Richard Booker

Armed Forces GP💼PHEM🚁innovator🛜Team➕tech🟰📈patient outcomes➕😃clinician satisfaction📲🌍🌏🌎🛰️😷 Views own, RT=/=endorsement

[Richard Booker @mildocrb]

https://t.co/XwcF080X0I @DMS_ComdJHG @DMS_DPHC_Comd @DMS_DG @DMS_SurgGen @DMS_MilMed @JHubMED_Defence @JHubDefence #Telemedicine to close sophistication gap @hello_pando @MedIS_Oli

[Richard Booker @mildocrb]

I've signed the Free Speech Union's petition against the Government's conversion therapy ban. Add your name: https://t.co/sEYGZT6Ie7

[XX-XY Athletics @xx_xyathletics]

Look at her.

[Gunther Eagleman™ @GuntherEagleman]

🚨 Riley Gaines is NOT holding back:

“At this point, I believe they’re just seeking a public humiliation ritual for the girls… It’s probably one of the most abusive things you can do to a young woman.”

A biological male “swept” three jumping events at a California track meet, then the top female finishers were FORCED to share first-place medals and the highest podium step with him.

This isn’t “inclusion.”

This is psychological abuse and the systematic erasure of women’s sports.

[Maeve Halligan @MaeveHalligan]

"No, I don't subscribe to this 'kindness' - I'll tell the truth instead."

I spoke at the Cambridge Union last night about LGBs, children's safety and women's rights. Full video here:

[Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙‍♀️🦉🐈‍⬛ 🦖 @babybeginner]

Ok, so @xx_xyathletics just did it again!!! How do they keep making videos that make me cry? I had goosebumps at the end. That last line just gut punched me.

I’m not giving it away. You have to watch it to see it.

😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

[Denys Shtilierman @DenShtilierman]

The Telegraph published an article titled “Putin is down. This is the time to start kicking him.” It’s a very powerful piece that deserves a detailed analysis. The author is Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, former commander of the 1st Royal Tank Regiment and commander of the UK’s Joint Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Regiment. This is a rare instance where a high-ranking Western military officer is directly telling the West: stop making concessions to Putin; it’s time to finish him off.

“For the first time in two decades, Russia could not muster a single tank in what is traditionally the Kremlin’s grand annual exhibition of military might – an event Putin himself describes as a warning to Russia’s enemies. What the world witnessed was not power, but weakness: a diminished parade, hollow symbolism, and a regime increasingly fearful of its own vulnerability.”

“With Ukrainian drones and missiles now capable of striking deep inside Russia, Putin clearly dared not risk displaying valuable military hardware at a known time and location. Instead, the regime relied heavily on massed marching formations, including North Korean troops, to create the illusion of scale and strength.”

A British colonel bluntly states what we have seen ourselves: Putin fears Ukrainian drones so much that he canceled the display of equipment at his own celebration.

“Even Putin’s speech, usually a lengthy endurance test in which the dictator indulges in imperial nostalgia and Soviet-era rhetoric, was remarkably brief and muted. Gone was the swagger of a leader convinced of inevitable victory. In its place stood a man attempting to justify an increasingly costly and strategically catastrophic war. Putin insisted Russia was fighting a “just” war and described Ukraine as an “aggressive force” being armed by NATO.”

From “Kyiv in three days” to a “just war” against NATO. This is not the rhetoric of a victor.

Separately, the author mentions Russia’s hybrid war against the West:

“It is Russia, not the West, that has spent years conducting a sustained hybrid war against Europe and particularly the United Kingdom. The murder of Alexander Litvinenko and the attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal in Salisbury remain chilling reminders of the Kremlin’s willingness to conduct state-sponsored attacks on British soil, alongside relentless cyber warfare, sabotage and espionage across Europe.”

This is an important point for Western readers — a reminder that Russia was waging war against them even before 2022. And it continues to do so everywhere to this day. Cut cables, blown-up warehouses, planes in NATO airspace — this is war, just without missiles for now.

