![JChimirie66677's tweet photo. Criminally Negligent. Andrew Neil's Words. Britain's Reality.
Andrew Neil does not use language carelessly. Writing in the Daily Mail this morning, he describes Britain as stuck in an energy emergency with an oil and gas policy bordering on the criminally negligent, delivered by a bunch of clueless inadequates at the tiller. He is not reaching for effect. He is delivering a verdict. And the evidence he marshals is unanswerable.
The Strait of Hormuz has been closed for the first time in history. Oil is heading toward two hundred dollars a barrel. Britain is facing the worst energy crisis since the Yom Kippur War of 1973. The International Energy Agency has described the supply disruption as the largest in history. And the government overseeing this catastrophe has spent the past year doing everything in its power to ensure Britain would be maximally exposed when it arrived. It closed North Sea oil and gas production. It borrowed against already strained public finances. It built an economic strategy on OBR forecasts that the energy crisis has already rendered obsolete. And it put the man most responsible for Britain's energy vulnerability, Ed Miliband, in charge of the response.
The Miliband contradiction has been hiding in plain sight for months. He stood at the despatch box during the energy debate last year and warned that Britain was a price taker not a price maker in international fossil fuel markets, leaving it exposed to their volatility. He was right. He was also the man who ensured that exposure would be as severe as possible by closing down the domestic production that could have cushioned the blow. The North Sea fields that could have been producing. The coal beds that remain untouched. The nuclear capacity that was decommissioned in pursuit of net zero targets that now look like a luxury policy designed for a world that no longer exists. Miliband diagnosed the disease and administered the poison.
Rachel Reeves now faces the consequences. The fiscal headroom she has been defending against every request for defence spending, every demand from the Treasury and every warning from military chiefs, is being wiped out not by defence costs alone but by the energy price shock her own government's choices made inevitable. Her foundations, as Neil puts it, are built on quicksand. The borrowing costs are rising at the fastest pace since the Liz Truss mini-budget. Foreign creditors are watching. The bond markets are watching. And the Chancellor is discovering that the numbers she has been citing as proof of fiscal responsibility were always dependent on a stable world that this government's foreign policy paralysis helped to destabilise.
Neil makes one observation that connects the economic catastrophe to the political one with surgical precision. A stronger Prime Minister would have fired Miliband. He is right. The man who led the Cabinet revolt against supporting America, who blocked the use of Diego Garcia, who has spent a year dismantling Britain's energy independence and who stood at the despatch box admitting British households would pay the price, is still in his post. Still in the Cabinet. Still in the room. The reason Starmer has not fired him is the same reason he needed a drone on his own runway before he would act, the same reason he consulted his team on minesweepers and the same reason Britain is now a diminished, exposed and strategically paralysed country being described in its own press as a nation of clueless inadequates. He cannot afford to. The coalition that put him in power will not allow it. And so the inadequates remain at the tiller while Britain heads for the rocks.
"Miliband diagnosed the disease and administered the poison. [...]. Rachel Reeves now faces the consequences."](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HD-PXegaYAA3pjV.jpg)
Olivia
Online
danman45
@grahamDaniel6
Joined July 2012
140 Following
23 Followers
238 Posts
@KingBobIIV Excellent piece ๐
https://t.co/xQbAxClgy4
@europa They stood around & did nothing when the BLM lot were rioting & pulling down statues!
@KingBobIIV It's intimidation.
@tonyblackburn I dare say you did it without oxygen, especially if it was by Jean-Michel Jarre ๐
@JChimirie66677 Sad, but true.
@Keir_Starmer This Saturday two marches will take place in central London simultaneously. The Unite the Kingdom rally, expected to draw over 100,000 British citizens, and the Nakba Day pro-Palestine march. Seven foreign speakers have been banned from attending the first. Not one foreign speaker has been banned from any pro-Palestine march in two and a half years.
Nakba means catastrophe in Arabic. It refers to the displacement of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. The suffering was real. What the marchers will not mention is that the Arab leadership rejected the UN partition plan that would have given Palestinians their own state and five Arab armies invaded the day Israel declared independence with the stated aim of destroying it. They will not mention that 850,000 Jews were simultaneously expelled from Arab countries, their property confiscated and their communities destroyed. That displacement has no annual march. No UN commemoration. No government statement of concern. The Nakba narrative, as presented on British streets, is half a history. The half that fits the argument.
