Johnjoe

Every Government Is Cutting Fuel Taxes. Reeves Can't Afford To Britain's non-tax component, the actual cost of the fuel itself, is roughly 72 pence a litre. Its tax take is 78 pence, made up of 52.95 pence in fuel duty plus VAT at 20 percent on the full pump price, including the duty. That is a tax on a tax. At £1.50 a litre, Britain is already paying more at the pump than the United States, Japan, Canada, Australia, Poland and Spain. The British state is extracting more from every litre of petrol than almost any comparable country on earth. And now, when every other government is cutting that take to protect its citizens, Starmer's government is silent. Crude oil prices have surged sixty percent since the US and Israel began attacking Iran. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has removed a fifth of global oil and gas supply from the market. Governments across Asia and Europe are responding. Australia has halved its fuel levy. France has subsidised trucking companies and cut farmers' diesel excise to zero. Spain has cut VAT on fuel from twenty-one percent to ten percent. Norway, Ireland, Poland and Italy have all announced relief measures. India has cut fuel taxes to near zero. Japan is releasing oil from its national stockpile. Even Vietnam is cutting taxes and urging citizens to carpool. Britain has announced nothing. Keir Starmer told the public there is no need to do anything other than what is normal. The reason is arithmetic. Rachel Reeves has already committed to ending the long-standing five pence cut in fuel duty this autumn, a move that will bring in just over two billion pounds. That two billion is not a discretionary line in the budget. It is load-bearing. Reeves has made spending commitments that depend on it. To reverse course now would require her to stand at the despatch box and admit that the fiscal strategy is broken. Which it is. But which she cannot say. So the government does nothing and hopes the crisis passes before the political cost of inaction exceeds the political cost of honesty. The figures make the position untenable. France's debt-to-GDP ratio stands at 113 percent, nearly twenty points above Britain's 94 percent. It has found the money. Spain's ratio is 101 percent. It has found five billion euros. Italy, Norway, Ireland and Poland have all found the money. Britain, with more fiscal headroom on paper than France, has found nothing. The argument that this government cannot act because the public finances are too tight is not an economic argument. It is a confession that Labour has already spent money it has not yet collected, on commitments it made before the world changed. This matters beyond the price at the pump. Britain went into this crisis with 1.5 days of gas in reserve. It is the only G7 country that cannot produce virgin steel. It pays the highest wholesale energy prices in Europe. It has no buffer, no storage, no domestic production to fall back on. Every price shock that hits the global market hits Britain harder than it hits comparable nations, because successive governments removed every layer of insulation between the British public and the market. And now, when the market delivers its sharpest shock in years, the government that promised to protect working people discovers it has nothing left to protect them with. Starmer told motorists to carry on as normal. For this government, normal means a crisis it cannot afford to address and a fiscal position it cannot afford to admit. The public will pay the price for both. "Reeves has made spending commitments that depend on it. To reverse course now would require her to stand at the despatch box and admit that the fiscal strategy is broken."

Lots of people are talking today as if the rape gangs are no longer happening. Trust me - they are. All over Britain. In almost every town and city. Vulnerable young white British girls raped and abused by gangs of Muslim men - predominately Pakistani, although a growing number of nationalities participate. The tactics have changed and evolved, but the outcome remains the same. Drugged and plied with alcohol, becoming increasingly reliant on these men - through fear, blackmail or addiction. Turned against their families. It's so much darker than people realise. There are national criminal networks behind so much of it. Torture, murder, abduction. With the same names coming up again and again. That is what shocked so much at our inquiry hearings. It was the level of organisation and sophistication that is involved. It's not just a handful of men, it is everywhere. It's all connected. Most disturbingly, it's how often these girls are trafficked overseas. Almost all of the survivors we spoke to had at some stage an effort to remove them from Britain. Most failed. Some did not. How many women are currently trapped overseas? I've raised this in Parliament. Almost nobody cares. It is devastating. I am still waiting on a response from the Home Secretary about one of the most harrowing stories we heard - no answer. Our inquiry continues. The report is progressing, with more news to come soon. Additional women have come forwards, and our team are working with them. We are doing everything in our power to help them tell their stories. But if you take one message from our inquiry, please let it be this. The rape of Britain continues today.

