Vivienne 🏴‍☠️🪴

@RiuHoteles @TUIUK I’m posting this because I think that if you want a decent @RiuHoteles holiday go somewhere where there’s no corruption and scam. I’m standing up for Madeira and their wonderful people.

@RiuHoteles Equally @TUIUK You need to look at your representatives here and sack the lot of them. This is obviously not a new thing. Shame on you for not doing anything about it. 4

Like anyone I was horrified by the report about RIU Palace in Cape Verde. We have been staying at RIU Madeira for many years now. We have never seen any flies on food or mould on bedding. 1

@marcoOguga @karenfthompson Says anime face stupid troll twat kid. Fuck off idiot. Blocked 🚫

@karenfthompson Jealous cause no one knows who the fuck the bitch Karen Thompson is? Dont worry, you have in max 15 yeasrs of life by the look of your face, dumb witch

Something for Twits of a certain age to ponder over ….!!!!!

@malprin Wow! 😎

Dull tweet: Today I’ve hit my target weight Since I started this ‘journey’ back in May last year, I’ve lost 6 stone (38.3kg) Just got to keep it off now… #WeightLoss

@LouAspinall @JChimirie66677 Apparently working all our lives and paying in for these sulky morons’ great grandparent’s and grandparents pensions as part of NI when we were young is simply NOT ENOUGH. We are THE problem.

@KitchandBot @JChimirie66677 How very dare us being pensioners. 😒

The Cheques Go Out. The Men Arrive. The Women Pay the Price. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office published its aid allocations without apology or embarrassment. Afghanistan receives £192 million. Somalia £143 million. Yemen £142 million. Sudan £141 million. Nigeria £138 million. The Treasury writes the cheques. The Foreign Secretary insists the money saves lives. Neither of them will say what the figures actually represent. Afghanistan is governed by a regime that in April 2024 announced the enforcement of stoning and flogging for women accused of adultery. The UN's own Special Rapporteur describes a system of institutionalised discrimination amounting to gender apartheid. Girls are banned from secondary education. Women have been stripped from public life by decree. Britain sends £192 million a year, routed through NGOs the Taliban has simultaneously banned women from working for, which rather defeats the stated purpose. Somalia ranks second on the Open Doors World Watch List for Christian persecution, behind only North Korea. Christians identified in the country face torture or death. Women and girls face forced marriage and sexual violence as instruments of social control. The Somali parliament has repeatedly failed to pass legislation on FGM and sexual violence. Britain sends £143 million. Yemen, where FGM affects up to 84 percent of women and girls in some governorates, and where apostasy carries the death penalty, receives £142 million. Sudan, which has 15 million women and girls who have undergone FGM, receives £141 million. Nigeria, whose northern states operate sharia courts with apostasy laws punishable by death, and where 14 million women and girls have undergone FGM, receives £138 million. Five of the ten top recipients of British aid appear in the Open Doors top ten for Christian persecution. The government knows this. The figures are its own. The same government presides over the Channel. Between 2018 and 2024, 147,568 people arrived illegally by small boat. Of those for whom data was recorded, 76 percent were males aged 18 to 39. In 2024, the leading nationalities were Afghans, Syrians and Iranians. In the first half of 2025, 70 percent of those crossing were young males from Afghanistan, Sudan and Iran. They arrive without verified documents. They arrive without verified ages. They are processed at Manston and dispersed into communities across Britain, often into hotels operating with minimal supervision. The crime record is now a matter of parliamentary record. Louise Casey's report into rape gangs identified asylum seekers among those involved in the sexual exploitation of young British girls. The five nationalities most likely to cross the Channel saw a 110 percent increase in sexual offence convictions between 2021 and 2024. Foreign nationals account for one in seven sexual offence convictions while comprising one in ten of the population. In London, they account for over 40 percent of sexual assault charges while comprising 25 percent of the population. The Sun found 339 charges in six months across only half the asylum hotels in operation. The Mail on Sunday found 708 charges across a third. A YouGov poll found 93 percent of Britons support the deportation of illegal migrants convicted of rape and violent crime. Ninety-three percent. The highest rate of support was in Scotland, at 97 percent. The British public has arrived at a verdict. The political class is still writing the briefing notes. Britain is funding, at scale, some of the most repressive and misogynistic regimes on earth. Britain is simultaneously admitting, without adequate screening, large numbers of young men formed in those same societies. The connection is not complicated. The refusal to state it plainly is a political choice, made in the full knowledge of the consequences, and those consequences are being borne by British women. "Britain is funding some of the most repressive and misogynistic regimes on earth."

