Klaus-Peter Münch

Opinionated sports loving, port loving, beer loving family man. Business owner so you know there's hints of insanity.

[The Iceman @the_iceman64]

90% of the soldiers on the first boats to hit the beach didn't live to see the end of the day. Look at those faces. Some of them never made it to 18.

Never forget that they paid the ultimate price for our freedom. We live our lives the way we do because of them.

[Jason | 🇬🇧 🇿🇦 🇮🇱🇺🇲 @Ajaon_of_All]

Let me categorically Debunk this utter rot. @sainsburys.

I am a poultry Breeder. The hens that lay white eggs (Amberline/White Star) DO NOT have a lower carbon footprint.

Yes they eat a bit less and produce roughly the same amount of eggs as the Brown egg layers (Bovan/Lowman/ISA Brown) but they live shorter lives, are prone to dying suddenly when startled, a flighty and nervous and because they live shorter productive lives (12 -18mnths) vs brown 18/24mnths (both commercial farmed), you have to incubate more which is increased (Electricity/gas costs) and their eggs are not the same quality.

I breed and keep 20+ different breeds, including: ISA Brown hens and White Stars. All my hens are 100% free range, Not a single barn kept bird, I have ISA browns that are 5yrs old and still laying beautiful Brown eggs, I have not seen a White star live beyond 3yrs and certainly none have laid eggs past 18-24mnths.
White stars Lay themselves to death. They are slender birds and because they dont eat a lot, it drains their personal vitality to keep up laying the eggs you want to sell because of the nonsensical lie that they are "More Carbon Neutral"

You want to know about eggs, come talk to someone like me, Don't rely on some hairbrained imagination of a buyer who's trying to squeeze the profit margin for a few extra pennies at our expense and to the poor hens detriment.

[X Freeze @XFreeze]

Wokeness is the most successful rebranding of evil in human history

It takes racism, division, and hatred, wraps them in the language of compassion and justice, and calls it moral progress

It made people cheer for the destruction of their own societies while feeling morally superior for doing it

[Lozzy B 🇦🇺𝕏 @TruthFairy131]

THE GATE KEEPING OF SCIENCE & INNOVATION 🧬

Allan Savory was born in Rhodesia & worked throughout Africa, the US & around the world helping change the way people think about land, livestock, ecosystems & regeneration.

Big corporations & Globalists want to control the narrative & profit off of all new ‘science’ & innovation.

This is why so many scientists go missing, turn up dead, they steal or buy patents only to shelve them to protect other corporations from profit loss over new/ better research findings or inventions.

[T20 Tracker @t20tracker]

Future of cricket apparently

🇧🇩 BPL
🇿🇦 SA20
🇵🇰 PSL
🇮🇳 IPL
🇧🇪 EUT20
🇺🇸 MLC
🇨🇦 NCL20
🇱🇰 LPL
🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 The Hundred
🇬🇾 GSL
🏝️ CPL
🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇪🇳🇱 ETPL
🇦🇫 APL
🇸🇦 Dunes T20
🇳🇵NPL
🇦🇪 ILT20
🇦🇪 ADT10
🇦🇺 BBL
🇳🇿 NZ20

Year round franchise circus. What has happened to this beautiful sport 😭

[Sama Hoole @SamaHoole]

What a sheep produces in twelve months:

- Two to four kilos of wool
- One lamb, on average
- Roughly 1,000 litres of methane that breaks down in the atmosphere within twelve years
- Lanolin used in everything from skincare to industrial lubricant
- Fertiliser for the field it lives in
- Maintenance of the upland landscape that supports orchids, ground-nesting birds, and dry-stone wall ecosystems
- A small amount of milk if you want it

What a return business-class flight from London to New York produces in nine hours:

- Roughly 1,000 kilos of CO2 per passenger
- No wool
- No lamb
- No lanolin
- No landscape maintenance
- No orchids
- Some duty-free Toblerone

The sheep is doing more for the planet on a wet Welsh hillside than the climate conference attendee did getting to the venue.

