Forest Whitely

@benonwine If you read or listen to some of our experts and elite influencers those with a certain political bias certainly appear to be ignoring the historical economic facts of the time.

Andy Burnham thinks it’s a great idea to take Britain back to the Labour governments of the 1970’s an era when Britain was widely labelled the “sick man of Europe”. Rampant inflation. Endless strikes. Rubbish piled high in the streets, dead bodies unable to be buried and Economic decline. Britain’s reputation on the world stage was in tatters. It took Margaret Thatcher’s government to reverse that decline and save us from destitution and drag us up from the gutter through reforming the economy and restoring Britain’s standing after years of turmoil and decline under Labour. Have we really forgotten the lessons of the 1970s, or are we about to repeat them?

@DaveKent101 Perhaps this is yet more confirmation that there is a hidden cohort with their own agenda controlling the economic, political and demographic direction of the UK.

Curious is it not that the Liz Truss government fell when 10 Year Gilts went above 4%. Yet the same yield on these 10 Year Gilts is currently 5.049% and rising. So why is it that Truss gets the boot over a much lower rate while Labour sail onwards with a much higher rate?🤔

@ElonBeyondX Why does he dress down for these photo ops. Is to to promote an intelligent elite and socially aware persona to hide his back to the 70s ideology.

🗳️ Do you think he can lead the UK in the right direction? 🇬🇧 🅰️ Yes, definitely ✅ 🅱️ Give him time ⏳ 🅲️ Not convinced 🤔 🅳️ No chance ❌

@Clockwerk777_ @AlexaBliz_ A straw is a tube!

@AlexaBliz_ The answer is 100% 10. If you think it's 16, then answer me this. If I took off my T-shirt and put a big hole in the middle, did I make one hole or two? Another question I have for anyone who thinks the answer is 16, how many holes does a straw have?

Most people will say 4 Only the sharp ones will get the real answer

@KieraDiss @goustocooking Perhaps they had been given delivery instructions to place the parcel in that bin if no one was at home!

A customer of food brand @goustocooking posted this door cam footage to social media after the DPD driver was seen flippantly throwing their package into the wheelie bin. They were not impressed with how their expensive subscription service was handled.

@Bbmorg No it’s recognition of the actual fact.

‘Commie’ is the MAGA word of the month. Easy to say and not too many letters.

@JChimirie66677 Your article states that these 9 men were apparently arrested in 7 locations. How did they communicate and how many others were involved but have not currently been arrested? To believe that this gang comprised of only 9 is a very big ask!

Nine Men Now Charged Over South Wales Grooming Gang. Gwent Police Told Wales There Was No Such Problem Nine men have been charged with 41 offences, including rape, following Operation Oak, a Gwent Police investigation into organised child sexual exploitation in Newport, Abergavenny and Swansea. The charges relate to eight victims, all children at the time, and cover alleged offending between 1985 and 1996, more than a decade of abuse before any of it reached a courtroom. The men charged are Shafaq Mohammed, 58, of Birmingham; Syed Mohammad Ashan Taqvi, 65, of Newport; Mohammed Sheikh Abdul Hannan, 54, of Edinburgh; Kevin Lawrence, 54, of Dunoon; Sheikh Mohammed Tahir Ullah, 73, of Newport; Aminur Rahman Chowdhury, 58, of Tottenham; Shakeel Babur, 58, of Lancashire; Murad Ali, 57, of Swansea; and Mohammed Ramzan, 76, of Newport, charged most recently with seven offences including two counts of rape of a girl under 16 and causing the prostitution of a girl under 16. All nine are British citizens. They are due before Newport magistrates on 24 July. The scale of the operation says something on its own. Detectives coordinated arrests across seven locations in a single day, Newport, Swansea, Birmingham, London, Lancashire, Edinburgh and Dunoon, meaning this was not a single community's failure but a network that spread across the length of Britain and stayed hidden across four decades. What deserves closer scrutiny is what Gwent Police told the Welsh government eighteen months before these charges were brought. In January 2025, amid pressure for a Wales-wide grooming gangs inquiry, Welsh ministers asked every force in the country whether organised grooming activity was a live concern in their area. Gwent's answer, made public through that process, was that the force had "no known gangs and grooming issues as regards sexual exploitation." In the same response, Gwent disclosed it was managing two historical child exploitation cases still awaiting a charging decision from the Crown Prosecution Service. Operation Oak fits that description closely: a historical, group-based exploitation case in the same force area, awaiting exactly the kind of charging decision Gwent said it was still waiting on. Whether it is one of the two cases referenced cannot be stated with certainty, since the department did not name Operation Oak directly. But the timing and description leave little room for an innocent gap. If it is the same case, a force assured the Welsh government there was no organised grooming problem in its area while sitting on an active file that would, a year and a half later, produce charges spanning eleven years of alleged rape and abuse against eight children, now against nine men rather than eight. That contradiction, real or narrowly avoided, is the story underneath the story. Wales spent much of the last two years being told, publicly and repeatedly, that it did not have England's problem. Officials in Cardiff leaned on exactly that reassurance when resisting calls for a dedicated Welsh inquiry. Operation Oak does not prove every one of those reassurances was false. It does show how easily "no known issues" can sit alongside a live, decades-long case simply because the case had not yet reached the charging stage when the question was asked, and how that case can keep growing even after the first set of charges is made public.

