

      Here is one I wrote last week and never sent. Instead I have tried talking to a number of people about it. The results do depend on one’s view of early 20th century history. Which in turn goes back to 19th century history. Ad infinitum. Curiously few have studied all these periods. So I will now post it anyway.

      When I was young, there was a rampant fashion for my peers to put posters of Che Guevara up in their bedrooms. I never did so and thus, according to the folk wisdom, I have no heart.

      In many ways, I have rowed against the similar romantic tide that swept T E Lawrence into the stuff of legend. Not meaning to insult his bravery or intelligence, and eschewing all the irrelevant gossip and the 1962 film, I am confining my judgement to whether, or not, he did the best for Britain. I have to conclude that, on balance, he did not.

      One left-leaning person had the admirably brutal honesty to admit to me that the reason she had a picture of Che up on her wall in her youth was that he was handsome!

      To be fair, he admitted that he had been over-estimated himself by the press.

      Your take on him?

      Vote UKIP :-D

      Like

    • 28

      To clarify, my question is about Lawrence and not Che. I inserted the fourth paragraph as a late addition but failed to make the following one mention Lawrence.

      Unchanged though is:
      Vote UKIP :-D

      Like

      • 31

        Lawrence was a fine intel officer and did the empire good service. Kept R’ussia out of ME and ME supplying us oil.

        If you are speaking to E’uropean’s you may be getting a distorted view : Fuck them. :-)

        Need to understand that competition over ME and !ndia in particular along the M’uslim axis. That was principally between Britain / G’ermany-Austr!a (Habsburgs…) / Russ!a for the old Ottoman Empire / territory.

        It has been intense and is still not resolved.

        This in large part is precisely what WWI was all about – even though R’ussia likely did not realize quite what would emerge from their sponsored actions in S’arajevo. The backdraft of there own revolution perhaps deserving of schadenfreud.

        You may want to look closer at the lighthouse also + check the source on B’ritish views back then – particularly the swing after the assassination of M’ayo.

        Lawrence did good – kept R’ussia out. Now R’ussia is trying to advance on secular / nationalist terms, we are swinging to pan-Islamism. A’fghanistan-S’oviet war shows which wins there.

        May want to have a look at the Vienna-Bosn!a axis as well. TWRA as one pointer, but note that Abduh studied there also ;-)

        You may want to note that R’ussia is making good inroads into !ndia once again through the new M’odi government. Would adjust the S’atnav slightly as the new Caliph perhaps not so supportive of that.

        C’hina could be in for a bit of a boxing match as well if it continues to ban fasting.

        Figure the lighthouse ;-)

        Vote UKIP :-D

        Like

        • 37

          Actually no. I was only speaking with English who are here in good numbers now, both visiting, owning property and even resident.

          The first thing to establish is whether people approved of Empire or not. I do most strongly. several generations of my family on both sides were stationed in Asia and Africa. A grandparent was a vet retained by a Maharaja. I can provide much evidence that can attest to impeccable behaviour, contrary to how people are brainwashed nowadays to think we were all bad. You are clearly on the same side of that argument as I am, so we can make good progress without huge impediment.

          At this point, one has to remember that the US hated our Empire and railroaded us into dismantling it. So fuck them too! :-)

          Now one’s view of Lawrence will be dictated by how one makes the judgement. I was careful to confine it to doing the best for Britain. Now that can be read in hindsight optimiser mode (American pragmatics – wrong ;-) ), in the context of the day (more of a deontological approach) or simply in terms of HM Government viewpoint (virtue ethics – duty was very prevalent with our forebears in morality). The state was always right – which we now know was not always the case.

          Given that the military was responsible for underpinning the civilian administrators and they themselves were much more duty based in approach then (I actually largely believe that despite some exceptions), then one can move on to examine Lawrence more critically.

          Apart from what I have said above, he was undoubtedly highly egotistical. He did things off his own bat and was difficult to control and even contact at times. OK, it wasn’t the easiest of places for communications then.

          On what basis was every “sandhill” owned by someone, as he held? It does not work in the same way as our concepts. We are back with something similar to the Roma issue. Not to argue (for now), just to question.

          One can neither dismiss the fact that he was idolised by the British press uncritically. Think Tony Blair – plus.

          It is important to get this ground clear before making judgement IMO.

          Your Russian analysis has interested me and I am getting there on it. You are pushing at a semi-open door for me (and some others incidentally). But you will understand that I cannot accept anything without giving it some due thought. And it does not happen overnight.

          Will revert on lighthouse.

          Like

          • Lawrence was implementing B’ritish F’oreign O’ffice policy at the time, and did so successfully.

            Bending the Arab Revolt to be in line with British interests was the primary aim.

            Bla!r was less successful as he failed to keep the Arab’s on side – apparently – particularly in Syr!a. His press is broadly negative for a reason – but look beyond.

            The US have caught some flak, but this period was before they started intervening noticeably in UK / European affairs. That came more at the end of WWI with W’ilson’s declaration, and thereafter.

            UK Empire was the envy of the world – still is – and had many enemies. Hatred sourced more from Europe, US was envy, R’ussia was more ambivalent.

            However – the old Ottoman territory remains a hotly contested area for all concerned.

            Perhaps worth retracting the US sentiment, or clarifying your historic positioning and reasoning of it. :-)

            (The two primary sources of anti-Amer!can sentiment are from Europe (Pan-Europa) and R’ussia. Particularly from Europe as the US did break up quite rightly the Habsburg shambles. Best not to help them by spreading their negative propaganda…)

            My sentiment is directly aimed at those in Europe who are right now trying to recreate the system which was acting to subvert UK interests at the time of Lawrence, and which he successfully disrupted. May be some blow back in V’ienna soon with luck… ISIS ;-)

            As far as F’oreign O’ffice policy back then is concerned, it was the right policy at the time, and I do not think there were any better alternatives either.

            The personality etc. of Lawrence is completely irrelevant.

            In matters of F’oreign P’olicy the only thing that matters are: Interests.

            R’ussia isn’t my analysis: Read up on the history. I did not bring it out in the last ‘radical history’ vid because that was focussed on core O’ttoman.

            (Hence part II)

            I would describe R’ussia’s involvement in all this as being like a hidden snake: It is clearly in the record, and it’s impact has been massive, but it is not widely taught or commonly known.

            On the R’oma topic: They are on the wrong side of history, but a thought occurred to me that their !ndian roots perhaps have worked against them more than many realize also.

            Their fortunes may be about to change now as they could be an excellent spear against several problem foes. Well – their M’uslim branch at least, if they hear the call of the Caliph.

            Think lighthouse.

            Vote UKIP :-D

            Like

          • Churchill, whom I unashamedly admire, despite his clear mistakes (humans do make them) in early life, said:


            History is going to be kind to me. I am going to write it.

            The eternal problem with reading history is whose does one chose?

            I do read lots of it but there is always the difficulty that it is part of a continuum which stretches for ever. A mere lifetime is just not long enough to do the subject justice. ;-)

            BTW When I say fuck the Yanks, I am voicing my thoughts, not others. I also did say fuck the English, as you may have seen by now. I spare no one who is working against decency and the main course of the tradition which is based upon individual responsibility. I dare venture that you will think the same.

            Vote UKIP :-D

            Like

      • 33

        Should also have stated that his actions led directly to the removal of the Caliphate of Abdülmecid II, in Turkey.

        The bringing to power of Atatürk through the fog of PC is regarded as ‘controversial’ but the conversion of a pan-Islamic middle east to a nationalist one allowed the borders to be redrawn and governments set up which were ultimately to the UK’s advantage. In particular it protected interests in !ndia and beyond.

        However, the UK mis-judged the rise of nationalism in Europe in the 1930′s and how that would align interests with the ME, and also how secular nationalist governments would be easier prey for R’ussia, especially after Stalin had installed full communism and established fully the USSR.

        That error cost us the empire, and WWII happened. The cycle though seems to be completing now. Big question: If a new caliphate is established, and can co-exist peacefully with !srael (likely) then how long until we see the Ottoman’s return to compete properly against the neo-Habsburgs ?

        If Europe doesn’t change course sharply we may find out quite soon.

        Vote UKIP :-D

        Like

        • 39

          Load more big items here but have always regarded Atatürk as a fantastic happening for the west and one which we have only been too keen to piss away the benefit of through sheer ignorance coupled with blinded arrogance.

          Talking here of English, German-speaking peoples and French, I am afraid to say. Fuck them all too!

          What a fantastic bulwark against fundamentalist Islam hotheads – until the Labour administration welcomed the latter in with open arms. Fuck them as well!

          By the way, you will see that I also cursed the Great Satan over what they pushed us into. What I did not mention was that they have simply created Empire by rent seeking and other similar means. So hypocrites too. (I love them as people though.)

          Other matters for later.

          Like

          • The French are fine (check Ottoman History) – It is the Habsburg / some in V’enice perhaps to be regarded with caution right now.

            The Atatürk rising was good for the West at the time, but for M’uslim’s it was a disaster. They need and believe in Unity.

            The impact to them could be measured in our terms by removal of the UK Monarchy overnight. That would be catastrophic on many levels, and is not something we would want.

            Removal of that system directly caused human rights to vanish overnight in much of the M’uslim world (Caliph is charged with maintaining those rights – State leaders were not) and opened the M’uslim countries to Communist subversion etc. Germany was close with !ran – aligned in part on nationalist lines – in WWII. Would not have happened if the Caliphate was still running.

            At the time though it was policy because there was a perception that pan-Islamism was not controllable and threatened B’ritish rule in !ndia. (Even though mainly H’indu’s took part in the revolt there. Political reality at apparent odds with actual reality.)

            The real problem then was G’erman subversion of pan-Islam against B’ritish interests.

            Pan-Islamism is fine provided you are on good terms with the Caliphs. That is the direction we are heading now: UK-USA – against R’ussia and it would appear E’urope.

            Watch the lighthouse.

            Vote UKIP :-D

            Like

          • Napoleon was a bloody pest! He was not fine! No way Jose! :-)

            I hate it when English people fête the miserable thief. Fucking traitors they are. There is a causal chain running from him, via Balta Liman, to both the World Wars and the hyper-inflation in Germany in-between set off… well I am not going Godwin here. :-)

            However the Germans mishandled the Muslim issue for our benefit, Blair, Straw and co beat them into the ground in scale. And Brown caused as much financial damage as they did and he was supposed to be batting for us FFS!

            Dinner beckons. I must take this lighthouse off the table… ;-)

            Vote UKIP :-D

            Like

    • 34

      What you see / experience in court rooms has to be accepted as fact, and you know when facts are a fraud or actually just outright lies. I don’t question that stuff.

      The adjustment of your perception you outline above is precisely an objective of political warfare. In fact it is a bona fide psyop.

      The courts are generally immune from this – but there are clear instances of miscarriage you will be aware of – but maybe not aware of why the mis-carriage occurred. Targeting folk individually, or collectively to undermine their faith in the system are bona fide tactics.

      The ‘independent’ bodies: Agreed. Gov bodies or NGO’s are sources of all shades of propaganda, the perception at present is they are mainly grey or black – but why ? There is a certain amount of infiltration by foreign powers for example – so some of that perception is perhaps home grown to reduce the impact of hostile propaganda that is sourcing from abroad.

      See the green lobby stuff as case in point.

      Back to L-B and the p’do mob: Just need to be careful with that only because jumping to the wrong conclusions either will result in a miscarriage, or distract from something much more important.

      Not being an eyewitness to events myself, knowing anyone involved, seeing anything other than what has been posted online or in MSM (regarded as partially hostile) it is impossible for me to conclude anything other than L-B is currently innocent, and until convicted that has to remain the case.

      His silence is working against him at present but only because that is damaging PR for him and perhaps some others who are calling for him to speak.

      Saying that – he has been up to something – but what precisely is unclear. If he has for example undermined some of the objectives of the pan-Europa mob (see Warburg / C’ommission History) then they for sure would be after him.

      Their style is to destroy reputation and legacy completely, and they would want folk to consider him a guilty p’do first as that serves their purpose irrespective of conviction. There are others who would also encourage that manipulation.

      Back to that vid of mine: It is very educational on this.

      Notice that it is a propaganda about propaganda. When you have figured the lighthouse out, the logic getting to the point I mentioned about B’lair et al., and have a careful look at the two ‘spy vs spy’ slides – you should get it,.

      If you accept it or not, that is a different matter.

      Vote UKIP :-D XXX ♥

      Like

    • 43
      Gullible says:

      I do hope this realisation has not come late in life, EYBW.
      Since the collapse of the Soviet Union UK governments have become more authoritarian. It is now the aim of both Lbour and Conservative Parties to restrict civil liberties (the do nothing wrong and you have nothing to fear approach) and to aim for a corporate society-as it was in the USSR. and as you describe.

      Our only rights will be confined to the consumer protection laws.

      Like

  10. 32
    Graham says:

    Arseholes rearranging deckchairs on SS MiliTitanic and Popeye Balls at the helm. Fucking joke. Abandon ship !!

    Like

  11. 40
    Bonar Law says:

    Alexander is chairman of election strategy, Guido, not “chair”, which is politically correct bunkum.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. 49

    They are still on a sinking ship though…

    Like

  13. 50
    Common says:

    Wee Dougie is just there to make Ed look statesmanlike. Whither the Dennis Healeys and Michael Feet of yesteryear who exuded a blithering Gravitas?

    Like

  14. 55
    The Critic says:

    Guido, the band ain’t playing on. The fucking ship sank the minute Captain Ed steered it into the pre-distribution/one nation statecraft iceberg.

    No point in surrounding him with a new team as they are still shovelling the same shit. Ed does not get this . He thinks we are too thick to understand,so just vote for him and he will sort Britain out. Of course, turning to Kinnock for advice was a fine move – after all look at his track record of election winning……….

    The problem with Ed and the rest is that they only have political solutions to problems. The country requires practical answers. No member of the political classes in the UK has the will or ability to find and implement what could be politically unacceptable solutions.

    So the machine traps us in an eternal cycle of image over substance. All expensively subsidised.

    Voting for the shiniest one ain’t working and judging by diminishing turnouts the voters are beginning to understand this.

    Like


Seen Elsewhere

BBC: It Was Guido Wot Won It | MediaGuido
Nick Robinson’s Britain First Selfie | Metro
Dyson: Leave German Dominated EU, Join EFTA |
How UKIP Won Rochester | Seb Payne
Labour’s Islington Problem | Harry Phibbs
Ed Lost More Than a By-Election | Labour Uncut
Labour the Biggest Losers in Rochester | Speccie
Thornberry a Gift to Farage | Nick Wood
Is Left Finally Turning Against EU? | Dan Hannan
Labour Votes Going Green | Guardian
UKIP Winning Class War | Tim Stanley


Find out more about PLMR AD-MS


Ralph Miliband on the English…

“The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world.”



Left on Left says:

The lefties are attacking because the panellist is a millionaire and lives in a London home worth upwards of two million. Someone had best tell them he’s called Ed Miliband.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,599 other followers