🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭

119.9K posts

🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 banner
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭

🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭

@_GoodyBCampbell

deliberately defiant & thoroughly indecent ! 🥂 mother | daughter | sister | aunt | woman - Adult Human Female

Katılım Mart 2020
3.1K Takip Edilen2K Takipçiler
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
@ChatsWithEm
@ChatsWithEm@chatswithem·
The U.K. has the LEAST out of many countries to feel shame about Its time the gaze was directed at the Middle East and Africa itself but this isn't about slavery This is just more Britain Bashing
Mark F. Proudman@mfproudman

Britain, and specifically the Royal Navy, played a large and arguably decisive part in ending the slave trade. Like so many on the left, Starmer, Hermer and Lammy despise Britain and its history. African countries complaining about the slave trade should note that people were enslaved initially by their fellow Africans, marched to the coast, and then sold to slave traders. In many cases, colonization stopped the slave trade, the occupation of the slave port of Lagos being one example. According to Christopher Lloyd's The Navy and the Slave Trade, the Royal Navy lost 2,000 men fighting the slave trade in the nineteenth century. There have been a number of good popular histories of the anti-slave trade campaign recently, but Lloyd's earlier work is based on extensive research in primary sources. For West Africa alone, 1,567 deaths were recorded from 1830-65, the height of the campaign, according to Parliamentary Papers. This excludes deaths at the Cape, in the West Indies, South America, and later in the century on the East African coast (fighting the Muslim slave trade). Noted historian Jeremy Black, writing in The Critic, gives a figure of 17,000, but this seems overstated. It may include all injured, sick or pensioned-off. t.co/hZWF1HfvId Relevant pages from Christopher Lloyd, The Navy and the Slave Trade: The Suppression of the African Slave Trade in the Nineteenth Century, Routledge: 1968 (1949), pp 288-89.

