BaffledBrit

Just a baffled Brit trying to understand what's going on, whilst praying our country hasn't passed the point of no return.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

I wasn’t seeking validation.

But you’re right that I was trying to make a point, and that was probably a waste of time.

Ironically, the point was about using words accurately. He won’t stop calling people “far right” when he means something else, and you’ve done exactly the same thing by calling that “seeking validation.”

The irony seems to have passed both of you by.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

@blaiklockBP Wow. She shows her true colours with the sexist insult. Why’s she so angry?

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

@TheBritLad 🤣

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

God speed, Rupert. You’re a warrior, and I’m proud to support Restore Britain.

For too long, people were told to stay quiet, not ask questions, and ignore what was right in front of them.

Worse still, many were afraid to speak openly for fear of being branded racist, smeared, or facing professional consequences.

Thank you for fighting to change that.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

Children cannot meaningfully consent to life-altering interventions. In my view, allowing them is morally wrong.

As for the social media ban for under-16s, you’re right. It highlights a glaring inconsistency in government thinking. We’re told children are not mature enough to make decisions about social media, yet some argue they are capable of making decisions with far more profound and lasting consequences. That contradiction makes no sense to me.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

If a person says, “I am transgender,” that is a statement about their internal experience.

There is currently no scientific test that can verify that claim.

It is therefore a belief.

If you’re an adult with that belief, I’m not here to criticise or judge. I’m sure coming to that understanding has been one hell of a journey. If you’ve found peace, I genuinely wish you well.

But children cannot meaningfully consent to life-altering interventions.

And yet our government is now seriously considering allowing irreversible decisions to be made on behalf of children based on a belief that cannot be objectively verified.

Take a moment to appreciate how extraordinary that is.

Not because it is controversial.

Because twenty years ago almost nobody would have believed a democratic society would even be debating it.

The risk of getting this wrong is not carried by politicians, activists, academics or journalists.

It is carried by the child.

Future generations will not judge us by our intentions.

They will judge us by what we allowed to happen.

[John Hannam @JohnHann04]

We now live in a society that has gone officially insane. We have a government and official bodies that are desperate to stop kids accessing Snapchat and Facebook right up to the age of 16 but are happy to sign off on drugs that will permanently change their physical and mental development at the age of 11.

The medical trial of new puberty blocker drugs at age 11 and 12 has been given the green light. Changing a child’s body forever is fine at 11, logging on to X days before your 16th birthday is not 🤷‍♂️. Voting in your 16th birthday is fine, you’re an adult, reading political information on social media the day before is not. Can nobody see the madness and inconsistencies??

For me giving puberty blockers to 11 yr olds is a crime and hypocritical in the extreme as you are allowing a child to make the most extreme possible decision about their lives but up to 5 yrs later they still can’t be judged adult enough to look at websites.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

Because we live in a free country with free speech. What a joke.

“We’ve had free speech for a very, very long time in the United Kingdom, and it will last for a very, very long time.”

— Keir Starmer, February 2025

Apparently that included covertly monitoring political dissent and flagging social media posts for removal.

[The Telegraph @Telegraph]

At the height of the pandemic, anti-lockdown campaigners were covertly monitored by the Government and military, and had their social media posts flagged for removal.

🔗 https://t.co/5Hc9CnKV8Z

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

It takes a working-class man, vilified, imprisoned and widely defamed, to speak the truth about what’s really going on and show your “wise and wealthy” politicians for the fools they really are.

Meanwhile, those in power, our supposedly wise, educated and well-connected political class continue to lecture the public while refusing to take responsibility for the consequences of their own failures.

[Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 @TRobinsonNewEra]

Let's be absolutely clear about this.

NOBODY is condoning attacking ANY innocent people, absolutely NOBODY.

Our failing political system has allowed this to happen, complicit politicians have repeatedly ignored the British public's concerns. Instead they have (for decades) demonised them, slandered them as 'racists' for simply pointing out their very obvious failures, failures that endanger the very people they are supposed to represent.

This isn't the fault of people shouting loudly holding our politicians to account, this is the fault of successive failed governments, policy, law, and justice.

These failures create the conditions for bad or mentally ill people to take matters into their own hands.

Our politicians need to look themselves in the mirror and hold themselves to account rather than pass the blame onto others. They continually refuse to accept any responsibility for this mess they have created.

I also find it interesting that our 'dear leader' quotes a BBC article that references MEND (Muslim Engagement and Development) which has known ties to Muslim extremists.

This is actually mentioned in an independent government review conducted by Sir William Shawcross back in 2023.

I covered that here - https://t.co/F1yIitIgfY

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

@Keir_Starmer There is a racial double standard in how you respond to crime.

Your response today only reinforces that perception.

You are not fit to be Prime Minister of our country.

Resign.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

This is without doubt wrong.

But the response is not always this strong. Why is it so strong today?

A clear pattern has emerged.

