Mark

I'm at the point where I just wish that Reform and all their supporters along with the Restore fucktards, Fox, Robinson etc would just FUCK OFF FOREVER and leave us normal people alone. I'm sick of seeing their racist shit all over my socials. They're all utter grifting cunts

Kemi Badenoch bemoans lack of "home grown" nurses, she was in the tory government that tripled tuition fees, scrapped education maintenance grants and allowances that helped poorer students, removed bursaries from nursing students, imposed years of pay freezes on NHS staff.

Publicly calling UK political figures “traitors”, as Liz Truss has done with Michael Gove, Mel Stride, James Cartlidge and others over the 2022 mini-budget, is profoundly misleading, highly polarising and dangerously irresponsible. It is profoundly misleading and factually loose because “traitor” implies betrayal of the country or a fundamental duty of loyalty. These were Conservative politicians who criticised or helped reverse an unfunded tax-cutting package that produced sharp rises in gilt yields, a weaker pound and higher mortgage rates. That is a policy disagreement and internal party conflict, not national betrayal. The label replaces argument about fiscal credibility, timing and market reaction with a false moral category, and substitutes a loyalty test for evidence. It is highly polarising because it converts a dispute about outcomes into a test of allegiance. Once critics are cast as traitors, opposition becomes illegitimate rather than simply mistaken. This raises the temperature inside an already factional party, makes reconciliation harder and encourages reciprocal extreme language. It is dangerously irresponsible and escalatory because repeatedly elevating ordinary Westminster disagreement to the level of betrayal contributes to a climate in which political opponents are treated as enemies. The UK has already seen a rise in threats and abuse directed at MPs. While arguably no single statement directly causes violence, this rhetoric lowers the threshold for others and erodes the shared premise that rivals remain legitimate actors within the democratic system. It is also highly selective: applied to internal critics while primary blame is placed on institutions such as the Bank of England. Strong criticism of the named individuals’ judgements, motives or actions is available. The charge of treachery is neither accurate nor necessary.

In this powerful monologue, Joe Scarborough proves that Trump and his cronies acting as cheerleaders for putin are no different from the Nazi sympathisers of the 1930s. It’s a chilling, crystal-clear wake-up call about what happens when leaders trade American democracy for a dictator's favour. Joe Scarborough: “… just peeling what putin has had a collection of useful idiots across America do now for the past five years. I really I really don't say this often in American politics. but when you're defending vladimir putin, an ex KGB agent who is committing war crimes by the day, I'm not sure how you sleep at night. And this phenomenon though, has historical parallels. It was 89 years ago this month in October 1937, that the former king of England walked up the steps of Adolf Hitler's mountain retreat in Bavaria. The Duke of Windsor had given up the throne less than a year earlier, but he toured German factories, inspected the SS and was photographed greeting the Führer. Time Magazine reported that Hitler gave the Duke a Nazi salute as they parted and Edward returned that Nazi salute. Later he told friends that Britain shouldn't fight Hitler, the war should not start. Winston Churchill had to actually send him to the Bahamas to keep him away from his new friend in Berlin. But the Duke wasn't alone, just like Donald Trump isn't alone. Here at home, Charles Lindbergh, an American hero who accepted the medal of freedom from Hermann Goering in 1938, went on to lead America First. And in a 1941 speech in Des Moines, he blamed Jews and the British for pushing America toward war. Even FDR's US Ambassador to Britain, Joseph Kennedy, predicted democracy is finished in England. His appeasement and his lack of moral alarm cost Kennedy his job. In Britain, aristocrats like the Astors and Lord Halifax thought Hitler was a man they could do business with. Does that sound familiar? Sounded so respectable, trade, stability, money, peace in our time. History remembers them now as morally vacuous opportunists who looked at a tyrant who was devouring his neighbours, the only thing they saw, a business partner. The parallels with Trump are too on point. Now on Friday, Donald Trump got on the phone with vladimir putin who always plays him when they get on the phone and what happened? He lifted sanctions on the Russian diesel deal, he did it three weeks after Republicans had forced him to sign a Russia sanctions bill in honour of Lindsey Graham. The White House says his gift to putin will lower prices at the pump, but it won't. The first shipment is only about 2.2 million barrels and America burns through more than that every day. It's not going to lower gas prices in America. But it will help putin kill innocence in Ukraine, a country Trump has always hated. Trump's four billion dollar gift to the man he kowtows to every day will buy missiles, drones, and glide bombs that will keep terrorising and killing Ukrainians who are fighting for their country's freedom and their children's lives and yes, our freedom. A bipartisan group of senators including Susan Collins wrote in a statement Sunday that the United States should not provide putin with a financial lifeline while Russia continues to kill Ukrainian civilians. But Trump's aping of putin’s talking points, they just keep getting worse. With this weak president attacking Ukrainian freedom fighters and perversely calling for new leadership in Kyiv. We do need new leadership, Mr. President, but not in Ukraine. Donald, I've known you a long time and I know you don't read history, so let me tell you how this story ends. The Duke of Windsor ended up a footnote, a cautionary tale in a fancy suit forever assigned to the dustbin of British history. And your time to finally do the right thing in Ukraine, Mr. President, it's running out. Stop bowing down to putin. And start doing your job. 1/2