Nobody is taking notes.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Gilles, je vais démonter ta prémisse de départ, parce que tout le reste de ton argument s'effondre avec elle.

Tu pars du principe qu'il faut une « sensibilité de gauche » pour ne pas laisser créver les gens de faim. C'est l'inverse total de ce que dit l'histoire économique des 50 dernières années.

Les chiffres bruts.

1990 : 2,3 milliards de personnes en pauvreté extrême. 38% de l'humanité.
2025 : 831 millions. Environ 10%.

1,5 milliard d'êtres humains sortis de la misère absolue en 35 ans. La plus grande réduction de souffrance humaine de toute l'histoire de l'espèce.

Qui a fait ça ?

Pas l'aide internationale. Pas les ONG. Pas les programmes de redistribution. Pas la « sensibilité de gauche ».

Le marché. L'ouverture commerciale. La Chine de Deng en 1978 qui abandonne le maoisme. L'Inde en 1991 qui libéralise. Le Vietnam, l'Indonésie, le Bangladesh qui s'ouvrent au capitalisme.

Les seuls endroits où l'extrême pauvreté a EXPLOSÉ sur la même période ? Le Vénézuela socialiste : de 27% de pauvres en 2008 à plus de 80% en 2018, avec une inflation de 130 000% et un Vénézuélien moyen qui a perdu 11 kilos par dénutrition. La Corée du Nord. Cuba. Le Zimbabwe de Mugabe.

La gauche ne nourrit pas les pauvres. Elle les fabrique.

Le capitalisme produit tellement de richesse que même ses « perdants » américains vivent mieux que la classe moyenne soviétique. Un pauvre US a un frigo, une voiture, un téléphone, l'air conditionné, internet. Un pauvre cubain attend du riz.

Ton argument selon lequel « le social aux USA est un désastre » repète une légende française. La réalité : le PIB par habitant américain est de 80 000$. Français : 45 000$. Un Mississippien — l'État US le plus pauvre — a un revenu médian supérieur au Français moyen.

La vérité que la gauche française refuse de regarder : dans un système libéral, il y a plus de richesse créée, plus largement distribuée, et beaucoup moins de pauvres. Partout. Sans exception. Sur toutes les périodes mesurées.

ÊTRE de gauche en 2026 face à ces données, ce n'est pas avoir de la « sensibilité ». C'est ignorer 35 ans de preuves accablantes. C'est préférer la posture morale au résultat.

La compassion sans résultats, ça s'appelle de la vanité.

[𝓑𝓸𝓫 𝓜𝓬𝓒𝓸𝓼𝓴𝓻𝓲𝓮 🇳🇿 @bobmccoskrienz]

In this episode of Family Matters, Simon sits down with @salltweets Grover to discuss how women are no longer recognised or protected under Australian law. Sall has just lost a court case in which the rights of actual women has come a distant second to the preferences of men who want to identify as female.

In a case called Tickle vs. Giggle, a biological man has successfully argued that his preferences and beliefs trump the biological reality of actual women. Sall discusses her legal journey and the extraordinary cost - in time, money, and effort - to fight for the most basic of human rights, that of protecting the distinction between men and woman.

[Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005]

A Norwegian neuroscientist spent 20 years proving that the act of writing by hand changes the human brain in ways typing physically cannot, and almost nobody outside her field has read the paper.

Her name is Audrey van der Meer.

She runs a brain research lab in Trondheim, and the paper that closed the argument was published in 2024 in a journal called Frontiers in Psychology. The finding is brutal enough that it should have changed every classroom on Earth.

The experiment was simple. She recruited 36 university students and put each one in a cap with 256 sensors pressed against their scalp to record brain activity. Words flashed on a screen one at a time.

