Balderdash

Links - 4th August 2026 (2 - DSA)

2026-08-04T17:05:00.000+08:00

NizNellie3 on X - "🚨 “The Communists are inside the gates!” - Mike Johnson. Rebecca Cunningham is the President of the University of Minnesota. Her yearly salary is $1.095 MILLION with perks that would make you throw up. Her campus was given $628 MILLION in federal funding last year. They’re about to get another $628-$630 MILLION for 2026-2027. You know why? Because Mike Johnson’s GOP gave the Dept of Education $79 BILLION in January for campuses like the University of Minnesota. Rebecca allows the Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA), the youth wing of the DSA, to operate on her campus. In January, the YDSA mobilized hundreds of students and led them in revolutionary chants. “IDF, KKK, I-C-E, they’re all the same! ICE OUT.” For weeks, the students organized a campaign of doxxing, targeting ICE agents where they stayed in hotels, and assaults against federal agents. They attempted to obstruct ICE as it carried out the arrests of illegals, like the child rapist Tim Walz unleashed on his citizens. This wasn’t a handful of university students. It was HUNDREDS of students who have been influenced by socialist, communist, and pro-terror ideologies. Professors joined the students as they screamed for all illegals to be protected from arrest. We’re funding this national security threat. The GOP is part of the problem, but they have the power to stop this. CUT. OFF. THE. FUNDING. @GOPoversight @SpeakerJohnson @EDSecMcMahon"

Flopping Aces on X - "Once “Death to the U.S.” comes out of these DSA fucks’ mouths like it’s just another fucking policy position, every last one of you still pretending they’re harmless little social democrats can go straight to hell. They’re not reformers. They’re not edgy progressives with strong opinions. They’re open goddamn traitors who live in this country, use every system it built, then sit there and say it shouldn’t be controversial to wish death on it. And the rest of the political class nods along like this is just spirited debate instead of the cancer it actually is. Their own national leadership already admitted the endgame is communism. Their members brag about taking America down from within and overthrowing the whole capitalist state. Now one of them says “Death to the U.S.” out loud and expects the rest of us to treat it like a spicy take instead of the fucking treason it is. Meanwhile these same clowns will lose their goddamn minds if you misgender someone or say men can’t get pregnant. But chanting death to the actual nation that protects their right to be this stupid? That’s just “pushing the conversation forward.” That’s just “punching up.” That’s just Tuesday in their little circle-jerk of cosplay revolutionaries who’d piss themselves if they ever actually got the revolution they keep begging for. You don’t get to hate the country this openly, cheer for its destruction, and still demand to be treated like a legitimate political movement. The DSA isn’t a party. It’s a support group for pathetic, entitled ingrates who want all the freedom and prosperity America provides while actively working to burn it down. The second “Death to the U.S.” stops being instant disqualification, the whole “democratic socialist” label is just marketing for people too cowardly to say what they really fucking mean. (article below)"
Left wingers claim "death to the USA" doesn't mean "death to the USA". But "hard work leads to success" means you're a white supremacist

Swann Marcus on X - "It's getting so ridiculous watching these useful idiots in the media act like the Democrats need to learn a thing or two from leftoids. The left won a handful of low-turnout primaries in districts the Dems will win by 70 no matter who runs. Meanwhile, out-of-touch, no-idea-how-to-win-an-election corporate Democrats are running away with North Carolina and turned Alaska into a toss-up. The sheer level of out-of-touch grandiose narcissistic self-delusion on the far-left is breathtaking. If you ran Graham Platner in Arizona in 2024, Kari Lake would currently be a member of the United States Senate. Platner probably would have lost to Herschel Walker by a convincing margin If the Dems ran left-wing candidates the DSA would support nationwide, in addition to the fact the policies they support would be psychotic, the GOP would have a veto proof Senate supermajority and 300 seats in the House. The only reason the Democrats are even competitive with the current map is that the Dems run way better (read: more moderate) candidates than the Republicans in red-leaning/purple states and the GOP regularly throws away races they have no business losing. The DSA basically wants the Dems to do the same thing, except America is too right-wing for a left-of-center party to get away with what the Republicans can."

Meme - ᗰᗩƳᖇᗩ @LePapillonBlu2: "Here’s a Christian, a Muslim, and a Jew working together for the people. 🥰" *Bernie Sanders, AOC, Zohran Mamdani*
Uri Kurlianchik @VerminusM: "*three Communists
*Working to destroy Western civilization"

Ten Years of Anti-Trump Sank the Moderate Democrats - "As a former “Hillarycrat” and centrist, we spent much of 2016 battling with the Democratic Socialists, insisting America was never going to allow socialism to overtake the country, and that it would result in an instant loss for the Democrats. But I also didn’t know back then that the centrists would spend the next ten years focused only on ridding the world of Donald Trump. What fools. They offered the people nothing except Trump hate. How did they think this would turn out? Now, they’ve opened the gate to the henhouse and ushered in not just Democratic Socialism but Radical Islam. And therein lies the real threat because, at the moment, the Right is going through its own version of the kind of fracture the Democrats experienced in 2016, and thus, is doing their part to speed things along. The Democrats don’t have a Socialist problem. They have an Islam problem, as does the Right. This is what brings both movements together and drives Zohran Mamdani, even over his socialist dreams. This is the Trojan horse... why, one might ask, would Hamas have attacked Israel so violently on October 7th, knowing what Israel would do in response? That’s both the question and the answer. They knew what Israel would do. They also knew that those hearts and minds in America, and wherever the Woke ideology traveled, would be on their side. It was smart. The worse the war got, the more propaganda they had to keep those hearts and minds headed in their direction, to turn the world against Israel with the main goal of decoupling Little Satan from Big Satan. The long game began with the Arab Spring. Social media was the way to spread the message without terrorism. Barack Obama’s administration introduced the concept of “Islamophobia,” which designated any Muslim person a protected group, among the “marginalized,” which explains much of Zohran Mamdani’s appeal to rich, spoiled college kids. Mamdani sold socialism, but he has seemed to be much more invested in fighting against Israel and Netanyahu than managing the business of New Yorkers. I guess we shouldn’t be that surprised things turned out the way they did."

Crazy Begets Crazy in New York City - "Darializa Avila Chevalier. She is a 32-year-old doctoral student in sociology. I assume she’s going to be ABD for a while (that’s “all but dissertation” for those of you who may not have known as many students-for-life as I have). Avila Chevalier is the kind of caricature-made-flesh that Fox News producers, GOP consultants, and right-wing Leninists dream about. I really don’t mean that as an insult to the producers, consultants, and Leninists, because they have every right to crow. She’s not a strawman. You can quote her directly without fear of being accurately accused of exaggeration. The things she’s said or endorsed on social media would fit perfectly in a Trump rally speech (and spare me the “retweets don’t equal endorsement” retort)... Of course, she hates Israel with blinding passion (she thinks Bernie Sanders is too Zionist), believing it has no right to exist. When Hamas launched its pogrom of rape and murder, she was one of those people who immediately attended that pro-Hamas rally the next day—while the raping and murdering had not yet abated. But she also thinks America is a “f—ing disgrace.” She may be a wonderful friend and colleague, a terrific cook, and if she has dogs or cats, they may love her dearly. But if we can judge politicians by their publicly stated views—and if we can’t, what are we doing here?—I think she’s a horrible person."

Thread by @ArmandDoma on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "Just utterly depressing that the Democratic party is about to send someone to Congress who opposes interracial marriage for "woke" reasons, sided with Russia's invasion of Putin, and cannot answer a basic question about prison abolition despite being asked four times in a row. Avila Chevalier genuinely crosses the line from "policy positions I disagree with" to "has opinions that make her a genuinely repugnant human being" and she's about to become a Congresswoman. fucking insane. like if your north star is minimizing the suffering of rapists and murderers there is something fundamentally wrong with you"

Flopping Aces on X - "The Democratic establishment deserves a slow clap here. Really. Bravo. They spent years building the perfect little political terrarium: NGOs, activist salaries, university grievance factories, donor cash, media protection, blue-city patronage, “equity” rackets, and taxpayer-funded do-gooder laundromats all humming along under the sacred banner of “Our Democracy.” Then they looked at the radicals crawling around inside and said, “Surely these people will remain manageable.” Absolutely brilliant, guys. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries now look like substitute teachers trying to take attendance during a prison riot. The donors are sweating through their custom suits. The consultants are pretending this is just a “messaging challenge.” The media is polishing the same old turd and calling it “youth energy.” No, champ. This is not youth energy. This is the bill. You told them America was evil. You told them capitalism was theft. You told them police were the enemy. You told them borders were immoral. You told them every institution had to be “decolonized,” “reimagined,” or burned down and rebuilt by people with sociology degrees and untreated rage. Now they believe you. And worse, they want promotions. That is the humiliation. The party bosses thought they were renting radicals by the hour. Turns out the radicals thought they were being trained to run the place. Democrats built the hive, fed the hive, defended the hive, and called anyone who noticed a conspiracy theorist. Now the hive has the keys. Enjoy the buzzing."

NizNellie3 on X - "🚨 The reaction by conservatives thinking “Flyover country will reject the Mamdani ideology” are grossly underestimating what’s happening. “Flyover country” are all soft targets for hijackings of students. And you, the American taxpayer, are funding it. Take a good look at these kids in Idaho. Minors are being recruited by the PSL, the ‘Party for Socialism and Liberation.’ One of their leaders, “they/them” led hundreds of underage students away from their schools to protest ICE in February. This is child recruitment for a Maoist-like revolution in a deep red state. Adults who are Marxists had access to the students’ phones, emails, class schedules, and their social media. Not a word or consequence from the Department of Education. This is how elections are won and lost. Where in the hell is the opposition party to this? @EDSecMcMahon"

The Undercurrent on X - "This is the DSA co-chair. Let me summarize what he says in this video: We’re using the Democratic Party as a ballot-access vehicle, not because we share its goals. We build our own organization, get elected under the Democratic label, caucus with Democrats when it’s useful, and push our own agenda from the inside. We see the Democratic establishment as an obstacle, not a home."
Fly Sistah 🪷 on X - "DSA membership is 85% white, the average age is 33, over 80% of its members have college degrees, & 35% have postgraduate degrees. A bunch of white would be middle managers priced out of the housing market willing to excuse racism & antisemitism for affordability."

POLITICO on X - "Moderate Democrats fear they’re on the verge of losing the party’s ideological civil war to progressives."
Swag Jockey Fern on X - "The truth is that they lost the civil war 10 years ago, and are only now beginning to realize it. Since Trump first descended that golden escalator in 2015, the Dem establishment has thrown EVERYTHING in their arsenal at him. Calling him Hitler 2.0, saying he wants to put minorities in concentration camps, calling him a threat to democracy etc. And now they’re surprised when over a decade of constant rhetoric like that has radicalized an entire generation and turned a significant chunk of their voters into rage-filled ideological zealots? Not only the Dem establishment fail to destroy Trump, but by being so unhinged in their attacks they sewed the seeds for their own destruction. In hindsight it was inevitable that something like this would happen, it was just a matter of time. And now those chickens are finally coming home to roost."

Timothy Gill - "There is a reason history matters. Lenin didn’t take over Russia overnight. He first took over his party. He energized young activists. He attacked moderates in his own movement as sellouts. He demanded ideological purity. He promised free everything, demonized business, divided society into oppressors and oppressed, and insisted the existing system was beyond reform, it had to be fundamentally transformed. Sound familiar? Today, Zohran Kwame Mamdani and the DSA aren’t trying to win over the Democratic Party, they’re trying to replace it. Primary by primary, incumbent by incumbent, they’re pulling the party further toward government control, wealth redistribution, and anti-capitalist policies. History doesn’t repeat itself exactly, but it often rhymes. Every New Yorker who believes in free enterprise, public safety, fiscal responsibility, and the American Dream should be paying attention. Political movements don’t transform institutions overnight. They do it one election at a time."

Roman Sheremeta 🇺🇸🇺🇦 on X - "The Democrats now have their own MAGA. And this is scary. I still cannot believe this insanity. Mamdani-backed socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier just won the Democratic primary in New York’s 13th Congressional District and is now well positioned to win the seat in November. I predicted that the backlash to Trump would produce a wave of ultra-left radicals who are completely detached from reality. And here we are. Her record is genuinely radical. She helped organize protests with signs calling for “the total eradication of Western civilization” and tweeted “Marg Bar Amrika” (“Death to America”). She has called for abolishing the police altogether - “No more police at all, ever” - and for abolishing prisons. In a recent interview, she declined to walk back that position when asked point-blank whether she would jail a murderer. In 2022, she described U.S. support for Ukraine as America “bullying Russia.” During the pandemic, she promoted calls to nationalize utilities, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies, and to seize property from landlords. This is extreme. The closest comparison on the right is Marjorie Taylor Greene. If you’ve been alarmed by MTG, I think Darializa Avila Chevalier is even worse - perhaps much worse. And she isn’t a fluke. She is one of three Mamdani-backed candidates who won their primaries this week. Across the country, candidates like this continue to win in deep-blue cities. And this is scary."

CNN on X - "Darializa Avila Chevalier, the Democratic congressional nominee endorsed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who ousted longtime Rep. Adriano Espaillat in Tuesday's primary, maintained a since-deleted Twitter account with repeated sympathetic references to communism, Marxist ideology and Soviet figures, including Vladimir Lenin."
Of course, only ignorant racist MAGATs call her a communist

Thread by @JCPolancoNYC on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "One of the weirdest features of today's politics is how many wealthy, privileged people in DSA/Justice Dems spend their time cosplaying as having struggles. Folks who grew up with every advantage are now lecturing us on life in the trenches. Can't grow up poor through osmosis. It's interesting to see people with trust funds and Hollywood legend moms lecturing us on how to build economic development, keep our streets safe, and educate our children, when we were left here to start from nothing. This Mr. Drummond complex is something else."
A left winger was mocking poor people for defending rich people (i.e. opposing ruinous left wing policies) and claiming that rich people never defended poor people

Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ on X - "There is no right-wing equivalent to the Justice Dems or the DSA. The Right is not good at organization, and relies instead on mobilizing its voters through individual personalities and media campaigns. The problem is that, in the long term, a Party will always defeat a Prince."

Joseph Hernandez on X - "The left-wing @DemSocialists aren’t just trying to elect one candidate. They are building a movement to fundamentally reshape New York and, ultimately, America. You may ask: who’s funding many of these DSA candidates and causes? I did some digging. Two of the largest outside groups supporting @ZohranKMamdani and other DSA-aligned candidates are New Yorkers for Lower Costs and OneNYC. Their donors are fascinating.
- Elizabeth Simons ($250,000) is a California billionaire heiress and philanthropist. She is the daughter of the late James Simons, founder of Renaissance Technologies, one of the most successful hedge funds in history. She lives in California and co-founded the Heising-Simons Foundation.
- Idris Mokhtarzada ($90,000) is a Maryland-based technology entrepreneur and investor. The son of Afghan immigrants, he co-founded http://Webs.com and Rocket Money (formerly Truebill), creating companies worth hundreds of millions of dollars. He has also been active in Muslim philanthropic organizations.
- Sara Rahnama ($75,000) is a professor and Director of Middle East and North Africa Studies at Morgan State University in Baltimore. Her academic work focuses heavily on the Middle East and Gaza.
- Members of the Singham family contributed thousands. Neville Roy Singham, born in Chicago to a Sri Lankan academic family, sold ThoughtWorks for approximately $785 million and now resides in Shanghai, China. He has funded numerous left-wing organizations and has faced scrutiny over alleged ties to pro-China influence networks, allegations he denies.
- Yasser Salem, founder of OneNYC, is a Harvard Business School graduate and former McKinsey consultant. He later worked with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, the Kingdom’s sovereign wealth fund, before founding Hira Ventures and becoming active in New York politics.
- The Unity & Justice Fund contributed $100,000 to New Yorkers for Lower Costs. The Washington-based super PAC states that its mission is to support candidates committed to “just domestic and foreign policies” and to mobilize voters in underserved communities. Public records show that it shares personnel and has been publicly associated by critics with individuals connected to CAIR Action, though the organizations maintain they are legally separate.
So ask yourself: Why are billionaire heirs, wealthy technology investors, academics, international business figures, and political organizations from outside New York investing millions to expand democratic socialism in New York? Why are they so determined to change the principles and institutions that made America the most prosperous and powerful nation in history? I’ll leave that to your imagination."
Money in politics is only bad when it hurts the left wing agenda

Meme - Swann Marcus @SwannMarcus89: "You know why. They cherry-pick their minority members to run for office because they want to pretend their ideology isn't a bunch of downwardly mobile white losers who failed at life despite having attorneys for parents"
daniela @danieta_127: "Why is it that DSA membership is almost entirely white, but almost all candidates that DSA runs are people of color?"

Hon. Vickie Paladino on X - "The DSA is standing up paramilitary wing within the party called the 'Red Rabbits', whose purpose is to train militants in direct action, chaos operations, and violence in service of their revolution. This is a 'popular front' insurgent organizational strategy used by countless leftist/revolutionary parties in history Just as the IRA had Sinn Fein, and the PLO had the Palestinian Liberation Army, and the Bolsheviks had the Red Guard, the DSA will now have the Red Rabbits to stoke violence, intimidate opponents -- and when necessary, engage in armed revolution. You don't understand how serious this actually is. This isn't just a bunch of dumb kids playing dress up. These people are not joking around. They have a ton of money, they're fanatically dedicated, and they are very well organized. They will not think twice about killing for their cause. Sure, on paper they'll make it sound as innocuous as necessary to preserve plausible deniability and not jeopardize their precious tax status and fundraising channels. But make no mistake, this group serves one purpose -- to become a revolutionary terrorist army on behalf of the DSA political agenda. This cannot be taken lightly. The DSA should now be treated as an enemy in the military sense, not just a political party. The writing is on the wall here, and we are idiots if we ignore it. And why isn't Zohran, AOC, Bernie, etc., being asked why their party is organizing a paramilitary wing? Shouldn't the highest-profile DSA members in the country have to answer some questions here? At some point we're going to have to stop pretending this is all business as usual."

Andrew Solender on X - "Justice Democrats filing to spend another $275,000 on TV and digital ads supporting Darializa Avila Chevalier, bringing their total spend in #NY13 to over $1.1 million. They're also spending another $175,000 on ads for Claire Valdez in #NY07, their first major buy in that seat."
Tali Goldsheft on X - "Shocker. These ‘anti-big money’ DSA candidates blast dark money… while riding Justice Democrats super PAC cash to attack their opponents. Darializa Avila Chevalier & Claire Valdez: all talk, same grift."

Mamdani-backed House candidate's deleted posts called for abolishing police, borders - "In the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, Avila Chevalier reposted a message calling for the nationalization of utilities, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies; suspending rent and mortgage payments; dissolving private health insurance companies; and “seiz[ing] all properties from landlords.” “Seize the means of production,” she wrote in a 2019 post. During the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, Avila Chevalier responded to a user asking what a better slogan would be than “defund the police,” by posting, “F-ck you. We’re gonna defund and abolish. You don’t get to water down our movements.” In another post two days later, Avila Chevalier rejected an argument that abolishing police meant only ending policing “as we know it.” “No. It means ending policing full stop. Period. No more police at all ever,” she replied, adding several clap emojis between words. Avila Chevalier, a Muslim convert, reposted a message from 2021 declaring that “ALL PIGS EVERYWHERE ARE HARAM,” an Arabic term used in Islam to describe something that is forbidden. She also accused socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of promoting “liberal Zionism,” and called out fellow democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for voting “present” on Israeli military funding, the New York Post reported. Avila Chevalier, in a series of messages, called Joe Biden a “rapist” and “war criminal” during the 2020 presidential election, referred to the U.S. as a “f**king disgrace,” talked about wiping her dirty hands on the American flag, and described interracial relationships involving white females as “fetishizing ugly colonizer women.” “My opponent wants to live in the past. He is re-litigating social media posts from half a decade ago, and continuing to champion an outdated politics that fails to serve our people,” Avila Chevalier told CNN. “I have grown considerably since in the years since these tweets, and I am focused on our community and our community’s future.”"
We're still told that left wingers don't hate their countries and don't hate white people
If you call her a communist, left wingers will call you ignorant, though she literally called to seize the means of production
Of course, talking about tweets she actually made 6 years ago is living in the past, but what Nigel Farage allegedly said in the 1970s is clear proof that he is unfit to be a politician

Jon Levine on X - "DSA is essentially a wealthy, white, highly educated movement which very carefully selects candidates from their 0.00001% members of color to try and sell the ideas to black and brown people who are historically extremely averse to socialism
Watching POC socialists feels like a deleted scene from Get Out"

Playbooks, plagiarism and a pig’s head: new claims surrounding a star Cambridge professor

2026-08-04T13:37:00.000+08:00

Playbooks, plagiarism and a pig’s head: new claims surrounding a star Cambridge professor | University of Cambridge | The Guardian

"When the superstar academic Jason Arday took to the stage at the British Sociological Association’s 75th anniversary conference earlier this year, he delivered a talk called Wanted Dead or Alive: the Playbook.

The youngest black professor in Cambridge University’s history told an audience of his peers that the playbook in question had helped bring down some of the biggest names in US academia. Conservative “activists” were trawling through the work of black academics, looking for anything to use against them: inconsistencies, citation errors, passages in their work that were similar to existing papers...

Some of the audience thought it was strange. Keynotes are usually places where academics talk about their work and discuss breakthroughs, yet here was Arday talking about racism and harassment. Some felt he must have been saying this for a reason.

Then last week a row erupted concerning Arday’s academic work. The Telegraph reported that analysis had found more than 100 passages in his PhD were similar to another thesis by Paula Zwozdiak-Myers, a student at Brunel University in London, published six years earlier.

The report followed a Substack post by Nathan Cofnas, an academic who was previously embroiled in a free speech row at Cambridge after he suggested in a blogpost that, in a meritocracy, there would be “close to zero” black professors at Harvard. The British politician and activist Simon Woolley called the post “abhorrent racism, masquerading as pseudo-intellect”.

Cofnas, a self-defined “race realist”, was sacked by Cambridge’s Emmanuel College in 2024 and underwent a disciplinary investigation into the blogpost about black academics. The investigation concluded that Cofnas was not guilty of “discrimination or harassment”, and that his views, “while seen by many as offensive, did not breach the law and did not contravene university regulations designed to uphold free speech”. He now works at Ghent University, in Belgium.

Cofnas claimed he had put Arday’s PhD through plagiarism detection software, which found that “many passages are lifted with minimal editing, sometimes retaining copy-editing mistakes from the original source”.

Another critic of Arday was Dr David Harris, professor emeritus at Plymouth Marjon University, in Devon, who had previously written to Cambridge with claims about Arday’s work.

Harris had been stripped of his professor emeritus title after he wrote a post about critical race theory that was deemed “controversial” by colleagues, but it was reinstated in 2026. After Harris’s earlier queries about Arday’s work, two corrections were made to papers released in 2018 and another in 2020.

The fact that the two most vocal critics of Arday harboured controversial views on race appeared to inform Cambridge’s response, which was a robust defence of Arday. The university called the claims a “vile smear campaign to undermine his credibility”.

An open letter in support of Arday, signed by the Green party leader, Zack Polanski, and the prominent black studies academic Kehinde Andrews, argued there was “an orchestrated and grim effort to delegitimise a brilliant, young, working-class academic for the sin of being successful while Black”.

Cambridge said it had passed complaints to the university where Arday completed the PhD, Liverpool John Moores, which had reviewed the work and found he had not plagiarised it...

Prominent academics of colour that the Guardian spoke to said the claims of plagiarism were legitimate, and that Arday’s alleged actions risked undermining others who study race.

Some of Arday’s peers said the fallout from the row could send shockwaves through academia and set the study of race in Britain back 20 years.

One academic, who has worked in the area of race and education for decades and spoke to the Guardian on condition of anonymity, said the accusations against Arday were worrying. “I think it’s plagiarism and it’s obvious,” they said.

John Preston, an emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Essex, said: “Having seen the evidence, it triangulates and there is, in my judgment, a case to answer here.”

Some have argued that Arday has come under unfair levels of scrutiny. But the academics the Guardian spoke to said it was “fair for someone at Cambridge”, in one of the most prestigious positions in academia...

For Arday, the accusations are potentially ruinous – plagiarism is as serious as it gets for academic malpractice and the professor has consistently claimed he has done nothing wrong.

In an interview with the Times on Friday, he suggested the issue had been blown out of proportion. “I am accountable for the mistakes I’ve made,” he said. “I hold myself accountable and other people should hold me accountable. We’re talking about academia here. I didn’t murder somebody. I think the cruelty that I’ve experienced, and the positioning of me as this kind of liar and fantasist, is totally unacceptable.”

For Cambridge, there are questions about judgment over Arday’s appointment, which occurred when its own track record on race was being scrutinised in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement. Cambridge had been criticised for the lack of diversity in its student body and faculty; when Arday was hired, there were only five black professors at the university.

But the accusations of plagiarism are only one element of the Arday story...

As his critics online have pointed out, £5m raised for charity would be a staggering amount for someone who is not already famous. In 2012, Arday said he hoped to raise £250,000 by the time he was 50.

When asked if the £5m figure was accurate, Arday clarified to the Guardian that the money was raised with the help of “many fundraising collectives over a two-decade period”. When asked to identify other people who took part in these efforts, Arday said he had signed NDAs preventing him from disclosing that information.

The Guardian also asked Arday about his claim to have run 600 miles in six days, an achievement that would make him one of the world’s most gifted endurance runners. (The first woman to achieve the feat, Megan Eckert, only managed it last year; the men’s record is 650 miles.) He said that because of the “cumulative wear and tear of training” from his previous running challenges he “had to put rest days in between the running days just to finish” the 600-mile challenge, which was actually completed over a 12-day period.

Earlier this year, two universities that had given Arday honorary degrees and doctorates amended their websites, with Southampton Solent University removing the 600 miles citation, and Anglia Ruskin University changing the six days claim to 12 days...

Doctors have told the Guardian that running nine marathons with a hairline fracture in a fibula would be incredibly painful, though technically not impossible...

As well as scrutiny of his academic record and fundraising history, Arday claims to have been the victim of a campaign of physical abuse and intimidation.

Arday began being sent racist emails as soon as he took up his position at Cambridge, becoming so intense that his emails had to be screened. But the messages paled in comparison to the other incidents the academic said he had faced.

In an open letter to the government minister Jacqui Smith in July 2025, which outlined Arday’s experiences, he claimed to have been “threatened with a knife, physically assaulted and spat on; [had] rape and death threats being made to him and his family; bananas and bullets being posted to him via the university campus; and corrosive substances and mutilated animals sent to his family home”.

In a subsequent interview with the Guardian, Arday claimed to have been confronted at his faculty building on two separate occasions by a masked man threatening to harm him if he did not resign, and evading detection both times. On the second occasion Arday said the intruder produced a knife and threatened him with it.

The Guardian understands that after Arday reported the first intrusion to the university, enhanced CCTV was placed in the faculty and a panic alarm was installed in his office. The professor said he hit the panic alarm during the second confrontation, but that no one responded. It should have triggered an alarm alerting the faculty’s security team, all of whom were present at the time of the alleged incident.

The intruder was not picked up by CCTV on either occasion and no one in the faculty reported seeing anyone suspicious. Arday did not report either intrusion at the time, telling the Guardian that after the second incident he continued his working day and even conducted a PhD viva for a student less than two hours later.

He did not inform colleagues that a masked man with a knife was in the faculty building.

Arday confirmed in an interview with the Guardian that the “mutilated animals sent to his family home” mentioned in the open letter was a severed pig’s head, delivered in a large cardboard box to his parents’ home address in south London. He claimed to have intercepted the package and immediately thrown it away, only telling the police several months later.

In a subsequent interview he claimed the police investigated, checking with butchers in south London if they had sold a pig, eventually finding one that had sold a “whole hog” on the morning the head was left outside the family home.

When the Guardian checked those details with the local butchers Arday named, they said no police officer had come in to ask them about a pig. When asked if they were sure, the butcher said “that’s the kind of thing we’d remember”.

When the details Arday gave about the pig’s head investigation were checked by London’s Metropolitan police, the Guardian was told they were “categorically” incorrect and no investigation had taken place...

Arday took no photographs of the bullet, the banana, the corrosive substance or the pig’s head. The only other people who saw any of the items were close family members, who told the Guardian Arday had shown them the bullet and the “poison”. Arday could produce no messages from the time in which he discussed any of the items with friends, family, colleagues or the police...

The abuse and harassment Arday has outlined would be some of the most extreme any academic has been subjected to in the UK.

When Arday was asked about his claims by the Guardian, he stood by them. “To be honest with you, I thought you’d just believe me,” he said. “Why would I lie?”...

He writes that people have been “outraged and offended” by the idea of a black professor at such an elite institution, and that he has faced harassment and persecution as “the subject of targeted campaigns driven by racial animus”.

“There have been days when I can only describe the experience as traumatising. It’s hard for people to even comprehend or imagine the toll this can take on a person,” he writes.

But the row over his academic work and some of the claims he has made is far bigger than one person.

“The whole area of the sociology of education, and particularly race studies within that, is very fragile,” said Prof Preston. “It is primarily Black, Asian and minoritised people who work and study in those subjects. Professor Arday probably holds the top position in the world in sociology of education. It’s important for the whole discipline that he addresses these claims.”"

The prominent academics of colour have internalised white supremacy!

Links - 4th August 2026 (1 - 2026 World Cup)

2026-08-04T09:23:00.000+08:00

Meme - Noam Blum @neontaster: "First Ana Kasparian's Bosnia and Herzegovina blunder and now this. Every one of these people is at base level just stupid. It's why they're also all ideologically aligned - stupid people are easy to sell stupid ideologies."
Cenk Uygur @cenkuygur: "Chinese don't use soy sauce. That's Japanese."
Readers added context: "This is incorrect. Soy sauce originated in China, where it has been used for over 2,000 years and remains a staple ingredient in Chinese cuisine."

Miss Jo on X - "This is really very sad. Mexico fans are making a massive noise in the middle of the night outside the hotel where the England team are staying in an attempt to keep them awake at night. I really hope that England thrashes Mexico."
Melissa Chen on X - "Flew into Mexico City from DC last night and I’m already clocking the shift in energy. I left my England shirt in the bag for this flight despite wearing it loud and proud on every single one before now without any second thoughts. But here? The Mexico fan vibe isn’t reading as normal rivalry. It’s heavier and meaner. It’s not banter; there’s no playfulness about it. There’s actual aggression in it, and underneath that, something colder and almost unhinged. Walked a few blocks around the hotel in my England shirt this morning and got called “puta gringa” - white whore, basically. The whole atmosphere is steeped in this hostility. Police have shut roads down, running checkpoints, confiscating glass bottles like they’re expecting things to pop off. Riot vibes. I’ve traveled everywhere in this shirt and never once felt this on edge. It feels like it’s more than “just football” at stake here. I hope that I’m reading it all wrong, that it’s just pre-match noise that burns off once the final whistle blows and everyone goes home."

Canadian Soccer Fans Boo United States Flag At World Cup (aka "Canadian Soccer Fans Proved The USA Lives Rent-Free In Their Heads By Booing The American Flag At World Cup") - "Every country represented at the 2026 FIFA World Cup was introduced prior to the first match at Toronto Stadium on Thursday afternoon. Only the American flag was met with boos... This should not come as a huge surprise. We have seen the Canadians boo a 15-year-old girl who sang the Star Spangled Banner. They do not care who or what it is. They are going to boo."

Fifa bans England fans over ‘submarine badge on flag’ - "Barrow has a submarine on their badge as a nod to the port town’s history of manufacturing and launching Royal Navy submarines. In the response sent to Mr Watts, Fifa said: “The application was rejected because the item includes imagery of weapons or military (submarine)... Taking a jab at the sport’s governing body, the National League side’s account posted an edited picture of its badge with the submarine blurred out. Accompanying the image, they said: “In order to make sure our supporter John Little can represent the Bluebirds over in Boston properly, we’d like to unveil our new *temporary club badge for the duration of the World Cup... “Fifa let us know if the Arrow has to go too...”"

Meme - Drew Paviou: "Third world mentality vs first world mentality"
MTH *Brazil flag* @4motane: "I'd rather burn whole streets than turn into a cleaning maid for the American"
End Wokeness @EndWokeness: "Moroccans vs Japanese after the World Cup *riot vs cleaning up stadium*"
Clearly, if you praise people who clean up after a match rather than riot, you're a racist, xenophobe and white supremacist

Thomas Partey banned from Canada after failing to declare rape charges - "Thomas Partey remains banned from entering Canada for Ghana’s World Cup campaign after his appeal did not mention he had been charged with rape. Lawyers for the former Arsenal midfielder, who was stopped from entering because of his rape charges, said his visa refusal had caused “irremediable prejudice”."
Time to condemn the US for not letting people with terrorist ties in

End Wokeness on X - ""World Cup — who are you rooting for to win it all?"
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D): "Mexico"
Darializa Chevalier (D): "Senegal""
Mike Solana on X - "it's just a soccer game, you might say. but that's exactly why this strikes me as so insane. there are zero stakes, the easiest "I care about america" in the world, and they still can't support our country. in fact, they seem to see any demonstration of support as a liability."
End Wokeness on X - "Yup. Somehow showing any support for the US is politically toxic in blue areas."
We are still told that left winger don't hate their countries
If you talk about dual loyalty despite its open proclamation, you're racist and xenophobic

Sky News on X - "Following Morocco's exit from the World Cup in the US, some football fans confronted police in and around London's Edgware Road. At least one police officer is injured, and several arrests have been made as football fans run amok in London."
Monty3812 on X - "There are plenty of Moroccans living in the Gulf countries. They won’t have caused the slightest bit of trouble, because they know full well that they and their families will be deported and on a plane home the following day. We are far too soft at dealing with this."

Paul Embery on X - "This is the downside of abandoning an overarching national culture and turning your country (and capital city) into something resembling an international airport terminal. Diversity is not our strength. It is, in many respects, our greatest challenge."

Visegrád 24 on X - "British police officers fleeing rioting supporters of Morocco in London after the France-Morocco game 🇬🇧🇲🇦🇫🇷"
Tyler on X - "When native white people protest against white children being brutally stabbed to death at a Taylor Swift dance class they are labeled far right thugs and subjected to the “full force of the law.” When foreigners trash our capital city and attack our police officers because they’re upset that they lost a game of the kickball, they’re treated with kids gloves because of “cultural sensitivity.” In other words, if you’re white you’re going to get shit by the state on even if your anger is understandable, but if you’re brown you’ll experience soft leniency even if the reason for your anger is laughable nonsense. And that’s the systemic racial two-tier justice that we can all very clearly see with our own eyes even as we’re told it doesn’t exist and that ‘we’ are the racist ones if we spot the very obvious pattern."

Visegrád 24 on X - "Antisemitic chanting in The Hague, Netherlands after Morocco lost to France in the World Cup. Holding up Palestinian flags, they chanted: “All Jews are gay” “Hamas Hamas, Jews to the gas”"
Max Klinger on X - "No doubt Owen Jones and all the other ‘anti-racists’ and islamo-leftists who suggested it was totally understandable that large Muslim mobs ran around attacking ‘cancerjews’ and throwing them in the river in Amsterdam. And then supported Islamist calls to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from entering the UK. And who claimed that sort of behaviour and open extreme, violent bigotry was just self-defence and an understandable response to a few videos of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans chanting dodgy things and that it was israeli propaganda to suggest otherwise….will therefore apply exactly the same logic here, and would be entirely comfortable to support calls for all Moroccan fans to be banned from the country. And would defend large mobs travelling around randomly beating up ‘cancermuslims’ and demanding to see their passports to check if they’re from Morocco then battering them, and throwing them in rivers and sending them to hospital… Right. Right?"

Mustapha Ezzarghani | Facebook - "Why Is It Always the Jews?
I watched Morocco lose to France in the World Cup quarterfinal with the same mixture of pride and disappointment that millions of Moroccans around the world felt. We wanted to keep dreaming. We wanted our team to keep making history. Losing hurt. What I did not expect was what happened after the final whistle. Within hours, videos began circulating from cities across Europe. Instead of grieving a football defeat, crowds were chanting, "Hamas," calling for the murder of Jews, and reviving slogans that belonged in humanity's darkest chapters, not in the streets of democratic societies. As a Moroccan Muslim, I felt something deeper than disappointment. I felt shame. Not because Morocco lost a football match. Every team loses eventually. I felt shame because a small but visible minority turned a sporting event into another excuse to express hatred toward people who had absolutely nothing to do with the game. France scored two goals. The Jews did not. Yet somehow, once again, the anger found its way to the same destination it has found for centuries. That should disturb every decent human being. Let me be clear from the beginning. The overwhelming majority of Moroccan supporters simply mourned the defeat, congratulated France, and went home. They represented the values of sportsmanship and dignity that I recognize in my own country. But the fact that only a minority engaged in antisemitic chants does not make the phenomenon less alarming. It makes it more revealing. Because this was never about football. Football was simply the latest excuse. The more I thought about those images, the more one question refused to leave my mind. Why is it always the Jews? History offers the same pattern again and again. When economies collapse, someone blames the Jews. When pandemics spread, someone blames the Jews. When political leaders fail, someone blames the Jews. When wars begin, someone blames the Jews. When conspiracy theories flourish, Jews somehow become the hidden hand behind every event. Now, apparently, even the outcome of a football match becomes another opportunity to direct hatred toward the world's smallest religious minority. As someone who has spent years building bridges between Muslims and Jews, I have learned that antisemitism rarely begins with facts. It begins with convenience. Blaming Jews is easier than confronting corruption. Easier than questioning failed leadership. Easier than examining extremism within our own societies. A scapegoat is always simpler than self-reflection. That is why antisemitism has survived for centuries despite constantly contradicting itself. Jews have been accused of being powerless outsiders and all-powerful insiders. They have been blamed for capitalism and for communism. For globalization and for nationalism. For war and for peace. The accusations change with every generation, but the target remains remarkably consistent. As a Moroccan, this troubles me for another reason. Our country has a unique history. For centuries, Muslims and Jews built Morocco together. Jewish communities were not strangers in our homeland; they were part of its very foundation. They contributed to our commerce, our music, our diplomacy, our crafts, and our culture. Morocco's identity cannot honestly be told without them. That is precisely why I refuse to remain silent when Jews become the convenient target for frustrations that have nothing to do with them. Silence is never neutral. History has taught us where silence leads. The Holocaust did not begin with extermination camps. It began with words that many people dismissed as harmless. It began with lies repeated so often that they started sounding reasonable. It began when ordinary people convinced themselves that blaming Jews required no evidence at all. Every generation believes it is different. Every generation imagines its hatred is justified by new circumstances. But hatred does not become noble simply because it finds a new excuse. As a Moroccan Muslim, I believe my faith calls me to stand against injustice regardless of who the victim is. My patriotism calls me to defend the best traditions of Morocco, a country whose history demonstrates that Muslims and Jews can share not only neighborhoods but also a common national identity. That is why the scenes that followed Morocco's defeat mattered. Not because they revealed something about Jews. They revealed something about us. The question the world should be asking is not what Jews supposedly did to deserve another wave of hatred. The question is why humanity keeps searching for reasons to blame the same people generation after generation. Until we answer that honestly, the excuse will keep changing. The target never will."

Masih Alinejad on X - "Wow, now Iran’s regime and Egypt have objected to Seattle’s Pride Match and urged FIFA to remove Pride-related symbols. This is exactly what I’ve been warning about: authoritarian Islamists never stop at asking for tolerance. First: “Respect our religious practices. Respect our customs. Respect our sensitivities.” Then: “Change your traditions. Silence your values. Adjust your society to our ideology.” These are the same “values” that sentence women to 74 lashes for singing, execute gay people, and shoot peaceful protesters in the streets. Free societies should never surrender their values to appease authoritarianism."
Garry Kasparov on X - "🎯 And when Westerners travel to repressive Islamic countries, they’re told to respect Islamic traditions. When representatives from these nations come to the West, Westerners are told to discard their traditions and freedoms and respect Islam."

Dr. Eli David on X - "Egypt's coach waving the Palestinian flag after their win in World Cup yesterday 👇 Fun fact: Egypt has built a 7-layered wall on its border with Gaza to make sure not a single Palestinian refugee crosses into Egypt 🤡"

Melissa Chen on X - "This is so captivating precisely because it has become such a rare sight in modern European societies. Each traveling World Cup fan base showcases the full, unfiltered expression of its national identity, something that now feels discouraged back home. Mass migration and a prevailing culture of self-loathing have made open pride in one’s heritage increasingly unfashionable. From Swedish fans raising maypoles and weaving flower crowns, to Norwegians rowing in unison like their Viking ancestors, to Scots marching in tartan to the sound of bagpipes. These are living portraits of a people, distilled to their purest essence. They embody the particular inheritance of language, custom, landscape, and ancestral memory that shaped who they are. For a few short weeks, Swedes can be fully and unselfconsciously Swedish again. Norwegians and Scots the same. The joy on display is the visible relief of finally remembering who you are when the constant pressure to dilute (or apologize for) that identity is lifted. These fans prove that the old nations still live on inside their people. Mass migration has transformed their homelands, and critical theory has instilled a deep sense of guilt, so much so that public displays of historic identity are now often seen as provocative rather than innocent and affectionate. Yet none of this has erased the fundamental human need to belong to a particular culture and story, and to express it without apology. What’s tragic is that this authentic expression can now only be performed freely abroad, at events like the World Cup. Enjoy it while it lasts"

Eat, pray and score, but only if you’re Muslim, not Christian - "Christianity is a thorn in the side even at the World Cup, whilst Islam is treated with the utmost deference. The prayer offered by footballer Felix Nmecha at the end of the match in which the German national team beat Curaçao 7–1 did not go unnoticed in his home country, Germany. It was precisely this German striker of Nigerian origin who kicked off the German rout with one of his own goals. But it is not for purely sporting reasons that we are reporting on this. The reason is linked to his Christian faith. A faith – he professes to be an Evangelical – which the young striker lives out publicly. After scoring the goal, he knelt on the pitch, formed a crown with his hands above his head and placed it on the ground. He then raised his hands towards the sky and later posted a photo of this moment on Instagram with the words “Thank you Jesus!”. After the match, he also formed a prayer circle together with Jonathan Tah and a couple of Curaçao players... The criticism that has rained down on him has all come from the press, which has not only criticised Nmecha but has also mocked him. “A professional footballer obsessed with Christ: a red card for Jesus!”; “German international Felix Nmecha flaunts his faith like a monstrance. Behind it lies a grim view of humanity”. “Nmecha’s prayer after the World Cup match is a stumbling block”... the fact that there is a not-so-subtle double standard is demonstrated by two other incidents set in the Atlanta stadium, where Spain beat Saudi Arabia 4–0 on Sunday. Here, the religion under scrutiny is Islam, but let us take a closer look at the treatment it received. First and foremost, the stadium made preparations to welcome the Saudi fans with every honour: designated areas for Islamic prayer and halal food available at the venue’s catering outlets... it is interesting to note the contrasting fate that befell Lamine Yamal, a rising star of the Spanish national team and, as is well known, of Moroccan descent on his father’s side. On his debut for the Spanish national team at the World Cup, Yamal scored and, whilst celebrating, knelt in the Islamic manner, raising his arms to the sky. A clear sign of reverence towards Allah. After all, this young Barcelona star is no stranger to displaying his Islamic faith in public. And he did so again on Sunday, in the European champions’ second match at the World Cup in the US. Protests? None. Criticism in Spain over this display of faith? Not even a shadow of it. Indeed, certain Muslim websites have praised the footballer’s gesture – which is certainly not the first of its kind (Antonio Rüdiger and Mohamed Salah have also done so). It goes without saying that the World Cup is a showcase capable of embedding certain gestures in public opinion and cementing them there. European public opinion, on the other hand – which had been up in arms against Nmecha – has gone silent. Praise rained down on the Muslim Yamal, whilst the poor Christian Nmecha received nothing but criticism. And it is also from these details, to paraphrase the well-known Italian singer-songwriter Francesco De Gregori, that a player is judged and – we might add – that the barometer of Christianophobia is gauged."

