Standin_In_My_Light

Interested in evidence-based policies to improve outcomes in schools, justice and more

[Standin_In_My_Light @Little_Less_Ego]

“...the sinister fact about literary censorship in England is that it is largely voluntary. Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark without the need for an official ban”

George Orwell
Preface to Animal Farm
As true today as in 1945

[Aro Korol @arokorol]

It Was Supposed to Be History

I'm a Polish filmmaker living in London.

I wasn't raised to care about antisemitism. Quite the opposite.

Like many Poles of my generation, I grew up with a version of history that focused heavily on Polish suffering during the Second World War. I visited Auschwitz as a teenager, yet somehow left without truly understanding the scale of what had happened to Europe's Jews.

That changed when I was 19 and worked on Schindler's List.

For the first time, I was confronted with parts of history that had been missing from my education. Later, living in Paris and spending time in New York, I met Jewish people whose understanding of Poland, Europe and history was very different from my own. Some conversations were uncomfortable. A few were life-changing.

The more I learned, the more I realised that antisemitism didn't disappear after the Holocaust. It adapted.

Today it often arrives dressed as political activism, conspiracy theories, selective outrage, historical revisionism, or simply a double standard applied to the world's only Jewish state.

I am not Jewish. I have no family connection to Israel.

What I do have is a deep distrust of propaganda, mob thinking, and people who demand that history be simplified into slogans.

My work on antisemitism began with a simple realisation: if I could be misled about history, so could millions of others.

That is why I make films, conduct interviews, and challenge narratives.

Not because I have all the answers.

Because I spent too many years believing things that weren't true.

[Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1]

Ugh. This is DISGUSTING @LushLtd. Teenage girls love to shop in your stores and here you are happily encouraging them to CUT OFF THEIR HEALTHY BREASTS in the name of trans pride.

This is beyond repulsive. It's dangerous and sick. No parent should allow their child near your stores.

Please share: #BoycottLushNow

[Janet Murray @jan_murray]

Dear Lush (cc Chelmsford City Council),

As a woman who had half a breast removed last year due to cancer, I am writing to raise my concerns about your “Proud of My Stripes” window display.

I am also, on behalf of other women who have experienced breast cancer, respectfully requesting its removal.

Because mastectomies are not a fashion statement, an identity marker or something to be celebrated.

They are something women undergo because they are ill, because they are frightened, because they are trying to stay alive.

Around 59,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in the UK every year. Many will undergo surgery - a mastectomy, lumpectomy or other procedure.

Others choose preventive mastectomies because they carry a high-risk BRCA gene mutation.

If a woman chooses to have her breasts removed to affirm a gender identity, that is her personal choice.

I honestly don’t know the number of women who have elective mastectomies for this reason.

What I do know is that it is a tiny number compared with those for whom breast surgery is medically necessary and not something to be celebrated.

I think I speak for many women who have experienced breast cancer - and for their families - when I say this:

Breast removal surgery is not something I regard as cute, playful or empowering.

Nor is it something I believe retailers should be celebrating.

For that reason, I am requesting that the display be removed and that @ChelmsCouncil apologise for promoting it on social media.

Yours sincerely,

Janet Murray

[It'sTheBiologyStupid @BiologyStupid]

@SVPhillimore Archived copy just in case: https://t.co/imxpL9i4s6

[Standin_In_My_Light @Little_Less_Ego]

@Alexarmstrong @Nanaakua1 Blocked me for sharing a parliamentary report on further education that did not support his views.

[Standin_In_My_Light @Little_Less_Ego]

@MichaelARothman Surely such a law would affect Muslims too? That realusation might cause further internal turmoil.

Interesting that they don't apply this thinking to gender ID related medication and surgery.

The Greens will eat themselves up.

[Dennis Noel Kavanagh @Jebadoo2]

1/ Zack and pals are peddling the attack line “no jury convicted them of terrorism” to try to undermine the sentences in this case. Let me explain why this is fundamentally wrong. In a criminal trial the jury is the judge of the facts and the judge is the judge of the law.

[Calum McNicholas @CalMcN1]

Quite a lot of misinformation about this sentence from the usual suspects.

A brief thread explaining the sentencing powers available to the Judge 🧵

[Andrew Fox @Mr_Andrew_Fox]

One of the most troubling aspects of the Palestine Action/Elbit case is the moral psychology involved.

It is what happens when a political cause becomes a total identity and creates the opportunity for malign actors to exploit it.

Once “Palestine” is transformed from a cause into a sacred symbol of moral standing, ordinary ethical boundaries begin to collapse. Violence is described as “direct action,” criminal damage as “solidarity,” arrest as “repression,” and prison as martyrdom.

