Far-White/Extrême Doigt

A slot on the Today programme beckoned, and a grilling from Nick Robinson. Robinson succeeded in baiting out the real Zack Polanski; scratchy, irritable and out of his depth. Yet the Green defence is already out there in the open; people pointing out the failings of his party will inevitably be portrayed as not giving him a fair hearing or part of some conspiracy. It becomes very difficult to apply scrutiny to people so utterly convinced of the existence of a shadow world and so minimally cognisant of political reality. Indeed, mockery might be the closest anyone can get to engaging meaningfully with Mr Polanski. Fortunately, the material is abundant, ripe and seemingly renewable. ✍️ Madeline Grant Article | spectator.com/article/mocker…

At least the Democrats aren't hiding it anymore. One of the leading Democrat candidates for CA governor, Katie Porter, just said the entire quiet part out loud about free health care for illegal immigrants. I'm old enough to remember when they said this wasn't happening.

@Alexandr4Denman As ive said a thousand times.. you want Sharia Law, Burkas, Halal.. good for you!! Theres at least 30 countries to choose from.. off you go !!! 👋🏻👋🏻

@JoeyMannarino @TRobinsonNewEra Wow. They’re banning everyone who was going to speak at the rally.

What Muslims did to Yazidis in Iraq was so much worse than what happened in Gaza. Elderly women buried alive for being too old to be sex slaves. Mothers forced to eat their own babies. Young girls locked in iron cages and burned to death. Yet not a single protest! Everyone who is now protesting for Gaza was completely silent. Why is that? Unlike the people of Gaza, the Yazidis didn’t start a war!

Yes, of course. Muslim children can avoid it. Just like vegetarians avoid meat.

We should not have to share the Muslims' phobias

The obsession with “they weren’t poor enough” is revealing. Even if Bezos had advantages, family support, or prior success, that still doesn’t explain away building one of the largest and most influential companies on earth. The garage story was never proof that founders magically start with nothing. The point was that massive companies often begin as uncertain private ventures, not state planned institutions handed guaranteed success. And notice how socialists constantly move the goalposts: If someone succeeds from nothing, they got lucky. If they had resources, connections, or investors, they were privileged. If they work harder, take risks, or build better systems, that gets ignored too. The conclusion is predetermined: Success itself must be morally illegitimate.

British common law already covers most of the core rights in the ECHR. The right to a fair trial, freedom from arbitrary detention, freedom of expression and the presumption of innocence were all embedded in English law centuries before the convention existed. What the ECHR added, or more precisely what the Human Rights Act 1998 added by incorporating the ECHR into domestic law, are several specific provisions that go beyond traditional common law protections. Article 8, the right to private and family life, has been the most consequential. It has been used extensively to block the deportation of foreign criminals and failed asylum seekers on the grounds that removal would breach their family life. That was never what the original drafters intended and it bears no resemblance to the 1950 text. Article 3, the prohibition on torture and inhuman treatment, has been interpreted by Strasbourg to prevent returns to countries where individuals might face harsh conditions, even when those conditions fall well short of what most people would recognise as torture. That interpretation blocked the Rwanda scheme. The right to life under Article 2 and the right to liberty under Article 5 are the most straightforwardly compatible with existing common law tradition. Article 6 on fair trial rights is largely duplicated in common law. A British Bill of Rights could retain the core protections while removing the expansions that have gone far beyond anything the original text envisaged.

@MattWalshBlog They said bible-changing, not faith obliterating. Faith, by definition, is believing something without evidence, and in practice is often DESPITE evidence. Why would anyone expect more evidence to shake the faith of those willing to believe something without or despite evidence?

I'm a lot more open to the possibility of aliens than many people here, but the idea that anything related to aliens or UFOs could have "Bible-changing" implications is totally ridiculous. There is no reason why it should shake anyone's faith to find out that God created other lifeforms on other planets out there in the vast cosmos. There are like a hundred billion galaxies. My faith does not demand that I assume they're all completely empty.

