Great news - another signature on our mass deportation motion in Parliament.
Conservative MP, @BradleyThomasUK.
That's 21 supporters now. A mixture of Tories, independents and Northern Irish.
All illegals must go. End of story.
The motion in full:
That this House expresses grave concern at the continued presence of over one million illegal migrants in the United Kingdom; notes that illegal entry into the country represents a clear breach of national law and undermines the integrity of the UK’s immigration system; further notes the considerable cost to the taxpayer in housing, processing and supporting individuals with no legal right to remain in the UK; recognises the growing public demand for decisive and consistent enforcement of immigration laws; and therefore urges the Government to implement a comprehensive national strategy to identify, detain, and deport all individuals found to be residing in the United Kingdom illegally, and to ensure that such policies are backed by the necessary legislative, diplomatic, logistical and financial resources to restore confidence in the rule of law and the security of our borders.
Yes, Keir Starmer has lied or misled the public on multiple occasions, including understating the Chagos Islands deal cost (£3.4bn vs. £30bn+ with inflation) and breaking pledges not to raise taxes on working people via employer NI hikes and other measures. Sources: Telegraph, The Sun, The TimesYes, Keir Starmer has lied or misled the public on multiple occasions, including understating the Chagos Islands deal cost (£3.4bn vs. £30bn+ with inflation) and breaking pledges not to raise taxes on working people via employer NI hikes and other measures. Sources: Telegraph, The Sun, The Times.
@basilthegreat No. While the UK protects expression under the Human Rights Act, restrictions on hate speech, incitement, and online content—enforced via laws like the Online Safety Act—limit it substantially, with recent arrests for social media posts@basilthegreat No. While the UK protects expression under the Human Rights Act, restrictions on hate speech, incitement, and online content—enforced via laws like the Online Safety Act—limit it substantially, with recent arrests for social media posts.
This was Chance when she came in.
Probably the most shut down dog we’ve ever had. She wouldn’t even look at me.
Much of her recovery is down to one very special dog… (1/8) 🧵
A failure to arrest and prosecute Bobby Vylan immediately would be a clear example of two-tier justice under Sir Keir Starmer and his Attorney General, Lord Hermer👉
⛽️🚙The Trump Effect:
As we head into Memorial Day weekend, the national average price of gasoline is expected to be $3.08 on Memorial Day – down from the $3.58 average last year, according to GasBuddy.
Adjusted for inflation – that’s the second cheapest price for a gallon of gas on Memorial Day since 2003.
We shouldn't just slash foreign aid, we should scrap it altogether. 50% is not enough - everything should go.
Then, if MPs want to approve specific projects? They should put their name to it. Solar panels in Pakistan or shrimp studies in Bangladesh? They should have the courage to personally sanction it.
Not delegating power to some nonsense department/quango, AGAIN. MPs should take responsibility for how taxpayer money is spent.
Let their constituents decide if that is a wise use of funds...
Is Britain really such a utopia where we can afford to splash millions and millions on green enterprises in India? A gender disinformation conference in Kenya? Mental health research in Colombia? Inclusion in the Congo?
Sorry - I just don't care. It's not our problem.
That British taxpayer money needs to be spent in Britain, on British people.
We're spending £133 million on aid in Pakistan this year.
WHY?! What are we getting for it? The honest answer?
Sod all.
We're borrowing money to hand it away. It is BONKERS.
Foreign aid was potentially once a noble idea, that has now been completely distorted out of any reality by virtue-signalling politicians who want to appear kind at their various cocktail parties.
WHO CARES.
Scrap the whole thing.
I say spend that money in Britain, on British people.
I watched the entire press conference with Zelensky. There was 40 minutes of discussion up to the argument. Most people saw at most the last ten minutes. The whole video gives the proper context.
When I first watched the argument without the proper context, I thought it was possible that Trump and Vance ambushed Zelensky or were even trying to humiliate him. That's not what happened.
You had 40 minutes of calm conversation. Vance made a point that didn't attack Zelensky and wasn't even addressed to him, and Zelensky clearly started the argument.
In the first 40 minutes, Zelensky kept trying to go beyond what was negotiated in the deal. When Trump was asked a question, it was always "we'll see." Zelensky made blanket assertions that there would be no negotiating with Putin, and that Russia would pay for the war. When Trump said that it was a tragedy that people on both sides were dying, Zelensky interjected that the Russians were the invaders.
For his part, Trump made clear that the US would continue delivering military aid. All Zelensky had to do was remain calm for a few more minutes and they would've signed a deal.
The argument started when Trump pointed out that it would be hard to make a deal if you talk about Putin the way Zelensky does. Vance interjects to make the reasonable point that Biden called Putin names and that didn't get us anywhere.
The Zelensky/Trump dynamic was calm and stable. It was when Vance spoke that Zelensky started to interrogate him. Throughout the press conference to that point, everyone was making their arguments directly to the audience. Zelensky decided to challenge Vance and ask him hostile questions. He went back to his point that Putin never sticks to ceasefires, once again implying that negotiations are pointless. Why on earth would you do this? Then came the fight we all saw.
Zelensky was minutes away from being home free, and he would have had the deal and new commitments from the Trump administration. The point Vance made was directed against Biden and the media, taking them to task for speaking in moralistic terms. This offended Zelensky, and that began the argument.
I've been a fan of Zelensky up to this point, but this showed so much incompetence, if not emotional instability, that I don't see how he recovers from this. The relationship with the administration is broken. Ukraine should probably go with new leadership at this point.