Olivia
Online
Tony Small
@Tony__Small
Joined October 2012
890 Following
273 Followers
371 Posts
‘I don’t think you have mate’ are words that will go down in infamy. That officer’s casual cruelty to a dying Henry Nowak captured the stinking rot of our DEI-driven police force. The police are playing with fire, says Julie Burchill
https://t.co/U18HNul171
Endless aid money for Gaza? In countless Washington conversations about Gaza’s reconstruction, one thing has become unmistakably clear: attitudes and institutional thinking have barely shifted since the horror of October 7 and the devastation that followed. Too many policymakers and aid veterans still frame Gaza’s future as a matter of restoring large aid flows — a technocratic problem of resource allocation — rather than confronting the deeper failure of the NGO, charity, aid, and development industries that entrenched Hamas’s rule for two decades and helped set the conditions for October 7.
It is astonishing that many of the same personalities who profited from “developing” Gaza now expect to return as architects of its recovery. At a recent think‑tank event, I met one such figure — someone who oversaw vast reconstruction contracts and whose negligence enabled Hamas to divert enormous quantities of materials into its tunnel network. This individual casually remarked that “aid should be restored to pre‑war levels, and that should be enough,” revealing a mindset concerned only with reviving their personal fiefdom, not rebuilding Gaza.
Under Hamas, every NGO operating in Gaza had to register first with the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah and then with Hamas in Gaza. Hamas demanded board lists, funders, staff names, and full financial transparency — and assigned an internal security officer to monitor each organization. International NGOs complied with these requirements, even as those same NGOs refused similar requests from the Israeli military after the ceasefire. Compliance with Hamas became the price of doing business.
Meanwhile, the sheer volume of aid flowing into Gaza allowed Hamas to survive financial sanctions and maintain multiple revenue streams — from the PA, the UN, Qatar, Iran, local taxation, and the group’s own foreign donors. Add to this the sprawling ecosystem of international NGOs, and the outcome was predictable: no sustainable development, no equitable distribution of aid, no functioning institutions, and no pathway to peace.
Instead, aid became a welfare system that trapped Gazans while enriching an industrial complex of NGOs, consultants, Hamas operatives, and a compromised civil society incapable of resisting Hamas’s diversion of billions toward tunnels, weapons, and preparations for October 7 — all in violation of humanitarian neutrality.
Gaza’s reconstruction cannot rely on the same apparatuses, personnel, systems, or approaches that failed so catastrophically. Repeating them will simply allow Hamas to reconstitute itself and ensure that radicalization persists, while Gaza remains stuck without transformation, cultural renewal, economic revival, strategic reinvention, or a viable future in the region.
The Sectarian Wave Is Here. A Former Green Deputy Leader Calls It a Danger to Society
A quarter of British Muslims have a favourable view of Hamas. They are more likely to view the IRGC favourably than unfavourably. Twenty one percent feel unfavourably toward British Jews, double the general population figure. Forty five percent believe Jews have too much power over the media. Thirty nine percent believe Jews have too much power over Parliament. Nearly a quarter believe violence is a legitimate response to burning the Koran. These are the documented results of a poll of 1,006 British Muslim adults commissioned by Policy Exchange. Dr Rakib Ehsan's conclusion is unambiguous. The United Kingdom is far from being a stable multi-faith democracy.
Read that sentence again. The United Kingdom is far from being a stable multi-faith democracy.
Now read what is happening to the vote. Muslim support for Labour has collapsed from 80 percent to 33 percent. Six in ten Muslim voters are prepared to back a pro-Gaza independent or the Green Party in Thursday's elections. The Henry Jackson Society has identified 171 sectarian style candidates standing across 31 councils, concentrated in Birmingham, Bradford, Blackburn, Tower Hamlets, Rochdale, Manchester and Oldham. These are not protest candidates. They are the advance guard of a structural realignment in British democracy that the political class is not yet willing to name.
The Green Party's membership has tripled from 68,000 to 215,000 under Zack Polanski. The party's own former deputy leader, Dr Shahrar Ali, has identified that surge as Islamist entryism and described his former party as a danger to society. Two Green candidates have been arrested this week for allegedly posting content defending Hamas and endorsing ramming a synagogue. Both will still appear on Thursday's ballot papers.