I always said that the political agenda known as the Climate Scam would self immolate, and that certainly seems to be happening now. Not only do we now know that many wind turbines contain asbestos (highly illegal) but the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change) have now admitted that their doomsday scenarios used for decades to scare us are simply not true. Also 46 of their scientists have resigned or left them in disgust over the lies that they used to peddle. The clock is ticking on your lies, boys: @Ed_Miliband @DaleVince @GBEgovuk

Yes, Ed Miliband has covered up evidence that Net Zero will increase energy bills. But until his political opponents themselves commit to abandoning Net Zero, they're no better than he is, says Ben Pile. dailysceptic.org/2026/05/06/ano…

Indeed there is something ominous about it, absolutely, BUT I'm starting to mull over another theory too—specifically relating to the sense of how "rushed" multiple governments including the UK's have appeared in recent years. Labour most of all. Ever since Brexit there's been a palpable sense that somehow someone somewhere is running out of time. Sometimes it's ramming through assisted suicide. Sometimes it's a Digital ID. Sometimes it's abortion up-to-birth. Sometimes it's a million H1Bs here, there and everywhere. Sometimes it's Canada, sometimes it's Germany, sometimes it's Australia. But the pattern is always the same: deeply, profoundly unpopular governments ramming through masses of unwanted legislation that they never campaigned on and was never in their electoral literature. That's what I notice in the broader context of unloved regimes attempting to speedrun bad legislation through their respective parliaments. VPNs are only one small part of the larger pattern.

I will NOT be attending the rally on May 16th in London that @TRobinsonNewEra is organizing and I likely won’t be attending CPAC UK either because the United Kingdom has decided, randomly, that I am unable to travel there any longer because my prescence is “not conducive to the public good”. I have had this ETA travel permission since last May and have been to the United Kingdom about four or five times since then. I didn’t reapply or anything. Today, I just woke up to this notice in my email. They have banned an American citizen from their country for no apparent reason whatsoever. I assume for matters of freedom of speech, but they haven’t clarified. I will most certainly be appealing that decision and applying for a visa through the formal process to see exactly why they’ve deemed me ineligible to come over. Free speech is DEAD in the United Kingdom. Absolutely dead. The Labour government has taken whatever was left of it and destroyed it.

The 1979 Dytham case is one we all must make ourselves aware of and here is why…. In R v Dytham (1979), a police officer stood by as a man was violently assaulted and died. The police officer did nothing - no intervention, no report, no action. The court held that this was not a passive failure, but a criminal neglect of duty. A police officer cannot simply choose not to act when circumstances clearly require it. The principle is simple but powerful: Where a duty exists, inaction can itself be unlawful and when applied to Operation Talla policing, the relevance is direct. Where members of the public presented allegations and evidence of potential criminal conduct, the duty on police was not optional - It required proper recording, assessment and where appropriate, investigation. If instead there was a practice of rejecting reports or failing to record them, the question arises: Was that a lawful exercise of discretion, or a systemic failure to discharge a fundamental policing duty? Dytham establishes that standing by is not neutral. In law, it can create culpability.

The Tories cut defence spending. Especially between 2010 and 2016 — a shaming 22% in real terms. Now, can you show me where, during these six years, the Labour opposition fought against these cuts? And can you tell me how much defence spending has increased in the past two years? No. Thought not.

Lord Hermer is a disgrace. He went after British soldiers over allegations he knew were likely unfounded. After I referred him, the Bar Standards Board has confirmed he could be investigated for serious professional misconduct.

“ A staggering 96,002 asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and Eritrea have arrived in small boats between 2018 and 2025. But only 495 - 0.5% - have been sent back to these countries in seven years. That's right, 495. “ @Daily_Express investigation

"The media leaves the British public in the dark. It presents Hamas, Palestinian and Iranian propaganda as if it's credible." Columnist & Author Melanie Phillips explains how "wicked media malice" has contributed to the uptick in antisemitism. @JuliaHB1 | @MelanieLatest

In 10 days the British lion roars like never before. We will Unite The Kingdom and the West in the greatest patriotic display to hit earth. Be part of history, join us. The whole day will be livestreamed on 𝕏. The only free speech giant available to man.