JToosley

Don't go with the flow.......

[Eva Vlaardingerbroek @EvaVlaar]

What we want is simple:

1Close the borders to non-Western immigration

2Set up a Europe-wide remigration system

If you want the same, sign the @SaveEuropeAct now:

https://t.co/jHHPmgZXxp

[Sunil Sharma 🇬🇧 @SunilSharmaUK]

Something has fundamentally changed with immigration.

Immigrants once came to Britain wanting to integrate, contribute and become part of the country.

Now we repeatedly see people who reject British values — and in some cases openly despise the country they’ve chosen to live in.

Britain has every right to expect integration.

[Together @Togetherdec]

One Login is distinct from the cancelled national Digital ID scheme - but the infrastructure still demands scrutiny

"Function creep" is real - and we've seen with Companies House how "optional" can quickly become compulsory

The question isn't only what government systems do today, but what they could become tomorrow

#OneLogin

[Essex Patriot @Essex_Patriot]

The UK is over £3 Trillion in debt.

That's £3,004,000,000,000!!

Rachel Reeves increased the debt by £500,000,000,000 in two years.

Andy Burnham keeps announcing more spending plans.

Totally irresponsible 'leadership'.

This Labour Government are leading us to disaster

SAME OLD LABOUR SAME OLD PROBLEMS

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

The secrecy surrounding the Government’s “anti-Muslim hostility” definition is deeply chilling — and there are serious questions that must be answered.

A Freedom of Information (FOI) request submitted by Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy has revealed that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government deleted all submissions made to the Working Group tasked with drafting the definition.

This evidence would have been central to the Working Group’s deliberations and to the ministers who implemented what is now, in effect, a de facto Islamic blasphemy law.

Who did they speak to during the process?

Now that all the evidence has been deleted, it cannot be properly scrutinised. How can the Government reasonably expect public bodies, private companies and charities to adopt this definition when the evidence underpinning it has disappeared?

Thanks to an FSU briefing published at the start of the year, we already know that all five members of the Working Group had troubling links to Islamist organisations, including the Muslim Council of Britain and MEND. These groups have been subject to a non-engagement policy by successive governments because of concerns about extremism.

Paul Stott has also rightly highlighted that the deletion of this material appears to conflict with the department’s own records and information management policy, which commits it to retaining information of “short-term administrative value” for two years, “operational records” for five years, “financial and audit related records” for seven years and records of historic value for 20 years.

We know that any consultation on an Islamophobia definition was bound to be contentious because of its potential chilling effect on free speech. No wonder the Free Speech Union was not invited to submit evidence. The Government concluded in 2019 that the proposed APPG definition was not in line with the Equality Act 2010. Yet campaign groups and activists have spent years pushing for a definition, and Angela Rayner — desperate to hold on to the Muslim vote — decided that our free speech rights should be sacrificed on the altar of electoral ambition.

We need to know why this evidence was deleted and whether it was a conscious decision made by ministers.

What have they got to hide?

There are now serious questions about whether extremist groups were able to influence the definition — questions that are harder to answer because the evidence has been destroyed.

Even though the “anti-Muslim hostility” definition is less than six months old, activists and politicians have already sought to use it to silence legitimate criticism and debate about Islam.

Labour may have dropped the term “Islamophobia” and replaced it with “anti-Muslim hostility”, but that has only increased the risk of chilling free speech because the new term is so vague and subjective.

The definition risks silencing those who wish to engage in some of the most important debates of the day, including migration, terrorism, social cohesion, women’s rights and the grooming gangs scandal.

Andy Burnham has so far said nothing on the matter — but the direction of travel is clear.

Read more from Paul Stott, Head of Security and Extremism at @Policy_Exchange 👇

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

Two Days Before Leeds, Police Found Him. They Let Him Go

Two days before Ibrahim Albashir nearly killed a woman on a Leeds street, West Yorkshire Police stopped him in the same area. He was found with his trousers around his ankles, in what officers described as a trance-like state. No action was taken. He was released. Forty-eight hours later, he lay in wait for a lone woman walking home from dinner, grabbed her from behind, and stabbed her thirty times with a broken bottle. Judge Robin Mairs told the court she survived "by good fortune alone."

