Geoff Huijer

Author of 'Death of a King - Massan Gow & the Hounds of St Andrew - Volume I'.
Fervent advocate of Scottish Independence & an egalitarian state - I Voted YES

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

Gordon Brown introduced the Work Capability Assessment and ATOS Healthcare; he's no friend of the poor. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing.

[Mike Dailly @mikedailly]

Gordon Brown reduced child poverty. And for that he will be remembered as a hero in my book.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

And I've accepted that it's very unlikely to happen in my lifetime. 😥

[James Melville 🚜 @JamesMelville]

For myself and many others, Scottish independence is not about some sort of Braveheart-tinged dislike of the English. I absolutely adore England and the English. It’s not about a desire for passports, anthems or sovereignty either. It’s about my homeland self determining a set of direct democracy political values that are diametrically opposite to what has been happening at Westminster for many years now.

What’s driving so many Scots to consider saying ‘yes’ to independence has less to do with their view of Scotland and more to do with what they believe has happened to British politics and the grotesque mess of corporatist governance at Westminster.

It’s also got nothing to do with the SNP (who have descended into woke authoritarianism). Instead, Scotland must look way beyond that and find the right people to reshape a better path for Scotland and free from the busted flush model elsewhere. This is probably idealistic, but there’s no other alternative.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

But, I'll turn the comments off so you don't have a voice, obviously.

[Lucy Powell MP @LucyMPowell]

I really want our Labour government to succeed, but we need to be clearer about whose side we're on, and in whose interests we're serving.

I will be a strong independent voice for members across our movement.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

British Nationalism all the rage again. 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

[Mike Tapp MP @MikeTappTweets]

Ready for the PM’s big speech.

Lots of flags!

🇬🇧

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

Apparently, flag-waving nationalists are ok now. Obviously, when it's British/English nationalists.

[Robert Peston @Peston]

Starmer: wave your flag

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

'It's a big club, and you're not in it' as George Carlin would say.

[Ellie Reeves @elliereeves]

A huge honour to be officially sworn in as Solicitor General in the Royal Courts of Justice this morning.

From tackling violence against women and girls, using AI to modernise the justice system to ensuring diversity across the legal professions, I cannot wait to get started.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

Political commentator backs Gov't in 'Who'da thunk it' SHOCKER!

[Sophy Ridge @SophyRidgeSky]

Keir Starmer has delivered his speech to Labour conference - and actually I think it's one of the most impressive speeches he's made.
Which is weird, because it was all about Nigel Farage. It felt a bit like we'd wandered into the wrong conference with all the mentions of Reform UK.
But here's the thing - a PM struggling to define himself has finally managed to do that - by defining himself AGAINST Nigel Farage.
He described a fork in the road, a choice, between Labour and Reform.
Two different parties. Two different visions. Two different versions of patriotism. Two different ways of flying the flag.
Rather than fishing in the same pond as Reform - trying to attract the same voters - this is a change of strategy for Labour.
Instead they're going for the voters who DONT like Nigel Farage. 
Because people don't just vote for who they like but who they don't like. And Labour are gambling that if they can be the anti Reform party - that hoovers up the votes of people who don't like farage - then they might just have a chance

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

Imagine feeling safe with this Tory tribute act.

[Viviane: Members need a say @LaindonFEMINIST]

I thought Starmer’s speech was powerful and passionate. I thought Rachel Reeves speech was monumental and moving.

Most of all I felt in safe hands, strong hands, caring hands. Both of them should be very proud of themselves.

Labour a Party I’m incredibly proud to support.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

I don't believe for one minute that a former barrister has any kind of respect for David Lammy. We are truly being ruled by fools and conmen.

[Jake Richards MP @JakeBenRichards]

It was a really profound moment seeing David Lammy being sworn in as our first black Lord Chancellor this morning. He’s going to do a great job. 🌹

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

Delusional doesn't cover it.

[Luke Akehurst @lukeakehurst]

The Labour Party, the PM and the Chancellor are all leaving Annual Conference in Liverpool in an immeasurably stronger position than we arrived on Saturday. What a great few days!

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

It's a fair point.

[Claire 💙 @clairebubblepop]

I keep hearing “we want our country back”. Yeah we all do. How’s about being able to buy a home on one wage? Or wages even being liveable? What about same day GP appointments? Or ambulances arriving within minutes? Clean rivers and beaches? I could go on and on. But I’ll tell one thing… it’s not migrants who’ve taken these possibilities away… it’s capitalist greed. Have you noticed we don’t own anything anymore? Almost everything is subscription… films, music, software for your phone or PC. Tell me how this is anything to do with migrants? Look to the people with the power, not to the people with NONE.

[Sony Thăng @nxt888]

🇷🇺SERGEY LAVROV:

"On the day the drones crashed on Polish territory, as soon as Poland raised the alarm, we proposed a business-like meeting with the Russian Defence Ministry, as befits professionals and without any hysteria.

The proposal was to inspect the wreckage and discuss what kind of drones they were and what their flight range was.

The crucial point is this: the drones found on Polish territory – if they are the ones we suspect – have a shorter flight range than the distance from the Russian Federation’s border to the Polish border.

I will reiterate – when the other party dodges an earnest discussion, accuses us of all manner of evil, and turns down proposals to sit down and sort things out because they 'don’t want to' – well, you know the answer."

"We have nothing to hide.

We never attack civilian targets.

Incidents may happen, but we never target them deliberately.

We do not, and would not, send our drones or missiles into the territory of member states of the European Union or European members of the North Atlantic Alliance.

Let me be clear once again.