Islam's moral ceiling is fixed. It was set 1,400 years ago, by Muhammad and the Qur’an. You can’t go higher than Muhammad. He’s the limit. The ceiling. Muhammad married a child, took slaves, ordered executions, waged wars, lied, raped, hated, and stole. So how can anyone say those things are wrong if the man who did them is still your highest example? That’s why Islam doesn’t change, not because Muslims don’t want it to, but because they’re not allowed to imagine anything better than what’s already been given. The West, shaped by centuries of Judeo-Christian moral struggle, leaves space to climb. It admits mistakes. It reforms. It questions. It separates power from holiness. Islam doesn’t. That’s why it doesn’t evolve, and why, when it enters a modern society, it doesn’t integrate. It collides. Because a faith that locks morality in the 7th century can’t live peacefully in a world that keeps growing.

"Dear Mother, I am writing these few lines severely wounded. We have done well, our battalion advanced about 3/4's of a mile. I am laid in a shell hole, with 2 wounds in my hip and through my back. I cannot move or crawl at all. I have been here for 24 hours and never seen a living soul. I hope you will receive these few lines as I don't expect anyone will come to take me away. But you know I have done my duty our here now for 1 year and 8 months and you will always have the consolation that I died quite happy doing my duty. You must give my best to all the cousins who have been so kind to me for the time I have been out here, and the best of love to Mother and Harry and all at Swinefleet." - A note from Private John Duesbury that was found on his body after the Battle of the Somme (WW1). What a waste.

We know that the problem presented by sectarian Islamism in this country is only beginning. As the population of believing Muslims grows, so the threat of Islamist supremacism will grow disproportionately with it. As Emma Trimble points out, even minority numbers of radicalised Muslims can have an outsized impact on what the rest of the population can say and do. Rather than tackling the problem, in the wake of the Gorton & Denton by-election, the Labour Party is in the process of cutting a deal with the Islamist bloc to stem the flood of Muslim voters deserting them for the Greens. That’s why Steve Reed’s anti-Muslim hostility definition was rushed through. Labour is pandering to Islamist supremacism. How are future generations going to deal with it?

Mr Starmer, On this day, 31 March 2026, history will record your actions with clinical precision. There you stood in Downing Street, warmly shaking the hand of Ahmed al-Sharaa, the former commander of al-Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, architect of jihad, suicide bombings and the slaughter of innocents. The cameras captured every second of Britain’s latest act of surrender while you grinned like a gracious host receiving an honoured guest. Only weeks earlier, you declared Muslims the new face of England and allowed a known Palestinian terrorist to lean in and whisper instructions in your ear while you nodded obediently like the spineless puppet you are. You have destroyed relations with our greatest ally, Donald J. Trump. You have betrayed every oath you ever swore. You have handed this nation over to its enemies piece by piece while rewarding traitors like Sadiq Khan with peerages. You are not a Prime Minister. You are a traitor who has deliberately dismantled Britain from within. Your name will be remembered with nothing but contempt. Britain First. No Surrender. 🦁🇬🇧

🚨"HELP ME. PLEASE HELP ME. THEY ARE GOING TO R*PE ME" The lawyers said "IF THE FOOTAGE OF THE ATTACK IS RELEASED THERE WOULD BE RIOTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY" This is horrifying. Listen to her words. The details of the r*pe of a 15 year old girl in Leamington have been released The girl recorded the whole thing on her phone Afghans did this It's awful beyond belief

This is what happens when one of the following goes to no. 10: An Israeli official. = Mass protests. President Trump. = Mass protests. Syrian President Ahmed al‑Sharaa, a man who led Al-Qaeda, anti-Christian pogroms and killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. = No protests.

We are pleased to see the back of Non Crime Hate Incidents after 7 years of battle against the ridiculous @CollegeofPolice But the instinct of Chief Constables to criminalise free speech remains. In fact, it has taken a sinister turn. We are now being recorded without investigation for actual crimes, at the behest of the Home Secretary…. Who, along with the idiot in charge of @LincsPolice, we are taking to the High Court. mol.im/a/15691995