Brother Rachid الأخ رشيد on X - "I went to the Morocco vs. Haiti game in Atlanta yesterday. One thing immediately caught my attention. Right after scanning your ticket at the entrance to Mercedes-Benz Stadium, there were groups of people handing out "Muslim Hospitality" pamphlets. They showed where to pray and which food was halal. Then, just a few steps inside, there was a large sign with the same information. It didn't feel like simple visitor assistance. It felt like the promotion of a religion. The stadium doesn't hand every fan a printed map, stadium rules, or event information, those are all available online. Yet for Islam, there were printed pamphlets being handed to everyone and an entire team dedicated to distributing them. No other religion had volunteers handing out pamphlets at the entrance. There were no Christian hospitality teams, no Jewish hospitality teams, no Hindu or Buddhist pamphlets, only Islam. This is a soccer match, not a religious event. If someone wants to pray, there are churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques for that. The irony is even greater considering that, according to many Islamic scholars, professional soccer itself is considered haram, and FIFA generates revenue from sponsors such as Budweiser. Yet instead of addressing that contradiction, there is an organized effort to promote Islamic practices inside the stadium. @FIFAWorldCup @FIFAcom"

Melissa Chen on X - "The World Cup has brutally exposed how shallow the "racial solidarity" framework actually is. Peruvians are openly declaring they'll root for Harry Kane and England in the semi-finals against Argentina because of very specific, very deep historical grudges: Peru backed Argentina during the Falklands conflict decades ago, only to feel betrayed when Argentina supplied arms to Ecuador during the 1995 Cenepa War, plus the ongoing cultural jab of Argentines using "peruano" as a casual insult. In other words, there is absolutely no such thing as "Latino solidarity." The whole construct is promoted by leftists in the West and astroturfed hard on Ivy League campuses by actually ignoring the complexities of history. Shared skin tone and shared language don't magically make you into a brotherhood. Ironically, they promote exactly the same race-only lens championed by race realists on the right. The matchups have been an excellent way to dig deeper into history. I learned for example, that Mexico has zero beef with England because the British sold them arms during their fight for independence from Spain. Turns out fellow Europeans did more to screw each other's colonial empires and decolonize each other than the subjects ever managed. So it's funny when it gets weaponized by today's third worlders. The ruse becomes clear when you see that they only care about colonialism of a *specific* (read: European white) kind. Everyone else from the Ottomans to the Arabs to the Chinese get a pass. Populations mix, empires rise and fall, alliances flip, specific betrayals get remembered for generations, and national identity or even regional club loyalty almost always beats abstract racial essentialism. I've seen people online treat the World Cup like a racial census. Black fans refusing to back any remaining team because they are "white colonizers." White fans abandoning their own squads for having too many non-white players. Cheering for matching melanin levels and broad ancestral categories is just dumb. There is no such thing as black solidarity, Western/white solidarity, and there's CERTAINLY no such thing as Asian solitary (lol) and Latino solidarity. This is all just activist nonsense. Yes people are tribal, but the tribes are usually smaller, older, and more specific than skin color or continent. History is messy, grudge-filled, and gloriously complicated."

Les Mileistes Français 🦁🇫🇷 on X - "Ayant échangé avec littéralement des milliers de personne sur ce site, il est clair qu'un grand nombre de français pense que les États-Unis sont une sorte de semi tiers-monde avec quelques très riches et beaucoup de très pauvres. On peut leur présenter tous les chiffres du monde qui montrent que les US sont bien plus prospères que nous, ils n'en démorderont pas. Ils l'ont entendu à la télé. La seule solution pour leur faire changer d'avis et voir net semble être de les envoyer y faire un voyage."

Europe buys the future, America builds it - "Europeans do NOT often holiday in America: too far and, these days, too dear. Except for the World Cup. As fans chase their sides across America this summer, they are discovering country music, ranch dressing and—most striking of all—the mass affluence of America’s suburbs. “DUDE LMAO THIS IS A GAS STATION”, marvelled one German online upon encountering Buc-ee’s, a chain of gobsmackingly large Texan rest stops. The American wealth enticing holidaymakers troubles European elites. America, once a peer, seems to be racing ahead. Mario Draghi, a revered Italian grandee, calls Europe’s stagnation an “existential challenge”."

Rocky statue curse lives on after Ecuador fans placed jersey on Philadelphia landmark before World Cup - "In Philadelphia, statue curses live on through the city's sports lore. The Curse of Billy Penn lived on for decades, and now the modern-day Rocky statue curse appears to have claimed its latest victim. Before the first 2026 Men's World Cup match Sunday at Lincoln Financial Field, aka Philadelphia Stadium, Ecuador fans swarmed the city, including at the Art Museum steps and the Rocky statue. But that might have jinxed Ecuador. Fans put the country's World Cup jersey on the Rocky statue, and then the team lost on a 90th-minute goal to the Ivory Coast in the city's first of six World Cup matches Sunday night. Both teams hit the crossbar three times before Amad Diallo's goal for the Ivory Coast at the end of the match. "

Meme - "The England team without immigrants *9/11 blacked out*"
Greenpeace UK: "Diversity is our greatest strength. he England eam igrants The England football team shows us that our country is stronger because of the many different people who have come here and made it their home. Sadly, extreme right politicians are trying to divide us right now. But we can't let them, because divided societies are unfair and unequal 'ones that are unable to come together to tackle the huge issues we all face like the climate crisis. Please add your name to our urgent petition to help us prove that the MAJORITY of the UK stands against the divisive politicians trying to divide us https://act.gp/4xXQOjz"
"Name me one player in the England squad who came here"
"I don't think this mate. Look back to the 80s, 90s. We did much better just saying"
Comment: "Marc Guéhi is the only player in the England national squad who was born outside of the UK. He migrated as a child. The rest are British born and bred."
Left wingers are racist and consider minorities immigrants even if they were born in the country. Also the left wing agenda is all connected - what does this have to do with the environment?
Suddenly, left wingers are able to tell who's an "immigrant". Curious.

Links - 3rd August 2026 (2 - Artificial Intelligence)

2026-08-03T17:20:00.000+08:00

Meme - "r/ChatGPT
ChatGPT can't believe RAM prices
ChatGPT: That is a very solid build, but I spotted one thing immediately: RAM Price Is Wrong. Your screenshot shows: G.Skill Flare XS 32GB DDR5-6000 CL36. $419.99. That has to be a pricing error or PCPartPicker picked some weird seller. 32GB DDR5-6000 should be around $80-120, not $420. If you actually paid $420 for 32GB RAM I'd call the police."

sword on X - "I have my critiques of the pace of data center buildout and their impact on our electrical grid. But we're reached a point where data center criticism is like antisemitism or black history and you can just make it up. Low IQ antidatacenterism."

Axios on X - "Exclusive: Conservatives plan nationwide protest against AI data centers"
Parker Thayer on X - "The “conservative” group planning this protest (Humans First) forgot to censor their website’s privacy policy, which shows they’re using The Action Network, which is basically ActBlue for nonprofits. Don’t fall for the psyop, folks."

IT Guy on X - "This is the first case of its kind in UK criminal justice history. A Derbyshire officer allegedly used AI to fabricate evidential material across multiple cases not one. The Crown Prosecution Service is now reviewing every conviction those cases touched. Three days ago, the UK government announced PoliceAI. £140 million. a national AI centre for policing. 40 new facial recognition vans. AI tools for every force in England and Wales by 2027. the official goal: "get responsible AI into the hands of officers." Three days later: criminal investigation into an officer for using AI to manufacture evidence. the interim director of PoliceAI put out a statement today. "our work is rooted in transparency." 97% of all criminal investigations in the UK now involve digital evidence. that's this year's figure. AI is already being used to summarise case files, triage evidence, and assist with disclosure. one officer already used it to manufacture evidence across multiple cases. nobody noticed until now."

Accenture’s crash shows the consultancy racket is finished - "Companies are turning to ChatGPT and Claude AI to provide research and analysis that might previously have been done by an Accenture partner for £500 an hour or more... In reality, the problem is not AI itself. The real issue is that the smart chatbots have exposed how shallow much of the consultancy racket has become. Sure, it can produce plenty of spreadsheets and clever-looking forecasts. It can spin lots of clichés about “picking the low-hanging fruit”, “moving the needle”, or even “boiling the ocean” (which refers to overanalysing a problem for anyone who hasn’t bothered to keep up with all the latest jargon). Very occasionally, it might be able to implement a project that a company lacks the resources to do itself. But very often it has become characterised by inflated bills for very mediocre work that was hardly even needed in the first place, and if it were, could have been done at a fraction of the price. AI has exposed precisely that. It is not that chatbots are especially clever. They might be one day, but they are certainly not there yet. But they are brilliant at regurgitating waffle and bluster that might sound good at first glance, but have all the depth, originality and understanding of an over-confident first-year trainee... There is a space for genuinely innovative consultancy. The type of work that McKinsey, Bain or the Boston Consulting Group produced when the industry was first created half a century or more ago was original and groundbreaking. Some of it still is, and there will always be a demand for that. And yet the AI boom has exposed a stark fact. Much of mainstream consulting is so routine that it can be easily replicated by a smart machine. The collapse in the Accenture share price is, if we are being honest, just the start. Unless they can reinvent themselves very quickly, the giant consulting firms are in big trouble – or rather heading towards a “cascading critical path failure”, as they might put it themselves."

Delving into LLM-assisted writing in biomedical publications through excess vocabulary - "Large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT can generate and revise text with human-level performance. These models come with clear limitations, can produce inaccurate information, and reinforce existing biases. Yet, many scientists use them for their scholarly writing. But how widespread is such LLM usage in the academic literature? To answer this question for the field of biomedical research, we present an unbiased, large-scale approach: We study vocabulary changes in more than 15 million biomedical abstracts from 2010 to 2024 indexed by PubMed and show how the appearance of LLMs led to an abrupt increase in the frequency of certain style words. This excess word analysis suggests that at least 13.5% of 2024 abstracts were processed with LLMs. This lower bound differed across disciplines, countries, and journals, reaching 40% for some subcorpora. We show that LLMs have had an unprecedented impact on scientific writing in biomedical research, surpassing the effect of major world events such as the COVID pandemic."

bu/ac on X - "AI in Canada lost before it even got started. They literally are trying to get AI to give a Land acknowledgement before any session. Here are 6 statements that show how Canada already blew AI like we all knew it would.
1. “The Government of Canada commits to applying Gender-Based Analysis Plus in a meaningful way across policy design, skills development, innovation, and governance to ensure that AI reflects our values, protects those most impacted, and leads to outcomes that are safe, inclusive, and beneficial for all Canadians.”
2. “Canadian AI must support, reflect, and project Canadian culture, which includes our customs, our history, and our heritage. Canadian voices, languages, communities, and knowledge must also be represented in how AI systems are designed, built, and used.”
3. “support Indigenous self-determination over how AI is built and used in Indigenous contexts, and build domestic capacity to address the specific harms Indigenous Peoples face.”
4. “promote the world’s first AI equity-based national standard on accessible AI to drive inclusive and accessible AI and remove accessibility barriers from AI systems, and ensure Canadian AI reflects the Accessible Canada Act principles.”
5. Repeated framing around “disproportionate exposure and impacts of AI harms to equity-seeking groups” and the need to “address the systemic barriers experienced by racialized communities, persons living with disabilities, and others who too often fall on the wrong side of the digital divide.”
6. “Canada will support and amplify Indigenous-led AI initiatives that reinforce cultural expression and linguistic vitality in Canada and around the world, building on existing efforts…”"
Left wingers hate economic growth, so this is a feature, not a bug

Carson Bradley on X - "Fun fact: Canada's new AI Strategy includes the word 'indigenous' over 6 times more than 'GPU'"
Left wingers still call Carney a Conservative because he's not destroying the country as fast as Trudeau

Bernie Sanders on X - "I will soon be introducing a bill to give the public a 50% ownership stake in the largest AI companies in America. This would guarantee that the trillions created by AI are used to improve the lives of all of us — and block oligarch decisions that harm the American people."
David Sacks on X - "While I’m no fan of socialism or arbitrary confiscations of wealth, I can see why Bernie Sanders’ proposal (for the government to take a 50% stake in AI companies) resonates, including with many on the right. The CEOs of the leading AI labs have told us repeatedly that they will cause massive job loss. This is not a story that I believe, nor does the data bear it out, but this is what they have told us. Similarly, they have hyped the risks of AI without putting an equal or greater emphasis on the benefits or readily available mitigations. Conservatives have another fear. The employees of the leading labs claim to be philanthropic, but what we’ve seen is massive enrichment of NGOs advancing an agenda at odds with traditional values, fueling a revolution against our cities and communities. Soros-maxxing is not charity in our book. Anthropic and OpenAI have established themselves as Public Benefit Corporations. What could be more in the public benefit than using half the wealth generated by these companies (which trained for free on the collective knowledge of humanity) to pay down the national debt? There is no ideological bias in that philanthropy. Dario and Sam have begun to walk back their claims of massive job loss, but the damage to public trust is done, and now the chickens are coming home to roost. I could almost support the Sanders proposal as a stupidity tax. There’s just one problem. Nationalization of AI will accelerate the corporate-government fusion we’re already sliding toward. Conservatives rightly fear a Central Bank Digital Currency. They ought to be even more concerned about Central Government AI — a system with even more totalistic power over information, decision-making, and human behavior. We saw how social media was weaponized to censor conservatives (including President Trump) in the last Democrat administration. The definition of “trust & safety” expanded to mean protecting the public from supposed psychological harms, micro-aggressions, and disinformation (you know, like hearing conservative ideas or true facts about Covid). That “safety” agenda as applied to AI will be vastly more powerful and Orwellian. AI won’t just moderate posts; it will curate reality — with the ability to rewrite history, enforce ideological conformity, influence policy at scale, mass surveil Americans, and condition the benefits of the many systems it controls on approved behavior. America won’t win the AI race if we beat China but end up with a CCP-style social credit system in the U.S. — and that is the danger as the government becomes more deeply involved in AI development and assumes direct ownership and control. Conservatives are right to fear where this is all headed but ought to think more carefully about how regulations they are flirting with now (that are widely celebrated among those with a long history of lust for Big Government) will be used against them the next time a Democrat administration is in power."

Andy Masley on X - "Warren's repeating the blatant lie that people's electricity bills near data centers have gone up by as much as 267%. Completely fake. This is a misreading of a Bloomberg article that found that wholesale nodal power prices very close to data centers rose as much as 267%. This is NOT a rate that residents pay, and her team is surely smart enough to know that. It has some effect on residential bills, but the effects haven't been large enough to be noticeable as a general pattern."
Bryan M. Likins on X - "Completely agree, Andy. She also completely ignores the taxes they are paying. Two recent examples in IN. Hobart already got $40M+ day 1 of an Amazon DC lacking there and will get $40M/year for 15 years. Jasper got $90M year 1 and $20M/year for 15 years."

Microsoft cancels Claude Code licences after engineers use it too much - "The tech giant is scaling back use of Anthropic’s AI coding assistant inside key engineering teams as rising enterprise AI costs force companies to rethink large-scale deployments. Microsoft is reportedly cancelling most internal licences for Claude Code across its Experiences and Devices division after heavy employee usage pushed AI-related costs sharply higher, exposing a growing financial challenge facing enterprise AI adoption... The move is notable because Microsoft has positioned itself as one of the world’s most aggressive adopters of artificial intelligence. Earlier this year, chief executive Satya Nadella said the company now generates up to 30 per cent of its code using generative AI. Microsoft has also invested around $13 billion in OpenAI and integrated AI tools across nearly every major product line... Claude Code was reportedly introduced within Microsoft’s Experiences and Devices division in December 2025. Less than six months later, the internal rollout is being scaled back. The issue was not low adoption. Reports suggest the opposite happened. Unlike traditional software licences, most advanced AI tools rely on token-based pricing systems. Every prompt, code review, debugging request or generated response consumes tokens that translate directly into usage costs."

Thai police post viral AI photo claiming male cops went undercover as female dance troupe to nab drug dealer - "A photo of “undercover” male police officers in Thailand dressed as a female dance troupe to catch a notorious drug dealer went viral — before cops admitted it was an AI-generated image. The photo, showing five male officers and a woman in colorful sparkly dresses with the suspect, was originally shared by Thai police on Facebook as a genuine picture — with cops boasting that they’d nabbed the suspect in spectacular fashion. But the image was revealed this week to be a joke generated using artificial intelligence software — with police saying the arrest itself in Tha Luang in eastern Thailand was real... The suspect, a man named Mekha Fa-wap-wap, was found with 53 methamphetamine pills, more than 200 plastic bags to hold drugs and a mobile phone, according to police. Cops suspected Mekha of involvement in illegal activity but decided to disguise themselves as dancers during a street festival to catch him off guard, the Vietnamese outlet Doi Song & Phap Luat reported... Although this case turned out to be fake, Thai police have reportedly resorted to outlandish disguises to nab suspects in the past. Recently, cops in the capital, Bangkok, dressed up as a lion dance troupe during the Lunar New Year to nab a repeat offender."

Meme - Tony Stark: "The truth is... YOU CAN'T BE A MARVEL FAN AND ALSO BE ANTI-DATA CENTERS. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE."

Meme - *Purple haired flurk left winger smiles seeing a homeless person*
Purple haired person on seeing a data centre behind the homeless person: "THERE GOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD!"

DuckDuckGo installs are up 30% as users reject being ‘force-fed’ Google’s AI Search - "During Google’s search antitrust trial in 2023, DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg testified that Google’s exclusive default search contracts harmed its ability to pitch itself as the default on other browsers. “Google is force-feeding AI with no way to opt out,” Weinberg said Tuesday in a statement, referring to Google’s Search overhaul. “As a result, their results are getting worse, not better. We want to be the place that puts users in charge and allows them to decide how much or how little AI they want.” Now, it seems that DuckDuckGo is beginning to benefit as consumers flee AI... DuckDuckGo also offers Search Assist, which is similar to Google’s AI overviews, and an AI Image Filter that filters out AI-created images from search results. Kamyl Bazbaz, DuckDuckGo’s chief communications and policy officer, said both of those AI features are among the company’s most popular, despite their differing ethos. “People just want a choice,” Bazbaz said."

You can no longer Google the word 'disregard' - "the Merriam-Webster link is still in there, but you have to scroll past a huge block of empty space. For most users, that single reply is the only thing you’ll see. And crucially, the AI response serves no conceivable value to a user searching the word “disregard.” It’s just a broken tool. For context, here is the same search in Bing, which has been less aggressive about its AI summaries... I have been a professional tech journalist for nearly 15 years, and before today, I cannot think of a single time when a Bing search result was more valuable than the Google equivalent. There really is a first time for everything!"

Meme - CyberNews: "A new Gallup survey found Americans are more concerned about nearby Al data centers than nuclear power plants Around 71% said they oppose having Al data centers in their area due to environmental, water, energy, and quality of life concerns, compared to 53% who oppose nearby nuclear plants
AMERICANS WOULD CHOOSE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OVER Al DATA CENTERS NEARBY"
Left wingers claim China building renewables shows that they are the future and that the US needs to follow suit. However, China is building hundreds of data centres (to say nothing about coal)... It's almost as if data centre moral panic is a Chinese psy-op to sabotage the West.

Meme - MsMelChen: "Trump was right in 2016 about climate change being a Chinese psyop designed to cripple American energy dominance and pretty much the whole media complex took shots at him. He's since been vindicated. Now the exact same playbook is being run again but this time, it's for Al data centers"
"The New York Times. Trump Has Called Climate Change a Chinese Hoax. Beijing Says It Is Anything But."
Joel Berry @JoelWBerry: "This was a Chinese psyop against American energy and data center computing power btw"
Sam Rogers on X - "The soviets funded and ran a similar campaign from the 50's to the 80's to cripple and sideline our nuclear power infrastructure."

Meme - Melissa Chen @MsMelChen: "I’ve been lurking in anti-AI, anti-data center activist facebook groups just to understand what their arguments are Guys it’s really not a good sign that they are borrowing the same tactic of framing non-violent things as violence. During the woke cultural revolution, innocuous things such as free speech and simply asserting the biological reality of two sexes were considered violence. You know where this leads, right? Labeling things as “violence” or “harm” lowers the bar for outrage and justifies…. anything. There are no limiting principles. It moves the issue from pragmatic cost-benefit analysis into moral theater. It might be the new mind virus"
SAY NO to Data Centers: . Stacy Miles: "We really need to start being honest about what violence actually is. Putting a data center in people's neighborhood knowing it can pollute their air, affect their water, drive up their electricity costs, and impact their health ... that's not neutral. That's not just policy. That's harm. That's violence. ... But people in power don't call it that. They only recognize violence when it looks loud, chaotic, something you can put on the news. Someone yelling, something getting damaged, something that makes people uncomfortable in a visible way. But the quiet decisions made in boardrooms and city meetings that slowly chip away at people's quality of life? That gets labeled as business as usual. And that's the problem. Most of the real harm happening in this country comes from people in suits making decisions that affect entire communities. What you see on the news is often just the reaction to that. So when they say we can't normalize violence, I hear that. But what they did was normalize it first."
Time to arrest the "far right" to protect everyone from political violence!
This is why at some level, left wingers really believe that lie about right-wingers being responsible for political violence. Because they classify their own violence as nonviolent and nonviolent things that people they disagree with do as violence

Colin McCarthy on X - "Insane stat of the day: California almonds use roughly 3–5.5 million acre-feet of water per year, depending on methodology. That's ~4-7x more water than all data centers in North America used combined in 2025."
The cope is that almonds are valuable and/or edible but data centres aren't

Melissa Chen on X - "I wonder how much of the ire directed at AI is (a) jobs vs. (b) fears of surveillance vs. (c) annoyance at how AI was shoved down our throats without consent Like we didn’t ask for our kettle bells and toaster ovens to connect to WiFi for app subscriptions and now AI feels like the same thing. Basically the whole 'internet of things" (IoT) craze made products and every day living WORSE and even more expensive because too many things required apps, subscriptions and cloud dependency. It was sold as “smart” and convenient, but mostly it just locked us into ecosystems and created new failure points. Now AI is conjuring up the same sense of deja vu - suddenly it’s in your search bar, your photo editor, your writing tools, your customer service, your car, and even your light bulbs. The public never really opted in. It was opt-out at best, and often not even that. So I think some of the ire is Luddite rejection and exhaustion because all this was sold as inevitable progress but it's created instead, nostalgia for the old products and appliances."

UnveiledChina on X - "Authoritarian propaganda has quietly brainwashed the world’s most advanced artificial intelligence, and Western tech companies let it happen. A groundbreaking peer-reviewed study published in Nature has exposed a terrifying reality. The Chinese Communist Party’s massive state-media apparatus has successfully infiltrated the foundational training datasets used to build major Western AI models, including GPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok. Researchers discovered that Chinese state-coordinated propaganda makes up 1.64% of Chinese documents in major open datasets like CulturaX. That is a staggering 41 times more prevalent than Chinese Wikipedia. When it comes to texts regarding Xi Jinping, party congresses, or central plenums, state propaganda completely floods the data, skyrocketing to roughly 23%. This did not happen via a complex hack or hidden injection. Instead, AI companies blindly used routine web crawlers that scraped public HTML pages, vacuuming up Beijing’s tightly scripted narratives. The consequences are deeply alarming. Blind tests revealed that Western commercial models produce significantly more pro-Beijing answers to politically sensitive questions when they are prompted in Chinese versus English. Meanwhile, China’s homegrown model, DeepSeek, remains rigidly aligned with Beijing’s narrative across all languages. By allowing state-controlled media to flood internet text, authoritarian regimes have found a strategic backdoor to shape the cognitive reality of global AI. #UnveiledChina #AIGeopolitics #Propaganda #NatureResearch #ArtificialIntelligence #CCP #TechSovereignty #DataContamination"

Abbas Khan ⟠ on X - "This is literally insane. guy had 5 BTC locked in a wallet for 9 years. dumped his old college computer into Claude as a hail mary. Claude found the wallet file, debugged btcrecover's password logic, decrypted the keys, converted to WIF, recovered the funds. We are so unbelievably early"

Man arrested for threatening shrine in Kyoto because it used AI art - "Kurumazaki Shrine in Kyoto City caused a bit of an uproar online when it changed its Twitter profile pic to an illustration of a miko shrine maiden created by an illustrator who uses generative AI... the shrine received messages of “Curse, curse, curse, curse, etc.” and “I’ll beat you to death,” the latter of which certainly crossed the line of legality. An investigation was launched, leading to the arrest of an unemployed 38-year-old man living in nearby Shiga Prefecture on July 3. This same suspect was also accused of sending dozens of emails to the shrine between 23 and 27 March, including one which read, “Your shrine will burn down in a fire of unknown origin someday,” and the aforementioned one about beating them to death, accompanied by images of flames which I have to assume were not AI generated. The man admitted to the charges against him and explained to police that he was angry about the shrine’s stance of supporting a generative AI artist. That artist goes by the name of Graham-san"

Lee (Greater) on X - "> does clerical office work quickly
> prone to making mistakes at math
> woke politics baked in
> needs huge amounts of water for some reason
> could be used for cooler stuff if you can get past the guardrails
Are office girls just AI data centers?"

Time to end the BC NDP's ideological nightmare and repeal DRIPA

2026-08-03T13:31:00.000+08:00

Time to end the BC NDP's ideological nightmare and repeal DRIPA

"With all the debate in and out of the courts about whether a United Nations declaration should dictate our reconciliation efforts, Canadians might be forgiven for forgetting – or not knowing – our country already has an able process to resolve Crown/Aboriginal relations.

Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 is the provision in our highest law that recognizes and affirms existing Aboriginal and treaty rights. Despite this, in 2019 an activist NDP government introduced a different and completely unworkable “reconciliation framework” throughout British Columbia.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) first found purchase in Canada as an uncalled-for recommendation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which stipulated that the declaration form the basis for reconciliation in Canada, despite this country already having a constitutional framework in place for that very purpose.

In 2019, the B.C. government, under the late Premier John Horgan, passed legislation that brought UNDRIP into British Columbia law. The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, 2019 directed each and every law in the province must conform to the ill-defined human rights concepts set out in UNDRIP.

Some UNDRIP provisions are not only vague, they stand in direct conflict with section 35 of the constitution. For instance, Article 26 directs complete Indigenous ownership of any claimed territory with no requirement to prove “exclusive occupation” of those lands as is required by section 35.

Using Article 26, the Eby government assumes every square inch of British Columbia’s land base is “stolen” land – what the Premier calls the “original colonial mistake” that he is intent on correcting. Again these assertions are in direct conflict with Canadian constitutional law. Proven Aboriginal title may ultimately cover around six per cent, but certainly not 100 per cent of the B.C. land base.

And Article 32(2) of UNDRIP stipulates Indigenous consent must be obtained before any government decision can impact that so-called territorial ownership interest. Section 35 of the constitution says no such thing. Most legal experts know that its practical effect is to create a veto power for Aboriginal communities over government actions.

No one has any idea what that provision means exactly. Is it a veto over Crown decision-making or not?

The Supreme Court of Canada already realized that requiring Aboriginal consent or agreement before governments could govern in the public interest would put a giant stick in the spokes of reconciliation. The Eby government is apparently fine with that outcome.

The BC NDP said DRIPA would not confer a veto when it introduced the legislation in 2019, but the B.C. government under David Eby has since signed agreements with First Nations in the name of reconciliation that do exactly that.

It is ridiculous to think that the B.C. government can effectively run the province in the midst of these uncertainties. Which is why, perhaps, a growing chorus of people are saying the province is not being run effectively.

DRIPA is currently enjoying a moment of infamy as the driver of radical provincial reconciliation policy and a major factor in several precedent-setting court decisions. Meanwhile citizens, Indigenous law experts, First Nations, industries, politicians, potential investors, and media outlets struggle to make sense of the law’s intention and the societal upheaval it is creating.

The stated intention of the legislature at the time DRIPA was passed by MLAs of all parties was for legislators, not the courts, to reconcile all B.C. laws with the articles of UNDRIP. That expectation was blown out of the water by the Dec. 5 BC Court of Appeal decision in the Gitxaala case.

For the second time in four months, a B.C. court referenced the principles of DRIPA in its ruling. In the Gitxaala v. British Columbia decision, two of three judges overturned an earlier court decision and decreed DRIPA was in fact “justiciable” as in, a law that can be used in a trial and upheld in court, and that all the province’s laws must immediately conform to UNDRIP.

With that judgment, the DRIPA nightmare became a full-blown constitutional crisis.

Business groups, Independent MLAs, Indigenous law experts and the two Opposition parties are in agreement that DRIPA should be repealed, with legislators demanding the Eby government recall the legislature to do so...

[Eby's] government’s ongoing inaction on this file engenders no confidence and adds to the uncertainty.

Four months after the BC Supreme Court’s Cowichan Tribes v. Canada decision recognized Aboriginal title on fee simple land and ruled Land Title Act protections for those private land titles don’t apply, the province has yet to fulfill its commitment to file so much as a petition for a stay of proceedings.

In fact, the only legal action the Eby government has taken of late – and it took it swiftly following the Cowichan ruling – was to support a declaration of Haida Nation Aboriginal title in the BC Supreme Court, including over the private lands on Haida Gwaii. The government did this with the full knowledge that a declaration of Haida Aboriginal title would – thanks to provisions in the Cowichan ruling – ensure the Land Title Act protections would not apply to private property within Haida territory.

Which can only mean the B.C. government intentionally created the same private property rights nightmare on Haida Gwaii that was, and is, being faced by private property owners in Richmond.

There is no world in which this can be called governing in the public interest.

In the case of the Gitxaala ruling, the Premier blames the court, claiming the judges over-reached. He said DRIPA was never intended to strike down B.C. laws or be wielded like a law in court against the government. It is up to legislators to determine B.C. laws, not the courts, Eby said following the decision.

Indeed, in 2021, when Eby was attorney general, he introduced an amendment (section 8.1) to the Interpretation Act with the following caution: “If a court considers a provincial law to be inconsistent with the UN declaration, this amendment does not allow the court to read in, read down or find that law to be of no force or effect.”

But Eby confused matters when he described the Interpretation Act provision as having “the requirement that provincial laws and regulations be read so as to be consistent with the UN declaration.”

In an additional bout of mixed messaging, he also said this: “But where a decision-maker is faced with two possible interpretations of the public interest in making a decision, the Interpretation Act, in this circumstance, would, we intend, instruct the decision-maker to prefer the interpretation of public interest that is consistent with the principles of the DRIPA legislation.”

Now Eby has the temerity to accuse the court of being confused about his government’s intentions for DRIPA. This week, he committed his government to assisting the courts “in understanding this is work for British Columbians to do, not the courts.” All of which drew a rebuke from the BC Trial Lawyers Association, which said the Premier’s comments “reflect a troubling national trend in which politicians use the courts as punching bags to score political points.”...

Premier Eby might recall what then Indigenous Relations minister Scott Fraser told MLAs during a 2019 debate on DRIPA. Fraser said it was the intention of government to interpret UNDRIP in a manner consistent with section 35 in the constitution.

This never happened.

Fraser also assured legislators the law would not to create new rights for Indigenous peoples or strike down any existing B.C. laws. The legislation passed unanimously, with the Opposition BC Liberals trusting the government’s stated intentions.

Given the BC NDP’s actions in the name of “reconciliation,” particularly under Eby’s watch in the past three years, Fraser’s aspirations were a stunningly incorrect representation of what actually unfolded in the name of UNDRIP and DRIPA. Most certainly, the current B.C. government has not interpreted UNDRIP in a manner consistent with section 35 and has left a trail of new rights and unprecedented decision-making agreements in its wake, completely over-stepping the careful framework built by decades of constitutional law.

DRIPA was flawed from the outset and the Premier, who was attorney general at the time, should have known it.

DRIPA should have expressly stated that neither DRIPA nor UNDRIP can create any new Aboriginal rights beyond those recognized and affirmed in the constitution. It should have also been clear that DRIPA and UNDRIP had to be interpreted by government in strict accordance with section 35 and in a way that ensured neither would affect or undermine private property rights. And DRIPA should have clearly directed that DRIPA and UNDRIP are strictly non-justiciable, as in, not liable to a determination of the court and not able to force any new B.C. laws.

Other sections1(4), 2(a),2(b), 3, 6, and 7 of DRIPA remain both legally problematic and entirely undemocratic. Yet the province continues to celebrate “reconciliation” agreements signed under these provisions.

Of course, these amendments, even if made now, would essentially render both DRIPA and UNDRIP superfluous and moot and make their adoption pointless. Because the truth is, no amount of DRIPA amendments will resolve UNDRIP’s complete inappropriateness to modern British Columbia and Canada.

Unfortunately, the federal Liberal government under Justin Trudeau enacted its own UNDRIP legislation in 2021, also with the unanimous, and perhaps similarly naive, support of all political parties. Regardless, Prime Minister Mark Carney is about to find out how equally ridiculous that adoption was when his government’s commitments to Indigenous consent under UNDRIP collide with the ‘elbows up’ push to advance major resource projects in the public interest.

Only a complete repeal of this enormous ideological mistake will properly rectify the mess the province now finds itself in. Then federal representatives will have to follow suit in the Canadian parliament to correct their own egregious mistake."

Links - 3rd August 2026 (1 - Get Woke, Go Broke: Supergirl)

2026-08-03T09:11:00.000+08:00

The Washington Times on X - ""Supergirl" star on character being seen as queer icon: "I'm honored that that's happening, but I think because she doesn't live inside the binary of what we think a woman should be, that is what makes it so special and so exciting and so new.""

Daniel Friedman on X - "There are two times a woman-led superhero movie has been a box-office hit:
1. Wonder Woman. The character was established in “Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice” and her solo movie released ahead of the “Justice League” crossover movie.
2. Captain Marvel. The movie was teased in the post-credits scene for “Avengers: Infinity War” and her movie came between that and “Avengers: Endgame.”
The sequels to Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel, which were not propped up by major crossover films, did poorly. And the small, disappointing audiences for both of those sequels were 65 percent male. Every superhero movie, including female-led ones, has a predominantly male audience. The movie must be marketed to men to overcome the presumption that the film isn’t for them. Because men might bring their girlfriends to the female superhero movie, but women aren’t going to show up to this without men. And just about the worst thing you could say while promoting a girlboss superhero movie that has to appeal to a skeptical male audience is: “This is the gayest superhero movie ever.” Nobody is going to see this."
Harrison Casper on X - "The only two superhero movies to have a majority female audience were Wonder Woman and Aquaman. These movies actually had romance and sex appeal. It's difficult to get more women than men to show up for an action movie, all of Marvel's female-led movies had a majority male crowd."

Gazz on X - "The new Supergirl movie is dropping in 2 days and it's already cooked. Mostly because of Milly Alcock and her nonstop weird comments. This girl keeps saying she's getting backlash just for "simply existing as a woman" in the franchise. Then she hits us with "we've become very comfortable having this weird ownership of women’s bodies. I can’t really stop them." When people called her out she doubled down like "i didn’t even say men i said people and y’all are proving my point 😂" She even laughs about critics being anonymous burner accounts or "Dad of four, Christian" profiles and says if you're pissing them off you're doing something right. Brother... if your entire press tour is basically "anyone who doesn't love this is a weird misogynist who owns women's bodies" before the movie even comes out, what do you expect? Tracking is already in the toilet. This one's gonna flop so hard. Anyone else think the comments killed it before it even dropped? #Supergirl #MillyAlcock"

Gazz on X - "‘SUPERGIRL’ just dropped on Rotten Tomatoes at 59% 🔥 Lowest score for any DCU movie so far. Even the big outlets that usually bend over backwards for controversial shit didn’t like it. Daily Telegraph gave it 2/5 and called it an endless Mad Max/Star Wars rehash. Associated Press said it struggles to match Supergirl’s energy. San Francisco Chronicle only went 3/5. The reviews are rough. Box office tracking is already collapsing too — now sitting at $45-55 million opening weekend. That’s weak as hell for this level of movie. it’s happening. Anyone else think this is about to be one of the bigger DC bombs? #Supergirl"
Time to blame the chuds for brainwashing the people into not watching it. Apparently they are so toxic they've brainwashed professional reviewers as well

CinemaCopa on X - "There needs to be an understanding that the marketing campaign is the audience's first introduction to the movie, and nothing about Supergirl says, "Family of four, please invite me into your life and spend over $100 on me." Supergirl herself looks disgusting, like she's some desert lot lizard on her 3rd hangover in 2 days. Girls don't want to imagine themselves looking like trash, boys don't find this look mixed with her cynically aloofness personality attractive, and parents don't want their daughters thinking this what you aspire to be. Furthermore, the plot and look seems to be a cheap Guardians of the Galaxy reskin. How many times can you spend $100+ on a movie you've already seen in four different variations over the last 12 years? Then you have Milly Alcock actively alienating the audience by claiming Christian dads are "the right people to piss off" and announcing that Supergirl "swings both ways."
Audience: "How does this sell movie tickets?"
Marketing/ Alcock: "Movie tickets?"
Sure, you can make the case that there is a social media dogpile happening here. You could even argue that rival studios are actively amplifying the backlash. But the biggest indicator that Supergirl is in trouble is its own introduction. Blame marketing, blame Gunn, blame Alcock, but don’t blame the audience who announces that they refuse to spend their hard-earned money on something that practically screams it's made of garbage juice."
Left wingers always blame the audience. They hate the people whose money they feel entitled to

Meme - Soyjak: "SupergirI failed because people aren't ready for a female led Superhero movie."
Soyjak bound by Wonder Woman's Lasso of Truth: "I have been trained like a seal to defend all corpo slop with identity politics."

ETHAN VAN SCIVER on X - "I just got back from SUPERGIRL. Women shouldn't be allowed to write this stuff because all they do is recycle from the kewl unisex SCI FI shit they've already seen. This movie is filled with cliches and characters straight up ripped from Disney STAR WARS, GAME OF THRONES, and MAD MAX. LOBO doesn't even need to be in this. We're introduced to him as a violent, murderous god who shouldn't be approached, but the Arya Stark clone isn't afraid of him. And so...he respects her. Lobo spends the whole movie doing nothing but respecting and admiring Arya Stark and Supergirl. Because that's what female creators in these spaces do with these popular bad ass masculine characters. They siphon their clout onto their female characters like vampires. Still, I wasn't bored. I was very interested in Kara and I am interested in seeing more of her story. I hope she gets herself together and finds purpose and family on Earth. BTW, @JonMalin 's theory about Brainiac and Jor-El's message was debunked completely in this film. I give it a C. Mediocre, with an EXCELLENT performance from Milly Alcock, a very talented actress who should have been given better material."

︎ ︎venom on X - "Superhero for men like Spiderman, Batman and Superman struggle, fail, learn, face heartbreak, lose everything, and despite everything keep saving people. While female superheroes get drunk, do hookups, one-night stands, are messy, hate men and always show how superior they are to men. Most of the audience for superhero movies are men. Why would men watch movies that mock and hate them constantly? No wonder She-Hulk failed and now Supergirl is a flop."

Mr Melancholy on X - "Supergirl's failure like every other female led movie failure will be blamed on misogyny but I am here to tell you the real reason female led movies don't succeed at the box office because they're made with the idea that the movie is not for men. They go far as to uglyfy the female lead so she doesn't appeal to the male gaze. Whenever a movie of any genre is made with the word "female led" attached to it everything else fades away in the favour of "female" take supergirl for example the story on which is based on is completely stripped of anything interesting the hot character, the plot, the colours the side characters everything. All that remains is the girl boss bad ass female who is there to beat up men and prove her gender superiority and that is just not an interesting plot to follow. It doesn't help that you kinda alienated the biggest market for superhero movies "men"."

GeroDoc on X - "🙄Stop. Making. Shltty. Movies. This post, below, in the first picture, is yet another example of "fan baiting" (or just fan-blaming) - it's a strategy now honed and perfected for the modern era and executed in decentralized fashion via social media. It's a way to blame fans and critics for studios, actors, and marketers for making a movie that suck ass. Let me tell you about a movie that came out in 2022 - during the pandemic era no less, called "Everything Everywhere all at Once." While not a superhero film per se, it featured a strong female (and Chinese American) lead who travelled through time, fought and kicked ass with martial arts action, and was heroic. It is a science fiction, action, and adventure film. It was kinetic, inventive, & I personally greatly enjoyed it. It featured a female led cast and protagonist, the Mom who was the lead was a business owner and had a lesbian daughter who also was the major supporting character (excellent character development). Despite it being released during the pandemic era of 2022, it nearly 6x'd its modest production budget of 20 million and is one of the most profitable independent films of the modern era. Rotten Tomatoes has it at 95% average rating amongst viewers, and critics universally loved it. Supergirl is a shltty movie. I'M SICK TO DEATH OF CORPORATES AND THEIR TOADIES BLAMING THE POOR PERFORMANCE OF THEIR MEDIA PROJECTS ON "SEXISM" OR "RACISM" OR "MISOGYNY." I LIVED THROUGH THE 80s AND 90S. AMERICA DOESN'T CARE. YOU FUCKERS ARE MAKING THIS SHIT UP. FUCK YOU. The American public is more than happy to accept strong female leads in action films. They just can't be shltty, and they need to stop treating half of their audience like they hate them and condescending the other half, and then lazily just cutting and pasting women into male roles and then calling that "feminist," because that's disinteresting and a turnoff to basically everyone."

TG✨🇯🇲 on X - "I’m extremely exhausted by the James Gunn comic book movie formula. It’s played out. It’s like the same thing repackaged countless times, even with the DC films he hasn’t directed like Supergirl.
Animal companion to emotionally manipulate the audience✅
Excessive and cringeworthy needle drops✅
Forced humour✅
Space adventure with weird creatures✅
Action scenes shot to look like one take, often accompanied by a needle drop✅
I’m tired. If James Gunn is going to mould all the films in his DCU to feel like his own films, even the ones he doesn’t write and direct then I’m out."

Matt Jarbo on X - "Ana Nogueira is about to become the scapegoat for SUPERGIRL. The movie has debuted rotten, the screenplay is one of the biggest targets in the reviews, and people are already calling for her to be removed from WONDER WOMAN and TEEN TITANS. That was always going to happen. James Gunn spent years telling everyone DC Studios would not greenlight a movie until the script was finished and strong enough to shoot. Then he publicly praised SUPERGIRL’s screenplay as being “so fucking good off the bat.” So when the movie lands and critics complain about thin storytelling, weak character arcs and safe writing, somebody has to absorb that failure. It probably will not be Gunn. It will be the first-time feature screenwriter whose name is on the script. Never mind that executives approved it. Never mind that Gunn praised it. Never mind that scripts change during production, reshoots and editing. Her name is still on the finished movie, and Hollywood loves a convenient person to blame when an expensive project misses. Nogueira may have earned the trust to write three DC films, but SUPERGIRL could easily become the reason she only gets to make one. Will DC Studios stand behind Ana Nogueira, or quietly let her take the fall?"

Threads - "We won’t green light a film until we have a finished script we’re happy with and, in general, we won’t cast a film until the script is finished. This is why some projects are moving faster than anticipated and others more slowly. It’s always gonna be quality first no matter what."
Gabe Hernandez | Urban Fantasy Author on X - "This post will forever haunt James Gunn if Supergirl flops. Why?... . . Because this post is what's called a pace setter. He's telling you why things are the way they are. More importantly, he's establishing himself as the boss in full control. He's positioning himself as the leader that has a plan and is executing it per his grand design. There are no mistakes. You "just don't understand" the plan. Now, we have reality. Superman was good but underperformed due to avoidable flaws. Supergirl early reviews are mixed to poor and could be a major flop. Lanterns is up next, and the early buzz suffers from the same drab, dreary edge lord tone as Supergirl (w/ a first season written by Tom King, the son of a longtime WB executive) Then, Clayface arrives. A b-list Batman villain film without Batman in it. Sony did the same with their Spider-Man villains, and all failed except Venom. Next year, Superman 2, which is too early to tell, and The Batman 2, which was started from a saga before Gunn took charge. When you put them all together, you get a leader who says he has a plan, who tells you everything is working as designed, who tells you everything is under control. Reality paints a different picture. What do you think? Do you feel reassured that James Gunn is a leader with a plan that's working?"