@medieval_rat OMG it’s fabulous 😎😁

The Lamb cake in all its glory. I know a fair few amateur bakers follow me I expect to see your version.

@karenfthompson Wow utterly charming 😑😎

As you all know I started on Good Friday to make some white chocolate carrot cake mice and chocolate mousse filled chocolate flower pots with “ carrots” 🥕 TA DAH …. Here is my little Easter plate I did for Easter Sunday … Those naughty bunnies have been in the farmers carrot patch … And are having a great feast .. I think it turned out quite lovely.. don’t you ..??

@ColonelTamar @HRHLadyJ I wonder if she has met Archificial and Invisibet? 🤔

@KitchandBot @HRHLadyJ I gotta say, I would. It’ll get her out of a jam and make $

Griffiths’ Sussex Cheerleading: Flirty Messages, a Harmless Tweet, and the “Security Crisis” That Isn’t Oh, the delicious, slightly faintly nauseating irony. In the latest masterpiece of “journalism” from the Mail on Sunday, Charlotte Griffiths, longtime Sussex cheerleader in chief, and the woman who once exchanged “mwah xxx” texts and nostalgic “weekend of naughtiness” banter with Prince Harry, has declared that Markle’s £1,400 per head girls’ weekend retreat in Sydney is being “overshadowed by growing security concerns.” The supposed villain, according to the article, is an online “troll” who allegedly plans to infiltrate the event and secretly record everything. Except if you actually read the X post Griffiths breathlessly parades in her article, and even screenshots for maximum drama, that’s not what it says at all. The post is from @MeghansMole, who wrote: “I hatched a plan with a friend who lives in Sydney to attend the best life weekend, they have been accepted & has a spot secured. Good luck figuring out who it is, Meghan 😊.” So to be clear, the person Griffiths’ article frames as a troll isn’t even the one attending. Her friend bought the ticket, was accepted, and secured a spot. There’s no threat, no mention of hidden cameras, no declaration of sabotage. Just someone saying their friend's going to an expensive commercial wellness event and ending the post with a cheeky smiley face. That’s it. That's the great security crisis now apparently overshadowing Meghan wellness weekend. And, predictably, other outlets that do zero reporting of their own have now lifted this entirely fabricated narrative and run it as fact, amplifying a manufactured security scare fed by a well placed Sussex mouthpiece. What a pathetic, manipulated, and entirely predictable state journalism is today. If this is genuinely just a paid weekend event for adults, it’s hard to see why one mildly cheeky X post about a ticket holder has suddenly become a national “security concern.” It now warrants a headline, a full page spread, and dramatic language about infiltration. Griffiths injected the “secretly record” angle entirely on her own. She turned a post that never mentioned cameras into an infiltration plot, complete with implied recording devices. It follows the same long-standing pattern: Griffiths spots a random anti-Sussex social media post, exaggerates the threat, and rushes it into print as proof that Meghan's under siege even from ticket-buyers at her own paid event. This is peak Sussex media protection racket. It gets even more absurd if you remember this point. Meghan has publicly said she only sees about 1% of what is written about her online. One percent. And yet somehow a obscure X post, which was neither nasty, threatening, nor defamatory, has been blown up into a fully fledged media story about security risks and infiltration. Or are we to believe that Griffiths was so troubled by this non-problem that she felt compelled to carry the banner for the Sussexes? So which is it? She sees almost nothing written about her, or she and her team are monitoring random social media posts closely enough to turn one into a security storyline in a national newspaper? You can’t really have both. It also raises a very practical question. Is this just setting the scene for something else? If this event, which even supporters admit isn’t exactly selling out, fails to pull in the numbers needed to make it worthwhile, what comes next? Does it quietly go ahead anyway, or does it get shelved? And if it does get cancelled, does “security concerns” suddenly become the reason? It would be a very convenient and commonly used talking point. Not lack of demand, not ticket sales, not profitability, but safety concerns. Something nobody can really