@LeVilla121 Campbell presents an extremely bias viewpoint that will deflect and deny all genuine facts to win his debate. He never appears to want to seek out the truth.

A very enlightening clip.

@charles_kernow @LucyTCWife Per Chat GPT nearly all of these reforms were from a combination of pressure from labour movements, broader social reform campaigns, economic development, and legislation enacted by governments across the political spectrum including the “‘right wing”.

@LucyTCWife Closest you'll ever get to having some responsibility.

Whoop! Bye pal 😆

@AntiWokeMemes When did he say these words and what was the occasion and context?

What is your reaction to Prince William ??

@DonaldTrumpfe Is this factual ? If so when did it occur, who made the decision and what exactly was the full reasoning behind such a divisive decision.

JUST IN: 🇮🇹🇺🇸 ​Italy banned a US military aircraft from landing in the country and stated: "We are not part of your war." ​It is the first NATO member country to close its airport to the United States. ​Salute to Giorgia Meloni. 👏

@JChimirie66677 In the US this is referred to as the swamp. In America the USSC has recently ruled that the US President has the authority to sack members of this cohort however here in the UK neither the PM nor Ministers appear to possess that capability. Dominic Raab springs to mind.

Much will be said about Angela Rayner in the coming days, and rightly so. A former care worker with no health administration experience, tasked with overseeing an £18.7bn overhaul of social care, is a legitimate story. It deserves scrutiny, and it will get it. But that scrutiny, however justified, is aimed at the wrong target if the goal is understanding who actually governs the country. Governments set policy. Whether that policy survives contact with the departments meant to deliver it is a separate question, and increasingly the answer depends on the permanent state, the officials who remain in post while ministers rotate through. Ministers like Rayner are not the ones actually running the country. They are the visible layer, replaced every reshuffle, while the people who administer, interpret and often quietly resist their policy stay exactly where they were. That permanent layer is not a neutral machine simply executing whatever instruction it receives. Over three decades, the same progressive assumptions that reshaped universities, HR departments and NGOs, DEI training, unconscious bias frameworks, equity treated as more important than equality, have been absorbed into a civil service that recruits, trains and promotes from the same graduate pipeline as every other captured institution. Institutional capture and the permanent state are not two separate stories. They are one story told from two angles. Capture explains what the permanent state believes. The permanent state explains why what it believes matters more than who nominally sits above it. Rayner's own department illustrates the second half of that story precisely. The health brief she may inherit is actually run day to day by Samantha Jones, DHSC's permanent secretary, the accounting officer legally responsible for how the budget is spent and the policy delivered. Jones was not elected. She was not selected by any minister accountable to a constituency. She moved directly from interim permanent secretary and chief operating officer at 10 Downing Street into running the department, appointed by the Cabinet Secretary "with the approval of the Prime Minister," entirely within Whitehall's own machinery. Nobody scrutinises that appointment, because no manifesto and no vote was ever attached to it. The pattern holds wherever the permanent state meets an elected minister determined to act. At the Home Office in 2022, Sir Matthew Rycroft, the department's permanent secretary, objected in writing to the Rwanda deportation scheme on value for money grounds. Parliament had legislated it and an elected Home Secretary had announced it. Suella Braverman could only proceed by publicly overruling her own most senior official through a formal "ministerial direction," forced into open confrontation just to implement what her government had already decided. She won that particular fight. That she had to have it in public is the point. Above Whitehall, the permanent state doesn't need to negotiate at all. On 14 June 2022, a deportation flight sat on the tarmac at Boscombe Down, passengers aboard, after Parliament had legislated and British courts, at every level, had already rejected every challenge against it. Hours before departure, a single duty judge at the European Court of Human Rights issued an interim order grounding the flight, no hearing, no published reasoning, no appeal available. One unelected official stopped what an elected Parliament, elected government and domestic courts had already cleared. So yes, much will be said about whether Angela Rayner is qualified to run the NHS. She probably isn't, and neither were several of her predecessors. But the more revealing question is the one nobody asks about Samantha Jones, or Sir Matthew Rycroft, or the duty judge in Strasbourg: not whether they're qualified, but who put them there, and what happens to a policy that survives every election only to meet people nobody elected at all. Angela Rayner and Samantha Jones

