John Stobbs

Hardworking family man. British through and through. Will say what I see. like it or lump it.

[Tyler Oliveira @tyleraloevera]

My documentary on Ireland's Immigrant Invasion was BANNED on YouTube in Ireland (due to a legal complaint from the Irish government).

You can watch the full thing here on X.

[Steven Barrett @SBarrettBar]

Rule of Law Collapse.

[Ramon Agusta @ramonagusta]

Tens of thousands of girls raped by Muslim Rape Gangs and this idiot thinks Reform are a “risk women cannot afford”. 🤦🤬

[John Stobbs @johnstobbs1]

The fake coppers are on the muslim, with a small m side, because they are cowards. They will all be dispensed with. All of them.

[Jayda Fransen @JaydaBF]

The UK police did nothing when a Muslim man spat in my face.
When I told the Muslim to accept Jesus as Lord, the police even mocked God saying “He also says don’t eat seafood”.
They wouldn’t dream of treating someone from another faith this way.
They are anti-Christian.

[Jayda Fransen @JaydaBF]

The UK police did nothing when a Muslim man spat in my face.
When I told the Muslim to accept Jesus as Lord, the police even mocked God saying “He also says don’t eat seafood”.
They wouldn’t dream of treating someone from another faith this way.
They are anti-Christian.

[John Stobbs @johnstobbs1]

Brilliant idea. It would be banned of course.

[Big Time Charlie @shadowcanman]

THE PATRIOTS LOTTERY 🇬🇧

A lot of people have told us they’ve stopped playing the existing lottery because they no longer feel comfortable with where some of the good-cause money ultimately goes.

But they actually liked having a flutter.

They liked the weekly ticket.
They liked the chance of winning.
They liked knowing some of the money was supposed to support good causes.

So perhaps we replace it with something better?

A PATRIOTS LOTTERY.

£2 a ticket. Weekly prizes. Completely transparent funding.

And the good-cause money goes towards things such as:

🇬🇧 Restoring churches and historic buildings
🇬🇧 War memorials and British heritage
🇬🇧 Apprenticeships for young people
🇬🇧 Veterans and cadets
🇬🇧 Village halls and community projects
🇬🇧 Local sports and youth organisations
🇬🇧 Protecting and restoring the places that make Britain Britain

You could even choose which county or cause receives your share.

Buy in Worcestershire? Part stays in Worcestershire.
Buy in Yorkshire? Part goes back into Yorkshire.

And every project funded would be published online so people could see exactly where the money went.

This would have to be a properly regulated, legally separate good-cause lottery, not political fundraising disguised as gambling.

Governed by vetted patriots that have proven their loyalty to Great Britain.

No woke nonsense. No funding the invasion of Britain. Just money spent carefully in British communities.

The principle is simple:

If people no longer want to play the old lottery, give them one they actually WANT to play.

WIN SOMETHING. REBUILD SOMETHING. 🇬🇧

Would you buy a Patriots Lottery ticket?

[Graham Linehan @Glinner]

Suddenly none of them know about the pamphlets. How come we all do?

[John Stobbs @johnstobbs1]

Trust me, I won’t be contributing a single penny towards any of this. Some deluded lefty will have to pay my share.

[Chris Rose @ArchRose90]

Andy Burnham has agreed to increase international aid spending to 0.7% of GNI.

Andy is hiking our taxes just to send £13 billion of taxpayers’ money abroad.

Nobody voted for this.

[Juanita Broaddrick @atensnut]

The UK has published a guide for asylum seekers “explaining RAPE is bad”.

UNBELIEVEABLE!!!

[Lisa Mckenzie @redrumlisa]

I actually cant read another news story about the rape of a child, a woman or a man. The images in my head, and the emotions I'm feeling is really having an effect on me now. I want this to be a national emergency. I want a Cobra meeting. I want zero tolerance. We are as a Country now having collective trauma. Do we really want to become a nation where rape becomes part of the national identity.

[Alexandra @Alexandr4Denman]

Police are very keen to find these men who attacked a boy travelling on the train sat by himself , they took his phone and tore his jacket in the struggle in the journey between Beckenham Junction to Shortlands.
The incident happened at around 5.30pm on Friday July 22nd. Anyone who recognises them is asked to contact British Transport Police by texting 61016 or calling 0800 40 50 40.
SO SHARE THEIR FACES LETS GET THEM TO THE POLICE FOR A CHAT!

[Basil the Great @BasilTheGreat]

🚨BREAKING: Four men have been charged with raping schoolgirls in Kirklees, West Yorkshire

3 of them are Muslim Pakistani migrants and one of them is described as 'white European'

The girls were just 14 years old

[James Melville 🚜 @JamesMelville]

This post from a Labour MP has now been deleted. Economic illiteracy on steroids.

[John Stobbs @johnstobbs1]

Let’s look at the bigger picture. Pretty soon this scenario will reflect native Brits in our own country. Or perhaps we will do something to stop it, now.

[Connie @Connkks]

A visual representation of how the migrants will look against the people of Piddington.

They are trying to provoke civil unrest.

[Diana Alastair💚🤍💜 ⚢ ❌❌✡️ @sappholives83]

They were in a park, watching the stars while he played guitar for her. It was a sweet, romantic first date — until two Afghan immigrants showed up. Holding a knife to his throat, they told her they “just wanted to have some fun with her.”

Then they took turns raping her.

Both men are in the UK illegally, and living in a taxpayer funded hotel.

https://t.co/Ee7GRsxq7M

[Zia Yusuf @ZiaYusufUK]

So now we learn that even when Henry Nowak's murderer was up in court our legal system was STILL trying to smear Henry as racist.

They crawled through his messages going back to when he was 12 years old.

