Debidoodoo

The EU Acted. Hungary Acted. The US Acted. Britain Signed Hotel Contracts Until 2039. Yesterday the European Parliament voted 418 to 218 to pass the strictest returns legislation in EU history. The lead negotiator described it as the final missing piece of Europe's migration system. After almost twenty years of standstill, he said, Europe finally has effective return measures. The vote followed the Chișinău Declaration of 15 May, signed by all 46 Council of Europe member states, pushing back against the European Court of Human Rights' increasingly expansive interpretation of migration law. Europe's governments, operating inside the ECHR framework, have decided they have had enough of judicial overreach. They are acting anyway. Britain's removal rate for illegal arrivals stands at 4%. The EU's removal rate, the number so catastrophically low it triggered yesterday's emergency legislation, stands at 20%. Britain is removing at one fifth the rate of a system the EU itself just declared broken beyond tolerance. While announcing it wants to stop the boats, the Home Office has signed accommodation contracts for asylum seekers running until 2039. A government that intends to remove people does not contract for 15 years of housing them. The standard explanation is the ECHR. Ministers have cited it for years as the primary obstacle to removal, the external constraint that ties Britain's hands regardless of political will. It is worth examining that claim against the Court's own published data. Of more than 430,000 applications processed by the ECHR in the past decade, fewer than 2% concerned immigration. Of those, over 92% were dismissed. Fewer than 450 cases, one in every thousand applications to the Court, resulted in a finding of human rights violation on immigration grounds. The obstacle is not in Strasbourg. It is in Chancery Lane. The domestic immigration tribunal system, staffed in part by judges whose documented backgrounds lie in open-borders advocacy, produces rulings that no democratically elected parliament ever intended and that the ECHR itself would not require. And the institutional machinery surrounding it ensures that challenging any of this carries consequences. A new Islamophobia definition, opposed by the government's own former anti-extremism adviser and by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, is being embedded across every school, hospital, broadcaster and public body in the country. Two-tier policing, documented in Hampshire's own Race Action Plan and in the College of Policing's guidance, conditions officers to treat a racism accusation as the primary fact requiring response. The framework does not just permit the embedding of mass migration. It is designed to make objecting to it a disciplinary matter. The EU has now demonstrated, within the ECHR framework, that effective returns legislation is achievable. Hungary has demonstrated that a 4% removal rate is a political choice, not a legal inevitability. The United States has demonstrated that border crossings can be reduced from 1.6 million to under 240,000 within months of a government deciding to act. Every external constraint Britain's government cites as the reason it cannot act has now been dismantled by other governments operating under comparable or identical legal obligations. Mass immigration is not an act of nature managed by people smugglers. It is a policy choice sustained by successive governments across thirty years, maintained by an institutional framework that classifies concern about it as extremism, and defended by a legal excuse that the EU just voted 418 to 218 to stop hiding behind. The smugglers did not build this system. The government did. Yesterday, 418 members of the European Parliament decided they had had enough of pretending otherwise. Britain's government has not. "Mass immigration is not an act of nature managed by people smugglers. It is a policy choice sustained by successive governments across thirty years"