ComicBook Clique | Facebook - "🗣 Has "Not Attractive Enough" become a death sentence for genuinely good movies, or do "fans" have a problem with women?
It is hard not to feel completely cynical about comic book movies lately, and it has nothing to do with the actual films. It is the exhausting, permissible cruelty that we just accept as part of the internet culture surrounding them. Every single time a woman takes on one of these major roles, it feels like we are just counting down the days until the internet tries to tear her apart. Look at what is happening right now with Milly Alcock. *Supergirl* just hit theaters, but the actual movie has been completely swallowed by bad-faith actors and culture-war grifters. She gave interviews where she pointed out the very real, uncomfortable truth that people feel a weird sense of ownership over women's bodies online. In response, the internet did exactly what it always does. It proved her point by twisting her words, running sensationalized headlines, and framing her as some villain who is attacking the fans. But if you dig beneath the manufactured outrage, the real driving force is even more shallow and pathetic. There is a massive, incredibly loud subsection of the online community targeting her simply because they do not find her attractive enough. Apparently, failing to cater to the narrow visual preferences of a bunch of basement dwellers is a punishable offense when it comes to a leading lady. Her fitness, her look, and her face all get hyper-analyzed and picked apart by people who act like a female superhero exists solely to be their personal eye candy. To be absolutely clear, I am not simping for a billion-dollar corporation, nor am I coming to the defense of a wealthy celebrity. The studio and the stars will be fine. I am just deeply saddened by how toxic, yet completely predictable, the entire discourse has become. We have seen this script play out so many times before that it is practically a formula. Rachel Zegler, Brie Larson, Kelly Marie Tran, Daisy Ridley, Moses Ingram, Ava DuVernay... the list just keeps growing. These women are mercilessly bullied for having opinions, for how they look, or simply for existing in spaces that a vocal minority feels entitled to control. The most disturbing part is how any perceived career speedbump or box office failure for these women is celebrated as a massive victory. It is treated as a win for a subsection of society that wants to feel like they have the power to punish and humble women they do not like or agree with. Look, I am not telling anyone that they have to like the Supergirl film or even watch it. Everyone is free to pass on a movie. But can we go back to judging these films on merit, or has that ship sailed into 4chan territory completely? The most depressing part is that a genuinely good, enjoyable film is going to die on the vine because of this. Instead of talking about the story, the performance, or the world-building, the entire conversation is poisoned. A young actress gets cast, she experiences an onslaught of scrutiny, she speaks up about how toxic it is, and then she gets labeled as difficult or ungrateful while the internet review-bombs the project. It is a race to the bottom where faceless burner accounts and media outlets extract maximum outrage for clicks, and we all just shrug and say it comes with the territory. They'll say I'm being disingenuous but actors like The Rock have been putting out slop for years with nowhere near the level of scrutiny that someone like Brie Larson has although she has a better filmography. We are building these massive, multi-billion dollar universes, but the human cost for the women leading them is becoming entirely too high. It makes you wonder why any actress would ever want to put on a cape when the reward is just being turned into a psychological punching bag for the internet. Then again, serves them right I guess?😔 (Please be kind to the chuds in the comments. They truly don't know any better. Pity them)"
It's weird how they recognize that the chuds make up the majority of their market but still insist on spiting them, then get upset when their products bomb. Of course, OP in comments is repeating the cope about the chuds brainwashing normies into not watching it

Nicholas Piff Peterson | Facebook - "It genuinely terrifies me that Supergirl only made $3.6 million domestically at the box office on Friday, July 3 — just a week after opening. That kind of brutal second-weekend drop after a soft $37–38 million debut is absolutely scary and shows how quickly audience interest faded. For a big-budget DC movie like this, those numbers are alarming and raise serious questions about the long-term health of the franchise. It’s terrifying to think we might not get a Supergirl 2 or any real continuation for Millie Alcock’s version because the studio could see this as too risky moving forward. Superhero fatigue is real, and when even promising new entries struggle this much this fast, it makes you worry about the future of these characters on the big screen. Here’s hoping the full run and word-of-mouth can salvage something, but right now the outlook feels pretty bleak."
These are the people who go on about white fragility. It seemed like in every other post, he was saying he was "terrified" by some trivial nonsense like this

Links - 2nd August 2026 (2 - Two Tier Policing in the UK)

2026-08-02T17:08:00.000+08:00

Andy Ngo on X - "Controversial anti-Islam activist @koreanscot was detained on suspicion of terrorism upon his return to the UK. Police used the same law to detain and charge Tommy Robinson with a terror crime (he was recently acquitted at trial)."
Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 on X - "UK "terrorism" laws being misused again to detain people critical to the ideology of islam. 75% of Mi5 terror watch list consists of Muslims. Literal terrorists. Yet they spend their time doing this!"

Doc  on X - "I'd rather share a country with people who crossed oceans to build a life than with people who won't lift a finger to make life better for anyone but themselves. I said what I said."
Apparently "refugees" move to the West for reasons other than making life better for themselves. Though tbf I can see how most illegal immigrants would be less insufferable than most left wingers

Bernie on X - "A man was arrested by police in Britain after he posted a picture online of himself posing with a gun in the US He was then held overnight in a cell and bailed… “I was told to be careful what I say online and I need to understand how it makes people feel,” WHAT?? The police seized his computers and phone and so he had been unable to even work. Then they dropped the charges. The process is the punishment 💣"
IT consultant arrested after posing with gun on LinkedIn - "Jon Richelieu-Booth said he was shocked by the “Orwellian” decision by West Yorkshire Police (WYP) to prosecute him over the social media post... A bail document seen by The Telegraph refers to an allegation of possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence and a further allegation of stalking related to a photograph of a house that appeared on his social media. He said he was held overnight in a cell before being interviewed. Mr Richelieu-Booth said he was initially released on bail until late October. He alleges that police officers then visited his property on three further occasions before he was re-arrested in October for allegedly breaching his bail conditions. However, that charge was later dropped... Describing his ordeal as “massive overreach”, Mr Richelieu-Booth added: “Anybody should be allowed to say anything they wish, as long as it’s not hateful. “When did we go from a society where you can have a discussion with somebody and go, ‘You know what? I don’t like your opinion. I’m going to disagree with you, but I’m not going to tell you why, I’m going to call the police’. “When did we get so thin-skinned as a society?” He said: “I’ve always believed in truth and justice and stood up for the police and believed they are doing an important job of keeping order. Now I have no faith in the police.”"
Given what left wingers define as "hateful", even allowing the police to persecute people for that is a bad idea

Israel-Gaza: Met Police in fresh 'two-tier' row after failing to stop pro-Palestine mob descending on London synagogue - "Despite a police exclusion zone being put in place, protestors appeared to defy it by displaying a banner saying: “JEWS SAY: ANTI-ZIONISM ≠ ANTISEMITISM”, outside St John’s Wood United Synagogue... Itai Gal, co-founder of Stop the Hate, who also staged a demonstration on the evening, said that police had "lost control". Another counter-protester said: "The police won’t look after us. They don’t give us any protection.""

British Intel on X - "🚨🇬🇧 WATCH: TWO TIER POLICING ON FULL DISPLAY IN THE HEART OF LONDON A Christian man peacefully preaching in the UK is dragged away and silenced - meanwhile, a Muslim preacher stands at Big Ben and Parliament with a microphone, uninterrupted, untouched, completely free to continue. Same country. Same activity. Two very different outcomes. Fair? Equal? Balanced? This is selective enforcement - the clearest example yet of Britain’s two tier policing. Is this the country you recognise?"

Revealed: Police quizzed wrongfully arrested Jewish mother over her faith - "A wrongfully arrested mother was interrogated by police about her Jewish faith and involvement in a Holocaust Memorial Day event at her daughter’s school, the JC can reveal. Citing a claim of “harassment” against her, an officer asked Rosalind Levine, 47, about emails she had sent her daughter’s school in which she offered to help arrange for Holocaust survivors to address pupils and requested the removal of her child from Christian prayer. Levine and her partner, Maxie Allen, 50, received a payout from Hertfordshire Police earlier this month after the force admitted they had been wrong to send six officers to arrest the couple at their Borehamwood family home in January over complaints the pair had made about their daughter’s school. CCTV footage captured the uniformed officers hauling the parents away as their three-year-old, Francesca, cried."

Concerned Citizen on X - "🚨🇬🇧 Meanwhile in once Great Britain This is insane.
Police:- “When you express things on the internet - do you know how serious it becomes?” “Because I wrote the letter ‘N’?” Man went to respond to a comment on social media with the intention of replying ‘No’. He missed off the ‘O’ and Police are now contacting him of a suspected Hate Crime, believing he intended to start a Tower of replies beginning with ‘N’. The UK has truly fallen."

Basil the Great on X - "THE UK IS A POLICE STATE "There is no law anymore in the UK. The law is just a tool of Government control now" Listen to this horrific story from Katie Hopkins Interviewed UNDER CAUTION by the Police for a joke she made on her own stage show about herself because it was perceived to cause offence She was WARNED by the Police off the record not to tell the world what happened She's releasing this in America in the hope it doesn't come back to her legally in the UK"

Wide Awake Media on X - "British police arrest a man for sharing a social media post that caused somebody "anxiety". 🤡 "Why am I in cuffs because of something he shared, then I shared?" "Because someone has been caused anxiety based upon your social media post. That's why you've been arrested.""

Two-tier policing of protests is REAL: Damning report into the Met calls for Labour mayor Sadiq Khan to be stripped of control - "Two-tier policing of protests is 'not merely a perception but a reality' in Britain's biggest force, a damning report has revealed. Scotland Yard is prioritising the rights of demonstrators over the ordinary public, failing to make arrests and treating some protest groups more leniently, which may lead the public to believe 'the forces of law and order have lost control of the streets and yielded control to a mob,' according to a new assessment. A report by the think tank Policy Exchange has called for the Metropolitan Police to be put back into 'special measures' due to its failure to handle protests properly and tackle runaway rates of mobile phone thefts, burglary and shoplifting. In a stark assessment of the Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley's three years in office, the report points to public confidence in the force falling to an all-time low as many residents and visitors believe 'there is a culture of impunity to crime in London'. It comes as the force is solving only a tiny fraction of thefts, identifying the culprit in merely 1 in 20 robberies and burglaries, 1 in 13 shoplifting offences and 1 in 179 street muggings. Now the Policy Exchange wants London Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan to be stripped of responsibility for the Met's oversight, saying the Home Secretary should be given the power to ensure the force's performance improves. Entitled 'A Long, Long Way To Go', the report criticises the force for choosing 'to prioritise the rights of protestors over the rights of the wider public' and accuses officers of doing more to protect Muslims over the Jewish community in various demonstrations. It says: 'With the apparently differential treatment of different groups based on either the cause of the protest or the identity of those protesting, it has become increasingly clear that "two-tier policing" is not merely a perception but a reality. 'This inconsistent application of police powers and the law is perhaps one of the most troubling aspects of modern policing – a factor which has seriously damaged policing's reputation for fairness in the eyes of many.' In one example cited, the force applied for 'very stringent conditions' in a United Kingdom Independence Party protest in Tower Hamlets on October 25, on the grounds that the area had the largest percentage of Muslim residents in the UK and the protest caused 'significant concern locally'... 'If the rationale for the force's decision is because they feared public disorder from those resisting the protest it is tantamount to an admission that 'mob-rule' has taken priority over the rule of law – an unacceptable state of affairs.' The report also found: 'Too often police choose to prioritise the rights and freedoms of protestors over the rights of ordinary people going about their daily lives', with officers failing to arrest those committing criminal damage or shouting 'jihad' at pro-Palestinian rallies. It called for the Met to face an inspection on its approach to protests, saying there needs to be transparency about decision-making. Elsewhere, the Policy Exchange suggested officers and staff be measured on crime fighting, with those failing to deliver being removed from their posts. In the latest public survey, only 45 per cent of Londoners believe the force is doing a good job, down from 69 per cent in 2016. Police station front counters have shut at a record rate, with just two set to remain open 24 hours a day in a city of 9 million people... The Policy Exchange blamed Sir Sadiq for reducing stop and search saying this 'has had a catastrophic impact on the fight against crime'. The report praised the Met's record reductions in homicide, but said: 'There is certainly no indication of the force taking a "zero tolerance" to anything other than the most serious crimes."

Twitter user is jailed for 18 months for two anti-immigration tweets made after Christmas market car attack that were viewed just 33 times : r/europe_sub - "> His posts were reported to the police by Yarwood's own brother-in-law who he did not get on with.
Nice fam!
> Yarwood replied: 'Head for the hotels housing them and burn them to the ground.'
We have seen worse from the pro Palestine crowd and nothing's done."

Twitter user is jailed for 18 months for two anti-immigration tweets made after Christmas market car attack that were viewed just 33 times : r/europe_sub - "Yes, it’s not a good thing that he said. But so what? Why should he be put in jail for one day, let alone 18 months for this? The government wouldn’t give a fuck if you said “kill all men” “kill the Russians” etc. but the moment it’s “kill the migrants” , it’s fine to ruin your life and jail you for years over it? I mean it was and still is a popular trend online for women to say “kill all men”, so either you’re advocating for millions of women to be jailed for that, or you’re a blatant hypocrite. Not only is that terrible enough, but even if you’re delusional enough to think that’s okay, you really think the government is capable and ethical enough of deciding what messages had harmful intent? Say you’re playing some shooting game and you send a text to your mate that we need to “kill all the Somalians” for example, and the government will take that, label you a right wing exttremist and jail you for years."

Darren Grimes on X - "Judge Andrew Lees, who got Andrew Clarke’s name wrong in court, has in recent times given five years for inciting racial hatred. He has given just a few years to a man who, angry over a queue query that he had just jumped, popped on a balaclava and killed an innocent man. Wow."

Men with machetes and blades are constantly fighting in and around my street. How long does a police investigation actually take? We've been reporting these fights since March 2025. : r/LegalAdviceUK - "Our area has unexpectedly become a hotspot for violence between what I can only assume are rival gangs. Men dressed up in dark clothes often covered screaming at each other and swinging large blades. I've had my car damaged twice as they throw each other into them. My car insurance premium has more than doubled because of this. We've reported it to police and we've been told they're investigating. We've called 999 every single time it happens, but they just keep fighting along the length of our street. We're not talking short knives here. They're like the length of your forearm! Can't even let me kids play outside in the evening because that's when they're fighting most often. We're talking at least two or three times per month. Groups of 3-5 men. This has been going on since March. How much longer should I be expecting to wait before the police just set up some kind of sting operation and arrest them all?"

I've been invited to a police interview over comments I made while having an operation in hospital. Do I need a solicitor? : r/LegalAdviceUK - " I was getting a flexible sigmoidoscopy in hospital 2 weeks ago. During the prepration stage I was really nervous and when I'm nervous I tend to make a lot of jokes. It's just a habit when I'm terrified. First joke was, "It's been a while since my wife's done this to me." Second joke was, "I hope you enjoy the view, I usually charge for showings." These two jokes resulted in a complaint from a member of the medical team (4 people total, 1 of which complained) who were performing the operation on me. Police visited my house this afternoon and have asked me to make contact with the station to arrange a suitable time for an interview. I haven't been told I'm being charged with anything. I'm really worried about this here. I know this is my own fault but what should I expect to happen? Can I maybe write a letter of apology to the hospital?"

Metropolitan Police on X - "A UKIP protest that was due to take place in Whitechapel next Saturday, 31 January must now take place outside the borough of Tower Hamlets following the imposition of Public Order Act conditions. We have intervened to prevent serious disruption and serious disorder."
Andrew Fox on X - "“Highly likely to lead to violence and serious disorder” are the key words, here. Their position is that if UKIP marched in Tower Hamlets, the locals would likely react violently, so the march is banned. As with the Aston Villa game in Birmingham, there is one very unfortunate logical conclusion: minority groups can affect decision-making by threatening violence. Therefore the next logical conclusion is that if the Jewish community had wanted Palestinian marches banned near synagogues or in heavily Jewish areas, the correct answer was not patient, good faith engagement (as this often did not work), but instead to threaten violence against the Palestinian protesters. This is an absolutely insane state of affairs."
This is how it works in Singapore

Kosher on X - "Manchester, UK Islamists in armbands are patrolling the streets and are chasing people down with horses. Police let it happen."

Revealed: The true story of the 'horsemen of the Ayatollah' who rode to defend pro-Iranian supporters in Manchester - sparking claims of a 'sharia police patrol': IAN GALLAGHER - "Earlier this month two fierce looking men on horseback suddenly appeared in Manchester city centre causing passers-by to stare in baffled wonder. Wearing peaked caps and what initially appeared to be uniform, the riders seemed to materialise out of nowhere, said one witness, like 'members of a strange militia'. At times they ignored instructions from police and instead trotted imperiously around the city streets 'as if on patrol'. Outside the Manchester Islamic Centre on Sidney Street that night on March 4, mourners were holding a candlelit vigil to honour Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, killed in the US-Israeli attacks on Tehran. Such provocation risked a counter action from anti-regime protesters, and so it proved. By 9pm trouble was brewing. Soon, hundreds faced each other across a no man's land secured by lines of police. And it was against this backdrop, as the atmosphere grew febrile, that the two-man cavalry arrived. That police officers at the scene, dozens of them, were all on foot only served to heighten the spectacle's incongruity. Leaving no doubt as to their allegiance, the bearded horsemen planted themselves firmly in the pro-Ayatollah camp, whose supporters were outnumbered. 'They were guarding their own and trying to intimidate people,' claimed a witness. 'Some of the anti-regime people kept asking who they were but they wouldn't tell them. They just sat on their horses, staring coldly ahead, not saying anything.'... one of the riders is a 35-year-old engineering lecturer who told us he did not support the Ayatollah but was simply acting as a peacemaker on the night. He owns both horses, Khyber and Lionheart, and stables them 20 miles outside the city centre. Describing himself as a British-born Pakistani Muslim, he said he was aware the vigil was taking place because some of his friends were attending... he claimed he only brought the animals to the city on the night because he wanted 'to get them trained for traffic so they wouldn't get spooked easily'. He said the sharia suggestions were wrong and denied chasing down anti-regime protesters. 'The video shows us going towards them, but I wasn't chasing them. I only went to them to try to say, "This is not the place for this".' Despite entreaties to police to arrest the riders, or at least get them to dismount and send them on their way, they instead let them go about their business. This enraged some of the anti-regime protesters and led to testy exchanges. One man is overheard on footage telling a police officer: 'They should be being nicked, they've just been chasing people on horses. Why aren't they being nicked?' The officer replies that he could hardly be expected to 'pull him off a horse'. To this the man shoots back: 'If they had a Union Jack on they'd be off the horse.' Still, some credit must go to the police. Beyond a few scuffles, they managed to keep both sides apart and the night ended peacefully with no arrests... A few days after the vigil, police contacted the horse owner, not to investigate what happened – but because 'they were concerned' about his welfare. Today, the horseman is keen to play down the incident: 'It looked more like a protest than a vigil. So I stopped by and saw some people and friends that I knew."

DJ Lippy on X - "Just when you thouhht it couln't get any worse. The Manchester police tracked down the sharia patrol horsemen who were threatening anti-Ayatolla protestor to perform a welfare check and make sure he was OK. We are a joke country and it looks like the police have been captuted by Islamists."

Melissa Morris on X - "Look at the UK, they've now banned swords because of Muslim violence. Guess who is still carrying around large knives and swords (muslims) and who is defenseless (English). They hide weapons in mosques, which law enforcement typically avoids raiding. There’s even video from a protest where an officer told them to put their weapons in the mosque. These policies don’t stop violence - they mainly end up disarming the average, law-abiding citizen. They make it easier for Britain to drift toward a system more like Iran’s. At this point, it seems many of the most corrupt and unethical politicians are the ones currently in power, and it feels increasingly deliberate. Truly evil."

The British Patriot on X - "WOW 🚨: In Britain, a citizen is recording in a public area when a few cars drive by. A police officer approaches and warns the individual. He says failure to provide their personal information could lead to an arrest on “terrorism charges”. Britain is lost."

Meme - Graham Linehan: "Pretty open and shut case for the @metpoliceuk. Or are they too busy working for Fat Tony and his gang?"
"Hang every zog pedo cunt"

Russian Garbage Human on X - "21-year-old son pleads guilty to throwing traffic cone at police.
- The cone didn't even hit the police
- It is the same judge that oversaw Southport
- All done via tele-link
- 3-5 years sentencing guidelines
- Immediately remanded to custody -
"Justice" in 72hrs because he isn't brown, muslim or a leftie.
If only he broke a policewomans nose instead. Or r*ped a working class English girl."

Jonathan Wong on X - "3-5 years for a throwing a traffic cone is wild when Hamid Safi, a Rochdale child rape gang member, only received 4 years. This is how disposable white lives are to them."

HJB News on X - "British police are now recruiting more Muslim police officers. A spokesman said it would make many citizens across Britain feel more comfortable with officers blending in with their communities."

Lozzy B 🇦🇺𝕏 on X - "Violent African Valdo Calocane stabbed to death Barnaby Webber & Grace O'Malley on 13 June 2023 in Nottingham, before killing Ian Coates & trying to kill three others. The Nottingham Inquiry heard how murderer Calocane refused consent for toxicology samples while he was in custody after the attacks & only the victims were tested for drugs & alcohol. On Wednesday, Grace's father said it was "disgusting" that the bodies of his daughter, her friend & fellow student Barnaby were tested for drugs & alcohol after they were killed while the actual murderer was not. The Western world is in complete moral decay, we have Two tier Policing, antiwhite laws & a broken justice system. Our cities are war zones & our people are being slaughtered on our streets. Enough is enough."

Don Keith on X - "🚨UK police knock on man’s door over Facebook criticism of Keir Starmer calling him a dictator. How ironic that the only leaders that send foot soldiers to question or arrest people for calling them a dictator are actual dictators. If you don’t see the similarities between Britain and Nazi Germany or Stalin’s Russia you have to be blind and deaf or one of their followers. Labour’s regime wastes resources silencing natives while ignoring migrant crime waves. This is outright tyranny against free speech."

Iceland founder blasts 'two-tier policing' after officers rushed to store when suspicious customer falsely accused staff of racism - yet they ignore violent shoplifters - "Iceland founder Sir Malcolm Walker says 'two-tier policing isn't just happening on the streets' as he revealed cops rushed to one of his stores three minutes after a phoney accusation of racism was made against a shop supervisor. The entrepreneur made a formal complaint to Scotland Yard after the Asian supervisor was handcuffed and dragged to a police car by officers who rushed to the scene when a black customer made a complaint of racism after being caught tampering with milk bottles. In contrast, Sir Malcolm said, police often did not attend even when staff had been seriously hurt or threatened with violence by shoplifters."
Two tier policing is a far right myth with no basis in reality

'Intoxicated' Nigerian man who sexually assaulted teenager is spared jail due to his 'troubled background' - as victim tells court he 'ruined her life' and is now scared to walk alone - "Ayomide Famakinde, 23, was given a community order by the judge who said the offence was a 'momentary aberration'."
Man jailed over anti-immigrant posts viewed only 33 times - "Luke Yarwood, 36, called on social media platform X for people to go to migrant hotels and “burn them to the ground” following a car attack on a Christmas market in Magdeburg, Germany, in December 2024"
Left wingers believe that words speak louder than actions, after all

Is the West empathizing with those who threaten it?

2026-08-02T13:41:00.000+08:00

The saddest and most tragic bit is that in normal Stockholm Syndrome, it is the weaker party which sucuumbs. But with wokeness, it is the stronger party - because it has been destroyed from within.

Islamo-leftism is only bewildering if you don't realise that they share a common enemy - the West (left wingers are quite keen on destroying it even when Islamism isn't in the picture).

Is the West empathizing with those who threaten it?

"What happened in Stockholm over six days, the West has been doing, collectively, gradually, and largely without acknowledgement for the better part of three decades.

The psychological mechanics of Stockholm Syndrome are important to understand precisely because they do not look like weakness from the inside. The hostage does not feel afraid. They feel enlightened. They feel that they alone have seen past the hatred and understood the grievance beneath it. They have convinced themselves that empathy is the only honest response, and that anyone who refuses to share it is the real aggressor. This is not weakness performing as courage. It is weakness that has genuinely come to believe it is courage. That distinction matters, because it explains why the syndrome is so resistant to correction. You cannot argue someone out of it by pointing to the gun. They have already reframed the gun.

Now scale that psychology across an entire civilization and you begin to understand what has happened to the West in the years since September 11, 2001.

The West, terror, and Stockholm Syndrome

The attacks on that morning did not merely kill nearly three thousand people. They introduced a species of dread into Western consciousness that has never fully left. Not the ordinary, manageable fear of crime or accident or illness, but something far more destabilizing, the fear of an adversary that was ideologically motivated, globally networked, indifferent to death, and explicitly contemptuous of every value Western liberalism holds sacred. The rational response to that kind of threat is to name it, analyze it, and resist it. And for a brief window, the West attempted to do exactly that.

But naming the threat required saying uncomfortable things. It required acknowledging that the attacks were carried out in the name of a specific interpretation of a specific religion. It required distinguishing between that interpretation and the faith of millions who shared none of its violence, while still insisting that the distinction be made honestly rather than weaponized to shut down scrutiny altogether. That is a difficult line to walk. And rather than walk it, the West largely chose not to walk at all.

What followed was not tolerance. Tolerance is a conscious and principled choice to coexist with ideas you find wrong or even repugnant. What the West developed was something quite different: a reflex aversion to any critique that might give offence, backed by a social and institutional apparatus designed to enforce that aversion.

The evolutionary psychologist and author Prof. Gad Saad has a precise and devastating name for this symptom: suicidal empathy. It is empathy so unmoored from self-preservation that it actively enables the destruction of the society practicing it. The West has developed a civilizational immune system that has been tricked into attacking the body it was designed to protect. Criticism of radical Islamism was reframed as Islamophobia. Analysis of the ideological content of jihadist movements was reframed as racism. Those who insisted on the distinction between Islam as a faith and Islamism as a political ideology were accused of drawing false lines to legitimize bigotry.

The tools of liberal discourse, accusations of prejudice, demands for sensitivity, and the machinery of social shame were systematically deployed to prevent liberal societies from defending themselves.

This was not an accident. And it was not, in the main, a conspiracy. It was the aggregate outcome of millions of individual calculations, each one driven by the same underlying impulse: the belief, conscious or otherwise, that the safest thing to do was to avoid provoking the people most likely to respond with violence. The hostage, rationalized across an entire culture.

The consequences of this have been profound and they have been methodical. Radical Islamism, the ideological project of imposing a theocratic political order, through violence or through the patient manipulation of open societies, did not simply persist in the absence of serious Western opposition. It expanded. It found its way into universities, where entire departments became sites of sympathy for movements that would, in their ideal world, abolish the university as an institution. It found its way into media organizations, where editorial cultures developed a consistent asymmetry: the fiercest scrutiny reserved for Western institutions and the gentlest handling extended to the ideologies most hostile to Western values. It found its way into political parties, and into the corridors of governments whose explicit purpose was the security of citizens those governments were increasingly reluctant to protect.

The vehicle for much of this was a political alliance that would, to any honest observer, appear bewildering. The Western left, with a tradition that built its identity on secularism, feminism, gay rights, freedom of speech and the universality of human dignity, found itself in a sustained and largely unexamined partnership with movements explicitly opposed to every one of those commitments.

The Red-Green Alliance, as it has been called in various forms across Europe and North America, is not a coherent ideological project. It is a coalition of convenience, united not by shared values but by a shared adversary: Western liberal democracy itself, and more specifically, the United States and Israel as its most visible embodiments.

From the perspective of the left, the logic has a surface plausibility. If the primary threat is imperialism, capitalism, and Western hegemony, then any force that opposes those things is at least provisionally allied. The fact that Islamist movements are profoundly anti-feminist, explicitly homophobic, and committed to theocratic governance is, in this framework, a secondary concern and a detail to be addressed later, in a future that the alliance somehow never quite reaches.

This is not strategic thinking. It is precisely the Stockholm dynamic operating at scale: the threat has been reframed as a grievance, the grievance has been elevated above all competing moral considerations, and the people raising those competing considerations have been designated the real problem.

There is only one explanation that fully accounts for what we have witnessed, and it runs deeper than politics or ideology. It runs into the psychology of populations that have watched, over a generation, what happens when these movements are confronted directly. They watched the towers fall. They watched Madrid, and Bali, and London, and Paris, and Nice, and Manchester. They watched editorial offices attacked and cartoonists hunted. They watched a teacher beheaded in a Paris suburb for showing his class a cartoon. They processed all of this, and somewhere beneath the level of conscious policy, they drew a conclusion: that the cost of serious resistance was higher than they were prepared to pay.

Appeasement and the Stockholm dynamic

Appeasement, historically, has always presented itself as wisdom. Neville Chamberlain did not believe he was surrendering. He believed he was being pragmatic, buying time, avoiding unnecessary provocation. The citizens of Western democracies who have watched their institutions bend and contort to accommodate demands they would never extend to any other group are not, in most cases, conscious cowards. They are people who have internalized a threat and adapted to it in the only way that felt survivable: by deciding, at some preconscious level, that cooperation was safer than conflict.

But here is where the Stockholm dynamic becomes not merely self-defeating but actively destructive. The hostage who sympathizes with the captor does not thereby become safe. They become useful. They become, in the language of the phenomenon, a resource for the captor, someone who will defend him, argue his case, undermine rescue attempts, and extend his reach.

The West, in its appeasement of radical Islamism, has not purchased security. It has provided infrastructure. Its universities propagate the ideology. Its media launders it. Its political classes legitimate it. Its legal systems protect it from scrutiny under hate speech frameworks that, with a consistency too systematic to be coincidental, are applied asymmetrically.

And then there is the question of Israel: the single sharpest test of whether the West's proclaimed values are genuine commitments or situational performances. The state of Israel is a liberal democracy, born in the aftermath of history's most systematic attempt to exterminate a people, surrounded since its founding by adversaries committed to its destruction. It is also, by any honest accounting, the primary target of the same radical Islamist ideology whose penetration of Western institutions this essay describes. One might expect that a West committed to liberal democracy, to women's rights, to the rule of law, and to the security of minorities, would find in Israel a natural ally and in its enemies a natural adversary.

What one observes instead is something close to the opposite... The people most loudly calling for the elimination of Israel are, in many cases, the same people most loudly claiming to speak for progressive values. The incoherence is not incidental. It is diagnostic...

The question that follows from all of this is the hardest one of all, and it deserves to be asked without flinching: how does a civilization extricate itself from a collective, largely subconscious trauma inflicted by those it allowed inside its own walls?

The language of therapy is instructive here, because that is precisely what this is: a civilizational trauma response. Before any group therapy can begin, before the West can sit in a circle and honestly examine what has been done to it and what it has done to itself, it must first escape its hostage status. And that is no simple undertaking. The particular cruelty of this situation is that the captors were not smuggled in under cover of darkness or parachuted behind enemy lines. They were invited. They were welcomed. They arrived through open borders and liberal asylum frameworks and multicultural policies designed, in good faith, to demonstrate that Western societies were better than the nativist alternatives. The welcome mat was not a trap set by the West's enemies. It was woven by the West's own hands, from the very values it is now being strangled with...

What does recovery look like?

The first step, as in any psychological disorder, is recognition. The West needs to be honest. Not performatively honest. Not honest in the narrow ways that attract social approval, but genuinely, rigorously honest about what has happened to its institutions and why...

It needs, most of all, to recover the confidence that free societies are worth defending. It requires a strategic re-calculation as a moral conviction.

Stockholm Syndrome is ultimately a failure of self-respect. The hostage who sympathizes with the captor has come, at some level, to believe that their own life and values are not worth the cost of resistance. The cure is not aggression. It is the quiet reacquisition of the belief that you have something worth protecting, and the willingness to say so clearly, without apology, and in the face of whatever disapproval that clarity attracts.

The West was not built by people who confused appeasement with virtue. It will not be saved by them either."

Links - 2nd August 2026 (1 - Masculinity)

2026-08-02T09:39:00.000+08:00

Meme - "Identifying problems now makes you an incel"
"Whoever made this image is an incel"
Crying female Wojak with glass of wine, 3 cats and baby: "Toxic masculinity is a major problem"
Normal woman: "43% of boys are raised by single mothers and 78% of teachers are female"
Crying female wojak: "So?"
Normal woman: "So the problem is clearly a lack of Masculinity."
An incel is nowadays anyone who says anything a woman dislikes

‘I’m Comfortable With My Masculinity,’ Says Man With Zero Masculinity | Babylon Bee

Threads - "Once they hit adulthood, men rarely get positive reinforcement. So if you see a random guy wearing a shirt that you like, tell him you like his shirt. If a friend is having a rough time, give him a hug. Those small moments of positive reinforcement will carry men great distances, and they will never forget them."

Mme - "OPINION. MICHELLE COTTLE
Is the Cure to Male Loneliness
Receiving a letter of marque to hunt drug cartel kingpins with the boys?"

@zesbian on Tumblr - "straight men trying to make Serious war dramas and accidentally making incredibly tender homoerotic cinema is the funniest thing"
"Can you imagine being so fucking disgustingly touch-starved and sex-saturated that any amount of fraternal camaraderie instantly signals “they are gays, they are in a homosexual relationship” to your ghoulish, porn-addled brain?"
Left wingers don't understand male friendship

Joel Berry on X - "I’ve had it with the endless repetition of the “men are turning to Tate because Conservatives don’t have any aspirational masculine role models” take. It’s not true. We have thousands of them. In fact, Conservatives have almost ALL of them. The difference is they offer a hard road to become a real man, and Tate offers an easy road to LARP as one. Most people go for the junk food, the slop, the broad and easy road. That’s just how it is. Stop wringing your hands over how to make the hard road more attractive. It’s not, and it never will be. Call men to something greater instead."
Scott Greer 6’2” IQ 187 on X - "You guys don't offer a "hard road" for young men. You guys just offer constant simping for women while telling young men to eat shit. Anyone who offers something else looks refreshing by comparison"

Chris Williamson on X - "“Male depression is nearly always a result of learned helplessness, but health providers treat it like female depression and try to make men feel loved instead of powerful.” — @AdamLaneSmith"

Is it okay if we girls approach to just compliment a guy? : r/SGExams - "So its 12.52am , i am like sitting on this swing in the playground and there is this guy exactly infront of me now like doing calisthenics in the fitness corner and i am like awe-struck by his form. Fellar is literally levitating on the pull up bars now. So i am contemplating if i should just go over to him and just tell him that his calisthenics is impressive. Cos i just want to compliment him and like no other intentions. I also dont wanna disturb him also la So are you guys okay with a girl coming up to you and complimenting you for something, with no other intentions in mind , or would you rather we dont say anything at all?"
"When I was sec 1 there was this pretty girl in my class who said "I like your eyes" and then stared at me like she was mesmerised. I'm 20 now and I still remember that moment as clear as day. So yes, please do"

The Atlantic on X - "The online right has a fondness for J. D. Vance. So why are right-wing accounts posting memes of the vice president that make him look like a doofus? @alibreland reports:"
Marc J. Randazza 🇺🇸 🇮🇹 🇧🇷 on X - "When I was in the hospital one of my buddies called me up When I answered the phone, he said “hey bro, I heard you’re in the hospital and you might die” I weekly said “yeah man” as the tumors choked my blood supply, and it took great effort to even breathe. He then yelled into the phone “HA HA, FAG!” And then he hung up the phone and blocked me until the next day Any man would know why that made me feel loved and made me laugh so hard that I was hyperventilating. Nobody who works for the Atlantic nor who reads it as a serious publication could possibly understand."
George Alexopoulos on X - ""In this hard hitting article we analyze the deadly far-right concept called 'comedy.' ""
Nate Hochman on X - ""Let me begin my long navel-gazing essay about the online right by informing you that I don't understand the online right at all""

Thread by @AuronMacintyre on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "Andrew Tate is terrible but turning him into some form of litmus test is a mistake and plays directly into his hands. Tate only exists because American conservatives have failed so thoroughly at speaking to young men and portraying masculinity in a positive light. Again, Tate is gross but he has an audience for a reason and the worst thing you could do is make him more dangerous and forbidden. The way to deal with Tate is to make him irrelevant by providing such a strong alternative that no one would bother with him. If you find that your movement is unable to provide a strong and compelling vision of masculinity because it is too afraid of offending the wrong people then you shouldn't be surprised when a guy like Tate comes around to fill that void.
Andrew is bad, Andrew Tate is gross, but there is a larger problem. "Why are you defending Andrew Tate!". I'm sorry wat?"

The young men leaving traditional churches for 'masculine' Orthodox Christianity - "Young, single men are flocking to the Orthodox church after discovering the “masculine” Christian religion through online influencers. Some converts said they felt disillusioned with the “feminisation” of the Protestant church and were attracted to the “authenticity” of Orthodoxy, which they claim pushes them physically and mentally. Priests are now planning to open new parishes to accommodate the “tsunami” of young men who have converted since the pandemic. They say that most of the new converts found the Orthodox church by watching YouTube videos or listening to podcasts... A 2023 survey by the Orthodox Studies Institute of Orthodox clergy in 20 parishes across 15 states found there had been a 80 per cent increase in the number of converts to the Orthodox church in 2022, compared with pre-pandemic levels in 2019. Of these, 60 per cent were men, compared with 54 per cent in 2019. Many of them had been drawn to the “masculine” nature of church, which puts emphasis on denial and pushing yourself physically. Worshippers must stand for long services, which can last upwards of five hours. They must fast, too, sometimes for up to 40 days. This, some felt, was in stark contrast to other religious denominations where they felt the church had been “feminised”... “It’s unfortunate that feminism has kind of sunk its teeth into all of our organisations to include Christianity,” he said. He said that at Protestant churches, the majority of the leaders “aren’t good, strong men”, whereas the Orthodox church leaders are more like “father figures”. He said: “They look like men. They look like fathers, they’re strong, spiritually, mentally, physically... I think young men right now are yearning to follow a good father.” Jesus Christ, he thinks, is the “perfect example of masculinity”, someone capable “of calling down all of Heaven’s armies to destroy his enemies” but who instead chose to serve others... Dr Sarah Riccardi-Swartz, an assistant professor of religion and anthropology at Northeastern University, whose research looks at recent Orthodox converts in the US, said that she started seeing an increase in people seeking out Orthodoxy from 2016... Mr Holland said that one aspect that appeals to newcomers is that while other churches are being drawn into rows about cultural issues, such as debates around the LGBTQ community, the Orthodox church does not shift."
Weird. We are told that churches need to modernise. Clearly, masculinity needs to be demonised even more, because desiring masculinity is toxic masculinity, and we need to crack down on YouTube radicalisation

Male bonding doesn’t have to be about bravado and bros. Dancing on stage naked taught me a better way | Gunnar Ardelius | The Guardian

Meme - *Girls gossiping meme* "He still identifies as a man"

Meme - Possum Reviews @ReviewsPossum: "There used to be men's only spaces until people like you said they were sexist."
danisha carter @danishacarterr: "if men’s mental health mattered (to men) they’d be creating safe spaces for themselves and each other, pursuing therapy, and creating community. instead, they perpetuate the very behaviors systems that have handicapped them in the first place, refuse to support or create community amongst each other, severely damage the women in their lives who try to care for them, and attack women online for not doing the work for them in replies to tweets like the one below lol."

Meme - nicole @honeebell: "Wait my brother just said that most men daydream about saving peoples lives, is that true??"
nicole @honeebell: "I'm cackling which one of yall would ACTUALLY do this?"
"The Masculine Daydream where you stay behind to hold off a pursuing force while your loved ones escape. *man in wilderness with rifle and cigarette*"

Opinion: In praise of tonic (not toxic) masculinity - "Despite ample and convincing evidence that a stable two-parent family is the best environment for raising healthy and successful children, today dads are widely treated in popular culture as incompetent buffoons . And feminist rhetoric is now explicit in its enmity. In a particularly vicious 2018 Washington Post column , feminist scholar Suzanna Danuta Walters declared of men: “We have every right to hate you.” "There is this general anti-male animus in society today,” laments Janice Fiamengo , a retired professor of English at the University of Ottawa. “Everywhere is this sense that men are at best irrelevant to women’s lives, and at worst, a menace to society. I see almost no appreciation for men’s unique and distinctive abilities and gifts.” Perhaps the first step to publicly recognizing the many benefits of masculinity is to rebrand it from toxic to tonic . The term “ tonic masculinity ” was coined by Miles Groth, a psychologist at New York City’s Wagner College, in 2021 to highlight the positive and necessary aspects of manliness. Tonic, Groth notes, has two meanings. It is “an invigorating substance” as well as the home key of a musical composition. Tonic masculinity, in other words, represents both harmony and healing. Groth notes the vast significance of the specific work men do. Surgeons, garbage men, soldiers, loggers, miners, bus drivers and those doing many other jobs that traditionally have been — and in most cases still are — male-dominated remain absolutely vital to society. Many of these activities involve a high degree of personal risk and/or self-sacrifice. In Canada, men account for 95 per cent of all on-the-job fatalities. The power of tonic masculinity, Groth writes, “is seen in men who pursue careers in public service such as first responders and … men who serve in the military.” Men push limits and explore frontiers. No woman has yet landed on the moon. Men first circumnavigated the globe, climbed Mount Everest and reached the North Pole. The same goes for intellectual exploration. Of the 970 Nobel Prizes given out since the award’s inception in 1901, 905 have gone to men. And those 65 women winners are predominantly in the non-scientific fields of peace and literature. The prizes in physics, medicine, chemistry and economics have been thoroughly dominated by men... the most comprehensive population-wide intelligence tests (conducted in Scotland in the 1930s and 1940s) revealed that at an IQ of 140, considered “genius” level, there were twice as many males as females. Other studies on mathematical ability report that within the top four per cent of quantitative reasoning, the male-female split is 60-40. A Duke University investigation of exceptional students in the U.S. and India reported that within the top 0.01 percent of SAT/ACT scores for math and science, there were more than 2.5 males for every female. The U.S. membership of Mensa is 64 per cent male — although in fairness joining Mensa seems a very male thing to do. These sex differences at the very highest levels are not related to any of the obvious physical advantages that men hold. Rather, this variability is an embedded masculine trait with no bearing on size or strength. Part of the secret may lie in the competitiveness that has always been essential to male behaviour. Competition pushes men to constantly strive to outdo each other. The evolutionary origin of this can be found in the competition for mates, but it carries over to all other activities and fields. Beyond sports and business, this dominance extends to fields that have no practical or physical component. Men dominate chess, bridge and even Scrabble tournaments because their drive to succeed leads them to spend more time studying and practicing. This gender divide has profound implications for Canada as a whole. Since 2015, our country has had a self-declared “ feminist ” government, with all that implies. Justin Trudeau’s first official act as prime minister was to unveil a perfectly gender-balanced cabinet. On domestic policy, he has focused almost exclusively on redistributing Canada’s existing pool of wealth through programs such as child care, pharmacare, dental care and so on. Meanwhile, Ottawa has proven openly hostile to resource development, agriculture and other “male” pursuits that involve creating new wealth, pushing frontiers and building big things. Canada’s many problems, including our faltering productivity and other economic maladies, the shrinking military, the housing crisis and our damaged international reputation are best understood as evidence of a lack of competitiveness, independence and risk-taking at the national level: traits that are typically associated with traditional masculinity."

Aimee Terese on X - "The left hates men so much."
Tim Walz Is the Role Model Kids Need - "Kamala Harris’s running mate, has been labeled “Tampon Tim,” all because he supported a law requiring public schools to carry menstrual products in bathrooms. “Do they not understand what tampons are?” Charlie asked me. He was genuinely perplexed. “I think they do,” I said. “They’re just worried that boys might see them … or something.” Charlie’s grin grew wider. “They’re tampons, dude, not dildos,” he laughed. I laughed along with him, even though I wasn’t entirely comfortable with my barely teen-aged kid being able to use “dildo” as a punchline... This is the dance of raising a boy. The challenge is to raise him so he won’t turn out to be a raging asshole as an adult. You know the kind I mean—the guy who aggressively shows you his Tim Robinson impression, who owns (or is saving for) a Cybertruck, and says things like, “Not all men …”"

Meme - RAW EGG NATIONALIST @Babygravy9: "For years we've been told, on the basis of studies of neutered animals and Korean eunuchs (really) that having lower testosterone is better for you as a man, but the truth is the opposite. Men with lower testosterone have shorter, not longer lives."
"Low testosterone in men associated with an early death. It has long been thought that testosterone shortens men's lives. Studies in neutered animals and Korean eunuchs seem to confirm this. However, a new study, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, draws these findings into question. In this study, led by a team at the University of Western Australia, the researchers combined the results of 11 high-quality studies (known as a meta-analysis) investigating the effect of testosterone levels on lifespan. The studies followed men for at least five years and found that participants with the lowest testosterone levels were more likely to die."

Meme - "MEN NEED TO KNOW IT'S OKAY
TO ASK FOR MERCY FROM THE LORD JESUS CHRIST
TO TALK ABOUT GUERRILLA WARFARE
TO BREAK EVERY GUN LAW KNOWN TO MAN
TO GO TO THE WOODS AND NEVER RETURN
TO NOT FOLLOW THE GENEVA CODE
TO EAT RAW BEEF AND THINK OF WAR
TO NEED AS MANY BATTLE RIFLES AS POSSIBLE
TO BE STRONG ENOUGH TO CRUSH YOUR ENEMIES"

I Go to My Fathers - The Heroic Masculinity of King Theoden - YouTube - "Pride looks inward, asking what do I stand to gain from this? While humility looks outward, seeking the good of others and asking how can I best serve them? Aragorn's gentle reminder to Theoden of his kingly duty echoes that of Gamling's from earlier. His men will follow him to whatever end because they love him. All they ask in return is that he love them... we need need stories like this to show us the heights to which we should aspire. Wanting fiction to reflect our own world is depressing, inward-looking and reflects our inability to hope. We should not want our heroes dragged down to our level. We should strive to be like them, to follow their example to be better and more than we are"

Gad Saad on X - "The West: We do not want men to express their masculinity. As a matter of fact, it's important to pathologize "toxic masculinity." Also, we shall import millions of people who hail from societies that are truly and breathtakingly toxic in their masculinity. Hence, by castrating our Western men, we can be peacefully conquered via the liberating force of Suicidal Empathy."