One finding stands out above the rest. Fourteen percent of Muslim voters polled reported having their postal vote collected by a political candidate or campaigner, almost double the general population figure and a practice that is now illegal. Courts have prosecuted it. It is happening at twice the rate in Muslim communities as in the wider population on the eve of elections in which those communities are expected to deliver transformative results.
The parliamentary arithmetic is already set. In Bradford West the Labour majority is 707. The Muslim population is 71,280. In Birmingham Yardley the majority is 693. The Muslim population is 48,310. In Rochdale the majority is 1,440. The Muslim population is 31,067. In Ilford North the majority is 528. The Muslim population is 36,511. These are not marginal seats in the conventional sense. They are seats where a disciplined bloc vote, organised around a single issue, could remove a sitting MP regardless of anything else happening in the country. Thursday's local elections are the rehearsal. The general election is the destination.
Dr Shahrar Ali's testimony is the detail that cannot be dismissed. A Muslim. A former Green deputy leader. Expelled by his own party for gender critical beliefs while the party gave a platform to a motion calling for the abolition of Israel. He says the Green Party has been infiltrated by Islamists, has formed an unholy alliance between Islamist entryists and gender ideologues and is a danger to society. He is not a right wing commentator. He is the party's own former deputy leader speaking from direct experience.
Thursday's local elections are the rehearsal. The constituency table is the script for what comes next. The direction of travel is not ambiguous and the destination is not far.
"Dr Shahrar Ali, has identified that surge as Islamist entryism and described his former party as a danger to society."
https://t.co/AqNM8WP49e
Who to follow
Tony Gilland
@tonygilland
Proud dad & former teacher. Engaged in the battle to put us - the public - centre stage of democratic accountability. @MCC_Brussels
Rosie Cuckston
@RCuckston
I’m one of the organisers of Birmingham Salon, which hosts regular in-person debates in various Birmingham venues on a wide range of topics.
jan bowman
@therealjanbow
Architect-trained artist/author. Inspired by humanity, democracy, gardening, ancient Greek vase paintings & melodious songs about 21st-century angst.
.@thereidout should stop commenting on international issues she knows nothing about
She's embarrassing herself comparing America to Iran
Wow.
What a beautiful speech from boxer Floyd Mayweather on Israel and the IDF 🇮🇱
“I take my hat off to the Soldiers, those warriors in Israel. I’m behind you guys, once again 100%”
It’s a short clip, but very powerful, take a listen
📣🚨The Free Speech Union is mounting a legal challenge against the Government over its official definition of Islamophobia — now repackaged as 'anti-Muslim hatred' — and its appointment of a new 'tsar' to punish people who fall foul of it.
This amounts to a Muslim blasphemy law via the back door. The definition is vague and subjective, and will be weaponised to silence legitimate criticism and debate about Islam, Muslims, and Islamic practices and history.
The FSU’s General Secretary, Lord Young of Acton, said: “This is the most serious threat to free speech the Government has come up with so far — the only area in which it’s achieving any success.
“If we don’t win this fight, tens of thousands of people a year could lose their jobs at the say-so of a Labour-appointed ‘tsar’. It’s dystopian.”
Public bodies will adopt this definition — despite it being non-statutory — with the same zeal the police have shown in investigating and recording non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs). It is predicted by one of the drafters of the definition that it could lead to around 20,000 reports of 'anti-Muslim hostility' a year. At present, the number of recorded anti-Muslim hate crimes is around 4,000.
In a free society, no religion should be shielded from legitimate criticism. This proposal places one faith above the rest.
The Free Speech Union is bringing a legal challenge on two grounds.
First, the definition relies on nebulous, legally undefined terms such as “negative and prejudicial stereotyping of Muslims”, making it incoherent and irrational — and ripe for weaponisation.