This was not the first sign anyone had of Albashir's condition. He has catatonic schizophrenia, confirmed by every doctor who examined him. He had already been convicted of a sexual assault in a Birmingham hotel where he was staying. He abused a member of staff while detained in a mental health setting. He had moved through Luton, Coventry, Birmingham and a hostel in Barrow-in-Furness, a drift through the system that left no single authority holding a complete picture of a man in repeated crisis. His asylum claim had already failed. He entered Britain via Calais using smugglers after being refused asylum, and on the day of the attack he had just been thrown off a train for having no ticket.

None of this required hidden information to piece together. It required someone, at any one of these points, to connect what was already known. Instead, each contact was treated as isolated: a failed claim here, a train ejection there, a man found half-dressed in a trance two days before he tried to kill someone, and each time, nothing followed.

Judge Mairs did not soften his assessment of what happened on that street. "It is of significance you chose to attack a lone female," he told Albashir. "The common sense conclusion is that there was a sexual element to the attack." That is a sentencing judge's finding, delivered after hearing the full psychiatric and criminal history, not a commentator's inference. The victim, now 32, said in her statement that she still has no idea why he attacked her, and that not knowing is what makes it hardest to live with. She was not the only one left without an answer. The public deserves one too.

This is precisely the kind of case that a published, nationality-broken conviction record would surface as part of a pattern rather than a single horrifying headline. Denmark and Sweden publish exactly this data as routine practice, and their ministers have had to stand up and answer for what it shows. Britain's Ministry of Justice is in a tribunal fighting a ruling that it must do the same, having failed to justify its own cost and privacy objections to the Information Commissioner. Whatever the department's stated reasons, the practical effect is that no British minister has ever had to explain, in public, how many cases share Albashir's shape: a failed asylum claim, a documented history of concerning behaviour, and a system that kept meeting him without ever holding him.

The doormen who ran to help when they heard the woman's screams did what several institutions, over months, had already failed to do. They stopped him. One of them knocked Albashir unconscious and ended the attack. Police, mental health services and the asylum system each had their own moment with this man before that night. None of them stopped it. The question this case actually raises is not whether anyone could have known. It is how many separate agencies did know something, and never once compared notes before a woman was left with wounds that will outlast the count of thirty stitches it took to close them.

"Forty-eight hours later, Albashir lay in wait for a lone woman walking home from dinner, grabbed her from behind, and stabbed her thirty times with a broken bottle. Judge Robin Mairs told the court she survived "by good fortune alone.""

[Bjorn Lomborg @BjornLomborg]

Good to see Germany’s highest-circulation newspaper, BILD, covering the data: despite the dramatic headlines, the world is burning less, not more.

Facts matter. And smarter forest management protects people far more effectively than costly climate policy.

https://t.co/29IvINz09w

[Reform UK @reformparty_uk]

Reform UK will end the £200m activist industrial complex in Whitehall.

If you work for the government, you work for the public. 🇬🇧

[Lee Harris @LeeHarris]

🚨NEW: Craig Guildford, the disgraced former Chief Constable of West Midlands police is now being investigated for fabricating and exaggerating evidence used to justify the ban on Israeli supporters.

They already have the evidence.
He's bang to rights.

This has MADE MY DAY! 🙌

[Sama Hoole @SamaHoole]

Your porridge oats were sprayed with weedkiller a fortnight before harvest, on purpose, to kill the plant while it was still standing. Scotland invented the trick.

A dying crop dies evenly. The whole field ripens on the same day, the plant pulls its last moisture into the grain, and the combine goes through once instead of three times. The grain is cut and bagged a few days after the drenching, which is how it gets into the bag intact.

1980s: Scottish farmers start killing standing cereals with glyphosate to dry them. Canada and the American Midwest copy it.

2015: the World Health Organization's cancer agency classifies glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.

2018: independent labs find it in 43 of 45 conventional oat products.

2019: the same labs find it in all 21 oat cereals and bars sold to children.

2020: Bayer puts up 10.9 billion dollars for around 100,000 people with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

2023: the EU bans pre-harvest spraying outright. Britain carries on.