Sometimes the students wrote the word by hand on a touchscreen using a digital pen, and sometimes they typed the same word on a keyboard. Every neural response was recorded for the full five seconds the word stayed on screen.

Then her team looked at the part of the data most researchers had ignored for years, which is how different parts of the brain were communicating with each other during the task.

When the students wrote by hand, the brain lit up everywhere at once.

The regions responsible for memory, sensory integration, and the encoding of new information were all firing together in a coordinated pattern that spread across the entire cortex. The whole network was awake and connected.

When the same students typed the same word, that pattern collapsed almost completely.

Most of the brain went quiet, and the connections between regions that had been alive seconds earlier were nowhere to be found on the EEG.

Same word, same brain, same person, and two completely different neurological events.

The reason turned out to be something nobody had really paid attention to before her work. Writing by hand is not one motion but a sequence of thousands of tiny micro-movements coordinated with your eyes in real time, where each letter is a different shape that requires the brain to solve a slightly different spatial problem.

Your fingers, wrist, vision, and the parts of your brain that track position in space are all working together to produce one letter, then the next, then the next.

Typing throws all of that away. Every key on a keyboard requires the exact same finger motion regardless of which letter you are pressing, which means the brain has almost nothing to integrate and almost no problem to solve.

Van der Meer said it plainly in her interviews.

Pressing the same key with the same finger over and over does not stimulate the brain in any meaningful way, and she pointed out something that should scare every parent who handed their kid an iPad.

Children who learn to read and write on tablets often cannot tell letters like b and d apart, because they have never physically felt with their bodies what it takes to actually produce those letters on a page.

A decade before her, two researchers at Princeton ran the same fight using a completely different method and ended up at the same answer. Pam Mueller and Daniel Oppenheimer tested 327 students across three experiments, where half took notes on laptops with the internet disabled and half took notes by hand, before testing everyone on what they actually understood from the lectures they had watched.

The handwriting group won by a wide margin on every question that required real understanding rather than surface recall.

The reason was hiding in the transcripts of what the two groups had actually written down.

The laptop students typed almost word for word, capturing more total content but processing almost none of it as they went, while the handwriting students physically could not write fast enough to transcribe a lecture in real time, which forced them to listen carefully, decide what actually mattered, and put it in their own words on the page.

That single act of choosing what to keep was the learning itself, and the keyboard had quietly skipped the choosing and skipped the learning along with it.

Two studies. Two countries. Same answer.

Handwriting makes the brain work. Typing lets it coast.

Every note you have ever typed instead of written went into your brain through a thinner pipe. Every meeting, every book highlight, every idea you captured on your phone instead of on paper was processed at half depth.

You did not forget those things because your memory is bad. You forgot them because typing never woke the part of the brain that would have made them stick.

The fix is the thing your grandmother already knew.

Pick up a pen. Write the thing down. The slower road is the faster one.

[Riley Gaines @Riley_Gaines_]

If you have to create a shared podium for the boy competing in the girls’ event, you’ve already admitted you know he isn’t a girl and that his participation is unfair.

At that point, you're just seeking a public humiliation ritual for the girls.

[Brenden Nel ⚒ @Brendennel]

The Ntlabakanye case is one of the most uncomfortable doping rulings in recent SA rugby history. And not because he cheated. 🧵

[Sama Hoole @SamaHoole]

Every generation since 1900 has been told that the food of the previous generation was killing them.

- 1900: The Victorians ate too much red meat, butter, and beer. Modern science would fix it.
- 1920: The Edwardians ate too much animal fat. Margarine, a French invention from 1869, was the future.
- 1950: Animal fat causes heart disease. Switch to hydrogenated vegetable shortening.
- 1980: Saturated fat is the enemy. Eat low-fat, high-carbohydrate.
- 1990: Cholesterol is the enemy. Replace your egg yolks with egg-white omelettes.
- 2000: Adopt the Mediterranean diet. Replace your butter with olive oil and your steak with pasta.
- 2010: Sugar is the new enemy. Replace it with aspartame, sucralose, and stevia.
- 2020: Red meat causes cancer. Switch to plant-based, ideally something extruded in a factory.
- 2026: Seed oils are inflammatory. Switch back to animal fat. The fat we removed in 1950.

