A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻

(aka Exile Bear) "Everybody knows you never go full Remain. You went full Remain. Never go full Remain."

[A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻 @agentsrapier]

@FUDdaily He was clearly some sort of intelligence asset.

[Mrs Locke a.k.a Boudicca Iceni now serf @MrsLocke5]

@ZakBentwater @moving_charlie @andyburnham Supposed we'd never had the immigration explosion of the past 20+ years then property prices would likely be lower in areas outside of London and other desirable cities. If banks had been restricted in how much they could lend for property.....

[Mrs Locke a.k.a Boudicca Iceni now serf @MrsLocke5]

@ZakBentwater @moving_charlie @andyburnham If non resident foreign buyers were banned, if investments were in stocks and shares instead of property, if immigration had tilted to high net worth individuals, if native births had been encouraged etc etc.

[Johannes M. Koenraadt @johannesmkx]

When you hear people say "let them in", this is what those words mean.

[A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻 @agentsrapier]

@JohnSchmoney One of the few actors out there who can make you forget it's him in a role. I enjoy Slow Horses despite the wokeness, and his character steals the show.

[Hemmingford Far Left Loon Finder General @SirHGrey]

Bit weird you covering for Tory governmental incompetence? I guess it really is a uniparty

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Dear @ShabanaMahmood,

You have described anti-asylum activist Daniel Thomas as “a far-right and outright racist” who will feel “the full force of the law” if his organisation commits crimes near contested asylum sites such as Piddington.

Here you've made a category error. You should think yourself fortunate that you only have @RealDannyTommo to contend with for the moment. He is not "a far-right and outright racist".

I know this because I'm very familiar with the right wing political landscape, and I know people who actually fit that description - as do the security services. Clearly you do not read their briefings. They are worlds apart. Danny Tommo is a pussycat by contrast.

I don't know what it is you think you're playing at, putting migrants into our communities, but if you keep it up then we very much will see "far-right and outright racist" activism and they will show you the difference. It will be your fault too.

Thus far, Danny Tommo has called for peaceful and disciplined protest, and has instructed his men to keep their behaviour lawful - but there are elements on the right who don't support him or even like him because they think he is "containment". Those are the people you need to worry about - because you have driven this to proto-IRA territory.

We have already seen the strength of feeling in Northern Ireland where homes earmarked for migrants have been burned to the ground. Nobody wants to see that here but I feel it is an inevitable consequence of your actions.

Worse still, they will enjoy the tacit approval of the general public because you keep demonstrating there is no alternative means of influencing your actions. You are well aware of the dangers illegal immigrants pose to our communities, but you inflict them on us anyway. If there is a far right movement waiting in the wings then you are playing midwife to it.

While you do not wish to see such vigilantism and disorder on our streets, you can't have it both ways. You cannot keep openly demonstrating your contempt for the British people and then say they have no right of reply.

Moreover, you cannot keep releasing violent criminals and sex offenders then direct the "full force of the law" to silence dissent. Don't think we haven't noticed the hypocrisy in play. While your sick little games might go down well with your dinner party friends, you are stirring a certain pot. That genie does not go easily back in the bottle.

You can slander men like Danny Tommo and his followers as "far right thugs" if you like, but you should keep in mind that men like them are the backbone of Britain. It is they who drive the lorries, fix the roads, deliver the fuel, drive the vans, and build the things you take for granted. They're the ones you expect to defend us in any war. You can probably contain the far right threat, but you cannot take on the ordinary men of Britain because you will lose. You can jail Danny Tommo, but there are countless others willing to step up and take his place. You can't jail us all. Just try it and see what happens. I dare you.

[Morgoth @MorgothsReview]

>It just so happens your identity is whatever we want it to be. When we want you to die in our wars, you're thoroughbred warriors doing your duty.

When we wish to inflate the population in the interests of Global Capital, you're worthless interchangeable mongrels.

[Tom Rowsell @Tom_Rowsell]

I am quite fond of Jacob Rees mogg because he represents a part of England that is mostly dead. His enduring presence in the political sphere evokes sentimental memories of a more civilised era. An ideologically decadent era, the ethnically-oblivious excesses of which we have no right to indulge in.

I imagine one day I shall have to justify my sentimental feeling to future generations who can’t possibly understand why I would feel anything other than rage towards his toxic statements intended to undermine the natural rights of the indigenous British peoples. I sympathise with them too.