For two and a half years the IHRC led chants of death to Israel on the Embankment. Bobby Vylan led chants of death to the IDF on a London stage and the CPS cleared him. The Together Alliance marched through central London carrying Iranian regime flags days after their proxy network firebombed Jewish ambulances in Golders Green. Thirty six MPs signed a letter to silence Nick Timothy for identifying that coalition. Your government attended an Iranian embassy party and called it diplomacy.
Not one of those marches was described as designed to confront and provoke. Not one foreign participant was blocked. Not one organiser faced the kind of language being directed at this weekend's rally before it has even taken place.
The IRGC remains unproscribed. The grooming gang demographic remains unnamed in Parliament. Two tier policing has been documented across two and a half years of pro-Palestinian marches held to a different standard than any other demonstration in living memory. And now the same government that watched all of that happen is banning American social media commentators from attending a rally of British citizens concerned about exactly those double standards.
You will not allow people to come to the UK and spread hate on our streets. For two and a half years that is precisely what you allowed. The only thing that has changed is who is marching.
@JChimirie66677 Great analysis ๐
@JChimirie66677 Well written Sir. Starmer is complicit without a doubt.
@ThePosieParker I watched the NZ video & it must have been terrifying for you & your supporters. The stress on you must be incredible & for you to keep going in spite of this is amazing. History will prove you're on the right side of sanity even if you have state actors working against you.
@JChimirie66677 Hmmm, curiouser & curiouser ๐ธ
Criminally Negligent. Andrew Neil's Words. Britain's Reality.
Andrew Neil does not use language carelessly. Writing in the Daily Mail this morning, he describes Britain as stuck in an energy emergency with an oil and gas policy bordering on the criminally negligent, delivered by a bunch of clueless inadequates at the tiller. He is not reaching for effect. He is delivering a verdict. And the evidence he marshals is unanswerable.
The Strait of Hormuz has been closed for the first time in history. Oil is heading toward two hundred dollars a barrel. Britain is facing the worst energy crisis since the Yom Kippur War of 1973. The International Energy Agency has described the supply disruption as the largest in history. And the government overseeing this catastrophe has spent the past year doing everything in its power to ensure Britain would be maximally exposed when it arrived. It closed North Sea oil and gas production. It borrowed against already strained public finances. It built an economic strategy on OBR forecasts that the energy crisis has already rendered obsolete. And it put the man most responsible for Britain's energy vulnerability, Ed Miliband, in charge of the response.
The Miliband contradiction has been hiding in plain sight for months. He stood at the despatch box during the energy debate last year and warned that Britain was a price taker not a price maker in international fossil fuel markets, leaving it exposed to their volatility. He was right. He was also the man who ensured that exposure would be as severe as possible by closing down the domestic production that could have cushioned the blow. The North Sea fields that could have been producing. The coal beds that remain untouched. The nuclear capacity that was decommissioned in pursuit of net zero targets that now look like a luxury policy designed for a world that no longer exists. Miliband diagnosed the disease and administered the poison.
Rachel Reeves now faces the consequences. The fiscal headroom she has been defending against every request for defence spending, every demand from the Treasury and every warning from military chiefs, is being wiped out not by defence costs alone but by the energy price shock her own government's choices made inevitable. Her foundations, as Neil puts it, are built on quicksand. The borrowing costs are rising at the fastest pace since the Liz Truss mini-budget. Foreign creditors are watching. The bond markets are watching. And the Chancellor is discovering that the numbers she has been citing as proof of fiscal responsibility were always dependent on a stable world that this government's foreign policy paralysis helped to destabilise.
Neil makes one observation that connects the economic catastrophe to the political one with surgical precision. A stronger Prime Minister would have fired Miliband. He is right. The man who led the Cabinet revolt against supporting America, who blocked the use of Diego Garcia, who has spent a year dismantling Britain's energy independence and who stood at the despatch box admitting British households would pay the price, is still in his post. Still in the Cabinet. Still in the room. The reason Starmer has not fired him is the same reason he needed a drone on his own runway before he would act, the same reason he consulted his team on minesweepers and the same reason Britain is now a diminished, exposed and strategically paralysed country being described in its own press as a nation of clueless inadequates. He cannot afford to. The coalition that put him in power will not allow it. And so the inadequates remain at the tiller while Britain heads for the rocks.
