Simon Fish

Christian, husband, dad, grandad, retired teacher, Spurs fan, suspicious of govt, politicians & their lackeys.
Simon Fish=a Protestant, anticlerical polemicist

[SOI media 🇬🇧 @MediaSOI]

What they are told to say by the government and the police is quite different to how the actual feel

Henry Nowak's father, Mark Nowak, has called for a thorough investigation into Hampshire Police.

He said: "The way Henry was treated by Police was inhumane and degrading. Henry did not die with dignity, we want a full, fearless and transparent investigation into the police response"

[Chris Philp MP @CPhilpOfficial]

South Wales Police are clamping down on more than “legitimate” discussion of Islam.

This is a blasphemy law. No other religion gets this treatment.

Will the Home Secretary condemn this?

#UKPolitics #Justice #EqualityBeforeTheLaw #LawAndOrder #FreedomOfSpeech

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

Well worth a read.
As the author requests, please pray for the family of Mr Nowak.
https://t.co/d9aVHknHnl

[J Stewart @triffic_stuff_]

🚨LAMMYS BOMBSHELL: “POLICE SHOULD FACTOR IN SKIN COLOUR”🤔

What the actual F*CK?!

Deputy PM and Justice Secretary David Lammy has just admitted police SHOULD take the colour of someone’s skin into account when dealing with crime scenes and policing.

He starts with “we are all equal before the law” but then declares because of disproportionate ethnic minority arrest and prison stats, “context can matter”.

After the national outrage over the horrific treatment of Henry Nowak, where race obsessed officers prioritised the killer’s claims over a dying white teen, Starmer spent the week insisting there’s NO two tier policing and everyone is treated equally.

Now his own Justice Secretary openly says race based “context” is fine.

Absolutely astonishing admission.

This is outright race conscious policing from the top while they gaslight Britain that it doesn’t exist.

[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:

[Bitcoin Teddy @Bitcoin_Teddy]

Javier Milei: “I thought being on the left was a mental problem. The empirical evidence is so overwhelming that it never worked anywhere, and they refused to accept it.”

“But what I discovered is that being on the left is a disease of the soul. The left is built on envy, hatred, resentment, and unequal treatment under the law. They are very violent, and since they have no way or arguments to answer, they go for physical violence.”

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

Well, @gmpolice , @AndyBurnhamGM ?

[Zia Yusuf @ZiaYusufUK]

🚨 Astonishingly, the heads of the Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service’s (GMFRS) ‘race and faith’ network have sent an email to firefighters, targeting staff members standing as candidates for Reform UK.

The email stated these individuals were "spoken to" and that management is seeking "legal guidance" to protect their "inclusive culture."

Sending an anti-Reform UK political broadcast on public systems during a regulated election period is a shocking breach of electoral neutrality and is unlawful.

Firefighters have every legal right to stand for election.

Hounding staff for lawful political views is unacceptable and is proof of the exact perception that anyone questioning an aggressive DEI agenda will be chased out of their job.

I have written to Chief Fire Officer Dave Russel demanding answers.

Petch and Ahmed - the network heads responsible - appear to have committed gross misconduct and should be dismissed.

GMFRS must apologize to Reform UK and the affected staff.

We have given GMFRS until Wednesday to answer 8 specific demands, including providing transcripts of what was said to our candidates and explaining why these network heads are permitted to weaponize IT systems.

I am also calling on HMICFRS (@HMICFRS) and the Electoral Commission (@ElectoralCommUK) to urgently investigate this unlawful breach.

Full letter below. 👇

[Nick Timothy MP @NJ_Timothy]

Lammy justifies the police treating people differently on the basis of race.

He says minorities are disproportionately in the justice system.

This is how the scandal of the police response to Henry Novak’s murder happened.

It’s completely wrong.

[Liam Halligan @LiamHalligan]

Labour risks being forced to seek emergency help from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as Britain lurches toward a debt crisis, leading economists are now warning.

Former IMF chief economist Ken Rogoff says, in a new interview, that there is “more than 50:50 chance” of a major UK debt crisis before the end of this decade.

He is joined by Sir Charlie Bean, a former senior official at both the Bank of England and the Office for Budget Responsibility, who says the need for an IMF bail-out is now a “material risk” for the British economy.

I not only firmly agree with Ken Rogoff and Sir Charlie Bean – but have been repeatedly issuing the very same warnings for a very long time.

