Andrew Fields 🇺🇸

[Andrew Fields 🇺🇸 @adf1969]

This is why the Left should BACK OFF! 😡
Because we are not few, WE ARE MANY!

[J͎Λ͎Y͎ @TakeThiamine]

“I’m Muslim and those Pakistani rape gangs were not Muslim. That is not my religion.”

I’ve seen this response countless times today.

Understand this: The only interpretation of Islam that matters is the one that has enabled the systematic rape of hundreds of thousands of White British girls. Your personal interpretation is irrelevant, as is mine.

Below, I will outline the theological architecture behind these egregious crimes—and why Islam, in its classical and dominant readings, is fundamentally incompatible with Western society.

الولاء والبراء
Al-walā’ wa-l-barā’ (loyalty and disavowal): This is an Islamic principle rooted in Quranic verses and hadith. It calls for alliance with believers and disassociation from non-believers. Mainstream and especially Salafi/Wahhabi/Deobandi interpretations (common among some Pakistani communities) emphasize enmity or at least strict separation from kuffar (disbelievers). Reformist or Sufi readings soften it toward personal piety. It fosters "us vs. them" thinking that dehumanizes outsiders.

دار الحرب
Dār al-Ḥarb (House of War) vs. Dār al-Islām: Classical fiqh divides the world this way. In non-Muslim territory, rules for interaction differ; some historical and jihadist readings treat it as a zone where normal restraints are relaxed or jihad applies until Islamic dominance. Peaceful modern Muslims often reinterpret this as irrelevant to living in the West under secular law. Others (including some UK imams or online preachers) maintain harder lines. It provides theological framing for parallel societies or resentment.

مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ
Mā malakat aymānukum (milk al-yamīn in shortened form) translates to “those whom the right hand possesses” (or “what your right hands possess”). It appears in roughly 15 verses and is the Quran’s most frequent way of referring to slaves or war captives (male and female) in 7th-century Arabian society. Interpreted in a certain way, it permits the rape of captives.

Aisha’s age
The most authentic hadith collections (Sahih Bukhari and Muslim) state Muhammad married Aisha at 6 and consummated at 9. This is the orthodox Sunni position held for most of Islamic history. It has been used to justify child marriage in various Muslim societies. Modern apologists sometimes argue cultural context, different age calculations, or that it was normative then. Traditionalists defend it as the Prophet's example. This precedent weakens absolute age-of-consent arguments within strict Islamic frameworks.

Combine al-walā’ wa-l-barā’ with dār al-ḥarb and milk al-yamīn. Now combine all of those with the belief that Aisha was 9 at the time of consummation. What do you get?

• Moral and religious justification for enmity toward non-Muslims as a category.
• License to operate with far fewer restraints inside non-Islamic societies, treating local laws and norms as non-binding.
• Permission to dehumanize and sexually exploit non-Muslim females—including minors—once they are classified as captives or property.
• No effective doctrinal floor on the age of sexual access, because the Prophet’s example overrides later, external standards of consent or maturity.

“I’m Muslim and that’s not how we interpret those texts.”

Doesn’t matter. This is how hundreds of thousands of South Asians interpret the Quran.

Do you understand now why this must be purged from Western society by any means? I don’t care if you’re a peaceful 145 IQ Muslim scholar, we don’t have time to figure out who’s who here. There are 3.8 million Muslims in the United Kingdom. Hundreds of thousands of White British girls were raped. The perpetrators are overwhelmingly Pakistani Muslim. To the degree that if they didn’t directly participate, they knew someone who did, and did nothing to stop it.

Get them out.

Every last one.

[Matt Morse @MattMorseTV]

One of the curious outcomes of the 2015-2025 BLM-era is that black culture isn’t seen as “cool” anymore.

Zero rap songs on the billboard top 100 right now.

Zero rap headliners at Lollapalooza for the first time in 10 years.

Black slang amongst young people is on the downturn.

The coupling of the LGBTQ “struggle” with the black “struggle” has left people associating blackness with gayness.

Police body-cam footage, cell phone videos, and the internet have exposed all of the absolutely insane, delinquent black behavior.

Whites got sick of getting called racist 100 times a day, which sparked a sense of White racial consciousness that hasn’t been seen in decades.

Things are moving fast.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Depuis des semaines, je dissèque le même corps sous trois noms différents.

Le wokisme dans un thread, la décroissance dans un autre, la French Theory dans un troisième.

Je le savais déjà : ce n'étaient pas trois maladies, mais trois symptômes d'un même mal — je l'écrivais à chaque fois, l'intention bienveillante qui accouche du contraire de son but, la compassion sans résultats qui n'est que vanité.

