We stand for truth without fear or favour. We’ll challenge hypocrisy, question the powerful and demand accountability regardless of politics, wealth or status.
Got something that needs exposing? Tag @TruthToPowerUK and bring the receipts. We’ll take it from there.
#TruthToPower
@FlyingPhotog1@a_guidarelli@Google So your argument is basically: corporate political interference is bad when the left does it, but fine when the right does it? That’s not consistency, it’s tribalism.
@HonestXray@a_guidarelli@Google “Changing a child’s gender” is a deliberately loaded way of describing something far more nuanced. Comparing that to renaming a lake isn’t an argument it’s a meme designed to provoke.
If you have a substantive point to make, make it.
@Chickenooble@a_guidarelli@Google Being based in the UK doesn’t make us immune from calling out corporate cowardice. If anything, it gives us a frontrow seat to what happens when institutions decide doing the politically convenient thing is easier than doing the right thing.
Quite the leap from “65bn barrels of Venezuelan reserves” to “$50 oil, $2 gas, plummeting inflation, parabolic stocks and an AI bubble that can’t pop.” 😂
The deal may be significant, but reserves ≠ immediate supply. Venezuela's production infrastructure needs massive investment, and bringing that oil to market will take years.
The oil deal is a fact. Everything after that is your crystal ball. 🔮
As for the “red wave” let's maybe wait for the voters before declaring victory. 🇺🇸
🚨 BREAKING:
US President Donald Trump bought $500,000 worth of Boeing stock on June 18, 2026.
That same day, the US Navy awarded Boeing an $880 million contract.
Are we having fun, America?
The facts matter here. He has been suspended pending a disciplinary investigation that does not mean he has been “punished for calling out” plagiarism.
The investigation concerns alleged discrimination arising from his conduct/statements. And the plagiarism allegations against Arday were not themselves established as proven misconduct.
You can argue the outcome is wrong, but presenting a precautionary suspension during an investigation as proof of punishment for exposing wrongdoing is simply misleading.
There’s a real story here, but you’ve buried it under claims the evidence doesn’t support.
Yes, around 31 tonnes of Venezuelan gold are held at the Bank of England. No, that is not “all of Venezuela’s gold reserves”, and no, Britain has not simply handed it over to the United States.
If the facts are strong enough, why exaggerate them?
Russia invaded Ukraine. Britain didn’t invade Russia.
Supplying Ukraine with the means to defend itself does not magically turn Russian aggression into British aggression.
Threatening “consequences” is easy. The harder fact for Moscow is that intimidating NATO countries hasn’t stopped support for Ukraine yet.
No. The US is not simply “confiscating Venezuela’s gold.”
The 31 tonnes remain at the Bank of England pending legal resolution.
Venezuela’s government and opposition have agreed to seek their release for reconstruction, with a proposal for the proceeds to pass through US Treasury accounts and be independently audited.
And 31 tonnes aren’t even “all Venezuela’s gold reserves.”
“We can’t allow vicious lies to take hold” yet you’re presenting allegations as settled fact.
Plagiarism was under investigation. “Fraud” is a far more serious claim, so where is the concluded finding that establishes it?
Scrutinise Arday all you like. But allegations don’t become verdicts simply because they fit your narrative.
And declaring racism played “nothing” whatsoever in how he was treated is another sweeping assertion you haven’t proved.
If accuracy matters, Tom, it has to matter even when the facts are inconvenient.
No, I’m suggesting you understand the difference between allegation, evidence and established fact.
Invoking Jimmy Savile doesn’t magically prove your claim about Arday.
There were serious questions and inconsistencies. There were also investigations still unfinished. “He lied for financial gain” is your conclusion, not a finding you’ve demonstrated.
Comparing two completely different cases isn’t evidence. It’s a false equivalence dressed up as an argument.
Calling someone a “coward” while hiding behind abuse rather than an argument isn’t the show of courage you think it is, Jack.
Challenge the views, challenge the facts but when your contribution is just “fucking cowardly cunts”, you’ve rather proved why anonymous accounts sometimes prefer to discuss ideas instead of personalities.