argue with and nobody can easily verify. A ready made reason sitting there in advance, just in case. Or perhaps this is simply another example to add to the ever growing list of security concerns that seem to follow Harry everywhere. Another incident that can be pointed to later, another example that can be referenced whenever the subject of protection, danger, and risk comes up again. Either way, the whole thing feels very carefully positioned. None of this should really come as a surprise. For well over a decade, Griffiths has operated as one of the Sussexes’ most reliable and consistently sympathetic voices in media. Her stories have an uncanny habit of appearing at exactly the right moment with exactly the right framing. Sources who only seem to echo the Sussex version of events, narratives that appear just when they are most useful, and coverage that rarely strays far from their preferred storyline. But the real irony in all of this is almost too perfect. Just days ago, in the final stages of Harry’s privacy lawsuit against Associated Newspapers, which is the very publisher that employs Griffiths, a caché of 2011 to 2012 Facebook messages between Harry and Charlotte surfaced in court. Harry had testified under oath that he barely knew her. Met her once at a party thrown by mutual friend Arthur Landon. Had no idea she was a journalist. Immediately cut contact when he found out. No relationship. No ongoing friendship. Nothing to see here. The messages read like the most awkward exhibit imaginable for “liar, liar, pants on fire,” and told a very different story. Harry messages her: “It’s H, in case u were confused by name and picture!!! X.” He calls her “sugar.” He talks about “movie snuggles.” He jokes about drinking her under the table. He fondly recalls “our weekend of naughtiness” and gives her his private mobile number. Griffiths replies: “Hello Mr Mischief… What a fun weekend of naughtiness, can’t we all get up to no good in the countryside every weekend damn it?? Smooches, CG String. Xxx.” It’s friendly, familiar, and clearly more than a one time introduction at a party. It’s the very opposite of “I barely knew her, Your Honour.” And yet here we are in 2026, and the same woman Harry swore was practically a stranger continues to step up, hold the line, and churn out pro-Sussex propaganda. The whole situation looks deeply awkward. This latest “story” isn’t an exclusive. It isn’t investigative reporting. It isn’t a story at all. It’s a social media post about a friend buying a ticket, twisted by Griffiths into trolls, infiltration, and “security fears,” all to pull sympathy for the Sussexes. Meghan isn’t facing an organised threat. She’s hosting an over-priced lifestyle retreat for paying customers. It all feeds the same familiar narrative. Even when they are hosting a luxury weekend event, there still has to be a sense that someone, somewhere, is out to cause trouble. The Facebook messages didn’t just embarrass Harry in court. They also cast a very long shadow over years of Sussex coverage. Every glowing Griffiths exclusive, every sympathetic Sussex story, every conveniently timed narrative now looks rather different when you know the history. Griffiths isn’t just another journalist merely covering the Sussexes. She’s carrying water for them. Still. After everything. After the texts. After the lawsuit against her employer. After the world saw just how close she once was to one half of the Montecito brand. And now we're meant to believe that a friend of a ticket holder posting a cheeky message on X represents a serious security issue worthy of national coverage. It would almost be funny if it weren’t so transparent.

@ColonelTamar @HRHLadyJ Ha ha, possibly, if she’s the one he “rode like a stallion”.

@HRHLadyJ Is Griffith gonna write a sex book?

@weeweebeena @RVealingthenarc @devastellar As much as I am loath to defend this woman this is right. She wanted to move the mic up so you could hear her better and yes she is holding her own mic.

@RVealingthenarc @devastellar It looks to me like she is moving the mike up so the lady holding it on her lap can be heard? Mm has her own mike?

Oh no, Meghan. Is this what we have to look forward to in Australia during panel discussions? #meghanmarkleexposed #meghanmarkleisanarcissist #revealingthenarc

@JChimirie66677 Brilliant post Jim. Starmer is possibly THE most hated PM ever. So many questions so few answers. I’d rather trust a starving wolf than this man.