Because the grave risk of a major fiscal meltdown has been apparent for at least the last two years – to anyone who combines serious knowledge of UK economics and politics and global debt markets with an open mind.

The UK's public finances were already fragile when Labour took office back in July 2024.

But this government's misguided, ideologically-driven statist policies have made a bad situation much worse, seriously increasing the danger of a deep fiscal crisis - which would cause a disastrous state funding shortfall and a very nasty inflation spike.

That would result in Downing Street being forced to follow the orders of unelected technocrats flown in from Washington and elsewhere.

It would be a very major national humiliation combined with a deep economic slump and an even more intense cost-of-living crisis – in which low-income households, as ever, would suffer the most.

Yet those of us that have shown the brains and courage to point out these inconvenient truths over recent months and years have long been dismissed and derided for our trouble - not only by ignorant politicians and approval-seeking journalists but also the overwhelming majority of "leading economists".

Ahead of the general election in mid-2024, with Labour on course to win, the conventional wisdom among the great sages of broadsheet journalism and the economics establishment was that "the adults would soon be back in charge" ... Labour would "get lucky with the economy" ... and "Britain would now enjoy an extended period of political and fiscal stability".

I thought that was total nonsense – not least as I was well aware Labour's plans irresponsibly to increase borrowing and spending would be met with deep scepticism by the global pensions funds, insurance companies and other institutional investors that lend governments serious money.

My weekly @Telegraph "Economic Agenda" column of 23rd June 2024, a fortnight ahead of the general election, was a total outlier. I recounted the disaster of 1976 – when Britain was forced to go "cap in hand" to the IMF for a bailout – and warned that "The Ghosts of the 1970s" would haunt Labour's (so-called) economic resurrection".

Six months later, after the October 2024 "Hallowen" budget in which Chancellor Rachel Reeves did indeed sharply hike borrowing and spending, I assessed the market reaction then doubled-down – warning more assertively in my column of 12th January 2025 that "The UK risks a return to 1976 unless Reeves changes course".

And then again on 20th July 2025, as Labour's policies raised the costs of doing business, translating into price pressures which pushed up government borrowing costs even more, I again cautioned that "Inflation risks are taking Britain to the debt-crisis cliff edge".

"It’s now screamingly obvious that Labour’s crude Keynesianism – “pump priming” the economy by upping state borrowing and spending – isn’t working," I wrote in that column last July.

"Worse than that, this Government’s actions are pushing Britain towards a budgetary crisis every bit as serious as that in 1976 – when the UK was forced to go “cap in hand” to the IMF for a bail-out".

It's been a lonely task issuing these warnings. I've been hounded in public debates, slagged off by senior civil servants and often dismissed by "leading economists" as "alarmist".

So what do these same "leading economists" now say to Rogoff (Harvard Professor, Former IMF Chief Economist) and Bean (LSE Professor and Former Deputy Governor of the Bank of England)?

The "economics establishment" – with very few honourable exceptions, the brilliant @jagjit_chadha among them – has been and remains extremely reluctant to point out the deeply unsustainable nature of this government's addiction to ever more borrowing.

The systemic fiscal dangers of evermore "tax and spend" – and the prospect of a serious spike in gilt yields and related fiscal meltdown – are now so real and present as to be completely undeniable.

Yet the UK government is about to shift even further to the left, pushing up borrowing and spending even more under a new leader, in a bid to appease the massed ranks of economic illiterates among Labour's Parliamentary party and activist base – making those dangers even more acute.

Yet, still, the silence among "public intellectual" economists is deafening.

I'm glad the likes of Ken Rogoff and Charlie Bean are now issuing clear warnings. So where is the rest of the "economics establishment" - those who purport to understand fiscal management and financial markets, and often funded by taxpayers' money?

Britain is now clearly in the crosshairs of a very serious danger. The government's creditors are increasingly fickle and based overseas – with no regulatory or cultural obligations to lend money to the UK government.

Those holding UK gilts are increasingly "speculative" rather than "strategic" long-term investors – looking for quick returns, financing their government bond purchases with "leverage" (money borrowed from elsewhere), which will quickly be withdrawn when senitment decisively shifts, causing a plunge in gilt prices and a sharp additional surge in government borrowing costs, setting up a vicious circle.