When the offender is white, politicians find their voice immediately. The full force of the law. Zero tolerance. Strong statements within hours.

When the offender isn’t white, suddenly we need nuance. Context. Patience. Ongoing investigations. Community sensitivities.

We’re told not to notice.

Most people have noticed.

[Keir Starmer @Keir_Starmer]

Absolutely appalling.

No one should face violence on our streets. The suspect appears to be motivated by anti-Muslim hatred. I will not tolerate this - he will face the full force of the law.

My thoughts are with those who are injured and I thank the police and the emergency services for their response.

https://t.co/eqa0XVTfv2

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

What you’ve described, and how you’re being treated, are things many people are far too afraid to even think, let alone say.

From an outsider’s perspective, what you’ve laid out sounds less like a faith and more like a controlling cult. The structure you’ve described feels like the opposite of what a spiritual belief should be. I’d expect words like freedom, enlightenment, compassion, beauty and liberation to come to mind, not fear of questioning, conformity and punishment for dissent.

The fact you’ve written this suggests you’re thinking for yourself. If there is a God, He gave you that brain for a reason.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

@Inevitablewest Brilliant! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

Ironically, not deporting illegal immigrants and suggesting they should be referred to as “neighbours” is the logical “betrayal of a nation”.

But I expect this was bait to get comments. No one in their right mind could follow your argument.

If you make every illegal immigrant your neighbour, you don’t even have a country.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

We already have a political system full of politicians without conviction and now, some people want the voters to be the same?

If you vote tactically, based on who can win rather than thinking what do I believe in? And which party do I believe is best to deliver that? Is there really any point in the long run?

Restore is providing a promise that a lot of right wing voters don’t believe Reform are going to be able to provide.

There’s a lot of evidence to show that left wing Green and Lib Dem supporters did exactly what’s encouraged here, and voted Labour just to stop Reform. In the long run, they won’t get policies that they believe in, because Labour isn’t even pretending, to want to deliver them. They’re happy to settle for that lesser evil.

If you keep voting for a party that doesn’t represent your beliefs, simply to stop another party winning, you’re helping to entrench a political system that never has to represent your beliefs.

[Erin Molan @Erin_Molan]

Dear @elonmusk,

You want a British comeback.

So do I.

So does every sane person who's paying attention.

But if support for @RupertLowe10 ends up stopping @Nigel_Farage and Reform...

and keeping Labour in power...

then all we've done is hand victory to the very people we're trying to defeat.

With the utmost respect, I'd urge you to hear @ThatAlexWoman out.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

We already have a political system full of politicians without conviction and now you want the voters to be the same?

You seem want people to vote tactically based on who can win rather than thinking what do I believe in? And which party do I believe is best to deliver that.

Restore is providing a promise that a lot of right wing voters don’t believe Reform are going to be able to provide.

There’s a lot of evidence to show that left wing Green and Lib Dem supporters did exactly what you’re encouraging and voted Labour just to stop Reform. In the long run, they won’t get policies that they believe in, because Labour isn’t even pretending, to want to deliver them. They’re happy to settle for that lesser evil.

If you keep voting for a party that doesn’t represent your beliefs, simply to stop another party winning, you’re helping to entrench a political system that never has to represent your beliefs.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

@NadineDorries Nadine sounds afraid

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

@AmericaRecharge No. I think he’s a twat.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

In the mid-1990s, the average UK house cost around £50,000 and was roughly 3–4 times the average annual salary.

Today, the average home costs around £300,000 and is about 7.6 times the average salary.

Young people are priced out of the housing market. Couples with decent jobs can’t afford to buy where they grew up.

So who is this headline actually for?

Because it’s not for me or most people reading it.

It’s a tick-box achievement. Fixing an issue that shouldn’t have existed anyway. A small admin change that can be added to a list of “wins” while the actual problem remains exactly where it was.

You’ll repeat this at election time as evidence of “action”, but the reality is, you’re not tackling the real issues.

You’re a waste of time government, shuffling paper around.

[BaffledBrit @BaffledBrit]

In the mid-1990s, the average UK house cost around £50,000 and was roughly 3–4 times the average annual salary.

Today, the average home costs around £300,000 and is about 7.6 times the average salary.

Young people are priced out of the housing market. Couples with decent jobs can’t afford to buy where they grew up.

So who is this headline actually for?

Because it’s not for you.

It’s a tick-box achievement. Fixing an issue that shouldn’t have existed anyway. A small admin change that can be added to a list of “wins” while the actual problem remains exactly where it was.

You’ll hear this repeated at election time as evidence of “action”, but the reality is, they’re not tackling the real issues.

This is a waste of time government, shuffling paper around.

[UK Prime Minister @10DowningStreet]

We’re reforming the homebuying process, so it works for first time buyers.

By getting key information upfront and reducing the number of failed sales, we're making sure home buyers don't get hit with legal fees, searches, and other costs again and again.