Darren Foley

Here, have a feature length documentary on Ancient Peru for free that I did the filming, editing, and narrating for. Advanced Ancient Ruins ✅ Evidence of Lost Civilisations ✅ Publicly Inaccessible Sites ✅ Support Original Creators on X with a Like, Comment & Repost! ❤️

Lobbyists feeding doctored statistics to government in order to extract subsidy should be treated as criminal corruption. Renewable energy is fraud.

The man who is chauffeured around London in a 3.5-tonne armour-plated Range Rover at public expense wants TfL to investigate heavy vehicles. The self-awareness deficit is something to behold. @MayorofLondon

This is Shahid Butt. Shahid is running for political office in Birmingham, in a seat that is 91% non-white and 70% Muslim. He is set to win. Shahid also claims to be a war veteran who fought in Bosnia and Afghanistan. He wasn’t in the military. He was an ISIS terrorist.

The Pakistani Paedo Promoting Party Keir Starmer suspended Lord Doyle, one of his own new peers, after the Sunday Times revealed he had campaigned for a man charged with child sex offences. He apologised repeatedly for appointing Lord Mandelson knowing of his links to Jeffrey Epstein. The controversy ran so deep that Emma Lewell, a Labour MP, revealed a member of the public had accused her of belonging to the "paedo protectors party." Starmer called it a crisis of standards. He positioned himself as the man who would fix it. The Sunday Times has finally followed up on our work and published how the serving Labour MP, Afzal Khan, has been filmed on a red carpet beside Lord Ahmed, the convicted child rapist. The Prime Minister who suspended a peer for campaigning for a man charged with child sex offences has decided this requires no response. It appears that the Prime Minister accepts Khan's dog ate my homework explanation. "When I realised Baron Ahmed was present, I left shortly afterwards." - Afzal Khan MP The same party that positioned itself as serious about child protection is silent when one of its own MPs lies on the record about sharing a ceremonial procession with a man who was imprisoned for raping children in Rotherham. Why? You know why. The same bloc vote that protected the rape gangs is the same bloc vote that is at risk should Starmer act against Afzal Khan. Now, more than ever, Labour needs its biraderi and their bloc Muslim vote. I have a name for what is taking place. Never mind the paedo protecting party, Labour is now the Pakistani Paedo Promoting Party. _________ I’m Raja Miah MBE. For seven years, I led a campaign that exposed how senior Labour politicians helped protect Pakistani rape gangs. The people of my town helped force the national inquiry. You won’t see me on the BBC. You won’t read my work in the legacy press. That’s not an accident. I take this to a place from where there is no coming back. My work is free. No paywalls. No gatekeeping. No exclusions. If you can afford to do so, supporting me costs as little as 75p a week (£30 a year). Sign up here; 👉 redwallandtherabble.co.uk If you can’t commit to a regular subscription, a one-off contribution genuinely helps keep this alive. You can support me using one of these links; 👉 BuyMeACoffee.com/recusantnine 👉 paypal.me/RecusantNine We’re up against a machine, politicians, police, officials, and media, working together to shrink, sanitise, and bury the truth. This work survives because of you. If you’ve ever shared my posts, learned something, or felt less alone reading them, stand with me. I need your help. Raja 🙏

The last two decades of immigration destroyed any hope of building a civic national identity. Our society is predicated on the idea that we, as citizens, have obligations to one another beyond our families - recognising that there is an inherent social cost to washing our hands of the less fortunate. That is the basic civic contract underpinning society, but also the welfare state. That, though, evaporates when suddenly we're financially and socially obliged to millions of newcomers who are non-contributors in every sense. People with whom I cannot even converse on a very basic level - who have no obligations impressed upon them, and feel no personal obligations towards British society. In handing out passports and entitlements like confetti, the state has eroded any kinship I might have otherwise felt towards those of immigrant stock. It's just another obligation placed upon me, in which I had no warning and no say. Of itself, that is offensive to me, but especially so when everything is made objectively worse for their presence. I now feel zero obligation towards anyone outside of my family, and especially none towards anyone with foreign ancestry. In fact, I feel obliged to be outwardly hostile to them to impress upon them how unwelcome they are. If you're foreign, living in a tent, and starving, I want your tent taken away. Your presence diminishes what my own people built. On that basis, any policy chatter form the Tory party about integration comes twenty years too late. I am not interested in making room or providing for non-contributory foreigners with whom I have nothing in common. I cannot share a civic identity with those who practice foreign religions, speak a foreign language and have loyalties to countries other than my own. But since I am robbed of any say in the matter, I am forced to become racist by default. I will not have this fake and threadbare identity imposed upon me by people who despise me and see me only as a tax milking cow. I withdraw my consent.