Ce qui manquait, ce n'était pas le constat.

C'était le nom du pathogène sous les symptômes.

Un évolutionniste vient de le poser sur la table : l'empathie suicidaire.

Et tout ce que je démontais une pièce à la fois forme désormais un seul mécanisme, parfaitement lisible.

Reprenons depuis le début, calmement, comme un médecin qui relit son dossier. J'ai décrit San Francisco supprimant les classes de maths avancées pour « réduire les inégalités », et obtenant l'effet exactement inverse : les familles aisées paient des cours privés, les pauvres se font enterrer, l'écart explose.

J'ai décrit trente ans de riz gratuit déversés sur l'Afrique, et les filières agricoles locales effondrées sous la générosité, une dépendance institutionnalisée là où on prétendait nourrir. J'ai décrit la discrimination positive censée élever, et ne fabriquant que de l'imposture, du décrochage et du ressentiment des deux côtés. À chaque fois, j'ai pointé la même mécanique : l'intention bienveillante accouche du contraire exact de son but. Je l'appelais l'égalitarisme des résultats. Je l'appelais la compassion sans résultats, qui n'est que de la vanité.

C'était juste. Mais tant qu'on ne sait pas pourquoi la bonté produit le malheur, on s'épuise à dénoncer une série d'accidents là où agit une loi. Et cette loi, je ne la tenais pas encore.

La voici. L'empathie n'est pas un vice, et c'est tout l'enjeu : c'est une adaptation, l'une des plus belles que la nature ait produites.

Elle a évolué pour nous faire protéger les nôtres — la tribu, les enfants, le clan — avec une précision féroce, intégrant toujours, sans qu'on y pense, le coût et le bénéfice. C'est elle qui a rendu la coopération possible, donc la civilisation possible.

Mais une faculté taillée par des millions d'années pour cent cinquante visages connus, nous l'avons branchée d'un coup sur huit milliards d'inconnus et, pire encore, sur de purs signaux idéologiques diffusés en boucle par des écrans. Le résultat n'est pas une empathie plus grande.

C'est une empathie déréglée. Un instrument de précision qu'on aurait décalibré et qui, désormais, tire systématiquement à côté de la cible. Voilà l'image juste : un système immunitaire qui, ayant perdu la mémoire du soi, se met à dévorer le corps qu'il avait pour mission de défendre.

Et une fois ce dérèglement compris, l'inversion morale qui m'obsédait cesse d'être un mystère pour devenir une conséquence logique.

Si l'empathie ne sait plus distinguer l'ami de l'ennemi, alors elle se déclenche à rebours, mécaniquement : pour le criminel contre la victime, pour le squatteur contre le propriétaire qui a bâti, pour le délinquant contre le policier, pour l'abstraction lointaine et flatteuse contre le réel ingrat qui est à portée de main.

On finit dans un monde où le fort qui crée est suspect et le destructeur excusé, où celui qui réussit doit s'excuser d'exister et celui qui démolit reçoit une tribune. Ce n'est pas de la perversité. C'est un instinct sacré qui s'est retourné, et qui continue de se vivre comme une vertu pendant qu'il scie la branche.

Restait la question qui me manquait : comment un instinct dévoyé devient-il une politique, une loi, une norme imposée à des nations entières ? Et c'est ici que le wokisme reprend sa vraie place dans mon récit — non plus comme la maladie, mais comme son bras armé. L'empathie suicidaire fournit la pulsion ; le wokisme fournit l'arme qui l'industrialise.

Souvenez-vous de ma généalogie : la French Theory avait livré le logiciel — il n'y a pas de vérité, il n'y a que du pouvoir, donc toute hiérarchie est suspecte, toute norme une violence, tout dominant un coupable. Ce logiciel, à lui seul, ne tuait personne ; il rongeait des départements de philosophie.

Mais greffé sur un instinct empathique déréglé, il devient un système d'exploitation complet. L'empathie détraquée dit : je dois protéger la victime. La French Theory répond : tout dominant est coupable, donc toute victime a raison.

Et le wokisme, enfin, déploie les bataillons qui exécutent la sentence : les DRH, les universités, les rédactions, les commissions, les parlements. La biologie donne la pulsion. L'idéologie lui donne une doctrine. Les institutions lui donnent la force. Le crime parfait, commis au nom du bien.

C'est pourquoi la cruauté ultime de tout cela — et le cœur même du livre — est que le système dessert d'abord ceux qu'il prétend sauver. L'élève pauvre privé de mathématiques exigeantes. Le paysan africain privé de marché.