🚨BREAKING: Starmer keeps repeating 'we’re not getting dragged into that war' and 'the UK is not at war' as if saying it loudly enough makes it true. Reality check: Iranian proxies already dragged British sovereign territory into the conflict when a Hezbollah-launched Shahed-type drone slammed into a hangar at RAF Akrotiri on the night of 1 March 2026. British soil was hit. British personnel evacuated. Our base in Cyprus — one of our most important strategic assets in the region — was directly attacked. Yet instead of a firm response declaring that attacks on UK territory will be met with consequences, Starmer’s government rushed to reassure everyone: the drone was launched before we allowed limited US use of our bases for defensive strikes. We’re only supporting ‘defensive’ actions against missile launchers. Akrotiri won’t be used for offensive ops against Iran. Britain is staying out of the wider war. This is the language of evasion, not leadership. When your sovereign base gets struck, pretending you can neatly compartmentalise the conflict and opt out of retaliation doesn’t project strength — it signals hesitation. Adversaries don’t respect legal fine print or repeated declarations of ‘we’re not at war’; they respect resolve. Chamberlain on steroids: desperate to avoid escalation while the escalation has already reached our gates. Britain isn’t ‘being dragged’ — we’re already in the picture because we have global interests, allies, and territory that others now feel free to test. Weak messaging only invites more probes, not less. The country needs a Prime Minister who defends British sovereignty first, not one who treats an attack on our bases as something to explain away with word salad. Cowardice masked as caution. Britain deserves far better than this beta PM.

Following Zarah Sultana’s inflammatory rant on Saturday proves Two-Tier Policing Isn’t a Conspiracy—It’s a Pattern Funny how it works in this country. Say the “wrong” joke online? Police at your door before the kettle’s boiled. Say something genuinely inflammatory from a podium, wrapped in politics and slogans? Suddenly it’s all “complex context” and “we’re assessing the situation.” We’re told the law is blind. Looks to me like it’s squinting—very carefully—at who you are before it decides what to see. Because here’s what people are noticing:    •   One group gets rapid response policing    •   Another gets endless benefit of the doubt    •   And the rest of us get told to shut up and trust the system You don’t need to be far-right, left-wing, or anything in between to spot it. You just need eyes. Equal law should mean equal treatment. Not “depends who said it”, not “depends what badge they wear”, not “depends if it’s politically inconvenient this week.” If the threshold for action exists—apply it. If it doesn’t—stop pretending it does when it suits. Because the quickest way to destroy trust in policing isn’t crime… …it’s inconsistency. So here’s the challenge: Look at how different cases are handled, side by side—and tell me, hand on heart, it’s equal. If you can’t… you’ve just answered your own question.

@TheGriftReport @WingsScotland

It's completely terrifying for young girls these days

Britain’s largest teaching union NEU is debating whether the Supreme Court ruling that a woman is biologically female equals “attempted genocide” of trans and non-binary people. Hard-left activists at their Brighton conference pushed the motion, branding the Equality Act decision and Cass Review as “erasure” with “genocidal intent”. They demand schools defy the law to “treat trans kids with dignity”. Even union boss Daniel Kebede admitted: actual genocide is Rwanda and Auschwitz, not biological reality.

I am against the Assisted Dying Bill. The reason is, in November 2018 my Mother was in hospital recovering from pneumonia. No sooner than she was moved from the A&E ward to a general ward my family we was called to a meeting informing us that Mum was dying and saying it would cause a lot of harm to her if she had heart failure and was resuscitated. What we were told was heavily weighted to a Do Not Resuscitate order. After this numerous meetings were called heavily weighted towards Mum being put on an end of life pathway. Every time I visited I dreaded being called to yet another meeting. I began to feel hounded. In a meeting around 7th November a doctor informed us Mum had recovered well and was fit for discharge. His words “She’s in good shape”, so there was no need for further treatment and if we agreed he could fast track Mum to any place of our choice. Why would you not agree to that? Mum had told us she wanted us to “Get me out of this place” and the doctor was telling us her infection was now negligible and she was in good shape and fit for discharge… However, on my next visit, one and a half days later, I found Mum in a comatose state. I checked at intervals if she knew I was there. All Mum could do was flicker her eyelids and raise her brows in reply. I found, after her death, she had been given morphine and Midazolam. I stayed at the hospital overnight and Mum’s breathing was heavy, but I was twice assured it was normal… As I tended her next morning I saw frothy liquid coming from her mouth. She died as I was wiping her mouth and talking to her. At some point I realised Mum must have died from drowning, with fluid filled lungs. I cannot imagine how awful this must be for someone who was severely claustrophobic and often felt as though she couldn’t breath. Absolute torture I imagine. When I got the medical records I realised Mum had actually been started on the outlawed Liverpool Care Plan by someone who wasn’t even an elderly care doctor. He was a rheumatology registrar. The notes said two doctors were present, but he was the only one who spoke with four of us (Mum’s close family). The notes said we had requested that Mum’s life be ended. In retrospect I think through all this the family were baffled by all the suddenness and what felt like harassment, and in a state of shock. The medical records show a TEP form stating the hospital did not expect to die in the next twelve months, just around the time they told my sister and I Mum was dying!!! This happened in November 2018. Since then I have been fighting for Justice. Mum did not want to die. The family had definitely not requested for her to be commenced on end of life “care”, and our Power of Attorney was ignored… The hospital PALS team, the PHSO, and the GMC, refuse to investigate the doctor. They say he followed end of life NICE guidelines and therefore did nothing wrong. My MP ignores my communications about the matter. After this happened I did some online research to see if others had had a similar experience. To my surprise I found The People’s Care Watchdog, with numerous cases. I then Co-founded EoL Watch “FAIME” [Families Against Involuntary Euthanasia], with a few others who had similar experiences. Then I heard of Jacqui Deevoy, who has made several films, and written a book covering people’s experiences of this. I also found other support and campaign sites, and found there were numerous people going through the same trauma. You see, none of us can trust an Assisted Dying Bill when we have encountered deceit, lies, collusion…. Our loved ones put on end of life before their time, our wishes and their wishes ignored, and Powers of Attorney not worth the paper they are written on… You want to safeguard doctors? I think you should also look into safeguarding patients, and their loved ones, because from what many of us have experienced we wouldn’t trust the Assisted Dying Bill any further than we could throw it. In our opinion it would be an easier path for unscrupulous doctors to end people’s lives with little to nothing done about any malpractice. A total disgrace. @Fox_Claire @LordCFalconer @CareWatchdog @JacquiDeevoy1 @EoLWatch @CompassnInCare @EOLCampaigner @SpotlightJustiz @factukorguk @DearCoroner @patientslives_m @Amanda_M_Hunter @JulieJa24986365 @TopPsychCoach @KD_UK1 @AshTFE

