We save each other. One moment at a time. One kindness at a time. One breath at a time. One heartbeat at a time.
Committed Pacifist, Peaceville
Joined August 2011
- Tweets139K
- Following1.1K
- Followers2.3K
- Likes214K
Pinned Tweet
Muslim leader, now deposed, of one of four countries making up the United Kingdom, calling on the Prime Minister to set the British Military against the British people.
Just let that sink in for a moment ... digest those words, then understand exactly what has been said ...
Now imagine a very small shift in the timeline, Humza or Khan becoming PM, and then we arrive at today ...
We only need a very small shift in the dynamic within the Labour Party to end up with a radical Muslim Labour Prime Minister.
Just. Let. That. Sink. In.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
I cannot even 😂😂😂
Human (guy with shoe on head) trolls AI Karen Bot in an interview for a minimum wage job at Burger King.
Absolute Perfection. 🤣🤣
Humans for the WIN!
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
Owen Jones bats his eyelids at Russell Brand to ‘Je t'aime... moi non plus’.
Not for sharing please.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
Official and industry estimates show that UK natural gas reserves—primarily located in the offshore UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) with minor onshore contributions—stand at several billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) or hundreds of billions of cubic meters (bcm):
Official Estimates (North Sea Transition Authority - NSTA):Proven and Probable (2P) Reserves: Estimated at approximately 2.5 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) (combined oil and gas) as of late 2025 (down from 2.9 billion boe at the end of 2024).
Contingent Resources (2C): Central estimates for discovered, undeveloped resources sit around 6.2 to 6.5 billion boe.
Prospective Resources: Mapped leads and prospects are estimated at roughly 4.6 billion boe (mean).
So , OK for Norway to us its reserves & for UK to buy from Norway - but not OK to use our own reserves and create jobs and massive tax revenue & get energy security ?
Please make it make sense.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
I'm not hoping for that because people will die. Also because the government will blame anything other than Net Zero policies, and the media will fall in with the lie and nothing will change. Regardless, we are in for a long term affordability crisis, leading to mass defaults, where we'll see armies of bailiffs deployed to force families on to prepay meters, and those families will self-disconnect once a month when they run out of money.
When that happens, they *might* think more carefully about who they vote for, but they will still probably vote for socialists who promise to nationalise energy, so we're still fucked.
There's the outside chance the Tories might win but Badenoch has recently stated that we still need renewable energy, and her party is still occupied by the green blob. As such, even if they do repeal Net Zero, certain economy killing restrictions will remain in place, not least the ban on coal, so any remedial measures will be too little and too late.
I recently reached the conclusion that nothing will be done to fix energy until circumstances force it, at which point it's going to take a minimum of ten years before we see any recovery, by which time Britain will be dirt poor and teetering on the brink of collapse - especially since nothing meaningful will be done about immigration or any other headline crisis.
My advice to anyone is to move somewhere rural, obtain a log burner, a solar generator, and a shotgun.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
643 people sent me a DM yesterday about my post exposing how Andy Burnham’s Manchester council machine secretly intercepts emails from the public.
I believe this new revelation is going to trigger an even bigger shockwave.
Manchester City Council is currently fighting tooth and nail to keep a massive urban regeneration contract hidden from taxpayers.
The corporate partner is a Hong Kong-based developer called Far East Consortium. The funding is a staggering £120 million of public money, including £34.1 million handed over directly by Burnham’s combined authority.
Here is the specific detail that exposes the absolute arrogance of the modern political class.
When a local resident filed a request to read the document, the Chinese developer actually consented to its publication. It was the British council that intervened, heavily redacted the contract, and officially branded the taxpayer’s request for basic transparency as "manifestly unreasonable."
We are operating in a geopolitical environment where foreign powers routinely use infrastructure and property investment to build leverage inside Western cities.
Yet local Labour authorities are handing nine-figure sums of public wealth to Chinese-linked conglomerates, while deploying the full weight of their legal departments to keep British citizens in the dark.
They are perfectly comfortable outsourcing the regeneration of a major UK city to foreign capital. They are just terrified of the people funding the project ever seeing the actual terms.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
Stop paying them. Just stop it!
I read a post this morning by @claire_adams694 saying her energy provider wants to increase her monthly direct debit payments.