L'étudiant promu au-dessus de son niveau et abandonné à son échec. La femme sommée de céder ses espaces au nom d'une compassion qui ne la voit plus.

À chaque fois, le protégé est la première victime, et le protecteur repart grandi de sa propre bonté. Car c'est bien là le ressort intime : l'empathie suicidaire n'a jamais eu pour vraie fonction de sauver l'autre. Elle a pour fonction de signaler la vertu de celui qui l'exhibe. La compassion comme parure, le malheur d'autrui comme miroir flatteur.

La vanité, encore et toujours la vanité, mais cette fois je sais d'où elle vient.

Voilà enfin pourquoi ce livre est un antidote, et non une dénonciation de plus à jeter sur la pile. Saad ne demande pas qu'on devienne moins humain, moins sensible, plus dur. Il demande l'inverse : qu'on cesse d'être empathique contre soi-même. Que l'on recalibre l'instrument au lieu de le briser.

La vraie compassion intègre le long terme et se juge à ses résultats, jamais à ses intentions affichées : aider quelqu'un, ce n'est pas lui donner un poisson pendant trente ans, c'est lui apprendre à pêcher quitte à le frustrer un matin. Une empathie incapable de dire non n'est pas de la bonté — c'est une lente abdication, un suicide au ralenti drapé dans la vertu, et il fallait un évolutionniste pour oser le dire à voix haute.

Une civilisation se reconstruit par ceux qui bâtissent, jamais par ceux qui se contentent de compatir bruyamment. Et on ne soigne que ce qu'on a d'abord su nommer. C'est désormais fait : la maladie a un nom, le mécanisme est sur la table, l'arme est démasquée.

Suicidal Empathy, Gad Saad. Lisez-le.

Et au travail.

[Ring Tail @RingTailed16521]

@mattvanswol “Ended up” there.

The BBC is complicit.

[Matt Van Swol @mattvanswol]

🚨#BREAKING: A 3-YEAR-OLD BOY HAS BEEN THROWN INTO A CROCODILE ENCLOSURE BY A 30-YEAR-OLD MALE AND HAS BEEN MAULED.

THE ATTACK WAS "RANDOM" AND THE MAN TOSSED THE BOY AT THE CROCODILES IN THE UK.

HE HAS BEEN ARRESTED FOR ATTEMPTED M*RDER.

THEY ARE NOT NAMING THE ATTACKER.

[Rothmus 🏴 @Rothmus]

Coulter’s Law: the longer it takes mainstream media to identify the race or name of a mass shooter (or similar attacker), the less likely it is to be a white male.

If the attacker were a white male, his name and face would already be everywhere , the way it always used to be.

Police say it was random and the 3 year old didn’t know him.

Five hours later and still no identities released, just thoughts and prayers.

That kind of delay almost always means the boy is white and the attacker is not.

Very possible this was a racially motivated attack and the child was thrown precisely because he was a little white boy.

We’ll see what they eventually tell us.

[Chief Egregore Officer @ChiefEgregore]

The establishment is structurally incapable of addressing the Rape Gangs because to do so would delegitimize their own rule.

Every ruling class on Earth constructs some kind of narrative for why it has the legitimacy to rule. In the Post-War West the fundamental premise that justifies effectively every Western government is some local variation of standing as a bulwark against Fascism, which is conflated with a more generic national sentiment or the idea that a nation exists to advance the interests of its people in particular.

That national particularism is treated as the first step towards a resurgence of the bellicosity of Nazism and so instead these states classify themselves as "multicultural" or "universalist." Some, like Canada, even go so far as to declare themselves a "post-national" state, which is to say that they see their political system as explicitly detached from the Canadian nation from which the system originally emerged.

This comes with localized justifications for why that particular nation's state has to broaden its consideration beyond the people of that nation. In the USA it's "righting the wrongs of slavery." In the UK it's "righting the wrongs of empire." In Ireland it's "fuck you everyone else is doing it." (No one said it had to be coherent).

But in all cases the effect is the same. Western states must explicitly elevate the considerations of people outside the nation for whom the state was originally constructed, otherwise the state is spiritually aligned to Nazism and is thus destined to unleash unspeakable horrors against the rest of the world.

Which brings us to the Rape Gangs. The Rape Gangs are an unspeakable atrocity inflicted by the foreign imports upheld by the state as the people whose interests they must represent against the native European populace whose interests the state intrinsically treats as suspect.