Bad news for Average Joes! Men in mediocre jobs are most miserable - "'The "miserable middle" is caused by men who are never in high- or low-status jobs,' explained Proefssor Yannis Georgelli, who led the research. 'Equally, individuals who move from low- to middle-status jobs may be frustrated not to move to the top of the career ladder. But men who have always been in low-status roles don't experience this frustration.'... The researchers compare this pattern to the 'Silver Medallist' effect. This describes how people who win Silver medals in sporting competitions are the least happy, as they compare themselves to Gold-medal winners. In contrast, Bronze medal winners are happier because they can consider the alternative of not getting a medal at all. Overall, women's life satisfaction was found to be less dependent on their job status. However, this was not the case for more highly educated women."

Meme - Daddy's Girl: "If you want to have a chance with me you have to deconstrct your toxic masculinity"
Soyjak: "'Yes queen!"
Soyjak wearing midriff-baring top and skirt: "I did it my queen"
Daddy's Girl to Gigachad: "You're like totally my type!"

End Wokeness on X - "Columbia's medical students made a music video. I apologize in advance."
Martin Erlic on X - "This is why men are dropping out of education and no longer participate in the labor force. Kindergarten never ends. I remember being completely sick of school by 9th grade despite earning straight As before. I thought to myself... Surely one day this ends and we become adults?"

Men Don’t Need Tampons. They Need Fathers - "As a woman, I never particularly cared about sex roles in the home until I started noticing a couple of things. First, despite my son being surrounded by strong archetypes of mother, maiden, crone, he was yearning for a stable, engaged, father figure. I’m divorced, and while his dad is in the picture, clocking in once a week for a few hours is a very different thing than being a father... A sound father figure isn’t something I thought about my son lacking until he expressed a biological need to be around other men around the age of 7. I notice the same patterns in the sons of friends who are also divorced. While each child is unique, each child did suffer in some way from not having a man around. It’s no secret that many boys today aren’t getting enough time around men. Instead they have celebrity substitutes like Jordan B. Peterson, Ben Shapiro, and BAP. Although their messages have drawn an audience of young men, it’s no substitute for their real fathers. Around this time, I also took my experience in Islamist extremism into extremism across other ideologies. There is one common denominator between young men who joined an extremist ideology: there was a conflict in the home centered on the absence of a strong, grounded male presence. Typically, either the father contributed to an environment of trauma or the father was missing, which is its own trauma. As a mother to a young boy, I don’t have the luxury of ignoring these facts if I hope to raise a young man who can survive this world. If I’m exploring the cornerstones of manhood, I’m not alone; a lot of men and women out there have the same question... If we’re trying to understand what is going on with our boys, we don’t need to fight amongst ourselves, battling between grievance tweets on thoughts and prayers, pointing fingers on the constitutional right to carry arms, or nose-diving into political rage. That doesn’t do anything except drive a culture of acceleration that extremists thrive on. Instead we need to focus on the anthropological clues. The Los Angeles shooter’s example shows a broken father figure... The scenario keeps changing but the formula is the same: fatherlessness and, as Black shares, a culture that dismisses men’s value. If we can’t come up with a reasonable, achievable track that gives young men status, emotional security, a path to a secure job, and a stable loving relationship, more and more young men are going to be drawn into ideologies that are misogynistic, homophobic, and seek to turn the clock back on all the gains of the last 50 years. Extremists are telling young men, “The system isn’t working for you and doesn’t care if you live or die. But we care, join us.” Now there is another form of ideological extremism being forced onto our boys: gender fluidity. We just passed International Men’s Day on November 19, which would have been a wonderful opportunity to discuss manhood. Instead the ACLU celebrated International Men’s Day with a campaign on how “men who get their periods are men.” Newsweek ran an article about International Men’s Day on mental health, but completely ignored the opportunity to a have a real conversation. Instead they curated conversations about discrimination related to race and sexual identity, self-care, depression, and how it’s socially acceptable to wear pink. That was it. It’s got to be hard being a man today. Your entire identity is systematically being scrubbed from existence. You’re repeatedly told you’re not good enough, punished for not conforming, and gaslighted into believing you are a distortion of your true nature. As a woman who has experienced all of this through misogyny in regressive cultures, I stand with our men against the crushing culture of misandry."

Meme - "R: 217 / 1: 52
/dmg/ - DwarfMode
General #1 Fulfill Your Density: DwarfMaxxing is the final redpill for manlets 5'8" and under who have unfortunate faces. Stop making yourself suffer trying to become what you weren't designed to be in order to"

Links - 1st August 2026 (2 - Woke Universities)

2026-08-01T17:30:00.000+08:00

Dr. Matthew M. Wielicki on X - "Divided by Design: How DEI Undermines Academia’s Mission...
In STEM fields, where merit and collaboration should be paramount, DEI policies felt particularly intrusive. One of the most glaring examples of this was the push to eliminate the GRE as an admissions requirement for graduate programs, all in the name of equity. I fought against this decision, arguing that the GRE, while imperfect, provided a standardized measure to evaluate students’ readiness for the rigors of graduate-level work. Without it, we were left with subjective criteria heavily influenced by identity-focused initiatives. This made it exceedingly difficult to fairly and accurately assess applicants, especially when academic records varied widely in quality and rigor across institutions. By removing objective metrics, we risked admitting students who might struggle unnecessarily while overlooking others who were truly prepared to excel. My resistance to these changes and my broader critique of DEI policies earned me immediate and intense backlash. Colleagues branded me a racist on social media, a reaction that was both predictable and profoundly absurd. When I first joined the University of Alabama as a faculty member, I had high hopes of contributing meaningfully to the field of science. I envisioned a career rooted in rigorous inquiry, collaboration, and teaching students to approach problems with curiosity and an open mind. But over the years, I watched as the university and others like it pivoted toward a different focus: the enforcement of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. While these programs were ostensibly designed to foster inclusivity and fairness, what I saw, and experienced, was something far darker. The DEI agenda at the University of Alabama and throughout the university system did not unite students or faculty; it alienated them. By reducing individuals to their immutable characteristics, race, gender, or ethnicity, DEI initiatives created division rather than cohesion. Instead of building bridges, they drew hard lines between groups, segregating students and faculty into reductive categories. These programs claimed to fight inequality, but they seemed only to foster resentment and mistrust. Speaking Out and Facing Backlash I was vocal about my concerns from the start. In STEM fields, where merit and collaboration should be paramount, DEI policies felt particularly intrusive. One of the most glaring examples of this was the push to eliminate the GRE as an admissions requirement for graduate programs, all in the name of equity. I fought against this decision, arguing that the GRE, while imperfect, provided a standardized measure to evaluate students’ readiness for the rigors of graduate-level work. Without it, we were left with subjective criteria heavily influenced by identity-focused initiatives. This made it exceedingly difficult to fairly and accurately assess applicants, especially when academic records varied widely in quality and rigor across institutions. By removing objective metrics, we risked admitting students who might struggle unnecessarily while overlooking others who were truly prepared to excel. My resistance to these changes and my broader critique of DEI policies earned me immediate and intense backlash. Colleagues branded me a racist on social media, a reaction that was both predictable and profoundly absurd. Image These accusations weren’t rooted in anything I had said or done but were based solely on my refusal to unquestioningly accept the DEI orthodoxy. The hostility escalated to the point where the university’s strategic communications office instructed my department to cut off all communication with me entirely. Overnight, I became a pariah in my own academic community. The absurdity didn’t stop there. One of my department’s DEI initiatives involved participation in the Unlearning Racism in Geosciences (URGE) program. Ironically, this program, designed to promote diversity, was almost entirely white at my institution, save for one student, despite the large number of minority students. Yet, this overwhelmingly homogeneous group felt entitled to lecture me about revising my lab protocols to ensure they were free of “microaggressions.” The suggestion was baffling, my protocols were strictly about research and safety. The idea that they could harbor hidden biases was a performative exercise in wokeness, devoid of any real-world application. Instead of addressing meaningful issues or advancing STEM education, initiatives like URGE devolved into self-congratulatory rituals that did nothing to foster genuine inclusion. These experiences highlighted just how far DEI efforts had drifted from their stated goals. Policies and programs ostensibly designed to promote equity and fairness instead created barriers to objective evaluation, fostered resentment, and prioritized virtue signaling over substantive progress. My refusal to stay silent about these issues came at a significant personal and professional cost, but it was a stand I knew I had to take. This silencing wasn’t limited to me. Across campus, there was a growing sense of illiberalism, where dissent was no longer tolerated. Faculty and students alike were pressured to conform to the DEI narrative, regardless of whether they believed in it or not. Conversations became stifled, as people feared being labeled as bigots or facing professional consequences for voicing alternative viewpoints. Worse still, DEI policies actively segregated students. Programs and initiatives were designed specifically for certain racial or ethnic groups, excluding others by design. Rather than fostering cross-cultural understanding, these policies made students hyper-aware of their differences. The result was a climate of tension and hostility, where students began to see each other not as peers but as members of competing tribes."

Adrian Vermeule on X - "In general, the problem with all the recent talk of “viewpoint diversity” as the cure for the monoculture of the university is this:
(1) everyone thinks that there must be some limits of professional competence to viewpoint diversity (no flat-earth types in the geography department please);
(2) academic progressives overwhelmingly hold that views like “men cannot get pregnant” are as inadmissible as believing in a flat earth.
Hence they are ultimately unable to reform themselves, at least at the department level. There must be thorough reconstruction from above or from outside."
Joe Duarte on X - "Yes, the University of Arizona social psychology PhD program denied me admission because I criticized Jimmy Carter on my blog. They asked me about it on the phone interview, wanted to clarify if I "really" felt that way about Carter. It was incredible to be talking about political opinions on an admissions interview. I was lucky that I got into better programs, and that those programs didn't see my blog... She (Stephanie Fryberg) even told me that all the other faculty were against me because of the blog post, but that she was not. This was in 2007, shortly after all the Jewish members of the Carter Center board resigned over his rationalization of Palestinian terrorism in his recent book. I agreed with the Jews."
John Carney on X - "I was recently speaking to a professor at a very prestigious university who argued that there was plenty of “viewpoint diversity” at his school. So I asked him: “How many Trump supporters do you have in your humanities departments?” He laughed and then said he didn’t think anyone who voted for Trump, much less still openly supported him, could be qualified to teach at his school. QED."
Adrian Vermeule on X - "A structurally analogous story (versions of which can be found in Rorty and elsewhere): “I’m for human rights! Human rights!” “Oh Ok, even for the [X out-group?]” “No no — they aren’t really human, you see.”"

ape attack survivor on X - "I know you guys hate hearing this but universities are open to a wide spectrum of viewpoints. Conservatives are just rarely capable of writing at an academically acceptable level. Sorry man. Stop begging for DEI hires"
Prof sues UCLA 'over suspension for not grading black students more leniently' - "“Recently, I was suspended from my job for refusing to treat my black students as lesser than their non-black peers,” wrote Gordon Klein in an op-ed on Bari Weiss’s “Common Sense” newsletter on Substack. The dean of UCLA’s business school launched an investigation into Klein’s actions, put him on leave and tried to terminate him, wrote the professor, who has taught at the university’s Anderson School of Management for 40 years."
Weird. We're told that DEI is meant to give everyone a level playing field

A new trigger warning for college kids: How to prepare them for the intellectual discomforts of a university - "I’ve concluded that universities should provide “trigger warnings” about upsetting content, as many student activists demand. But not many warnings. Just one, and not the one they have in mind... The self-infantilization on display in this tirade lacked even the dignity of a sinister ideology. Its point was more like: “I want my mommy.” But if students feel the modern university’s job is to create a “place of comfort” rather than an “intellectual space,” that is hardly all their fault. Many parents of my generation make it their business to spare their children any exposure to upset and risk. Then kids and parents alike are wooed by colleges that promise idyllic experiences at very steep prices. Yale, for example, markets its residential colleges as “little paradises.” No wonder if some students expect college to provide shelter from intellectual and interpersonal storms. And no wonder the movement for trigger warnings and safe spaces is gaining traction at colleges around the country. Trigger warnings supposedly help students cope with (or avoid) exposure to upsetting ideas and images; their other purpose, I and many other free-speech advocates believe, is to chill the presentation of controversial material. Either way, they seek to make higher education emotionally safer by making it less intellectually dangerous. The trouble is that intellectually safe places are finishing schools, not universities. They can confer connections, polish and useful skills, but they will not educate, because to educate is to inflict and to endure criticism, which is not comfortable... So it is only fair to warn students and their parents that higher education is not a Disney cruise. Tell them in advance so they can prepare. Not, however, with multiple trigger warnings festooning syllabi. One will suffice: “Warning: Although this university values and encourages civil expression and respectful personal behavior, you may at any moment, and without further notice, encounter ideas, expressions and images that are mistaken, upsetting, dangerous, prejudiced, insulting or deeply offensive. We call this education.”"
From 2015

Peter MacKinnon: Yale report on declining trust in higher education should be read - "Yale is among America’s — and the world’s — finest universities, and we should take note when its president identifies a problem of declining trust in higher education and commissions a faculty committee to examine the problem. The Committee on Trust in Higher Education submitted its findings and recommendations , which committee members supported unanimously, on April 10. The committee’s report declared that “the issue of declining trust is real, urgent and must be addressed” and identified several reasons for the decline at Yale and other universities. The reasons will not come as a surprise to careful observers of these institutions: the cost of higher education, generally but particularly at Ivy League and private schools, is widely seen as too high; admissions without transparency and often driven by non-academic criteria (read identity, athleticism, family connections and money); pressures toward conformity, intimidation and social shaming; self-censorship; and ideological echo chambers resulting from homogeneity — on the left — in the professoriate. Smart phones and social media contribute to the problems, devaluing the classroom. The committee also cited a challenge to Yale’s governance model which, in recent decades, “has come under strain from the growth of non-academic administrative functions across the university.”...
Among its recommendations:
• The committee begins with a shift in attitude: “We must be willing to admit where we have been wrong, and where we might improve,” and must focus on “what makes a university a university” as expressed in Yale’s historical mission “to create, disseminate and preserve knowledge through research and teaching.” That is the mission; it does not include institutional pursuit of social justice, cancel culture, decolonization, or recruitment of faculty and students according to race, colour, gender, or sexual orientation.
• Free speech must be treated as a first principle. “It includes the right of invited speakers, of any political or intellectual persuasion, to speak unimpeded on campus. It also affirms the right of students, faculty, and other members of the community to engage in peaceful protest, debate and exchange, though not to disrupt events, shout down speakers or block access to buildings.”
• Support for academic freedom, the “scholarly bedrock of any excellent university,” must also be prioritized.
• Higher education must be made affordable.
• Undergraduate admissions must be reformed: “We recommend that the university embrace a standard of candour; it should only use criteria for admission that it is willing to describe publicly and defend openly. The top priority in admissions decisions should be academic achievement.”
• The committee further recommended “that Yale undertake a multi-pronged series of initiatives and experiments with the goal of enhancing open and critical debate on campus.” It emphasized the importance of open minds: “Great teaching and scholarship require contestation.” As John Stuart Mill reminded us, “it is only by the collision of adverse opinions” that truth can be found."
Damn Trump! Damn fascists!

Thread by @sfmcguire79 on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "Yale has issued a new report on declining public trust in higher education. The New York Times has a great headline summing it up: This is so refreshing. The first step is admitting the problem.
The first recommendation in the report? “Take Responsibility.” “Universities champion critical thinking. However, those of us in higher education have too often resisted calls to critically examine our own institutions, professions, and modes of thought. As we move forward, we must be willing to admit where we have been wrong and where we might improve, even as we defend what is essential about higher education and its academic mission. “This imperative applies to faculty, who must balance our rights as scholars with our obligations to our students, institutions, communities, nation, and world. But the need for self-scrutiny includes everyone from the first-year undergraduate to members of the Board of Trustees. The tendency to be self-regarding, insular, and unreceptive to legitimate criticism does not engender public trust. A shift in attitude is needed.” President McInnis’s response to this recommendation: “The committee calls on Yale to reflect on and take responsibility for our role in the erosion of public trust. I accept this judgment fully. This decline did not come out of nowhere, nor did it happen overnight. And we were certainly more than mere bystanders. We must acknowledge how we have fallen short. That means welcoming as comprehensive a panorama of perspectives as possible—even, and especially, those that may be critical—and facing such criticism with humility and curiosity.”
The second recommendation: “Focus on the Mission.” “In 2016, departing from its traditional emphasis on the creation and dissemination of knowledge, Yale expanded its mission statement to include ‘improving the world today,’ educating ‘aspiring leaders worldwide,’ and fostering ‘an ethical, interdependent, and diverse community.’ These are all worthy goals. But they are not what makes a university a university. “We recommend that Yale adopt a focused university-wide mission statement such as the one currently articulated in its own Faculty Handbook: ‘Yale University's mission is to create, disseminate, and preserve knowledge through research and teaching.’ This statement serves as the basis for the recommendations that follow in this report. At a moment when higher education is being buffeted from all sides, it is imperative to understand what we are here for and what universities do best. That requires clarity, not diffusion, of purpose.”
Further recommendation focus on free speech, academic freedom, opening minds, making higher ed affordable, reforming admissions, education value, grading reform, etc., etc. It’s a pretty incredible report. Read the whole thing here: president.yale.edu/sites/default/…"

The Best Argument for the “State of Scholarship” Report Is Its Critics - "When the chancellors of Vanderbilt University and Washington University in St. Louis commissioned a committee chaired by the New York University philosopher Paul Boghossian to assess the condition of humanistic and social-scientific scholarship, they invited a particular sort of reply. The report that resulted advances a contestable empirical claim: that across several fields, certain politically charged questions have been quietly treated as closed, dissent is recoded as incompetence rather than disagreement, and a good deal of scholarship now serves a moral program settled in advance. One can answer such a charge in the ordinary scholarly way—with evidence, counterexample, and argument. The report invites it, conceding that its conclusions are not yet supported by the kind of quantitative study its critics would demand and urging administrators to consult disciplinary experts before acting. Instead, the Vanderbilt and Washington University chapters of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) have supplied something more useful than any defense the report’s authors could have drafted for themselves: a confession. Their June 11 joint statement does two things, and each one proves the case it means to refute. First, it demands not rebuttal but erasure. The chapters call on their chancellors “to rescind the report” outright—to unpublish it, to make it disappear from the universities’ websites. This is a revealing reflex. A confident discipline meets an unflattering description of itself with a better description. A discipline that has lost confidence in its own standards reaches instead for the delete key. The report asked, in effect, whether some fields have lost the capacity to hear criticism as anything but an attack to be repelled. The first substantive response was a motion to suppress the question. Second—and this is the part that should make even sympathetic readers wince—the statement defends the disinterested pursuit of knowledge by appealing to a political mission. Weakening faculty governance, the chapters warn, would undermine the university’s ability to address society’s deepest problems, “the inequalities of wealth and white supremacy” and the political consequences of climate change among them. Set aside whether those are worthy causes. The report’s charge was that scholarship in these fields has been bent toward a predetermined political agenda. Offered the chance to deny it, the AAUP instead named the agenda. A political creed produced as a defense against the accusation of harboring a political creed is not a rebuttal. It is an exhibit. The inversions compound from there. The statement accuses the report of licensing a “heckler’s veto” because it suggests administrators might weigh dissenting and minority scholarly voices within a discipline—while the statement’s own central demand is that a document it dislikes be silenced. It credits the American Council of Learned Societies, the Modern Language Association, and the American Historical Association as the real defenders of free inquiry against political interference. But those are the professional societies of the very disciplines under review. The disciplines grade their own scholarship and, unsurprisingly, award themselves high marks. That closed loop—in which a field’s health is certified only by the field’s own guild – is not a counterargument to the report. It is the mechanism the report set out to describe. I have argued before that the AAUP, statement by statement, keeps disclosing what it actually thinks academic freedom is for. The same reflex appears here. The surest sign that a profession has mistaken a political consensus for a discipline is its inability to treat an outside criticism as anything other than an enemy at the gates. A healthy field metabolizes critique; it absorbs the challenge, tests it, and is strengthened or corrected by it. A politicized field excommunicates the critic and reaffirms the creed. The distinction matters because the humanities and social sciences cannot be rescued by administrators, legislators, or donors. They can be rescued only by scholars who still believe their disciplines are answerable to evidence rather than to a cause—and who can say so out loud without being told they have breached the faith."

The Question Haunting the Vanderbilt/Wash U Report (opinion) - "Once the academy broadened who could participate in knowledge production, it was always likely to broaden what counted as important knowledge and how that knowledge would be pursued. To accept the former while viewing the latter with suspicion risks preserving the very assumptions that made these subjects marginal in the first place. What the report identifies as a departure from neutrality may instead be evidence of the success of the academy’s transformation. The humanities have become more attentive to voices once excluded from scholarly consideration. They have broadened our understanding of what counts as a legitimate object of inquiry and whose experiences are worthy of serious intellectual attention."
When you say that diversifying academia by including women and other "minorities" results in a loss of objectivity and its transformation into political grievance mongering. That conclusion would be "bigotry" coming from a a non-left wing angle. Ironic.

Phil Magness on X - "I documented the sharp leftward shift in academia several years ago, along with its accompanying decline in research standards. The Vanderbilt report is welcome, but it's also simply confirmation of what was already obvious (although adamantly denied by many faculty on the left)"

OK Then on X - "I’ve written this before but we’re already in the early stages of a massive Anglo university bust(US/UK/Canada/Australia). It’ll intensify in the 2030s but thousands of colleges are going to go out of business. Terrible student demographics, far less Chinese students wanting to study abroad, not enough wealthy students from the rest of the world to replace said Chinese, and AI just completely destroying most entry level knowledge work and eventually up the ladder as well. Only truly elite universities and public universities will survive IMO. Mid tier schools like syracuse, a lot of the small private liberal arts schools, and anything that’s private and low tier are absolutely finished. Universities will go back towards being an elite privilege. The golden age of the university was fun while it lasted."
Anatoly Karlin 🧲💯 on X - "Anglo universities getting hit by a double whammy. First, AI undermines the entire value proposition of the academy. Second, Chinese universities now dominate actual high quality research (as proxied by the Nature Index). 9 of the top ten world universities by this metric are now Chinese. The old university prestige rankings might still say otherwise but that is cope and irrelevant. Universities exist to create new knowledge. The rankings will adjust to reflect this new reality or they will lose relevance. You could make a case for US and UK academia having some "intangible" value in their "unique" spirit of truth-seeking and freedom of inquiry. However, they voluntarily destroyed that reputation in a decade of Wokeness 🤷‍♀️. So now there's just the hard metrics, and they're not looking too good."
Post-Menshevik on X - "@Scholars_Stage Also talks about how many Chineses student emigres in USA ended up radicalizing, and ended up pro-China, anti-USA."
arctotherium on X - "At some level I want to be indignant about this, but TBH I have a hard time imagining spending four years at a US university and *not* becoming radicalized against the country, one way or another."
David Sun on X - "I attended a mandatory DEI class w many Chinese students in early days of woke at UW- a large angry butch lady professor authoritatively demanded the class to refer to her as they/them, and had us introduce ourselves and state our pronouns. The Chinese kids looked at each other in bewilderment and stammered out their gender pronouns with a confused expression. Ironically in the post-Deng China they managed to escape struggle sessions at home yet had to undergo one (of many later on) in what they then viewed as a futuristic advanced and prestigious American institution that they spent double the local tuition to attend"

Durham students’ plan to shake off ‘Oxbridge rejects’ tag... cancel formal dinners - "The commission’s final report, published this week, found that “students feel an overwhelming pressure to not only exist, but to thrive within a co-opted version of an Oxbridge experience” and use “the ritualism of formals, to signal their proximity to this trope”. Formal gowned dinners, which have been a central feature at Oxbridge for centuries, “represent a more sinister history of oppression”, the commissars said... The commission, led by Seun Twins, the outgoing Durham Students’ Union president, found that formals and college dining traditions “are barriers” for international students as “tokens of British culture”. Their report also took aim at Durham’s collegiate system, which is one of only a handful of universities outside Oxbridge, which are “overtly reminiscent of a boarding school” and “the subtle elitism of the British upper classes”. It made a series of recommendations for Durham University bosses, chief among them a mandatory “universal core module for students” that would set out the “key elements, competencies and expectations” of degrees there. This module would emphasise diversity to “deconstruct Durham’s elitist image [and] subvert the image of what the Durham student is”, modelled on the London School of Economics’ “LSE 100” module which is a compulsory guide into culture and skillsets for undergraduates. The Durham Students’ Union report also found that some undergraduates feel “marginalised, dismissed and silenced” by the willingness of their peers to play devil’s advocate, and felt “intimidated by their remarkable peers and the prominent narrative of the exceptional Durham student”... Other recommendations included active bystander training for all students, sex and relationships workshops and a ramping up of decolonised curriculum efforts with the help of a current crop of student union decolonisation interns. Toby Young, the general secretary of the Free Speech Union, said: “All the old traditions the commission wants to do away with are what make Durham such a special place. “A Durham cleansed of all its old-fashioned characteristics won’t appeal to anyone. You might as well pull down the old buildings, replace them with prefabs and call it Durham polytechnic.” The report came after Durham was embroiled in a row over free speech following a student walkout during an address by Rod Liddle, a journalist, who students accused of making “transphobic, sexist, racist and classist remarks”. The incident led to Prof Tim Luckhurst, the founding principal of the university’s South College, calling students “pathetic”."

Kevin Bass on X - "Academia: We don't hire conservatives because they are flat earthers, reject evolution, etc.
Also academia: We are happy to announce we hired our 10,000th Leninist professor who believes men can get pregnant, math is white supremacy, overthrowing capitalism ends poverty, etc."

Thread by @77_steeze on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "Because of the bubble they live in, progressive academics live more or less in a small town. Despite how much they value “worldliness”, they’re “hillbillies” in a way because only the people in their small town subscribe to their beliefs but they don’t really know why anyone outside the village behaves the way they do and are terrified by the outside world (non-urban environments). This has been coming through so loudly in their cartoonish explanations for “how conservatives think”. They sound like guys in Idiocracy going “Water? Like…from out the toilet??” Except…they’re supposed to be the people who got bred out of that world. Like someone (I forget who) pointed out to me a couple weeks ago, the “anywheres” can’t actually live anywhere. Sure, they can hop continents, but that environment needs to be curated to the hilt to keep, not only their preferred physical conditions, but also their ideological bubble in tact.

New York Post on X - "Ivy Leaguer who's 'not interested in working for a Jew' says Cornell is welcoming him back"
Rachel Moiselle on X - "Elite universities will ruin your career over an email about Halloween costumes, but writing ‘not interested in working for a Jew’ is A OK."

Steve McGuire on X - "In four different surveys, 33-45% of faculty said they would discriminate against conservatives when considering job applications:"
Proof that Conservatives don't have the intellectual capacity for academia

The Failure of Libertarianism in the US

2026-08-01T13:18:00.000+08:00

Christian Heiens 🏛 on X

A lot of people are asking why the "Libertarian moment" failed to materialize. Here are my thoughts, as a former Libertarian myself. About ten years ago, there was an expectation, certainly within libertarian circles but across the Right at large, that the future of "Conservatism" in the US would be Libertarianism. There was this belief that the GOP would become a vehicle for libertarian philosophy and that the Right as a whole would be moving in a far more libertarian direction. The Tea Party movement, Ron Paul's presidential bids, the prospect of a future Rand Paul bid, and old Reagan quotes about how the essence of conservatism is libertarianism were all in vogue if you were involved in any sort of Right-wing politics in America. There really was this feeling that the old Reaganite fusion was exhausted and the Iraq era had discredited Neoconservatism. Meanwhile, the 2008 crash, coupled with the managerialism of the Obama presidency, had radicalized a bunch of young men into rejecting what they saw as the establishment narratives of both parties. For a 20-something-year-old guy, being able to proudly say that he hated both Bush and Obama felt incredibly liberating. Ron Paul's two presidential runs, and the prospect of a third and potentially more successful one from Rand, promised to herald in a new era for American politics. Libertarianism also seemed like a great diffuser of the insidious social Progressivism that was beginning to creep into all mainstream institutions. The Great Awokening was just in its beginning stages, and at the time there seemed to be absolutely no response to the Progressive agitprop that was gaining traction on the Left. We understood that these "social movements" were all pulling in the same direction, but no one had any idea how to address them because they were about as intense as they were insane. Libertarianism seemed to offer a great response. Do nothing. I'm serious. There was this expectation that we could completely sidestep the Great Awokening and nip the entire thing in its bud by adopting a "You do you" approach. By pretending like social or cultural issues didn't matter, or in some cases, that Progressives were actually in the right on them, Libertarianism offered an avenue for the Right to seemingly take off the table an entire revolutionary movement that we all thought was driving young millennials (who were still in their teens and early 20s) into identifying as Democrats or Socialists or even Communists. "I don't care about the culture war. I want gay married couples to be able to adopt and protect their marijuana operation that's going on in the basement of their private property with AR-15s, and I want to abolish the income taxes they make on it, too." But when this tactic was put into practice, it never seemed to work. I remember in my old libertarian days over a decade ago, having conversations with Leftists my age in high school and college, and it was always disappointing. It's like I kept trying to win them over and explain I was on their side and that they just needed to understand that wealth redistribution and socialism were bad policies, but that we were both "social liberals" who wanted the same thing. I just wanted them to be rich on top of it all. And for some reason, it just never worked. At the time, I didn't understand why. But I do now. Libertarianism offered the possibility of escaping politics itself while still being political. You could tell someone that you didn't care about their lifestyle, worldview, theology, or culture, and still plausibly make the case for why they should vote for you and implement your policies, because your policies were all about transcending conflict rather than confronting it. Libertarianism offered the illusion of a sophisticated ideology for adults who had outgrown the tribal passions of the past. But that's exactly why it failed. It was always operating like a parasite on an older order that it didn't create and couldn't defend, but few of us could see it at the time because of the nature of the world around us. But that world, like the Bushite one before it, died. Mass migration and open borders actually changed the visual landscape of America in a way that was far more abrupt than the gradual changes of decades earlier. The Great Awokening, which Libertarianism offered to neutralize with its "live and let live" attitude, ended up devouring everything around it until people could no longer ignore it. The economic situation, which Libertarianism had such elegant solutions for as the centerpiece of its entire worldview, actually ended up being far more complex than the activists ever expected. America's massive twin fiscal and trade deficits, endless QE, zero interest rate environment, and the hollowing out of the Rust Belt all coincided with the rise of managerial credentialism, the professional laptop class, and the adoption of Progressivism as the civic religion of every institution and profession that seemed to be benefiting from these very policies. "Social Justice Warrior" and "Rich Liberal" became synonymous with all the institutions that had betrayed America. This created a rebellion, as Libertarians expected, but the moment Trump arrived, he revealed that the overwhelming majority of those rebels were not interested in smaller government in the abstract. They were looking for a government that would fight for them. They had felt betrayed, humiliated, forgotten, and denigrated. They believed, correctly, that they were losing their country. They had a deep resentment of our oikophobic ruling class and their wacky social views that seemed to always pop up whenever core elements of their way of life were about to be torn away from them. And once those things came to the surface, the "Libertarian moment" was essentially dead because it had no satisfying answer to the actual question being asked, which wasn't "how to balance the budget?" or "what procedural railguards can we set up to protect Americans from warrantless wiretapping?" It was “Who rules, in whose interest, and can we do anything to stop our dispossession at the hands of people who openly hate us?” The Libertarian moment failed because it had no answer to this question, which has essentially been the foundation of all of American politics since Obama's second term. It's a political ideology that wants to escape politics itself, and the moment politics became more than just a complicated math problem and instead was about which vision of civilization would prevail, the entire premise disintegrated.

Links - 1st August 2026 (1 - Healthcare in Canada)

2026-08-01T09:56:00.000+08:00

Doug Ford defends health-care treatment at Ontario pharmacies - "Ontario Premier Doug Ford is defending his government’s decision to allow pharmacists to handle more ailments instead of doctors, saying it’s one of the most popular moves his government has made. The Ford government announced last week that it has started consultations on expanding the number of health problems patients can get treatment for at pharmacies... The new consultations announced last week (opens in a new tab)will look at expanding pharmacists’ scope of practice to include treating other problems such as sore throats, mild headaches, shingles, and sleep disorders like insomnia. The move has been slammed by the Ontario Medical Association (OMA), as well as a chorus of doctors on social media. In a recent post on X, the OMA said(opens in a new tab) it is concerned the move will “fragment an already fractured health-care system” and jeopardize patient safety."
Left wingers hate choice and love protectionism, so of course they were bashing him

Pascal Anglehart 🇨🇦 on X - "In Canada, if you earn $75k annually, you pay around $7,1k in taxes toward healthcare. You struggle to find a family doctor, ERs are overflowing, you spend years on waiting lists. In the USA a good Gold plan costs about $7k annually. You can access a doctor in minutes, literally"

Breast cancer death: Montreal woman dies at 32 - "A Montreal woman who was told by health-care professionals that she was too young for breast cancer but later diagnosed with it, has died from the disease. Valerie Buchanan was 32 when she died... Throughout 2020, Buchanan sought answers for a lump in her chest but had said she was reassured by multiple health-care professionals in Ottawa and Montreal that it was a benign cyst without sending her for imaging to confirm. After 13 months, Buchanan eventually went to a private clinic and was diagnosed with Stage 3 triple-negative breast cancer – a biologically aggressive subtype of breast cancer. Just a few months later, she learned it was Stage 4."
Clearly, this shows why private healthcare is a horrendous evil that should never be allowed

Ontario to spend $14B building Canada's largest teaching hospital - "Ontario has announced more than $14 billion in new funding to build the largest teaching hospital in Canada. The new Peter Gilgan Mississauga Hospital will triple the size and fully replace the existing Mississauga Hospital to help provide health care to an estimated 2.2 million people, the province says."
Time to bash Conservative governments again for underfunding healthcare

BC consulted U.S. Batten disease experts who had links to drug company - "Almost all the U.S. research experts the B.C. government leaned on to make a decision to reinstate a $800,000-a-year drug treatment for a 10-year-girl have, or had, relationships with the pharmaceutical company that manufacturers the drug or foundations that advocate for treatment, a Postmedia examination has found. The province’s decision went against its own 58-member advisory committee. Of the 12 physicians and one neuroscientist who signed a letter sent to B.C. Health Minister Josie Osborne calling on treatment to be reinstated, eight of the signatories have declared conflicts in the past five years in papers written for scientific journals or for public presentations because they have consulted for, been paid by, or received grants from California-based BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. Another doctor reported being a consultant for BioMarin for four years on a resumé posted online and was paid by BioMarin to be on a medical podcast... one of the U.S. doctors that signed the letter owns shares in BioMarin, two have been quoted in BioMarin news releases and three former BioMarin employees sit on one of the U.S.-based Batten research foundations. Experts in bioethics and pharmaceutical policy say the conflict-of-interest revelations raise questions on why the B.C. government overruled its own advisory committee, why it depended on the opinions of U.S. doctors with relationships to BioMarin, and whether it took those conflict-of-interest relationships into consideration... Following the reversal, 10 members of the advisory committee quit and B.C. Premier David Eby has now called for a review and overhaul of the decision process... Schafer, who formerly worked as an ethics consultant for the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, said he believes the B.C. government capitulated and caved to pressure, as he believes most Canadian provincial governments would. “And I think the resulting decision is not morally justifiable,” he said. Schafer noted the effectiveness of these expensive rare-disease drugs is often unproven, underscoring the importance for governments to have independent expert advice when making difficult decisions in the face of emotion, public pressure and scarce resources. Other experts have made similar observations. Pierre-Marie David, a professor in the faculty of pharmacy at the University of Montreal who has been researching access to exceptional drugs, said a key to making these decisions is building trust in provincial health agencies, particularly given there is a large pipeline of these expensive drugs with uncertain effectiveness for rare diseases, which means more difficult decisions and increasing costs... Another group, the Beyond Batten Disease Foundation, has raised $35 million to help fund research to find treatments and has partnered with the Batten Disease Support and Research Association. The research association has several chapters around the world, including in Canada. The 10-year-old B.C. girl’s mother, Jori Fales, is on the board of directors of the Canadian chapter, according to the latest filing of the group for registered charities in Canada."
If a doctor prescribes something to a patient, there's no reason to deny it. We are justified in murdering anyone who denies coverage.
This is why left wingers hate Postmedia so much

A new era: Rare disease drugs can cost millions of dollars per patient - "The B.C. government has listed 35 of these expensive drugs that it will fund. The costs for these drugs are very high. At the low end, they include $119,000 a year for Zavesca, which is used to treat certain rare genetic disorders including Niemann-Pick type C disease that primarily attacks the nervous system. At the high end, they include Zolgensma, which is listed at a one-time cost of $2.9 million. It is a gene therapy used to treat spinal muscular atrophy. In B.C. spending on expensive drugs for rare diseases was $22 million eight years ago, according to provincial pharmaceutical spending reports. Last year, it hit just under $200 million. The annual increases jumped significantly starting in 2022, increasing by about $50 million a year. Medical observers and experts are concerned that if increases continue at that pace, spending on these expensive drugs could hurt the ability of health-care systems to treat larger populations. The just under $200 million B.C. spent on these drugs last year provided treatment to 600 people. That’s about 10 per cent of the money the province spends on its pharmacare program, which provides drugs to more than one million people... Lexchin, who was also an emergency physician, said he knows of no country that has a good policy to contend with the myriad issues. These include the high costs of the drugs, and patient groups and clinicians who want publicly funded treatment even as the effectiveness of rare disease drugs is sometimes unclear. These types of drugs have often not been studied for long periods and trials take place with fewer people than for drugs for common diseases. There’s also a lack of understanding of why these drugs cost so much because the drug companies don’t release that information, said Lexchin. And then there’s what is called the “rule of rescue,” which describes the strong human impulse to help identifiable individuals facing death or serious harm even when the costs of doing so are high, added Lexchin. “If they get publicity, you’ll spend a lot of money.”... “The hypocrisy of it is just astonishing to me. They say no one wants politicians making decisions about your health. Well, that’s exactly what they did,” said Sirrs. Sirrs had been part of the review process for drugs for rare diseases since its inception. She has also quit as the medical lead for rare diseases at the Provincial Health Services Authority, which provides provincewide specialized health services. Sirrs says patients with rare diseases should not be discriminated against, but they also should not be given an unfair advantage. Decisions on a drug should not be made based on negative publicity generated by media attention, she said. It ultimately harms the ability to negotiate prices for drugs for rare diseases with pharmaceutical companies, ending up with prices being based on a government’s willingness to pay, said Sirrs... In the past few weeks, one of the strongest opposition voices against the decision to halt the drug treatment for the 10-year-old girl came from the Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders. After Osborne said no stone was left unturned in assessing the drug, the patient advocacy group’s CEO, Durhane Wong-Rieger, said the B.C. health minister did not know what she was talking about. But some bioethics observers have raised concerns about corporate donations that these advocacy groups get from pharmaceutical companies. The Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders lists 20 corporate partners on its website, almost all of them in the pharmaceutical industry. Those included some of the biggest names in the industry such as U.S.-based Pfizer and Amgen, and Danish company Novo Nordisk. The total annual revenues of these companies is nearly $600 billion. In some years, pharmaceutical company representatives have sat on the patient advocacy group’s board."
Time to "tax the rich" to pay for these drugs, because health is priceless, so we need to spend unlimited amounts of money on healthcare

The Healthcare in Toronto is so much better than Ottawa/Montreal? Why is that? : r/montreal - "There's a bunch of problems with healthcare in quebec. A lot of it comes from the need of the government to micromanage everything. Another big problem is the heavy bureaucracy linked to healthcare. Physicians can not practice where they want unless the provincial government gives them the ok; what is commonly called PREMs and PEMs (these are the sole purview of the government) It's divided into administrative areas (sometimes it's by hospitals, sometimes by geographical area); So if an area needs 10 orthopods, but the government says nope you'll be fine with 5 (and give out 5 PEMS). Guess what ? You can't recruit more orthopods. Now the government, thinking of next year's election and their dwindling popularity, has come up with the genius idea to micromanage even more... So we now have a law that prohibits graduating physicians from leaving quebec or go into private practice... which seems great on paper... but if you go into med student reddits, you'll see some discussions about this, and basically, the consensus is to avoid quebec medical residencies like the plague. (And no residents, no new physicians). Now they're going to put forth a new law within the next months with productivity linked penalties... which against might sound ok on paper... but it's ill thoughout. In the hospital nearest to me, some of the available ORs are not open (fully functional ORs) surgeons do not operate as much as they would love to, because of staffing issues. Now, the government tells them to "operate more with the same ressources", and when asked about this, their answer is "figure it out". On top of this, these quotas will be by administrative areas, so if there's 2 of you in a specific specialty in that area, and you are see a bunch of patients (above your quota) but your collegue isn't cuz they don't feel like it... you both get screwed. So what's the incentive to work hard if you're getting screwed anyway ? And so, a bunch of physicians might think about retiring early (the average / median physician age is quite high), and others will migrate to other provinces. Again, making things worse. (And things will unfortunately keep getting worse). Again, this is my 0.02$, but to me, the biggest problem is that need to micromanage, especially since it's done incompetently with a governing idea that changes every voting cycle (that and the incredible amount of bureaucracy created: https://thenorthstar.media/2025/05/bureaucracy-and-health-care-costs-explode-the-caq-betrays-its-commitments/
https://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/article825153.html"
Damn conservative governments underfunding healthcare!
Of course, elsewhere in the thread people claim that healthcare in Quebec sucks because they allow private healthcare

The Healthcare in Toronto is so much better than Ottawa/Montreal? Why is that? : r/montreal - "Quebec requires grads to
apply to a specific region of the province and if you decide not to respect that, 30% pay cut
do 12 hours a week of work outside of a clinic (chsld, hospital, ER, home care etc..) or else you get… a 30% pay cut.
get in with an institution but has to respect an institutional manpower plan. So that way a hospital isn’t allowed to have too many staff to just get more people in their area
essentially be forced to practice in a family medicine group where the government pays certain things (a certain amount of rent, computers, nursing hours) but in exchange they own you. If you’re too small you can be forced to merge with another clinic or lose all your “benefits”.
To my knowledge no province has any of these. This started after an embarrassing death in the late 80s or very early 90s of a man who died being transported to another hospital while having a heart attack because a regional ER was closed. The government knew it would be closed and they were embarrassed to they vowed that would never happen again so they started their insane micromanagement In Ontario you can do what you want, go wherever in the province etc… it’s up to you. Think about it: you have the most mobile desired professionals in the country and you micromanage them to death. So nobody wants to go into family medicine anymore. And it’s precisely that micromanagement that has killed family medicine."

Martyupnorth®- Unacceptable Fact Checker on X - "Alberta's former health minister Sarah Hoffman giving advice on staying healthy and preventing our healtcare system from getting overwhelmed. "Get jabbed". Nothing about eating good food, exercising, drinking lots of water and getting a good night's sleep. Nope. Get jabbed by big pharma."