2026: Bayer offers another 7.25 billion, paid out over as much as 21 years, and Britain's licence decision lands in December.

Eleven billion in settlements, a second one on the table, and a public consultation still deciding whether it is acceptable to spray it directly onto food four days before that food is harvested.

Now the part that should ruin your morning. The residue does not sit evenly through the grain. It concentrates in the bran, the outer layer, which is the part sold to you as the reason to eat the stuff at all.

Whole is worse than white. The healthier you have been trying to be, the more of it you have eaten.

The oat milk in the flat white you ordered instead of dairy was dried on the stalk by the compound Bayer is paying billions to stop hearing about. Lovely leaf on it, though.

[Adam Brooks AKA EssexPR 🇬🇧 @EssexPR]

Our seaside towns are being turned into asylum seeker rape towns.
And our Government labels us for calling it out.

Labour out 🥀

[Claire Coutinho @ClaireCoutinho]

Yesterday, energy bills went up again.

Labour’s Energy Secretary admitted her policies were part of the reason why.

Yet she’s about to hand another load of huge subsidy contracts to wind developers without knowing what this will add to your bills.

This is grossly negligent.

[Ben Graham @BenGrahamUK]

Anyone who has followed me for any length of time knows I almost never call for someone to be sacked.

But if these reports are accurate, Home Office officials who genuinely “fear for their lives” because British flags are flying should be sacked.

Immediately.

You work for the British Government.

The British Government serves the British people.

If our national flags make you fear for your life, you have no business holding a position of responsibility at the heart of the British state.

Public service requires resilience, professionalism and respect for the country you serve.

If you cannot handle the sight of British flags, find another job.

The British state needs stronger people than this.

[David Shaw @David90shaw]

🚨 EXPOSED: LABOUR'S NEW MINISTER FOR PROTECTING WOMEN VOTED TO ALLOW RAPISTS OUT OF PRISON EARLY!

Meet Labour MP Satvir Kaur.

You honestly have to laugh at the absolute sick joke Prime Minister Andy Burnham is playing on the British public right now! 🤡

Burnham has just appointed Satvir Kaur as the new Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls.

This is the exact same Labour politician who literally voted against a major parliamentary amendment designed to block rapists, child groomers, and domestic abusers from early release!

Instead of taking violence against women seriously, Labour promotes politicians who actively voted to allow mass sexual offenders back onto our streets.

They leave British daughters completely unprotected while giving themselves massive taxpayer funded promotions.

I will keep exposing every single Labour MP who refuses to do their job. The mask has completely slipped!

[Allison Pearson @AllisonPearson]

Amazing. 💥

3,000 comments on my piece about illegal migrants making Britain unsafe for women and children.
People are really angry at what they’ve done to our country. Rightly so.
Groups of foreign men making even quiet market towns intimidating.

Read here 👇

https://t.co/wdx4aWAK87

[Big Time Charlie @shadowcanman]

🚨🚨🚨🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 BRITAIN GAVE AWAY A QUARTER OF A TRILLION POUNDS SINCE TONY BLAIR CAME TO OFFICE

I have spent the last few days going back through Britain’s foreign aid and international development spending since 1997, and the scale of it is extraordinary.

The official number alone is roughly £254.9 BILLION of ODA from 1997 to 2025.

Inflation-adjusted into 2025 money, that is about £352.3 BILLION.

And that is before you start looking at the broader non-ODA security and stabilisation spending that sits alongside the aid system.

What is striking is not simply the total. It is the architecture underneath it.

The biggest channels are enormous:

World Bank IDA: roughly £21.6bn in identified UK replenishment commitments from 1997 through IDA21.

International Climate Finance: around £21.2bn across its three major phases.

EU development and external-aid channels: at least £11.2bn already reconstructed from 2010 onward, with earlier years still to complete.

Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria: £5.5bn by 2024.

UK education aid: around £5.7bn across the reviewed 2015–2020 period.

DFID contractor spending: roughly £5.3bn across the 2007/08–2013/14 profile.