“Today, the battlefield reality is moving increasingly in Ukraine’s favour. Ukrainian forces continue to make incremental but meaningful advances while Russia suffers appalling losses in both manpower and equipment.”

“At the same time, Ukraine has demonstrated an increasingly sophisticated ability to strike strategically important targets deep inside Russia, even without large-scale American military support. Critical infrastructure attacks are now placing growing pressure on the Russian economy and exposing the Kremlin’s inability to fully defend its own territory.”

This is a very valuable insight regarding the current state of the war. The British colonel openly acknowledges what we are achieving on our own. Without American aid, under international pressure, and under constant attack — Ukraine is still ramping up the pressure on Russia.

Separately, the author mentions the internal situation in Russia:

“All of this comes amid growing signs of unease inside Russia itself. Public criticism of the war, once almost unthinkable, is becoming more visible as ordinary Russians begin to question the price of Putin’s disastrous gamble in Ukraine. This criticism would be even more evident were it not for a recent crackdown on internet services in Russia and the silencing of many dissenting voices.”

But the most important point in the article is made in the conclusion, to which I can only give a standing ovation:

“What Saturday demonstrated beyond doubt is that Putin is wounded politically, militarily and psychologically. History teaches us that when a dangerous predator is weakened, that is precisely the moment to apply maximum pressure – not to offer concessions for the sake of expediency. The most effective time to kick a man is when he’s down.”

“The West must ensure that Volodymyr Zelensky is empowered to secure a just peace for the Ukrainian people, rather than allowing Putin an escape route simply to bring the fighting to a premature close.”

This is precisely the logic we have been repeating for four years in a row. Concessions to the aggressor do not end the war — they merely postpone it. Poland waited 45 years to gain its freedom after Yalta. The Chechen Republic of Ichkeria signed the Khasavyurt Accords — and then more than 20 percent of its population was massacred. Ukraine has no right to let such a fate befall its people.

[Chief of the Defence Staff @UKCDS_MOD]

Extraordinary work from @16AirAssltBCT. A joint operation with @RoyalAirForce to deliver vital medical relief to the most remote inhabited British Overseas Territory.

Congratulations to all involved on a job well done.

[Aaron Rupar @atrupar]

standing ovation after King Charles sings the praises of NATO and says "that same unyielding resolve is needed for the defense of Ukraine"

[Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський @ZelenskyyUa]

For some reason, some people in the world have begun to take Putin’s words at face value – that if Ukraine were not present in Donbas, the war would end. Despite all the words previously said by Russia, the aggression has only intensified, and we simply cannot trust the Russian side.

We can try to negotiate an end to the war with strong mediators, but the conditions must be such that we do not trust or rely just on Russia’s words. We must understand that Ukraine’s withdrawal from Donbas will not guarantee that Putin will not continue the war. I would even say the opposite. What is certain is that he will continue. What is not certain is whether he will continue immediately.

He needs time to prepare, to staff brigades, bring in additional divisions, and so on. That takes time. This is what I believe: he needs this time. But who can guarantee that afterward he will not resume the occupation?

Moreover, why should we leave our own land that we control? He has not succeeded on the battlefield. He has no strength. He wants us to believe him and simply withdraw from our well-fortified territories. These fortifications limit the capabilities of Russian forces. Putin understands that if we withdraw, he will preserve between 300,000 and a million of his soldiers, depending on the intensity and duration of offensive actions in Donbas. Why, then, should we suddenly trust him and hand him such gifts?

From an interview with Rai Italia (5/5).

[KCL Stop The PATHWAYS Trial @KCLStopPATHWAYS]

Medical research must meet the highest ethical and academic standards, especially when it comes to children.

We are calling on @KingsCollegeLon to end its involvement in the PATHWAYS puberty blockers trial.