Second, adopting such a definition cuts across legislation already enacted by Parliament and therefore breaches the public law principle known as “occupying the field”. Under this established public law doctrine, new regulations, put in place by ministers, must not replace existing legislation. It is constitutionally unlawful. In this case, the body responsible for protecting Muslims from discrimination is the Equality and Human Rights Commission, not an anti-Muslim hostility 'tsar'.
Parliament voted to abolish blasphemy laws 18 years ago. We can't let this Government resurrect them via the back door.
This is one of the biggest battles the Free Speech Union has ever taken on in its six years — and we need your help. Judicial reviews are expensive, but this is a fight we felt we had to take on.
Donate to our crowdfunder below👇
Iran: “Death to Israel! Death to America!"
Israel: …
Iran: “Also we’re building nuclear weapons.”
Israel: “You can’t do that. We’re going to stop you.”
Iran: “If you hit us, we’ll attack American military bases.”
Israel: “Okay, America, just so you know, they’re threatening to hit you if we act.”
America: “Wait, so if Israel defends itself, Iran attacks us?”
Iran: “Yes.”
America: “So we get attacked either way because you decided that?”
Iran: “Correct.”
America: “Then we’re not waiting around to get hit.”
*America and Israel attack Iran
Iran and Co: “How dare you escalate! This is a violation of international law!”
We need to understand something here.
When Iran says “If Israel strikes us, we will attack American bases,” then the responsibility for those attacks belongs to Iran. Not Israel or the United States.
Accepting that threat would mean allowing a hostile regime to dictate American foreign policy by blackmail. Imagine if North Korea announced that if South Korea didn't surrender, they would attack the United States. Would we take that lying down? And would we blame South Korea? Of course not.
It's interesting that the same voices who constantly insist that American foreign policy is somehow “controlled by Israel” suddenly lose interest when an actual regime openly tries to dictate U.S. policy through threats and intimidation. When Tehran says it will attack American forces if Israel acts, the answer from those people is not outrage at Iran. It's lectures about why Israel should stand down.
Reports have indicated that Saudi Arabia was also privately urging the United States to strike Iran. But that never becomes a scandal, never becomes evidence that American policy is “controlled” by Riyadh.
Because that's not the story they want to tell.
For people like Tucker Carlson, the only country whose influence ever seems to matter is Israel. Every decision becomes proof of Israeli manipulation, while every other country lobbying Washington, threatening Washington, or trying to shape American policy simply disappears from the narrative.
I have no idea why Tucker is doing this (although I suspect there is a financial incentive here), and frankly it doesn't matter. What matters is that Tucker is trying to manipulate and lie to the American people and that's just wrong. The American people deserve the truth so they can decide for themselves.
Today I watched the British Parliament, and I swear it felt like I was watching the parliament of the Islamic Republic. British MPs did not condemn Iran’s attacks on the UAE and others. Instead, they questioned whether the UK should stand with the United States or its allies in the Middle East. On a rainy day, they tell the world not to look to Britain, so should Britain expect the world to stand with it when it is attacked?
You have reached a point where the UAE, even on its worst days under Iranian missile and drone attacks, feels safer than London on its best day after 9 p.m.
Let that sink in.
Iranian women, upon receiving the news of the death of Iran's lslamic regime religious leader Khamenei, celebrated by dancing.
🙋♀️Hello - Iranian here.
For those fixated on 'legality' to excuse the regime in Iran - F*ck You.
No, I will not let you be my voice. You don't get to narrate my story, you don't get to claim moral superiority. You don't get to tell me my feelings are wrong.
Is it legal to throw women in prison for strands of hair? Is it legal to mass execute people? Is it legal to turn a fertile land into a parched desert? Is it legal to rape? Is it legal to shoot innocent people? Is it legal to kill children? Is it legal to torture people to death? Is it legal to spread terrorism? Is it legal to deprive people of a livelihood? Is it legal to shoot people in the eye to blind them? Is it legal to silence people and take away all of their human rights? Is it legal to shoot down a passenger plane? Is it legal to drive millions to leave their country? Is it legal to jail women for singing and dancing? Is it legal to disappear people including children?
You will never experience anything like Iranians have experienced for the last 47 years.
Iranians have fought barehanded and they've paid a price. All up to 1,000,000 (one million) Iranians have been murdered since the regime came to power.
