For once Dan Wootton got it right in condemning ‘Randy Andy’ and ‘Farting Fergie’ as “deluded… self-centred… gauche… disgraced public figures”
Yesterday afternoon in the MailOnline, for once, the usually “deeply unpleasant” Dan Wootton actually had his finger on the pulse.
In an opinion piece titled: “If Fergie’s fairy-tale romance with Andrew endures it’s because they are two of the most deluded and self-centred individuals on the planet (with apologies to Meghan),” Wootton raged of deluded deviant Prince Andrew and his loopy live-in ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York: “You are both disgraced public figures who have ended up back in each other’s lives by necessity and little else.”
Continuing and though somewhat generously describing ‘Farting Fergie’ as “more naïve than nasty; more silly than snide,” Wootton concluded:
“If Fergie REALLY loves Prince Andrew, she only has two choices.
“Insist he flies to New York immediately and cooperates with the FBI, come what may.”
“Or pack him off to a tiny cottage where he costs the Royal Family and taxpayers nothing and where he can quietly conduct charity work out of the public gaze without embarrassing his poor mother further.”
“But, once again, this gauche pair will put maintaining their own extravagant lifestyles ahead of anything else. And live unhappily ever after in disgrace.”
Pictured top – Sarah, Duchess of York looking like a fool for a segment on her joke of a YouTube channel, ‘Fergie & Friends’ (left) and her equally cringeworthy ex-husband Prince Andrew mocked up as Jimmy Savile (right).
I’m sorry, Fergie, your relationship with disgraced Prince Andrew is a “fairytale” in the same way Meghan Markle is a selfless soul who puts others first and always tells the truth. My new @MailOnline column on the latest cringeworthy royal TV tell-all. https://t.co/7CbyriNdaQ
Sharing his ‘MailOnline’ article on Twitter, Dan Wootton declared: “I’m sorry, Fergie, your relationship with disgraced Prince Andrew is a ‘fairytale’ in the same way Meghan Markle is a selfless soul who puts others first and always tells the truth.”Sarah, Duchess of York pictured with the since incarcerated Ghislaine Maxwell at an opening party at Asprey in 2003. It remains unknown as to whether ‘Fergie’ ever repaid a loan from the mucky madam’s now croaked sidekick and lover Jeffrey Epstein.The Queen’s most embarrassing son and his wacky wastrel ex-wife took their children with them when they went to stay on Peter Nygård’s Caribbean island in 2000. Nygård has since been charged with multiple sexual offences against at least 57 individuals in both the United States of America and Canada and accused by two of his own sons of “directing a known sex worker to rape them.”The royal rotters have also been known to associate with other since convicted sex offenders – amongst them (from left to right) disgraced television Stuart Hall, disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein and disgraced financier Harvey Weinstein.On Thursday 20th August 1992, the ‘Daily Mirror’ shared what they called “the pictures they didn’t want you to see.” In them, a topless Duchess of York was shown having her toes sucked in the South of France by a Texan millionaire named John Bryan. Of the incident, the ‘Mirror’ later reported: “Royal writer Richard Kay claimed in the ‘Daily Mail’ that he received a message via pager from Princess Diana the night before the photos hit the newspaper stands. Diana’s message was simple: ‘The redhead’s in trouble.’”Fergie’s’ non-sweating ex-husband Prince Andrew was widely mocked after claiming to distinctly remember a visit to Pizza Express in Woking on the day he allegedly had sex with the then teenage Virginia Roberts, now Giuffre, in 2001. During his juggernaut crashworthy interview with Emily Maitlis in November 2019, he remarked: “I was with the children and I’d taken Beatrice to a Pizza Express in Woking for a party at I suppose four or five in the afternoon. And then because the duchess [Sarah Ferguson] was away, we have a simple rule in the family that when one is away the other is there.” Whether he actually attended has since been disputed and whether he actually consumed pizza remains still unknown.
