Grandmother to adorable grandchildren Retired. Cat lover. Gin lover. Anti woke 🇬🇧
Greater London
Joined April 2010
- Tweets42.6K
- Following1.3K
- Followers1K
- Likes68.5K
Janthea46 retweeted
Never forget that Palestinians were offered a state in 1937, 1947, 1967, 2000, 2001, and 2008.
They said no every time!
Janthea46 retweeted
"A royal insider has revealed that Meghan Markle was never subjected to the same background checks that Princess Catherine was"
Of course she was not. The reality is that everything was oversimplified for Meg because the RF was so afraid of being called "Racist", they cut corners for her😏
When Catherine was William's girlfriend, the RF and the press treated Catherine as if she had to prove that her DNA was good enough for the Monarchy. Catherine was put through the "Royal grinder":
• The RF watched her face 5 years of daily press abuse, paparazzi stalking and verbal harrassment to see if she could handle marrying into the RF. It was so bad, William had to interverne and address the press while the Middeltons had to lawyer up;
• Catherine and her entire family faced national scrutiny, mockery and snobbery from the Aristocracy because her bloodline was "too common" on her mother's side to be worth marrying the Heir;
• The Palace aides belittled her, even after marrying William, forcing William to interverne. And Catherine was not handed any important patronages, as Meghan was, as soon as she married into the RF, until she spent years proving herself;
• The RF run background checks on her entire family, Her family had to be careful what to say, what to do, what to wear and could not even live their own lives in peace;
• they did blood tests and medical tests on her to make sure she was healthy enough to mother the children of the Heir,
• Catherine had to give birth in front of 4-5 male doctors, three times, to certify that the royal children came out of her body and could be in the line of succession as children of the heir🔥
Yet, Catherine NEVER publicly complained about the harrassment, humiliation nor pressures she faced. She has NEVER painted herself as a victim nor shown resentment toward the RF.
Catherine actually kept her head high, her signature grace under pressure and focused on being the wife William needed, the mother for their children and on learning everything she needed to learn about being the Future Queen❤️
TODAY, it is Catherine who has cleaned the stain that was left on the RF after the Diana debacle. It is Catherine's stellar reputation and popular image with the Public that has brightened the face of the Monarchy.
When it came to Meghan, the RF was focused on making sure she integrated so they were NOT called Racists. Thus they waived a lot of the normal protocol:
•They did not run extensive background checks on her family, and if they did, they chose to ignore what they saw for fear that they would be called "racist" if they rejected that a mixed woman marry into the RF. Something Harry threatened them with🤷🏽♀️
• They allowed Harry's protection to be Meghan's protection while she dated Harry. Thus Meg NEVER went through the paparazzi harrassment Catherine endured for 5 years.
• The press was also very excited about her at the beginning due to her mixed race. Neither her, nor her mother receive any of the horrible press abuse and snobbery Catherine and her mother went through because Carole's coal miners ancestry which was publicly portrayed as "darkening" the royal bloodline;
• H&M royal wedding cost even MORE than the Wedding of William and Catherine, yet Meghan found a way to complain that it was not good enough;
• The Queen went out of her way to assign Samantha Cohen, her 17 years long serving private assistant, to tutor and guide on Royal protocol, etiquette and diplomatic expectation. Meg complained that she was not trained good enough simply because Samantha still could not take the trash out of her;
• Meghan did not undergo any of the medical testing Catherine was put through to see if she was healthy enough to carry children;
• AND Meghan chose to NOT use the royal medical team during her pregnancies and NEVER gave birth in front of a Royal doctor, as was Protocol. Therefore NO ONE has ever verified that her children came out of her body before being added to the LOS, as they did for Catherine and any other royal woman🔥
• on top of that, Meg was handed a senior patronage in the commonwealth as soon as she joined the RF, without ever having to prove herself.
Yes, my dears, all that bending over backwards the RF did for Meg and what happened? Meg STILL turned against the RF and accused them of racism; she still attacked them with vicious lies and accused them of never welcoming her, just because she wanted more privilieges and was resentful of Catherine. This is how Meghan repaid them their welcome.
