Pat Brewin

"If russia stops, the war ends. If Ukraine stops, Ukraine ends. That's why we must help Ukraine win." -Kaja Kallas She is right..💯 So, Don't stop supporting Ukraine 🇺🇦🫡

100% stoptrump.org.uk/petition-no-ro…

Why is O'Leary @RyanairPress saying the EU is "punishing" Brits? These entry rules, as you must know, are for ALL Non EU/EFTA citizens, which we Brits chose to be. As you'll also know these EES rules were designed for outsiders when we Brits were members. We then became outsiders

Keir Starmer should make it clear Trump’s aim of bombing Iran back to stone age, including bombing energy plants, civilian infrastructure & hospitals is a war crime Any use of UK air bases for these attacks means that the UK is implicated in these crimes. bbc.co.uk/news/live/cgj0…

It is blowing my mind how many people don’t seem able to grasp that oil & gas in the North Sea is not “ours” but was sold off to private companies who will trade it on the international market like any other fuel. We don’t get any kind of privileged access to this fuel.

WHY? Why is it that if Russia did this there would be worldwide rallying, condemnation, sanctions But when it’s Israel…. SILENCE. WHY?????

🚨GIVEAWAY🚨 If Adam Wharton plays for England during the international break we'll give away one of our new European Tour t-shirts to one lucky follower. To enter: ✅ Like this tweet ✅RT this tweet ✅Follow @FYPFanzine 🛒 fypfanzine.myshopify.com/products/were-… Good luck!

@PalaceReport Yes definitely

What’s everyone’s thoughts on Iraola? Is it a yes or no from you? 🤔

@LetsTalkPalace No

Sean Dyche... yes or no? #CPFC

@JackkBarton The under 18s won.

Danny Imray, thank you for saving an otherwise disastrous weekend. #cpfc

Right now a weakened IRGC surviving in a ruined Iranian state and economy still on a path to collapse alongside a weakened United States no longer able to command allegiance from allies or fear from adversaries seems a likely outcome from this disastrous war.

A year ago today Farage and his partner bought a house in Clacton, in cash, worth £885,000. Nigel told the world he bought it, but when it transpired he didn't pay enough stamp duty (he owns 4 other properties) they said his partner paid and he had lied. However, she does not have that kind of money so it only raised more questions. Who paid? Did they dodge tax? Was it Russian money? Was it from the ongoing fraud case in the EU? Was it a bribe? Considering he could be the next PM, the public have a right to know. Why is the media silent on this?! We won't forget Nigel, and we won't let the media forget.

@BBCSteveR @BBCRadio3 @BBCRadio4 Brilliant

What do you get if you cross The Archers theme tune with Rachmaninoff? I tried...here’s the result. Celebrating 75 years of the world’s longest-running drama (by the way, Arthur Wood composed the original Archers theme). @BBCRadio4

Today, Congress was finally briefed on Trump's war of choice in Iran. Even behind closed doors, they couldn't get their story straight. But one thing is clear: they don't have a clue what the end game is, and it sure as hell isn't making America safer.

Harry Maguire pretending to be kicked in the head when he isn’t touched at all, David Raya pretending to have been launched to the floor when he isn’t touched at all…surely the time has come to retrospectively ban this sort of play acting/cheating? Pathetic and awful to watch.

I would like to know why gulf dictatorships are worth vigorously protecting with U.S. air defences while the largest European country, a vibrant democracy, isn’t.

@GordonFielden @Peston Contrary to what a lot of commentators and fawning right wingers are saying I’d say Starmer is anything but weak. He’s stood his and the country’s ground, not cow-towing to every whim of a President who is unreliable at best.

Peston’s analysis follows a now familiar pattern when it comes to Keir Starmer. The framing is rarely neutral. It begins not with the principle at stake, but with an implied weakness. The reader is invited to see the Prime Minister as either naïve, overly legalistic, or politically cornered. That lens then shapes the rest of the commentary. The central issue was whether the United Kingdom should permit the United States to use British bases, including Diego Garcia, at a moment when America was arguably the initiating force in a conflict with Iran. The reported advice of the Attorney General was that doing so before any Iranian retaliation would place Britain on questionable legal ground. That is not a minor technicality. It is the difference between participating in an unlawful act and acting in collective self defence. To portray adherence to that advice as political timidity or diplomatic miscalculation is to invert the argument. If Britain claims to uphold international law, then it cannot suspend that commitment whenever a powerful ally demands expediency. Law is not an accessory to be worn in peacetime and discarded in crisis. It is also misleading to suggest that this was some uniquely British hesitation. Germany and France adopted similarly cautious positions. Neither signalled blanket support for immediate participation in a conflict whose legal basis was contested. That places Britain within a broader European posture rooted in prudence and legality. This was not isolation. It was alignment with major allies who took the view that international law must frame action from the outset. The suggestion that Starmer “alienated” Donald Trump also deserves scrutiny. Alliances between states are not personal friendships. They are institutional, strategic and enduring. A refusal to act outside legal parameters is not hostility. It is sovereignty. If the American administration were to respond by withdrawing tariff arrangements secured through negotiation, that would reflect a transactional approach in Washington rather than a failure of statecraft in London. As for the apparent shift from refusal to later cooperation, the distinction is neither cosmetic nor contradictory. Once Iran retaliated against regional allies, the legal character of the conflict changed. Collective self defence carries a different basis in international law than participation in a first strike. Recognising that distinction is not inconsistency. It is constitutional discipline. There is also a broader point that is underplayed. Public opinion in Britain remains cautious about further military entanglement in the Middle East. A Prime Minister who insists on lawful justification before committing national assets is not necessarily weak. He may simply be reflecting both the law and the electorate. The easy narrative is that in moments of crisis leaders must privilege realpolitik over principle. The harder truth is that once principle is abandoned in favour of expediency, it becomes far more difficult to invoke it later. If international law is dismissed as inconvenient when allies breach it, then it loses moral force when adversaries do the same. One may disagree with Starmer’s judgment. But to suggest that fidelity to legal advice is folly misunderstands the very order Britain claims to defend.

Why has George not gone to the police? #thearchers

@trwrail I’m trying to book tickets on line and every time I get stuck at ‘find tickets’. I have tried using a different browser and going via national rail but that doesn’t work either. Is your website likely to work in the near future?