@WasAcop They will now go into overdrive in changing all aspects of our country. The conservatives were bad and failed our country, Starmer was worse and Burnham will just continue mismanaging our country’s demise.

🚨Hope Not Hate has taken over the government.🚨 Meet Alison Phillips – their board member and former Mirror editor – is now Andy Burnham’s Director of Transition. She’s “very proud” to support the group that smears anyone questioning mass migration or Britain’s demographic replacement as “haters.” Her words: “We don’t want children growing up hating people for being different.” On diversity she wants to “widen the diversity of ethnicity” in newsrooms because “the British media has a lot of work to do to improve representation of black, Asian and minority ethnic people.” Expect faster open borders, forced demographic change, and more attacks on those on the right . Hope Not Hate is now steering the ship.

@RachelD1892 No

Given what you've seen of Andy Burnham so far, do think he's going to be an improvement on Keir Starmer? Yes or no?

@benonwine Unless there is a radical change in the direction of our country’s governance then future generations will live in a totally alien society.

One in five people living in Britain today was born outside the UK. Whether you see that as a strength, a challenge, or something in between, it’s one of the biggest demographic changes in modern British history. What do you think this means for Britain’s future?

@HJB_News__ Sounds like plausible deniability in action.

Labour leader Andy Burnham says he wasn’t involved in ousting Keir Starmer.

@RealScottieM @cosmicjungle22 @andrewlawrence Having lived through this turmoil I suggest that you re-read your history books and reacquaint yourself with the economic facts of the time. Among the many serious economic problems Britain faced at the time was the run on sterling and withdrawal of credit.

@cosmicjungle22 @andrewlawrence The country was not bankrupt, the country was low on it's dollar reserves. Hence the reason the loan was all in dollars. The UK cannot go bankrupt, it can never default on any loan in it's own currency.

She left office 36 years ago lad.

@gatesisavirus @NJ_Timothy It has actually increased racial tension and made it a major political talking point generating even more division within our population.

@NJ_Timothy Im fucking sick of that word DIVERSITY,its brought us more gloom than benefits

In one of his last acts as Justice Secretary, David Lammy has put Lynne Berry in charge of selecting judges. It's just been confirmed. She says judges should not be appointed solely on merit. Labour are wrecking our justice system in the name of diversity.

@NJ_Timothy Just let that sink in. This woman it appears is now relegating the actual skills required to performing a legally binding decision making role as an after thought when selecting appropriate candidates.

@QuantumGuard17 The fact that this woman who is apparently a qualified US medical doctor cannot answer a simple scientific question is absolutely incredible. She should lose her status immediately .

🚨 HOLY CRAP. This actually just happened on Capitol Hill. SEN. JOSH HAWLEY: "Can men get pregnant?" LIBERAL DR. VERMA: "I'm not sure what the goal of the question is." HAWLEY: "The goal is to establish a biological reality. Can men get pregnant?" VERMA: "I take care of people with many identities." HAWLEY: "Can men get pregnant?" VERMA: "Again, as I'm saying-" HAWLEY: "You said science and evidence should control. Can men get pregnant? You're a doctor, I think." VERMA: "Science and evidence should guide medicine." HAWLEY: "Do science and evidence tell us that men can get pregnant?" VERMA: "I think yes-no questions like this are a political tool." WOW. 🤯🤯🤯 @HawleyMO