Your books on 'civil disobedience' and 'collective protest' are useless against an armed opposition that is ideologically driven and will kill all that stand in its way.
You want legality? The world has a duty to protect innocent lives. It's enshrined in R2P. Some people seem to think Iranians aren't humans. The murder, genocide and massacre of Iranians receives scant media attention - hence scant sympathy.
Those who proclaim to care about 'human rights' must think Iranians are animals and not worthy. Their hatred of Israel and US is so great they've lost all perspective.
Yes, Iranians are happy. They're happy someone took out Ali Khamenei and many others directly responsible for so much pain and agony.
And you know what? We're unashamedly hopeful that with the help of the world's superpower, we can reclaim our country and build a better tomorrow.
We know there's a long way to go, but give us this brief moment of reprieve, because daily we sit and try to tell the story of the lives lost, those at risk of execution, those under torture. We've seen the pictures and videos of massacres taking place.
Our dance and happiness comes with a heavy weight. We do so, in knowledge of the many who never lived to see this day.
The day of freedom will come to Iran, it's glorious - and we're not sorry if some outside help contributed to making that happen.
So don't speak on my behalf and stop excusing this regime on grounds of 'anti-colonialism'. and 'anti-Zionism'.
#Iran
‼️Attention Please ‼️ 🔔
I know everyone is glued to the headlines about Iran right now, and long reads feel impossible amid the chaos.
But please, bookmark this, share it, and give it 8–10 minutes when you can.
This piece contains information most Westerners have never heard, but it is essential for understanding what is really happening, why things escalated to this point, and why certain decisions were not just necessary, but brave and inevitable.
After reading, you will understand:
❗️Why war and regime change were the only realistic path forward, and why it was the courageous choice
❗️Why the regime refuses cooperation and behaves so recklessly and self-destructively
❗️Why it deliberately targets civilian areas in the UAE and Saudi Arabia
❗️The real root of the regime’s deep, obsessive hatred toward America
❗️Why the danger is far greater than most people realize
This isn’t opinion. It’s the hidden logic behind the regime’s actions, drawn from its own ideology, history, and behavior.
🛑 Read it. Share it. The stakes are existential.
#Iran #Israel #IranRevoIution2026
As an Iranian who came to the West, one of the biggest shocks that still hits me every day is the deep antisemitism I see, especially among white people here. It just keeps surprising me more and more.
With Muslims, I can understand where a lot of the hatred toward Jews comes from. It's not even hidden, it's built right into the core of Islam, and plenty don't bother denying it.
But white Westerners, they try so hard to pretend it's not there, to deny it, or to reframe it as criticism of something else. Yet it keeps coming out anyway, and almost always from the same type: people who have failed in life, who refuse to take responsibility for their own messes, and who need a scapegoat to feel less worthless.
You rarely see successful, smart, capable people pushing this garbage. It's the bitter, resentful failures who grab onto it like a lifeline.
The most frustrating and ridiculous part is how Muslims, especially the ones who are openly the West's worst enemies, have figured out how to exploit this exact weakness.
Muslims in the West steal tax money, rape daughters, terrorize and kill people, intimidate everyone, and make no secret that they want to dominate, take away freedoms, and conquer from within.
But muslims have learned the trick: just press the Israel button, frame anything as connected to Israel, and suddenly a ton of Americans and Canadians have their brains reset. They start screaming "Israel! Israel!" and completely forget about the real crimes and threats right in front of them. It's like watching a switch flip, and it's absurd.
Take Tucker Carlson as a perfect example: His antisemitism was spotted right away as a vulnerability, and suddenly Qatar rolls out the red carpet for him. It's no coincidence; they detect the weakness and move in to use it. They welcomed him warmly, and now you see him pushing their agenda hard, criticizing Israel relentlessly, spreading narratives that align exactly with what Qatar wants: keeping the regime alive in Iran.
For us Iranians, this whole situation is honestly laughable and exhausting at the same time. Every day under my posts, these lunatics swarm in calling me a Mossad agent or saying I'm paid by Israel. It's so stupid it's hard to believe people actually type it out.