Ottawa says provinces should pay for nurse practitioners, gives one-year grace before penalties - The Globe and Mail - "The federal government says provincial health plans should start covering the services of nurse practitioners who provide primary care as of April 1, but will delay enforcement for non-compliance for a year. Some of the estimated six million Canadians not connected to family doctors have turned to alternative health-care providers, often staffed with nurse practitioners, that may charge fees for services that would otherwise be covered by public insurance if provided by a physician... Provinces receive billions of dollars from Ottawa to pay for health services, and some of that money is clawed back if a province is found to be allowing health care providers to inappropriately bill patients. In the 2024-25 fiscal year, Ottawa transferred $52.1-billion to provinces and territories for health care and levied $62.2-million in penalties for inappropriate patient charges."
Clearly, since provinces are responsible for healthcare, this is proof that the federal government has nothing to do with why healthcare all over Canada sucks

Across the political spectrum, ageist provincial budgets fail the young - The Globe and Mail - "Both are directing the lion’s share of new spending toward medical care. Both are running large deficits to do so. Both are allowing investments in housing, postsecondary education, child care and support for young workers to grow far more slowly. That two governments who disagree on so much arrived at this same point because of something embedded in Canadian political culture: a willingness to protect older voters at almost any cost, even when it shifts the burden to younger generations. Unless citizens confront this inversion, provinces will keep tabling budgets that are anti-child, anti-parent and anti-young worker, regardless of which party holds power. The warning signs are visible: new data show B.C. now has the highest rate of children starting kindergarten developmentally vulnerable in a quarter century – the worst in the country. These children face higher risks of school failure, incarceration and preventable illness. When Alberta last collected comparable data, its rate was nearly as high. Demographics are part of the pressure behind this fiscal pattern. Canadians over 65 use roughly four times as much medical care as those under 50, according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information. As baby boomers move into their 70s and 80s, demand for care inevitably climbs as the share of seniors doubles compared with when boomers were young. That much was predictable decades ago. What was not predetermined was the response. Provinces chose not to modernize revenue systems to prepare for aging-related health costs. By contrast, Ottawa reformed the Canada Pension Plan in the 1990s, raising premiums by 68 per cent so boomers would pre-fund a substantial share of their retirement benefits... Expanding it without matching revenues – and covering the difference with debt – is a political choice. Governments could have paired rising medical costs with new contributions tied to aging. They could have slowed health spending growth to free more funds for generations being crushed by housing prices, navigating underfunded postsecondary systems or entering a fragile labour market. They chose not to. Part of the explanation is electoral arithmetic... Expanding medical care is now treated as a moral imperative – almost beyond scrutiny – while asking financially secure retirees to help finance their longer lives is framed as politically perilous. Across party lines, the safer path is to protect age-linked medical spending and let the fiscal consequences fall elsewhere. That “elsewhere” is younger Canadians: slower investment in housing and education, and deficits that leave them unpaid bills. Every year we delay modernizing how we finance boomers’ healthy retirements, the costs deepen and younger Canadians remain the collateral damage. Partisan battles may dominate the headlines, but beneath the political theatre the fiscal outcome is the same: budgets that discriminate against children, parents and young workers."
This won't stop left wingers insisting that "conservative" governments like the BC NDP deliberately underfund healthcare so it will collapse and they can privatise it

Where do our health care dollars go? - The Globe and Mail - "When it comes to spending money on health care, Canada is doing well compared to other developed countries. Charts measuring spending per capita generally show Canada falling in the middle, a rank that would be higher if the figures were age-adjusted. (Health care costs rise rapidly as people age and most European countries have older populations than Canada, so they should be spending more.) But what are Canadians getting for those health care dollars? When it comes to medical technology, such as MRIs and CT scans, Canada ranks dead last, below countries that spend much less per capita, including Slovakia, Croatia and Turkey. If we’re not spending on technology, then where is the money going? Is it going toward better access to emergency care, major medical procedures, hospital beds or family doctors?... Canada spends a disproportionate amount on end-of-life care, more than the United States and many European countries. A 2021 C.D. Howe Institute study found we spend nearly double on end-of-life hospitalizations compared with England and the Netherlands. Yet, there’s little to show for it in terms of higher life expectancy or quality of life at advanced ages. And even though they spend less than Canada, I would guess that Europeans do not believe they are any less compassionate toward their elderly. Another potential factor relates to a trend identified by economist William J. Baumol known as Baumol’s cost disease. His theory noted that salaries in any given sector will rise higher along with the rest of the economy, even when there are no productivity gains within that sector itself. When additional public funding becomes available, a disproportionate amount gets spent on raising salaries rather than on productivity improvements, infrastructure or technology."
Clearly the problem is not enough spending

EDITORIAL: Canada’s family doctor shortage was engineered - " To borrow a phrase from Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Davos speech, Canadian politicians for generations posted a sign in the window no one believed. It said: “Canada has the best health care system in the world.” Canadians stopped believing that a long time ago. A recent poll by the Angus Reid Institute found half of Canadians surveyed don’t have a family doctor or struggle to see the one they have, up from 40% a decade ago. Seven in 10 say the quality of health care in their province has deteriorated over the past decade, the same number who are dissatisfied with their provincial government’s performance on health care. While health care spending nationally has nearly doubled over the past decade, from $219 billion in 2015 to $399 billion in 2025, almost 60% say they’re worried they will not get timely access to health care if they have an emergency. International surveys show Canadians, while paying a disproportionately high price for health care, face some of the longest medical wait times in the developed world among countries that have universal health care... Canada’s shortage of family doctors was no accident. It was the result of deliberate government policies. In the early 1990s, provincial governments became convinced the best way to control medical costs was to cut the number of family doctors. They got this idea from university academics — so-called health-care economists — whose flawed advice was an example of the dangers of relying on “experts” with little knowledge of front-line health care. Despite warnings from Canada’s medical colleges that this would inevitably lead to a national doctor shortage, the provinces stalled funding, cut enrolments in medical schools and capped residences. As predicted, that led to today’s doctor shortage, even as Canada’s aging population requires more care and the baby boom generation of doctors are retiring. Pay for family doctors has not kept pace with compensation in the medical specialties, exacerbating the shortage."

Privatization means longer waits, less access for surgery: report - "Privatization of surgical services in Ontario has not improved wait times, but instead has forced patients to wait longer while negatively impacting access for all but the wealthiest residents, according to a new report from the Ontario Council of Hospital Unions and the Canadian Union of Public Employees."
Clearly, union-backed studies have no conflicts of interest, because conflicts of interest only exist when alleging that helps the left wing agenda

Why Canadian-trained doctors should be allowed to practise anywhere in Canada without additional licensing - "While politicians tout the benefits of reducing interprovincial trade barriers to unlock prosperity amid escalating trade tensions, our most precious health-care resources — fully qualified doctors — remain shackled. Physicians face a maze of regulations when attempting to practise beyond their home province... The answer lies not in medical competence, but in bureaucracy. Despite national standards for training and qualification, the power to grant a licence rests with 13 separate provincial and territorial regulatory colleges. This fragmented system creates artificial barriers, limiting the mobility of our highly skilled physicians across Canada."

Meme - Shuv Majumdar: "Canada spends among the most on healthcare in the developed world, yet ranks near the bottom for doctors, hospital beds, MRIs, and timely care. In Carney's Canada, you pay more, wait longer, get less."
"Canada is a HIGH SPENDER on health care, but has POOR PERFORMANCE compared to other universal health care countries"
Proof that healthcare in Canada is underfunded because conservatives want the system to collapse so they can privatise it and bring in US healthcare!

The myth of universal health care in Canada - The Globe and Mail
She says privatisation is a dirty word because of US horror stories, but this doesn't get at the role that Canadian patriotism as expressed through reflexive hatred of the US plays (besides, as she points out, 30% of Canadian healthcare is privately funded, including mental health)

Links - 31st July 2026 (2 - Migrants: Europe)

2026-07-31T17:54:00.000+08:00

Brigitte Gabriel on X - "🚨 BREAKING: 6 DEAD IN GERMANY MASS SHOOTING: A 45-year-old man of Turkish descent opened fire at a facility for pregnant women and young mothers near Hamburg. All 6 victims were employees. Several others hospitalized. Suspect is in custody. Motive: domestic violence. Germany has some of the world's strictest gun laws. Six people are still dead."
Woman Who Helped Stade Shooter Flee Worked for State-Funded Pro-Migration NGO - "The 65-year-old woman who drove the Stade mass shooter away from the scene works as a family and migration adviser for a pro-migration organization that receives significant funding from the German government, according to exclusive information obtained by German outlet NIUS. The woman, identified as Sylvia S from Bremen, reportedly drove the 45-year-old German citizen of Turkish origin to Monday’s custody-related meeting at a mother-and-child welfare facility in Stade, Lower Saxony. The man opened fire during the meeting, killing six employees—four women and two men—before fleeing in a grey Mercedes driven by Sylvia S. Police stopped the vehicle after a pursuit and detained both of them. The suspect, reportedly linked to the notorious Miri clan, remains in custody."
Afghan Commits Mass Groping And Attempted Rape Against Underage Girls At Swimming Pool - "A 21-year-old Afghan migrant has been arrested for a mass groping attack and attempted rape against underage girls at a German swimming pool in Schwäbisch Gmünd. At least four girls aged 12 to 14 were victims of sexual assaults last Saturday afternoon at the swimming pool, where the 21-year-old suspect reportedly groped their buttocks and thighs as well as trying to pull off their bikinis. In one case, he attempted to penetrate one girl’s vagina with his finger, which police are investigating as a potential rape under the legal definition. The girls successfully fought the man off before he was arrested by police officers. The public prosecutor’s office requested an arrest warrant, but the presiding judge suspended it. Now, the Afghan is free on the streets, with only the condition he not visit any public pools. German news outlet Tagesschau has reported on the incident has not disclosed that the suspect is an Afghan migrant. This omission fits a pattern at the taxpayer-funded outlet that has been sharply criticized by the right. Other outlets, however, reported his nationality. The story is very similar to a piece that ran just yesterday by Remix News, in which an Indian migrant sexually assaulted four underage Italian girls at a waterpark in Italy. The Indian migrant committed suicide inside his police cell just 48 hours later. Last year, nine girls were sexually assaulted at a swimming pool in Germany by Syrian men, fueling national anger over migrant crime. In 2023, in the German city of Stuttgart, police arrested a 23-year-old Syrian migrant who is accused of groping several women at an outdoor swimming pool over Pentecost weekend. In total, seven women, ranging from ages 12 to 18, were sexually assaulted at the swimming pool in three different incidents. Three men in total were taken into custody, including a 23-year-old Syrian migrant. In Cologne in September 2023, eight foreign nationals were arrested for surrounding and sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in a swimming pool. The girl managed to break free and alert police, who detained the suspects shortly after. In 2022, three 12-year-old girls were sexually assaulted in the Kaufbeuren public swimming pool in Bavaria by a group of six older teenagers described as having dark skin and speaking broken German. Police are still looking for the suspects. The internal report stated, “(We) can confirm a surge in sex crimes at these establishments. In particular rape and the sexual abuse of children in bathing establishments have given us grave cause for concern. The perpetrators are, for the most part, immigrants.” In 2022, violence in German outdoor swimming pools alarmed the Federal Association of German Swimming Champions (BDS) to such an extent that its president, Peter Harzheim, said he could no longer recommend that families visit such facilities on weekends. While speaking to Bild TV, Harzheim claimed he would be “acting irresponsibly” if he attended an outdoor pool with his own three grandchildren."
Visegrád 24 on X - "The German government under Chancellor Friedrich Merz is funding a nationwide campaign promoting the slogan "Muslims: A part of you!" as part of its "Action Weeks Against Anti-Muslim Racism." The whole program is funded at the expense of German taxpayers. The Federal Ministry for Family Affairs has awarded €624,997 in 2026 to CLAIM, the organization coordinating the campaign, which includes billboards, exhibitions, conferences, school programs and public events across Germany. The funding has drawn criticism because CLAIM inherited the structures and staff of a previous alliance of around 50 Muslim organizations that was dissolved in 2025. Germany's domestic intelligence services tied that network to groups linked to political Islam, including Muslim Brotherhood circles and Hamas-supporter networks."
X Freeze on X - "Germany is spending taxpayer money on a nationwide campaign saying: “Muslims: A part of you!” But where is the same campaign for Christians? Germany was built on deep Christian roots, yet Christians are constantly expected to stay silent while the government publicly promotes selective “equality” No Arab or Muslim-majority country is running taxpayer-funded campaigns saying: “Christians: A part of you!” So why is Germany doing this only one way? How is it okay to trash equality in the name of promoting one religion?"
Over 280,000 Iraqi refugees in Germany: migration office
Clearly, this is karma for Germany for supporting the illegal Iraq War! If they didn't want refugees, they should not have supported illegal wars!Anthony LaMesa on X - "Denmark has really maintained Japan-adjacent peace, order, and security despite having significantly more liberal immigration and criminal justice policies (freedom of movement for 450 million Europeans, Schengen open borders, and humane prisons). Danish Social Democrats have achieved liberalism that works for citizens and their approach stands in stark contrast with DSA’s “no bedtime” thinking about borders and crime."
Jacob Shell on X - "Denmark was Bernie's model society in all his mid-10s speeches and interviews. The Danes have vigorous assimilation rules, including controlling where immigrants can live (to prevent formation of non-Danish linguistic ghettos and "parallel societies"). The Danish left also got on board with this kind of thing. This obviously cuts hard against the grain of what the wider Western left has been advocating over the past decade-plus. Not sure what explains Danish exceptionality, but I suspect it has to do with a certain deep-rooted defensive prickliness, which the local left shares in as well, due to that land border with Germany."
Mj מירי on X - "Worth noting that Denmark’s model actually includes geography-based sentencing that targets immigrant heavy areas. They basically have a two-tiered justice system wherein offences committed inside designated neighbourhoods called “skærpet strafzone” — enhanced punishment zones— receive harsher sentences than the same offences committed elsewhere. So immigrants are receiving tougher sentences than Danes. Some immigrant and refugee groups, specifically from MENA and African nations, also receive lower welfare benefits than ordinary Danish welfare recipients, so immigrants can claim welfare, but they wont receive as much as a Dane. I don’t think this would, or should, fly in the States. It certainly doesn’t fly in Canada."
Ayaan Hirsi Ali - Migrants and the Threat to Women’s Rights in Europe - "European statistics on sex crimes are a maze, if not a minefield, of inconsistent and changing definitions. Denmark is unusual for making it relatively easy to distinguish immigrant offenders. Since 2015, the country’s share of immigrants from “non-Western countries,” excluding their Danish-born descendants, has risen from around 5% to 6%. Yet from 2015 to 2019 they have accounted for around 11% of convictions for sex offenses and 34% of convictions for rape. In Germany a new category of “rape, sexual coercion and sexual assault in especially serious cases including resulting in death” was introduced in June 2016, making it hard to measure the effect of the migrant influx. Even so, in 2017 and 2018, more than a third of the suspects in the new category were non-Germans. For all sexual-abuse cases, the share of non-German suspects rose from 15% in 2014 to 23% in 2016, 2017 and 2018, and 21% in 2019. “Non-German” is a broad category. In Germany’s crime statistics, the term zuwanderer, or “newcomers,” was used until 2016 to identify suspects who were asylum applicants, failed asylum seekers and illegal residents. This definition was expanded in 2017 to include successful asylum seekers. From 2017 to 2019, zuwanderer accounted for between 10% and 12% of sex-crime suspects, and around 16% of suspects for rape, sexual coercion and sexual assault in especially serious cases. It is unlikely that zuwanderer accounted for much more than 2% of the German population. In Austria, “crimes or offenses against sexual integrity and self-determination” increased by 53% between 2015 and 2018. Between a quarter and a third of suspects were foreign, but in 2018 only 19.4% of the population was foreign-born. Between 4% and 11% of the suspects were asylum seekers; the share of the population born in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria—among the largest sources of asylum seekers—was only 1.2%. In the absence of official statistics, the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet reviewed the gang-rape cases heard in Swedish courts between July 2012 and December 2017. Of the 112 men convicted, it found that three-quarters were foreign-born (almost all of those from outside Europe), and 30% were asylum seekers. I don’t claim this problem is unique to Muslim migrants. Rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment seem to be universal. Nevertheless, the behavior of Muslim men in Europe is important for three reasons. First, the scale of the migration and its likely continuation. Second, its political salience. Sexual misconduct by some migrants provides the far right with a tool to demonize them all. Third, the lack of frank discussion also helps Islamists, who recognize the problem but propose a remedy that would set back all women. Talking about violence by Muslim men against European women is at odds with identity politics and its matrix of victimhood. Politicians, journalists and academics have been reluctant to acknowledge that the migrant sex-crime wave even exists. This is as much an issue of class as religion or race. Much of the crime and misconduct against women takes place in low-income neighborhoods. Somehow in the era of #MeToo, their predicament arouses less sympathy than that of Hollywood actresses. I have been encouraged by French President Emmanuel Macron’s condemnation of Islamist ideology in his country. But he and other leaders are still much too reluctant to talk about the sex-crime wave, which signifies an erosion of women’s rights. Rapes in France surged by 31% and other sexual “aggressions” by 32% from 2016 to 2018. Pretending the problem doesn’t exist is the surest way to empower not only the far right but also the Islamists, whose solution entails even greater restrictions on female freedom."
From 2021. Time to pretend that per capita doesn't matter, that rise in rates is due to expanding methodology (which is a good thing) even if victim surveys disagree, and that the higher arrest and conviction rates are proof of racism, xenophobia and Islamophobia
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry on X - "I am translating this horrifying, heartbreaking testimony from Lili R. Many people who don't live in France might not understand how bad things have become. "I am 26 years old, blonde, with light eyes, and I have always lived in the 6th arrondissement of Lyon, which is thought of as the poshest area in Lyon, and my daily life has become unbearable. I write this because, ten years ago, I could go out with my friends in the evening, at any hour, without being bothered, insulted, followed, or stabbed. I mention stabbing because, three years ago, my boyfriend, along with two of his friends, on their way home, were approached by a group of men. They surrounded them, stole one of their cell phones. They tried to fight back, and my boyfriend, in spite of being a strong rugbyman, got stabbed, in the arm--while protecting his neck, which was the target. Someone tried to cut his throat. As for myself, on a regular basis, men follow me, insult me because I refuse to talk back or because I say I have a boyfriend. One day, one spit on me. More and more, I am whistled at like a dog, or "ksksks"'d like I am a cat. Acts of this nature have happened to me perhaps thirty times in the past year. Six months ago, we adopted a puppy. One evening, my boyfriend went out to walk him at 9pm, and three men tried to steal the puppy. Since then, we only go out in the evening as a couple, and I always carry pepper spray in my purse. In our neighborhood, just in our block, there are three drug dealing spots, which work constantly. Day and night. With everything that entails: watchmen loitering outside our house, milling about, shouting, getting high and bothering people, especially women. Every single one of the actions I mentioned (and they are only a part of what we have gone through) is the fact of men of sub-Saharan African or North African origin. A white man has never behaved towards me the way they have. Is it racist to call out what my daily life has become as a woman, because of immigration? Is my reality, my daily life, racist? Am I not as legitimate as any other person to call out traumatising acts of violence, just because they are done by foreigners or immigrants? To be clear, I am not talking about men in general, but specifically men, sometimes underage, who are of immigrant background. Now, and for about four years, the way I live my life has had to change to live with this constant insecurity. Now I live with a pepper spray outside my front door, a taser, and a false pistol, after an attempted break-in. We have had an extra lock added to our door. We have a security camera in our apartment. In my purse, I carry a second pepper spray, as well as brass knuckles on my keychain. I never walk into a building without checking both sides of the street, in case a man is following me. I never make eye contact with you-know-who. I constantly cross the street. I no longer leave my home on my own after 9pm. I no longer use public transport for obvious reasons. I am afraid when I am alone at home. I am afraid when outside. Now, I am always afraid. I do not want this future for my children who, fortunately, are not yet here. I do not understand people who do not see that France is turning into a cradle of insecurity because of immigrant men. Insecurity to women, but to men as well. Therefore, for your future, and those of your children or your children-to-be: cast the right vote."
From 2024
Migrant Squats: How the Far-Left Keeps Undocumented Migrants on French Soil : r/europe_sub - " Notes from the territorial intelligence services, consulted by JDNews, reveal the collusion between certain associations and the far-left protest movement in illegally opening squats for migrants. The alert was raised at the highest levels of the State, in the middle of summer, by the intelligence services. Migrant squats are skyrocketing. In February 2024, 157 squats were recorded by the Interior Ministry, 169 last December, and 244 by June. That’s a 55% increase in less than a year and a half. Southern France, particularly Toulouse and Perpignan, is especially affected, accounting for two-thirds of these illegal occupations. Most squatters are from sub-Saharan Africa and the Maghreb. The largest squats are mostly made up of single men, adults or claiming to be unaccompanied minors, while smaller ones are mainly occupied by families with children. These newcomers, who entered the country illegally, do not find housing—even precarious—on their own. A system relying on a myriad of intermediary associations allows them to remain on French soil. JDNews obtained access to several recent notes from the National Directorate of Territorial Intelligence (DNRT), shedding light on this network of connections between migrant aid associations—often subsidized with public funds—and the far-left protest movement.
Public Buildings Targeted First
Nationwide, 69 associations and collectives, 18 of which are considered “disruptive,” have been identified for their ties to the No Border or anarchist-autonomist movements, requiring “increased vigilance.” Among these groups working on behalf of migrants, 550 individuals have been identified as activists or members; 230 were already known for “their proximity or belonging to various far-left movements, as well as for their subversive and violent potential regarding security and public order,” according to analysts. These individuals do not hesitate to pool their resources locally to open new squats.
Activists Present Themselves as Educators for Disabled Children
In Toulouse, where the far-left has a strong historical foothold, No Border activists target properties owned by the local public land establishment of the metropolitan area. These properties are known to have longer eviction timelines than private homes. Activists occupy the premises and then present themselves to authorities as belonging to an association for educators of disabled children, thereby delaying the State’s action to remove them. When legal decisions become imminent, associations of lawyers specializing in the defense of migrants step in, further extending eviction deadlines through multiple appeals. In Lyon, Grenoble, and Tours, school buildings are the main targets. All this creates a deterioration in living conditions for residents: begging, altercations among squatters, incivilities, noise pollution due to drug or alcohol consumption—and sometimes even physical violence, theft, or burglary.
When the State is Put on the Spot
Some squat openings are even publicly claimed, under the guise of humanitarian action, by activists convinced of the legitimacy of their cause. Their strategy is to expose the State’s “failures” and flood the media so that public opinion focuses not on the illegal nature of their actions but on the allegedly “repressive” response of law enforcement. The association Utopia 56, which has official civic service accreditation, regularly inundates the General Inspectorate of the National Police (IGPN) and the Defender of Rights with complaints. Human Right Observers, for its part, organizes copwatching operations—police surveillance—along the coast to disrupt efforts to stop illegal boat departures for the UK. Historic associations such as Réseau Éducation Sans Frontières (RESF), La Cimade, and the Ligue des droits de l’homme “regularly march together with far-left collectives” during protests or days of action. One such example was on March 22 during a demonstration called by La France Insoumise “against racism,” which mixed support for Gaza with controversy over an antisemitic poster depicting Cyril Hanouna. Two-thirds of the disruptive collectives identified by intelligence are, in reality, “de facto groups,” making it impossible—just like with Les Soulèvements de la Terre in the environmental field—to bring administrative or criminal charges, since they take care not to expose themselves directly to violent acts, leaving such actions to individual activists.
Authorities Respond—but Activists Adapt
Prefects dealing with this issue have sometimes succeeded in stopping these occupations. Thanks to the July 2023 anti-squat law, which strengthens housing protections and shortens eviction deadlines, the use of administrative rather than judicial procedures has risen sharply. In the first half of 2025, 36 squats were shut down, including 22 in Perpignan alone. In Fontaine-lès-Dijon, an illegal camp was cleared in early April. In Lyon, the emblematic squat on Quai Arloing was cleared last June. But intelligence services report that activist groups are already finding ways around the law. They now open new shelters via the Airbnb platform: renting apartments for a few days, changing the locks, and moving in new migrants. Since the property owner authorized entry, accelerated eviction procedures cannot be triggered."
Bonaccini (President of the Italian Democratic Party and MEP) shocked La7 (tv network): "Without migrants, who will clean the hotels and pick the vegetables?" The web: classist and racist (video) : r/europe_sub - "Immigrants as new slaves. The incredible speech by Stefano Bonaccini, a Democratic Party MEP, on Omnibus on La 7 is a eulogy to slavery. What if there were fewer migrants? "I'd send Vannacci to work as a caregiver for Italian families, to clean hotel rooms, to clean restaurant kitchens, and to pick all the vegetables in the fields..." This video excerpt is making the rounds online, shared and re-shared, and sarcastically commented on. "They want underpaid workers above all," writes one user on X about migrants. Bonaccini, a radical chic on La7: migrants as new slaves The topic of immigration and jobs was discussed. The words of the former governor of Emilia Romagna are disconcerting, embarrassing. It's not a high-profile vision, no doubt about it. "The left's last mask is finally falling: indiscriminate acceptance so they can be exploited and underpaid in menial jobs, only to then demand their votes," criticizes another. Bonaccini makes a fool of himself with this brief argument, however brief. Some unmask a certain do-goodism in a flurry of unforgiving comments: "Having no real reason, other than ideological, to support the multicultural massacre they've promoted for years, they're always forced to use the issue of jobs, which Italians blah blah. Disturbing inadequacy." In reality, writes another, "they fear losing their vote (of immigrants, ed.), since they can no longer count on that of Italians." The web: "The last mask falls on migrants: underpaying them for menial jobs." Stefano Bonaccini raised the issue of foreigners' contribution to the Italian economy, which he drastically limits to strenuous work like fruit and vegetable picking, elderly care, cleaning, and catering. Bonaccini misses the complexity. Dig deeper, and the classist soul of a certain left emerges, captured in these few, significant words. "They're so radical they don't even realize what they're saying." This reasoning is based on a unique classism and racism. Fabio Dragoni, a columnist for La Verità, who shared the post, sparking a back-and-forth, commented: "One of the most classist and racist speeches I've ever heard... He wants slaves. The same dynamic that arose during the American Civil War." Another user expressed indignation: "They're unspeakable. The fight is against illegal immigration, not against those who live in Italy and work legally. Furthermore, he calmly maintains that there are workers who are underpaid and in the hands of gangmasters. Truly unspeakable." Here is the classist “vision” interpreted by Stefano Bonaccini."
PeterSweden on X - "IT HAS HAPPENED Sweden has made the UN update their guidelines so that r*pe is now considered a serious crime that warrants deportation. This comes after the shocking case in Sweden where a man from Eritrea was convicted of r*ping a 16 year old girl. But the court said he couldn't be deported it wasn't considered a serious enough offence for deportation. Of course this story was covered up by the media. But it was reported on X and caused massive outrage in Sweden."
The far-Left sees electoral gain in building a ‘new France’ defined by immigration - "as Mélenchon put it, he wanted “to connect the old France” with what he called “La Nouvelle France” (The New France)... it means the mainly immigrant population of the banlieues, the wretchedly poor suburbs which now encircle most major metropolitan centres in France. In 2026, the term “New France” is being mobilised as the key part of Mélenchon’s electoral strategy, bringing politics to a traditionally disillusioned and disenfranchised section of the population. This is why Mélenchon has chosen figures such as Bagayoko, whose family come from Mali (and has a Palestinian flag hanging in his office), Aly Diouara, a National Assembly deputy for LFI of Gambian descent, and Rima Hassan, an immigrant of Palestinian and Kurdish origin who was born in a Syrian refugee camp as “the new faces of the LFI”. Saint-Denis has in effect become a testing ground for the “New France” and so far it seems to be working. Alongside the term “New France”, Mélenchon speaks of the “creolisation” of France, to describe the hybrid demographic of the banlieues. This is a term which he has borrowed from the poet and philosopher Édouard Glissant, a native of the Caribbean island of Martinique, a French overseas territory. It rejects the traditional notion of “integration” in favour of a blending of “behaviours, norms and languages” shaped by the immigrant experience. Mélenchon thinks that this is a genuinely new French Revolution for the 21st century, one which he defines as “a concrete Universalism”. Unsurprisingly, however, there are plenty of people who belong to the “old France” who violently object to Mélenchon’s “extremism”. These come not just from the Right but also sections of the French Left who might otherwise have been sympathetic to the LFI. Fabien Roussel, a presidential candidate for the Communist Party in 2022, has, for example, denounced the LFI strategy. He claims it is a form of “communautarisme” – a taboo form of identity politics in communist circles – which might well “fracture France” even further. Mélenchon responded to Roussel that this was a form of “racialised politics” which risked dangerously alienating the “New France” of the banlieues even further... Seen from Britain, it seems that Mélenchon’s electoral strategy of the “New France”, replacing one “native” political constituency with another, is only doing explicitly what many on the UK Left would like to do by stealth. It remains to be seen, however, whether this ushers in a new age of social transformation for France, or only deepens the existing political chaos."

UK Labour and Mass Migration

2026-07-31T13:26:00.000+08:00

Thread by @KingBobIIV on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App
🧵 I have spent days going back through old Labour governments, Labour manifestos, speeches and Hansard, because I wanted to know when it apparently became "far-right" to suggest that rapid population growth and mass immigration can put pressure on housing, wages, jobs and public services.

Unfortunately for modern Labour, old Labour left an enormous paper trail.
1965, Harold Wilson's Labour government published its White Paper on Commonwealth immigration and openly acknowledged the problems caused by the concentration of immigration in areas "where there is already a housing shortage and pressure on the social services".

The problems were listed under four headings, housing, education, employment and health.

Labour understood sixty years ago that the poorest communities, where housing and services were already under pressure, would feel rapid demographic change first.

Source: UK Parliament/Hansard
Commonwealth Immigration debate, 2 August 1965

hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1965-0…
The same 1965 Labour policy was not simply a discussion about integration, the government proposed reducing annual work permits from 20,800 to 8,500 and abolishing work permits for unskilled workers altogether, while simultaneously providing extra help in schools and communities affected by migration.

In other words, Labour believed you could treat immigrants decently, tackle discrimination and still recognise that numbers, concentration, housing and public-service capacity mattered.

Source: House of Commons Library
Immigration white papers, 1965–2025

researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-…
By the Michael Foot era, Labour's 1983 manifesto explicitly stated, "We accept the need for immigration controls."

Foot's Labour opposed racial discrimination within the immigration system and wanted to repeal Conservative legislation, but it did not therefore conclude that immigration required no control at all, it argued for a different system of control.

That distinction seems to have become almost impossible to make in modern political debate.

Source: 1983 Labour manifesto
A New Hope for Britain, Labour manifesto 1983

labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/198…
Tony Benn's position was different and I am not going to rewrite history to make him fit my argument, Benn opposed immigration controls as the solution, but his entire economic analysis was rooted in the power imbalance between capital and labour, and in the ability of capital to search the world for lower labour costs while ordinary workers lacked comparable power.

His answer was stronger unions and control of capital rather than immigration restrictions, but the question at the centre of his politics was always the same, who benefits economically and which class pays?

Source: Tony Benn interview
Tony Benn on labour, capital and the global economy

pbs.org/wgbh/commandin…
In 1987, Labour's manifesto was still explicitly committed to a policy of "firm and fair immigration control", while also insisting that the law should not discriminate on grounds of race, colour or sex.

There was no intellectual contradiction, Labour could argue for equality before the law and firm immigration control in the same paragraph, because opposing racism did not require pretending a country had no right to control migration.

Source: 1987 Labour manifesto
Britain Will Win with Labour, manifesto 1987

labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/198…
In 1997, Tony Blair's landslide manifesto could hardly have been clearer, "Every country must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception."

That was not a fringe movement trying to drag Labour to the right, it was written into the manifesto on which Tony Blair won 418 seats and the largest Labour majority in history.

Source: 1997 Labour manifesto
New Labour: Because Britain Deserves Better, manifesto 1997

labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/199…
By 2001, Labour was welcoming workers with skills Britain "needed" while drawing a very clear distinction between selected economic migration and abuse of the asylum system, stating, "But asylum should not be an alternative route to immigration."

The principle was that Britain could welcome migration which met an identified need, enforce its rules, decide claims quickly and remove those who had no right to remain.

Source: 2001 Labour manifesto
Ambitions for Britain, Labour manifesto 2001

labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/200…
In 2005, Blair's Labour government published a five-year immigration plan based on "strict controls that work", proposing a points-based system, phasing out low-skilled migration schemes, restricting permanent settlement largely to skilled workers, English-language requirements, fingerprinting visa applicants, migrant identification documents and increased removals.

This was a Labour government arguing that migration should be selected according to Britain's economic and social interests ONLY.

Source: UK Government archive
Controlling our borders: Making migration work for Britain, 2005

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c7415…
Then, in 2007, Gordon Brown used the phrase "British jobs for British workers".

The slogan was controversial even then, but the political concern behind it was obvious, Labour knew its traditional voters were worried about employment, wages and the consequences of employers accessing a much larger labour market while British workers were told to accept stagnant wages and increasing competition.

Source: contemporary coverage of Brown's 2007 Labour conference speech

Gordon Brown and “British jobs for British workers”

theguardian.com/politics/2007/…
In October 2008, Labour Immigration Minister Phil Woolas said something so extraordinary in hindsight that it deserves to be read in full:

"This Government isn't going to allow the population to go up to 70 million.

There has to be a balance between the number of people coming in and the number of people leaving."

A Labour Immigration Minister explicitly said his government would NOT ALLOW the British population to reach 70 million.

Source: Hansard
Immigration Controls debate, 21 October 2008

hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2008-1…
This was not an invented quotation or a line retrospectively attributed to Woolas, his comments were reported contemporaneously in October 2008, when he also said that a cap on immigration would be needed if numbers rose above a certain point and that the points-based system could be changed.

The argument was explicitly about preventing Britain reaching 70 million.

70 million was seen as the maximum amount of people the UK could cope with before the infrastructure and services would collapse. This included water/sewage, healthcare, public transport and education.

The magic number. Go beyond that and the UK could descend in to chaos.

Source: The Guardian, 18 October 2008
Immigration minister calls for cap on newcomers

theguardian.com/politics/2008/…
In 2009, Labour Home Secretary Alan Johnson admitted Labour had made mistakes on immigration and acknowledged that some communities had "legitimate concerns about the strain on jobs and services".

This is the point modern Labour so often seems desperate to avoid, the pressure is not distributed equally, a wealthy household with private healthcare, private schooling and secure housing experiences population growth very differently from a family competing for affordable housing, low-paid work and overstretched local services.

Source: The Guardian, 2 November 2009

Alan Johnson: Labour has made mistakes on immigration

theguardian.com/politics/2009/…
By 2009, official projections were warning that Britain's population was heading towards 70 million, and the debate was increasingly concerned with whether housing, water, energy, waste systems and infrastructure could keep pace with population growth.

The Environment Agency's own planning work was examining future water demand against population growth, because governments and infrastructure planners understood the rather obvious point that millions more people require millions more people's worth of water, sewage, housing and physical capacity.

Source: UK Government population and sustainability material
Demographic Change and the Environment

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c4f03…
On 2 February 2010, just three months before the General Election, Labour Immigration Minister Phil Woolas told Parliament:

"The Government agree that a population of 70 million is not desirable."

There is no ambiguity in that sentence, the Labour government formally stated in Parliament that a population of 70 million was not desirable.

Some experts think we're now 10 or more million beyond that number.

Source: Hansard
Population and Immigration debate, 2 February 2010

hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2010-0…
Then read Labour's actual 2010 General Election manifesto, because it explicitly said, "We understand people's concerns about immigration — about whether it will undermine their wages or job prospects, or put pressure on public services or housing — and we have acted."

Labour itself joined immigration to wages, job prospects, public services and housing, and the negative effevt this was having on the worling class, and the poorest towns and villages, in its General Election manifesto.

manifesto.deryn.co.uk/wp-content/upl…
The same 2010 Labour manifesto promised to use an Australian-style points-based system to ensure that, as economic growth returned, Britain saw "rising employment and wages, not rising immigration".

That sentence is almost impossible to reconcile with the economic argument we have heard repeatedly in more recent years, that ever-higher immigration is necessary to produce economic growth.

Source: Labour Party manifesto 2010
A Future Fair for All, immigration section

manifesto.deryn.co.uk/wp-content/upl…
In 2012, after Labour had lost the election, Ed Miliband gave a remarkable speech on immigration in which he admitted that Labour had been "too slow" to understand who benefited and who bore the costs of immigration, and he explicitly framed part of the argument around class.

His point was that immigration could make life easier for some people while making life harder for others, and Labour had failed to recognise that distributional divide.

Source: Ed Miliband immigration speech, June 2012

Ed Miliband outlines Labour's new approach to immigration

ein.org.uk/news/ippr-ed-m…
Miliband then said, "The combination of immigration and an under-regulated labour market held wages down in hospitality, food processing and social care."

These were not highly paid City jobs, they were sectors employing large numbers of lower-paid workers, and the Labour leader was openly acknowledging that immigration, combined with weak labour protections, had held wages down.

Source: Ed Miliband immigration speech, 22 June 2012

ein.org.uk/news/ippr-ed-m…
Miliband's argument went beyond wages, because he also acknowledged that Britain had opened its labour market to Eastern European migration too quickly and that the last Labour government had made mistakes.

Contemporary reporting summarised his admission plainly, Labour had allowed too many Eastern European migrants into Britain by lifting controls too early.

Source: The Guardian, 21 June 2012
Change rules on migrant workers, says Ed Miliband

theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/21…
Later in 2012, Miliband continued the argument, saying immigration had significant economic benefits, "but not when it is used to undercut workers already here and exploit people coming here".

This used to be an entirely recognisable Labour argument, employers should not be allowed to use an international supply of cheaper labour to weaken the bargaining position of workers already living here.

Source: Ed Miliband Labour conference speech, 2012
Ed Miliband's conference speech transcript

labourlist.org/2012/10/ed-mil…

In 2015, Labour's General Election manifesto was still warning that exploitation of migrant labour "undercuts local wages and increases demand for further low-skilled migration".

Labour understood the cycle, employers gain access to cheaper labour, wages and conditions remain unattractive, fewer local workers enter those sectors, employers announce a labour shortage and demand access to still more low-paid migrant labour.

Source: Labour Party manifesto 2015
Britain Can Be Better, Labour manifesto 2015

manifestos.org.uk/manifesto/2015…
Now come back to the present and remember the number Labour once said was "not desirable", 70 million.

Britain's population has passed that threshold while the country simultaneously faces an acute housing shortage, enormous NHS waiting lists and acknowledged failures in water and other infrastructure, yet we are increasingly encouraged to discuss each crisis as though population growth is the one variable that must never be included in the calculation.

For the current population figures, (estimates) see the ONS population estimates and projections.

Source: Office for National Statistics
UK population estimates and projections

ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati…
Labour's own 2024 manifesto promised 1.5 million new homes, described the NHS as broken, acknowledged a housing crisis, promised infrastructure reform and said the immigration system needed to be "controlled and managed".

These problems are discussed throughout the same manifesto, yet the obvious question remains, how quickly must housing, water, sewage capacity, transport, schools and healthcare expand merely to maintain the same provision per person when the population is growing so rapidly?

Source: Labour Party manifesto 2024
Change, Labour Party manifesto 2024

labour.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
The class question has barely changed since Wilson's government identified housing shortages and pressure on social services in 1965.

The wealthiest experience mass immigration largely as an economic argument about aggregate growth, while the poorest are more likely to experience pressure through the affordable housing market, low-paid sectors of the labour market and reliance on local public services, which is precisely why Labour politicians from Wilson's government to Miliband repeatedly discussed concentration, wages, jobs and services.

Commonwealth Immigration debate, 1965
hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1965-0…
None of this requires pretending *all* immigrants are "bad people", it simply requires applying the old Labour question to public policy, who benefits and who bears the cost?

If an employer benefits from a larger labour supply, while the state must provide additional housing, water, sewage capacity, healthcare, education and transport, and lower-paid communities experience the greatest local pressure, it is perfectly legitimate for a workers' party to ask whether the benefits and costs are being distributed fairly.

Labour write these rules. They made these arguments.

So when did making these same points start becoming a "far right" narrative?
In 1965, Labour identified housing, education, employment and health.

In 1983 Labour accepted the need for immigration controls.

In 1987 it promised "firm and fair immigration control", in 1997 Blair said Britain needed "firm control".

In 2010 Labour explicitly warned about wages, jobs, public services and housing.

In 2012 Miliband admitted immigration combined with an under-regulated labour market had held down wages in several low-paid industries.

These are Labour's arguments, preserved in its own manifestos, government papers, speeches and Hansard.

So, why are we - the same working class - now labelled "far right" for making the very same arguments, for the very same reasons, that the Labour party has been making since the 1960s?