Nikolay Kalinin joins those condemning Boris Johnson’s decision to waste £200 million on a boat Britain didn’t ask for (or need)
Remember when Eurosceptics pledged Brexit would enable the government to give £350 million per week ($496 million, €406 million or درهم1.8 billion per week) to the NHS? Well, now we finally know where that money is actually going as the government has officially decided to waste some of it commissioning a vanity ship they claim will showcase the “best of British.”
Yet, one cannot ignore that this project seems so pointless and unnecessarily expensive, a fact that has been called out by figures in Parliament. When asked about the diplomatic benefits of “recommissioning HM Yacht Britannia” by Conservative MP for Romford, Andrew Rosindell, President for COP26, Alok Sharma, admitted: “The royal yacht was used on just 37 occasions for… signing trade deals during 1989 – 1997. There’s no evidence that the yacht made a difference to the trade deals secured in these years and this level of use would not represent a good return on investment.”
The Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Bridget Phillipson, also seemed to agree, stating: “We want to see public money used for targeted investment in a green economic recovery, resources for our NHS, and supporting families to succeed.”
She added that if the government does go ahead with the plan to build the yacht: “We’d want to see it built in Britain, supporting jobs and skills in shipyards here, and with a real focus on value for money at every stage.”
What we are seeing here once again is the government misappropriating taxpayers’ money in order to reinforce the fake vision of muscular unionism. The government is trying to reinforce a vision of a united Britain and ‘Britishness’ not through progressive deeds that reflect ‘British values,’ but through objects such as yachts named after recognisable things.
It’s not only the costly yacht however that reflects the idea that ‘muscular unionism’ is so empty, as some time ago an autonomous company launched trials of a self-driving bus in Cambridge, which was draped in the Union Jack.
Comedian Jonathan Pie reacted to the news by calling the bus “the perfect visual metaphor for a country in the grips of such inept and directionless leadership,” while Lord Andrew Adonis mockingly wrote that it “looks like a Brexit bus.”
While I like flags as much as the next man, the fact that ‘BoJo’ seems hellbent on putting them up everywhere demonstrates that his government has nothing much to offer. If Johnson really wants to unite the people of his country, he should work on fixing the rift between his government and Scotland and solve the problems Northern Ireland is facing as a result of Brexit.
The Queen’s love of the Royal Yacht Britannia was never a secret, but even she’s said to believe the decision to order a replacement to be quite beyond unrequired. Meanwhile, the most enthusiastic tin banger for the expensive tub has been Christopher Hope of ‘The Telegraph.’ He has run the paper’s campaign for the vessel since September 2016 and written three dozen articles in support of what he believes to be “putting right [the] historical wrong” of not having a royal yacht.
More money goes down the drain in the Madeleine McCann case on top of the £13.5 million of British taxpayer wonga chucked away on absolutely no results
This morning – continuing the pointless pattern of the Mirror and MailOnline to “note nothing new” in the case of ‘disappeared’ Madeleine McCann we highlighted last week – The Sun shared an “exclusive” about the investigation that frankly wasn’t worthy of a single column inch.
After beginning with the bashfully bold headline “Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop” Goncalo Amaral – whom currently is owed a “six-figure sum” believed to be circa £750,000 by Gerry and Kate McCann after he beat them in court in February 2017 – the paper then concluded without an actual “when” and the non-news that “the judges will now give a verdict by the end of the year.”
Of this diatribe of drivel, one could say: “Thanks for that,” but more realistically anyone rational would ask of The Sun instead: “Couldn’t you have asked your contributor to instead go looking for a missing person where there is a genuine chance of that person actually being found?”
Meanwhile, on Sunday, the Mirror – a red-top reliable for prattling on about “non-news” about a situation that could have been avoided perhaps if two doctors hadn’t left their toddlers unattended so they could live it up in a restaurant with their mates – shared that the prosecution team that named Christian Brueckner (AKA ‘Christian B’) exactly one year ago just as the British government began their ‘coronavirus distraction technique,’ have actually not spoken to Gerry and Kate McCann once during the ensuing period.