There are 90 million Iranians fighting this regime for our own damn good reasons, real, deep, legitimate ones that have zero to do with Israel. Yeah, getting rid of the regime would help Israel too, but that's not why I'm saying what I say. I have more than enough of my own reasons; no one needs to pay me or brainwash me. I’m Iranian, I grow up in Iran moron. I know what I am talking about when I say this regime is an existential threat to the US, not Israel.
These people's minds are so warped they can't see reality anymore. It's twisted, dangerous, and one of the biggest cracks in Western society. The US and Canada have to confront this antisemitism directly and stop it. Letting it go unchecked just lets real enemies exploit the divisions and get away with everything while the actual threats keep growing. This madness needs to end.
Yes.
Courts Minister Sarah Sackman MP has said that up to 30,000 defendants who were promised jury trials will now face a lone judge.
Instead of accepting that their plan to slash our ancient right to trial by jury is wrong, unworkable and sinister, the Government has gone further. Sackman has told MPs the proposal will also apply retrospectively.
How many more voices need to tell them they’re wrong? All four Bar Councils, senior lawyers, Labour MPs, opposition MPs, Starmer’s former mentor and chambers — even the Ministry of Justice itself have said the plan is wrong and will not cut the Crown Court backlog.
Chairman of the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) Riel Karmy-Jones KC has said: “This retrospective move, which contradicts previous statements made by the Government, is like pulling a rug from beneath the feet of those most vulnerable in our justice system.
“Thousands of people, both accused and victims, were expecting to present their cases at trial to a jury of their peers from their community – people best placed to understand them and their circumstances.
“Now they are told that they will be tried by a single judge sitting alone, in a move that will not make any appreciable difference to the speed with which their cases are heard. One cannot blame them if many feel betrayed.”
The Free Speech Union’s research shows that those charged with speech-related offences are almost twice as likely to be found not guilty in the Crown Court, before a jury, than in a magistrates’ court without one.
It’s clear, if the Government gets their way, more people will be locked up for simply exercising their right to free speech.
✍️Sign our petition below to SAVE JURY TRIALS 👇
Lammy Forced Into U-Turn Hours Before Court Records Were Due to Be Deleted
The Government did not protect the Courtsdesk archive. It nearly destroyed it. Only hours before the database was due to be deleted, David Lammy abruptly reversed course and asked for talks. A national resource containing millions of court records was spared at the last possible moment, not because it was safe by design, but because the political pressure became impossible to ignore. That distinction matters. It tells us everything about the instinct that guided this decision.
This was no small technical archive. Courtsdesk holds data drawn from more than 4.8 million court records across England and Wales. Within that database sit the details of 25,118 child sexual abuse cases involving 24,670 defendants across 153 courts. More than 1,100 victims were linked to multiple defendants. Nine victims were each linked to ten or more separate offenders. Those numbers speak to the very patterns investigators need to detect networks of abuse, organised offending and systemic failure. This is the kind of evidence base a serious country protects as a matter of principle. Instead, Labour came within hours of deleting it.
The official story was that the company had shared court data without authorisation. Courtsdesk denied this and said no serious breach had ever been reported to the Information Commissioner, something the law would have required within seventy-two hours if the allegation were true. Yet despite the supposed gravity of the accusation, the department allowed the situation to drift until the archive stood on the brink of destruction. Only when journalists, campaigners and opposition politicians forced the issue into the open did the Ministry of Justice suddenly discover the value of dialogue.
David Lammy now insists the archive will be saved and an interim licence explored. That is welcome. It is also an admission that the original course of action was not inevitable. Governments do not execute last-minute reversals on routine administrative housekeeping. They do so when the political cost of continuing becomes higher than the cost of retreating. This was not a carefully planned policy correction. It was a scramble.
The timing makes the episode even more serious. Britain is preparing for a national inquiry into grooming gangs, crimes that flourished for years because warning signs were missed, information was fragmented and patterns went unseen. At precisely this moment, the justice system came within hours of losing a database that allows journalists and researchers to track patterns across courts and across time. The optics are devastating because they strike at the same wound that has already shattered public trust: the fear that the state reacts slowly, reluctantly and defensively when confronted with uncomfortable truths.