In life, shielding people from challenges teaches victimhood and entitlement. Overcoming challenges teaches resilience, adaptability and appreciation🔥
That is why the person who actually run their way to the finish line will always appreciate the value of victory better than the person who was carried to the finish line.
The one who runs the race learns how to count on self-determination and persistence to become a Victor in life. The one who is carried learns to expect others to carry them through life. Therefore they will blame others when they cannot reach their goal🔥
That is the difference between Catherine's humble success in the RF and Meghan's arrogant failure in the RF☕️
Janthea46 retweeted
I really don't know which lunatic decided that a White kid born in 2005 owes the world an apology for something that happened 300 years ago
Slavery wasn't some White invention. Every civilization did it. Africans sold other Africans. The Arab slave trade ran for over a thousand years and enslaved millions. Nobody talks about that
And guess who actually ended it? The West. Britain banned the trade and literally sent its navy out to hunt down slave ships. That part somehow never makes it into the lecture
Meanwhile, slavery still exists today in parts of Africa and the Middle East. Mauritania only made it a crime in 2007. You will never see the outrage or the protests... Nothing but silence
But in the West, people are told to feel guilty for being born. Criminals get excused because "the system made him do it." Repeat offenders get arrested again and again and walk right back out. The victim gets forgotten and the criminal gets treated like the victim
Seriously, how did it get this bad? The same civilization that built the modern world and ended slavery is now tearing itself apart and calling it morality
You have no reason to feel guilty for things that happened centuries ago. You don't even remember what you ate last week
This isn't compassion, it's insanity
This is literally civilizational suicide
Janthea46 retweeted
A 1960s childhood.
A bath and hair wash once a week.
Bedtime after the Magic Roundabout at 6pm.
Watch with Mother for an hour or so after school on a black and white TV where you frequently needed to reset the horizontal hold buttons and replace the valves.
Eating whatever meal was put in front of you. Because you didn't get a choice.
No snacks between meals.
Sixpence a week pocket money for sweets or a comic.
Always playing outside on bikes, hand made go karts and pushing our dolls in toy prams.
Being happy if you got bath salts or talc as a birthday present. Or a hanky with your initials embroidered on it.
Being taught to tell the time, your times tables, tie your tie and shoelaces before you started school.
Getting a small smack on the bottom for answering back.
Getting the cane or slipper at school.
Mums still did the housework and dads cut the grass or washed the car.
Mum went shopping most days because you didn't have a freezer.
And if you had a twin tub washing machine, you were well off.
Ready Steady Go or Top of the Pops to see your favourite groups and singers.
And how exciting when space hoppers came to the UK in 1969.
Occasionally on a Friday, you'd get fish and chips for tea and put your empty bottle of Corona out for the man to come and give you your deposit back.
Saturday afternoon at Nan's watching the wrestling or Sunday tea with winkles you'd need pins to extract the contents from.
The coal man and rag and bone man were regularly visiting your street.
And the late Sunday afternoon dread as you had school again tomorrow.
Were we happy? Of course we were. We knew no different. Were we anxious? Of course not. We probably didn't even know the word. We just played make believe and did as we were told. Children need boundaries and routine. Both sadly lacking now.
Janthea46 retweeted
So, for everyone trying to push the sympathy narrative, let’s get the timeline straight.
Meghan had already been estranged from her father since 2018. The public explanation surrounding their falling-out centred on the wedding, the paparazzi photographs and the subsequent family fallout. She was reportedly informed of the deeply disturbing allegations against him in 2019, after the estrangement had already begun. In other words, these allegations were not the reason she initially cut contact with him.
Conveniently, however, the narrative now seems to be shifting, with these allegations being brought forward as an explanation for the estrangement. But the chronology matters. You cannot retroactively turn information reportedly received in 2019 into the reason for a falling-out that had already begun in 2018.
Had she been a devoted daughter who knew nothing about her father’s alleged dark secrets, there would be every reason to feel compassion for her. But the timeline and the public narrative surrounding their estrangement are important, particularly when people now attempt to rewrite the circumstances to build a sympathy narrative.