Every decade, a new culprit. Every decade, a new product to sell. Every decade, the same chronic disease curves climbing in the same population that has been doing exactly as it was told for a hundred and twenty-five years.

In 1900, heart disease was the cause of roughly 8% of British deaths. By 1970, it was the leading cause, killing more than one in three. It has come down since, but cardiovascular disease still accounts for one in four premature deaths in the UK. Obesity has gone from a rounding error to 28% of adults. Type 2 diabetes has gone from a medical curiosity to 4.4 million diagnosed cases. The intermediate steps were all marketed as improvements.

The food your great-great-grandmother ate, on the diet she ate it on, was not the problem. The food that replaced it has been.

The advice has changed twelve times. The food has changed once. The disease has only ever moved in one direction.

[Sicelo Zwane @ZwaneOmkhulu]

Sizwe, you can no longer seriously posture as an “independent political analyst” while functioning as a full-time political combatant for a clearly identifiable factional agenda.

For years, critics observed that your commentary almost always bends in one ideological direction: anti-Ramaphosa, sympathetic to the so-called “Radical Economic Transformation” bloc, indulgent toward Zuma-aligned narratives, and relentlessly hostile to institutions whenever outcomes do not favour your preferred side.

Many dismissed those concerns as unfair.

But statements like “President Cyril Ramaphosa must resign” — absent a criminal conviction, absent an impeachment finding, absent any judicial conclusion of constitutional delinquency — expose the shift from analysis to activism.

A serious analyst distinguishes between:
• political dislike,
• legal liability,
• constitutional thresholds, and
• evidentiary standards.

You increasingly collapse all four into factional rhetoric.

What makes this more revealing is the selective outrage. The same circles that now demand immediate resignation spent years rationalising:
• State Capture,
• attacks on the judiciary,
• the hollowing out of SARS, SAPS and the NPA,
• open contempt for commissions of inquiry,
• and systematic institutional vandalism under Zuma.

Now suddenly constitutional morality is discovered.

The irony is profound: Ramaphosa presides over a constitutional order in which courts remain independent, commissions investigate freely, ministers are challenged publicly, and even the President himself is scrutinised daily without fear.

That is not the profile of a captured state.

Your recent commentary no longer reads like detached political analysis. It reads like partisan mobilisation masquerading as intellectual commentary.

At some point, honesty requires dropping the “independent analyst” branding and openly acknowledging the ideological project you consistently advance.

[Michael Warburton @For_Film_Fans]

The late great ALAIN DELON’s parents divorced when he was 4yrs old and put him up for adoption - so his answer when asked — “if God exists what would you ask him after your death?” — hits me hard every time.

[Sama Hoole @SamaHoole]

Animals killed per year at 180g daily protein:

Beef: 1 animal
Pork: 5 animals
Chicken: 150+ animals
Salmon: 100+ animals
Bread: hundreds of field animals per harvest (mice, voles, rabbits, ground-nesting birds)
Vegetables: same harvest death toll, plus the soil ecosystem you've tilled into oblivion

The cow is the most ethical option by a considerable margin.

Nobody tells you this.

[Today In History @historigins]

This scene changed my whole way of thinking forever

[End Wokeness @EndWokeness]

Homicides per 100,000 in El Salvador:

2015: 103
2016: 81.0
2017: 60.2
2018: 50.4
2019: 35.8
2020: 21.2
2021: 18.1
2022: 7.8
2023: 2.4
2024: 2.0
2025: 1.15

Disorder is a policy choice

[Barry Bateman @barrybateman]

Looking at this picture reminds me of that invention, though I cannot quite remember the name.
Here you have individual engine things each pulling single cargo things.
Now imagine one very strong engine thing pulling hundreds of cargo things, and then putting that long power-engine-cargo-thing on its very own special highway that stretches hundreds of kilometres.
Mindblowing.
Why don't we have those things?