The UK government is very heavily indebted – and the global investors we rely on to bankroll a huge slice of our state spending are alarmed that of the £132bn the government borrowed last year, no less than £110bn was spent on debt interest – as I wrote in a column on 17th May 2026, "As Labour lurches further left, the markets are calling time".

Global investors are alarmed the UK has consistently had the highest inflation in the G7 (which pushes up borrowing costs) and has easily the highest share of index-linked debt (which magnifies the burden of inflation on the state's balance sheet).

And they are deeply, deeply alarmed that when Labour came to power in mid-2024, the Office for Budget Responsibility was forecasting additional state borrowing of £323bn by 2029, the scheduled end of this Parliament.

But Labour’s runaway spending and growth-crushing tax rises mean that the same five-year borrowing forecast is now £583bn – 80pc higher. And still, the trade unions, MPs and Labour activists who will choose Starmer’s successor now want even more.

It is not too late to pull the UK back from the fiscal brink, to avoid the extremely painful and deep, lingering damage of being forced to go to the IMF and perhaps other multi-lateral creditors for a bailout.

It is not too late to avoid the inflation surge, the currency crash, the shocking blow to consumer and business confidence alongside the sky-high interest rates that will seriously whack our economy – or the perhaps even deeper damage of yet more of the British electorate losing faith in the ability of our establishment to manage the country in a manner that avoids imposing serious hardship on so many hard-working people simply trying to make their way.

But our political and media class needs to start acknowledging the economic and financial truth – that the UK government is borrowing and spending too much, taxation is now so high that it's hammering growth and employment, and that trying to finally get the economy moving by "moving further left", borrowing and spending even more, will result in a fiscal collapse.

Smart, experienced, high-profile economists need to start speaking out – as Rogoff and Bean just have – raising the alarm in a bid to force the broader establishment to face reality. Before it's too late.

If you've read this far, you clearly think this analysis is worthwhile and important. So please like and share.

And for more, read my "Economic Agenda" column in The Sunday Telegraph each week – and subscribe to "When The Facts Change: Economics and Politics in a fast-moving world, with Liam Halligan"

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

When DEI Replaces Medicine. Three Dead In Nottingham. The NHS Called It Reducing Inequality.

In May 2020 Valdo Calocane attempted to break into a neighbour's flat during a psychotic episode. Mental health professionals decided not to section him. They cited the over representation of young black males in detention. Hours later he attempted to break into another neighbour's flat. A woman was so frightened she jumped from a window and broke her spine. In June 2023 he stabbed Barnaby Webber, Grace O'Malley-Kumar and Ian Coates to death on the streets of Nottingham.

A Care Quality Commission representative visited the secure ward where Calocane was treated shortly before the killings. Standing on a ward housing twenty patients who had all committed serious offences the representative told the doctor words to the effect of we all know half of these people shouldn't be here. You're doing wrong keeping these people locked up, and that goes particularly for the black patients. The CQC subsequently noted that opportunities to stop Calocane were missed.

Prof Sir Robin Murray, one of the world's leading researchers in psychosis at King's College London, said the pressure to reduce black sectioning rates is akin to saying that it's very unfortunate that so many black patients are having treatment for prostate cancer, so we should decrease the number having operations. Black people have an increased risk of sickle cell anaemia and prostate cancer. Nobody calls urologists racist. A doctor said once a patient has psychosis, we shouldn't perform sociology, we should perform medicine.

Nine current and former NHS psychiatrists told the Telegraph they had been encouraged to limit the number of black patients they section to avoid over representation. Team members questioned sectioning decisions warning it could be construed as racism. One senior professor put it precisely. You are seen as failing if you admit a black person on a section. Admit a white person and it's clear they are very ill and needed it. Frustrated doctors said DEI had become an industry, with trusts employing diversity leads who had a financial incentive to allege racism in sectioning decisions.

Lord Sewell chaired the 2020 Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities. His central finding was precise and simple. Racial disparities are not automatically evidence of racism. Disparity and discrimination are not the same thing. The Commission concluded that the evidence does not support claims of discrimination within psychiatry. The challenge was convincing vulnerable people in ethnic minorities that mental healthcare is neither a threat nor a punishment but something genuinely helpful.

The progressive establishment denounced the report as a whitewash. Activist groups and public sector unions attacked it. Media outlets amplified the outrage. Several commissioners were vilified online and professionally punished. The University of Nottingham rescinded the honorary doctorate it had awarded Sewell for his work in education. They said the report was too controversial. Calocane was also a Nottingham student. It was there that he first experienced hallucinations.