"Miliband diagnosed the disease and administered the poison. [...]. Rachel Reeves now faces the consequences."
![JChimirie66677's tweet photo. Criminally Negligent. Andrew Neil's Words. Britain's Reality.
Andrew Neil does not use language carelessly. Writing in the Daily Mail this morning, he describes Britain as stuck in an energy emergency with an oil and gas policy bordering on the criminally negligent, delivered by a bunch of clueless inadequates at the tiller. He is not reaching for effect. He is delivering a verdict. And the evidence he marshals is unanswerable.
The Strait of Hormuz has been closed for the first time in history. Oil is heading toward two hundred dollars a barrel. Britain is facing the worst energy crisis since the Yom Kippur War of 1973. The International Energy Agency has described the supply disruption as the largest in history. And the government overseeing this catastrophe has spent the past year doing everything in its power to ensure Britain would be maximally exposed when it arrived. It closed North Sea oil and gas production. It borrowed against already strained public finances. It built an economic strategy on OBR forecasts that the energy crisis has already rendered obsolete. And it put the man most responsible for Britain's energy vulnerability, Ed Miliband, in charge of the response.
The Miliband contradiction has been hiding in plain sight for months. He stood at the despatch box during the energy debate last year and warned that Britain was a price taker not a price maker in international fossil fuel markets, leaving it exposed to their volatility. He was right. He was also the man who ensured that exposure would be as severe as possible by closing down the domestic production that could have cushioned the blow. The North Sea fields that could have been producing. The coal beds that remain untouched. The nuclear capacity that was decommissioned in pursuit of net zero targets that now look like a luxury policy designed for a world that no longer exists. Miliband diagnosed the disease and administered the poison.
Rachel Reeves now faces the consequences. The fiscal headroom she has been defending against every request for defence spending, every demand from the Treasury and every warning from military chiefs, is being wiped out not by defence costs alone but by the energy price shock her own government's choices made inevitable. Her foundations, as Neil puts it, are built on quicksand. The borrowing costs are rising at the fastest pace since the Liz Truss mini-budget. Foreign creditors are watching. The bond markets are watching. And the Chancellor is discovering that the numbers she has been citing as proof of fiscal responsibility were always dependent on a stable world that this government's foreign policy paralysis helped to destabilise.
Neil makes one observation that connects the economic catastrophe to the political one with surgical precision. A stronger Prime Minister would have fired Miliband. He is right. The man who led the Cabinet revolt against supporting America, who blocked the use of Diego Garcia, who has spent a year dismantling Britain's energy independence and who stood at the despatch box admitting British households would pay the price, is still in his post. Still in the Cabinet. Still in the room. The reason Starmer has not fired him is the same reason he needed a drone on his own runway before he would act, the same reason he consulted his team on minesweepers and the same reason Britain is now a diminished, exposed and strategically paralysed country being described in its own press as a nation of clueless inadequates. He cannot afford to. The coalition that put him in power will not allow it. And so the inadequates remain at the tiller while Britain heads for the rocks.
"Miliband diagnosed the disease and administered the poison. [...]. Rachel Reeves now faces the consequences."](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HD-PXr-X0AAah61.jpg)
@sharrond62 Its a sop to a certain demographic who don't want girl babies. Its horrifying!
@EdwardJDavey, let us be clear about what you have just said. Thousands of people gathered on the Embankment in central London yesterday and chanted death to America and death to Israel. A speaker from a charity named in a Lords report on Iranian influence in Britain led the crowd in chants of death to America and death to Israel in Arabic. Bobby Vylan led chants of death, death, death to the IDF. Banners celebrated the bombing of Tel Aviv. Khamenei's autobiography was on sale for seventeen pounds. And your considered assessment is that the greatest threat to Britain comes from Nigel Farage.