But this is a woman who spent years shouting from the rooftops about how horribly the Royal Family had treated her. She gave interviews, participated in documentaries and made millions portraying herself as the victim of an institution that welcomed her, gave her a platform, a title, international recognition and privileges she continues to benefit from.
Yet when it came to her own father, where was that same outrage? Where were the public declarations about accountability? Where was the determination to speak up?
The contradiction is even more glaring when you consider how frequently Meghan positions herself as a champion of children and the vulnerable. She has never been short of a platform to lecture the world about compassion, protecting children and doing what is right. Yet when it comes to the deeply disturbing allegations surrounding her own father, that public moral outrage is conspicuously absent.
And by the same logic being used to demand sympathy for Meghan, shouldn’t the Royal Family also receive sympathy because of Andrew? Why should the entire family be subjected to condemnation over Andrew’s alleged conduct while Meghan is expected to receive sympathy over her father’s alleged conduct?
Thomas Markle’s alleged actions do not automatically tarnish Meghan, just as Andrew’s alleged actions do not automatically tarnish every member of the Royal Family. Even though some people never miss an opportunity to shove Andrew’s name into every discussion concerning the Royal Family, they now expect Thomas Markle’s alleged conduct to generate sympathy for Meghan.
But Thomas’s actions do not absolve Meghan of her own conduct, her public statements or the questions surrounding her selective outrage.
I would never attribute Thomas Markle’s alleged actions to Meghan or hold her responsible for her father’s conduct. But I will absolutely question her silence, particularly when she has spent years publicly discussing her grievances against the Royal Family. While the Royal Family has generally kept its private family matters out of the public arena, Meghan has repeatedly chosen to take her grievances public, give interviews and make serious accusations. She cannot repeatedly invite public scrutiny of one family while expecting the same scrutiny to stop at the door of her own.
You cannot demand individual consideration for Meghan while insisting on collective condemnation for the Royal Family. You cannot demand compassion for one family while denying the same consideration to another.
The same standard must apply to both. Meghan is accountable for her own choices and conduct, just as the Royal Family should be judged on its own actions, not simply Andrew’s.
So spare us the selective sympathy and double standards.
dailymail.com/news/royals/ar…
Janthea46 retweeted
You caused Prince Philip stress while he was in the hospital. You caused the queen stress when she was dying of cancer. You cause your dad stress while he is dealing with cancer. You sat back and watched Kate get attacked while she was bullied by your fanbase while dealing with cancer. You mocked, trashed, lied about, and distorted the truth about what happened with you and William. You sat back and watched your wife start lies about an affair. You sued your father’s government when he would not let you rob from the taxpayer government for your continued security you don’t need. You don’t deserve awards, you don’t deserve our pity. You need to grow up and stop dining out on your mother’s death. You are ruining her legacy. #PrinceHarryTheMan
Janthea46 retweeted
YES!! THIS THIS THIS!! 👍💪
Muslim parents "demanded" a ban on pork at a school in a city in the Netherlands.
The mayor of that place responded with wise words!
"Muslims must understand that they must adapt to the Netherlands, their customs, their traditions, their way of life, because it was the country they chose to emigrate to.
They must understand that they are the ones who must integrate and learn to live in the Netherlands.
They must understand that they are the ones who must change their lifestyle, not the Dutch.
You must understand that the Dutch are not racist or xenophobic.
We accept many immigrants, from many countries with different cultures and religions, which are Islamic countries that do not accept non Islamic immigrants.
Therefore, the Dutch are not willing to give up their identity and their culture.
In conclusion, they must understand that in the Netherlands, with their Jewish Christian roots, Christmas trees, churches, and religious parties, the religion must remain in the Netherlands.
For Muslims who disagree with the Dutch culture and religion and do not feel comfortable in the Netherlands, there are 57 beautiful Muslim countries around the world, most of them populated and ready to receive them with open arms, according to the sharia.
If you leave your country to come to the Netherlands, and not to a Muslim country, it is because you have seen a better life in the Netherlands than where you come from.
THIS IS THE WAY TO TREAT PEOPLE COMING IN THAT ARE THEIR TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRIES! IF YOU DONT LIKE IT? GO HOME!
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
「市長がムスリムからの要求をはね除けた。給食から豚肉を除けという要求だった」とは2013年頃から発生し、以後何度も繰り返し発生しているデマです。そのようなオープンレターは存在しませんし、そもそも給食に豚肉禁止を要求したというムスリムすらいませんでした。
ファクトチェックした記事のリンクは以下です。
leadstories.com/hoax-alert/202…
snopes.com/fact-check/bel…
Janthea46 retweeted
‼️Allegedly he’s 12 years old.
Yes you heard right Salam is 12 years old. ‼️
He’s a refugee and fleeing Eritrea. 🇪🇷
Parents of School 7A have welcomed him in. (Clearly no questions asked)
The school has also asked that all pupils and parents offer a warm Welcome to the 12 year old to protect him from his recent trauma and to help his wellbeing.
HOW WOKE AND BLIND IS OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM?
Children need to be taken out of school! This is fucking ridiculous.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
The purported school letter is fabricated; its photo of "Selam" is edited from a prison mugshot. x.com/mcgregormacken… x.com/mcgregormacken…
Correct me if I’m wrong, and I’m sure you will, but isn’t Starmer’s wife Jewish? You would think he would be more supportive and invested in the situation.
1
41
Janthea46 retweeted
Do you want this man in a private space with little girls?
Don’t tell me he is unusual. Tell me. Do you want to be able to keep him away from women and children or don’t you???
Stop playing games. Stop making it legal for him to be there.
Janthea46 retweeted
The Archbishop of Canterbury has said that legalising DIY abortions up to the point of birth is “legally, morally, and practically complex”.
It isn’t ‘complex’.
It’s WRONG.
Killing a 39 week old baby is morally indefensible. No Christian should find that hard to say.
Janthea46 retweeted
Activist: "The water usage for beef is obscene. Thousands of litres per kilogram."
Farmer: "That's rainfall."
Activist: "What?"
Farmer: "The figure includes all the rain that falls on the pasture. The cows drink from the stream. The rain falls whether there's a cow here or not."
Activist: "It's still water consumption."
Farmer: "Should I stop the rain falling on my field?"
Activist: "Grow crops instead. More efficient."
Farmer: "This is a 35-degree slope in the Welsh hills. Show me the crop."
Activist: "Technology..."
Farmer: "To make tractors climb mountains?"
Activist: "There must be a solution."
Farmer: "There is. It's called a cow."
Activist: [checks phone]
Janthea46 retweeted
Iran executed the 19-year-old champion, Saleh Mohammadi for protesting the Khamenei regime.
Nothing from Greta Thunberg, Gary Lineker, Charlotte Church, sectarian Muslim politicians.
No hunger strikes on University campuses.
Where have all the “human rights” activists gone?
Janthea46 retweeted
As a Bishop, I cannot stay silent. I have today drafted and sent an open letter to His Majesty King Charles III, the text of which reads as follows:
To:
His Majesty, Charles III,
King of the United Kingdom and the Realms,
Supreme Governor of the Church of England,
Bearer of the ancient title Defender of the Faith.
Your Majesty,
I write to you neither as a politician nor as a commentator, but as one of your loyal subjects who, as a bishop of Christ’s Church, cannot remain silent while the Christian foundations of this kingdom are steadily dismantled.
Sir, there are moments in the life of a nation when silence becomes a form of betrayal. If I refused to speak to Your Majesty now, this would be such a moment.
For more than a thousand years the Crown of this realm has stood in solemn covenant with the Christian faith.
The laws of this land were shaped by it.
The liberties of our people were nurtured by it.
The conscience of our civilisation was formed by it.
From the abbeys of medieval England to the parish churches of our villages, from the preaching of the Reformers to the missionary zeal that carried the Gospel to the ends of the earth, the Christian faith has not merely influenced Britain — it has defined her.
Yet today that inheritance is being quietly but deliberately eroded. Across the institutions of this nation there is a growing hostility toward the faith that built them.
Christian belief is mocked in the public square. Christian morality is dismissed as intolerance. Christian institutions are pressured to surrender doctrine in order to conform to the ideology of the age.