Emma Webber, whose son Barnaby was one of three people Calocane killed, told the Nottingham Inquiry that police and mental health services were spending far too much time worrying about discrimination and segregation and doing the wrong thing because somebody's of a certain colour or certain religion. If you're dangerous, you're dangerous, and it does not matter what colour you are or where you're from.

Sewell's closing observation is the verdict on all of it. When identity politics replaces evidence the consequences are not just intellectual. Sometimes they are deadly. Barnaby Webber. Grace O'Malley-Kumar. Ian Coates. Henry Nowak. Different institutions. Different victims. The same cause.

"Calocane was also a Nottingham student. It was there that he first experienced hallucinations."

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

Political banquets were crucial in the forced abdication of King Louis Pillippe in the early phase of the 1848 revolution in France. These gatherings matter in France, which is why the Left are fearful.

[Miss Jo @therealmissjo]

In France there is a new activity that the Left is getting their knickers in a twist about.

Le Canon Français is running massive banquets. For about £70 you can have great food and drinks and spend time singing patriotic songs.

The “Far Left” is furious.

LFI says it has evidence of racist chanting, and of immigrant staff being insulted. With pork regularly on the menu, they say the feasts are purposely designed to exclude Muslims and vegetarians.

Meanwhile, everyday people who love France, love food and beer are having the time of their lives.

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

@Kaleidicworld @SimonMagus Case in point? Sir Roger Scruton was barely cold before this hit piece was written.
https://t.co/FVSShwSx7T

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

Works across virtually all state institutions.

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

Exactly right. James Lindsay has documented this framework more precisely than almost anyone and the analysis is correct. And it's worth spending a little time explaining the specific mechanism that makes it so effective and so difficult to dislodge.

Classical Marxism divided society into bourgeoisie and proletariat based on their relationship to the means of production. When that framework failed to produce the revolution its architects predicted, the Frankfurt School theorists, Gramsci, Marcuse, Adorno, reframed the oppressor and oppressed categories around culture, identity and consciousness rather than economic class. Race Marxism is the logical extension of that reframing. Whiteness replaces capital as the mechanism of oppression. White supremacy replaces bourgeois ideology. Structural racism replaces the base and superstructure.

The most important element of the framework is the last one you identify. Where no person or institution is racist, racism occurs because the structure produces racist outputs from no racist inputs. That formulation is the key to understanding why the framework is unfalsifiable and therefore impossible to dislodge through evidence. If racist outputs can occur without racist inputs then no amount of demonstrated good faith, equal treatment or documented impartiality can disprove the existence of structural racism. The accusation is immune to evidence by design.

It is also the precise framework that produced the Me and White Supremacy book club for Sussex Police senior officers. If the structure is racist regardless of individual intent then the solution is not better individual behaviour but the dismantling of the structure itself. That is what the book demands. And Sussex Police called it leadership training.

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

Well, @Keir_Starmer ?

[Ben Leo @Benleo]

Keir Starmer can complain about foreign interference from @elonmusk and @JDVance all he likes but:

He's the one who led the UK's martyrdom of George Floyd in 2020

And he's the one who led a party which campaigned for Kamala Harris in battleground states during the US election

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

@theweeflea @alexwickham @Keir_Starmer also approved ofUK Labour activists going to USA to help with Biden/Harris in 2024 election. That wasn't political interference.

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

@SamanthaNiblet4 Coercion and fibbing.

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

@theweeflea @AtheistTakes Thankfully, Jesus died for the indecent and worse. The atheist has no atonement or opportunity to bear fruit in keeping with repentance. At our church, we confess our sins and repent every Sunday because we're crap people. We're no better than anyone, that's why we seek mercy.

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

@Kaleidicworld @tonyannett Thanks. There remain limits to tolerance. Then coercion (moral, spiritual, economic, societal, familial etc) begin. There are some things which even the tolerant cannot accept...and there will be disagreements.

[Simon Fish @SimonFish1529]

Never have we asked for more from the state. Energy crisis? Cap our bills. Hot inflation? Subsidise our tickets to Peppa Pig World. Private pensions underperforming? We weren’t told our capital was at risk! Quadruple lock now!
https://t.co/kPtd1V8XJA