Anti-white prejudice is embedded in Britain’s justice system.

RIP Henry.

[Tribuno Económico @Tribunolibre]

"Un hombre que escapa de la guerra lo hace con su mujer y sus hijos. Un hombre que va a la guerra los deja en casa."
- Martín Varsavsky.

[tag 🇬🇧 @tag4UK]

Operation Britishlion

Members of the Legal Profession,

We are seeking legal professionals willing to examine whether the British Government and its agencies can be held accountable for failures connected with border security, immigration enforcement and public protection.

A number of serious crimes have reportedly been committed by individuals who entered the United Kingdom through irregular or unlawful routes. Responsibility for those crimes rests first and foremost with the offenders. However, legitimate questions remain about whether public authorities identified foreseeable risks, followed proper safeguarding procedures and took reasonable actions to protect the British public.

The potential consequences extend beyond ordinary immigration enforcement. In May 2025, the Government confirmed that three Iranian nationals, who had arrived in the UK illegally, were charged under the National Security Act with conduct allegedly assisting a foreign intelligence service.

The National Crime Agency has also arrested people in Britain who were wanted abroad for serious offences, including an Egyptian national wanted for murder in France, while reports have described suspects in a separate French murder investigation as potentially having crossed to Britain by small boat.

These cases do not establish the guilt of everyone arriving irregularly, but they demonstrate the serious national security and criminal risks created when identities and backgrounds cannot be reliably established before entry.

The Home Office has also published guidance for people ‘seeking asylum’ covering gender equality, consent, domestic abuse, sexual assault and offences against children. The existence of this guidance does not establish collective guilt or prove that every recipient presents a danger. It does, however, raise questions about the evidence and risk assessments informing government policy, and whether education through a booklet is being supported by adequate screening, monitoring and safeguarding.

We are therefore seeking assistance from solicitors and barristers specialising in public law, human rights, immigration, negligence and government accountability.

In particular, we would welcome advice on:

-Whether any identifiable government decision or failure could be challenged through judicial review.
-Whether the state’s duties under the Human Rights Act may arise where authorities knew of a real and immediate risk to an identifiable person.
-Whether individual victims might have a civil claim arising from a specific and foreseeable institutional failure.
-How relevant risk assessments, safeguarding records and official data can lawfully be obtained.
-What evidence would be required to establish causation, standing and an appropriate remedy.
-Whether a suitable test case could be brought in the public interest.

This initiative is not intended to accuse every asylum seeker or migrant of criminality. Our concern is whether the Government is failing in their fundamental duty to protect everyone living in Britain.

We recognise that political dissatisfaction alone does not create a legal claim. Any proceedings must be founded on evidence, an identifiable legal duty and reasonable prospects of success. For that reason, we are asking the legal profession to examine the facts independently and tell us honestly whether an arguable case exists.

We would be grateful to hear from any firm, solicitor or barrister able to provide an initial consultation, preliminary written opinion, reduced-fee assistance or pro bono support. We would also welcome guidance on establishing a transparent legal fund to cover research, court fees, representation and potential adverse costs.

Victims deserve answers. The public deserves transparency. Government agencies entrusted with border security and public protection must be prepared to account for their decisions where credible evidence suggests that preventable failures have caused serious harm.

If you believe the law may provide a route to obtaining those answers, we respectfully ask for your help.

My PM’s are open if you prefer to message me directly.

[The London Patriots 🇬🇧 @LondonReformist]

🚨NEW: Can a Standards Chair Who Hid His Wife’s Taxpayer-Funded Job. Then Pushed for Staff Anonymity. Can He Fairly Judge Farage Case?

Alberto Costa chairs the Commons Standards Committee, the very body that will decide any sanctions against Nigel Farage if the Parliamentary Commissioner finds he breached the rules on registering interests.

Yet this same Costa failed to declare, during a July 2025 debate on the Register of Interests of Members’ Staff, that his own wife has been employed on his taxpayer-funded parliamentary staff since 2016.

The Commissioner later ruled this a clear breach of the Code of Conduct, because any reasonable observer could conclude his words were influenced by that personal interest. Costa apologised to the House in April 2026, calling the omission “inadvertent.”

Worse still, the committee he leads then recommended and implemented, the removal of staff names from the public register, replacing them with anonymous job titles.

The stated reason was security. The real-world result is a deliberate reduction in transparency and accountability: it is now harder for the public and press to scrutinise potential conflicts, family employment, lobbying access, or foreign influence among the people closest to MPs.

Costa oversaw a process that promoted secrecy precisely in the area where he himself had a direct, undeclared personal stake.

This record raises profound and legitimate doubts about whether Costa can judge Farage’s case fairly.

The Standards Committee’s legitimacy rests on the public’s confidence that its chair applies the rules without fear or favour, free from any perception of hypocrisy or self-interest.

How can that confidence exist when the chair himself recently breached the declaration rules on a staff-related matter and then steered a change that makes such matters less visible?

When the same man who omitted a relevant interest while discussing staff transparency is now positioned to rule on whether another MP properly declared major financial benefits, the process risks looking selective rather than impartial.

It is wholly unacceptable for the chair of the body charged with upholding standards and accountability to have such a recent, personal failure on disclosure, followed by a push toward greater secrecy.

That combination alone is enough to cast serious doubt on his fitness to deliver a fair, unbiased judgement in the high-profile Farage case. Public trust in parliamentary standards demands better.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

CAN YOU TRUST COSTA IN JUDGING FARAGE CASE? - My answer is NO!

[Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 @TRobinsonNewEra]

Watch as @tyleraloevera covers the invasion of Ireland.

The Irish government have had the footage banned.

Can't ban the truth on 𝕏.