Asked if they had genuinely made any progress in the case, prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters “angrily hit back at critics” and illustrated the weakness of his work in declaring: “I don’t care who believes what… We are missing important important information. We want no stone unturned. Whether there will be an indictment in the end, I cannot foresee at the moment.”
The Mirror concluded: “Brueckner, serving seven years for raping a 72-year-old woman in Praia, has not been interviewed,” whilst elsewhere the Daily Record added Wolters pathetically offered: “Our appeal for witnesses still stands.” We respond: “Where on earth do you think these people are given the millions already offered in rewards that have never been claimed?”
Clearly, on top of the £13.5 million of British taxpayer money wasted on this case already, that’s another chunk of change down the drain whilst other families of missing people shamefully get little to no help at all. Enough is enough; it is time to close down the investigation into ‘missing’ Madeleine McCann.
— Madeleine Case Tweets🌐 (@McCannCaseTweet) March 8, 2018
Elsewhere on social media this weekend, the matter of Kate McCann being photographed with bruises on her wrists in the days after her daughter disappeared was again discussed. This tweet from 2018 was once again referenced.Christian Brueckner (AKA ‘Christian B’, pictured left with his ex-girlfriend Naskcije Miftari) was brought to public attention just as the British government began to suffer “very bad news days” at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic last year. The narrative of him being the evil, paedophile suited Boris Johnson’s government a treat as it helped shift the headlines – for a period – away from their appalling handling of initial lockdowns. This weekend, equally, Johnson has managed to do something similar by marrying his latest ‘baby mama’ Carrie Symonds and in doing so, cynics quite correctly argue that he has used the ‘distraction technique’ to get his bad week courtesy of Dominic Cummings off the front pages. Unsurprisingly, social media manipulated imagery from the wedding by using images such as those pictured (centre and right).
In December 2017, when £11 million of British taxpayers’ money had been spent towards the search for ‘missing’ Madeleine McCann, 86% of viewers of ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’ said the public purse should cease to fund the investigation. Now, in May 2021, with that sum at £13.5 million (aside from the millions in private money also), it is time to allocate resources to the search for missing people who actually can be found, we would suggest.
As decidedly dippy Dame Esther Rantzen calls for tyrannical twerp Sir Philip Green to hand over his behemoth boat to the Queen, we suggest Sir James Dyson or Sir Charles Dunstone’s gin palaces as other options that could be commandeered
This morning on Radio 4’s Broadcasting House, Dame Esther Rantzen, for once in her somewhat curious career, made a valid suggestion when discussing the current hullabaloo over whether or not the nation should spend £200 million on a new royal yacht.
Commenting to the programme’s Paddy O’Connell of a “pomp and ceremony” focused proposal that the Conservatives are plainly using to wind up Labour, Dame Esther remarked:
“This is to me a crazy idea at a time when our economy has been obviously dealt something of a death blow by COVID, when we have no plans for social care, when food banks are thriving. Do we really think that the taxpayer, let alone the royal family, want £200 million spent on a royal yacht?”
“I think it’s an example of a newspaper starting a campaign which is so out of touch. However, perhaps, I have the solution: Sir Philip Green, do you remember him? He has a knighthood – which some people have questioned. He lives in Monaco, where there’s plenty of other people with yachts. Why doesn’t he donate his boat to the royal family?”
“If he’s got monograms with the words ‘Philip’ on it, that would be suitable for those who feel that the yacht should be named after Philip, Duke of Edinburgh… Prince Philip, you could just add a few, a few, you know…”
Pictured top: The late Sir Donald Gosling’s former yacht Leander and its owner with the Queen and her late husband in 2012.