Hi Darren, I’m not “banging on”. I’m from a town where more girls were abused by Pakistani-Muslim rape gangs than anywhere else in the country. I was sexually abused by different men from the age of five. I grew up knowing which takeaways raped little girls. Which taxi companies changed their names whenever they had a ‘scandal’. Which estates to avoid walking through alone. I saw countless little girls like me being abandoned by society. Turning to drugs and alcohol and crime to numb the pain of the trauma they experienced. I experienced the industrial failure of victims by powerful people and organisations. I was asked by a detective from Operation Chalice if I “consented to sexual activity” at any point. I was told by my social worker that “my actions led me to where I was.” I’ve heard the horror stories that mirror my own from women 10, 20, 30, and even 40 years older than me. And I’m seeing those exact same stories being repeated with little girls today. So no, I’m not “banging on”. The majority of sex crimes are committed by white men because we are a majority white nation. But the sex crimes committed by migrants per capita is staggeringly high. Far higher than white men. We are facing a migrant rape epidemic. You, Darren, have the privilege of being able to sneer from your moral pedestal. Because you will NEVER experience what I did. Or what the millions of little girls like me are experiencing right now. You will never understand what it feels like. I will continue speaking out. I will continue exposing the truth. I will continue protecting victims. I will continue “banging on.” And I will not be silenced or shamed by the likes of you, Darren.

Inflation isn’t some random phenomenon that just happens to a country. Political choices have made life so much more expensive for British families, and political choices can make life so much more affordable for British families. When the state grows too large, it spends beyond its means. That spending has to be funded. Through higher taxes, more borrowing, or printing money. Those are their options. All three drive inflation. All three make your food shop more expensive, your pint more expensive, your tank of fuel more expensive. High taxes make it more expensive to produce, hire, and invest - so businesses pass those costs on. Prices rise. Inflation soars. It’s a vicious cycle. And so many of those taxes are done through stealth. We all pay SO much tax but we have no idea because it’s hidden from us. That money is stolen from the people, and they don’t even know it. Frozen thresholds. Stealth taxes. State theft. I detest it. Of course, excessive and reckless state spending pumps more money into the system, so prices rise - the cycle continues. And when governments print money and inject it into the economy, what happens to the value of the existing money? What happens to your savings? Your wages? It all becomes worth less and less. This is not complicated - a bloated state makes a country more expensive. It makes Britain more expensive. It makes your life more expensive. So the reverse is also true. Cut the size of the state, and you reduce wasteful spending. Cut taxes, and you lower the cost of production. Restore proper discipline, and you stabilise the value of money. A Restore Britain Government would not manage inflation, we would tackle the root causes of it. We would not engage in unnecessary foreign wars that hike the price of oil, punishing British families at the pump and everywhere else. When fuel gets more expensive, everything follows. Britain needs cheap fuel, cheap energy. That means drilling, drilling and drilling some more. Domestic energy production is vital. Cheap energy makes everything more affordable. Everything. The drive for Net Zero must end - Restore Britain will halt that mad march to further bankruptcy . A country that lives within its means is a country people can actually afford to live in. And yes, that will mean many cuts, and many difficult decisions. But the hour is late, and nothing else will suffice. Any political party saying otherwise is lying to you. There are no easy fixes. That time is over. Restore Britain’s approach will be painful in the short term, but it will bring the cost of living down. It will make life more affordable for hardworking British families.

