🚨Big announcement from Asmongold!
He just said live on stream that he’ll be reading the entire UK Rape Gang Inquiry report word for word on stream.
With his huge audience of 3.4 million+ Twitch followers, this is going to reach a massive number of people.
No more relying on mainstream media spin.
Tune in to @Asmongold on Twitch tomorrow. This one’s important.
#Asmongold #RapeGangInquiry #GroomingGangs
NEW: Reform are subsidising prices at a petrol station in Buxton to promote their proposal to cut fuel duty in the wake of the Iran War - more on @skynews later
Eighty million in cash looks impressive. Part of it is my taxes in the EU. And yours. Who was this pile of money going to? Ursula, wouldn’t you like to tell us?
‼️BREAKING || UKRAINE MAFIA 100'S MILLION IN GOLD & CASH RUN BUSTED IN HUNGARY -- ZELENSKY'S EX-GENERAL HELD WITH $40M, €35M AND 9KG GOLD
Hungarian authorities have blown the lid off a staggering cross-border cash haul after seven Ukrainian nationals -- including a former general from Ukraine's security service -- were detained while escorting armoured cash trucks packed with money and gold.
The dramatic bust unfolded on 5 March 2026, when Hungary's National Tax and Customs Administration (NAV) intercepted two armoured collection vehicles heading from Austria toward Ukraine.
Inside, investigators say they found a fortune: $40M, €35 million and 9 kilograms of gold bars being transported across the border.
Hungarian officials have now opened a criminal investigation on suspicion of money laundering, with the former Ukrainian intelligence general reportedly overseeing the shipment.
The discovery has also exposed a much larger financial pipeline flowing through Hungary.
According to NAV figures, more than $900 million, €420 million and 146 kilograms of gold bars have already been transported through Hungary into Ukraine the beginning of this year alone.
The main question -- who ultimately controls the vast cargo heading from the EU to Ukraine.
Britain Is Sleepwalking Into Lebanon.
Lebanon did not fall overnight. It was once the most cosmopolitan, pluralist state in the Arab world. Beirut was the Paris of the Middle East. A functioning democracy. A free press. A Christian majority that built a nation generous enough to welcome those who came. It believed that openness would be met with openness. That tolerance would be reciprocated. That good faith was a universal language. It wasn't. It never is.
The Palestinians arrived after 1948 and in their hundreds of thousands after 1970, expelled from Jordan with their militias intact. The Lebanese state, too timid to enforce its own sovereignty, allowed armed factions to operate as a state within a state. Then Iran exported its revolution westward and Hezbollah was born, funded from Tehran, running its own hospitals, schools, courts and welfare networks. It made the Lebanese state optional for an entire community. Every accommodation encouraged the next demand. Every retreat was read as weakness, because it was.
The civil war that followed lasted fifteen years and killed 150,000 people. But the war was merely the violent expression of something that had already happened. The state had lost its monopoly on violence. Communities had retreated into armed confessional blocs. The centre had hollowed out. Lebanon was already two countries sharing a flag but not a future.
The Christians didn't lose because they were cruel. They lost because they were naive. They believed demographic generosity could be squared with political stability. They believed armed factions could be absorbed into a civic order. Power follows population. Identity hardens under pressure. Every community with a coherent creed will eventually act on its interests. The moral high ground is not a defence. In Lebanon it became a grave marker.
Now look at Britain.
Since 2018, boats have arrived on the Kent coast carrying tens of thousands of men, the overwhelming majority unvetted and undocumented, from Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Eritrea. They are housed and supported at public expense while the state performs the pantomime of processing them. Anyone who raises the subject is accused of racism before the sentence is finished. This is not immigration. It is the progressive dissolution of Britain's right to determine who enters its own territory.
The parallel institutions are already here. Sharia courts operating alongside civil law. Educational environments teaching loyalty to the Ummah rather than to Britain. Areas where policing is negotiation, investigations are quietly dropped, and the state modifies its own behaviour for fear of communal reaction. In Lebanon they called it accommodation. They kept calling it accommodation right up until the checkpoints went up.
The electoral bloc pressure is already here. Candidates selected on the basis of foreign conflicts. Representatives answering to communal leaderships rather than constituents. The institutional failure is already here. The Charity Commission investigated the Islamic Centre of England for three years. Little changed. Universities host vigils for mass murderers and hold nobody accountable. Prevent is applied selectively. Everyone knows it. Nobody says it.
Lebanon did not collapse because its enemies were strong. It collapsed because its institutions were weak. Because it confused tolerance with the abandonment of standards. Because it believed the centre would hold without anyone holding it. Britain is not Lebanon yet. But Lebanon wasn't Lebanon yet, once. It drifted. Demographics shifted. Parallel loyalties hardened. The state lost the nerve to enforce a single standard of law. Bit by bit the centre hollowed out.
We are drifting. The question is whether anyone in authority will admit it. Before the drift becomes a current too strong to swim against.
"Power follows population. Identity hardens under pressure. Every community with a coherent creed will eventually act on its interests."
British politicians and military leaders claim that Russia is a threat to Britain and that “British sons and daughters need to prepare to fight.”
What is the biggest threat to Britain?
🇬🇧 WELCOME TO THE UK: TWITTER USER JAILED FOR 18 MONTHS OVER 2 ANTI-IMMIGRATION TWEETS WITH JUST 33 VISUALIZATIONS
A man sits in a prison cell today, not for assault, not for arson, not for inciting a riot, but for 2 tweets with just 33 visualizations.
Luke Yarwood, a socially isolated man from Dorset, has been sentenced to 18 months in prison for posts deemed to have "stirred up racial hatred" in the wake of a deadly car attack in Germany. The tweets were vile, no question. But 33 views? Reported by his own brother-in-law? This is justice?
His words were controversial. But the right to express controversial views, without inciting actual violence, is exactly what separates free speech from state-controlled thought.
Even the prosecution admitted the tweets were viewed by almost no one. Even his lawyer called them "impotent rantings." There were no riots, no arson, no group mobilized. And yet, a year and a half in jail.
Meanwhile, the UK continues to host radical protests, intimidation outside MPs' offices, and open calls for violence on far larger platforms, largely unchecked.
While serious crimes linked to illegal immigration dominate public concern and are routinely silenced by politicians and mainstream media, a man is sent to prison for 18 months over 2 tweets.
What Yarwood said was provocative. But is being provocative now a criminal offence?
When speech becomes a crime, and context no longer matters, the legal system stops protecting the public, and starts protecting power.
Who decides which speech is acceptable? And what happens when your opinion is next?
Source: Daily Mail
Rolls Royce is planning to move its narrow body jet engine program to the US out of Britain because of Starmer’s bullheaded net zero policies. That’s 40,000 jobs and $1.6 trillion that the UK is going to miss out on.