Option 1 – Sir Philip Green’s ‘Lionheart’
Pros – The disgraced businessman’s gin palace is definitely big at 295-foot and can accommodate 12 guests with a crew of 30. It’d probably also appeal to ‘Randy Andy’ given his liking for living it large and there is plenty of space on the boat’s deck for the ‘Duchess of Dork’ to engage in a bit of toe sucking as well.
Cons – This boat’s décor would likely be considered a bit ‘lowbrow’ by the Queen given “Call Me Lady Tina” – the rotten retailer’s wife – is known more for brass than class. The tacky tub might need a bit of a clean also as in September 2020, the vessel was impounded in Monaco due to two of its staff contracting coronavirus.
As was reported in the Guardian yesterday, this steam yacht has also been subject to a £25 million restoration and has ‘previous royal form’ in that it housed the then King Edward VIII and Mrs Wallis Simpson just prior to the 1936 abdication crisis. Perhaps that might attract that devious duo’s modern day equivalents, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, onboard for peace talks.
Cons – The Queen could find herself like the majority of the population, who’ve wasted money on his frankly mostly useless products, a little frustrated with the vessel’s hypocritical Brexiteer owner and we don’t think she’d like ‘Dreary Deirdre’s’ appalling rug designs either.
Option 3 – Sir Charles Dunstone’s ‘Shemara’
Pros – The 210-foot motor yacht Shemara is a favourite of all at The Steeple Times. Built by Sir Bernard Docker at the behest of his brilliantly batty wife, ‘Lady Nora,’ in 1938, this vessel has played host to everyone from King Farouk of Egypt to coalminers.
Cons – If the Queen took over this boat, she might find herself a little beholden to the ‘Chipping Norton set’ given Sir Charles Dunstone is considered one of that group’s most illustrious members. Conversations with Rebekah Brooks about her thoughts on her wayward grandchild and his money grabbing wife might not prove easy, but Jeremy Clarkson could break the ice with a drink or five.
Gerry and Kate McCann rake in £773,600 of private money in spite of admitting there is “nothing much to report” 14 years into the fast approaching £13 million public funded investigation into the dubious ‘disappearance’ of their daughter Madeleine
Not content with having garnered over £12.5 million in public funding for the police investigation with a further £300,000 top-up likely to come soon, it has this week been revealed that Gerry and Kate McCann’s privately administered fund now has an astonishing net worth of £773,629.
Whilst last week, Dr and Mrs McCann told the Mirror that they “still believe in miracles,” in a post on the ‘Official Find Madeleine Campaign’ Facebook page the particularly pugnacious pair also had to admit of the investigation: “Nothing much to report.”
Previously, a ‘friend’ (‘unnamed,’ of course, as is so often the case with anyone speaking on behalf of those close to the case of missing Madeleine McCann) of Dr and Mrs McCann remarked:
“Kate and Gerry know the police investigation cannot go on forever.”
“When [the police investigation] is shelved, and if there is no result, Kate and Gerry will use money in the fund to continue the hunt.”
“That is what it is there for. They paid for their own team of private investigators initially and when the official inquiry ends they will do so again although in the past it has proven to be extremely costly.”
Today, again, we ask: “Why does so much public money continue to be wasted on an investigation that has achieved nothing in 14 years and why is another £300,000 about to be given from the public purse when other missing person searches get little to nothing? Why is this disproportionate allocation of taxpayer funded resources allowed to go on?”