Add your name to the open letter:
https://t.co/o3k4IDZRQp

[Olena Rohoza @OlenaRohoza]

🇮🇹 The speech that all of Italy heard. And that the world must hear.
In a country that will host the Olympic Games, Italian Senator and Vice President of the Human Rights Commission Filippo Sensi took the floor and said what should have been said out loud long ago.
He called it a disgrace that the International Olympic Committee disqualified Ukrainian skeleton athlete Vladyslav Heraskevych.
Not for doping.
Not for violating fair play.
But for… memory.
For a helmet bearing the faces of Ukrainian athletes — his friends, colleagues, champions — killed by Russia.
The IOC stated that the helmet “did not comply with regulations.”
And then Sensi asked a question that brought silence to the chamber:
Does aggressive war comply with regulations?
Is there a separate technical protocol for it?
The correct angle of a missile strike?
The permissible size of a crater?
An athlete prepares for the Olympics for years.
A Ukrainian athlete trains between air raid sirens, in shelters, under news of the dead.
He overcomes fear, exhaustion, and loss.
And he steps to the start line not only for a medal — but for the right to exist.
And he is suspended… for remembering.
Because memory is the most dangerous substance. It is hard to add to a prohibited list. But apparently, someone would very much like to.
The senator named names. Just a few among more than 650 Ukrainian athletes killed by Russia:
▪️ Yevhenii Malyshev, 19, biathlete — killed in Kharkiv.
▪️ Mariia Lebid, 15 — missile strike in Dnipro.
▪️ Dmytro Sharpar, 25, figure skater — killed in Bakhmut.
▪️ Volodymyr Androsiuk, 22, track and field athlete — also Bakhmut.
▪️ Daria Kurdel, 20 — missile strike in Kharkiv.
▪️ Alina Perehutova, 14 — standing in line for water with her mother in Mariupol.
▪️ Maksym Halinichev, 22, boxer — killed defending Luhansk region.
▪️ Viktoriia Ivashko, 9, judoka — missile strike in Kyiv.
▪️ Kateryna Diachenko, 11, gymnast — airstrike on Mariupol.
▪️ Karina Bakur, 17, world kickboxing champion — shielded her father with her body.
These were the faces Heraskevych wanted to carry with him to the start line.
So that they would “compete” alongside him.
So that their dream would not die with them.
And for that, he was punished.
Because it turns out that the faces of murdered athletes violate regulations.
But their absence on the track does not.
In his speech, Sensi said the most important thing:
The Olympic Committee did not lose an athlete.
It lost its most valuable medal — its conscience.
Sport without memory is just a show.
Sport without humanity is just decoration.
Sport that fears truth is not about peace.
The Olympic movement was born from the ideals of honor, dignity, and unity.
Yet today Ukrainian athletes must prove not only their strength — but their right to remember their fallen.
And if memory becomes a violation of regulations — then the problem is not the helmet.
The world must hear this.
Because silence is also a position.
And indifference is also a choice.
Memory cannot be disqualified.
And conscience cannot be added to a prohibited list.
🇺🇦 We remember every one of them.
And we will not allow their names to be erased.

[Jürgen Nauditt 🇩🇪🇺🇦 @jurgen_nauditt]

Instead of sending Ukraine only $100 million in long-range missiles to destroy the Iskander-M factory, the West is wasting several billions of dollars to repair infrastructure destroyed by Iskanders and billions of dollars in air defense missiles to shoot them down.

[Bricktop_NAFO @Bricktop_NAFO]

Ukraines Motherland Statue lit up with the United Kingdom’s Union Jack and Ukraines flag the ‘Derzhavnyi prapor Ukrayiny’ on the 1 year anniversary of the UK and Ukraines 100 Year Partnership.

🇬🇧❤️🇺🇦

[Janet Murray @jan_murray]

The Minister for Women and Equalities, Bridget Phillipson is quoted in the Telegraph as saying trans people must not be used as a “political punchbag”.

Which confirms what many women already knew: despite the job title, her priority is not women.