The U-turn does not end the story. It merely changes its shape. Access to court data older than six months remains restricted, and Courtsdesk's five-year dataset remains in limbo while officials consider what happens next. The long-term question is still unanswered: will the public retain meaningful access to the information needed to scrutinise the justice system, or will transparency shrink behind bureaucratic walls?
Trust in institutions is not rebuilt through last-minute reversals. It is built through instincts that favour openness from the start. The instinct revealed here was different. Issue a cessation notice. Allow the archive to edge towards deletion. Reverse course only when the outcry becomes impossible to ignore. That sequence will linger long after the press releases fade.
A government confident in its record protects evidence without being forced. It preserves transparency before the deadline, not hours before destruction. The Courtsdesk archive survived, but the episode leaves a deeper question hanging over the justice system. If the backlash had not arrived, would the lights have been switched off anyway?
These 3 women have VERY important jobs within His Majesty’s Government.
Their titles:-
Home Secretary
Minister for Safeguarding & Violence against Women and Girls.
Minister for Victims & Violence against Women and Girls.
ALL 3 Voted AGAINST a Rape Gang Inquiry!!!!!
Not one of them have responded to letters I have written on behalf of The Pink Ladies movement. Not one of them have reached out to Rhiannon’s, Katies, Lily’s or Stephanies families and not one have publicly discussed or acknowledged the fact that the UK is now the Official Rape Capital of Europe!!! With some charities saying they are “Overwhelmed” by victims. Shabana Mahmood said in May 2025 there would be a “moment of reckoning” when asked about the thousands of British girls raped by mainly Pakistani rape gangs up and down this country… NOTHING! This is so so wrong.. and I’m sure that everyone reading this post will be as disgusted, furious outraged and frankly as devastated as I am by what this country has become!Absolute and total disgrace.
GET LABOUR OUT !!!!!!!! @Keir_Starmer @ShabanaMahmood @jessphillips @AlexDaviesJones @pinkladies_uk @SarahForRuncorn
Yesterday was the last day before Recess - I gave a rather rapid speech critiquing the government's counter-extremism strategy. Inevitably those branded extreme can too often be those who dissent from progressive orthodoxy. And guess what - it rarely includes the elephant in room: Islamism. Oh, and I managed to get union-jack-waving, purple-haired goth Amelia in there too...!
https://t.co/DKWyjGgyHK
It is shocking that @mehdirhasan would attack @AlinejadMasih and call her - and Iranians fighting for freedom - “raging Islamophobes”. Now of all times.
A woman seen as a staunch fighter for liberty for women in Iran and such a ‘threat’ to the Islamic regime that they sent assassins to her doorstep in New York. The would be killers now behind bars, thanks to the FBI.
Since its creation 47 years ago, hundreds of thousands have been killed by the regime due to so called “Islamic edicts”. Edicts that include “sedition” - protesting - being deserving of immediate death. Countless women have been slaughtered for not wearing a hijab, another religious edict enforced by the regime.
Criticising the Islamic regime is NOT Islamophobic. And defending the Islamic republic is NOT defending Islam, as so many Muslims without any critical thinking keep doing.
Anything that either consciously or unconsciously defends this regime in the name of Islam has to be called out.
Surely support for the people of Iran should not be conditional on how the Iranian diaspora makes Mehdi “feel”. That is his issue. You cannot expect victims to tune their pain to fit his, or anyone else’s narrative.
I know Mehdi has written a book called “Win Every Argument”. But this is not an argument. And maybe he needs to do the mature thing and apologise, not just to Masih, but to all Iranians. Especially to the families of the tens of thousands who have in the last few weeks given their lives to be free of this murderous regime.
Incredibly truthful piece here in @spikedonline please read ⬇️
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
240.1M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.3M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.6M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
108.9M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
97.3M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.1M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
90.6M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
86.8M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
80.6M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
72.1M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.4M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.6M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
68.5M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.4M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.5M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
61M followers
X
@x
60.9M followers
CNN Breaking News
@cnnbrk
59.9M followers