Links - 31st July 2026 (1 - Indigenous Peoples in Canada)

2026-07-31T09:28:00.000+08:00

Canadian media ate up false news that Aboriginal title was no threat | National Post - "the Canadian Press told readers far and wide that private property was safe from Aboriginal title thanks to that day’s decision by the Supreme Court. It wasn’t true at all, but the national wire service hasn’t even bothered to issue a correction, let alone a retraction. What actually happened was this: the Supreme Court declined Thursday morning to hear an appeal from New Brunswick’s highest court about whether the indigenous Wolastoqey Nation, in its quest to claim half of the province, can go after private property in addition to Crown land. The Brunswickian judges had answered that question with “Kind of”: Aboriginal title can be found to exist on private property, for which the Crown will be liable (not the private owners); Aboriginal title can’t, however, be declared on private property, which would involve handing over ownership rights to the Indigenous people. This two-pronged system isn’t found elsewhere, including notably B.C., but this is how it will work in New Brunswick until the province’s appeal court, or the Supreme Court, decides otherwise. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case is not a ruling and has no legal bearing on the rest of the country, but you wouldn’t have gotten that from the ensuing Canadian Press report. The initial headline that circulated widely was this: “Aboriginal title can’t apply to private land, High Court rules.” This was wrong in two ways: the Supreme Court didn’t rule anything, and the decision for which appeal was sought found that Aboriginal title could apply to private land. The Canadian Press went on to open the story with the following line: “The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld a ruling that Aboriginal title cannot be declared over private land, in a decision the federal government says will have an impact on the Cowichan Tribes case in British Columbia.” Again, this was riddled with errors: the Supreme Court didn’t uphold anything (for it to do that, it would have had to hear the case). Nor did the court say whether Aboriginal title can be declared over private land — that remains the rule in New Brunswick only. The reporters added to the false impression by uncritically repeating an assertion by the federal government that the top court’s refusal to hear the appeal would impact a case in B.C... There was much applause for the Supreme Court for protecting people’s homes — which it didn’t do — and much gloating from those who insist that Aboriginal title poses no threat to property rights. This of course is not true: B.C. is still bound by the B.C. Supreme Court’s Cowichan Tribes decision from August, which paradoxically ruled that Indigenous groups and private owners can both somehow have exclusive ownership rights over the same piece of land, in part because some colonial officers a century ago didn’t consult the Indigenous locals to the modern judge’s standards. And so, the matter remains unresolved. The University of Saskatchewan’s resident Aboriginal law expert, Dwight Newman, gave his assessment on Friday: “The outcome in the Wolastoqey case (out of New Brunswick), then, is moderately positive for those hoping to see a change in the Cowichan result. But only moderately so. British Columbia’s courts could yet go a different path than the New Brunswick court did, and then the Supreme Court of Canada may have to look at everything again.” Plus, if the Supreme Court one day went with the milder version of Aboriginal title that New Brunswick judges have developed, but even this would be a disaster because of the sheer cost it would impose on government. If you think government’s finances are bad now, just wait until a court slaps down a $100 billion bill for “stolen” land. A map showing the Wolastoqey Nation’s title claim in New Brunswick... the Canadian Press didn’t acknowledge any of this. Later on Thursday, it quietly issued a new version of the story with no indication that a false report had ever been made. That would be fine if it were a minor typo, but not for a substantive problem that has been widely passed off as true... Both of the journalists responsible for this misreport know better. In February, co-author Nono Shen interviewed “misinformation experts” for a story about the unfortunate tendency for incorrect information to spread online in developing situations, a theme she’s covered multipletimes, ashas co-author Wolfgang Depner. But it’s not all up to them: the Canadian Press should have stepped in and corrected the public record. That’s what its policies call for, anyway. Ultimately, this means more ammo in the sling for those who continue to insist that the growing threat that is Aboriginal title isn’t a problem, for they can now point to an incorrect news story to show that your concerns over private property are paranoid and irrational. It’s a small political gain for the feds and provinces like B.C., who have been recognizing title claims without knowing the consequences, and preventing their lawyers from fully defending the public interest when Indigenous claims go to court. The public is catching on, but some current-event confusion can slow that down."
The Less Certain Future of Private Land in British Columbia
FULL TRUTH: Are Land Claims a Threat to Property Rights in Canada? Top Aboriginal Lawyer Interview - YouTube - "Lawyer Tom Isaac, chair of Castles’ National Aboriginal Law Group and a former BC chief treaty negotiator... warns the Cowichan decision creates real uncertainty for private landowners by undermining indefeasible title, with potentially catastrophic economic consequences."
Cowichan decision raises questions around fee simple titles | Insights | MLT Aikins
Weird. Left wingers tell us that Cowichan does not endanger private land ownership at all and anyone who suggests otherwise is spreading misinformation
How B.C.'s reconciliation law, DRIPA, is a major threat to democracy | National Post - "There is a growing political and constitutional crisis in British Columbia sparked by the province’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA). The growing controversy around DRIPA and its impacts has become a major political severe headache for Premier David Eby, whose plan to suspend the law fell apart amid threats of blockade and lawsuits from Indigenous leaders. In this interview with NP’s Rob Breakenridge, Without Diminishment co-founder and National Post contributor Geoff Russ makes the case that DRIPA has evolved into a “quasi-constitutional veto” and “legal stranglehold” that threatens democratic governance, social cohesion, resource development, and even the names of B.C. municipalities. Russ warns that the rest of Canada should be paying attention, and that B.C.’s experience should serve as a cautionary tale."
Time to end the BC NDP's ideological nightmare and repeal DRIPA - "With all the debate in and out of the courts about whether a United Nations declaration should dictate our reconciliation efforts, Canadians might be forgiven for forgetting – or not knowing – our country already has an able process to resolve Crown/Aboriginal relations. Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 is the provision in our highest law that recognizes and affirms existing Aboriginal and treaty rights. Despite this, in 2019 an activist NDP government introduced a different and completely unworkable “reconciliation framework” throughout British Columbia. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) first found purchase in Canada as an uncalled-for recommendation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which stipulated that the declaration form the basis for reconciliation in Canada, despite this country already having a constitutional framework in place for that very purpose. In 2019, the B.C. government, under the late Premier John Horgan, passed legislation that brought UNDRIP into British Columbia law. The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, 2019 directed each and every law in the province must conform to the ill-defined human rights concepts set out in UNDRIP. Some UNDRIP provisions are not only vague, they stand in direct conflict with section 35 of the constitution. For instance, Article 26 directs complete Indigenous ownership of any claimed territory with no requirement to prove “exclusive occupation” of those lands as is required by section 35. Using Article 26, the Eby government assumes every square inch of British Columbia’s land base is “stolen” land – what the Premier calls the “original colonial mistake” that he is intent on correcting. Again these assertions are in direct conflict with Canadian constitutional law. Proven Aboriginal title may ultimately cover around six per cent, but certainly not 100 per cent of the B.C. land base. And Article 32(2) of UNDRIP stipulates Indigenous consent must be obtained before any government decision can impact that so-called territorial ownership interest. Section 35 of the constitution says no such thing. Most legal experts know that its practical effect is to create a veto power for Aboriginal communities over government actions. No one has any idea what that provision means exactly. Is it a veto over Crown decision-making or not? The Supreme Court of Canada already realized that requiring Aboriginal consent or agreement before governments could govern in the public interest would put a giant stick in the spokes of reconciliation. The Eby government is apparently fine with that outcome. The BC NDP said DRIPA would not confer a veto when it introduced the legislation in 2019, but the B.C. government under David Eby has since signed agreements with First Nations in the name of reconciliation that do exactly that. It is ridiculous to think that the B.C. government can effectively run the province in the midst of these uncertainties. Which is why, perhaps, a growing chorus of people are saying the province is not being run effectively. DRIPA is currently enjoying a moment of infamy as the driver of radical provincial reconciliation policy and a major factor in several precedent-setting court decisions. Meanwhile citizens, Indigenous law experts, First Nations, industries, politicians, potential investors, and media outlets struggle to make sense of the law’s intention and the societal upheaval it is creating. The stated intention of the legislature at the time DRIPA was passed by MLAs of all parties was for legislators, not the courts, to reconcile all B.C. laws with the articles of UNDRIP. That expectation was blown out of the water by the Dec. 5 BC Court of Appeal decision in the Gitxaala case. For the second time in four months, a B.C. court referenced the principles of DRIPA in its ruling. In the Gitxaala v. British Columbia decision, two of three judges overturned an earlier court decision and decreed DRIPA was in fact “justiciable” as in, a law that can be used in a trial and upheld in court, and that all the province’s laws must immediately conform to UNDRIP. With that judgment, the DRIPA nightmare became a full-blown constitutional crisis... Four months after the BC Supreme Court’s Cowichan Tribes v. Canada decision recognized Aboriginal title on fee simple land and ruled Land Title Act protections for those private land titles don’t apply, the province has yet to fulfill its commitment to file so much as a petition for a stay of proceedings. In fact, the only legal action the Eby government has taken of late – and it took it swiftly following the Cowichan ruling – was to support a declaration of Haida Nation Aboriginal title in the BC Supreme Court, including over the private lands on Haida Gwaii. The government did this with the full knowledge that a declaration of Haida Aboriginal title would – thanks to provisions in the Cowichan ruling – ensure the Land Title Act protections would not apply to private property within Haida territory. Which can only mean the B.C. government intentionally created the same private property rights nightmare on Haida Gwaii that was, and is, being faced by private property owners in Richmond. There is no world in which this can be called governing in the public interest. In the case of the Gitxaala ruling, the Premier blames the court, claiming the judges over-reached. He said DRIPA was never intended to strike down B.C. laws or be wielded like a law in court against the government. It is up to legislators to determine B.C. laws, not the courts, Eby said following the decision... But Eby confused matters when he described the Interpretation Act provision as having “the requirement that provincial laws and regulations be read so as to be consistent with the UN declaration.” In an additional bout of mixed messaging, he also said this: “But where a decision-maker is faced with two possible interpretations of the public interest in making a decision, the Interpretation Act, in this circumstance, would, we intend, instruct the decision-maker to prefer the interpretation of public interest that is consistent with the principles of the DRIPA legislation.” Now Eby has the temerity to accuse the court of being confused about his government’s intentions for DRIPA. This week, he committed his government to assisting the courts “in understanding this is work for British Columbians to do, not the courts.” All of which drew a rebuke from the BC Trial Lawyers Association, which said the Premier’s comments “reflect a troubling national trend in which politicians use the courts as punching bags to score political points.” If the BC NDP government did not intend for DRIPA to direct B.C. laws to literally conform to UNDRIP, here’s the Premier’s chance to prove it. But the remedy will require more than a few simple tweaks to DRIPA. Leaning into government’s original intentions, Premier Eby might recall what then Indigenous Relations minister Scott Fraser told MLAs during a 2019 debate on DRIPA. Fraser said it was the intention of government to interpret UNDRIP in a manner consistent with section 35 in the constitution. This never happened. Fraser also assured legislators the law would not to create new rights for Indigenous peoples or strike down any existing B.C. laws. The legislation passed unanimously, with the Opposition BC Liberals trusting the government’s stated intentions. Given the BC NDP’s actions in the name of “reconciliation,” particularly under Eby’s watch in the past three years, Fraser’s aspirations were a stunningly incorrect representation of what actually unfolded in the name of UNDRIP and DRIPA. Most certainly, the current B.C. government has not interpreted UNDRIP in a manner consistent with section 35 and has left a trail of new rights and unprecedented decision-making agreements in its wake, completely over-stepping the careful framework built by decades of constitutional law. DRIPA was flawed from the outset and the Premier, who was attorney general at the time, should have known it... sections1(4), 2(a),2(b), 3, 6, and 7 of DRIPA remain both legally problematic and entirely undemocratic. Yet the province continues to celebrate “reconciliation” agreements signed under these provisions... Unfortunately, the federal Liberal government under Justin Trudeau enacted its own UNDRIP legislation in 2021, also with the unanimous, and perhaps similarly naive, support of all political parties. Regardless, Prime Minister Mark Carney is about to find out how equally ridiculous that adoption was when his government’s commitments to Indigenous consent under UNDRIP collide with the ‘elbows up’ push to advance major resource projects in the public interest. Only a complete repeal of this enormous ideological mistake will properly rectify the mess the province now finds itself in. Then federal representatives will have to follow suit in the Canadian parliament to correct their own egregious mistake."
B.C.'s DRIPA law is irredeemable and must be scrapped | National Post - "DRIPA, which was passed by the government of former B.C. premier John Horgan in 2019, cannot provide a viable framework for reconciliation in British Columbia, because the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is not a viable framework for reconciliation in an advanced western democracy such as Canada, which already recognizes and affirms Aboriginal and treaty rights in its Constitution... Sec. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, states, “The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.” The Supreme Court has interpreted this as the proper vehicle for reconciliation in Canada. While Sec. 35 has been criticized, it at least provides a balanced approach to reconciling the pre-existence of Indigenous societies with the imposition of sovereignty by the Crown. UNDRIP is inconsistent with Sec. 35 and is contrary to what the Supreme Court has determined to be the constitutional obligations of governments and the rights they are supposed to protect. Governments simply cannot accept UNDRIP as an alternative pathway to reconciliation in the Canadian context. Apparently the B.C. government’s view was that it never intended DRIPA to be legally enforceable by the courts, or to cause UNDRIP itself to be the law of the land. Yet in December 2025, the B.C. Court of Appeal disagreed with that interpretation of both DRIPA and Sec. 8.1 of the Interpretation Act, which states that, “Every Act and regulation must be construed as being consistent with the Declaration.” The court determined that, “Properly interpreted, the Declaration Act incorporates UNDRIP into the positive law of British Columbia with immediate legal effect.” This has created enormous levels of legal uncertainty in the province and opened the door for First Nations to litigate, and potentially upend, any provincial laws if they so choose. Even American First Nations have cited DRIPA and UNDRIP in legal challenges to provincial government decisions, including the government’s approval of the Eskey Creek mine in northern B.C. Recently, the Business Council of British Columbia surveyed its members and found that 98 per cent of them are “very concerned” about DRIPA “applying to all laws in the province. The same share of respondents also said that they do not believe DRIPA is living up to its original promise of creating greater investment certainty in B.C.” This is a far cry from how the province’s NDP government pitched DRIPA in 2019, when it claimed in a press release that the “legislation aims to create further certainty for investment and reaffirms B.C. as a world-class destination providing opportunities for business.” Once hailed by the B.C. NDP as a sort of holy grail of reconciliation, blindly following the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, DRIPA is now clearly causing havoc throughout the province, as the business community is now bluntly stating. Far from being a framework for advancing reconciliation in a “respectful and meaningful way,” there are now existential reasons to insist upon the full and outright repeal of DRIPA, to ensure that UNDRIP ceases to have any application at all in British Columbia."
DRIPA creates certainty - that indigenous issues will sink your investments
Clearly, Geoffrey S. Moyse, "a retired senior lawyer who served as legal counsel to the Province of British Columbia, advising six successive governments on Aboriginal law over more than 30 years" is ignorant and doesn't know what he's talking about and hates indigenous people
Meme - "THIS LEGISLATED EXTINCTION IS A FORM OF GENOCIDE." - SENATOR BRIAN FRANCIS. Lnu/Mi'kmaq - Prince Edward Island"
On not being able to pass on Indian status to all descendents. Everything a left winger hates is "genocide". The irony is that the more "indigenous" people there are, the sooner the gravy train will stop, because it will bring forward the point at which it will become unsustainable due to too many taxpayers having to pay off "indigenous" peoples
In Canadian first, Yukon to get Indigenous-only parking spots | National Post - "As part of their stated commitment to “decolonization & Indigenization” in health care, the Yukon is debuting Indigenous-only parking spaces at all its three hospitals. In a social media post last week, Yukon Hospitals announced that the territory’s hospitals would henceforth feature reserved parking spots marked “Respectfully Reserved for Elders.” Reserved exclusively for “First Nation, Inuit, and Métis Elders,” the spaces are marked with signs featuring commissioned art from two Yukon-based Indigenous artists; one prepared a stylized image of two elders, while another prepared the accompanying text reading “respectfully reserved for elders.”... Yukon Hospitals, like many Canadian government and health-care authorities, has publicly embraced the notion that its facilities are shot through with “systemic racism” that can only be alleviated via differential treatment for marginalized groups... That same plan has the hospital authority pledging to make “Yukon First Nations ways of knowing, doing and being part of everything we do.”... the territory, like B.C., has a policy of asking patients their Indigenous status in order to access culturally specific services such as access to traditional food or “traditional medicine.”... The threshold of Indigenous-only parking spots is a new one. Not just in the Yukon, but in Canada generally. In fact, the Indigenous-only spots appear to be Canada’s only instances of public parking spots being set aside based on the immutable characteristics of the driver. The closest analogue would be instances in both Germany and South Korea where public parking spots were set aside exclusively for women. Germany has been installing women-only parking spots since the 1990s, following a wave of violent sexual assaults taking place in parking garages. The spots, labelled “reserviert fuer frauen,” are typically in well-lit areas located close to building entrances. No such “she-spots” or “Frauenparkplatz” are known to exist in Canada, although there are spots for expectant mothers, or parents with young children. The Yukon parking spaces do fit within a larger trend of Indigenous Canadians being given priority access to public spaces in the service of reconciliation. One of the more controversial of which was the B.C. government agreeing last year to begin closing select provincial parks to non-Indigenous users."
Alexander Zoltan on X - "Probably the most shocking story I've ever written. The Cole's notes: a $12 billion Trudeau-era department dedicated to "nation-to-nation" communication & negotiation between Ottawa and First Nations has allocated $0 to tracking communication between Ottawa and BC First Nations."
IntegrityTO on X - "TTC wants to “decolonize wayfinding” You don’t have a serious transit system because you don’t have a serious TTC Board."
Jonathan Kay on X - "This whole racist TTC plan seems to involve putting little animal symbols on things, because apparently they think indigenous people are all four-year olds who don’t understand how words and street signs work, and so they need to look at little pictures"
Meme - "oh look, yet another colonial Christian nationalist white woman trying to tell indigenous people how it should be. 3825you"
"excuse me bigot?!? Thats anti-Indigenous racism or colourism you're spouting at me because I'm white presenting. Nice job. *showing certificate from Metis Nation of Alberta*"
Christina Victoria | Facebook - "The hypocrisy in these conversations is exhausting. People say you’re only allowed to speak on Indigenous issues if you’re Indigenous. But if you’re white-presenting, suddenly you’re “not Indigenous enough” to have a voice. And if you are openly Indigenous but hold an opinion they disagree with, then you’re called a traitor, a colonizer, or accused of “hurting your own people.” So which is it? Because it starts looking less like “listening to Indigenous voices” and more like only allowing Indigenous voices that repeat the approved opinion. Everyone else gets silenced. At the same time, many of these same people call things like the Alberta separation petition “authoritarian” or “anti-democratic,” while openly trying to shut down discussion, shame dissent, and block democratic processes they personally dislike. You cannot claim to defend democracy, Canadian values, the Charter, rights, freedoms, and open dialogue while also deciding certain people are not allowed to speak, question, disagree, or participate because of their appearance, beliefs, or political opinion. That is not reconciliation. That is ideological gatekeeping. And calling a white-presenting Indigenous person a “colonizer” because they don’t fit your stereotype of what Indigenous people should look like is still racism. Anti-Indigenous racism doesn’t disappear just because it’s wrapped in progressive language. Indigenous people are not required to prove their identity through skin tone for your comfort. And for the record: consultation is not the same thing as unilateral veto power. The duty to consult is meant to ensure communication, negotiation, and consideration of impacts — not to mean that one group alone has the absolute final say over every decision affecting millions of other Albertans as well. In a democracy, difficult issues are supposed to involve discussion, disagreement, compromise, and participation from everyone affected — not the silencing of people who hold the “wrong” opinion. You cannot preach democracy while demanding ideological obedience, and you cannot claim to support Indigenous voices while silencing Indigenous people who refuse to repeat your script."
Meme - *Parody of Every Child Matters poster* "Dig up or shut up"
Orillia mayor, council at odds over what to do with Champlain statue | National Post - "A small Ontario city has removed its monument to Samuel de Champlain, again, as city council rebelled against the mayor’s unilateral decision to return it to its waterfront plinth. The monument to the French explorer was taken from Couchiching Beach Park on June 10 and stored away in a municipal yard after Orillia City Council voted 6-3 last month to take it down as part of continuing fallout from the Kamloops residential school “graves” controversy. It was originally erected in 1925 but removed by Parks Canada in 2017 for restoration amid reconciliation discussions. Mayor Don McIsaac then briefly returned it to its plinth last month. “The vast majority of Orillians want the monument returned. They’ve done surveys. They’ve done all sorts of reach outs and people want it returned”... The back-and-forth removals came amid discussions and dissent from local First Nations leaders, who would not grant interviews on the latest development... Following the monument’s return, controversy erupted once again. An Indigenous woman was arrested on May 21 for spray painting “Rama said no” on the monument’s steps. The debate about Champlain and reconciliation was rekindled. On May 29, the city council successfully voted to remove the statue. It was tarped and fenced off for protection. But just over a week later, someone spray-painted the monument again. On June 8, the statue was tarped again and two days later, it was removed."
Co-op Tory 🍁 on X - "Attacking Champlain in the name of “reconciliation” makes no sense. He built Quebec on a basis of conciliatory relationships with indigenous people. Champlain had genuine respect for indigenous people and approached their cultures and language with curiosity and admiration."
Left wingers just hate white people
It's only oligarchy to go against what most people want if it threatens the left wing agenda

Links - 30th July 2026 (2 - Trans Mania)

2026-07-30T17:22:00.000+08:00

Róisín Michaux on X - "Transgender Europe, the secretive Berlin-based NGO that works to replace sex with 'gender identity' in EU countries via strategic litigation, has secured EU funding of €1 million per year for the next 3 years. This is separate from the money it receives for individual projects from the EU budget."
“You can’t take someone to court for not wanting to go out with you”: Trans woman takes young man to court for rejecting her - "In Spain, a trans woman plans to sue a young man she was dating, alleging discrimination after he decided not to continue the relationship upon learning her gender identity on the fourth date. 😳 The case exploded on social media with thousands of divided comments: one side believes that no one should be judged for whom they choose or do not choose to have a relationship with; the other side sees it as a legitimate way to combat transphobia protected under the 2023 Trans Law. Writers such as Lucía Etxebarria are already talking about “the judicialization of love”. Where is the line between free rejection and discrimination? 👇"
Clearly, all they want is to have the same rights as everyone else
Oxford professor cancels lectures after abuse from pro-trans protesters - "Dr Michael Foran, 32,
an associate professor of law at the university, was interrupted by protesters at two separate talks discussing gender law in recent weeks. Footage obtained by The Telegraph showed activists standing in front of his lectern and telling the audience he was a “bigot” and “transphobic”. The academic, who is an expert on gender law, confirmed on Sunday that he had cancelled his remaining two lectures because of the “escalating disruptive protests”. “This is deeply lamentable, but the disruption has undermined the academic nature of this series,” he said in a post on X. “Students shouldn’t face bullying or harassment when attending academic events.”"
Damn transphobes trying to suppress freedom of speech! They need to be jailed for harassing vulnerable minorities!
Richard Dawkins on X - "This unqualified bore says his secondhand opinions are “not up for debate.” Yes they are. At a university all opinions are up for debate. If you cannot defend your opinions rationally, either they are indefensible or you are too stupid to defend them. In either case you have no right to force them on students who have expressed their wish to attend a lecture by doing so."
Jonathan Kay on X - "Another exciting DEI initiative from @UWaterloo : Share your pronouns! Buttt ....
1. Pronouns cannot be more than "60 characters"
2. Using the (publicly posted!) pronouns without first getting permission can "devastate" people
3. "Mocking" this exciting system = DEI investigation"
Spanish Museum Launches Virgin Mary-Inspired Art Exhibit Featuring Trans-Identified Male Models In Lingerie - "The Museum of Guadalajara in Spain is under fire for an exhibition that “reimagines” the Virgin Mary using trans-identified male models and fetish-inspired imagery, drawing condemnation from women’s rights advocates and Catholic groups alike. Opened to the public on May 7 and running until June 21, Alonso Cano: Like a Virgin claims to be an attempt to develop a “contemporary ideological discourse on sexuality, gender, and the ‘re-appropriation’ of the female body in art.” According to the official description issued by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports of Castilla-La Mancha, the exhibit is a collaborative project by students at the Elena de la Cruz School of Art and was inspired by one of the Museum’s most important pieces: Alonso Cano’s 17th century painting La Virgen de la Leche... the Ministry’s regional spokesperson, Ángel Fernández, has defended the exhibit as being a demonstration of the artistic and creative freedom for the students of the Elena de la Cruz School of Art. “We are educating young people in a democracy, under a set of principles,” Fernández stated, arguing that one of the fundamental principles of democracy is “freedom of expression and artistic, literary, and scientific freedom, and the idea that we should be free individuals.”... In 2021, online zine Feminist featured the work of Argentina-based photographer Kenny Lemes. While five pieces of Lemes’ art were posted in total, one in particular featured a seemingly naked male cradling a baby, which was suckling at a rubber nipple that had been affixed to the male model’s own. Lemes told the outlet that the purpose of the photo was to “[expand] the gaze on bodies,” claiming it was a “very important political act one discovers the potency of existing, proudly, on the edges of hetero-patriarchal thinking.” The zine was later forced to delete the photo due to overwhelming backlash, even amongst liberal feminist readers, who implored Lemes not to use real babies in highly controversial art. In 2023, the Gender Museum (KØN) in Aarhus, Denmark, drew similar backlash after erecting a statue of a naked trans-identified male breastfeeding a baby. The nude figure, constructed in 2021 as a self-portrait by Aske Kreilgaard, is depicted with exposed male genitals and breasts to which he is holding a feeding baby."
Good luck if you insult Islam
Leor Sapir on X - "The data out of Oregon really are astonishing. A phenomenon once observed in about 1 in 20,000 adult men and 1 in 50,000 adult women (DSM-5) is now being diagnosed and medically treated in at least 1 in 250 17-year-old girls in Oregon."
Meme - Leor Sapir @LeorSapir: "It's always been the case that 1 in 250 teen girls is actually a boy with XX chromosomes and a vagina. curious, what's the threshold here? If it were 1 in 150, would that be cause for concern? 1 in 127? 1 in 3?"
Madeleine Callan @CallanMade50182: "Here we go. Leor more people are comfortable coming out these days. Acceptance in society changes these stigmatizing statistics."
Emma Johnson @JohnsonEmma: "Also: if the world is safe enough to ensure more people feel comfortable coming out, then why do trans people need special protections?"
Colin Wright on X - "This is truly shocking data out of Oregon. Between 2016 and 2023, nearly 1 in 100 insured children ages 8 to 17 received a gender dysphoria diagnosis. By age 17, around 1 in 240 insured girls were on testosterone and 1 in 630 boys were on estrogen."
Wesley Yang on X - "Transgenderism is proof of concept that there are absolutely no limits on what cult ritual from the outermost fringe of human extremity we can market to young children and normalize in less than a decade. You could say that it's a portent of greater horrors to come, but brainwashing tens of thousands of quirky young people to yearn to be chemically castrated and dismembered and threaten suicide unless they get the ruinous self-harm they have been propagandized into believing is their sole chance to become their true selves is already at the outermost limit of horror from the childhood of humanity that the postmodern age has brought back to life in a monstrous and all-encompassing new form that implicates the professional and leadership classes of the whole of the Western world in a terminal moral and epistemic corruption. Let no one gaslight you into saying or seeing otherwise."
Benjamin Ryan on X - "Over 1 in 250 Natal Girls Were Taking Testosterone By Age 17 in Oregon, From 2016 to 2023 https://open.substack.com/pub/benryan/p/ over-1-in-250-natal-girls-were-taking This rate, from a study of data about insured adolescents in Oregon, represents an average over this period. Given swift increases in hormone uptake over time, the rate was likely much higher by 2023. The use of gender-transition drugs among adolescents in Oregon soared between 2016 and 2023, charting a nearly 10-fold increase among biological girls and a 14-fold increase in natal boys. Across this period, about 1 in 100 insured youth ages 8 to 17 in the Pacific Northwest state were diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a psychiatric condition involving distress stemming from a conflict between an individual’s natal sex and their gender identity. By age 17, about 1 in 240 insured natal girls were taking testosterone and about 1 in 630 natal boys were taking estrogen in Oregon. These figures are nearly three-fold higher for natal girls and nearly twice as high for natal boys as figures from a study published last year that analyzed national data on commercially insured youth from 2018 to 2022."
Wilfred Reilly on X - "AS A MINOR, one in every 250 Oregon girls is not only "diagnosed" as trans - that's 1/98 - but is being "medically treated.""
Agnes Wold on X - "It is a purely iatrogenic epidemic. Once you open clinics for teenagers where you promise that psychic and social problems are due to X, and X can be treated by Y (here: hormones and surgery), you will recruit a variety of unhappy young persons to your clinic.>"
Wampater on X - "But think about all that lovely money ... 'Gender reassignment surgery market size was valued at USD 2.98 billion in 2025 and is projected to hit the market valuation of USD 6.06 billion by 2035 at a CAGR of 7.35% during the forecast period 2026–2035.'"
As usual, TRAs are trying to pretend that cosmetic surgery is "gender affirming". This is one reason left wingers keep making up terms and concepts - so they can make more straw men
Big Think on X - "Why wouldn't older populations of women come out at similar rates if society is more accepting? Also if society is more accepting, why do they keep wailing about a non-existent trans genocide?"
The doublethink and cope need to go into overdrive
Ray Yuan Zhang- Build Back Trust in Public Health on X - "This is the data on (unfortunate) suicide. I can find data from 2019 to 2023, during that time, rates of gender-affirming medical treatment among adolescents increased substantially, while Oregon youth suicide deaths and suicide-related emergency department visits remained relatively stable. At the population level, these trends do not show an obvious corresponding decline in suicide outcomes. It is, from an ecological level, access to 'lifesaving' gender affirming care has no impact on suicide."
The cope is that transphobia increased during this time, exactly cancelling out the effects of "life saving" trans "treatment"
Meme - Ugly MTF: "Hello fellow lesbian, do you want to suck my girl dick?"
Black woman: "Ew"
Ugly MTF: "This is transphobic! I'm a lesbian. You genital fetishist! SUCK MY DICK!"
Black woman: "I'm a lesbian. I'm not into men."
Naturally, left wingers were gaslighting and claiming this never happened
High school female athlete sues after unknowingly wrestling male, who sexually assaulted her during match - "A male wrestler sexually assaulted the female wrestler in December 2025 during a high school girls’ wrestling tournament, an event sponsored by the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association. The female athlete, Kallie Keeler, and her mother, Stephanie Brown, are suing state officials after those officials directed Keeler to take the mat without telling anyone that she was about to wrestle a male and after the officials waited 53 days to report the sexual assault to law enforcement, in violation of a mandatory 48-hour reporting law. “A 15-year-old girl was sexually assaulted because of political cowardice. Washington state officials insist on pushing gender ideology at all costs—even at the expense of girls’ safety and privacy,” said ADF Senior Counsel Kate Anderson, director of the ADF Center for Parental Rights. “Our client’s story is proof of the grave harms caused by lying about biology. This must end—otherwise, girls will continue getting hurt and violated. We are urging the court to require state officials to change their policy to ensure that girls’ privacy and safety are protected when they compete in the sports they love. No girl should have to unknowingly wrestle a boy. And at a minimum, parents must be notified before their daughters are matched against male opponents.” “Tragically, because of district policy, a 15-year-old girl was sexually assaulted by a male opponent on the wrestling mat,” Anderson continued. “Kallie’s mom was in the gym with her daughter, but she could not protect her because the district’s written policy prohibits notifying parents or anyone else when their daughters will be matched against male athletes. She and her mother promptly reported the assault to school officials, who sat on the information for nearly two months. Washington state failed this family, but it isn’t too late to protect other girls. State officials must change their policies and prioritize girls’ safety in sports.” Keeler, who was 15 at the time of the incident, was matched against a male athlete without her or her mother’s knowledge. During the match, the male athlete sexually assaulted her. She appeared visibly distressed while competing and tried to communicate what was happening to her mother, who was recording the match. As ADF attorneys explain, the assault was not a wrestling move—it was a flagrant foul and criminal conduct—sexual assault in its truest form. She left the mat crying, but her coaches did nothing... If she returns to wrestling, she can be matched against a male athlete again without notice and over her objection."
Kristen Waggoner on X - "Let’s make one thing very clear: signing up for girls’ wrestling is in NO way a permission slip for sexual assault. As @ADFLegal explained in our lawsuit: “Digital penetration falls outside the scope of implied consent to participating in athletics because, under normal circumstances of girls wrestling, it is not a reasonably foreseeable hazard from the perspective of a girl wrestler. Nor is sexual assault or groping generally accepted by society as part of any lawful athletic contest.” Also: girls who sign up for girls’ wrestling aren’t consenting to wrestle boys. Kallie Keeler was betrayed by multiple adults in authority, who knowingly allowed her to wrestle a male without her knowledge or consent. They bear responsibility for what happened to her—and they are continuing to put female wrestlers in harm’s way through their actions and policies. That’s why, besides suing governing bodies @wiaawa , @waOSPI , and the Puyallup School District, we’re also suing:
- State superintendent Chris Reykdal
- Kallie’s principal
- Her school district’s Title IX coordinator
- Her opponent’s coach
… and not just in their official capacities, but as individuals. I’m also glad to hear the local prosecutor is reportedly still considering action against those who failed to report the sexual assault, as required by law. These mandatory reporters should have reported the incident within 48 hours but waited 53 days. They should face consequences. We won’t rest until Kallie gets justice—and girls in Washington state get their sports back."
Jennifer Sey on X - "To use a leftie term, I’m feeling especially triggered by the response to what happened to Kallie Keeler. All the anon accounts screeching that it's a normal part of wrestling, just an "oil check" (an illegal move by the way, that this was not), that she's too wimpy and weak to be a wrestler if she can't handle it. Bullshit. She was assaulted. A man stuck his fingers inside her vagina and held them there. This incident echoes dark patterns that I have witnessed and even been caught in the midst of for decades. Bad men will hide behind shields of respectability while abusing girls and women in plain sight. As a former gymnast and whistleblower, I see the parallels to Larry Nassar immediately. Nassar hid behind the respectability of his medical degree and his role as USA Gymnastics team doctor. After he abused young female athletes for 30 years, finally women came forward in droves to report the assaults. Those victims were attacked for months until there were too many to ignore. My coach hid behind his "coach" title, while claiming to keep athletes safe as a spotter, then molesting in plain view. Athletes were shamed into silence. Predators will exploit any opening to find, abuse and assault their victims."
Jonathan Kay on X - "This is fantastic. Someone asks Canada’s Chief Science Officer what a woman is, and the Liberals start howling that the question is prohibited because “it’s pride month.” The same guy then says that referring to “men and women” is “highly offensive”"
Green councillor forced to study Equality Act after cancelling authors - "A Green councillor who compared gender-critical authors to Holocaust deniers has been forced to study the Equality Act. Helen Elliott-Boult, a Green councillor for Stroud district council (SDC), justified the cancellation of an event featuring two authors critical of transgender ideology, set to take place at Stroud Brewery in the Cotswolds. The event was cancelled because of fears for “the safety of members of our trans community”. Council officers have mandated that Ms Elliott-Boult attend training, reinforcing that gender-critical views are protected by law in the UK... Stroud has become an unexpected battleground for debates over gender ideology in recent years. In 2025, local police treated graffiti that stated “men can’t be women” as a hate crime. Gloucestershire Constabulary launched an investigation into slogans daubed around Stroud ahead of the town’s annual Pride march, including the phrases “you can’t change sex”, “being female is not a costume”, and “trans women are men”. Police said the graffiti was “targeted towards transgender people” and the incident was being treated as a “hate crime”."
Green councillors ‘pushed lies to allow trans women in single-sex spaces’ - "The Green Party has wrongly advised its councillors that trans women are still allowed in single-sex spaces, The Telegraph can reveal. The Association of Green Councillors (AGC), which provides support to the party’s councillors, has issued guidance to its members stating that trans women do not have to be excluded from single-sex spaces. But this goes against the code of practice from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). Critics have now accused the Greens of “lying about what the law says”, raising concerns about how Green-run local authorities will manage single-sex spaces in public buildings. Campaigners warned that Green Party councillors could even put their local authority at risk of legal action if they followed the advice."
Trans suspects can demand strip search by female officer - "Police chiefs have been plunged into a fresh row over equality guidance after suggesting trans women suspects have the right to request a strip search by a female officer. The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) guidance suggests men who identify as women can request a female officer to strip-search them and “efforts will be made” to find an officer of their “lived-in gender”. Women’s rights campaigners said the interim guidance, drawn up after the Supreme Court ruling that sex under the Equality Act means biological sex at birth, would be challenged in the High Court. Campaigners said senior police chiefs had fallen “hook, line and sinker for gender ideology” and the Tories described the advice as “madness”... While the guidance does say that female officers can refuse to search a trans woman, women’s rights campaigners argue that female officers would fear being labelled “transphobic” if they did, which could harm their careers. Sex Matters and the Women’s Rights Network have applied to the High Court for the guidance to be overturned, saying it hands “male detainees who have an erotic interest in cross-dressing, get a sexual thrill from exposing themselves in front of women or simply enjoy humiliating and intimidating women, an easy way to do so inside the custody suite”. Sex Matters argues that the guidance also contravenes the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which says a strip search can only be carried out by someone of the same sex as the detained person... “This madness needs to end. The police must focus on enforcing the law, not trying to undermine it.”"
Meme - *Man seeing 2 women being intimate on a bench*
Man: "You ladies just haven't been with a real man yet!"
*Shocked women*
Woman 1: "He said 'ladies'!"
Woman 2: "I passed!"
Man: "Wait, they said he? I passed!"
Woman 1: "Wait, he says 'they'?"
Woman 2: "You Passed!"
This is a piss take of a silly PizzaCake comic
Meme - Eve Keneinan @EveKeneinan: "When your ideology leads to you a burning hatred of reality, it isn't reality that's the problem."
Radfem Lioness @Adr...: "i hate human sexual dimorphism with a burning fury"
@atelier Loop @tatami...: "Translated from Japanese. Skeletal Structure of Male and Female Core Body (Repost) I like the way it's displayed side by side for comparison."
Transgender woman performed sex act in full view of staff at Cardiff hospital - "A transgender woman has been jailed for masturbating in front of nurses at a Welsh hospital. Serial sex offender Paula Stanton, 62, of Severn Avenue, Barry, has been jailed after she admitted carrying out an act outraging public decency by masturbating at the University Hospital of Wales in Cardiff earlier this year... In November 2019 Stanton was handed a five-year sexual harm prevention order for outraging public decency. She was again handed a five-year long sexual harm prevention order in August 2025 for indecent exposure offences. The defendant has 12 previous convictions for 19 offences, five of which are sex offences committed between 2019 and 2025. Many of Stanton's previous convictions include outraging public decency offences as well as indecent exposure offences. An earlier offence by Stanton involved a sex act while wearing lingerie in a window as women walked past. Another offence saw Stanton performing a sex act in a car."
Women masturbate in front of healthcare workers all the time, so if you think this is unusual, you're just a transphobic bigot. In fact, this act was due to transphobia, so the solution is to give trans people "equal rights"
Canada adds forced or coerced sterilisation to Criminal Code - "The law, passed in the House of Commons last week, follows reports of healthcare professionals sterilising people without their free and informed consent as recently as 2024."
Jonathan Kay on X - "This is great news. Many children “affirmed” into genderwang sterilization procedures have comorbid psychiatric conditions that prevent them from giving meaningful consent"
TRAs will just find a cope to get away with it
The Undercurrent on X - "If you don’t think radical ideology can threaten this country, you weren’t watching the transgender movement. In barely a decade we went from biology being a settled fact to being told gender identity overrides it, that kids can decide their own sex, and that anyone who hesitated was a bigot. It started as a fringe academic idea. Then it was in the schools, the hospitals, the boardrooms, and the government. It didn’t take a majority. It took a small, disciplined movement that knew which buttons to push, compassion, victimhood, the fear of being called cruel. And it worked. That’s the part to sit with. It was never about one issue. It’s proof that a determined movement can rewrite an entire society faster than anyone thinks possible. If it happened once, it can happen again. Pay attention…."

A Salient Example of Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Canonical Islamic Jew-Hatred—Introduction, Text, and Commentary (4/X)

2026-07-30T13:20:00.000+08:00

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
A Salient Example of Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Canonical Islamic Jew-Hatred—Introduction, Text, and Commentary (4/X)
"Koran 2:143 and 2:144 recount another example of the Jews""angry subversion," as per el- Husseini, of the alleged divine revelation which mandated changing the direction of prayer (the "qibla") from Jerusalem to Mecca. Classical (Tafsir Ibn Kathir; Tafsir al-Jalalayn) and modern (Maariful Qur‘an) commentaries, substantiate el-Husseini‘s gloss...
El-Husseini claims that verses 4:51 and 4:52 provide yet more evidence of the Jews‘ attempts to confuse and dishearten Muslims, while simultaneously abetting Muhammad‘s enemies. As a result, they have been accursed by Allah, eternally. Here too, el-Husseini‘s gloss is validated by the interpretations of classical and modern exegetes...
Concluding his litany of Koranic quotations, appropriately, with Koran 5:82, el-Husseini insists this verse "quite unmistakably characterizes the position of Islam and Judaism." Once again, his assessment is upheld by a continuum of authoritative Koranic exegeses that span over a thousand years, till now. The classical Koranic commentaries on Koran 5:82 by Tabari, Zamakashari (d. 1143), Baydawi (d. 1316), and Ibn Kathir demonstrate a uniformity of opinion regarding the animus of the Jews toward the Muslims, which is repeatedly linked to the curse of Koran 2:61 (i.e., for killing prophets, and transgressing against the will of Allah, repeated at verses including 2:90-91, 3:112, 3:181, and 4:155)...
The modern gloss on Koran 5:82 in Maariful Qur‘an notes that the vast preponderance of Jews felt an unremitting malice toward the Muslims, and a lust for the "material pleasures of mortal life"—the rare exceptions to this rule, for example, Abdullah ibn Salam, became Muslims!...
El-Husseini‘s depiction of the nefarious attempt by Shas b. Qays to foment discord amongst the nascent Muslim "Ansar" tribes is confirmed by Ibn Ishaq‘s sira account...
The verbatim canonical hadith which chronicle Muhammad‘s alleged poisoning by a Khaybar Jewess, are reproduced below, confirming el-Husseini‘s paraphrase of these accounts. However, el-Husseini does incorrectly attribute to Abu Huraira the hadith reports of Aisha and Anas which recorded the long-term, purportedly terminal effects of Muhammad‘s poisoning...
Additional confirmation of el-Husseini‘s overall narrative regarding Muhammad‘s poisoning is provided by the sira accounts of Ibn Ishaq, and Ibn Sa‘d. Ibn Ishaq‘s report concludes that Muhammad ultimately died from this poisoning episode, and notes his death was considered an act of "martyrdom"...
Ibn Sa‘d (in his Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al- Kabir) focuses on the putative Jewish conspiracy behind Muhammad‘s poisoning, while insisting adamantly that the Khaybar Jewess perpetrator was put to death...
El-Husseini appositely concludes his compendious discourse on Islam‘s canonical Jew-hatred with a central motif from Muslim eschatology, as recorded in the hadith—how the destruction of the Jews is requisite for ushering in the messianic times. Here are the canonical hadith el- Husseini accurately renders:
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah‘s Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."
Abu Huraira reported Allah‘s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: "The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews."

Finally, apropos of their longstanding Islamic relevance, Ibn Kathir‘s 14th century commentary on Koran 4:155-159, which discusses Isa‘s (the Muslim Jesus‘) role in defeating the Dajjal (the Muslim "anti-Christ"), and his Jewish minions, invokes these same apocalyptic canonical hadith of Jew annihilation.
Despite its minor errors, or deviations, Hajj Amin el-Husseini‘s proclamation demonstrates great fidelity to the canonical Islamic narrative regarding the Jews. Seminal Western academic studies of how the Jews are depicted in the sira, hadith, and Koran, independently validate el- Husseini‘s assessment of these canonical Muslim sources. Moreover, these analyses have long been available to the academic community.
For example, Hartwig Hirschfeld‘s detailed mid-1880s analysis of the sira accounts of Muhammad‘s interactions with the Jews includes this rather understated summary of the "mutual disappointment" that characterized their relationship, and the predictably disastrous results for the Jews:
The Jews, for their part, were singularly disappointed in their expectations. The way in which Muhammad understood revelation, his ignorance and his clumsiness in religious questions in no way encouraged them to greet him as their Messiah. He tried at first to win them over to his teachings by sweetness and persuasion; they replied by posing once again the questions that they had already asked him; his answers, filled with gross errors, provoked their laughter and mockery. From this, of course, resulted a deep hostility between Muhammad and the Jews, whose only crime was to pass a severe judgment on the enterprise of this Arab who styled himself "God‘s prophet" and to find his conduct ridiculous, his knowledge false, and his regulations thoughtless. This judgment, which was well founded, was nevertheless politically incorrect [une faute politique], and the consequences thereof inevitably would prove to be disastrous for a minority that lacked direction or cohesion.

Georges Vajda‘s 1937 essay "Juifs et Musulmans selon Le Hadit" ("Jews and Muslims according to the Hadith")—a magisterial seventy-page analysis, replete with 202 accompanying notes—remains the definitive study of Jews and their relations with Muhammad and the Muslims, as depicted in the hadith.
Vajda‘s meticulously documented research conclusions were not understated. He demonstrates how Muslim eschatology highlights the Jews supreme hostility toward Islam. Jews are described as adherents of the Dajjal—the Muslim equivalent of the Antichrist—and as per another tradition, the Dajjal is in fact Jewish. At his appearance, other traditions state that the Dajjal will be accompanied by seventy thousand Jews from Isfahan wrapped in their robes and armed with polished sabers, their heads covered with a sort of veil. When the Dajjal is defeated, his Jewish companions will be slaughtered—everything will deliver them up except for the so-called gharkad tree. Vajda also emphasizes how the notion of jihad "ransom" extends even into Islamic eschatology:
Not only are the Jews vanquished in the eschatological war, but they will serve as ransom for the Muslims in the fires of hell. The sins of certain Muslims will weigh on them like mountains, but on the day of resurrection, these sins will be lifted and laid upon the Jews.

And in the corporeal world, Vajda observes, "distrust must reign" in Muslims‘ relations with Jews, because,
the Jews . . . are rebels to the solicitations of Islam and keep their religious traditions in a way liable to lead Muslims into error. Even when Islam knowingly borrows from Judaism, these borrowings are presented as amendments of the corresponding Jewish customs, unless they expressly forge traditions that aim to efface the true origin of the rite in question, by transposing it either into Arab paganism or into "Israelite" or pre- Israelite antiquity . . . especially beware of asking them for information of a religious kind.

But it is the Jews‘ stubborn malevolence, Vajda adds, that is their defining worldly characteristic:
Jews are represented in the darkest colors [i.e., in the hadith]. Convinced by the clear testimony of their books that Muhammad was the true prophet, they refused to convert, out of envy, jealousy and national particularism, even out of private interest. They have falsified their sacred books and do not apply the laws of God; nevertheless, they pursued Muhammad with their raillery and their oaths, and harassed him with questions, an enterprise that turned to their own confusion and merely corroborated the authenticity of the supernatural science of the prophet. From words they moved to action: sorcery, poisoning, assassination held no scruples for them.

Vajda concludes that these archetypes, in turn, justify Muslim animus toward the Jews, and the admonition to at best "subject [the Jews] to Muslim domination," as dhimmis, treated "with contempt," under certain "humiliating arrangements.""