We who stand at the precipice between the misguided sentimental nostalgia of the Britain we allowed to slip from our grasp and the hellish contest of multi ethnic competition we inherited from the boomers, inhabit a strange liminal time.

[David Betz @DavidBe31099196]

Jacob Rees-Mogg has been talking about duty and upset people, quite rightly. If war comes, he says, people must join up. Some may have to die. That is how countries last. Rome fell when citizens paid others to fight.
The line would be ordinary if it came from a man of the nation. It is damaging because it comes from a man who once seemed to stand with the nation against something else.

A few years ago Michael Rainsborough and I argued that Western government had ceased to be national in the ordinary sense and become imperial: a system of management over peoples, not a home belonging to a people. Empires do not need citizens. They need subjects, communities, and a priesthood of progress. The nation state asks for loyalty among equals.

The new arrangement asks for deference to a civilising mission aimed, more and more, at the historic population itself. Brexit was a sovereign native revolt against that. It was not a tantrum about trade. It was a people saying they would not be administered as a province of a postnational order.

In 2016–19 Rees-Mogg looked as if he understood the distinction. He treated the referendum as a valid instruction. That put him on the national side of the only argument that mattered. The slouch in the Commons in September 2019 was easy to misread as mere insult.

At the time it could be taken as something colder and, in its way, political: magisterial unconcern toward the people who thought the vote was an outrage to be managed away. He would not sit up for them.

Many of us forgave the manners because the target of the manners seemed right. Turley was correct that the pose was ugly. She was wrong about what the fight was.
The new interview wrecks the alibi. The same loucheness is still there. The object has changed. He is no longer declining to perform anxiety for the postnational court. He is reciting its war liturgy and calling it duty.

The men who are to kill and die are not being asked to defend a bordered people. They are being invited to service an imperium that still cannot hold a coast, still treats national self-assertion as a public-order problem, and still speaks the language of progress when it means rule.

That is why the sofa now looks different. In 2019 the sprawl could pass for aristocratic refusal. In 2026 it reads as arrogance, detachment, dishonesty and stupidity: the ease of a man who will not live the risk he names.

On Russia the sermon moralises what does not need moral theatre. States act from interest. Russia has a historically intelligible one in its near abroad. Kennan and others said that driving a victorious alliance onto the ruins of Russian power would produce a collision.

The collision came. One may dislike Moscow’s answer. Ascribing ‘brutality’ as if it were the point is a progressive habit: turn strategy into sin so that the only virtuous pose is imperial supervision of the sinner.

As wars are fought, this one has not been the cartoon of indiscriminate slaughter the commentary requires. Whether one grants that or not is secondary. The primary fact is simpler. Russia is behaving like a nation. Britain’s elite is not.

That is the disgrace in what Rees-Mogg said. He had the chance to remain what Brexit briefly suggested he was: a spokesman for a country that still existed as a country.

Instead he talks now like a provincial officer of the progressive imperium, surprised that the natives might object to dying for a project that has spent a generation dissolving them.

Duty, from that perspective, doesn’t come across honestly. It feels like the Union flag being draped deceitfully over the progressive imperial agenda.

The slouch in 2019 was a tell. Then it said: I will not be hustled by the managerial elite. Now it says: I am comfortable among them. A foolish man, which I now think he is, can be right only sometimes. The blithe pose now grates heavily.

I wouldn’t trust the lives of my son and daughter to this project and its exponents. Just back TF off.

[Burnside @BurnsideWasTosh]

The cornerstone of boomers retirements is crumbling. 50% of UK household wealth is held in property an unproductive, highly taxed, cash draining asset. Many retirement plans have been predicated on selling their homes, but because the postcards generation didn't have enough children and removed many of the benefits they had enjoyed while govong them more pronouns, there is no one rich enough to buy their homes.

The strategic error of investing in property over financial assets is the biggest strategic error of post-war Britain. The tyranny of Martin and Paul Lewis.

[Professor John Hearn @jbhearn]

THE BIG DECEPTION: THE CAUSE OF INFLATION AND HOW IT IS PERPETRATED BY A CENTRAL BANK.

1. The Central Bank causes every inflation by allowing monetary demand to grow faster than output.

2. The new money enters the economy when the Central Bank buys and/or buys back government debt.

3. The new money takes several months to enter the mainstream and increase demand for goods and services.

4. Aggregate demand grows but individual firms just see an increase in demand for their product so they run down stocks and prepare to expand output and increase profits.