BREAKING: A British teenager is going viral after saying: “They are forcing us to learn about Islam and prophet Mohammed in school. I don’t want to learn about that. I want to learn about my culture. I'm proud to be English!” Do you agree with him?

Perceived hurty words by a handful of Reform councillors apparently means the whole party is like that. I guess using this method means the Labour Party is one massive paedophile ring.

Name something Trump did better than any other president? "Everything" for me👇🇺🇸

Something is happening to the US that is slow, systematic and deadly. Trump is dismantling our country, and it’s deliberate, calculated and surgical. 1: trump killed NATO partnership, our strongest defense alliance against Russia and China 2: trump’s HHS Secretary is killing our public health infrastructure, creating a more sicker and vulnerable America with communicative diseases 3: over at the pentagon trump’s frat boy Petey is firing our most qualified generals, depleting our best military hardware rapidly, in a stupid war to make our military a third world level armed forces 4: trump’s DOGE deliberately hollowed out our government from essential experts, to zap its functioning capabilities 5: trump killed USAID, and we lost our goodwill around the world and became isolated pariah 6: trump ICE became his brown shirts, killing and abusing Americans to obey 7: trump’s weirdo FBI director is charging everyone and anyone to silence Americans 8: trump DOJ is robbing the treasury to the tune of $1.8 billion dollars, to create an army of bribed foot soldiers to protect their dismantling of the country during midterm elections 9: trump’s interior secretary is dismantling our national parks 10: trump’s economic team of Bassett and lutnick is crashing the economy, creating a population of economically disadvantaged 11: trump’s Epstein files are now officially been shelved to protect trump the destroyer 12: trump let his oligarch enabler Peter Thiel to confiscate all our private data, including social security, tax, health and court and business records 13: finally and most importantly, trump and his family and his oligarch enablers are looting our treasury, and stuffing our tax dollars into their pockets. Now tell me, you don’t think trump is a foreign agent, disguised as the president of the U.S, installed to destroy the US? Could it be that fuck Putin, specially after lifting all sanctions against Russia? Or, the other fuck Elon, the asshole AIPAC Netanyahu, the anti Christ fuck Theil owning trump’s ass? Trump is no longer doing the duties of the president, but having out loud fantasies about men in his circus rallies, shit posting all day, all night, and golfing in the weekend. Drag this enemy of America out of the White House. That foreign escort “Epstien hooker” Melania too.

HE HAS NO CARDS! Well, Trump's latest tweet has finally explained everything. His sudden, panicked, mysterious, and complete shift toward the Kremlin, along with his hysterical attacks on Ukraine and Zelensky, has nothing to do with hopes of persuading Putin to agree to a ceasefire, lowering diesel prices, or “supporting American farmers and ranchers.” And it doesn't require some elaborate conspiracy theory, either. The explanation, I believe, is much simpler: pure, personal, suffocating FEAR. Fear that Putin might start “helping Iran” far more than he already does. And I suspect that this is precisely what the former KGB officer made unmistakably clear to our “genius negotiator” during their very long telephone conversation. Cross me, and I'll demonstrate just how much assistance Russia can provide its “Iranian partners,” conveniently timed to coincide with the critical election period. The resulting foreign policy and economic disaster could leave Trump completely screwed. And the Great Orange Pumpkin knows it. He dragged America into a war that turned out to be nothing like the glorious little adventure imagined by a man whose understanding of geopolitics sometimes resembles that of an eight-year-old with delusions of grandeur. Now he has absolutely no idea how to get out of it. Shouting at reporters, renaming oceans, and posting ridiculous memes are one thing. Escaping a genuine geopolitical catastrophe is something entirely different. Meanwhile, people around him may already be calculating that the more damage the Pumpkin does, the brighter the halo above his successor's head will appear. But Trump's fear, at least, follows a certain logic. He understands that Putin has the ability to inflict enormous political and economic damage on him, and he may believe that the Kremlin is threatening to do exactly that. What he apparently fails to understand is that concessions will not buy him Putin's goodwill. He will get NOTHING in return. Absolutely nothing. TRUMP HAS NO CARDS. NOT A SINGLE ONE. In my view, he is now in the weakest negotiating position of either of his presidential terms. Xi Jinping must be watching this spectacle in disbelief. The president of the United States, the leader of the world's most powerful democracy, appears increasingly vulnerable to pressure from the Kremlin. We may be witnessing something extraordinary: a situation in which Moscow is not merely trying to influence American foreign policy but appears capable of shaping Washington's decisions through threats and intimidation. The Kremlin, which American presidents once confronted from a position of strength, now seems to have discovered how to exploit the fears of the man sitting in the Oval Office. And the tragedy is that Trump appears willing to sacrifice Ukraine's interests, America's credibility, and the trust of its allies in a desperate attempt to protect himself from the consequences of his own decisions. So much for peace through strength. Look how things turned out, Mr. Reagan.