English
0
6
18
390
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Burnside
Burnside@BurnsideWasTosh·
I've been walking up and down the road for 4 hours now and still no one has grabbed my phone.
Burnside tweet media
English
34
98
669
6.7K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Ramon Agusta
Ramon Agusta@ramonagusta·
"Labour leader was head of CPS when he applied to European court to reverse Germany’s prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir in 2008." The signs were there, folks. We did try to warn people. #Starmergeddon telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/…
English
1
70
116
713
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Daniel Cremin
Daniel Cremin@DanielCreminGB·
Powerful remarks from @ZiaYusufUK on stage at the Suffolk rally tonight. Worth a read: 👇 “Today is actually a very dark day in British politics and we have to talk about this. For years Labour and the Tories have gorged themselves on fat donations from all sorts of shady characters. Reform has subsisted on a relative pittance for sometime and still run rings around the Uniparty. But recently, Reform received a pretty large donation from an upstanding British citizen. That donation was perfectly above board. Perfectly lawful. So how did Keir Starmer respond? By weaponising the instruments of state to persecute his political opponents. He commissioned a civil servant named Philip Rycroft to write a report on stopping - and I quote here - "foreign interference" in British politics. The result? Well the report published this afternoon said a new law was going to come into force to cap what that donor could give us in the future and it would be retroactive from when? *Today*. Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake - these are the actions of a dictator in a banana republic. Starmer is an authoritarian... He cancels election he's going to lose. He surveils anti government speech. And now he chokes off perfectly legitimate funding for his political rivals. Well we have message for Starmer. You are already the most unpopular Prime Minister in this country's history. Your authoritarian attempts to crush us will not work. You will only make Reform stronger. Isn't it fascinating how fast the machinery of government can move when it is protecting itself. Chocking off the legitimate funding of his political opponent? Instant. It can happen in weeks. When it comes to stopping the boats, or deporting illegal migrants, or ensuring violent criminals are in jail... oh that takes years... YEARS according to the Uniparty. When it comes to justice for the rape gang survivors, that takes DECADES according to the Uniparty. Well here is my message to you: I promise you when Reform is in power we will move at the speed of light to secure our borders and ensure all those involved in the rape gangs and their cover up face the heaviest possible price for their crimes.”
Daniel Cremin tweet media
English
41
487
1.3K
13.1K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Mel Stride
Mel Stride@MelJStride·
Inflation up, unemployment spiralling, borrowing surging and billions thrown down the drain on debt interest payments. Rachel Reeves' economic mismanagement has left us weak and totally unprepared. Starmer and Reeves must bin Ed Miliband and back Britain. Axe the fuel tax hike, ditch the net zero dogma and drill the North Sea. Holding the Chancellor to account this morning 👇🏻
English
49
73
374
8.8K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧
Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧@JChimirie66677·
When Leadership Is Needed, Britain Gets Process Iran has fired ballistic missiles at a British base in the Indian Ocean. The Strait of Hormuz has been closed for the first time in history. Oil is heading toward two hundred dollars a barrel. Defence manufacturers are laying off staff. The defence investment plan that should have been ready last year is still blocked in Whitehall because it has to be agreed by everyone across government. And the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom appeared before the liaison committee this week to explain that he considers the conversation on defence and security to have started, but is urged by others to take it to another level. Tim Stanley, watching from the press gallery, felt a powerful urge to jump into the Thames. He was not alone. The liaison committee appearance was not an aberration. It was a portrait. Everything was being looked at, consulted on, mulled over and carefully considered. Intensive discussions were under way about how Britain can be involved. Processes were happening in particular ways. At pace. At speed. Going nowhere. Stanley noted the contrast with Donald Trump, interviewed simultaneously on the tarmac, shouting about Ayatollahs and oil prices with the chaotic energy of a man who at least understands that the moment requires action rather than vocabulary. Whatever you think of Trump, he is not setting up committees to investigate underfundment while the country slides into chaos. Starmer is. It has been obvious for weeks where the biggest blockage in Britain's defence planning sits. Not in the Ministry of Defence. Not in the Treasury. In Downing Street, in Numbers 10 and 11. The Prime Minister cannot tell the country where the money for defence is coming from because doing so would require cuts that would put him in new difficulties with his party. The party that cannot be offended. The coalition that cannot be challenged. The constraint that explains every hesitation, every delay and every process that substitutes for decision. A war is burning in the Gulf and the Prime Minister's answer is that he needs to get it right. And the decision that has been obvious for weeks, the one that a stronger Prime Minister would have taken on day one of this crisis, is to sack Ed Miliband. Miliband: the man who led the Cabinet revolt against supporting America. The man who blocked the use of Diego Garcia. The man who spent a year dismantling Britain's energy independence and then stood at the despatch box admitting British households would be exposed to international fossil fuel markets. The man who is now presiding over the energy emergency that Andrew Neil has described in the Daily Mail as bordering on the criminally negligent. He is still in post. Still in the Cabinet. Still in the room. Because Starmer cannot afford to remove him. The coalition that put him in power, the parliamentary left, the public sector unions, and the bloc votes Labour cannot afford to lose, will not allow it. That is the answer to every question this crisis has raised. Why did Britain hesitate over Diego Garcia? Why did it send the wrong ship? Why is the defence plan still unfinished? Why is Miliband still Energy Secretary? Why does the Prime Minister answer every urgent question with a process? Because governing in the national interest would require decisions that the political coalition that put this government in power will not permit. Stanley put it best. The PM normally operates in a coma. His authority, when tested, goes up in smoke like a mini Krakatoa. The smoke has been visible for three weeks. The fire started long before that. "And the decision that has been obvious for weeks, the one that a stronger Prime Minister would have taken on day one of this crisis, is to sack Ed Miliband."
Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 tweet media
English
44
331
776
15.9K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Andrew Man
Andrew Man@TegoArcanaDei·
“Diesel is nudging towards 173p a litre. Filling up a family car now costs the best part of ninety pounds.” “UK energy costs are four times higher than in the United States. “Factories are shutting. Investment is leaving. “Jobs are disappearing.” “No credible plan. Just a deadline and an ideology.”
Andrew Man tweet media
Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧@JChimirie66677

When Leadership Is Needed, Britain Gets Process Iran has fired ballistic missiles at a British base in the Indian Ocean. The Strait of Hormuz has been closed for the first time in history. Oil is heading toward two hundred dollars a barrel. Defence manufacturers are laying off staff. The defence investment plan that should have been ready last year is still blocked in Whitehall because it has to be agreed by everyone across government. And the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom appeared before the liaison committee this week to explain that he considers the conversation on defence and security to have started, but is urged by others to take it to another level. Tim Stanley, watching from the press gallery, felt a powerful urge to jump into the Thames. He was not alone. The liaison committee appearance was not an aberration. It was a portrait. Everything was being looked at, consulted on, mulled over and carefully considered. Intensive discussions were under way about how Britain can be involved. Processes were happening in particular ways. At pace. At speed. Going nowhere. Stanley noted the contrast with Donald Trump, interviewed simultaneously on the tarmac, shouting about Ayatollahs and oil prices with the chaotic energy of a man who at least understands that the moment requires action rather than vocabulary. Whatever you think of Trump, he is not setting up committees to investigate underfundment while the country slides into chaos. Starmer is. It has been obvious for weeks where the biggest blockage in Britain's defence planning sits. Not in the Ministry of Defence. Not in the Treasury. In Downing Street, in Numbers 10 and 11. The Prime Minister cannot tell the country where the money for defence is coming from because doing so would require cuts that would put him in new difficulties with his party. The party that cannot be offended. The coalition that cannot be challenged. The constraint that explains every hesitation, every delay and every process that substitutes for decision. A war is burning in the Gulf and the Prime Minister's answer is that he needs to get it right. And the decision that has been obvious for weeks, the one that a stronger Prime Minister would have taken on day one of this crisis, is to sack Ed Miliband. Miliband: the man who led the Cabinet revolt against supporting America. The man who blocked the use of Diego Garcia. The man who spent a year dismantling Britain's energy independence and then stood at the despatch box admitting British households would be exposed to international fossil fuel markets. The man who is now presiding over the energy emergency that Andrew Neil has described in the Daily Mail as bordering on the criminally negligent. He is still in post. Still in the Cabinet. Still in the room. Because Starmer cannot afford to remove him. The coalition that put him in power, the parliamentary left, the public sector unions, and the bloc votes Labour cannot afford to lose, will not allow it. That is the answer to every question this crisis has raised. Why did Britain hesitate over Diego Garcia? Why did it send the wrong ship? Why is the defence plan still unfinished? Why is Miliband still Energy Secretary? Why does the Prime Minister answer every urgent question with a process? Because governing in the national interest would require decisions that the political coalition that put this government in power will not permit. Stanley put it best. The PM normally operates in a coma. His authority, when tested, goes up in smoke like a mini Krakatoa. The smoke has been visible for three weeks. The fire started long before that. "And the decision that has been obvious for weeks, the one that a stronger Prime Minister would have taken on day one of this crisis, is to sack Ed Miliband."

English
6
34
81
3.1K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Tony
Tony@EvacTony·
As I've been publicly saying for some time, this was my experience having served in Leicestershire Police, in the attempt to stop racism which during my 8 years I didn't see any of, they've frightened officers into inaction, as soon as that word is mentioned, they're rabbits in the headlights with images of job loss and mortgage payments flashing in their minds. This is what gave birth to two tier policing, on an organisational level and on the front line they've chosen appeasement and apology as a response to the accusation of "institutional racism" and its costing lives! The same sickness is at play within the mental health services it seems, who again feared racism and didn't keep him locked away because black men were over represented within their service. Political correctness kills 💔 #NottinghamAttacks #ValdoCalocane
Tony tweet media
English
7
37
132
1.1K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Britzer
Britzer@BritzerHist·
Has Ghana conveniently forgotten that the Ashanti Empire was one of the largest slave trading kingdoms in Africa and activity participated in the transatlantic trade? Britain launched a series of campaigns to abolish slavery, forcing the Ashanti to outlaw slavery in 1874.
BBC News (World)@BBCWorld