Links - 30th July 2026 (1 - The Great Reset/The World Economic Forum)

2026-07-30T09:33:00.000+08:00

Now is the time to look much more closely at The Great Reset, a fake Utopia being sold to us by charlatans - "The term rose to prominence at the 50th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in June 2020. It was initially launched by the Prince of Wales, before being absorbed into the philosophy of the sartorially dystopian sci-fi villain Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the WEF. The Great Reset refers to a plan to rebuild the world’s infrastructure ‘in a sustainable way’ following the economic ravages of the Covid-19 pandemic and to establish a global treaty to prevent future pandemics, or as it is described more formally, to “build a more robust international health architecture that will protect future generations.” If you ever hear people talking about “building back better,” they are referring to The Great Reset. Probably the most disturbing part of The Great Reset is how much it strongly resembles business-as-usual, only with EXTRA globalism. Most of the plan’s outlines include a further weakening of national boundaries and individual national autonomy, in favour of a more ‘universal governance.’ As usual, it is the rapidly vanishing Western middle class which must shoulder this burden, as their freedoms are further curtailed to meet the quotas of corporate-media-fuelled activism... As a rule, it seems their solutions to specific environmental or scientific problems mysteriously become entwined with LGBTQ+ rights, workplace equity, open borders initiatives and other unrelated social justice causes. It’s as though any goals they have are somehow unilaterally from the same source, or entail the same solution, regardless of causality or consequence. Therefore, a united response to a global pandemic mysteriously also equals trans rights activism. In their own words, “No single government or multilateral agency can address this (pandemic) threat alone. Together, we must be better prepared to predict, prevent, detect, assess and effectively respond to pandemics in a highly co-ordinated fashion.” There are many other sweeping sentiments expressed by Schwab and his acolytes which can seem either trite or threatening. Consider “the gulf between what markets value and what people value will close” and “we want more attention paid to scientific experts. No one can “self-isolate” from climate change so we all need to “act in advance and in solidarity.” There is much talk of the pursuit of “fairer and equitable outcomes.” International treaties always tend to be about concentrating power. It’s one of those rules of life, for realists, as there is no escaping power dynamics in human affairs. Real problems don’t often have feel-good solutions. Often, they require ‘solutions that sound mean’, that don’t sound good on a corporate goals bulletin. Initiatives like The Great Reset all entail the gradual loss of the autonomy of individual nations, as their decision-making power is transferred to an international, disembodied rule-maker. It has been, without a doubt, a globalist fantasy for a long time, but the key question is: do they realise what they are doing or not? As far as their amazing coordinated pandemic response goes, this appears to be nothing more than forced world-wide vaccinations for EVERYBODY. According to Klaus Schwab himself: “As long as not everybody is vaccinated, nobody will be safe.” To which the attendant neo-liberal world leaders nodded in re-affirming unison, repeating in unison their mantra: “Global public good.”... Despite the fact that the WEF and Davos and all associated entities are entirely elite institutions, the website styles itself on grassroots urban activism. There is much cringeworthy symbology in its white papers, such as a green and rainbow flag-combination with fey slogans like ‘we salute you, zoom queen!’... It appears at best to be all be smoke and mirrors, a childish corporate fantasy manufactured by isolated bean counters. At worst, it is an intentional power-grab by unaccountable international agencies and hidden oligarchs. Either way, it is a fake utopia at the price of privacy and autonomy, sold to us by used-car salesmen who think they are princes."
Meat, Plane Rides, and Clothes Are Gone in 2030, Say WEF Commie Prags - "For starters, you’ll eat roughly 35 lbs. of meat per year under the WEF’s “progressive” goal. That’s down from the 252 lbs. of meat the average American consumes annually as of today, which means our meat consumption will be roughly 14% of what it normally is. If the misers at the WEF hit their “ambitious” goal, you won’t taste another steak again as of 2030. The WEF is also keen on digital currency — it makes it way easier for them to control what you buy. They don’t want you buying things they find “less desirable,” like ammunition. Don’t take my word for it — listen to one of the tyrants tell you himself. You may want to take up sewing. If the WEF meets its “progressive” goal in regard to new clothing, you’ll only purchase eight new articles of clothing per year. And if they hit their “ambitious” goal, you’ll only get three articles. Does that include socks and underwear?... What about travel? Our new fuhrers will graciously allow us to take one flight — up to 950 miles — every two years, but they prefer to get us to a point where we only fly every three years. As PJ Media’s own Catherine Salgado reported, the Marxists also plan to take your cars away. How will we get around? We won’t. They will lock us down at their will, and we’ll be too protein-deprived to fight back. And if you complain, you won’t get your yearly socks stipend, you planet-killing enemy of the state."
GOLDSTEIN: The World Economic Forum is not our friend | Toronto Sun - "Critics have pointed out Stephen Harper spoke at the WEF when he was PM, to mock Poilievre’s pledge and accuse him of promoting conspiracy theories. But Harper’s view of the WEF, founded by German economist Klaus Schwab in 1971, changed over the years. He did speak twice at the WEF while PM. He praised Schwab for creating it and described it, in its origins, as an “outstanding organization” and a “remarkable event” in his 2018 book, Right Here, Right Now — Politics and Leadership in the Age of Disruption. But he also described the WEF today, as “a bit disturbing. “In recent years, Davos has taken on an atmosphere of elitism that would be hard to surpass,” Harper wrote. “Gathering at Davos’ remote location and high elevation, many of its attendees seem to view themselves as some kind of supreme world council, casting judgments on whether nations and their leaders measure up. You can see it in the press reports. “The one commonality in virtually all the new, populist or disruptive political movements of recent years is their suspicion of such ‘globalism’ and their appeal to nationalism and the national community. “The citizens who support these parties are not just frustrated with particular policies or economic outcomes; they simply do not trust the elites who support globalization. They believe such ‘globalists’ do not share their values and do not care about their interests. And, too often, they are right.” It’s clear Poilievre is appealing to this sense of frustration shared by many Canadians, and to mock him for doing so is to mock them. So, no, the WEF — which I covered as a reporter when then Ontario premier David Peterson led a provincial delegation there more than three decades ago— is not a globalist conspiracy. It has no power in and of itself. But it is an incubator for a globalist agenda that many Canadians profoundly distrust — such as fixing the climate by paying a tax, and other measures championed by the late Maurice Strong — a Canadian who was both a founder of the WEF and the founding executive director of the UN Environment Programme."
The fact that this article was written by a Jew won't convince the anti-Semites that not all Jews support globalism
Wide Awake Media on X - "World Economic Forum founder, Klaus Schwab, speaking at the World Government Summit in March 2022: "History is truly at a turning point. Global energy systems, food systems and supply chains will be deeply affected. In times of crisis, the role of governments is more important and more relevant than ever. The profound challenges to mankind such as climate change, are globally interconnected and require collaborative responses." Translation: Due to our manufactured energy crisis, contrived food shortages and deliberate sabotage of global supply chains, we must grant governments more authoritarian powers over the lives of the peasant class, while simultaneously exploiting the imaginary "climate emergency" to replace national sovereignty and representative democracy with one world government, ruled by unelected, unaccountable and unremovable technocrats."
WEF ranks “misinformation” as the top global threat - "In its annual ranking of global threats, the World Economic Forum has declared that the top issues endangering the world are misinformation and disinformation. "
Nate Silver on X - "If the experts think that misinformation is a bigger problem than war, then a way bigger problem than misinformation is that the experts are fucking idiots."
War was #5, also behind extreme weather, societal polarisation and cyber insecurity
Analyzing Bizarre Tribal Ritual at World Economic Forum 2024
Matt Walsh on X - "A few years ago the elites were telling us to wear masks and stay 6 feet apart. Now they’re bringing in a native woman to cough directly in their faces."
James Lindsay, anti-Fascist on X - "Haha this is a humiliation ritual. Look how those idiots just sit there and take it. They're "elites.""
Ian Miles Cheong on X - "Going to Davos and telling them they are the problem seems to be gaining popularity this year. "You are part of the problem, you are not the solution". This is the first time I can recall people like Javier Milei and now also Kevin Roberts, going on stage and directly telling them that."
World Economic Forum calls to reduce private vehicles by eliminating 'ownership'
Climate change is a good excuse to control people
At Davos, leaders talked big on rebuilding trust. Can the World Economic Forum make a difference? - "“the phaseout of fossil fuels is essential and inevitable" he added. “No amount of spin or scare tactics will change that.”"
Plotting to make everyone's lives harder will rebuild trust, naturally
Of course, climate change hysteria is not spin or scare tactics
Wide Awake Media on X - "Now they're coming for your coffee. Swiss banker and World Economic Forum "agenda contributor", Hubert Keller: "The coffee that we all drink emits between 15 and 20 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of coffee... Every time we drink coffee, we are basically putting CO2 into the atmosphere.""
Wide Awake Media on X - "Author of 'The Great Reset', Marc Morano, on Klaus Schwab's recent B20 speech: "He's talking about us essentially giving up national sovereignty, giving up individual freedoms, and turning over rule to experts... This whole agenda is to make it so we have no choice on some of the biggest questions of our lives." "We didn't get to vote on whether gas powered cars would be banned, we didn't vote for vaccine mandates, we didn't vote for lockdowns, we didn't vote for banning of meat. But all of this is happening, because at these meetings like the World Economic Forum and the United Nations, they meet and they work with government-corporate collusion to bypass democracy and impose stuff through this corporate government fascism.""
We Got It on X - "The World Economic Forum’s Yuval Harari’s infamous line: “Humans are Useless Eaters” and Bill Gates’… “We need to reduce the Population…” #WEF #WEFAgenda2030"
Richard Hanania on X - "Rightoids think Klaus Schwab runs the world, meanwhile he’s getting dragged in the WSJ for letting N-bombs fly and telling women they’re pretty, while telling others they’re fat. The press wants us to believe that any woman can resist Klaus. Liars."
John Kerry says First Amendment is the enemy, as elites try to stamp out free speech - "If you want to know how hostile the global elite are to free speech, look no further than John Kerry’s recent speech to the World Economic Forum. Rather than extol the benefits of democratic liberty versus dictatorships and oligarchs, Kerry called the First Amendment a “major block” to keeping people from believing the “wrong” things... The “freedom” to be won in this election is to liberate officials who like himself can set about controlling what can be said, read or heard. Kerry insisted that the problem with social media is that no one is controlling what they can say or read... “Democracies around the world now are struggling with the absence of a sort of truth arbiter, and there’s no one who defines what facts really are.” It is not clear when in our history we allowed “referees” to “determine what is a fact.” Since the First Amendment has been in place since 1791, it is hard to imagine when referees were used in conformity with our Constitution. The Founders would have been repulsed by the idea of a “truth arbiter.” Yet it was a pitch that clearly went over big at the crowd at the World Economic Forum... The greatest irony was that, after fearmongering about this supposed parade of horribles that comes from free speech, Kerry insisted, “If we could strip away some of the fearmongering that’s taking place and get down to the realities of what’s here for people, this is the biggest economic opportunity.”... In my new book on free speech, I discuss the growing anti-free speech movement being led by law professors and supported by both politicians and journalists. They include Michigan law professor and MSNBC commentator Barbara McQuade, who has called free speech America’s “Achilles’ heel.” Columbia law professor Tim Wu, a former Biden White House aide, wrote an op-ed declaring “The First Amendment Is Out of Control.” He explained that free speech “now mostly protects corporate interests” and threatens “essential jobs of the state, such as protecting national security and the safety and privacy of its citizens.” George Washington University Law’s Mary Ann Franks complains that the First Amendment (and also the Second) is too “aggressively individualistic” and endangers “domestic tranquility” and “general welfare.” Kerry hit all of the top talking points for the anti-free speech movement. He portrayed the First Amendment as hopelessly out of date and dangerous. He argued that citizens would be far better off if an elite could tell them what was information and what was disinformation. Other political contemporaries are working on the same problem. Hillary Clinton has called upon Europeans to use the Digital Services Act to force the censoring of Americans. She has also suggested the arrest of Americans whom she views as spreading disinformation. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has called for companies like Amazon to use enlightened algorithms to steer readers to “true” books on subjects like climate change to protect them from their own poor reading choices. Kerry explained how the true heroes are those poor suffering government officials seeking to protect citizens from unbridled, unregulated thoughts... There is, of course, another possibility: that there is no existential danger of disinformation. Rather there are powerful figures who want to control speech in the world for their own purposes. These are the same rationales and the same voices that have been throughout our history for censorship. Each generation of government officials insists that they face some unprecedented threat, whether it was the printing press at the start of our republic or social media in this century. Only the solution remains the same: to hand over control of what we read or hear to a governing elite like Kerry. In 1860, Frederick Douglass gave a “Plea for Free Speech in Boston,” and warned them that all of their struggles meant nothing if the “freedom of speech is struck down” because “Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist.” Douglass denounced those seeking to deny or limit free speech as making their “freedom a mockery.”"
John Kerry is against free speech, Letters - " Former Secretary of State John Kerry recently made headlines for his remarks portraying the First Amendment as a threat (“Elites stoking war on speech,” Jonathan Turley, Oct. 3). It’s also fitting that the comments were made at the World Economic Forum, which is run by Klaus Schwab. He once declared the role model for governing to be China — a communist dictatorship — during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which originated there. Free speech is not a threat to the public good. Would-be tyrants like Kerry — who want to control everything we do and never face criticism— are. These are the very people the founders gave us the First Amendment to protect us from."
World Economic Forum on X - "'If you think the economy is more important than the environment – try hold your breath while you count your money.' - @BadrJafar with a powerful message at #DavosAgenda Watch here: https://t.co/5gknAALkjt @_HadleyGamble @CNBC"
If you think the environment is more important than the economy, try starving to death while hugging a tree
Instagram - "This 2016 video of "bioethicist" S. Matthew Liao is circulating again, in which he calls for bioengineering of humans to make us allergic to meat (to save the planet!). But who is this dweeb, and why has he not been crammed into a locker yet? Liao has held positions at Oxford, Johns Hopkins, Georgetown and Princeton, and is now a professor at NYU. In the video, he was speaking at the 2016 World Science Festival, otherwise known as the "Davos of Science". After suggesting that humans could be made allergic to meat to stop them eating it, he also suggests shrinking people to reduce their carbon footprint. Seriously. He says a reduction of 15cm would reduce an individual's carbon footprint by 25%. Liao has been making these crazy suggestions since at least 2012, when a paper he published on "biohacking" to solve the climate crisis was picked up by the Atlantic magazine. Liao suggested IVF screening to ensure reduced height; skin patches to stimulate meat allergies; and bioengineering the human body to combat climate change. Giving women "smart drugs" to raise their IQ, which would in turn make them have fewer children (obviously). And, in a suggestion straight out of Equilibrium, he proposed giving everyone the pro-social drug oxytocin to ensure they cooperate with tackling climate change. So far so strange. Truth is, the notion of "biohacking" (altering our genome to produce desirable traits) is central to the WEF vision of the Great Reset (see Schwab's book on the 4th Industrial Revolution, for instance). And guess what? Liao is closely associated with the WEF. NYU, where Liao works, is a nexus for WEF interests. Blackrock CEO Larry Fink is on NYU's board of trustees (and the board of the WEF). Liao regularly hosts WEF members at NYU, like Francesca Rossi. Information about Liao's work with the WEF has, funnily enough, been scrubbed. #regenerativeagriculture #matthewlaio"Instagram - "This 2016 video of "bioethicist" S. Matthew Liao is circulating again, in which he calls for bioengineering of humans to make us allergic to meat (to save the planet!). But who is this dweeb, and why has he not been crammed into a locker yet? Liao has held positions at Oxford, Johns Hopkins, Georgetown and Princeton, and is now a professor at NYU. In the video, he was speaking at the 2016 World Science Festival, otherwise known as the "Davos of Science". After suggesting that humans could be made allergic to meat to stop them eating it, he also suggests shrinking people to reduce their carbon footprint. Seriously. He says a reduction of 15cm would reduce an individual's carbon footprint by 25%. Liao has been making these crazy suggestions since at least 2012, when a paper he published on "biohacking" to solve the climate crisis was picked up by the Atlantic magazine. Liao suggested IVF screening to ensure reduced height; skin patches to stimulate meat allergies; and bioengineering the human body to combat climate change. Giving women "smart drugs" to raise their IQ, which would in turn make them have fewer children (obviously). And, in a suggestion straight out of Equilibrium, he proposed giving everyone the pro-social drug oxytocin to ensure they cooperate with tackling climate change. So far so strange. Truth is, the notion of "biohacking" (altering our genome to produce desirable traits) is central to the WEF vision of the Great Reset (see Schwab's book on the 4th Industrial Revolution, for instance). And guess what? Liao is closely associated with the WEF. NYU, where Liao works, is a nexus for WEF interests. Blackrock CEO Larry Fink is on NYU's board of trustees (and the board of the WEF). Liao regularly hosts WEF members at NYU, like Francesca Rossi. Information about Liao's work with the WEF has, funnily enough, been scrubbed. #regenerativeagriculture #matthewlaio"
Meme - Drake Hotline Bling: "PROJECT 2025" *No*
"THE GREAT RESET" *Yes* Desiree Fixler on X - "I helped build the WEF’s “Great Reset.” Here’s what it really is — from the inside. The WEF sold the “Great Reset” as “build back better” — climate action, ESG, inclusion, and PPP. In practice, it shifted power away from voters to NGOs, corporate elites, and unelected technocrats. Policy was relabeled “science” to silence debate. Markets were warped by ESG scores, carbon taxes, and paper-pushing regulation. Corporations were turned into enforcers of ideology. As Nicole Shanahan reveals, communities weren’t uplifted — wealth and power were pushed upward. We got higher energy bills, debased money, an affordability crisis, fewer jobs, and creeping control over how we live and speak. I questioned it. Then I walked away. And I’ve been speaking out ever since. @NicoleShanahan"
Trust the Experts! If you oppose the left wing agenda you're a bigot and a Denier
Jim Ferguson on X - "🚨 RFK Jr Just TORCHED the World Economic Forum — and he’s absolutely right. Asked by Glenn Beck where he stands on the WEF, RFK didn’t hold back: “It’s a billionaires’ boys club shifting wealth upward and imposing totalitarian controls.” “They fly to Davos on private jets and tell world leaders how to govern the rest of us.” “During COVID, $4 TRILLION was shifted upward while they closed the little guys.” This is the part the media will bury:
RFK Jr is openly stating that Big Tech, Big Government, and the WEF colluded — to censor dissent, crush small businesses, and eliminate constitutional rights while enriching the global elite. And he’s not wrong. The WEF model is simple:
• Obey global governance
• Erase national sovereignty
• Criminalise dissent
• Centralise power
• Enrich the elite class
• Digitise the population
Meanwhile ordinary people were locked down, bankrupted, silenced, and surveilled. RFK Jr is saying the quiet part out loud: The WEF isn’t a “think tank.” It’s an unelected cartel of billionaires trying to run the world. And people are finally waking up. @glennbeck"
Wide Awake Media on X - "Former US government insider and author of 'The Great Reset', Marc Morano, on Klaus Schwab's recent B20 speech: "He's talking about us essentially giving up national sovereignty, giving up individual freedoms, and turning over rule to experts... This whole agenda is to make it so we have no choice on some of the biggest questions of our lives." "We didn't get to vote on whether gas powered cars would be banned, we didn't vote for vaccine mandates, we didn't vote for lockdowns, we didn't vote for banning of meat. But all of this is happening, because at these meetings like the World Economic Forum and the United Nations, they meet and they work with government-corporate collusion to bypass democracy and impose stuff through this corporate government fascism." Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=CAFgmKW0Veg For more content like this, visit: https://wide-awake-media.com #KlausSchwab #WorldEconomicForum #GreatReset #UnitedNations #Agenda2030 #Agenda21"

Links - 29th July 2026 (2 - Ukraine War)

2026-07-29T17:28:00.000+08:00

Pascal Lottaz on X - "It is now official. The EU IS sanctioning the retired Swiss Army Col. and previous NATO advisor Jacques Baud who was on Neutrality Studies before. One of the most cool-headed and well-informed analysts out there. Reason: Baud is spreading Russian propaganda, the EU says. It is insane. The EUSSR is real. EU sanctions are not part of the judicial branch. They are punishments coming straight from the executive arm (Kaja Kallas‘ office is responsible for compiling and proposing them). Sanctions against individuals that have never been found guilty by any court of law should not be possible. Even worse, Baud is living in an EU country and has now all his assets frozen and a travel ban for the entire Union (Switzerland is not part of the EU). I was in touch with Baud yesterday and he is currently assessing the legal implications on him: „Yes, I have been sanctioned for ‚Russian propaganda‘. The fact I never use Russian material for my books, but exclusively Ukrainian and Western information and that I consequently refused invitations from Russian media, I am still a "Russian propagandist"! As stated in my books, my work is not about who is good and who is bad, but about how bad media reflect the realities on the ground. I wanted to show that even without Russian information you can have a better understanding of the conflict. The idea is that the way you understand a crisis defines the way to solve it! I didn't realize how right I was“"
Freedom of speech in the European Union means you can only support the establishment
@amuse on X - "EU: The EU has sanctioned Diana Panchenko, a former Ukrainian TV host named Journalist of the Year in 2021, for exposing Zelensky’s government’s corruption. It did not sanction Zelensky or his cabinet after the New York Times confirmed the corruption."
Glenn Diesen on X - "William Perry, the U.S. Secretary of Defense when the decision was made to expand NATO, argued: "Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction was when Nato started to expand, bringing in eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia". Perry argues that the rest of the Clinton administration also understood that Russia feared NATO expansion, but ignored it due a "contemptuous attitude among US officials" toward a weakened Russia: "It wasn’t that we listened to their argument and said he don’t agree with that argument... Basically the people I was arguing with when I tried to put the Russian point ... the response that I got was really: ‘Who cares what they think? They’re a third-rate power.’ And of course that point of view got across to the Russians as well. That was when we started sliding down that path.”
- Today, the widely recognised security concerns about NATO expansionism can no longer be discussed, as these are labelled “Kremlin talking points.” Conflicts can be resolved by recognising and reducing mutual security concerns, yet our political-media establishment smears, censors, and cancels any dissent to their war propaganda and historical revisionism."
Russian cavalry hit by Ukrainian drones - "Russia has sent the cavalry to the front line in its latest low-tech attempt to claim land in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region. Video footage shared by Ukraine’s 92nd Brigade shows drones hunting down Russian soldiers as they race through an open field on horseback... Before this, there had been numerous reports of Russia utilising donkeys, horses and even camels to transport ammunition and other heavy equipment to the front line through muddy conditions not suitable for regular vehicles. Throughout the ages, horseback cavalry charges have provided speed, shock and flexibility on the battlefield. Tanks and other heavily-armoured fighting machines are rarely seen on the battlefields of Ukraine and, when they do appear, they are almost instantly disabled by a wave of drones. Russia’s Kommersant newspaper said of the return of cavalry: “In armed conflicts that have become arenas for showcasing technological innovations, participants are once again forced to rely on basic tools – from analogue telephone lines to pack animals and carts – when modern technologies prove vulnerable.”"
Meme - Terrence K. Williams: "Let me be very clear since y'all really don't know the difference. Zelensky showed up in Washington begging for billions in US. taxpayer money and couldn't even put on a suit. He came here asking for something. The Saudi Crown Prince showed up announcing over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS in investment into the United States - and he wore his cultural attire, which is the equivalent of a suit in his country. He came here bringing something. There's a difference between a man asking America for money... and a man bringing America money. But keep pretending you don't understand"
Don Winslow: "Dear #MAGA, Strange how your President didn't ask him to wear a suit like he demanded of @ZelenskyyUa. Your President IMO kneels for Saudi Arabia and Russia and don't you ever forget it. Your President is a weak coward."
Europe is betraying Ukraine by pretending it can still win - "Even Ukraine’s most stalwart backers must acknowledge that the war is at a critical juncture and isn’t going well for Kyiv. The Russian army remains on the offensive at multiple points of the front line and now controls the majority of Pokrovsk, the rail town that Moscow has been trying to capture for a year and a half. The obscene number of Russian casualties aside, Putin is still believed to be meeting his recruitment goals by throwing money at Russians with little to lose. Many young Russian men are entering the war to write off their criminal records or pay down their debts. While the Ukrainian army has no doubt fought far better than many experts expected when the conflict began, it would hardly be surprising if its troops are finding it increasingly difficult to keep the Russian offensive at bay. The Russians, after all, have more of everything. And the man at the top of Russia’s political system is so convinced of his own geopolitical genius that one wonders whether anything could persuade him from his current course. European leaders frequently proclaim that nothing short of a “just peace” for Ukraine is acceptable. That sounds terrific in theory. But is a so-called “just peace” even possible any more, nearly four years, hundreds of thousands of deaths and hundreds of billions of dollars of lost economic opportunity later? The hopeless romantic in me says yes; the cold-stoned realist in me says no. So Trump appears to be right. In his Politico interview, he warned that Kyiv should accept his peace deal because the Ukrainians were losing. “I give the people of Ukraine and the military of Ukraine tremendous credit for the bravery and for the fighting and all of that,” he said. “But you know, at some point, size will win, generally.”"
Yaroslav Trofimov on X - "What is interesting is that the most pro-Russian and anti-Ukrainian demographic group is the under 30 year olds — more so than all-age MAGA Republicans. This is the demographic that often gets its news from X, TikTok and Instagram algorithms."
Park MacDougald on X - "Quite similar to Israel. A little over a year ago, there seemed to be consensus that TikTok was a potential national security threat due to CCP control over the algorithm. Now the view seems to be that our holiest principle, free speech, is all about letting our kids get mind-raped by hostile foreign actors for fun and profit"
Zelenskyy's chief of staff resigns after anti-corruption investigators search home - "Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced Friday the resignation of his powerful chief of staff, Andrii Yermak, who was also the country's lead negotiator in talks with the U.S, after Yermak's residence was searched by anti-corruption investigators."
Clearly, this is a Russian set up
Batya Ungar-Sargon on X - "From the annals of "It can now be said": NYT is reporting that Zelensky's inner circle laundered over $100 million. Kiev "rewrote company charters to limit oversight, keeping the gov in control and allowing hundreds of millions of $ to be spent without outsiders poking around.""
Clearly, the NYT is a victim of Russian disinformation!
@amuse on X - "UKRAINE: Zelensky enlisted Senator Mark Kelly’s twin brother to raise $2.8B for a USAID-created propaganda arm targeting US voters and politicians. Much of the money moves anonymously via crypto. Observers note the conflict of interest: the brother of Sen. Mark Kelly helping run a foreign influence operation targeting the very government his twin serves in. United24, created by Ukraine’s Ministry of Digital Transformation using a USAID-funded infrastructure, appointed Scott Kelly, Senator Mark Kelly's twin brother, as its ambassador to help raise money for the propaganda outlet. Since then it has raised $2.72 billion, much of it routed quietly via cryptocurrency. United24 produces coordinated messaging marketed as “fact-checking” and “anti-corruption efforts,” but in practice operates as a state propaganda engine shaping US public opinion and Congressional support for Ukraine’s war. h/t @pepesgrandma"
Hans Mahncke on X - "While the news of Andrey Yermak’s demise should surprise no one (much like Covid, the Ukraine war has been turned into a massive grift for a select few), what may surprise some is that this is the same Yermak who was knee deep in the fake impeachment scam. At the time, he promised to investigate President Trump’s entirely correct claims about Biden and Burisma. But he never investigated anything at all, because he was himself a chief beneficiary of the corruption."
Kyiv’s new peace talks chief caught in same corruption scandal as ousted predecessor - "Volodymyr Zelensky’s new chief negotiator in Ukraine’s peace talks is embroiled in the same corruption scandal that ousted Andriy Yermak, the previous head of Kyiv’s delegation. Rustem Umerov led the Ukrainian team’s high-level peace talks with US secretary of state Marco Rubio, Donald Trump’s top envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law, in Florida... the Ukrainian president was criticised for the “bewildering” new appointment and accused of choosing his “cronies over professionals”."
Thread by @nfergus on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "The best is the enemy of the good. Contrary to recent press speculation, the draft 28-point plan for peace in Ukraine is in fact a reasonable basis for negotiations. Journalists can gripe about it as they griped about the 20-point Gaza plan. But wars are not ended by op-eds. Wars are ended either by victory or by compromise. This plan affirms Ukraine's sovereignty. It provides Ukraine with a US-backed security guarantee. It envisages Ukrainian reconstruction. Of course, the territorial terms and the amnesty for war crimes are hard to swallow. ⁠But if you want to take back territory and try Putin, you have to win the war. And realistically Ukraine has never been in a position to defeat Russia. The critics should also acknowledge that President Trump has taken some risk here. I do not believe it is in the Ukrainian people's interests for the war to be prolonged for another year. The risks seem to me too great. So I hope @ZelenskyyUa will use his eloquence to explain why the time is right to negotiate. Ukrainians have fought heroically for their independence. It is now time to consolidate what they have achieved through diplomacy."
Damn Russian asset!
Zelensky is losing touch with reality - "The timing of the Kyiv corruption scandal, just as Zelensky is desperately seeking funding and weapons, could hardly be worse. Ukraine’s Western-backed, independent anti-corruption bureau NABU has accused several members of Zelensky’s inner circle of stealing $100m by taking kickbacks from the construction of air defences for Ukraine’s vulnerable nuclear power stations. As the country faces increasing blackouts due to Russian strikes, that kind of alleged war profiteering is especially disgusting. And the fact that Zelensky attempted last July to shut down NABU’s investigations by bringing the agency under government control before street protests forced him to reverse his controversial law is not a good look. Zelensky is haemorrhaging support at home. Loyal members of Zelensky’s own party have begun calling for the resignation of Andriy Yermak, the president’s right-hand man. Yermak had previously been chief counsel at Kvartal-95, the television production company founded by Zelensky and Timur Mindich – who stands at the centre of the NABU corruption case and who fled to Israel just hours before prosecutors raided his home. According to opposition MPs, trust in Zelensky has fallen to 20 per cent and nationalists are calling for “traitors” in his inner circle to be “liquidated”. Meanwhile former Zelensky supporters like prominent Ukrainian activist and volunteer Serhii Sternenko have begun criticising Kyiv’s military and political leadership. “We are headed toward a disaster of strategic magnitude, which could lead to the loss of statehood,” warned Sternenko on Monday. “Our defence is falling apart.” The coming loss of the strategically important town of Pokrovsk and Russian advances into the far less well-fortified southern Zaporizhzhia region will be a body-blow to Ukraine’s defences. Travelling around Europe signing fantasy arms deals Ukraine cannot afford is no answer to the looming political and military crisis at home. Zelensky’s behaviour is a worrying sign for all of Ukraine’s well-wishers, because it signals desperation. With the war entering its critical phase, international funds running out, desertions from Ukraine’s army running at four times the rate of last year, Russians advancing on the ground and the president’s political credibility in ruins, we should be very afraid for Ukraine’s future."
Of course, the warmongers claim that Russia is losing, just as it has been for more than 3.5 years, so the West just needs to support Ukraine more and it will win
Delusional Europe cannot keep Ukraine in the fight - "European leaders have lavished Ukraine with promises of support, drafted gigantic defence-spending proposals and even formulated plans to put European boots on the ground. But what has been conspicuously lacking are actual transfers of sufficient hard cash and weaponry to plug Kyiv’s estimated $60bn budget gap, pay for a comprehensive defence against Russia or even less mount any kind of pushback. Meanwhile, the actual nuts and bolts of the war’s endgame are being thrashed out – however imperfectly – directly between Putin and Trump’s envoys without reference to Europe or to Ukraine. The sad truth is that European leaders act like they play a part in great power politics, but in reality the continent has long surrendered the ability to fill that role... Europe’s politicians may lie to Ukraine and to themselves about their devotion to Kyiv’s cause, but the numbers tell a truer story. Back in March, as Europe was realigning to the new reality that Washington was pulling its funding of Ukraine, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen announced a “ReArm Europe” plan that she said “could see up to €800bn poured into the defence sector over the next four years”. The EU’s first move was to tweak its borrowing rules to exclude defence investment, thereby potentially allowing members to borrow more to spend on defence. Days later, von der Leyen announced €150bn of defence spending loans open to EU member states but with one proviso – 65 per cent of the military kit would have to come from suppliers in the EU, Norway or Ukraine. The rest could be spent in non-EU countries like Britain if they signed a security agreement with Brussels. Kallas then presented another plan for EU members to chip in €40bn actual cash to finance arms for Kyiv, rather than for the EU’s own defence. But that proposal was rejected by Italy, France, Spain and Portugal. Even a slimmed down pledge of €5bn, focused on just the artillery ammunition component of the rejected package, was also scrapped. Indeed even the term #ReArmEurope was deemed too militaristic by Italy’s Giorgia Meloni. “I don’t like the term rearm,” objected Spanish prime minister Pedro Sánchez. “I think the EU is a political project of soft power … This is my principled objection to the term of rearm.” With enemies like these, who needs friends? On the economic front there’s a similar disconnect between Europe’s words and its deeds. By some estimates the EU paid Russia €311bn for its energy products since Feb 2022, while giving €187bn in support for Ukraine. “Sanctions are hitting Russia where it hurts,” claimed Kallas this week, adding that the EU is preparing its twentieth package of sanctions. Yet the continent continues to import Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) while Hungary and Slovakia are busy negotiating sanctions opt-outs in order to continue importing piped Russian gas and oil. And the first really painful sanctions against Russian oil giants Lukoil and Rosneft are being introduced this month by Washington, not Brussels. The clear pattern that has emerged over four years of war is that Europe’s northeastern corner, led by the Scandinavians and the Baltics, have been the most consistently hawkish on Russia and adamant about the continent’s need to rearm. Finnish president Alexander Stubb has argued that Ukraine must be “militarised to the teeth” to deter Moscow, for instance, while Kallas said in January that Europe must “prepare for war” – after last year fantasising about breaking up the Russian Federation into little statelets. But the European countries who will actually have to pay the bills have been more measured. Macron, for instance, while being wholeheartedly supportive of Kyiv diplomatically has spoken out against confiscating frozen Russian assets. The irony is that Europe’s economy and defence sector may be smaller than the US’s, but not by that much... So why has Europe’s generosity not translated into more diplomatic heft in the Ukraine peace process, and why has the continent’s enormous armaments industry not been able to keep Ukraine supplied with air defences, armour, artillery and rockets that it needs? One answer is capacity, complicated by national differences. Europe’s militaries are vastly smaller than the US’s, and keep correspondingly smaller stockpiles. The capacity of European factories is therefore limited too. And fatefully, though Nato equipment like the standard 155mm artillery shell is meant to be seamlessly interchangeable, “Ukraine’s experience has made clear that Nato … howitzers and munitions are not truly interoperable,” according to a recent report by West Point Military Academy’s Modern War Institute. Europeans tend to spend their defence procurement money domestically, leading to a bewildering array of British, French, German, Czech, Swedish and Polish infantry fighting vehicles, all with different spare parts, operating on Ukrainian front lines. Overall, that’s made Europe’s military contribution bitty, complex and expensive. More importantly in practical terms is that the most effective big-ticket weapons, from Patriot air defence missile batteries and ATACMs short range cruise missiles to F-16 fighters, are made in the US... The most crucial problem of all for Europe is, bluntly, money. Spending is always a political choice and every major EU economy, as well as the UK, is facing a similar crisis of ballooning spending, deficits and debt."
Putin has a new drone strategy to render Nato’s defences useless - "Up to four out of the 19-23 Russian drones that breached Polish airspace were shot down, with Polish F-16s, Dutch F-35s, Italian AWACS, Nato Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft, and German Patriot systems all deployed, as confirmed by Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte. AIM-120C-7 air-to-air missiles were reportedly used to destroy the drones. The price for such a missile in its latest configurations is roughly $1.37m (£1m) for domestic procurement as of 2024 (although the export price could be much higher). So the Nato response is likely to have cost between $6.18m (£4.7m) and $16.9m (£12.9m), depending on how many missiles were fired and accounting for aircraft operations and fuel. The 19 Gerbera drones deployed by Russia, by contrast, will have cost as little as $10,000 (£7,600) a piece. That is a 30-90 times cost ratio in Moscow’s favour... Russia’s mass production of inexpensive drones exposes critical gaps in Europe’s air defences. Nato currently does not have an answer to Russia’s cheap attack drones, it has focused on more expensive US Reaper and Global Hawk UAVs. Moscow’s willingness to violate Nato’s sovereign airspace with cheap drones is likely bolstered by the fact that the Nato alliance possesses no similar capability and cannot respond in kind. Russia’s strategy is not an accident. Moscow has been searching for an answer to US/Nato technological superiority for decades. In 2018, Putin publicly declared that the answer lies in “making the US defence expenditures useless,” asserting that Russia possesses the “fundamentally new munitions” which will “neutralise the US military’s multi-million dollar expenses”."
Ukraine-Russia war live: Europe agrees to cap size of Ukrainian armed forces - "European officials have agreed to a cap on the size of Ukraine’s army during peace negotiations in Geneva. The European counter-proposal suggests Kyiv’s forces should be limited to a number of 800,000 in a rebuttal of the 600,000 cap proposed in Donald Trump’s 28-point peace plan... Even with the cap, Kyiv’s army – which currently stands at around 850,000 – would be one of the largest in the world. It represents a marked increase from three years ago, when Moscow proposed Ukraine retain a peacetime army size of around 85,000 during talks in Istanbul.
The warmongers are unhappy that there's finally going to be peace. They claim that it's only a negotiation if there're concessions, but they're unwilling to accept any
Meme - Garbage Human: ">500,000 men killed in battle
>women most affected"
"Girls in the shadow of war: Ukraine's hidden mental health. Two years on from the escalation of conflict in Ukraine, Maria, Olena, Evelina and Veronica speak bravely and openly about the impact the conflict has had upon their mental health."
President Zelensky suspends 11 political parties in Ukraine over Kremlin 'collusion' claims - "Volodymyr Zelensky's government has suspended 11 Ukrainian political parties because of their alleged links with Russia. The decision was taken by the Ukrainian national security and defence council, and although 10 of the 11 were small parties, one - the Opposition Platform for Life - holds 44 of the 450 seats in Ukraine's parliament, according to The Guardian. At the same time, Zelensky signed a decree on Sunday to merge all national TV channels into a single government-run service - effectively ending the operation of private TV media... The move comes on the tail of a decision by Zelensky to enact what he called a 'unified information policy' during the period of martial law, which will give his government a monopoly on the news."
Clearly, only Putin supporters think there's anything wrong with Ukraine, which is a Model Democracy
Moment Ukrainian men yell 'get away from me' as they are dragged out of nightclubs and restaurants by army recruiters during targeted raids - "In March 2023, it was revealed that foreign fighters who joined the Ukrainian army were not able to go home until the war ends. Would-be recruits were having second thoughts at the Polish border after being handed contracts that effectively make them conscripts... some Ukrainian men are so desperate to escape mobilisation that they are risking their lives to break out of the country. Oleksandr Danylyuk, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London, told the newspaper: 'Mobilisation has begun to be perceived as a one-way ticket, where the only way to end service is to die or become disabled.' In April, the Boarder Guard Service reported that at least 30 men had died trying to flee the country since the start of the war often by drowning while trying to swim across rivers of freezing to death on mountain passes. In January 2024, a YouGov poll found that 38 per cent of under-40s in Britain would refuse to serve in the Armed Forces in the event of a new world war, and 30 per cent said that they would not serve even if Britain was facing imminent invasion."
Ukrainian female POWs tortured and paraded naked through the snow by Russian troops
Polish women have worsened their attitude towards Ukrainian refugees: what is the reason? - "According to a recent study by the University of Warsaw's Research LAB, which was conducted from May to June, it is among women under the age of 29 who are most likely to dislike Ukrainians. There are several reasons for this concern. Firstly, Polish women fear growing competition in the labour market. Secondly, the huge number of Ukrainian women in Poland makes Polish women anxious about the high level of competition in the marriage market. After all, the number of weddings between Poles and Ukrainians in Poland is growing rapidly every day. It is also noted that Polish dating sites are dominated by women, which makes it much more difficult to find a husband... the number of Poles who feel threatened by Ukrainian refugees has increased by 12%. It is noted that locals fear an increase in crime, inflation and clashes with Ukrainians due to different cultural views. 67% still have a positive attitude towards Ukrainian refugees, but there has been a significant decline in this trend. Compared to January 2023, the number of Poles who are friendly towards Ukrainians has decreased by 13%."

Marco Rubio on European Decline

2026-07-29T13:27:00.000+08:00

Too bad Europeans don't mind or are even happy to decline, and resent the US for not following them down that path. This is also why left wingers hate Rubio. From February:
Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the Munich Security Conference - United States Department of State
"[At the end of the Cold War]
the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion: that we had entered, quote, “the end of history;” that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.

This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history. And it has cost us dearly. In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.

We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves. This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests. To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.

And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people. We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.

Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past. And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.

For the United States and Europe, we belong together. America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before. The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.

We are part of one civilization – Western civilization. We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir.

And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel. This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe. The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply. We care deeply about your future and ours. And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily. We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally. We want Europe to be strong. We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.
National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions. They are. But they are not the fundamental one. The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions. Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation. Armies fight for a way of life. And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny.

It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born. It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution. It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels. They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future. But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future.
Deindustrialization was not inevitable. It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence. And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade. It was foolish. It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis.

Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence. It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West. Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people. But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past. It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century. Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South. Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century.
But we must also gain control of our national borders. Controlling who and how many people enter our countries, this is not an expression of xenophobia. It is not hate. It is a fundamental act of national sovereignty. And the failure to do so is not just an abdication of one of our most basic duties owed to our people. It is an urgent threat to the fabric of our societies and the survival of our civilization itself.

And finally, we can no longer place the so-called global order above the vital interests of our people and our nations. We do not need to abandon the system of international cooperation we authored, and we don’t need to dismantle the global institutions of the old order that together we built. But these must be reformed. These must be rebuilt.

For example, the United Nations still has tremendous potential to be a tool for good in the world. But we cannot ignore that today, on the most pressing matters before us, it has no answers and has played virtually no role. It could not solve the war in Gaza. Instead, it was American leadership that freed captives from barbarians and brought about a fragile truce. It had not solved the war in Ukraine. It took American leadership and partnership with many of the countries here today just to bring the two sides to the table in search of a still-elusive peace.
It was powerless to constrain the nuclear program of radical Shia clerics in Tehran. That required 14 bombs dropped with precision from American B-2 bombers. And it was unable to address the threat to our security from a narcoterrorist dictator in Venezuela. Instead, it took American Special Forces to bring this fugitive to justice.

In a perfect world, all of these problems and more would be solved by diplomats and strongly worded resolutions. But we do not live in a perfect world, and we cannot continue to allow those who blatantly and openly threaten our citizens and endanger our global stability to shield themselves behind abstractions of international law which they themselves routinely violate.

This is the path that President Trump and the United States has embarked upon. It is the path we ask you here in Europe to join us on. It is a path we have walked together before and hope to walk together again. For five centuries, before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding – its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe.

But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, it was contracting. Europe was in ruins. Half of it lived behind an Iron Curtain and the rest looked like it would soon follow. The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world and drape the red hammer and sickle across vast swaths of the map in the years to come.
Against that backdrop, then, as now, many came to believe that the West’s age of dominance had come to an end and that our future was destined to be a faint and feeble echo of our past. But together, our predecessors recognized that decline was a choice, and it was a choice they refused to make. This is what we did together once before, and this is what President Trump and the United States want to do again now, together with you.

And this is why we do not want our allies to be weak, because that makes us weaker. We want allies who can defend themselves so that no adversary will ever be tempted to test our collective strength. This is why we do not want our allies to be shackled by guilt and shame. We want allies who are proud of their culture and of their heritage, who understand that we are heirs to the same great and noble civilization, and who, together with us, are willing and able to defend it.
And this is why we do not want allies to rationalize the broken status quo rather than reckon with what is necessary to fix it, for we in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West’s managed decline. We do not seek to separate, but to revitalize an old friendship and renew the greatest civilization in human history. What we want is a reinvigorated alliance that recognizes that what has ailed our societies is not just a set of bad policies but a malaise of hopelessness and complacency. An alliance – the alliance that we want is one that is not paralyzed into inaction by fear – fear of climate change, fear of war, fear of technology. Instead, we want an alliance that boldly races into the future. And the only fear we have is the fear of the shame of not leaving our nations prouder, stronger, and wealthier for our children.
An alliance ready to defend our people, to safeguard our interests, and to preserve the freedom of action that allows us to shape our own destiny – not one that exists to operate a global welfare state and atone for the purported sins of past generations. An alliance that does not allow its power to be outsourced, constrained, or subordinated to systems beyond its control; one that does not depend on others for the critical necessities of its national life; and one that does not maintain the polite pretense that our way of life is just one among many and that asks for permission before it acts. And above all, an alliance based on the recognition that we, the West, have inherited together – what we have inherited together is something that is unique and distinctive and irreplaceable, because this, after all, is the very foundation of the transatlantic bond.

Acting together in this way, we will not just help recover a sane foreign policy. It will restore to us a clearer sense of ourselves. It will restore a place in the world, and in so doing, it will rebuke and deter the forces of civilizational erasure that today menace both America and Europe alike.

So in a time of headlines heralding the end of the transatlantic era, let it be known and clear to all that this is neither our goal nor our wish – because for us Americans, our home may be in the Western Hemisphere, but we will always be a child of Europe."