Well, I was shocked by the replies. Shocked by the fact so many of you pay by direct debit. Just handing over whatever these large organisations tell you to, whether you owe it or not.
I don't have any direct debits. None. My meters for gas, electric and water are read quarterly (or you can do it monthly if you prefer) and the readings are submitted online to the provider and it automatically generates a bill based on your actual usage. So you only give them your money for what you've used.
The same with council tax. I pay monthly. If they forget to collect my garden waste bin one week, I'll deduct a pro rata amount from my monthly council tax payment to teach them a lesson. It might only be £2 but it's my £2. Not theirs.
A friend recently told me her energy company have advised her she's £1,000 in credit. And she's still paying them an amount by direct debit every month too. Why? Just why?
Why are you giving these companies more than they're owed?
Do you give Tesco £100 every week when your grocery shop is only £80? Of course you don't. So why do you do that with your energy company?
If they're just sitting on £100 of yours a year, times that by every customer and they're earning millions in capital and interest. Keep your £100. Or £500. Or whatever it is. Buy some premium bonds. You might even win.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
Today is the day. David vs Goliath. Today we go to the High Court for our landmark judicial review against the Government. We have been shocked at the arguments being advanced by the Home Secretary in defence of its failure to implement key recommendations made by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA). These arguments include, that The Maggie Oliver Foundation does not have standing to bring this challenge on behalf of children, that the Government is under no obligation to implement child protection measures, and that the public at large cannot rely upon promises made by the Prime Minister and Ministers that are made in Parliament.
The Government's legal defence raises fundamental questions about public trust, accountability and whether promises made to survivors following public inquiries mean anything at all.
At the centre of the judicial review are 20 key recommendations issued by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) proposed to better protect children across the UK from sexual abuse. These include properly collecting data relating to child abusers and victims of abuse and exploitation, ending the use of pain-inducing restraint techniques on children in custody and regulation of staff in children’s homes.
We are concerned that more effort and public money appears to be going into defending a challenge designed to ensure these critical improvements in child protection are made than into implementing them.
The simplest example of this is this – if the Government had implemented the first recommendation of the IICSA, there would have been no need for a further three-year, £65 million public Inquiry (The Statutory Independent Inquiry into Grooming Gangs).
WHO IS ALLOWED TO ASK THE QUESTION?
The Secretary of State is a challenging whether The Maggie Oliver Foundation and our founder and Chair, @MaggieOliverUK , have standing to bring the case at all.
This raises a deeply troubling question.
If organisations representing survivors and working every day with the consequences of child sexual abuse are not entitled to ask why promised child protection measures have not been implemented, who is?
The Government is trying to exclude from the debate the very people closest to the consequences of these failures.
For years survivors have been told to come forward. Speak up. Tell the truth. Many have done so at enormous personal cost, but now the Government says they, and those who represent them, cannot object to failures to protect children. Their voices must be silenced.
This challenge was never about politics. Governments of all stripes have let down children. It is astonishing that the Government's first argument in this judicial review is that victims can have no voice.
If organisations representing survivors, and survivors themselves, cannot ask why promised child protection measures have not been implemented, who can?
IF GOVERNMENT DOESN'T HAVE TO ACT, WHAT IS THE POINT?
A central plank to the Government's defence is that ministers are under no legal obligation to implement recommendations made by public inquiries.
If that is right, why spend hundreds of millions of pounds on public inquiries if Government is just going to ignore what they find? We genuinely struggle to understand how anyone can think that is acceptable.
Millions are spent, years of hearings are had, victims pour out their hearts, findings and recommendations are made, promises are made by Government and then broke – but when someone has the temerity to ask why those promises haven't been kept, the Government's response is we never had to keep our promises.
If that is right, the Government must be open about it, and explain to the public why they hold expensive public inquiries at all.
IICSA took seven years, heard from more than 7,000 survivors, cost more than £200 million and made twenty recommendations intended to protect children. But the Government now says, we have no obligation to fulfil its promises to implement recommendations to protect children.
CAN POLITICIANS DENY THEIR PROMISES MATTER?
We are also challenging the Government's position regarding promises made by the Prime Minister and ministers following publication of IICSA's recommendations.
Repeated assurances that action would be taken have been made by senior politicians across successive governments.
The Government's defence includes arguments relating to parliamentary privilege. In effect the Government say that The Foundation cannot rely upon ministerial promises made in Parliament, and that such promises cannot give rise to expectations about future action.