To therefore acknowledge both the racialized element of these crimes and the direction of victimization undermines the state's entire legitimacy to rule. Because the facts of this case demonstrate that universalist harmony under a neutral system has not panned out the way proponents of this regime imagined (which was the primary goal of their entire political project), and that in denying the White Europeans a state apparatus that explicitly exists to advance their interests those White Europeans are then subject to extreme and gratuitous crimes, demonstrating why there is an explicit need for such an institution to exist. The very kind of institution that they have treated as eternally suspect.

And so to meaningfully address the realities of this case is simultaneously to acknowledge that their own political project has been a failure that did not materialize what it originally promised, at the same time that it acknowledges why there is an explicit need for the exact type of state construction they are existentially required to oppose.

To address this case then is to acknowledge their own failure and illegitimacy. So they don't address it, they bury it and try to manipulate public perception through information control and media programming which will enable them to survive another day.

Widespread knowledge of the Rape Gangs and demands they be meaningfully contended with are thus an existential threat to the current order because it is structurally dependent upon fictions that are dispelled by an honest assessment of what happened to these girls.

And so expecting them to address it is a fool's errand. They will never be addressed without regime change, and regime change is both just and necessary precisely because this regime can never address this atrocity.

Restore Britain is, in my opinion, the last possible chance for an "orderly" regime change in the UK. Anything else will be a continuation of the current regime and its structural incapability of dealing with this problem. And if orderly regime change is not allowed to occur, chaotic regime change accompanied with extraordinary violence is inevitable.

[Secretary Linda McMahon @EDSecMcMahon]

The Department of Education is a pass-through entity for federal dollars.

It doesn’t educate a single student or hire a single teacher.

The money it sends to states for education can be sent directly, without waste.

[Brian Cates - Political Columnist & Pundit @drawandstrike]

Oh hey everybody...

You might wanna follow this account.

Watch CA.

[Wall Street Apes @WallStreetApes]

I hear literally nothing but facts

“If systemic racism exists now, the 2 groups that it's against are white people and Asians. It's not happening to Black people”

“Being Black in America in 2026 is one of the greatest things to ever happen to me. Jobs have diversity quotas, affirmative action in college — There's so much bending over backwards for the Black community and for the feelings of Black people. And during campaigns, it's all about how can we cater to the Black community. You are privileged to be Black in America now.

But then when you look over at white people, it's like white people are constantly demonized. Constantly like, "Oh my gosh, I can't believe you said that. I'm not allowed to say that."

If we're in such a racist country, why is it that Black people are able to say and do what they want, but white people feel like they can't? It's so hypocritical.

But the Asians, the Asians are the ones that I'm surprised don't speak out on it more. 'Cause when you look at something like the SAT, the average Asian to go to the same school, the same program as a Black person has to score like 250 points higher on the SAT than a Black person”

Everything is so true but it’s actually worse than he’s describing. Blacks actually get a 450 point advantage on SAT scores which is INSANE

This is real and well documented

According to the key school data the effective admissions advantage for Black applicants could reach around 450 SAT points relative to Asian applicants at selective private institutions

[Thorolf Butter @ThorolfButter]

@elonmusk IMO there will be progression when:
- Starmer is held accountable for his role in the cover-up during his time as Director of Public Prosecutions & Head of CPS.
- The public accepts that Starmer was likely made PM because of factors surrounding the cover-up, & not in spite of it

[AliensAreReal✨ @r2jrfvtt2g]

@elonmusk They’re still threatening the victims.

[Leonard Campagna Freedom=Happiness=Freedom @LeonardCampagna]

@elonmusk How much evil can the U.S. do with $3.5 trillion in annual waste, fraud and abuse?

[Steve's Law 🇬🇧 @MaximusChud]

@elonmusk Okay, but can you unban Mark Collett now?
https://t.co/sQFaoVy0js

[Kiera Diss @KieraDiss]

@elonmusk Zack understands the enormity of this scandal, we don’t even know the true scale.

[The Daily Controversy With Chris Reid @DAILYCONTROVERS]

@elonmusk @Keir_Starmer decided not to prosecute 13,000 Pakistani muslim men who raped young girls.... instead, he sent them warning letters! RETWEET

[Andrew Follett @AndrewCFollett]

Sad truth:

The 🇬🇧 Muslim rape gang horrors are so insane, evil, and over the top that Leftists will be able to dismiss them as fake

This is one of the Left's most effective defenses...the fact that the truth of their policies is so insane it sounds made up!

[Kevin Bass @kevinnbass]

@elonmusk Abetting atrocities for votes. Muslims overwhelmingly vote Labour. And legal immigrants from Commonwealth countries like Pakistan can vote within weeks of arriving in the uk.

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

And this report is just the tip of an enormous iceberg of evil

[WasAcop @WasAcop]

This.

https://t.co/CpIHaEwIwO