WELL SAID THAT MAN.RESPECT TO ALL VETERANS 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧AND HOLD YOUR HEADS IN SHAME MARKS AND SPENCERS 🤬🤬

Good evening, Apsana Begum. How very revealing. “In East London, we have always shown that we will stand together against injustices at home and abroad.” One does so admire the breathtaking hypocrisy of a woman who stands on a stage surrounded by Palestinian flags, Hezbollah symbols, and every other foreign cause, while claiming to fight “injustices at home”. The real injustice at home is the grooming gangs that destroyed thousands of British girls in towns across the country, scandals you and your colleagues spent years downplaying or deflecting from. The real injustice is the knife crime, drug dealing, and community breakdown tearing through East London under your watch. The real injustice is British taxpayers funding demographic replacement while you lecture us about “standing together”. You don’t stand with East London. You stand with every foreign interest except the British people who pay your salary. The British public sees you clearly now, Apsana Begum, another career activist in parliamentary robes, prioritising Palestine, Hamas sympathies, and imported grievances over the safety and future of the communities you were elected to serve. You are not fighting injustice. You are importing it. Britain First. No Surrender. 🦁🇬🇧

In the decade between January 2015 and December 2024, 9.081 million immigrants entered Britain. 3,018,000 were from nations within the European Union, of which 2,298,000 emigrated, with the rate of emigration increasingly dramatically after the 2016 Brexit vote, for a net immigration of 720,000 EU immigrants in 10 years. In contrast, 5,317,000 of these immigrants came from nations outside the European Union. 3,887,000 came since Brexit came into force in 2020, that is, in just five years. None came from countries that are at war. None of them are refugees. Net migration into Britain (that is, the number of immigrants minus the number of emigrants) between 2015 and 2024 was 3,961,000. However, 3,747,000 (94.5%) of these immigrants were from countries outside the EU. The 2.3 million Europeans emigrating from Britain are not alone. In even greater numbers the British are fleeing our own country, with 2.369 million British citizens leaving Britain between 2012 and 2024 resulting in an estimated net migration, by the end of 2025, of minus 1.2 million. The real figures on the change to the racial and ethnic demographic of Britain, therefore, are even higher than the headline reports in our media and parliament. In 2024, for example, net migration to Britain was 431,000; but more UK and EU citizens left than arrived, with net migration, respectively, of minus 17,000 and minus 96,000. So net migration from non-EU countries was actually 544,000, or the population of Sheffield in a single year hailed by the UK Government and media as seeing a reduction in immigration. Similar headlines met the most recent ONS report that, in the year to June 2025, net migration had fallen to 204,000, around what it was before the 2021 threshold. What the headlines didn’t say was that, over the same year, the net migration of UK and EU citizens was, respectively, minus 109,000 and minus 70,000, and the actual net migration to the UK, therefore, was of 383,000 non-EU nationals, about the size of Middlesborough. These, irrefutably, are the figures of replacement immigration. More concerning even than these numbers is where the immigrants replacing the British and European population have come from. Between January 2021 and December 2024, 850,000 immigrants came to Britain from India, 392,000 came from Nigeria, 256,000 came from Pakistan, 94,000 came from Bangladesh, 86,000 came from Zimbabwe and 77,000 came from Ghana. That’s 1.755 million immigrants from South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, the population of the Manchester Metropolitan Area, in just 4 years. There is a difference, however, between the millions of immigrants from South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa that arrive in our airports and those who arrive in small boats accompanied by UK lifeboats. Of the top 10 countries — Afghanistan (24,419), Iran (23,644), Iraq (16,116), Eritrea (14,584), Syria (13,111), Sudan (9,319), Vietnam (7,897), Turkey (6,741), Somalia (3,042) and Egypt (3,036) — from which 160,535 people entered Britain illegally between January 2021 and June 2025, all but one (Vietnam) are Muslim-majority countries. Of the 171,143 immigrants that, according to the Home Office, have arrived in Britain since numbers were first recorded in January 2018 and June 2025, 71% have been adult males aged 18 and over, and 95% have claimed asylum. On 6 September, 2025, 1,101 immigrants crossed into Britain illegally on small boats from Calais, the highest number in a single day in 2025. Even that is not the highest number ever, however, which occurred on 3 September, 2022, when 1,305 immigrants crossed into Britain illegally. But even if that number arrived every day of the year (making 476,325 illegal arrivals) it would still be a half of how many immigrants are arriving here legally. In fact, the highest annual number of illegal crossings was 45,755 in 2022 — although that was closely rivalled in 2025, when 41,472 crossed into Britain. In contrast, net legal migration from non-EU countries in 2022, the highest number so far, was 965,000, or 2,644 economic migrants from non-EU countries settling in Britain every day of the year, Monday to Sunday, day after day, 18,508 every week. Even in 2024, when net migration from outside the EU dropped to 528,000, the lowest it’s been since 2021, there were 1,447 economic immigrants settling in Britain every day of the year, considerably more than the highest number of illegal immigrants ever to arrive in a single day. To differentiate these two means of arrival, therefore, as ‘legal’ and ‘illegal’ is inaccurate, because it is clear that, with a navy, army, air force and special services at its disposal, if the UK Government wanted to stop the ‘illegal’ arrivals they could do so. Instead, not only are our lifeboat services escorting these so-called ‘refugees’ to our shores, but the Government is then conveying them by coaches, often under the cover of night, to hotels and other accommodation paid for by the UK taxpayer, where they are given free pocket money, three cooked-meals a day, free medical care, free access to doctors and dentistry and other benefits that an increasing number of the British people cannot afford to pay for or to which, with the increased burden on our defunded state services, they cannot gain access. If you don’t want to see the British people replaced in our own homeland by immigrants that have and will contribute nothing to the common weal of this country, in which their men rape our women and children with impunity, their women live on benefits and their children turn our streets into third-world slums, and want to know what we, the British people, can do to stop it, please consider purchasing a copy of my book. The link is below. Click and have a look. architectsforsocialhousing.co.uk/2026/02/26/the…

@John_EdwardsUK Deliberate hit job across the West. Too many of these examples to count. The goal is to crash the existing system, both socially and economically.

The UK is £3 trillion in debt. We spend around £130 billion a year just on debt interest — more than we spend on education or defence. Millions of people are waiting years for adequate social housing, including veterans and children right here in Bracknell, stuck in housing so poor it risks their health. So why did the government sign off a £7 billion Afghan resettlement scheme comprising 4* hotel accommodation, dedicated onsite healthcare, wrap-around care, and move-on support into the private rental sector? Why did Bracknell Forest Council support the scheme without once pushing back or refusing to manage it locally unless the government provided the same level of support for its own struggling residents? Instead, Bracknell Forest Council told residents a sanitised version of the scheme that hid the true scale of the support being provided. They then spent £15,000 of taxpayers’ money on a year-long disciplinary process against me for telling residents the truth about the level of accommodation being offered. The information wasn’t confidential — the council simply didn’t want residents to know. It’s now time to start revealing what’s been happening over the past year, and how the council has been trying to silence me. Because Bracknell needs a council that works to protect its residents — not its own reputation.