UK’s energy crisis started with Theresa May’s government putting Net Zero 2050 target into law. Bonkers. May also closed giant Rough gas storage. Every Tory MP ran scared of Lord Debden and the Climate Change Committee. Miliband doubled down. We need show trials.

In 1998, Abu Hamza sent a group of terrorists (including his son) to blow up the British consulate in Yemen. They were caught. During their trial, others amongst Hamza’s thugs kidnapped foreigners in an attempt to bargain for their release. Hamza was eventually convicted in the USA of, inter alia, ordering that kidnapping - during which four of the hostages (including three Brits) were killed. Separately, amongst the gang convicted of the attempt to blow up the consulate alongside Hamza’s son was Shahid Butt. Shahid Butt is now a candidate for council in Birmingham Sparkhill in May’s local elections. This is where our suicidal empathy brings us. Someone convicted of explicitly targeting this country’s diplomatic mission for destruction is a political candidate in… this country, today.

@Councillorsuzie @Sara78187546 He won’t like this ether?

Hermer's Law: How a Non-Binding Opinion Became a £30 Billion Surrender The Chagos bill is dead. Not delayed, not paused, not pending resolution of a diplomatic disagreement with Washington. Dead. The government has run out of parliamentary time, lost American support, lost a domestic court ruling, and is now appealing against a judgment that grants the very people it claimed to be helping the right to return to their homeland. The deal Keir Starmer signed, the bill his ministers championed, and the legal reasoning Lord Hermer placed at the heart of Labour's foreign policy have together produced a comprehensive and entirely avoidable disaster. Begin with the legal foundation, because that is where the rot starts. The government's case for surrendering Chagos rested on a 2019 advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice. Not a binding ruling. An opinion. One that carries, in the Spectator's precise formulation, roughly the legal force of a politely worded email. Any government confident in its own sovereignty would have noted the opinion, acknowledged its non-binding status, and proceeded as before. Instead, Lord Hermer, as Attorney General, treated it as an obligation Britain had no realistic choice but to honour. International law was placed at the heart of Labour's foreign policy, and a non-binding advisory opinion became the justification for surrendering a strategic asset Britain has held for two centuries. The consequences were predictable and have duly arrived. The legal framework constructed to make surrender seem inevitable has since been turned against the deal itself. A domestic court ruled earlier this year that Chagossians expelled from their homeland have a right of abode. The government is now appealing against that judgment, deploying British courts to resist the rights of the people whose welfare the deal was ostensibly designed to protect. The legal reasoning that was supposed to close the argument has reopened every argument simultaneously. Then there is Trump. His final withdrawal of support came after Starmer refused to allow American aircraft to use British bases to strike Iran. The refusal was consistent with this government's broader posture: cautious, legally constrained, reluctant to act without multilateral cover. But the consequence was the loss of American backing for a deal that required American cooperation to implement. Britain had already committed £30 billion of public money. It had signed. It had staked its diplomatic credibility. And then, when the alliance was tested at the precise moment it mattered, the terms of British foreign policy prevented Britain from meeting the condition on which everything else depended. The geometry of this failure is worth stating plainly. Starmer signed a deal he could not implement without US consent. He then adopted a foreign policy posture that made US consent impossible to retain. He built his legal case on a non-binding opinion that has since generated binding domestic consequences he is now fighting in court. And he committed billions of public money to an agreement that cannot be ratified, to lease back a base Britain already owned, from a government it was paying to take it. Lord Hermer bears particular responsibility. The decision to treat the ICJ opinion as effectively binding, to frame sovereignty as a liability and legal compliance as a virtue, set the terms for everything that followed. A government that begins by conceding the argument rarely wins the negotiation. Britain conceded Chagos in principle before a single formal demand had been made, and has spent the years since discovering the price of that concession while failing to collect any of its promised benefits. The bill is dead. The deal is stranded. The base remains, for now, in British hands. That is not a vindication of the strategy. It is a verdict on it.