The worker in the factory, the police officer with a family, the public frightened by political violence, even the activist discarding their own future, all fade into a heroic narrative about resistance.

It is radicalisation. Outrage narrows the mind; group approval encourages escalation; online applause replaces conscience. The slogan provides moral permission, and the crowd offers emotional insulation. Every consequence is then reinterpreted as proof that the system is evil, making self-correction nearly impossible.

The most tragic aspect is how cheaply lives are destroyed. People with futures sacrifice them for a fantasy of moral purity. Supporters enjoy the warm glow of righteousness. The accused face the sentence, the criminal record, the terrorist notification requirements, and the ruin of adulthood.

You can care about Palestinians without excusing political violence. You can condemn civilian suffering without romanticising criminality or being duped by false propaganda narratives about “genocide”.

Having a just cause does not make a person just. Sometimes the most dangerous lie people tell themselves is that because they have chosen the “right side”, anything they do in its name must be good.

You can read my report on the Psychology of Disinformation, here: https://t.co/6jA4m151gr

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Je vais partir du principe que tu es de bonne foi, parce que ton raisonnement est intuitif et que 90% des gens le partagent. Mais il repose sur trois erreurs factuelles, et ça vaut le coup de les regarder calmement.

Erreur 1 : la fortune d'Elon n'est pas un tas d'argent. C'est de la propriété d'usines, de fusées et de satellites. "Prendre la moitié de sa tune", concrètement, ça veut dire forcer la vente de la moitié de SpaceX et Tesla. L'argent ne sort pas d'un coffre, il sort des entreprises elles-mêmes, qui passent sous contrôle de fonds étrangers ou d'États. Tu ne redistribues pas du cash, tu démantèles un outil de production. C'est la différence entre récolter des pommes et découper le pommier.

Erreur 2 : "ça résout énormément de problèmes dans le monde". Cette expérience a déjà été tentée, en vrai. En 2021, le directeur du Programme Alimentaire Mondial de l'ONU a affirmé que 6 milliards de Musk pouvaient "résoudre la faim dans le monde". Réponse d'Elon : décrivez-moi exactement comment, comptabilité publique à l'appui, et je vends mes actions Tesla immédiatement. Le PAM a publié son plan. Verdict : ce n'était pas "résoudre la faim", c'était nourrir 42 millions de personnes pendant un an. Un an. Puis il faut re-payer, pour toujours. Le PAM avait d'ailleurs levé 8,4 milliards l'année précédente, et la faim était toujours là. Les ONG traitent les symptômes en boucle, jamais les causes, parce que leur financement dépend de l'existence du problème.

Erreur 3, la plus importante : tu cherches ce qui sort vraiment les gens de la pauvreté. Bonne nouvelle, on a la réponse, et elle est massive. En 1990, 36% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Plus d'un milliard de personnes sorties de la misère en 30 ans. Par quoi ? Pas par la charité ni par l'aide internationale (plus de 1 000 milliards versés à l'Afrique en 60 ans pour un résultat à peu près nul). Par l'ouverture des marchés, l'industrialisation, le commerce. La Chine seule a sorti 800 millions de personnes de la pauvreté en abandonnant le collectivisme, pas en taxant ses entrepreneurs.

Donc fais le calcul complet. Option A : tu confisques 500 milliards, tu finances quelques années de programmes, l'argent est consommé, et tu as détruit la machine qui produisait les fusées, les voitures électriques et l'internet des zones rurales. Option B : tu laisses le meilleur allocateur de capital de sa génération réinvestir 100% de sa fortune dans des industries qui baissent les coûts pour tout le monde et emploient des centaines de milliers de personnes. L'option A soulage ta morale pendant 18 mois. L'option B sort des populations entières de la pauvreté pour toujours.

La pauvreté ne se redistribue pas. Elle se résout par la création. C'est contre-intuitif, c'est frustrant, mais c'est ce que disent 200 ans de données.

[David Wolfson @DXW_KC]

1 The Code of Practice is not “rules”. It’s guidance.

2 Rejecting the EHRC’s guidance doesn’t change the law. The law stays the same.

3 Parliament can of course change the law. And if this is what you mean, say so—and also how you’d change it. Otherwise this is just posturing.

[Sarah Phillimore @SVPhillimore]

I have been informed by the BSB that the review process requested by Good Law Project will now commence and they invited my comments which I have given.

Either way, this is likely to end up in court. It is my most fervent wish therefore that 2027 will see Jolyon Maugham required to justify his behaviour in two distinct sets of High Court proceedings.

[Fred Sargeant 🏳️‍🌈 🟦 @FredSargeant]

Found another one @IfindRetards.