Ukraine non-military support: around £5bn, although much of this is guarantees and fiscal support rather than simple grant aid.

Syria crisis response: about £4.63bn.

Reproductive, maternal, neonatal and child-health programmes: about £4.6bn.

Economic-development portfolio: about £4.69bn across 268 programmes.

Agriculture aid: about £4.15bn from 2016–2021.

Gavi: at least £4bn committed by 2020.

African Development Fund: around £3.56bn in core replenishments identified.

Afghanistan: nearly £3.5bn.

CDC/British International Investment capital increase: around £3.1bn.

Nigeria debt relief: around £2.8bn scored through the aid system.

And then there are the less obvious categories.

In 2024 alone, £2.827bn of British ODA was spent inside Britain on refugees and asylum seekers.

The old Conflict, Stability and Security Fund and its successor also carried large non-ODA spending. From 2017/18 to 2024/25 I can identify roughly £4.7bn of non-ODA security and stabilisation spending alongside the aid budget.

Thus, Britain built an enormous, highly distributed international-development machine involving the World Bank, EU institutions, UN agencies, climate funds, vaccine alliances, development banks, private contractors, universities, NGOs, debt relief, guarantees, investment vehicles, refugee costs inside Britain, humanitarian programmes and security funds.

Where did every pound go, who received it, what did Britain get for it, and why has nobody ever presented the public with the full ledger?

That is the audit I have now started building.

[Nick Timothy MP @NJ_Timothy]

Anna Turley put the police officers who died in Middlesbrough on a par with the thugs who killed them.

Instead of recognising her error, she doubled down and claimed the local police told her to say what she did.

This is completely implausible, and the local Labour police commissioner denies it.

I've had no reply to my letter to Anna this morning, in which I asked for evidence.

As a Home Office minister, she should know better than this.

Do you think she's telling the truth?

[Zia Yusuf @ZiaYusufUK]

The Tories let some of the most dangerous men on earth into Britain.

On Tuesday, a Sudanese man called Ibrahim Albashir was jailed for the attempted murder of a 32-year-old woman.

He ambushed her as she walked home from a meal with friends. 

He stabbed her 30 times with a broken bottle. 

She survived only because locals heard her ‘blood-curdling screams’ and intervened. 

Albashir is an illegal migrant. 

The Tories let him in.

He had previously tried his luck in France.

They rejected his asylum claim and detained him in a mental hospital for six months due to catatonic schizophrenia. 

After entering Britain, the court heard he sexually assaulted a female staff member at a hostel. 

Despite all this, he was left to roam free. 

It could have been your daughter, wife, sister, or grandmother.

Stabbed 30 times with broken glass. 

At this very moment, thousands upon thousands of unvetted illegals continue to roam free.

This is the consequence of inaction. 

Every day that passes without mass deportations risks ever more blood on the government’s hands.

They do not care about you.

Reform will detain and deport all the illegal migrants the Tories and Labour allowed to come here.

[Darren Grimes @darrengrimes]

At around 9pm on 17 March 2024, on Otley Road in Headingley, he came up behind a woman in her thirties walking home from dinner and set about her with a broken bottle. Head, neck, chest. It was reported he tried to stab her more than thirty times.

She is alive for one reason. A group of lads outside the Original Oak heard her scream and ran at him.

Not the Home Office. Not the asylum system. Passers-by.

He’s now been handed 25 years and a hybrid hospital order. The court heard he suffers catatonic schizophrenia with persecutory beliefs. Judge Robin Mairs found there was a sexual element to the offending, following previous reports of Albashir making sexual advances towards women.

Which leaves the only question worth asking. Why was he here at all? A homeless, severely ill man, off his medication, already the subject of reports about his behaviour towards women, and the British state’s answer was to leave him wandering Leeds until a woman was nearly murdered on a busy high street.

He should never have been our problem. He certainly should never have been a threat to her life.

[Matt Goodwin @GoodwinMJ]

In February, after the Gorton & Denton by-election, I warned we are losing our democracy to sectarianism.

The likes of @ZackPolanski & Hannah Spencer laughed.

Now, a major investigation finds widespread family voting & election interference in Birmingham

New piece ⬇️