If the public cannot rely on promises made in Parliament, what can they rely on?
Survivors and the public hear ministers make promises.
They hear repeated assurances that lessons have been learned and change will follow.
They build their expectations around those promises.
Many survivors have spent years believing ministers when they said action was coming.
To now be told that those promises cannot be relied upon is not just a legal argument, it is a fundamental betrayal of the trust survivors (and children across the UK) were asked to place in the process.
Trust works both ways.
Survivors are asked to trust public inquiries with the most painful experiences of their lives.
Governments should not then be able to argue that survivors cannot rely on the promises they receive in return.
WHILE GOVERNMENT ARGUES, CHILDREN ARE STILL BEING ABUSED
Government figures show that approximately 2 million children have been sexually abused since IICSA published its recommendations in October 2022.
That astonishing number must not be lost amidst legal arguments and the Government’s technical defences. This case is about the protection of all British children.
What shocks us most is how much ingenuity and effort has gone into finding reasons not to act.
Imagine if half of the same energy had been invested in implementing child protection measures.
Imagine if the resources currently being spent defending this case had instead been spent protecting children.
How many children might already be safer?
While well paid Government lawyers argue, children are still being sexually abused.
That is the reality we cannot lose sight of.
This case was never about clever legal arguments.
It is about whether promises made to children and survivors mean anything at all.
The Maggie Oliver Foundation will not be silent on that question.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
Energy policy wonks (the sane ones) have been warning about the stupidity of renewable energy for twenty years. Those in the know have long predicted this level of precariousness on the grid, and each year we creep closer to the winter where the grid simply cannot stake the strain.
I don't know if this is the year when the grid finally does fall over but we are seeing balancing cost spikes that mean we're in for some pretty eyewatering bills.
Regardless, the situation is now so precarious that there is very little resilience against unplanned events. We should prepare for the possibility of rolling blackouts. The government's recent chatter about stockpiling basics is not coincidental, and it's not because they fear an imminent Russian attack.
What's not being properly considered is what a blackout really means. Most people have experienced a few hours outage in recent memory, and know what a nuisance it can be. It is fairly frequent in my rural village, and the power goes down for the or four hours.
This is often problematic because it cuts me off from the internet so I can't do my work, and because the gas boiler is dependent on electronics, the heating stops working and we have no hot water. I can put up with it for a day. I can just go out for a few hours or walk to the pub down the road.
If, however, the power is out for two days, then most of the freezer foods start to defrost. You can mitigate that but after three days it all has to be thrown out. And, if it's a nationwide blackout, so does all the food in the supermarkets and the warehouses.
This, actually could be the best case scenario. We are taking it on faith that restarting the National Grid is a straightforward affair. As I understand it, it isn't and it could lead to two or even three weeks of rationed electricity. That's a long time to go without a warm drink, home heating and hot water.
It is likely that such a blackout would happen in the middle of a wind drought, at the coldest weeks of winter. That means people will die. It also leaves a lot of people stranded because most of us no longer keep cash in the house, and there won't be any working cash machines. They'll soon be emptied anyway.
That means we could see the looting of shops. Some out of opportunism, and others out of necessity. While the grid may take a few days to get back to normal, it could be several weeks before all the supply chains are back to normal. The wider cost to the economy is enormous, not least the collapse of investor confidence. This is a major downgrade in Britain's status as developed country.
At the best of times, it is said that Britain is only three missed meals away from anarchy. I don't think it's quite that bad, and communities will pull together to help each other out, but most places no longer have a pub, and the remaining ones are just as prone to problems that go with having no power or heating.
This is going to require a full emergency response form the government, but our civil contingency capacity is no longer what it once was. It could cope with a regional blackout due to a snow storm, but will rapidly collapse if the whole country is without power.
By this, I do not mean to scaremonger. It is simply a fact that there is very little supply chain resilience, and a quick glance at grid metrics tell you how unstable the grid is becoming.
It should also be noted that the European grid is more integrated than ever. The Ukrainian power grid is close to collapse and if it does, it has serious grid stability ramifications for its immediate neighbours. Mainland Europe may not have enough surplus energy to bail us out in a crunch.