The Money of McCann – Ben Needham, then aged just 1, disappeared on the Greek island of Kos on 24th July 1991. He has been missing for over 29 year and in the time since his mother, Kerry Needham, has shockingly come under attack from supporters of the family of Madeleine McCann. Of this in October 2015, she commented: “It feels like a personal attack on me. It is deeply, deeply hurtful. I have myself had massive amounts of slanderous abuse from supporters of the McCann campaign in the past but I have never taken that personally. It’s freedom of speech. But it is getting the names of two missing children out there which is really important.”The Money of McCann – Luke Durbin disappeared aged just 19 in Suffolk in May 2006. In spite of his mother’s tireless campaign to attempt to find her vanished son, why don’t the police devote more resources to the search for him?The Money of McCann – Martin Allen vanished without a trace in London on 5th November 1979 aged just 15. Though his brother, Kevin Allen, has kept the case in the public eye as much as he can, he gets little to no help from the Metropolitan Police. Again today, we ask: “Why isn’t money from the public purse allocated to solving this case and thousands like it and why, instead, has fast approaching £13 million been allocated to a case that has not been solved in 14 years?”
The Money of McCann – In September 2018, Ben Needham’s mother Kerry quite rightly told ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’ that “it hurts” that so much money has been allocated to the search for Madeleine McCann whilst so little has been given to aid help other families find their missing relatives. She added: “[Madeleine] deserves to be found, but so does Ben. We haven’t had a fraction, I’ve had to fight alone as a single mum and try to get the help that Ben deserves… I don’t take anything away from anyone who’s got a loved one who is missing, but every single one deserves to be found.”
Avocados and a “lack of British chefs in the kitchens” get the goat of out-of-touch British peers just as Norman Fowler calls for their numbers to be cut
This morning, the Mirror revealed that “pampered peers” in the House of Lords have spent 2020 complaining about the quality of avocados just as, in a year when the country teeters on bankruptcy, the taxpayer has propped up their loss-making dining rooms and bars to the tune of nearly £2 million in subsidies.
“Boris Johnson stuffing the House of Lords with his dodgy mates is clearly having its effect.”
“Instead of playing at Downton Abbey, these peers should be looking beyond their own dinner plate and address the real problems people across the country are facing.
Shockingly paid £305 plus travel expenses for each and every day they attend, yet charged just £3.70 for a full English breakfast, peers also “griped” about the halting of the sale of alcohol of the Parliamentary Estate due to coronavirus restrictions. One even whinged that “there were not enough British chefs in the kitchens.”
Elsewhere, last week, Lord Fowler, the lord speaker of the House of Lords, quite rightly argued in the Guardian that “there are too many lords” and remarked on Boris Johnson adding another 52 peers during 2020.
He questioned the sense of the resulting total number of 830 – “despite a cross-party agreement three years ago that numbers should over time be reduced to 600” – and questioned the fact the Lords is almost 200 larger in number than the Commons “and far in excess of what needed to transact its business.”
“As we have just seen, its recommendations can be overridden by No 10. The result is that a prime minister has the power on his or her own to add peers to a house of parliament that can make and, within limits, unmake laws. Is this what the public expect in the third decade of the 21st century?”
“When making appointments it has become obvious that governments wish to avoid parliamentary scrutiny. Both of the initial announcements of new peerages in the last 12 months have been made when parliament has not been sitting. It simply adds to the impression that the choice of peers is the exclusive preserve of No 10 – and the less publicity the better. This may be fine for the government’s public relations team: whether it is fine for parliament is another matter.”
Pampered Peers Prattle About Avocados –In March 2015, ‘The Steeple Times’ reported that “peers had complained about being left ‘scarred’ after having had their dinner bookings cancelled and were angered by the size of the menus, ‘chaotic’ table layouts and ‘inferior cappuccinos.’”Pampered Peers Prattle About Avocados – Norman Fowler, Baron Fowler PC is quite right to call for reform of the House of Lords. A 2017 “analysis of voting, speaking and expenses records in the Lords, [showed a] ‘something for nothing culture among peers” by the Electoral Reform Society astonishingly revealed “115 Lords – one in seven of the total – failed to speak at all in the 2016/17 session, despite claiming an average of £11,091 each, while 18 peers failed to vote but still claimed £93,162” and that expenses claims had soared by 20% in just two years “at a time when public services have been under strain.”