MOTHER ENGLAND IS BLEEDING She has been betrayed. Not by enemies at the gates, but by the permanent government within. And they are mortgaging her future. Four people. Four names you never voted for. Four people who control more power than the Prime Minister, more power than Parliament, more power than you. And they are borrowing billions from your children to pay for it. DAME ANTONIA ROMEO - The Bully She controls 500,000 civil servants. Her own staff called her "unreasonable, degrading, demeaning." She repaid £31,000 in dodgy expenses. Investigated for bullying in New York. Multiple women came forward. Starmer promoted her anyway. She decides what ministers see. She decides what policies live or die. She runs the machine that outlasts every government. SIR JAMES BOWLER - The Debt-Maker He controls the Treasury. The borrowing. The "no" to tax cuts and the "yes" to debt your grandchildren will pay. He admitted Britain is "dependent on the kindness of strangers" to borrow. He commits billions that future governments cannot undo. Four Chancellors have come and gone. He remains. He has never faced a voter. GARETH DAVIES - The Gatekeeper Fresh into Home Office, now controlling who enters, who stays, who is removed. The borders are his. The policing is his. The small boats keep coming. He keeps his job. Who appointed him? Why now? What commitments has he made that will bind the next government? VIJAY RANGARAJAN - The Sovereignty-Giver He negotiated the Chagos handover. British territory given to Mauritius. The cost? £35 billion. A 99-year commitment that binds your grandchildren. £101-165 million every year until 2124. Long after Starmer is dust. Long after the next government is forgotten. The payments continue. The unelected man who gave away British territory now runs British elections. He investigates Reform UK repeatedly. Finds nothing. Questions about Brendan Cox associations. Questions about loyalty. THEY WERE ALL APPOINTED WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS. Romeo - February 2026. Bowler - entrenched since 2022, borrowing for decades. Davies - April 2026. Rangarajan - March 2024, committing billions for a century. Fresh appointments. Fresh power. Fresh debt. They will outlast Starmer. They will outlast the next government. The permanent government commits. The elected politicians pay. Your children inherit the bill. WHO DO THEY REALLY SERVE? Not you. You never voted for them. You cannot remove them. Yet they control the money, the borders, the elections, and the civil service. They borrow billions your grandchildren will repay. They give away territory your grandchildren will never reclaim. They make commitments that bind for 99 years. They hide behind "operational independence." They hide behind "expert advice." They hide in plain sight while mortgaging your future. MOTHER ENGLAND IS BLEEDING. Her sovereignty sold for £35 billion. Her borders open. Her elections overseen by the sovereignty-giver. Her Treasury run by the debt-maker. Her civil service run by bullies. Her future mortgaged by people she never elected. This is not democracy. This is intergenerational theft by bureaucratic dictatorship. WHO HAS THE RECEIPTS? I am compiling the complete dossier. If you have evidence, documents, verifiable facts about these four, submit them. Facts only. Sources required. The next government must remove them. All four. On day one. Cancel the Chagos commitment. Fire the debt-makers. Clean house. No more operational independence. No more expert advice. No more permanent government. No more borrowing from our children's future. Mother England will not bleed forever. The British people will not be ruled by those they never elected. And we will not pay for their 99-year mistakes. Submit what you have. I will verify. I will publish. I will not stop. Your move.