This is the sort of thinking that should have been done before we decided to make our power grid weather dependent - but nobody in receipt of renewables subsidies gave it any thought at all. The profits are private but the losses will be socialised - to the tune of hundreds of billions. Unless you're in the tinned food or rechargeable torch business, you're in for a rough old time of it.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
I just got a note from a Jewish mother in Leeds who took her kids to the Vue cinema at The Light for a birthday on Remembrance Sunday.
The staff member checking tickets was wearing a Palestinian badge, and she told him she didn't think staff should wear political badges that can make customers feel uncomfortable.
She says two managers were called, her family was refused entry, and one manager told her she wouldn't get a refund if she kept complaining.
@vuecinemas, can you confirm your version? Are your staff allowed to wear political badges on shift, and what happens to a customer who comes in with her children and says a badge makes her feel intimidated?
People are still not getting it - because renewables are unpredictable and unreliable they have no choice but to be subsidised.
With nuclear, coal, oil and gas you take the fuel to the generating infrastructure, and feed the machinery, 24/7.
For renewables you have to take the generating infrastructure to the fuel source, then have a narrow window of time to feed the machinery. – at Saint Erme, England
If you said the stuff in that tweet you're misleading the public again
When exactly are wind and solar going to deliver lower bills?
We started wind subsidies in 1990... It's not credible at this point that we will ever be able to stop subsidising them. In fact wind subsidies have gone up significantly and all the subsidies are now for 20 rather than 15 years
Then you have to add the costs of backup to cover periods of low wind and solar... We just had 4 days of almost no output from either
Plus the extra cost of balancing intermittency
Plus the additional grid costs which are higher for wind and solar due to their very low energy density and in many cases remote locations
You need to drop the slogans and start bringing some reality to energy policy. An energy system based on the wra will never be cheap
If you want low carbon eo you'd be much better off implementing Fingleton and building nuclear ASAP
11
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
It just happened AGAIN. Some of you actually had a power cut this time, didn't you?
Our govt via Neso Energy just paid a whopping £1570/MWh to keep the lights switched on. Even higher than the £999 they paid in August.
THIS is why the govt is telling you to prepare supplies. Their mental Net Zero ideology is driving the country to ruin.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
The Left has begun to unleash a campaign of vengeance on @elonmusk. But did they even think this through?! Because it won’t end well for them.
Last Saturday, two chartered party buses, funded by a network of left-wing non-profits, rolled up right in front of Elon’s house. They danced in the street for an hour and hit a Cybertruck piñata. But wait... aren’t these the same leftists that were insisting just last week that Elon was buying the election? Maybe they were celebrating that they were wrong.
Then you have NYU Professor Scott Galloway. He went on stage and boasted to a crowd about taking a dump in the passenger seat of his own Tesla before selling it. I can guarantee Elon wasn’t hurt by that. The only people affected by his “protest” were whoever bought that car from him and whoever had to clean up that mess.
And now, there’s incoming Texas governor Gina Hinojosa. She’s already pressuring state agencies to hold off on SpaceX land deals right next to Starbase until she takes office.
And of course, there’s half of Congress that’s threatening to sue him into oblivion.
I have a serious question for all these people: How do you think this will end?
Elon is a trillionaire with a rocket company. If Texas tries to shut him down, he’ll just move to another state. If Congress tries to make his life a living hell, he’ll move to any other country that wants his businesses and innovations. I’m sure Argentina would love for him to build there.
And if the whole world turns on him, there’s always space.
When government power and mob tactics get unfairly weaponized against builders like Elon, they leave. But guess what happens after that? Because it’s even worse for our country.
The next builder doesn’t come. If the Democrats make an example out of Elon because of his political stances, it tells all future innovators that they’re not safe here. Not unless they fall fully in line... kind of like fascism.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
Burnham's betrayal on the EU could well see him lose his seat in Makerfield.🙏🙏🙏
Andy Burnham’s Makerfield voters are firmly opposed to handing new powers to the EU, new polling shows.
With less than two weeks before the Prime Minister attends a major Brussels summit, his plans to bring the UK back under EU rule have been roundly rejected by his own constituents.
Eight in ten say the UK should make its own decisions on state aid to grow regional economies, and 78% say the UK government alone should make its own decisions about VAT rates.
express.co.uk/news/politics/…
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
@neso_energy now paying over £1500 /MWh to keep the lights on...