Pampered Peers Prattle About Avocados – In January 2018, the ‘National Geographic Discovery Channel’ reported on a peer complaining about a pork chop that was “uneatable, tough and dry, and clearly cooked for hours before.” Of some “gone off” smoked salmon, another member added: “It really was disgrace.”
Another petition on the site, created two days ago by someone named Sophia Mepham, that was actually first brought to our attention by a former social associate of ‘Sir Shifty’ Philip Green, however, has rocketed to 190,000 signatures in just hours.
The campaign to “Strip Sir Philip Green of his knighthood” is one we urge readers to sign by clicking here. It is accompanied by the following missive:
Sir Philip Green’s net worth is £930m according to the Sunday Times rich list, although other reports say it’s even higher. His retail empire has just collapsed, taking along with it employees financial stability and part of their hard earned pensions.
Sir Phillip Green is a British businessman, whose wife is the owner of the investment group Taveta Investments. This said investment group owns the retail company ‘Arcadia Group’ for which Green is Chairman. It is made up of fashion brands such as Topshop and Dorothy Perkins, in total eight high street retailers.
Sir Philip Green was made a Knight Bachelor in the 2006 Queen’s Birthday Honours “For services to the Retail Industry”.
Now, it is 2020 and for a number of years the Arcadia Group has continued to spiral in to financial turmoil, ending in the Arcadia Group going in to administration on 30th November 2020. Putting 13,000 jobs at risk, along with over 10,000 of the employees pensions pots at risk of being cut.
This said pension pot has an estimated deficit of £350m, which at the time of writing both the industry and MP’s have called on Green to plug the shortfall, whilst he sits on his £100m yacht, in Monaco (the tax haven he lives in with his wife, not to be confused with where Taveta Investments is registered – in another tax haven, Jersey).
Sir Philip Green has mis-managed the Arcadia Group by not providing the resources it requires (both financial or otherwise) to stop the company going in to the brink of financial ruin for years. He is responsible for putting peoples livelihoods in jeopardy.
Adding to it now, the uncertainty around him plugging the deficit of the pension pots. Chancellor Rishi Sunak has said he ‘stands ready’ to help the employees at risk of job losses at Arcadia. However, when a man has become so incredibly wealthy from a retail empire, (allegedly avoiding tax), he should not be seeking help from the official lifeboat scheme – the Pension Protection Fund or the government to use taxpayers money to fund the deficit.
Other holders of a knighthood that have been revoked include, Fred Goodwin who is the former RBS boss. He was knighted in 2004 for ‘Services to the Banking Industry’ but his title was revoked because he let the bank to the brink of collapse in 2008. The Cabinet Office based their decision on the fact that the catastrophe required a £45billion bailout from the taxpayer.
Green does not deserve a knighthood ‘For Services to the Retail Industry’, the only service this man has provided is to help Arcadia Group’s 13,000 employees have an uncertain future. He too, much like Fred Goodwin, has left the Arcadia Group, which is owned by his company Taveta Investments on the brink of collapse.
To get a knighthood stripped we need to get the Forfeiture Committee to consider the honour be removed. The Committee’s recommendations for forfeiture are submitted through the Prime Minister to the Queen, who will then approve it.
By signing this petition, we can get this issue in the laps of the Forfeiture Committee and strip Sir Philip Green of his knighthood.
Shameless and Shocking – Whilst 13,000 employees of Arcadia Group face Christmas and beyond in penury, tubby turd Sir Philip Green and his title-obsessed wife Tina continue to live-it-up on their 295-foot long yacht, Lionheart. The petition to strip this grubby duo of their titles deserves everyone’s support.
BHS bandit Sir Philip Green’s wife’s bleating about being stuck on her yacht in Monaco is nothing but pathetic; Lady Green plainly has no comprehension of how out of touch she truly is with reality
The world said “diddums” for Sir Philip Green and his ludicrously wealthy, tax minimising wife Tina today with news that the couple cannot take their £100 million gin palace on a “family cruise” due to two staff onboard testing positive for coronavirus.
