Outrage, Indeed

Peter Tatchell also wanted to bomb Libya.

I have never held the view that his exclusion from Parliament was any kind of tragedy. He wants to lower the age of consent to 14.

On both grounds, David Cameron duly offered him a peerage.

Moreover, well into the 1990s, never mind in 1983, "straight" had no colloquial meaning other than "honest" to anyone outside sexual minorities that were then utterly unconnected to mainstream culture except in the persons of camp caricatures from Larry Grayson to Mr Humphries.

Today, Tatchell joined the long list of old left-wing star turns who resent having been made into supporting acts by a man whom they had spent decades assuming was the cloakroom attendant, but who turns out to have an appeal beyond their wildest dreams.

Aleppo is rapidly approaching complete liberation from the head-chopping, crucifying, heart-excising proxies, if that, of our dear friends in Saudi Arabia.

So much for Boris Johnson after all. But his original statement of the obvious about Saudi Arabia and Yemen still needs to be written up and tabled as a parliamentary motion.

More than 100 Labour MPs absented themselves last time, hardly any of them with any good reason to do so.

As I said on George Galloway's radio programme last night, after the Foreign Secretary's intervention on the subject, we need to see how they could possibly explain themselves this time.

George told me that I would make a fine addition to the Green Benches. I told him that so would he again. Watch both of those spaces.

In all fairness, Tatchell has demonstrated outside the Saudi Embassy, to absolutely no coverage from those who have found Jeremy Corbyn's vitally important speech today worth mentioning only because of Tatchell's interruption.

That speech's content, on women's rights, remains unreported.

Remind me how a Sky News owned entirely by Rupert Murdoch would be any worse than today's Sky News, or any worse than today's BBC News?