Malcolm Michaels, drag name Marsha Johnson, and Rae "Sylvia" Rivera played literally no role of the creation, proposing or organizing of Pride. Within a few short years both were banned from Pride.

No one owes these two junkie, child pimps a thing. Neither were at the Stonewall riot when it kicked off. Johnson/Michaels said so himself.

We were not inspired or led by a drunken, drug-addled, crossdressing, drug fueled, homeless, profoundly mentally ill, violent pimp.

@CatbethJ is a blithering transtard.

[Sarah Phillimore @SVPhillimore]

Permission granted in Judicial Review application against @WiltshirePolice for unlawful breach of its statutory duty of impartiality by wearing Progress Pride colours.

But some really worrying comments in Wiltshire's defence, including a suggestion that there is a hierarchy of crimes that the police will investigate and they 'must' show their support for one community above all others by wearing its colours.

I will look forward to these arguments being fully explored in the substantive hearing - likely Oct/Nov

[Standin_In_My_Light @Little_Less_Ego]

@HeidiBachram @LBC @LBC sort your sh1t out!

[Imtiaz Mahmood @ImtiazMadmood]

Two days after Henry died Hampshire Police secretly recorded Digwa in a police van speaking Punjabi to his brother. Digwa admitted stabbing Henry. Discussed claiming self defence. Made zero mention of racial abuse. Not one word.

Hampshire Police had that tape.

They knew Digwa was lying about the racist attack. They had the evidence. They had his own words and then tried to smear Henry as the aggressor anyway.

Three days after his death their statement read “it was reported two men had been assaulted by an unknown man.” Henry was the unknown man. The boy bleeding out on the street. They flipped it.

Family complained. Statement changed. Then police told the family their NEXT update would again infer Henry was the initial aggressor. His family had to fight them a second time. While grieving their murdered son.

Then during the trial Hampshire tried to issue a statement telling the public to stop talking about it online. Calling it disinformation. The CPS had to step in. Told them they were about to collapse their own murder case.

This is the force that handcuffed a dying boy. Missed the murder weapon twice. Had a secret tape proving the killer lied. And still tried to bury Henry's name.

That's not incompetence. That's a machine protecting itself. At the expense of a dead boy's reputation and three officers are still on active duty. Not suspended. Treated as witnesses. To their own actions.

Hampshire Police didn't just fail Henry on that street. They kept failing him for six months after he died.

- @Banksycat

[Rafe Heydel-Mankoo @RafHM]

The Bank of England DELIBERATELY FIXED the fake "public vote" to remove ALL historical figures from bank notes & replace them with nature images

Freedom of Information requests by the Telegraph reveal the decision to remove historical figures was based on a "focus group" of a mere 119 people

The Bank LIED because it previously claimed the decision was based on a "public vote".

In truth, however, even this vote was FIXED. Instead of having HISTORY v NATURE, the bank deliberately split the "history" category into 3 sections: historical events, historical figures, architecture & landmarks.

That was the only way that "nature" could win.

However, of course bank notes always combine at least two of those history categories. For example: Churchill & Parliament or Wellington & Waterloo.

The Bank's actions are indefensible and questions should be asked in the House.

The Bank of England has clearly been captured by progressive woke ideology. A visit to the Bank of England with its permanent exhibition on slavery makes that clear

This is part of the wider war on British history. It's an attempt to create a NEW BRITAIN, based on ridiculous myths that "Diversity Built Britain" and that Britain has always been multicultural.

Remember: the Bank of England issued a 50p coin (held aloft by Rishi Sunak) which was imprinted with the nonsensical statement: "Diversity Built Britain"

Anyone who lived behind the Iron Curtain will find all of this eerily and scarily familiar.

The pulling down of statues, the renaming of streets and schools, the rewriting of history, denigrating heroes, changing bank notes etc....these were all tactics of the communists.

Severing the connection between a people and their history is the best way to demoralise a society and prepare them for the imposition of new myths.

Me on @GBNews:

[Standin_In_My_Light @Little_Less_Ego]

@ImtiazMadmood @KatieAmess If this is true, not only must these officers be held to account, but the entire chain of command must be sacked.

[Heidi Bachram @HeidiBachram]

What the hell is @ZackPolanski doing wearing a shirt to free the Palestinian terrorist Marwan Barghouti who murdered 5 civilians. This is TOO FAR.

h/t @habibi_uk

[Mark Zlochin - מארק זלוצ'ין༝ @MarkZlochin]

¹ Thanks to the work of @bandlersbanter, @AshleyRindsberg, @EllaTravelsLove and @shlomitlir, there's growing awareness of coordinated ideological takeover of Wikipedia's Israel/Palestine coverage after Oct. 7

So I decided to measure its extent and the results are extraordinary🧵