I have today commenced legal proceedings against Jim McMahon MP in relation to serious allegations made about me. I sought to resolve this matter without litigation and invited him to identify any document supporting the claims that I covered up the abuse of children and engaged in financial misconduct. None has been identified. Those allegations were presented as confirmed by official reports and capable of verification. They are not. No Serious Case Review refers to me at all, and no official report contains any finding that I engaged in the conduct alleged. Instead of identifying any supporting material, the position now advanced is that I have misunderstood what was said and that such claims can be made without identifying any evidential basis. I have also been warned about the financial risks of pursuing this claim. I have risked everything to pursue the truth. I will not be deterred by warnings of cost or by the involvement of heavyweight lawyers acting for a powerful client. These are serious allegations, presented as supported by official material but now defended on the basis that I have misunderstood what was said, rather than by reference to any supporting evidence. They will now be tested in the High Court. My work has always been about exposing the truth and holding institutions to account. That does not change. I will continue to play my part in ensuring that the National Inquiry into grooming gangs is properly scrutinised. I will not be commenting further while proceedings are ongoing. Raja Miah MBE

John, you've just identified the elephant in the room. MPs and senior civil servants receive defined benefit pensions, which means they are guaranteed a specific income in retirement regardless of investment performance or economic conditions. Those pensions are inflation linked, which means they rise automatically every year to keep pace with the cost of living. The employer contributions, which come from the taxpayer, run at roughly five times the rate of a typical private sector scheme. And none of this is ever mentioned when politicians talk about pension reform. Think about what that means in practice. The people deciding whether to means test your state pension, scrap the triple lock or redefine what you are entitled to are the same people whose own retirement income is gold plated, taxpayer funded and completely insulated from the reforms they are proposing for everyone else. They are not in the same system. They never have been. You're absolutely right that if the demographic argument applies to the basic state pension it applies equally to every taxpayer funded pension scheme. The numbers do not become more sustainable because the recipient works in Westminster rather than a factory in Rotherham. Any serious reform conversation that starts with the basic state pension and leaves public sector defined benefit schemes untouched is not a fiscal necessity. It is a political choice about whose retirement is worth protecting. And as you say, it starts to look very much like a targeted raid on the people least able to fight back.

The nut zealotry of Ed Miliband A new occasional series — No 3 Massive Silicon Valley company OpenAI has today paused its major Stargate UK data centre infrastructure project, citing high energy costs and the regulatory environment in the UK. UK industrial energy costs are the highest in the world (thanks, Ed). OpenAI and other AI giants are worried that Starmer’s desire (backed by Ed) to cosy up closer to the EU will mean AI in the UK coming under the Brussels’ regulatory regime, which is killing off AI projects in the EU.

When over 800 women were attacked on New Years Eve in Germany by hordes of migrant men Jess Phillips downplayed it and said this is just an average Saturday night out How she is seen as this great defender of women and girls I will never know

From today, family farms and family businesses are subject to the Labour government’s inheritance tax. This is having a devastating impact on family businesses. Generational family businesses are being punished and in many cases, unable to afford the financial impact. Shameful.

The free speech union have found out all five members have links to Islamist groups and pro Hamas organisations ! This is criminal and should be stopped in its tracks immediately!

Labour MP Jim McMahon, serious questions need answering! A grooming gang victim has alleged she was trafficked into Parliament as a teenager. She says she reported what happened. So what happened next? Why were those concerns not treated as a criminal matter? Why were they misdirected instead of properly escalated? Oldham has been one of the areas at the centre of this scandal for years. McMahon came up through that system, from councillor to MP. So the question stands. What did he know, and how were these reports handled? Jess Phillips was written to by Oldham requesting action on a grooming gang inquiry and did not acknowledge the letter. Why? You also have Labour Councillor Amanda Chadderton, who downplayed the issue at council level, and later moved into a role in Westminster working with Yvette Cooper. Why? This is about accountability. Is this coincidence or does it run deeper? Victims deserve the truth!