Well after today’s announcement from the Bank of England, there is something very, very, very wrong in the system. So … let me get this straight: * British Gas made a profit of £1.3bn between January & June * BP announced profits of £6.95 billion between April and June alone * Shell has profited by £9.4bn in a year The MEN at the top: * John Pettigrew, boss of National Grid received £6.5m bonus on top of his salary * Chris O’Shea, chief executive of British Gas owner Centrica was paid almost £2m last year in salary and benefits * Centrica's non-executive directors were paid almost £1m * Scottish Power's CEO Keith Anderson is on £1.15m. * E.On boss Michael Lewis is on £1m * EDF's Simone Rossi is also on £1m * And their top execs enjoyed a share of £4.65m * Peter Simpson of Anglian Water earned a £1.3m pay package * Welsh Water bosses awarded themselves bonuses of over £930,000 * Severn Trent bosses awarded themselves bonuses of £5.56m * Thames Water's Sarah Bentley, received a £727,000 bonus on top of her £2m annual salary Meanwhile there are... * People who haven't had breakfast and/or lunch TODAY, because they can't afford it. * People using FoodBanks because food is becoming more of a luxury than a necessity. * Children celebrating a birthday without presents. * Parents worrying about new school uniforms - and some schools enforcing rules which are not cost-effective. * People who can't get to work because they can't afford to put petrol in their cars/pay for public transport anymore. * People who are working so much they're making themselves ill, and they STILL CAN'T AFFORD to pay their bills. * People who have been given fines by these same energy/water companies because they couldn't afford to pay their bills in the first place - increasing their debt. * Customers being told to do STAR JUMPS TO KEEP WARM for crying out loud! * Hose pipe bans when gallons of water leak away everyday. * Elderly people NOT DRINKING because they're worried about running out of water!!! All this and energy prices are set to rise up to 75% in October... THIS IS MADNESS!.. I'm all for supporting profits … I'm not for supporting greed at the cost of lives of others. Something needs to change. Why is customers' money being used to make life more comfortable for those who are making life more intolerable for the rest of us? I actually don't understand how the energy companies are allowed to get away with this and why the government aren't stopping them instead of handing out money.....

Nigel Farage says it's banter, it's just what blokes say when they're relaxed down the pub after a few drinks. Well @Nigel_Farage I've been out with the Thursday club today, there were 10 of us, we all had 'a few drinks'. Not one of us used the word parasite when talking about others, not one of us likened a female to a child and declared that 'Thursday night would always be bath night', not one of us said that if a woman hugged us we would 'finger her'. It is not normal behaviour. You @Nigel_Farage are a disgusting human being, your company is a disgrace to the UK.

Trump claims he did not order restrictions on Ukraine’s access to Starlink “I don’t know who it could have been, but it wasn’t me. And I don’t think it was Elon Musk either,” the US president said. Do you buy this?

This graphic has been circulating for years and often pops up on @X, usually posted by suspicious anonymous low-follower far-right accounts. The graphic mixes a few accurate census figures with several that are mislabelled, inflated or untraceable, and lets the accurate ones lend credibility to the rest. Taking each claim in turn: 1. "UK Muslims: 6.5% of population": Accurate, but mislabelled The figure is correct for England and Wales, not the UK. It comes from Census 2021, which counted 3.87 million people in England and Wales who identified as Muslim. Scotland's 2022 census recorded 2.2%, and Northern Ireland's 2021 census around 11,000 people, so the UK-wide figure is closer to 6%. It is a minor slip, but it matters for the terror claim that follows. 2. "97% of terror deaths since 2000": Unsupported This figure appears in no official source, and none of the sources listed on the graphic contains it. Restricted to Great Britain, Islamist-motivated attacks such as 7/7 and the Manchester Arena bombing do account for most terrorism deaths since 2000, so a high percentage under that narrow, unstated definition is plausible. But the headline says "UK", which means including Northern Ireland, where PSNI security statistics recorded 18 security-related deaths in 2000/01 alone, with more in later years. More fundamentally, the claim attributes the actions of a small number of attackers to 3.9 million people. That move is the core trick of the whole graphic. The official figures that do exist show both the reality of the Islamist threat and its scale. As of March 2026, 273 people were in custody in Great Britain for terrorism and terrorism-connected offences. Of these, 58% were categorised as holding Islamist-extremist views, 29% extreme right-wing ideologies and 12% other ideologies, and 165 described their religion as Muslim. Islamist terrorism is the largest category, and that should be acknowledged plainly. But 165 people set against a Muslim population of around 3.9 million in England and Wales alone is fewer than one in 20,000. Arrest figures add further context: excluding arrests linked to Palestine Action, 52% of people arrested for terrorism-related activity in the year to March 2026 were recorded by officers as being of White ethnic appearance, and 29% as Asian. 3. "90% of MI5 terror watchlist": Unsupported No official source gives this figure. MI5 has not published an ideological breakdown of the wider pool of people on its radar, which The Times reported in 2020 numbered more than 43,000, including closed subjects of interest. Higher figures circulate online, but none traces to an official breakdown of the wider watchlist. What MI5 has published is the split of its counter-terrorism work: in October 2024, the Director General put it at "roughly 75% Islamist extremist, 25% extreme right-wing terrorism". Note that "Islamist extremist" describes an ideology under investigation, not Muslims as a population. 4. "75% of terror threats": Accurate figure, misleading framing The number matches MI5's October 2024 figure for its counter-terrorism work. The problem is presentation. The graphic uses what is essentially the same statistic twice, once as an unsupported 90% and once as 75%, so it looks like two separate findings. Under a "UK Muslims" heading, a share of investigations into an ideology becomes a share of threats attributed to a religious population. MI5 itself warned in that speech that labels like "Islamist terrorism" or "extreme right wing" do not fully reflect "the dizzying range of beliefs and ideologies we see". The picture has also moved since. In October 2026 MI5 reported that the UK threat level had returned to SEVERE for the first time in almost five years, and that the rise was "driven in significant part by Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism". The same speech made clear that the Islamist threat persists: Al Qaida and Islamic State continue to direct and inspire attacks, and three Islamist extremists were convicted in February for planning to use automatic weapons against the Jewish community in Manchester. Other official measures add further context. In the year to March 2025, extreme right-wing concerns accounted for 21% of referrals to Prevent, against 10% for Islamist extremism, and 42% of the cases adopted for intensive Channel support, against 15%. Referrals measure concern rather than threat, but together these figures show how much a single, undated "75%" leaves out. 5. "84% of grooming gang rapes": Misleading, from a discredited source This is misrepresented on three counts. It derives from a 2017 report by the now-defunct Quilliam think tank, which claimed that 222 of 264 offenders it identified were of South Asian heritage. So it measured offenders, not rapes, and "Asian", not "Muslim". The criminologist Ella Cockbain and others criticised its methodology heavily, and the Home Office has since acknowledged it is not a reliable source. Listing the Casey audit as a source implies Casey supports the 84%. She does not. Her 2025 audit found that ethnicity is still not recorded for two-thirds of perpetrators, and the Home Secretary told the Commons the national data was "not good enough to support any statements about the ethnicity of group-based child sexual exploitation offenders". To be fair to the evidence, Casey did find disproportionate numbers of Asian men among suspects in local data from Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire. Overrepresentation in those areas is supported; a national figure of 84% for Muslims is not. Scale matters here too. The crimes popularly associated with "grooming gangs" are officially recorded as group-based child sexual exploitation. Police analysis of 2022 data for England and Wales found that all group-based child sexual abuse and exploitation, a broad category ranging from peer groups