If it was, she’d acknowledge that it’s women - not trans people - who’ve been the ‘political punchbag’ of the past decade. And that women have been:

- Pressured to deny biological reality - or risk jobs, livelihoods and professional standing

- Forced to share single-sex spaces with men - in changing rooms, prisons, rape-crisis centres, hospital wards and workplaces

- Written out of their own language and replaced with terms like “pregnant people” and “cervix-havers” - then told they’re bigoted for objecting

- Dragged through tribunals, and court cases - just to keep rights that already existed

- Pushed aside while men take women’s places - medals, records, prizes, awards and commercial contracts

- Threatened and abused for speaking up

This is what it looks like to be used as a political punchbag. Being told to stay out of women’s spaces if you’re a man is not - that’s just basic safeguarding practice.

And the final betrayal? Philippson has refused to sign off the updated guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission - meant simply to give clarity on single-sex spaces after the Supreme Court ruling.

After years of women carrying the consequences, our women’s minister has chosen not to act on our behalf. And prioritise men’s feelings over women’s safety, privacy and dignity.

Which tells us exactly who is expected to keep taking the blows.

[Kateryna Lisunova @KaterynaLis]

“Let's start with the most important. What does Ukraine want? Peace? Yes. At any cost? No. We want the war to end, - but not Ukraine. Are we tired? Very much so. Does this mean we're ready to surrender? Anyone who thinks that is deeply mistaken. They clearly still don't understand who Ukrainians are after all these years. A people enduring 1,407 days of full-scale war. Just consider those numbers. That's longer than Nazi occupation of many cities in World War II. 1,407 days of undefeated Ukraine, spending nights in shelters, fighting daily, often without electricity or sleep, many days at the frontlines. But always without panic, chaos, or division - united for peace. Do we want the war to end? Absolutely. Why hasn't this happened yet? The answer lies with our neighbor. Can Russia end the war? Yes. Do they want to? No.” - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during his New Year’s address, Wed, Dec 31, 2025

[Bricktop_NAFO @Bricktop_NAFO]

Russia claimed that Ukraine attacked the resident of Putin and have threatened a retaliation strike against Ukraine.

An attack of Putins residence would be perfectly acceptable given that every single day and night Putin attacks Ukrainian civilians with long range Strike Drones, has previously sent assassination teams to try to kill Zelensky on multiple occasions.

They don’t like it because they are getting close. And Putin knows it, this is a sign of weakness for Putin.

This was Zelensky’s response.

"Another lie from the Russian Federation. It's clear that we had a meeting with Trump yesterday. And it's clear that for the 'Russians,' if we don't have a scandal with America and make progress, that's a failure. Because they don't want to end this war. They can only end it by putting pressure on them. Well, and I'm convinced they were looking for reasons. Frankly, I expected some rhetoric yesterday. So they're pushing ahead.”

“Now, with their statement that their residence was attacked, they're paving the way for attacks, probably on the capital and probably on government buildings. We already saw this in September, when there was a missile attack on the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers, as you recall. That's why we all need to be vigilant now, absolutely all of us. An attack on the capital could happen. Especially since this person—if you can even call them a person—said they would select suitable targets, so they're threatening.”

“I think today President Trump, his team, and the Europeans basically need to get involved and do some work with the people, from to whom they told just yesterday that they very much want to end the war.“

[Muslims Against Antisemitism and Christianphobia @MAAS_UK]

We fully endorse this statement

[(TCAG) Командир Бред Кроуфорд (CDR Brad Crawford) @evo1tactical]

I honestly do not know how to put this into words. Stories like this hit you in the chest.

One hundred and thirty days on position, under constant fire, exposed to the elements, making contact with the enemy, adapting, surviving. That is not just combat, that is endurance at the absolute edge of what a human being can withstand.

Denys “Bars” and Dmytro “K2” did everything a soldier can be asked to do and more. They fought, they held ground, they adapted when equipment was destroyed, they turned the enemy’s weapons against him, and they used captured radios to keep their battalion informed for months.