If the Poles genuinely wanted to look into this incident, we would immediately offer a meeting.

But no one ever wants to discuss the facts.

There have been numerous examples where we were accused, only for it to later emerge that Ukraine was responsible for hitting a market, a maternity hospital, or other civilian targets.

Once the noise of the initial accusations subsides, journalists – including those who raised the fuss in the first place – lose all interest in exploring the facts and establishing the truth.

Perhaps they are simply not permitted to.

But we remain ready for an honest conversation."

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

@LizzyBuchan Utter nonsense. Labour have proven to be nothing more than a pretendy Tory Party. They even manage to out-Tory the Tories on occasion.

[Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald]

The most common tactic of war propagandists:

If you oppose a regime change war, it means you love that regime:

Opposing Iraq war = pro-Saddam
Opposing Libya war = pro-Gaddafi
Opposing Syria war = pro-Assad
Opposing Ukraine war = pro-Putin
Opposing Venezuela war = pro-Maduro

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

From 'Vote for us, we're not the Tories' to 'Vote for us, we're not Nigel Farage'. Labour (indeed, the Red Tories) are clueless.

[Sophy Ridge @SophyRidgeSky]

That was an impressive speech from Starmer.

And marks a change of strategy with Reform. Accept the next election will be about Nigel Farage - and define yourself against him - ie if you don’t like Farage, vote Labour

[Thomas Fazi @battleforeurope]

This is turning into a sick joke. At every European election, unsubstantiated accusations of “Russian interference” are used to justify massive EU-NATO interference, including the banning of anti-establishment candidates and parties — as seen once again in Moldova — and massive financial/media boosting of pro-war, pro-EU and pro-NATO candidates/parties. Then, once the “right” outcome has been engineered, mainstream politicians all repeat the line that “democracy has triumphed despite foreign (i.e., Russian) attempts to manipulate the election”. It’s truly disgusting.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

@RachelReevesMP We don't believe you.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

This site will be robbed at least once a week until the project finishes. Police may be called but regularly won't even turn up. Having worked in security (incl building sites) I know it to be the norm. Crime is rampant.

[Steve Reed @SteveReedMP]

BUILD

BABY

BUILD

🇬🇧

[Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand]

The Guardian isn't even trying anymore, just going for basic "darkness v light" propaganda, including the holy halo around the head of the pro-EU politician 😅

The story (https://t.co/enB5SUfTpd) focuses entirely on supposed "Kremlin interference" but doesn't as much as mention that:
- a) the current pro-EU government just barred two pro-Russian political parties just 2 days before the elections (and one day before this article was written)
- b) that Moldova literally has its elections supervised by the EU on the ground, including (according to Kaja Kallas: https://t.co/TNuUK37slX) a "specialist team... to address illicit financing around the elections" and "a hybrid rapid response team [fighting] against the foreign interference"

So the side of the "light" is literally banning opposition parties at the last minute, and having foreign teams actively helping them shape electoral outcomes on the ground.

And they make the story all about "Russian interference". This isn't even remotely journalism, this is just stenographing for one side.

[Geoff Huijer @GeoffHuijer]

Red Tories want your vote.

[Bridget Phillipson @bphillipsonMP]

We can’t fight Reform if we’re busy fighting ourselves.

As Deputy Leader, with a seat in Cabinet, I’ll unite our party, deliver change and take the fight to Reform.

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

I'm seeing quite a bit of comment about this, so I want to make a couple of points.

I'm not owed eternal agreement from any actor who once played a character I created. The idea is as ludicrous as me checking with the boss I had when I was twenty-one for what opinions I should hold these days.

Emma Watson and her co-stars have every right to embrace gender identity ideology. Such beliefs are legally protected, and I wouldn't want to see any of them threatened with loss of work, or violence, or death, because of them.

However, Emma and Dan in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right - nay, obligation - to critique me and my views in public. Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created.

When you've known people since they were ten years old it's hard to shake a certain protectiveness. Until quite recently, I hadn't managed to throw off the memory of children who needed to be gently coaxed through their dialogue in a big scary film studio. For the past few years, I've repeatedly declined invitations from journalists to comment on Emma specifically, most notably on the Witch Trials of JK Rowling. Ironically, I told the producers that I didn't want her to be hounded as the result of anything I said.

The television presenter in the attached clip highlights Emma's 'all witches' speech, and in truth, that was a turning point for me, but it had a postscript that hurt far more than the speech itself. Emma asked someone to pass on a handwritten note from her to me, which contained the single sentence 'I'm so sorry for what you're going through' (she has my phone number). This was back when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak, at a time when my personal security measures had had to be tightened considerably and I was constantly worried for my family's safety. Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness.

Like other people who've never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is. She'll never need a homeless shelter. She's never going to be placed on a mixed sex public hospital ward. I'd be astounded if she's been in a high street changing room since childhood. Her 'public bathroom' is single occupancy and comes with a security man standing guard outside the door. Has she had to strip off in a newly mixed-sex changing room at a council-run swimming pool? Is she ever likely to need a state-run rape crisis centre that refuses to guarantee an all-female service? To find herself sharing a prison cell with a male rapist who's identified into the women's prison?

I wasn't a multimillionaire at fourteen. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women's rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.

The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me - a change of tack I suspect she's adopted because she's noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was - I might never have been this honest.

Adults can't expect to cosy up to an activist movement that regularly calls for a friend's assassination, then assert their right to the former friend's love, as though the friend was in fact their mother. Emma is rightly free to disagree with me and indeed to discuss her feelings about me in public - but I have the same right, and I've finally decided to exercise it.