Zarah Sultana has been referred to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards for posting language described as a modern iteration of the medieval blood libel. Vote Palestine 2026 activists are going door to door in May's local elections making lists of people who fail to denounce Israel. The Walney report documents ten charities with links to the Iranian regime operating under British charitable status, four of them in receipt of Gift Aid, subsidised by the British taxpayer. The Foreign Office attended an Iranian embassy party days after the regime massacred thousands of its own citizens and called it normal diplomacy. And your considered assessment is that the greatest threat to Britain comes from Reform.
The Union Jack, which you invoke so tenderly, has been described as a tool of hate in a leaked government social cohesion document produced under your political allies. Concern about mass immigration has been classified alongside white supremacism in official Prevent training materials published on https://t.co/ivFinfvGSB. Churchill has been removed from the currency without a vote, without a debate, without asking anyone. And your considered assessment is that the greatest threat to Britain comes from the people objecting to all of the above.
This is not naivety, Ed. A naive man stumbles into error. You have walked into this position with your eyes open, wrapped it in the language of patriotism, and pointed the finger of blame at the people trying to defend the country you claim to love. That is not a mistake. That is a choice. And it tells us everything we need to know about why Britain is in the condition it is in.
The greatest danger to Britain does not come from Tehran or Moscow. You are right about that. It comes from politicians who can look at everything happening in this country and conclude that the real enemy is the people refusing to look away.
@RupertLowe10 What's going on is exactly what many of us have been warning about: the quiet Islamisation of public life, carried out behind the backs of parents, hidden under the banner of "diversity." Schools serving only halal isn't an oversight - it's policy by stealth. The culture of the majority is erased, and the norms of a minority are imposed, without debate and without consent.
And it doesn't stop at the dinner table. British children are being marched into mosques, dressed in Islamic garments, and taught to write in Arabic. Not as part of a fair, comparative study of religions, but as a full-immersion experience in one faith alone. All of this in taxpayer-funded schools, overseen by a state that bans Christian symbols in some classrooms and calls nativity plays "exclusive."
Ask yourself this: would the same schools take Muslim children into a church, dress them in cassocks, have them kneel at the altar, and write the Lord's Prayer in Latin? Not a chance. It would be denounced as colonial, oppressive, and coercive. But reverse the faith - and suddenly it's "enrichment."
This is not education. It's indoctrination dressed up as tolerance. It's the LeftistโIslamist alliance at work: Islamists demand space and deference; the Left enforces it, smearing any objection as "racist." The result is not informed citizens, but compliant subjects. Children taught to be ashamed of their own heritage while praised for embracing another.
We are not a Muslim country. But unless this is stopped, that is exactly where we are heading: a Britain where the native culture is erased, Islam is normalised, and submission is drilled into the youngest, most impressionable minds.
"And it doesn't stop at the dinner table. British children are being marched into mosques, dressed in Islamic garments, and taught to write in Arabic."
โ๏ธ Blasphemy? Let's cut the crap. The British government just rolled out this new "non-statutory" definition of anti-Muslim hostility.
Sounds harmless, right? Just guidance to fight hate crimes.
But read it closely: it carves out special protections for one faith - Islam - while every other religion gets told to fend for itself.
Christians can have their crosses mocked, their beliefs called bigoted fairy tales, their churches vandalized, and nobody's rushing to codify a special "anti-Christian hostility" definition - they don't get their own government-endorsed shield.
But criticize Islam? Suddenly you're risking being labeled as encouraging "prejudicial stereotyping" or "hatred against a collective group." Even if you're just pointing out facts or debating ideas.
This isn't about stopping violence - violence is already illegal, and hate crimes against Muslims are prosecuted under existing laws.
This is about tilting the scales. It's favoritism dressed up as compassion.
And once you start giving one religion special status in law and policy, you're not protecting free speech - you're quietly importing a hierarchy where some beliefs are more equal than others.
We know where this road leads. Look at parts of Europe already: two-tier policing, speech codes that chill criticism of one faith while others get dragged through the mud.
It's not a slippery slope - it's a deliberate step toward a sectarian society, where the state picks winners in the marketplace of ideas.
And if we're not careful, Britain risks sliding from a free, pluralistic nation into something that looks a lot more like the theocratic systems some people fled to get here in the first place.
The elites will tell you it's just "guidance." Don't buy it.