That level of composure under pressure does not come from luck. It comes from discipline, teamwork, and an unbreakable will to survive and protect the men beside you.

What stands out just as much is their humanity. Taking a prisoner, keeping him alive, sharing food and supplies for more than two months while still under threat is not weakness. It is professionalism and moral strength in the middle of chaos. That matters. It always has.

These two warriors embody what it means to defend your country. They absolutely deserve the highest recognition for their actions. Their families should be proud beyond words, and I hope their return home brings some peace after what they have endured.

God bless these two fine soldiers, and all those still holding the line.

Slava Ukraini. Heroyam Slava 🇺🇦

[Bricktop_NAFO @Bricktop_NAFO]

“On the eve of Christmas, the Russians once again showed who they truly are. Massive shelling, hundreds of Shaheds, ballistics, Kinzhals—everything was there.”

“This is how the godless strike. This is what those who have absolutely nothing in common with Christianity or anything human do.”

- President Zelensky

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

The Supreme Court spoke plainly. Sex in law means biological sex. Single-sex spaces exist to protect privacy, dignity, and safety. That ruling was unanimous, deliberate, and designed to end a decade of institutional confusion. It was not ambiguous. It did not invite reinterpretation. It settled the matter. And yet, months on, women are still waiting for the law to be applied. Not because Parliament has overturned it. Not because the judges were unclear. But because a Cabinet minister – Bridget Phillipson, the Secretary of State for Women and Equalities – has decided she does not like the outcome.

The task of turning judgments into practice falls to the state. That is why the Equality and Human Rights Commission drafted guidance spelling out what the ruling requires of hospitals, councils, gyms, schools and businesses. It did exactly what it exists to do: interpret the law as declared by the court and urge ministers to act at speed. Instead, the guidance has been sat on, stalled, and quietly attacked from within government.

While women wait, the minister responsible has gone further. In court filings, she has described the guidance as "trans-exclusive," as though enforcing sex-based law were an act of discrimination rather than compliance. She has offered bad-faith hypotheticals about infant boys and pregnant women in queues to muddy a judgment that was written precisely to prevent such games. She has demanded extra process where none is required. And she has aligned herself with a legal challenge brought by the Good Law Project, whose purpose is not to clarify the ruling, but to blunt it.

The effect is not academic. Because the guidance is blocked, institutions do nothing. Hospitals continue to tell women to accept males in wards and changing rooms. Employers continue to discipline women who object. Public bodies continue to pretend the law is unsettled when it is not. The chaos the court sought to end is being prolonged by design. This is how rights are hollowed out in practice while being praised in principle.

The contradiction at the heart of government is now stark. Keir Starmer told Parliament the ruling must be implemented "in full and at all levels." Yet his own minister is arguing, in court, for a "case-by-case" approach that would reintroduce the very incoherence the judges rejected. If a women's toilet must admit a male based on appearance or attitude, it ceases to be a women's space. There is no middle ground. There never was. The law does not bend because a minister finds it awkward.

What we are watching is not caution. It is sabotage by procedure. No vote. No Bill. No open argument in Parliament. Just delay, reframing, and obstruction until the ruling is drained of force. That is not how a democracy treats its highest court. It is how an executive evades it.

The irony is bitter. For years, women were told to be patient while clarity was sought. The court has now provided that clarity. And still they are told to wait – not for the law to be written, but for a minister to accept it. This is not about complexity. It is about will.

A government that accepts a judgment only in words, while resisting it in action, is not governing under the rule of law. It is testing how long it can get away with ignoring it. And the price of that test is being paid by women who were promised protection and are instead given process.

The court has done its job. The law is settled. What remains is a simple question of integrity. Will ministers carry out the law as it stands, or continue to stall until it means nothing at all?

"While women wait, the minister responsible has gone further. In court filings, she has described the guidance as "trans-exclusive," as though enforcing sex-based law were an act of discrimination rather than compliance."