This story is a good example of quite a number of things. 1. It's a good example of the poor quality of BBC "science journalism". 2. It's a good example of how big corporations and their interests have captured mainstream media. 3. It's a good example of why we really need independent social media (and why governments and large corporates, which have essentially merged together (into a form of corporatism as Mussolini define it) don't like social media and want it censored). Let's look at what the story says. The headline says "Cervical cancer deaths fall to zero in young women given vaccine". Specifically, they say "Between 2020 and 2024, no cervical cancer deaths were recorded in women aged 20 to 24 - the first time that had happened over a five-year period." But routine vaccination of 13 year olds only started in 2018. So the earliest children vaccinated in 2018 would only have been 19 in 2024 at the end of their study period. And we know that even prior to vaccination starting, the number of deaths in 20 to 24 year olds was always close to zero (see graph). So the claim is misleading. Not factually incorrect, but giving a false impression. It's disinformation, in fact. Making us think the vaccine has caused a dramatic improvement, when it has not. If we look at that graph, we can see that the trend is for deaths in all age groups to fall over time, a long time before vaccination started. So the decline in deaths is clearly due to something else (routine cervical screening and earlier treatment being the prime candidate). The BBC journalist who wrote this story has clearly put zero critical thinking into it. The company responsible for the HPV vaccine might as well have just written it verbatim and given it to the BBC to publish. Maybe they did? Let's project ourselves into the future, where all social media users have to provide government ID to access social media, and governments can track who is posting what, and identify and single out "troublemakers", critics and whistle-blowers for their social media posts. Do you think they will stop at censoring and banning people breaking the law, or do you think they will tackle people who are merely criticising flaws in the narrative using data and evidence? Well, we don't need to be Mystic Meg to imagine the future. We can just look back to 2020-1 and see what happened then. Exactly what I described. Government disinformation units tackling what they called "misinformation" and "disinformation" which turned out to be inconvenient truths about lockdowns, vaccines, masks, social distancing, government statistics. So without social media, big corporations and governments can get away with pushing their propaganda through unquestioning mainstream media journalists. That's why we need independent social media. As for the HPV vaccine: it might turn out to be a life-saver. But given that the first cohort of teenagers who received the vaccine in 2018 are now only 31, and the median age at diagnosis with cervical cancer is 45, we are not going to know for sure from empirical data for another decade or more. There are also potential confounders here. In parallel with the introduction of the HPV vaccine for teenagers, cervical cancer screening processes have been changed. Screening is starting at a later age, and is now focusing on detecting HPV rather than directly looking for cancer, and increasing the intervals between screenings. These changes alone may well result in the appearance of less cancer in younger age groups, but risk a big spike in cancers being detected at a later age. The authorities are tilting the table in favour of the vaccine pushers in the short term, but possibly at the expense of women in the longer term. And the other thing we will likely never know is whether the total effect on health from the HPV vaccination is a net positive. Little point in saving 20 cervical cancer deaths per 100,000 people if the vaccine itself is directly causing more than 20 deaths and chronic illnesses per 100,000 people from adverse effects. Why won't we ever know this? Because long-term comparisons of death and illness from all causes between vaccinated people and those receiving a saline placebo is almost never done. Studies always look narrowly at the target disease alone with a very brief and temporary consideration of adverse effects. This ⬆️ is the kind of in-depth analysis our national broadcaster should be doing, in the public interest. Not just parroting vaccine manufacturer talking points. But when you point this out, you get accused of being a conspiracy theorist, and the BBC sets the spook-y Marianna Spring on you. 🙄🕵️‍♀️

@RickOpland @9mmsmg Some people got 3 years jail time for a tweet. A boy recently got arrested and charged for throwing a rubbish bin which hit nobody. All of them in response to horrific incidents involving "people of another culture". What can we do?

@9mmsmg The tolerance of the British people is unbelievable. The fact that hundreds of fathers didn’t get revenge and take out as many as possible is something I can’t comprehend.

Whats happened in the UK is so repulsive that I don't even like thinking about it. What these Pakistanis have done can't be undone, but it can never happen again. Our government needs to make the UK feel the pressure from this. Honestly if they weren't a nuclear country I'd say the United States should completely take them over. This horror needs fixing. Everyone involved in the government and media needs to face justice. They all need to go back.

Imagine the 24/7 Whore Media coverage if a report dropped this week on Far-Right, white, Christian rape-gangs targetting 250k+ Muslim girls in Britain. We know the coverage would be fanatically insane. Yet the other way around? SILENCE! Why so? @BBCNews @SkyNews @dailytelegraph

A long, but worthwhile read, with sources.

🚨 Listen very carefully to what Tony Blair and Larry Ellison of Oracle are telling you. Everything about you will be centralised as data, run by AI, from your genome to your behaviour. You will be watched & monitored constantly. The Panopticon is being built without consent. And when it’s built they won’t need to bother asking you anything anymore. Why do you really think they need those data centres 🚨