sharing images to organised abuse, accounted for around 5% of recorded child sexual abuse offences. Group-based sexual exploitation itself accounted for 717 offences in 2023, against roughly 115,000 recorded child sexual abuse offences. Casey warned that these figures almost certainly undercount the true scale, because recording is so poor. That is precisely the point: if official data cannot reliably count these offences, it certainly cannot support a precise claim about who commits 84% of them. 6. "18% of prisoners": Accurate, but lacks context The figure is broadly correct for England and Wales. The most recent published figure is 16,051 Muslim prisoners in June 2025, around 18% of the prison population. The Ministry of Justice has warned that changes to how prisoners' religion is recorded, made in June 2025, mean figures before and after that date are not directly comparable, so claims about how quickly the number is rising should be treated with caution. The graphic offers no context. Britain's Muslim population is young, with a median age of 27 against 40 nationally, and offending is concentrated among younger adults. Around one in five Muslim prisoners is white, far above the share among Muslims generally, but the data cannot show whether they converted before or during their sentence. 7. "6000 FGMs per year": Misleading NHS England data shows 6,980 women and girls had an NHS attendance where FGM was identified in 2024-25. That counts women and girls found to have undergone FGM at some point in their lives, including many first identified in earlier years. It does not count procedures carried out each year. The number recorded in the dataset for the first time in calendar year 2024 was 3,855. The dataset does not record religion, and FGM is practised across several faiths in parts of Africa, so attributing it to "UK Muslims" has no basis in this data. 8. "1.5x higher birth defect rate": Unsupported This cannot be traced. NHS data does not publish birth defect rates by religion. The best-known UK evidence, the Born in Bradford study, is about cousin marriage, not religion. It found consanguinity roughly doubled the risk of congenital anomaly, and its lead author stressed that this means a rise from 3% to 6%, so the absolute risk remains small. The 1.5x figure matches neither finding, and it applies research on consanguineous couples in one city to all Muslims. 9. "48.6% of 16-64 not employed": Accurate, but lacks context The figure is arithmetically correct but stripped of context. Census 2021, still the latest official source, found 51.4% of Muslims aged 16 to 64 in England and Wales were in employment. Of the rest, 6.7% were unemployed, while 16.1% were looking after home or family and 13.8% were students. The ONS attributes the gap largely to these factors and to the group's young age profile. "Not employed" is not the same as unemployed, and the ONS says it holds no data on the religion of benefit claimants. 10. "27% in social housing": Accurate, but lacks context The figure is rounded from the census finding that 26.6% of Muslims in England and Wales lived in social rented housing, against 16.6% of the overall population. The census records the association but cannot explain it. The ONS points to income, employment, inherited wealth, house prices and where people live as factors shaping housing outcomes across groups. Presented without any of that, the figure invites readers to treat a pattern of disadvantage as a characteristic of a faith. The wider context Graphics like this do not circulate in a vacuum. Home Office figures published this month show religious hate crimes targeting Muslims in England and Wales rose 15% in the year to March 2026, to 5,132 offences, around 45% of all religious hate crime. Excluding the Metropolitan Police, whose recording system changed, the total was the highest since the data was first collected in 2018, with spikes during the far-right protests and disorder of September 2025. Muslims are the most frequently targeted religious group in absolute numbers, although Jewish people face a higher rate relative to population. In its October 2026 threat update, MI5 said that over the past year "the most marked trend has been an increase in cases where extremist versions of anti-immigration and anti-Muslim grievance are tipping into terrorist intent", including would-be terrorists "attempting to attack mosques and venues connected to immigration and asylum". Overall Three figures are accurate but lack context (prisoners, employment, social housing), one is accurate but mislabelled (6.5%), one is an accurate figure with misleading framing (75%), two are misleading (84%, FGM) and three are unsupported (97%, 90%, birth defects). The techniques are familiar. A source list at the bottom implies every bullet is sourced when several are not. One MI5 statistic is used twice. Offenders become "rapes", "Asian" becomes "Muslim", and identifications become procedures. Throughout, aggregate figures invite readers to draw conclusions about any individual Muslim, a version of the ecological fallacy, and the crimes of a small number of people are attributed to 3.9 million. In van Dijk's terms, it is negative other-presentation dressed up as data.

Did her parents come here illegally? Just wanting to know, because there's a MASSIVE difference.

The Express bring back Project Fear for their master Farage.

Was Farage @Nigel_Farage right when he said people don't care about his undeclared £5million bung? For the record, I still fucking do, how about you?

I seem to have upset the @SuellaBraverman fan club - so let me be clear. This women sows hate, lies and division. She is wrong. She does not represent the vast majority of Britons. RT if you agree P.s. multiculturalism is great.

What's your honest Thoughts when you see him in uniform? "Super proud" for me👇🇺🇸