5. However demand grows across the economy for all firms and the increased demand for productive factors starts to raise individual firms costs and this eats into their profits.

6. To recover the increase in costs firms start to raise their prices and demand for their product returns to the previous level.

7. Overall this process will take more than a year which means that the inflation lags the cause by 12-18 months.

8. To avoid taking any responsibility for the inflation that they caused the Central Bank will focus the media’s attention on the prices that have gone up the most and the media will do the rest explaining that higher petrol prices, food prices energy prices etc have caused the inflation.

9. At the same time and in search of recognition and jobs economists will write many articles absolving the Central Bank of any responsibility by focusing attention on supply shocks, excessive wage claims, shortages due to wars and climate change, the failure of capitalism, greedy businesses price gauging and profit seeking. They use mathematical modelling and economists lingo to obscure the truth.

10. THE END AND THE DECEPTION IS COMPLETE: TO BE CONTINUED

[A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻 @agentsrapier]

The £100 Question: how would you spend Britain's money? https://t.co/reJEtxLT3m

[A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻 @agentsrapier]

@DavidBCollum Paul Johnson did an incredibly even-handed account, especially given his biases, in that section of his book, Modern Times, which was a history of the first half of the 20th Century.

[A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻 @agentsrapier]

@OwenBenjamin Yeah, definitely dodged a bullet there.

[A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻 @agentsrapier]

@Wayne_Dixon As Gavin MacInnes once pointed out, drag is black face for women.

[A Gentleman's Rapier KC🐻 @agentsrapier]

@firasmodad FWIW, I knew a bunch of British patriots (they didn't dance) who hoped that at least the money from the US would stop flowing to the IRA/Sinn Fein once 9/11 happened. That (i)could(/i) have been the same reason Israelis danced. I'm agnostic as to why, myself .

[Richard North @ollieparrot]

One of the particularly unsavoury aspects of the RNLI’s propaganda about its aid to criminal migrants is its claim that only 1.2 percent of its launches are dedicated to its taxi service.

That is an extremely selective “take” which heavily downplays the extent of the RNLI’s involvement. If the activity is redefined in terms of crew hours at sea, a very different picture emerges.

A standard RNLI launch - such as assisting a stranded jet ski, a broken-down pleasure craft, or a walker cut off by the tide - is typically a localised event. The lifeboat is often back at the station, washed down, and ready for service again within 1 to 2 hours.

By contrast, a Channel crossing interception is a long, highly complex operation. A large All-Weather Lifeboat (ALB) must travel out into the deep shipping lanes, locate a crowded vessel, slowly transfer dozens of individuals safely aboard, and then steam back to a designated processing port like Dover. A single one of these operations can easily take 4-6 or more hours at sea.

The “1.2 percent of total workload” figure averages the 109 Channel launches across the RNLI's entire network of 238 lifeboat stations spanning the UK, Ireland, and the Channel Islands. Stations in western Scotland, northern Northern Ireland, or western Wales will never be tasked to a migrant dinghy.

But in the 2025 edition of the RNLI’s annual report, the Southeast region claims 2,579 launches, expending 14,438 crew hours at sea, to save 77 lives, with 3,670 people aided. RNLI says it directly “rescued” and landed 2,353 people – but clearly it does not claim to have saved their lives

The nearest equivalent region is Wales, the West and Isle of Man which claims 73 lives saved and 1,141 people aided, for the expenditure of 9,587 crew hours sea. No other region, incidentally, claims more than 1,000 people assisted from an annual total of 8,290 with 272 lives saved by a total expenditure of 56,569 crew hours at sea.

From this, it is very clear that “assisting” the migrants involved an inordinate amount of crew time, probably representing more than 10 percent of the total annual crew hours expended nationally by the institution and more than 30 percent of the crew resource in the Southeast region.

This is by no means a small investment and the determination of the RNLI management to play it down makes you wonder as to their good faith, especially as crews complain about management complacency and lack of resources.

https://t.co/VGK2vUq7dZ

[Dr Helen Ingram @drhingram]

The country is fawning over women from a nice leafy village when pleas for help from women on Birmingham estates like mine have been ignored for so many years. We tried to warn you but you attacked us and called us far right. Now you ask us to stand with you. Good luck with that.

[Sam Ashworth-Hayes @SAshworthHayes]

Government: "We have a major Islamist terror risk!"

Public: "Have you considered importing fewer Islamists?"

Government: "No."

[Some time passes]

Government: