M

Britain’s own Epstein ⬇️

Tony Blair thinks the answer to this country’s problems is AI, welfare cuts and endless spending on war. Who benefits? Arms companies and tech billionaires. Once again, Blair is wrong. The answer is a redistribution of wealth and power and the relentless search for peace.

"The first genocide in history where its victims are broadcasting their own destruction in real time."

Walk in the authority that God has given you. You’ve been handed the keys of the Kingdom of God.

Making someone feel delusional for accurately sensing deception is the ultimate form of betrayal.

Not every friend request is a friend request. Some are just surveillance cameras.

@BladeoftheS Exactly

We are just Germany in the 1930s instead of blaming Jews we are blaming migrants. But they aren't responsible for Austerity, Brexit or the profiteering crisis. #bbcqt

So yes, I would not say “never trust lawyers.” But I would say: never trust blindly. Ask questions. Keep records. Demand explanations in writing. And remember that a professional title does not automatically mean integrity.” Luba McPhearson

“”These are not ordinary disputes. Lawyers in these areas should be held to the highest possible ethical standard. When they treat people as case files, income streams, or procedural problems, they become part of the harm.”

@zarahussain999 Where is this?

British Christian patriots protest on the streets, waving UK and England flags and holding a large crucifix. They chant “Whose streets, our streets?” along with “white power” and “white victory.” I can’t believe this is happening in Britain, and the police do nothing. Is this the new British Christian values? We have a big problem in Britain.

be proud of yourself for passing the hardest times alone.

Ignoring Christ does not remove the day you will stand before Him.

The pattern is hard to miss Patterns akin to Narcissistic Abusers The State has become the perpetrators We are seeing too many vulnerable British citizens, elderly, disabled, SEND, homeless victims of abuse, sacrificed on the Alter of the State as currency for their actions Too many British citizens being tortured by the State for speaking truth to power and challenging wrong doing The weaponisation of Psychiatry and Lawfare used to further inflict harm And a government who criminalised us for speaking out We have become a tortured society in this Satanic and Spiritual Battle for power Evil walks among us

You are right. The pattern is becoming impossible to ignore. When vulnerable people, disabled people, elderly people, children in care, victims of abuse, and families who speak out are treated as the problem, something has gone very badly wrong. What frightens me most is the weaponisation of systems that are supposed to protect: safeguarding, psychiatry, legal process, confidentiality, and “best interests”. These words can sound compassionate on paper, but in practice they can be used to silence people, remove family, hide failures, and destroy lives. I am going to try to make appointments with the newly elected council leaders in Sunderland and Newcastle. Labour were wiped out locally, and new councillors have now been elected. Let us see whether they are prepared to listen, look at the evidence, and act differently. Because this cannot continue. Public bodies cannot keep hiding behind process while vulnerable people and families are left to suffer. Accountability has to start somewhere.

Never rush to marry someone because you met in church. Church is like a hospital, not all the Patients are responding to treatment.

A coward by your side is more dangerous than an enemy in front of you.

Holy Spirit, expose what looks good but carriers bad intentions for the children of God.

My evidence was also completely ignored, despite serious concerns being raised by an expert in Mental Capacity Law and Pharmacology. That is what makes these cases so frightening. It is not simply that people disagree with the evidence. It is that crucial evidence can be sidelined altogether, while decisions are then presented as if the process was fair, balanced, and properly reasoned. In my case, the consequences have been devastating. Historic assumptions were relied upon, current concerns were not properly examined, and serious issues about capacity, medication, safeguarding, and family life were brushed aside. When courts or public bodies ignore expert evidence, the question becomes very serious: was the evidence actually considered, or was the outcome already being protected? Justice cannot exist where inconvenient evidence is simply erased from the picture.

“For the barristers, the Court of Protection is a guaranteed income, so they extend the case for as long as possible, then all claim from Legal Aid.” Luba macphearson

I know exactly what is meant by this. In my own case, trauma was not some vague allegation. It was formally recognised in legal submissions. A detailed Skeleton Argument was prepared on my behalf referring to “trauma-informed treatment” and even warning about a “set up to fail” dynamic. That is what makes what followed so hard to accept. If the trauma was known, documented, and clearly placed before the court, why was it not properly acted upon? Why were the consequences for my daughter’s liberty, family life, contact with her family, and basic human rights not pursued with the seriousness they deserved? Instead, the harm continued for years. Later, when I raised serious concerns about the misuse of the Mental Capacity Act, procedural unfairness, and the impact of the orders on my daughter, my own legal representatives, including the same barrister who previously produced Skeleton Argument were no longer truly acting to protect us. Instead of challenging the system, they appeared to become part of it. The most disturbing part was when doubts about my own capacity "to instruct them" were suddenly raised. To me, this felt like the same mechanism that had been used against my daughter: question capacity, silence the person, remove their voice, and then call it protection. That is not justice. That is legal abuse. For the professionals involved, this may have been another case file. For me, it has meant eight precious years lost with my daughter. No proper family life. No Christmases. No birthdays. No holidays. No normal life together. And for my daughter, the loss has been even greater: she was torn away from her only family. How can that possibly be described as the least restrictive option? How can it possibly be in her best interests? Lord Munby once made the point that there is no purpose in locking someone away if the result is simply to make them unhappy. Yet this is exactly what has happened. So yes, add some solicitors and barristers to the list. Certainly not all. But some have protected themselves, protected the system, and ignored the harm caused to the very people they were supposed to defend. For the barristers, the Court of Protection is a guaranteed income, so they extend the case for as long as possible, then all claim from Legal Aid.