@neso_energy withdrew the EMN for this morning after buying back lots of volume on the interconnectors as expected
But this evening is tighter than this morning was an no warning has been issued
However interconnector buying continues and, as with Friday, NESO is spending large in the BM
Everything now hangs on whether wind picks up as forecast (and not later or by less) and demand is not higher than expected. Given the state of NESO's forecasting both are big IFs
@Miatsf @mgshanks @AndrewBowie_MP @ClaireCoutinho @harrietc @ColinMoynihanUK @drlukeevans @ashley7fox @TiceRichard @cmackinlay @DavidGHFrost @mattwridley @Iromg @AllisonPearson @MerrynSW @EdConwaySky @afneil @mattotele @jonathan_leake @julietsamuel @energygovuk
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
‼️Something REMARKABLE just happened
Poland tried to pin the mass-shooting on a "far-right" actor
and the ENTIRE GLOBAL corporate media repeated the messaged
but within HOURS they were ALL flooded by MILLIONS of social media users calling out their lie.
They're losing.
Kuan Yin meets Marici retweeted
Folks after todays sentencing of Russel Brand to 10yrs 6mths he is to serve at least 7yrs before he can apply for parole!
There are some mixed views mostly that the sentence was correct then some say it was too harsh even that Brand should NOT have even been convicted;
Well what is a fact is that SEVEN women made a complaint of various degrees from Indecent assault to rape 3 charges & 4 respectively;
For 7 victims to have come forward each not known to each other or sold their stories to the media is deemed quite compelling: would/could 7 such victims all make up such serious allegations?
Both the Police & @CPSUK didn’t think so as he was charged with 7 sexual offences 3 of Rape; the maximum sentence for a single offence of rape is one of life Imprisonment & for Indecent assault 10yrs!
Brand was convicted of one rape charge & three cases of Indecent assault; he was acquitted of two rapes & one Indecent assault so a mixed findings & acquittals; had he been convicted of all offences he could/would have faced a sentence circa to at least 18yrs
Some have highlighted that other such convicted rapists have got less than Brand; each sentence given by a judge is done so after the Judge has read stated cases ie sentences for a similar offence & being guided by the sentencing guidelines; they then listen to both the aggravating & mitigation factors before delivering/passing sentence;
A sentence can be both appealed ie the Actual conviction or that the sentence was manifestly too harsh by the defence & transversely unduly lenient by the ‘Prosecution’ > the attorney general;
Both👆is not a right as if there are not any/sufficient grounds for an Appeal it will be refused & likewise If deemed as fair & reasonable by the AG then it won’t be appealed by the prosecution!
I cannot lie I’ve seen many sentences fir various offences from Murder to Shoplifting & Serious Assaults on police; tho few are ever challenged;
A typical example of an Appeal was over the recent the Henry Nowak case who was Stabbed to death by Vickrum Digwa in December 2025;
He was given 21yrs that is the minimum time he will have to serve before being eligible to apply for parole; now Homicide & Stabbings are crimes I’ve become an authority on; the sentencing guidelines for such a murder are circa 18yrs > 26yrs!
A judge as I stated earlier will read up on stated cases & look at the sentencing guidelines for guidance on such sentences;
Digwa chanced his arm in my opinion of appealing that the sentence was manifestly excessive which the appeal judges dismissed!
However with the AG they agreed that the sentence was unduly lenient in so much the sentencing judge did not give more weight to him lying about the racist allegations the number of stabbings filming the victim dying & disposing of the knife which he passed on to his mother who was also convicted of assisting an offender & sentenced to 3yrs!
So the Appeal Court JudgesIncreased the minimum sentence from 21yrs to 25yrs very near to the top end of the sentencing guidelines;
So back to Brand; the sentencing Judge would have sought guidance from all the areas I’ve highlighted; his sentencing comments I felt very detailed & fair & was within all the guidelines set fir such offences;
Judges do not like getting their sentencing wrong as if their sentence is deemed too lenient or too harsh & the appeal court overturns such they would/should take it as a criticism & take it personally!
Can Brand Appeal will he Appeal? Well he can Appeal against conviction or the sentence; If its against conviction & is won then a Retrial can be requested; against sentence that can be considered!
My view listening to what I have I don’t think he will be successful on either as the judge has been tight all round!
Any person can appeal against a sentence as too high or too low (normally too low if its public) but must do so within 28 days of the persons sentence!
I hope the above👆helps!
Thanks!