[John Ʌ Konrad V @johnkonrad]

Something is really bothering me about the Ben Roberts-Smith case.

Nobody likes being a hypocrite. Unlike most, I actually go for a walk when I suspect myself of being one.

On one hand, this prosecution stinks of liberal bias.

Out of thousands of potential war crimes cases the social justice warrior police chief could have pursued, she picked THE most decorated soldier on the entire continent. That isn’t justice. That’s a public humiliation ritual.

On the other hand, I do believe actual war criminals should stand trial regardless of rank or honors. And I know what’s coming: “John, Roberts-Smith already lost the 2023 defamation case. Justice Besanko found he committed the murders.”

Yes. On the balance of probabilities. 51 percent. That’s the civil standard. Criminal conviction requires 99 percent.

The same fragile evidence that barely cleared a coin flip is now supposed to send a man to prison for life.

Here’s why my post is not hypocrisy.

When the school got hit in Iran weeks ago, I said mistakes aren’t war crimes, but if it was intentional or grossly negligent, someone should be court-martialed. That strike is recent. Physical. Investigable.

The Roberts-Smith allegations are 20 years old. And here’s what the Brereton Inquiry, for all its 510 witnesses & four years of work, could never get:

No crime scene access. The Taliban didn’t let investigators into Uruzgan.
No Afghan witnesses interviewed.
No secured scene.
No blood-spatter analysis.
No DNA
No autopsies.
No recovered bodies.
No weapons tied to victims.

The investigators themselves admitted they “lacked access to Afghan crime scenes and were missing the physical evidence that would normally anchor a murder prosecution.”

So what’s left? Memory. Twenty-year-old memory from men in the fog of war.

The science is unambiguous. Countless research studies confirms memory is reconstructive: later suggestion, media exposure, and repeated questioning distort it. This is the textbook misinformation effect.

Confidence and accuracy decouple within months, let alone decades. Studies on soldiers who suffer PTSD show the gaps get even larger.

I admittedly don’t know 🇦🇺 law but US courts admit decades-old testimony but warn juries it is inherently fragile, not scientific proof. Australia is treating it as load-bearing concrete.

The media says “20 former soldiers testified against him.” Fine. Was all their testimony actually against him? How clear was it? Did 20 people watch him murder a civilian in broad daylight? And even if they did, you still have to prove the dead man wasn’t Taliban. In Uruzgan. In 2009. Without a body.

Some will say I’m being pedantic.

Yes. I. Am.

Because Ben Roberts-Smith was charged with murder, and under war-crimes law the same act can be framed as murder, willful killing, or killing a person hors de combat depending on the framing.

How it gets framed sets precedent for every future war.

And here’s the question nobody in Canberra wants asked:
Why is the trigger-puller in the dock while the officers who wrote the rules of engagement, approved the missions, and signed the after-action reports keep their pensions?

The Victoria Cross winner hangs. The chain of command walks. Past “War crime” cases with more hard evidence remain “unsolved”

That isn’t accountability. That’s a scapegoat ritual.

You do not get a Victoria Cross just for killing. You get it for extraordinary gallantry, valour, self-sacrifice & devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy.

And here is what Australia just told every soldier watching: the reward for a VC is fame which will make you a target for future show trials built on 20-year-old memories, prosecuted by a police chief with no combat but more ribbons on her uniform than you.

If murder can be proven without hard evidence decades later.

That isn’t justice even if he is guilty. Proof of guilt matters.

That’s a Marxist humiliation ceremony leading to national strategic disarmament by lawfare.

[ClarksonsFarm @ClarksonsFarm1]

Well said! End the Net-Zero lunacy.