When You Can't Beat Reform, Change The Rules. Labour Just Did. There is a line in a democracy that, once crossed, changes everything. When those in power begin adjusting the rules of the game to determine its outcome, the game is no longer democracy. It is managed succession. That line was crossed again on Tuesday night. Two days before the Makerfield by-election, Labour rushed a change to the mayoral voting system through the House of Lords. Regional mayors will now be elected using the supplementary vote system rather than first past the post. The change applies immediately. It will govern whoever replaces Andy Burnham as Mayor of Greater Manchester if he wins on Thursday and stands down. The government's defence is that it is simply restoring the system used before Boris Johnson changed it in 2021. That argument requires the public to believe that a change Labour could have introduced at any point in two years of government became urgent on Tuesday evening, forty eight hours before the vote that triggers the election it is designed to affect. Lord Hayward, a Conservative peer and experienced pollster, was precise in the Lords. There is no other justification for the haste, he said, other than that it solves the Labour Party's problems and prevents Reform winning a mayoralty. Not clumsy. Not rushed. Designed. The mechanics explain why. Under first past the post, Reform could win the Greater Manchester mayoralty on a plurality of votes in a fragmented field, precisely as it won all eight council wards in May's local elections with around fifty percent of the vote. Under the supplementary vote system, voters express a first and second preference. Lib Dem and Green voters, given a second preference, will direct those votes to Labour overwhelmingly. The change does not affect Thursday's by-election. It affects the mayoral contest that follows it, constructing an anti-Reform coalition from the second preferences of smaller parties that Reform itself cannot access. Lord Jackson identified the wider implication. This is potentially a strategy for a progressive alliance being rolled out ahead of a general election, he said, with the aim of locking out the Conservatives and Reform from power. Burnham's allies have already confirmed he would scrap first past the post nationally in favour of proportional representation. The supplementary vote is the local pilot for a national project. Pool second preferences, lock out the right, govern indefinitely on a minority of first preference votes. This is not the first time. Earlier this year Labour delayed local elections after the Electoral Commission stated explicitly that the justification was not legitimate, that extending mandates damages public confidence and creates a conflict of interest by allowing those in power to decide how long they may remain there without consent. The Commission's objection was noted and ignored. Reform demolished Labour anyway. Now the same instinct has been applied to a different mechanism. Not cancellation this time. Electoral system change, deployed with surgical precision forty eight hours before the vote that triggers the election it is designed to affect. Governments confident in their mandate do not need to change the rules two days before the ballot. They face the electorate and take their chances. The timing of Tuesday night's Lords motion is not a coincidence. It is a confession. The voters of Makerfield vote on Thursday. The question of who governs Greater Manchester after that, and under what rules, was settled in the Lords on Tuesday. Nobody voted for that. "Burnham's allies have already confirmed he would scrap first past the post nationally in favour of proportional representation."

🚨Sadiq Khan read the reports of young girls being drugged, threatened & gang-raped in London hotels by Muslim grooming gangs - then repeatedly denied they even existed. His cover-up enabled years of horror. When will he finally face accountability? 🇬🇧

📰 What is a D-Notice? The UK government doesn’t want you to know something important? They send a quiet letter to every major newspaper, TV station and website saying: “Please censor this story for ‘national security’” It’s called a D-Notice (now DSMA-Notice). Here’s the dirty truth: It’s “voluntary”… but almost everyone obeys No court, no vote, no public debate Just a cosy club between spies and editors deciding what YOU are allowed to read Real stories about war crimes, spying on citizens, or government lies get killed in secret It’s not a law. It’s self-censorship by gentlemen’s agreement, the most British form of censorship ever invented. They call it “protecting the country.” In fact, they are protecting the powerful from the public. This system has been running since 1912. Still going strong in 2026. The “free press” isn’t as free as they tell you.

Wake up. Labour must be called out. They are talking about banning VPNs, overnight curfews and total control of the internet. This is authoritarian state stuff outside our tradtions of liberty and should be resisted loudly by anyone committed to magna carta and our constitution.

🚨 A 14 year old girl told a social worker she was being sexually abused. The social worker asked if she wanted to audition for Emmerdale because of her "experience." She was then trafficked across Britain for six months. Raped by multiple men. When police finally found her abuser he was released without charges. She was sent home. This is in the official inquiry report. This happened on British soil. To a British child. And Keir Starmer spent five years as Director of Public Prosecutions and then blocked a national inquiry into it for years after that. He did not fail these girls. He looked the other way while it happened and then spent a decade making sure nobody was held accountable for it. RT if you are absolutely done with every single person who protected this system over these children. 🇬🇧🔥