In an article titled: “Sir Shifty Cannot Be Shifted,” The Sun reported comments from Lady Green – whose grubby “Benny Hill-esque” husband ought to have been stripped of his title after having wrecked the British high street and treated his workforce so appalling – where she bleated about being stuck in Monaco and having a yellow flag of quarantine imposed on their vessel.
Lady Green plainly hasn’t learnt from her and her husband’s disastrous Prince Andrew-esque past forays into media relations. The public really couldn’t give two hoots for her situation; they’d rather the two of them did the decent thing and learnt the art of treating their employees and the British taxpayer properly.
Pictured top: A cartoon of Marie Antoinette-like Lady Green – a woman whose extravagance knows no bounds, but whose sympathy for ordinary folk could be summed up as: “Let them eat cake.”
On Twitter, ‘Metro’ mocked Lady Green and her husband and stated: “Our thoughts are with anyone quarantining on a superyacht at this difficult time.”Sir Philip Green and his wife have enjoyed a life of luxury with Bentleys and Louis Vuitton tennis racket covers whilst their workers have been forced into penury.Previously another Twitter user, @RedFlagUK, pointed out that “greedy capitalist” Sir Philip “robbed people’s pensions to purchase himself a luxury yacht.”In April, Led By Donkeys quite rightly reminded Sir Philip Green – whom was branded a cross between “Shylock and Al Capone” by the actor Steven Berkoff in The Steeple Times in September 2016 – of his contradictory behaviour alongside an image of him looking like a beached whale.
In a rare moment of sanity, Katie Hopkins entirely rightly sums up the public’s attitude to the reprehensible attempt by job killer Sir Richard Branson to grab British taxpayer’s money
Katie Hopkins doesn’t often get it right (in fact, she mostly gets it entirely wrong), but in calling out Sir Richard Branson she’s, for once, spot on.
In a video that has gone viral on social media, Hopkins stated:
“Just to interrupt the coronavirus crisis for one moment with a special announcement for Richard Branson. Richard Branson would like us, the furloughed British taxpayer, to bailout his airline, Virgin Atlantic.”
“A few facts on Dick: Dick has $4.1 billion. Dick is one of the largest shareholders in Virgin Atlantic. Dick sued our NHS for compensation when he didn’t get the contract he thought he should have been awarded. Dick lives on a private island and bases his businesses offshore so that he pays zero tax into the UK economy. And Dick is actually a bit of a dickhead.”
“So actually, Richard, we don’t want to bailout your airline. Don’t come to the British taxpayer for that. We have a simple message for you, no expense spared: We would quite like it if you could SOD OFF.”
“Thank you, Richard. All the very best.”
Miss Hopkins then predictably returned to her old-self and took to Twitter to rant about how she wants people to “stop clapping at the sky.” We sadly knew her being decent could never last.
Pictured top: Birdbrain Katie Hopkins (left) and self-absorbed job killer Sir Richard Branson getting busy with an especially classy looking woman’s breasts (right).
Thieving Chelsea based trollop Carina Reid was labeled “arrogant”, “extremely boorish” and a fraudster by a judge in May 2017. Often spotted in the now defunct La Brasserie restaurant, this tarty so-called beautician was jailed for three years in May 2016 and ordered to pay back £50,000 she’d falsely claimed in benefits a year later. Despite arguing she had no savings, taken no holidays and lived off free food from a mosque, somewhat dubious Miss Reid somehow managed to send £116,000 abroad to acquire property in Dubai in 2013/2014, paid £20,000 as a deposit for a flat in the Kings Road, SW3 and held savings of £180,000 in 19 separate bank accounts. Of this dishonest wench, Judge Douglas Marks-Moore remarked: “This is pie in the sky… You don’t listen to a word I have to say anyway. You have not got a hope in hell of getting an extension. You have been playing the system in my view”.