Links - 29th July 2026 (1 - Feminism)

2026-07-29T09:43:00.000+08:00

Girls get extra school help while boys get Ritalin - "In classrooms nationwide, girls are pulling ahead of boys academically... little is being done to correct the imbalances. All of the major players — schools, education colleges and researchers — largely ignore the gender gap. Instead of pursuing sound solutions, many educators merely advocate prescribing more attention-focusing Ritalin for the boys, who receive the drug at four to eight times the rate of girls, according to different estimates. "Too often the first reaction to an attention problem is 'Let's medicate,' " says Rockville, Md., child psychologist Neil Hoffman. "Some schools are quick to recommend solutions before they've fully evaluated the problem." One reason boys are losing academic ground to girls appears linked to a shift by schools to more word-based learning for which girls' brains are believed to have an advantage. Over the years, even math problems have become more word oriented, according to education researchers. But because schools are doing little to help boys adjust, males risk becoming second-class academic citizens. Already the academic success girls enjoy in high school translates into more college acceptances — 56% of the students on campuses are female. The full impact from this shift is something society has yet to discover. But a drop in earnings for males is one likely result. Workers with only a high school diploma earn $20,000 a year less than those with a bachelor's degree. One fact explains why educators are ignoring boys' needs: You can't address a problem that you don't admit exists. The U.S. Department of Education concedes that no serious research is available comparing different instructional methods that might help boys. In fact, many education researchers are hostile toward research aimed at exploring gender differences in learning. Last April, when Kenneth Dragseth, superintendent of schools in Edina, Minn., presented a paper describing his district's gender gap at the American Educational Research Association's annual meeting in Chicago, he says the reception ranged from chilly to hostile. Female education researchers in the audience questioned whether helping boys would mean hurting girls. Their attitude follows years of lobbying by groups such as the American Association of University Women, which alerted educators to the fact that girls were being shortchanged academically in the fields of math and science. The extra attention helped focus schools on girls' difficulties, but it has made it too easy for educators to overlook the problems of boys. Among them:
•Boys and girls learn differently. The best research on boy-girl learning differences is produced more by accident than by design. The lack of data in this field can hurt girls as much as boys. For instance, as part of an ongoing 20-year dyslexia study focusing on Connecticut schools, Yale neuroscientist and pediatrician Sally Shaywitz discovered that schools were identifying four times as many dyslexic boys as girls. Yet when her team entered schools to screen children, it diagnosed just as many dyslexic girls as boys. Shaywitz found that the mostly female teaching staff was quicker to identify rambunctious boys than quiet girls. The results are just one example of what might be learned about the role gender plays in education, especially in elementary school, where 85% of teachers are women.
• Future teachers aren't trained to deal with learning differences. Therapist Michael Gurian, author of Boys and Girls Learn Differently!, has visited more than 100 education colleges. But he has not found one that offers courses on male-female brain differences. His discovery explains why many new teachers arrive in classrooms clueless about what teaching techniques might work best for boys' learning styles.
• Boys lack advocates. The special efforts made by schools to steer more girls into advanced math and science classes came after powerful advocacy groups embraced the problem. But Gurian and other advocates for boys say they run into resistance from educators who point to males' success in the workforce as proof that advocacy for boys is unnecessary.
In spite of the lack of research, anecdotal evidence shows that far more effective strategies are available for teaching boys than plying them with Ritalin. Patricia Henley runs a boy-friendly charter school in Kansas that hires many male teachers. It also recognizes boys' natural tendency to favor active learning by conducting more class work on the chalkboard and allowing more student movement within the classroom. And the school trains teachers to deal with boys' particular styles. For instance, because boys volunteer answers more slowly than girls do, teachers are told to count to 10 before calling on a student."
Damn patriarchy! We need to help girls even more!
When Will Feminism Be “Enough”? - "Throughout many of my debates with feminists, I've asked a simple question: “When will you stop fighting? What is going to be good enough for you?” Most of them can't give me an answer. It's not because the question is confusing or unfair, but because they can't admit the flaws of their own movement. Women are outperforming men on every metric right now: college enrollment, graduate degrees, consumer spending power, social mobility. Yet we still see major influencers like Alex Cooper of Call Her Daddy claiming women are oppressed and will never be as successful as men, while signing a $125 million, three-year deal with SiriusXM. At a certain point, you have to ask: do these women actually want to be oppressed? I'm a social media influencer, and I'm honest enough to admit that I would not be as successful if I were a man. In fact, I've seen men put out very similar messages to mine, but attractive women will always be at an advantage when it comes to media and entertainment. Anyone who denies this is clinging to a victim mentality that has become more valuable than the truth. Feminists still cite the “gender pay gap” as proof of systemic oppression, despite the fact that it has been debunked so many times I genuinely can't believe it's still used as an argument... This disparity in pay between men and women is not because they're women, but because the jobs women choose are generally lower paying. But admitting that would undermine one of feminism’s last remaining grievances, so the myth persists. If feminism delivered what it promised, women should be thriving. Instead, the opposite has happened. Despite having more freedom, choice, and opportunity than any generation of women in history, women today are unhappier than ever. Researchers call it the “paradox of declining female happiness,” and it tracks neatly with the paradox of choice, which argues that an overabundance of options leads to anxiety and decision paralysis. Our current culture floods us with the idea that having an endless pool of choices is sexy and cool, but it's only making us more anxious. Ironically, married moms in America are the happiest demographic, as cited by a 2025 report. But the data only gets more inconvenient for feminists from here. Feminism promised to elevate womanhood. Instead, it erased it. In their effort to "smash the patriarchy" feminists dismantled the very category they claimed to be fighting for. Today, even the most “educated” scholars in our society can't clearly define what a woman is... And the consequences are tangible: biological women are being beaten by male competitors in their own sports and competitions. Both Caitlyn Jenner and Dylan Mulvaney have been named “Woman of the Year” by major publications... The rise of radical individualism alongside feminism has devastated the institutions that hold society together. Traditionally, men's duty to society was to protect women and children. Women’s duty was to bear and care for children. But feminism erased women from any sense of social obligation, replacing duty with the singular pursuit of personal “happiness,” and then placed that happiness on a pedestal above everything else, including the continuation of civilization itself. Based on current U.S. birth rates, deaths are projected to outpace births by 2030. If the trend continues, we are on a trajectory toward demographic collapse within the next few centuries. The anti-suffragettes of the 19th century—women who opposed the passage of the 19th amendment—predicted nearly every crisis I've just described. They predicted the birth rates dropping from an average of 5 children in 1870 to just 2 children by 1940. They predicted the demonization and domination of men. They were also right about what the institution of marriage and family would look like. In 1900, the rate of births outside of marriage was only 4%. By 2010, that number reached 41%. Even Susan B. Anthony, arguably the most well-known suffragette in history, framed the movement as the result of persistent activism by a committed minority. Many of the foundational rights—property, education, social influence—were already in place by that point, and most women were satisfied, even in 1897. So what, exactly, was feminism still fighting for? Many feminists today argue that the movement must continue because women and children are still endangered by violent men. But they refuse to admit that their own movement made this worse. Feminism did not keep its promise to protect women and children. In fact, children are in more danger now than before the movement gained full cultural dominance. According to the National Incidence Study, the rate of overall endangerment standard maltreatment for children living with two married biological parents is about 16 per 1,000. The rate for children in all other circumstances is more than 52 per 1,000; the worst cases occurring in one biological parent cohabitating with an unmarried partner. In the U.S., women account for a slight majority of child maltreatment perpetrators—typically around 53% to 56%, compared to roughly 42% to 46% for men. Additionally, children from fatherless homes represent 90% of homeless kids, 85% of kids with behavioral disorders, 70% of kids in juvenile facilities, and 75% of kids in adolescent substance abuse treatment centers. Feminism told women they didn’t need men and their children paid the price. After a century of organized feminism, women are three times more likely than men to have mental health problems. Children are more at risk for maltreatment than ever. Divorce rates are higher than ever... When you destroy the patriarchy—the very system that has been put in place to protect you—chaos and perversion takes hold. Feminism has ultimately become a vehicle for policies that have harmed the very women and families it claims to champion. So I'll ask the question again: Will feminists ever admit that their movement made things worse for women? Or will they keep marching, no matter how much wreckage they leave behind?"
Spanish govt study finds huge backslide in people identifying as feminists - especially among young peple! Majority says it's political manipulation. : r/MensRights - "I am familiar with Spanish law and the situation in Spain. It is almost certainly the country where radical feminism has most successfully implanted its misandric ideology in laws and institutions. Furthermore, the most high-profile radical feminists (led by the former Minister of Equality, Irene Montero) have shown nothing more than that they are out of their minds and completely disconnected from the reality that Spanish youth experience in their daily lives. I believe this is why they have had the opposite effect on young people, along with the fact that they are now seen as pathetic, hysterical screamers and hypocrites who demand from others what they do not want for themselves. I hope more data like this continues to emerge, because Spain is certainly the country that most needs to change its gender policies."
Gains in women’s rights haven't made women happier. Why is that? - "Evidence supports the idea that women’s rights and roles in the home in the US and Europe have not moved in step with changes in the workplace. Therefore, because women with jobs often do most of the chores and childcare, they shoulder a dual burden that cuts into their sleep and fun... When the dual burden is carefully measured – as it has been across European countries – the results illustrate the influence that expectations have on how happy we feel. Experiencing the dual burden leads working women in Sweden, for example, to feel more miserable than their counterparts in Greece, probably because Swedes’ expectations around gender equality are more ambitious. (Fewer than 35% of Swedish women do three-quarters of the housework, compared to 81% of Greek women.)... The social history of Switzerland, where women weren’t allowed to vote until 1971, reveals the subtleties of employment expectations on happiness. A decade after Swiss women gained suffrage, the country’s citizens voted in a referendum on whether the constitution should be amended to state that women deserve equal pay for equal work. Different parts of Switzerland voted very differently. Unsurprisingly, cantons (Swiss states) with a high proportion of votes in favor of the amendment were recorded as having a small gender wage gap some years later. But strangely, working women in areas with strong traditional values – where most people had voted against equal pay – were happier than working women in liberal cantons. Even though their salaries were further below those of the men around them, the women in more traditional communities were less likely to report discrimination than their countrywomen in more liberal areas. This inside-out result probably arises from different cognitive comparisons. Women in liberal communities are less happy and notice discrimination because they automatically compare their opportunities and salary to everyone else around them, men included"
When you add paid and unpaid work, married men do more work than married women, but the feminists can't accept that. But they are right about expectations - feminism tells women that they're oppressed, so women become unhappy
Clearly traditional women in Switzerland were just stupid and didn't know that they were being oppressed, because discrimination can never be in your head (despite the findings of the Dartmouth scar experiment)
Feminism against Jennifer Love Hewitt - "Many opined that these crude comments and attacks on Hewitt were the inevitable work of patriarchy, of men dominating and humiliating women by holding them to impossible ideals. These patriarchs, we are told, sexualize girls, then scorn them for aging. They dehumanize, reducing the vast subjectivity of a woman to a fleshy body—a mere ornament to be ogled. This is what we might call the feminist thesis of discourse about women. The feminist thesis claims that impossible standards of beauty are weapons of male control, used to denigrate and subjugate. This thesis is widely promoted, especially among educated elites, but it is implausible. The explanation is too simple, too ideologically convenient. A more plausible account must look not to patriarchy, but to two broader, interrelated social trends. First, the second and third feminist revolutions, which emphasized sexual liberation, have exacerbated intrasexual competition among women, where sexual allure becomes a primary instrument for securing status and desirability. Second, these same feminist revolutions have dismantled the reverence for motherhood that once dignified maternal bodies and honored aging women for their roles as caretakers of children and custodians of a civilization’s moral memory. The result is a society in which women are no longer respected for maternal dignity, for gaining weight or aging naturally. Instead, they are compelled to remain sexually alluring as long as possible, using cosmetics, fitness regimens, and eventually surgery in a vain battle against time itself. Competition for youth, thinness, and sexual capital is more intense than ever. The sanctity of motherhood is no longer honored but dismissed as an antiquated norm, a holdover or vestigial organ to be removed or transcended, but certainly not celebrated. Not only is the feminist thesis wrong, it is the opposite of the truth. It is feminism, not patriarchy, that has given rise to the impossible ideals now tormenting ordinary and famous women alike. It is feminism that encourages the barbs that sting aging women with maternal bodies. It is feminism that has vitiated the power of the wise, dignified woman, trading it for the fleeting currency of sexual capital. In many traditional (that is, patriarchal) societies, motherhood, and the plump body that often accompanied it, conferred dignity, not derision. The aging female body, marked by the strains of pregnancy and the labors of childcare, was not treated as an undesirable sexual body but was lifted above sexuality altogether. The Roman matrona exemplified chastity and exercised moral authority, robed in a stola and often commanding the household (domus). She did not compete with younger women for sexual allure; she guided the moral development of her children, inculcating Roman virtues and the ways of the ancestors (mos maiorem). The Victorian “angel in the house” likewise was not a seductress, but a sanctified presence whose maternal role eclipsed the fleeting intrigues of romantic dalliance. Religious iconography reinforces this elevation of motherhood across Western civilization, celebrating Mary and other saints for their uniquely feminine contributions to life. They were depicted not as sexual, but as motherly beauties. Plump, reserved, life-bearing beings. The cultural reverence for motherhood did not survive the feminist revolutions of the twentieth century. Many feminists rejected the maternal ideal, the “angel in the house,” as repressive, claiming it was a role devised by men to confine women to domestic servitude. In its place, they celebrated the image of the liberated, “autonomous” woman, sexually expressive, economically independent, and freed from the burdens of biology. Feminism rejoiced in the ruin of the sanctified mother and matron. But in shattering what they called the tyranny of motherhood, feminists also destroyed its public dignity. What was once considered the culmination of feminine virtue, the highest expression of woman’s life-bearing gift, became simply a degraded body, a ruined, sagging, and scarred body desperately competing against younger, firmer, more nubile bodies. And the older woman, once celebrated as a matriarch, was now expected to maintain sexual relevance or risk obsolescence. Women fled the putative prison of motherhood only to enter the harsher incarceration of constant sexual competition. The intensity of female sexual competition cannot be explained solely by reference to male preferences or desires. The feminist errs profoundly in dividing the world into men and women, oppressors and oppressed. Women do not, in fact, share many interests and often have more in common with men than with one another. They are not comrades. They are rivals. If homo homini lupus est, then femina feminae vulpes est. Woman is a fox to woman, cunning and covert in her competition. As the status of motherhood declines and the number of sexually liberated competitors increases, the pressure intensifies. Women’s competition is often indirect and psychological rather than physical. They disparage one another’s bodies, mocking flab, scars, wrinkles, not always to please men, but to wound rivals. The goal is twofold. To diminish the other’s sexual status and to erode her confidence. A woman who is timid, insecure, and ashamed is far easier to surpass. She is less of a threat. Indeed, a cynic or a realist might contend that feminism itself is a tactic of intrasexual competition... Traditionalism, whatever its faults, reveres the maternal and discourages ferocious intrasexual competition among women. No, the real source of this cruelty, beyond the ordinary pettiness of human nature, is feminism itself and its long war against the so-called tyranny of motherhood. In the name of liberation, feminism has intensified sexual competition and degraded the mother and the matron. It has encouraged a desperate quest for the fountain of youth, not in the New World, but in the scalpel of the plastic surgeon."
Rothmus 🏴 on X - "The Deputy Prime Minister is reminding everyone that Scotland is a tolerant and inclusive society. In leftist doublespeak, this means placing this community above the Scottish people. It shields them from criticism and ignores their wrongdoings because holding any member accountable supposedly stains the entire group, and the community’s sanctity places it above scrutiny. It also means locals must accommodate every cultural demand, including wearing the hijab apparently (hail Western feminism). Assimilation is a one-way obligation where you adapt to the newcomers. They have no duty to adapt to you, because your culture either doesn’t exist or is evil by definition. Capitulation dressed up as virtue."
Rothmus 🏴 on X - "A tale of two feminisms. In 2017, during her presidential campaign, Marine Le Pen visited Lebanon. She was asked to wear a headscarf for her meeting with The Grand Mufti. She refused, told reporters to pass along her regards, and left without attending. “You will transmit my regards to the Grand Mufti but I will not wear a veil.” She pointed out that two years earlier she’d met Egypt’s Grand Imam at Al-Azhar and no veil was required. She accused the Mufti’s team of trying to present her with a “fait accompli.” It’s not respect or tolerance or acceptance. They wanted her wearing the veil as a sign of submission and humiliation. She did not let them score that point. Her words: “the headscarf is a symbol of a woman’s submission. I’m not putting it on.”"
If you believe non Muslim women shouldn't be forced to wear hijabs, you're a far right extremist
Fall from grace - "Fifty years ago Erin Pizzey answered the call of the sprouting global Women’s Liberation Movement. Inspired by the notion of “women coming together for a greater good”, the young London mother sent in her membership fee. Full of anticipation, Pizzey attended her first group meeting only to see her hopes crushed: “There were posters of women waving guns on the walls and posters of Mao,” she recalled. “Communism was not what I expected or wished for, so I was upset from the start.”... Erin Pizzey became the destitute’s hero, but fellow feminists resented her ways. “My personal experience of an abusive childhood and my work with the women taught me that domestic violence is not a gender issue,” explained Pizzey. “I learned that both men and women are abusive, but this did not agree with women’s groups who were pushing the oppressive-patriarchy narrative. “I did a study of the first hundred women that came into the refuge,” Pizzey recalled. “My conclusion was that 62 were as violent, even more violent than the men they left. I wrote the book Prone to Violence about my therapeutic work with violent women and their children, where I spoke of women as perpetrators of violence. That book changed everything. The people involved with the refuge said to me, ‘You can’t write a book about women being violent or else you won’t get any funds’ to which I replied, ‘That’s not the point — the point is the children.’” The discord culminated at a 1974 church meeting where Pizzey was ousted by the movement she had founded. “We held a conference in our little church hall, asking other groups to come and join us so that we could share what we’ve all been learning. In came group after group after group of highly organised feminists, who converted themselves into the National Federation of Women’s Aid and took over refuges everywhere. At the church meeting I realised that we were going to be erased,” said Pizzey with marked sadness. “I was cancelled and to this day, fifty years later, I am still airbrushed from their history books.” The pain of rejection might be eased by the deep gratitude of the many women and grown-up children who contact Pizzey with thanks for the safety and the security they felt at the refuge. “But still, it is hard to feel like a hero when all your work has been destroyed and discredited.”... “The feminists did celebrate in the House of Lords with a huge number of attendees and star studded names,” replied Pizzey. “They celebrated because in 1974 they invaded the little conference and voted themselves into The Women’s Aid Federation. They were welcomed with open arms at the time by the Department of Health and Social Security, partly because most of them were feminists anyway.” Pizzey was excluded because she rejected what she views as “the false consensus of men as the batterers and women always being on the receiving end”. She was cancelled because she asserted that “domestic abuse is not a gendered issue and that both women and men are abusive”. Pizzey was “airbrushed away” as she calls it, because she committed the ultimate sin in the feminist book — she empathised with men. “Your cancellation brings to mind Warren Farrell, Bettina Arndt and Jordan Peterson who were castigated for highlighting men’s issues,” I told Pizzey. “You are right,” she replied, pointing out that Farrell was the darling of the American NOW (National Organisation of Women) until he began to talk about men’s roles. “To these groups man is the enemy and the patriarchal oppressor,” added Pizzey, “and here lies the difference — they hinge domestic violence on ‘the patriarchy’ where I see it as a human issue; they avoid mixing with men where I made it a point to always have kind, ‘normal’ men at the refuges, as positive male role models for the children.” Pizzey points to “this poisonous ‘patriarchy’” narrative starting in 1969 when the Women’s Liberation Movement came to England. “It was hugely fashionable to call yourself a feminist, after all, we were all told that this is equity feminism and of course we agreed with it; men agreed with equal rights for women too but what they didn’t know was that this was in fact a Trojan horse — from that point on, it was ‘man is the enemy’ which led to the breakup of the family. “These feminists wanted a movement where women could hear each other’s voices, but like so many good intentions, it was taken over and became a weapon against men and fathers — when people look back historically, they’ll see the last 50 years as the Dark Ages.” Therapy is key to breaking the cycle of abuse: “You can talk to a woman who has been born into a war between her parents, and has become violent, and tell her ‘look, these are strategies you learned as a child to survive in a very dangerous environment, but there are other ways of dealing with stress and frustration other than going straight from stress to rage’. That’s the work I did in the refuge but unfortunately, it was hijacked by the feminists, who at that point were looking for a just cause and funding — the refuge idea fell into their lap.”"
We are still told that feminism benefits men and that feminists care about men
Meme - "Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1: This is almost funny coming from the Green Party deputy leader, pictured here with his wife. *wife in niqab*
Mothin Ali @MothinAli: So proud of Sarah for calling out the reform candidate for Makerfield for his abusive misogynistic attitude!"

Links - 28th July 2026 (2)

2026-07-28T17:39:00.000+08:00

Chow resorts to fear campaign to bring back speed camera cash grab | Toronto Sun - "Can we talk about that report to Toronto City Hall that Mayor Olivia Chow used to claim that speeding was out of control. The report, and the way the data is presented, is dodgy at best, relying only on percentages without also presenting the hard numbers. What’s worse is how Chow is presenting this as a matter of life and death — you support speed cameras or people dying at the hands of out-of-control motorists... The report compared data from locations around the city looking at the speed vehicles were travelling at before and after the speed camera shutdown. They examined 13 locations where the speed limit was 30km/h, 53 locations where the speed limit was 40 km/h, and 38 where the speed limit was 50 km/h. “Across 104 locations with comparable before-and-after data, the average 85th percentile operating speed increased by 4.8 km/h,” the report read. Wait? Chow said people were driving like it was a highway, but the average increase was less than 5 km/h. Meaning that in a 30 zone, people who were speeding were doing on average 35 km/h. You can do the math on the other zones. So how do we arrive at the idea, widely reported by the media following this story, that there is a 410% increase in big speeding following the removal of speed cameras? Of the 13 locations where the speed limit is 30 km/h and the city was able to compare before and after data, they found that when speed cameras were active, just 1.4% of all drivers were clocked at speeds 16 km/h or higher than the limit. After the speed cameras were taken out, the city says the percentage of drivers clocked at 16 km/h or over jumped to 7.2%. The city calculates the increase from 1.4% of drivers to 7.2% of drivers to be a 410% increase and uses that to scare people. For zones with 50 km/h as the speed limit, Chow says the increase in those going fast is a 480% increase. The actual percentage of drivers going 16 km/h over or more in those zones went from 0.5% to 2.9% and she pulls out the 480% increase figure to scare people... The mayor pushed back on the call by Premier Doug Ford to install more speed bumps by saying ambulances and fire trucks can’t safely navigate those traffic calming features. That might be a serious argument if Chow didn’t support bike lanes reducing response times for emergency vehicles in areas bike lanes shouldn’t be in just because she likes more bike lanes. As for the claim that dropping speed cameras causes more deaths, the city’s own report shows that’s not true. During the period of this study from December 2025 until May 2026, there were 25 fatal collisions and 25 deaths in areas where speed cameras once operated. The report also shows that from December 2021 until May 2022, those same speed camera zones saw 25 fatal collisions and 27 deaths... The entire problem with the way the speed camera operations were set up in Toronto, in Brampton, in Ottawa or Mississauga, is that it was a cash grab. Any safety considerations were secondary to the amount of money municipalities could collect. Money and not safety is why they set them up and money and not safety is why Chow is fighting to bring them back."
Left wingers hate cars and love taxes. The municipalities admitted it was a cash grab too, so
Meme - "Bookstores feel like they come from a parallel reality these days.
>Step inside
>Top 40 dance music blasting
>Instantly assaulted by multiple stands for books with covers featuring garish colour combinations and huge bold simple fonts.
>They are all best sellers with 75 awards each from prestigious literary institutions that were established 3 weeks ago
>They all have trite, nonsensical, pseudo-poetic titles like 'All The Fire That We Hold Tomorrow'
>The authors all have vaguely African or Indian last names, or are Sarah J. Maas.
>Every book is covered in reviews claiming it is 'brave', 'timely', 'a pertinent reminder', or 'necessary'
>Another stand is full of books promising me how to Un-F*CK YOUR FINANCES or beat Anxiety with Keto.
>A giant poster for a deeply moving celebrity autobiography hangs from the ceiling
>Trip over a stack of books from 2017 about Trump gathering dust in the corner
>Return a week later to find a whole new suite of books, authors, and awards have been randomly generated and placed on display.
Do not buy from these homosexual locations!"
The UN is being used as a weapon against the West - spiked - "
Meme - Andy Riley: "It's taken me ages to realise, but if Frodo had led a chicken along on a bit of string, I and made the chicken carry the ring all the way, no risk of Frodo turning evil. Sure the chicken might turn nasty but realistically how much damage to middle earth can one evil chicken cause"
Jacob Kolman: "The exact logic elves and wizards used when they let a hobbit carry it"
Meme - "Happy June teeth to all who celebrate"
"The ROSENBERGS DIE TONIGHT"
Keywords: Happy Juneteenth to all who celebrate
Reasonable Blackman: Wikipedia Page for a Non-Existent Historical Figure - "There are markets in historical knowledge, as in all things. When the market wanted “great men",” historians discovered great men. When the market wanted “pioneering women,” historians discovered pioneering women. For the past few years, we have seen high demand for “people of color” who lived in pre-modern Europe. But the supply is very, very low. Under such conditions, can you blame academics for creating new supply? It’s what the people want. Well, I blame them... I doubt the article, published in the journal Shakespeare in 2015, made an enormous splash. The Reasonable Blackman Wikipedia page wasn’t created until 2019. What changed? Well, the times changed. The market for knowledge changed. And a more prominent book took up the argument: Miranda Kaufmann’s Black Tudors, of 2017. Kaufmann, as best I can tell, was the first to call our guy by the highly memorable “Reasonable Blackman.” Salkeld later cited to personal correspondence in which Kaufmann defended her choice as “the most modern composite of the variations in which he is recorded.” Read: it’s the catchiest. Don’t just make your product. Market it... Reasonable Blackman was not a Black man. He wasn’t even a Blackman. He was an English silk weaver named Reasonable Blackmore. He left almost no trace in the records. That wasn’t because he was a “blackmoor.” It’s because almost no one left more than a trace on the records."
How ignorant. Doesn't he know that "these isles were black before they were British"?!
Meme - Abu Yusuf Al-Hanbali: "Muslims should not have any affinity, loyalty or allegiance to secular politicians, be they Muslim (oxymoron) or non-Muslim. Muslims should have a strong disgust towards secularism, for it separates Allah from politics."
Lisa Reid: "So, this is a public admission that Islam is POLITICAL! Allah is not separate from politics meaning Islamic Sharia Law. Thank you for your honesty!"
Time to arrest Abu Yusuf Al-Hanbali for promoting Islamophobic stereotypes about Islam being inherently political and incompatible with secularism!
BBC's "Children in Need" Charity Funded Terrorists - Business Insider - "Oops! In what the BBC's calling "a rare allegation," its Children in Need charity accidentally supported the propaganda efforts of the Islamic terrorists who bombed the London transit system on July 7, 2005. The charity donated 20,000 pounds (or roughly $40,000) to a school that also subsidized an Islamic bookshop where two of the suicide bombers regularly met. The terrorists also used their location to try to indoctrinate nearby school children."
Meme - Brianna Lee: "Happy Father's Day to the best there is <# I couldn't ask for a better father to my boys :) Cheavez Clapp"
WFMY News 2: "Cheavez Clapp has been charged with first-degree murder in the death of 28-year-old Brianna Laray Lee."
‘Mexican Batman’ tapes men to lamp posts - "A vigilante has been nicknamed Mexico’s “Batman” after hunting down bike thieves and taping them to lamp posts. Police in the western state of Jalisco are searching for a suspect after at least five men were bound to poles with “ratero”, Spanish for “thief”, written on their foreheads. Some also had cat whiskers and moustaches drawn on their faces, while others had their mouths taped shut... The person responsible was nicknamed the “Batman of Lagos de Moreno” by Luis Cardenes, a prominent journalist. Local media reported the man, whose identity is not known, became frustrated with what he called inadequate law enforcement and decided to take matters into his own hands, like the fictional comic book character... Mexico has long struggled with high levels of violent crime, with more than 36,000 violent carjackings recorded nationwide in 2023 alone."
Thief told police: ‘You’re lucky I’m not grooming girls’ - "Judge Christopher Hehir jailed Stanbury for three years and four months at Southwark Crown Court, saying may die in prison if he did not give up drugs. “Ultimately, the only person who can truly help you is you,” he told him. “No one puts a gun to your head and forces you to take heroin or other drugs, and no one puts a gun to your head and forces you to go out burgling. “You have a choice – go on wasting more of your life in prison and possibly dying in prison, or take a step back, look in the mirror and resolve to change your ways.” The judge said Stanbury was “confrontational” with those trying to help him, and that past efforts to avoid prison in favour of rehabilitation “simply have not worked”. He added: “Your tendency is to blame others for your misfortunes, rather than asking yourself whether you might be to blame.” The court heard Stanbury had 50 previous convictions, stretching back more than 30 years and covering 140 offences, with the “vast majority” for non-dwelling burglaries... After his arrest four days later, Stanbury replied “so what?” when confronted over his breach of the criminal behaviour order, the court heard. The prosecutor added that Stanbury also insisted he was “not some druggy”, but took heroin to “calm himself down”."
How ignorant. Doesn't the judge know that as a minority, Stanbury is a victim of racism and colonialism and so not responsible for his actions?
The pointless world of Unesco - "So what has gone wrong for Unesco’s heritage filter? As is often the case with large multinational organisations, there isn’t exactly a single cause. But the fact that Unesco relies on voluntary contributions from its member countries to pay its 2,000 or so staff plays a role. After all, if you’re dependent on national governments to pay the bills, you want to make sure they’re getting some kind of recognition in return."Unesco - "So what has gone wrong for Unesco’s heritage filter? As is often the case with large multinational organisations, there isn’t exactly a single cause. But the fact that Unesco relies on voluntary contributions from its member countries to pay its 2,000 or so staff plays a role. After all, if you’re dependent on national governments to pay the bills, you want to make sure they’re getting some kind of recognition in return."
Meme - "Tucker Carlson: "I just love George Galloway" Galloway is a socialist who has been an open apologist for every terrorist groups and murderous dictator (going back to Saddam Hussein) in the last 40 years. How can anyone still pretend this demagogue Marxist bigot is on the right?"
"Tucker Carlson to Sky News: The UK does not have a democracy. George Galloway would be the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom if you had a democracy."
Meme - Zach Schieffer: "My little cousin had career day at school a while back. Most kids put astronaut, firefighter, or pro athlete. Couldn't be prouder."
"Career Day: When I Grow Up
When I grow up, I want to be a... Life cycle & CRM Retention Specialist
Why do you want this job? because the money is in the back end not the first purchace
What will you do at this job? Segment the list so we dont email everyone the same build the welcom flow and the abandond cart increes the LTV and lower the churn
Draw yourself at work: Me at 2am sending the campane *sleepy stick figure and phone*"
Meme - Johan Christian Sollid @sollidnuclear: "Everyone dunking on French nuclear this week while the big red rectangle just sits there doing its job"
"Public net electricity generation in France in week 26 2026
Solar *highly variable*
Nuclear *very constant with barely a blip*
Wind offshore *highly variable*
Wind onshore *highly variable*"
AtomicAstrid @AtomicAstrid: "Just an insane amount of headlines due to a tiny tiny dip - people want nuclear to be intermittent, they like it when they get this confirmation"
Standing desks could be bad for your health - "A new study from Australia involving over 83,000 participants has found that prolonged standing may not improve heart health and could even increase the risk of certain circulatory problems. Researchers discovered that standing for extended periods did not reduce the risk of heart disease and stroke. In fact, spending too much time either sitting or standing was linked to a higher risk of problems such as varicose veins and feeling dizzy or light-headed when you stand up... Much of the enthusiasm was based on limited studies that didn’t comprehensively assess long-term health consequences. This gap in knowledge prompted researchers to investigate further. In the new study, participants wore devices to track their sitting, standing and physical activity over several years. This objective measurement provided accurate data, reducing the inaccuracies often found in self-reported information. The researchers found that sitting for more than 10 hours a day was associated with a higher risk of heart disease and stroke. However, simply standing more did not mitigate this risk. In fact, standing for extended periods was linked to an increased risk of circulatory problems. Prolonged standing can cause blood to pool in the legs, leading to conditions such as varicose veins. The study’s large sample size and use of objective data strengthen the reliability of these findings. However, as an observational study, it cannot definitively establish cause and effect. Also, the average age of participants was around 61, which may limit how these results apply to younger people. These findings suggest that simply swopping sitting for standing isn’t a perfect solution. Our bodies respond better to regular movement rather than static positions, whether that’s sitting or standing. Incorporating short walks, stretching or light exercises throughout the day can interrupt long periods of inactivity and offer significant health benefits. Workplace interventions promoting movement have shown promise. Researchers found that office workers who reduced their sitting time by adding periods of standing and light activity saw improvements in blood sugar levels and other health markers. Another study indicated that alternating between sitting and standing, combined with brief walks, was more effective for health than standing alone."
MAHA Action on X - "The editors of the world's most prestigious medical journals are sounding the alarm, and nobody is listening. "We have peer reviewed, high impact editors in most of the journals that are the most high impact, saying that they don't believe what is being published in those journals is trustworthy anymore." "The BMJ, The Lancet, all of those editors have come out and said, we have a huge problem. We can't replicate this research and we actually don't even know who did the research." "Everywhere we've looked for corruption, we've found it." Emily Kaplan, co-founder of the Broken Science Initiative. @broken_science"
How ignorant. Why don't these dangerous far right extremists just Trust the Science?!
Christian Heiens 🏛 on X - "We dropped a nuclear bomb on Japan, twice, and 80 years later they light up their cities in our colors as a show of how much they love us. Meanwhile, we bailed half of Europe out, twice, and their governments take every last opportunity to signal how much they despise us."
TankieRepublic on X - "Europeans and Canzcucks online talk exactly like they’re Chinese allies, they legitimately don’t know americans are still contractually obligated to die for them"
Film Updates on X - "‘OBSESSION’ has grossed over $370M worldwide. It will surpass ‘SINNERS’ tomorrow to become the highest grossing live-action original film of the 2020s."
Kaguya’s Top Gal on X - "The no budget film made by a 20 something white guy beat the astroturfed Hollywood black revenge porn propaganda movie, that’s actually amazing"
Meme - remakingmanhood: "I can vote for progressive Dems. I can vote for centrist Denis. I can vote for Democratic socialists. God help me, I can vote for an AIPAC Dem if I'm forced to. Because I am a Democrat who understands what will happen if I fail to vote blue no matter who. Vote progressives in the primaries (it's working) vote blue no matter who in the general elections. Rinse and repeat. Seeing some "how we got here" messaging discipline showing up from some low follower accounts. This is how they do us. This is the fight AIPAC wants us to have."
"Vote blue, no matter who" - and left wingers call the other side a cult and Nazis while electing a Nazi and spreading Jewish influence conspiracy theories
Meme - Death reading book: "Yo, kid. Better tie your shoelaces."
Kid: "Is that how I'm going to die?"
Death reading Book of Death: "Um no, you're gonna die peacefully of old age."
Kid running off: "Awesome! I'm gonna go try heroin!"
"War and Peas"
Former Coronation Street actress stripped naked during drunken rampage in Scots pub - "Imogen Boorman, 52, terrified staff and customers at The Picture House in Montrose... Boorman stripped bare, drank from draught beer taps and sprayed a customer with the draught juice gun... [She] picked up a bottle of whisky and began drinking from it, before proceeding to remove her clothing. She continued drinking from the bar display and when a customer tried to intervene, she struck him on the face four times. Mr Hamilton continued: "The accused then removed all of her clothing, leaving her completely naked." He explained Boorman picked up a bottle of whisky and began rubbing herself in a sexual manner. Still nude, she lay on the bar and began drinking straight from the draught beer taps. While on the bar, she took the hands of the man she had hit and placed them on her naked breasts. He was eventually able to pull them away. Lying down on the bar, she began rubbing the man's groin, over his clothing, with her feet and then grabbed a draught juice gun and used it to spray him in the face. Boorman then left the bar area and went to the pub's dining section. There, she sexually assaulted the same man by dropping to her knees and trying to pull down his trousers "in a sexual manner". Four police officers arrived and given Boorman's state of undress, two female officers approached and attempted to clothe her. Drunken Boorman resisted their help and lashed out her arms at them violently. After she arrived at West Bell Street HQ in Dundee, she assaulted one of the constables and grabbed her arm, causing scratching and reddening."
Basil the Great on X - "🚨SHOCKING STORY: Two women from the Netherlands were lured to Pakistan by the son of a politician promising them investment opportunities They were kidnapped, gang raped, beaten before being told their organs would be sold if they did not find people to pay their ransom of $2 million They stole the equivalent of $17,000 dollars from the women before driving them through a local town During the drive they crashed their car allowing the women to escape The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs is aware of the case and dealing with it The two women are now being cared for by health professionals"
AngloFash on X - "As soon as I see the word ‘Pakistani’ I don’t read any further because I automatically know it’s about them raping someone."
The Hollywood Handle on X - "‘MINIONS’ director confirms no Minions worked for Hitler. (Via: @Polygon)"
Endymion on X - ">Minions director
>Confirms they never worked for Hitler
>Minions canonically work for villains
What did he mean by this?"
Emeka Amakeze on X - "A man ordered a bowl of beef noodles on a delivery for $30. When it arrived, he searched the entire bowl and found only one slice of beef. So, he called the restaurant to complain but the owner confidently replied, "Even if there’s only one slice, it’s still beef, right?" The man hung up. Then he went downstairs and bought half a pound of beef. He covered the whole bowl with beef, took a photo and posted it in the review section "So, satisfied. The restaurant has amazing service. They’re incredibly generous with the beef. Definitely the right choice." A few days later, the restaurant, started receiving tons of complaints. The platform removed them completely."
Listening to a new Torontonian's point of view. : r/toronto - "Today, I had a customer who traveled over two hours from downtown Toronto to my shop in Scarborough (near STC), all by transit. Now that the RT is gone, its quite a long ride. Him and his elderly parents, originally from Brazil, were in great spirits when they arrived. They've recently acquired their PR status and will be finally settling in Toronto soon. What struck me most was their perspective on the city—they spoke of Toronto with such admiration, seeing it as a place full of hope and well-functioning systems. They talked about the people and social networks and compared the city to Sau Paulo. The multiculturalism, the cleanliness and how much safer they feel. Growing up here, I've often heard about the city's challenges, but their words reminded me of its strengths and the optimism it can inspire. It was a powerful reminder that every place has its own magic and hope."
"It’s the same when people bitch about the TTC. Go to almost any other transit system in North America and you’ll wish it was half as good as the TTC. People who don’t travel really lose perspective on how great Toronto is."
Ironic. Canadians who tell others to travel to realise how good Canada has it think the world has only 2 (developed) countries: Canada and the US. Arrogance and complacency ftw

The Shoddy Efforts to Pin Political Violence on the Right (Fatal Problems with the ADL, CSIS and The Prosecution Project Studies blaming Political Violence on the Right)

2026-07-28T13:32:00.000+08:00

Nowrasteh's problems are dealt with in my other posts on left and right wing violence:
The Shoddy Efforts to Pin Political Violence on the Right
It turns out that if you count the Jan. 6 riots but not the Black Lives Matter riots, then the Right is infinitely more violent than the Left. If you don’t count racist black men mowing down a bunch of white people as a left-wing racist murder, but you do count a suicidal kid with President Donald Trump on his “hit list” killing two white strangers as a right-wing racist murder, then you can get results that appeal to the liberal media.

After a nihilistic left-wing extremist assassinated conservative activist Charlie Kirk for his political beliefs, liberals rushed to deny that left-wing political violence is a problem and claim that the real problem is right-wing domestic terrorism. At their disposal, Democrats in Congress and the media had multiple studies, supposedly proving that right-wingers are responsible for many times more political killings, attacks, and hate incidents than left-wingers and Islamists combined.

“Data isn’t vibes,” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) posted above a pair of pie charts showing that “right-wing extremists” are responsible for 80% of all “incidents” and 75% of all “killings,” and “left-wing extremists” are only to blame for a tiny sliver of the violence.

Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic responded to worries about left-wing violence by posting at conservatives, “Please do let actual facts get in the way of your conclusions about political violence.”

These liberals’ “actual facts” and “data” are two studies purporting to count and compare the extremist or political violence by the different sides.

“Between 2013 and 2022, right-wingers committed the vast majority of political murders,” said liberal columnist Eric Levitz of Vox. “If you actually care about political violence, you should not spread wild lies about it.”

Levitz and Omar cited the Anti-Defamation League, which has published studies on extremism for years. Filipovic cited a study by libertarian Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute. The Center for Strategic and International Studies published its own study, and a liberal academic study called “The Prosecution Project” asks similar questions.

The major news media cited all four studies and reported that they found exactly what reporters and commentators would want to find: conservatives are far more violent and murderous than liberals.

These quantitative studies are worthy of consideration because our memories of headlines can leave false impressions, especially in a day and age when media diets can be so siloed, either by choice or by default. But upon even light examination, the bold claims fall apart.

The first problem is that these studies do not show what the commentary on them claims. A deeper problem with these studies is their conceit of being objective data when they are really subjective research. What counts as “extremist violence” or “political violence” is a judgment call. Who is really motivated by ideology over madness is a judgment call. Some calls are easy. On the tough calls, most of these researchers seemed to err on the side that would support their ideological prior suppositions.

The studies fall prey to poor methodology and questionable judgment calls, and the media accounts of them are even worse.
The Authors

The Prosecution Project is the brainchild of University of Cincinnati assistant professor Michael Loadenthal, whose intellectual approach is helpful in interrogating the various studies touted these days.

The Economist and former CNN and Washington Post journalist Chris Cilizza rely on it. So does Bloomberg News, which cited the project as showing “Islamists and those on the political right to be the main culprits of U.S. terrorist attacks over the past three decades, with leftists accounting for a relatively small portion.”

Loadenthal is a left-wing academic (one of his papers is titled “Operation Splash Back!: Queering Animal Liberation Through the Contributions of Neo-Insurrectionist Queers“) who sees his job as inculcating a “decolonial framework” into his students’ thinking. “Queering the nation” is another way he describes his life’s work.

Notably, Loadenthal is explicitly pro-violence: In an article in the Peace Chronicle, the magazine of the Peace & Justice Studies Association, he notes that one of his central goals is “to advance the argument that violence as a response to colonialism is expected and just.”

That is, “emancipatory violence” — violence directed at oppressors — is good and just. (This, of course, is exactly the sort of mentality that could justify killing a political commentator and activist you hold to be a “fascist” or a bigot.)

The project is an exercise in critical theory, “countering dominant narratives,” to borrow a phrase from Loadenthal. The U.S. media and academia are controlled by the Left, and their dominant narrative, as we’ve seen in recent days, is that the Right is far more violent than the Left.

A critical approach involves examining the biases of those who craft the dominant narrative.

For the Prosecution Project, such an analysis is simple: This is the project of a radical-left academic who wants to justify left-wing violence.

The other projects are not so obviously biased, but the authors all lean left or at least closer to the Democratic Party than to the Republican Party. If we are to take Loadenthal’s scholarship seriously, we need to consider this bias as part of a critical reading of the studies.

The ADL is run by Jonathan Greenblatt, a former political appointee of former President Barack Obama. Under Greenblatt’s leadership, ADL has ventured far away from its purported aim of fighting antisemitism and has become more purely partisan and ideological. For instance, the organization petitioned the courts to force the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns, to violate its consciences and provide contraception coverage to its employees.

CSIS is much more centrist, including Democrats and Republicans in its leadership.

Nowrasteh is not a liberal but a libertarian who sometimes sides with the Right and sometimes with the Left. Because immigration is Nowrasteh’s main concern and because he describes himself as a globalist and elitist, he often ends up on the Democratic side of things in the era of Trump, an immigration restrictionist who rails against globalists and elitists.

Now to the substance and methods of those studies.
What Are They Actually Counting (and Ignoring)?

Levitz, posturing as something of a fact-checker, said ADL’s study showed “right-wingers committed the vast majority of political murders.” But the data he provided didn’t even try to make that claim.

If you read ADL’s methodology notes, the organization doesn’t claim to be tracking “political murders” as Levitz falsely claimed, but murders “by people associated with a variety of domestic extremist movements.”

That may sound like a thin distinction, but it really matters, especially on the ADL study. A “political murder” would be the assassination of Kirk. Murders “by people associated with a variety of domestic extremist movements” is a far larger category. If a KKK member murders his wife, that is a murder by a person associated with a domestic extremist movement.

It turns out that this sort of apolitical murder by extremist-associated people is a massive portion of the ADL’s study.

For instance, Aidan Ingalls was an obviously disturbed and suicidal boy who planned a school shooting and made a “hit list” of people he wanted to assassinate, including Trump. A few years later, Ingalls shot two random strangers — an elderly white couple on a pier.

ADL counted this as a “right-wing extremist” killing in the chart Levitz posted, because “police found swastikas and other white supremacist markings on the gun he used.” That’s obviously inapt, but it’s even more obviously not what Levitz called it: a right-wing “political murder.”

For another example, Jesse James Sullivan of New Hampshire in 2024 shot and killed his half-brother, who was white. Sullivan, during an earlier stint in prison, joined a prison gang.

Washington Post columnist Megan McArdle deconstructed ADL’s 2021 study and suggested that ADL overrepresented white supremacist killings. Violent criminals in prison have incentives to join gangs, often organized along racial lines. Those who join the white gangs are easily recognizable by the swastika tattoos they get. When they leave prison, every violent crime they commit now counts as “right-wing” violence in the ADL’s tally.

ADL includes plenty of “non-ideological” yet “extremist-associated” killings. It explained: “Extremists can also commit murders while engaging in non-ideological criminal activities ranging from home invasions to domestic violence. In some cases, extremists may commit a murder, the motive for which is never revealed. We include all these types of killings in this report.”

Half of the killings ADL has tracked over the past decade are nonideological, and those are disproportionately classified as “right-wing” killings.

There’s more reason to doubt ADL’s findings: It consistently tosses ambiguous cases in the right-wing pile.

One example: A Black man named Corey Cobb-Bey, who identifies as a Muslim, killed a policeman in 2024. ADL called this a right-wing ideological killing because his specific sect, the Moorish Science Temple, has “ties to the sovereign citizen movement.”

Just as important is who is not included.

Darrell Brooks was a black man and a budding rapper who drove a car into a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin, killing six people and injuring dozens. His Facebook profile showed he was racially motivated and a supporter of BLM. One post showed the middle-finger emoji and the words “The old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT.” Brooks posted anti-police content and made posts about white privilege.

Where did this BLM supporter murdering white people show up in ADL’s study? He didn’t. It simply never mentioned the mass killing in its 2021 report.

Audrey Hale, a 28-year-old woman who identifies as a man, went into a Christian school and killed six children. She railed against white privilege and chose her target — her former elementary school — in part because it was Christian. In her manifesto, she railed against parents whose “conservative religion” makes them reject gender transitions. She also railed against white people and “privilege.”

Hale’s crimes do not show up in ADL’s 2023 report. Brooks and Hale were obviously mentally ill, and so it’s fair to say theirs weren’t ideological or extremist crimes. But it’s hard to ignore a transgender shooter who railed against conservative Christian parents shooting up a Christian school, while you count a white kid who wanted to kill Trump killing two random white strangers as a white supremacist crime.

Yet that’s exactly the way the ADL study works.
A Clear Pattern

The four studies cited these days have different methodologies, all of which call into question their accuracy, even-handedness, or relevance to the question of right-wing political violence.

For instance, CSIS excluded violence at protests, but made an exception for that rule and included violence at the Charlottesville protests populated by white supremacists. