From: fedora@fea.st   
      
   On Wed, 4 Feb 2026 12:22:20 -0800, Dude  wrote:   
      
   >On 2/4/2026 11:21 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >> On Wed, 4 Feb 2026 10:15:29 -0800, Dude  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 2/4/2026 7:19 AM, Julian wrote:   
   >>>> Truth and Reconciliation is Needed   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Now that Peter Mandelson’s crimes have become undeniable the British   
   >>>> right-wing press (with the noble and notable exception of Guido Fawkes)   
   >>>> are kicking into their ‘Operation London Bridge’ Jimmy Savile   
   >>>> revelations mode. We will be told by hundreds of hacks that they ‘always   
   >>>> knew’ about Mandelson (why didn’t you write about him, then?) Fiat 500   
   >>>> rent-a-grinch women will watch spooky true crime docs about Mandelson   
   >>>> and pretend they never liked him when, in fact, they didn’t know who he   
   >>>> was. Mandelson will have his royal palace taken away like Prince Andrew   
   >>>> and then get pardoned by an ‘impressive’ judge who will never be named   
   >>>> or criticised in any of the papers.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The reality is, everyone over the mental age of 12 knew, the moment it   
   >>>> was confirmed Mandelson retained contact with Epstein in 2011, that he   
   >>>> was a culprit.   
   >>>>   
   >>> Finally something interesting to read!   
   >>>   
   >>> As a military brat, we lived in East Anglia for three years, so I'm   
   >>> always interested in news from Great Britain. Thanks for bringing this   
   >>> to our attention.   
   >>>   
   >>> It looks like Peter Mandelson is accused of passing on market-sensitive   
   >>> information that was of clear financial interest to Jeffrey Epstein in   
   >>> the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.   
   >>>   
   >>> Then, there was that book compiled for Epstein’s 50th birthday in 2003.   
   >>> Mandelson had penned a handwritten note describing Epstein as “my best   
   >>> pal.” Apparently, he was also pictured in a bathrobe sitting with   
   >>> Epstein, talking.   
   >>>   
   >>> You just can't make this stuff up!   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It is not the job of Prime Ministers, intelligence > agencies and   
   >>> journalists to let judges do their thinking for them,   
   >>   
   >> So ignore judges?  Nah, that dog won't hunt.   
   >>   
   >You be the judge. Was he guilty of sitting in a bathrobe talking to Epstein?   
      
   It might be that the point is that does not prove he broke any law.   
   Have you ever sat in a bathrobe and talked to somebody?   
      
   >>> it is   
   >>>> their job to exercise something called ‘discretion’ or ‘Intelligence’   
   >>>> where you reason likely conclusions from available evidence. One use of   
   >>>> ‘intelligence’ would be to deduce appointing a man with an existing   
   >>>> misconduct record, who is now known to be friends with a foreign spy to   
   >>>> a sensitive diplomatic role is a bad idea. Barely a single Westminster   
   >>>> journalist even thought it merited comment. That would make one a   
   >>>> “crank.” Let’s talk about headphones on the tube.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Of course, many of you will be genuinely angry about Mandelson’s crimes.   
   >>>> But you know, deep down, you have no way of avenging yourself upon him.   
   >>>> Last year, many people were talking about a grooming gang inquiry. It   
   >>>> did not take a tripos mind to see the problem. The issue of the grooming   
   >>>> gangs inculpated so many people, and required scrutinising so many   
   >>>> different aspects of law, that to really stage an ‘inquiry’ it would   
   >>>> mean putting the entire British government on trial. And to do that, you   
   >>>> need a new government first. Not just a new name you put a tick next to   
   >>>> at the election. New judges. New civil servants. New police inspectors.   
   >>>> Similarly, with Mandelson, you think about the issue for more than five   
   >>>> minutes and it becomes apparent multiple layers of the state must’ve   
   >>>> consciously abetted his behaviour. Gordon Brown could have known   
   >>>> Mandelson knew Epstein in 2008 and he would’ve certainly known about his   
   >>>> past record of sleaze.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> SIS would’ve almost certainly been informed by foreign intelligence   
   >>>> services about Mandelson’s behaviour in 2024 at the absolute latest when   
   >>>> he was vetted for the diplomatic role. Indeed, one of the most   
   >>>> disappointing things about the media coverage thusfar is how nobody is   
   >>>> holding SIS responsible. Preventing an easily compromised individual   
   >>>> with a track record of corruption from getting access to official   
   >>>> documents and selling them to a foreign intelligence agent is minimal   
   >>>> baseline competence for a public intelligence organisation. That SIS   
   >>>> were not monitoring Mandelson in 2006 is a failure, that they didn’t   
   >>>> prevent his appointment as ambassador in 2025 is a disgrace. I seriously   
   >>>> hope the occasional fawning over this obsolete body, which routinely   
   >>>> attempts to meddle in democratic politics, from the Right will be tested   
   >>>> by this scandal.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> What makes the mainstream reaction so enraging, to those of you who   
   >>>> think, is that they describe Mandelson as a lone individual who did   
   >>>> something wrong. Treating Mandelson’s corruption as the actions of one   
   >>>> man, rather than the logical consequence of the New Labour machine, is   
   >>>> like if the South African press pretended Wouter Basson was just ‘a bad   
   >>>> scientist’ who happened to be working on chemical weapons, ignoring that   
   >>>> he was only able to do this because of laws and cultural norms inherent   
   >>>> in the society in which he lived. This required people to come to see   
   >>>> this period not as a natural extension of this society’s history but as   
   >>>> a ‘regime’, distinct and illegitimate from its predecessors and the new   
   >>>> order. Every real moment of lasting political change relies upon these   
   >>>> events, in which it is clearly and loudly declared by the voice of   
   >>>> progressive society that the old ways are unacceptable and a line is   
   >>>> drawn under the past. The officials responsible for the Marian   
   >>>> persecutions were punished in their turn. After the Glorious Revolution,   
   >>>> the Jacobites were outlawed. There is never going to be any permanent   
   >>>> victory for ‘the Right’ and Basically Fine future unless this happens in   
   >>>> Britain. We must draw a line under the whole New Labour period and I   
   >>>> shall explain how this is reasonably achievable in a court of law.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The crimes of Mandelson, the perjury of Parliament which led to Iraq,   
   >>>> the grooming gang scandal and systematic harassment of civil society are   
   >>>> not isolated crimes perpetrated by individuals but the actions of a   
   >>>> regime deriving from collective conspiracy. Some individuals might not   
   >>>> have benefited, or participated, in the crimes of others but the   
   >>>> testimony of Nuremberg shows this is no defence. They deliberately   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)