Trump has now compared Starmer to Neville Chamberlain. Not Winston Churchill. Not a loser. Chamberlain. The man whose name has been synonymous with appeasement, miscalculation and the catastrophic misreading of a mortal threat for eighty years. The escalation of historical comparisons tells its own story. Each one has been worse than the last. Each one has been earned. The context makes it worse. Trump has issued Iran a final ultimatum. Open the Strait of Hormuz or face the destruction of every power plant and bridge in the country within four hours. The Strait has been closed for over a month. Oil is heading toward two hundred dollars a barrel. Britain's fiscal headroom is gone. Energy bills are rising. And according to the i newspaper, Starmer is preparing to refuse American use of British bases to strike Iranian bridges and power plants, on the grounds that such targets fall outside the narrow definition of defensive action that Lord Hermer's legal opinion permits. Lord Hermer again. The Attorney General who blocked Diego Garcia at the start of this crisis is now drawing the boundaries of what America can and cannot do from British soil at its most critical moment. He has not stood for election. He has not been held accountable by a single British voter. He was appointed. And he is determining the foreign policy of a country whose closest ally is issuing ultimatums while the world's most important shipping lane remains closed. The suspicion, and it is one that the evidence does nothing to dispel, is that international law is not the reason for these decisions. It is the cover for them. The reason is the same one it has always been: a governing coalition that cannot afford to be seen taking the American side. The pattern established at the very beginning of this crisis has never broken. Starmer and Hermer blocked Diego Garcia. A drone on his own runway forced the reversal. A ship in dry dock took a fortnight to reach a base that had already been hit. He consulted his team on minesweepers. He called for negotiations with the regime bombing his own personnel. He issued humanitarian statements about Lebanon that did not mention Hezbollah once. At every stage the response has been the same: find the legal opinion, follow the process, do the minimum the moment demands and nothing more. And now, as Trump prepares what may be the decisive strike of this conflict, Starmer is drawing up fresh legal reasons why British soil cannot be used to support it. Five weeks in, the pattern is unbroken. Churchill did not need a lawyer to tell him what the moment required. Thatcher assembled a task force within days of Argentina's invasion, acted with clarity and speed, and did not mistake the legal framework for a substitute for leadership. Starmer has never understood that distinction. Lord Hermer has made a career of not understanding it. Together they have produced a foreign policy that has managed to disappoint Washington, alarm Gulf allies, lose the confidence of Cyprus, cede moral leadership to France and earn the Chamberlain comparison from the President of the United States, all within five weeks. Trump's ultimatum may or may not end the crisis. Iran's rejection of the Pakistan-brokered ceasefire suggests the regime is still gambling that continued defiance costs less than surrender. That gamble may yet prove fatal. What is already certain is that Britain will have played no meaningful part in the resolution, having spent five weeks finding legal reasons to watch from the sidelines. Chamberlain famously returned from Munich believing he had secured peace in our time. He had secured nothing except the contempt of history. Starmer will not return from anywhere waving anything. He has simply been present while others acted. The Chamberlain comparison stings precisely because it is not about cowardice. It is about the catastrophic cost of mistaking process for leadership. Appeasement has a new face.

@SamRaincock @CDodson_Thatch I’m keeping out of this debate.

@CDodson_Thatch It is Roddas Cornish cream. I am implementing according to their instructions roddas.co.uk/cream-teas/

Proper!

@immahermit @poperespecter1 This love has broken me. 😭

@poperespecter1 I’d never seen this before and I have no words for how touched I am right now 🥲 His kindness and love for all of God’s children is genuine and evident in this encounter. Such a blessing! TY for posting ❤️

Maybe my favorite Pope Francis moment. 🥹

@agreatdayinnc @poperespecter1 It was pure love.

@poperespecter1 I could feel all of his emotions from this interaction

@rogeliomtz75 This is photo of the year @BBCWorld @BBCNews

En el Viacrucis del Viernes Santo, en un barrio lleno de fé, un perrito callejero, se acercó sin miedo… y suavemente apoyó su cabecita sobre él, como diciendo, sin palabras: “No estás solo". 🐾❤️

@Eng762051364509 @dougiebrimson Yet you are still alive, glory be! Hallelujah!

@dougiebrimson As long as it improves your driving the percentage of boomers i’ve been taken out by on the roads increases daily

I've just spend £15.26 of my old age pension on some bits for my car. I hope that's alright with everyone.