This is how you erode liberty - one "non-statutory" definition at a time.
Wake up, Britain. Your freedoms are worth more than woke gesture politics from @UKLabour โ๏ธ๐ด๓ ง๓ ข๓ ฅ๓ ฎ๓ ง๓ ฟ๐ฌ๐ง๐
#FreeSpeech #UKPolitics #NoSpecialTreatment
The BBC Doesn't Make Mistakes. It Makes Choices
The BBC has made another error. A live translation of Pete Hegseth's Pentagon address rendered the word "regime" as "mardom," the Persian word for "people." So when the Defence Secretary told the world that the regime that chanted death to America had been gifted death in return, BBC Persian told its audience inside Iran that the American government was threatening the Iranian people. The BBC issued a correction. It called the mistranslation "human error." That is also what it called Panorama.
When the BBC edited Trump's January 6th speech, it did not accidentally make him sound more peaceful. It cut the line where he called for his supporters to march "peacefully and patriotically," spliced in footage from elsewhere, and broadcast the result a week before the American presidential election. The BBC's own standards adviser called it deliberate distortion. The Chairman Samir Shah eventually called it an "error of judgment." The Director-General Tim Davie said nothing of substance. Two senior executives resigned. Trump sued for ten billion dollars. And throughout, the Corporation's position was consistent: mistake, not malice. Human error. Regrettable. Corrected.
Now examine the Hegseth translation. A single word, "regime," becomes "people." Not a complex clause. Not an ambiguous idiom. One word, with one meaning, translated into its opposite. And the effect was not neutral. BBC Persian broadcasts inside Iran, to people for whom the distinction between the regime and the people is not semantic. It is the difference between those who imprison and those who are imprisoned. When that audience heard America threatening the Iranian people, they did not hear a translation error. They heard confirmation of what the Islamic Republic has told them for forty years. The BBC handed the regime its propaganda line, live, with the American Defence Secretary's voice attached.
Thamar Eilam-Gindin, a Persian linguist and Iran expert at Haifa University, said the mistranslation fundamentally altered the meaning of the address. She added that among diaspora Iranians she works with regularly, the incident confirmed what they already believed: that BBC Persian runs a long-standing pro-regime editorial line. That charge does not come from Republican media monitors or Trump's legal team. It comes from Iranian exiles. The people with the most direct experience of both the regime and the BBC's coverage of it have reached their verdict.
The BBC will say the two incidents are not comparable. Panorama was edited; this was live. One was deliberate craft; the other was a translator under pressure. But this defence only holds if you believe the errors are random. Random errors scatter. They make subjects sound better and worse, more threatening and less, more guilty and more innocent, in rough proportion. The BBC's errors do not scatter. They cluster. Trump is made more dangerous. America is made more threatening. Iran's regime is made less culpable. Israel's actions are made less justified. The mistakes, every time, travel in the same direction as the ideology. That is not a coincidence. That is a culture.
An institution whose errors always serve its prejudices has not made errors. It has made choices. The method changes. The outcome never does. And the people who pay the price are not politicians with lawyers. They are Iranians inside Iran, who tuned into a service their licence fee helps fund, and were told that America wants them dead.
"The BBC's errors do not scatter. They cluster. Trump is made more dangerous. America is made more threatening. Iran's regime is made less culpable. Israel's actions are made less justified. The mistakes, every time, travel in the same direction as the ideology."
@JChimirie66677 What the af is going on in this country? This is bordering on criminal.
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
่ฟ่ตดไบบ้ดๆ้ธฟๅฎด
Seen from Singapore
ffkk
Seen from Vietnam
jonaguapo
Seen from Chile
Ibu sange
Seen from Netherlands
MILF HUNTER
Seen from Indonesia
MALOTUGDG
Seen from United States
๎จ ๐๐ถ๐๐พ๐๐ฑ๐ง๐ฌ๐ง๐ฆ๐ช 
Seen from Israel
Stw desa
Seen from Singapore
Jenny Rhythm
cyank Tante
Seen from Indonesia
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
240.2M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.3M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.6M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
109.1M 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
86.9M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
80.7M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
72.3M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.4M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
68.7M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.6M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.5M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.5M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
61.3M followers
X
@x
60.9M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
60M followers