Ghana demands compensation for slavery in landmark UN vote bbc.in/4rRUjny

English
40
264
1.4K
22.9K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
John Redwood
John Redwood@johnredwood·
Why does the government urge peace by negotiation in Iran, but not in Ukraine? Why is more death and destruction in Ukraine OK? When is the government going to start talks with Iran?
English
39
63
302
4K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Clarissa Reilly
Clarissa Reilly@clarescastle·
Here is footage of @CommonsSpeaker telling Boris Johnson to answer questions. Something he keeps insisting he is constitutionally unable to get Starmer to do @TimesRadio He and the PM have rendered PMQs pointless.
Chris Rose@ArchRose90

More examples of the Speaker, Lindsay Hoyle, reminding Boris to answer the question put forward to him. There’s no excuse for allowing Keir Starmer to evade every question time and time again during #PMQs

English
10
127
330
5.3K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Hannah Barnes
Hannah Barnes@hannahsbee·
Interesting. I remember working on this story with Sima Kotecha at Newsnight. The costs to victims are really high. One rape victim was quoted £7,500 for the transcript of her trial. Another victim was quoted £300 just for the judge's sentencing remarks: bbc.co.uk/news/uk-671238…
Sienna Rodgers@siennamarla

Exclusive by @nadinebh_: Labour MPs have been told to vote AGAINST an amendment to allow victims free access to transcripts of court proceedings Why? The minister cites preparedness and affordability 👇 politicshome.com/news/article/l…

English
14
306
738
27.8K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Sedd 🇬🇧
Sedd 🇬🇧@SeddSezz·
🚨Europe faces a fuel shortage within DAYS, warns the CEO of Shell The Oil and gas supply squeeze is already forcing parts of Asia to cut energy consumption If only the UK had vast oil and gas sites to approve for drilling… Oh wait, we bloody well do! Why are we not USING the assets our country was endowed with by nature? Because we have a corrupt government driven by a moronic ideology and neoliberal agendas.
Sedd 🇬🇧 tweet media
English
112
408
1.1K
16K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Robbie
Robbie@Robbie_Reasons·
As Ghana calls for reparations and the left wing media rush to reinforce the white guilt some may feel, it is notable that none use this photo of a British Sailor removing the chains from a freed slave. Great Britain ended the slave trade and paid in blood and coin. No charge.
Robbie tweet media
English
82
492
2.4K
37.4K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Andrew Neil
Andrew Neil@afneil·
We’re relying more on LNG to set the price because we’re allowing domestic supplies to decline and depend more on imported LNG supplies. A matter of policy. A bizarre policy driven by net zero zealots. Even in a mature field like the North Sea there is still a lot more gas to get out. Ask the Norwegians. Increase that supply and UK NBP hub prices will come down. Tax revenues will rise. Balance of payments will improve. Sterling will strengthen. And more jobs will be saved/added. Simples.
Tara Singh@RenewableUKCEO

@afneil Hi Andrew — you’re right there are regional hubs. But the UK NBP increasingly relies on LNG to balance the system, and cargoes go to the highest bidder globally. So the price here is increasingly set by the marginal LNG cargo — i.e. a global price, not a domestic one 1/2

English
79
518
2.2K
71.2K
🧡🌻bramblecampbell 🦖🤍💚💜🧹🍰☕️📚🎨🔬🔎🔭 retweetledi
Leo
Leo@LeoNelissen·
We (the Netherlands) have absolutely no gas in storage, no Russian gas, our Qatar supplies got bombed, and the U.S. is selling to the highest bidder (obviously). Our solution: Pouring cement into Groningen gas wells so we can never drill gas again. I think that's the definition of r*tarded.
LiveSquawk@LiveSquawk

$TTF | Dutch Gas Storage Drops To Lowest For Time Of Year Since 2010 - Gas Storage Drops To 6.1% Full, According To GIE Data

English
417
1.4K
10.4K
448.8K