🚨 THE MOST DANGEROUS BORDER LOOPHOLE IN BRITISH HISTORY. Nobody in the mainstream media is talking about this. That is exactly why I am here! While Keir Starmer and Edi Rama (Starmer's ally who shut down TikTok to "save the kids") pretend their deal will stop the boats, they are hiding a terrifying reality. 🤡 We already know the Belfast knife suspect literally travelled straight through our wide open, unmonitored land border with the Irish Republic. Now think about what happens when Starmer completes his plot to drag us back under Brussels rules! The EU is actively pushing to admit Albania as a full member state. Once Albania joins, their citizens will gain substantial EU free-movement rights, allowing them to fly legally straight into Dublin. Because of the Windsor Framework and the Good Friday Agreement, there can never be a physical hard border between Ireland and Belfast. We are talking about the Albanian mafia, which is already the biggest and most powerful criminal network in Europe. By aligning Britain back with the EU, Starmer is creating a permanent, legal highway for these violent gangs to fly to Dublin, drive straight into Northern Ireland with zero checks, and vanish into the UK. It is a complete and utter sham designed to look tough while surrendering your security to Brussels. RT if you demand we stay completely OUT of the EU and protect our country! 🔁🇬🇧🔥

It’s all coming out now. Starmer’s “seized” Russian tanker was allegedly stripped of its registration, made stateless, uninsured and crewless before the military boarded it. Less daring maritime heroics, more stage-managed theatre. Batman without the ‘Kapows’ - typical Starmer

Just when you thought that Labour and the Climate Scam could not get any worse, it has. UK taxpayers are paying an extra £770 million per year to give France surplus electricity because our national grid cannot handle all the extra electricity generated by wind turbines when the wind is blowing. This is because under existing rules, energy companies can sell “surplus energy” . Yet Labour are insisting on building even more wind turbines before the grid is remotely ready or we have enough battery storage.🤦‍♂️ Guess what though?🤔 It is about to get even worse! On account of Labour signing us up to the EU energy market, we will have to fire up gas power stations to sell surplus energy to the EU. This is because the grid cannot transfer the excess energy from wind turbines in Scotland so we have to pay twice through our bills to generate EVEN MORE electricity so as to sell to the EU at cheap prices! Even the energy companies are criticising this utter nonsense. What a scam this all really is.

@dantwodaughters @benonwine @LuaneLittl32359 Bloody should be!

@benonwine @LuaneLittl32359 Because the people that let them in would then be held accountable. This is self preservation of the political class, they are terrified that they will be drawn and quartered.

Why isn’t the Rape of 250,000 white girls (Children) by predominantly Muslim men on the FRONT-PAGE of every newspaper in the UK. WHY!!!!!

@jollyjamba @benonwine 🎯

@benonwine The UN's 'Replacement Migration' policy being followed by the leaders of every advanced nation relies on the multicultural fantasy to programme native populations to accept mass immigration. Any evidence that challenges the fantasy has to be denied or concealed.

@renaes2b @real_shirelass @POTUS As a Brit I would welcome any help to remove ALL our treasonous politicians, but especially Starmer and this awful Marxist government. We are rapidly heading towards communism and anyone who objects, verbally or in person, gets arrested.

@real_shirelass As an American I am asking @POTUS to suspend ALL international deals with the UK until they remove these POS from office. Since the Royals won't stand up for their own people. Just my opinion

🚨UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and London Mayor Sadiq Khan have both been named in the Rape Gang Report for covering up the Rape of children and standing with the Pakistani Muslim men to rape, torture, traffic and murder young girls who were just children. Our Prime Minister along with other prominent leaders and politicians facilitated the rape and trafficking of these girls to these evil bastards. They allowed it to happen and were 100% involved. THIS SHOULD BE ON THE FRONT OF EVERY SINGLE NEWS PAPER AND MSM!!!!

ARTICLE 19 - Universal Declaration of Human Rights “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Keir Starmer has no legal authority to implement a social media ban. Where are the human rights lawyers? Oh wait… Starmer is one.