Within the very Church that bears the name of England, voices have arisen that appear more eager to mirror the spirit of the age than to proclaim the eternal truth of the Gospel.
Meanwhile, beyond the walls of our churches, powerful political movements openly speak of removing Christianity from its historic place within the life of this nation.
What would once have been whispered is now proclaimed openly: that Britain must become a post-Christian state.
It is in this context that I write to you, Your Majesty. For the British Crown does not stand apart from this crisis.
The Sovereign of this realm bears a title that is not merely historic but sacred in its origin and meaning: Defender of the Faith. Those words are not decorative. They are a charge.
They speak of a monarch whose duty is not merely to preside over the ceremonies of the Church, but to stand as a guardian of the Christian inheritance of the nation.
Yet many among your subjects now ask, with increasing anxiety: “Who will defend that inheritance today?”
They see a nation drifting from its foundations. And they ask whether the Crown will remain silent while that inheritance is dismantled.
Your Majesty, may I be so bold as to observe that your coronation oath was not a poetic formality. It was a solemn vow made before Almighty God to maintain and preserve the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law.
Those words bind the conscience of the sovereign. They remind the Crown that its authority is not merely constitutional but moral. The monarch is not merely a symbol of national continuity, but a custodian of the spiritual inheritance that shaped this realm.
History records moments when kings and emperors were confronted by the Church and reminded that their authority was accountable before God. In the fourth century Ambrose of Milan stood before the Emperor Theodosius I and reminded him that even the ruler of an empire must bow before the moral law of Christ.
That tradition of prophetic witness has never disappeared. Nor should it. For when rulers forget the foundations upon which their authority rests, the Church must speak — not with hostility, but with holy clarity.
And so, I write to say this, Your Majesty: The Christian character of this nation is under profound and accelerating assault.
If the Crown does not stand visibly and courageously in defence of that inheritance, history will record that the guardians of Britain’s institutions watched in silence as the foundations were removed.
The issue before us is not nostalgia. It is civilisation. Remove Christianity from the story of Britain and you do not create a neutral society — you create a moral vacuum. And history teaches us that moral vacuums are never left empty for long.
Your Majesty now stands at a crossroads that few monarchs in modern history have faced.
For the erosion of Britain’s Christian inheritance will not ultimately be judged by speeches made in Parliament or debates in the press. It will be judged by whether those entrusted with the guardianship of our ancient institutions chose to defend them — or merely preside over their quiet surrender.
You may preside over the quiet dissolution of Britain’s Christian identity. Or you may rise to the ancient responsibility entrusted to the Crown and speak with clarity about the faith that built this kingdom. The first path requires little courage. The second will require a great deal. But it is the path that history honours.
Your Majesty’s subjects are not asking for religious coercion. They are asking for leadership. They are asking that the sovereign who bears the title Defender of the Faith remember what that title means.
They are asking that the Crown hear the growing cry of anguish from Christians across this land who feel that the spiritual inheritance of their nation is being surrendered without resistance. And they are asking whether the Crown will stand with them.
For the faith that shaped Britain is not merely a cultural ornament. It is the wellspring from which our laws, our liberties, and our moral imagination have flowed. If it is cast aside, the nation will discover — too late — that it has severed itself from the very roots that sustained it.
Your Majesty, to many the Crown is a symbol of authority. But before God it is also a symbol of stewardship. And stewardship carries with it the duty to defend what has been entrusted.
May Almighty God grant Your Majesty the wisdom to discern this hour, and the courage to fulfil the sacred duty entrusted to the Crown.
Yours faithfully,
Bishop Ceirion H. Dewar FSHC
Missionary Bishop
Diocese of Providence
Confessing Anglican Church
@PhilHs10 @RevBrettMurphy @revwickland @BishopRobert1 @GBNews @TalkTV @danwootton @Jacob_Rees_Mogg @LozzaFox @BackBrexitBen @RupertLowe10 @KemiBadenoch @JohnCleese
Janthea46 retweeted
There are actual slave markets in Islamic countries where black people are traded like cattle
The left say nothing
Antifa says nothing
BLM says nothing
The hypocrisy is staggering but they do not care at all
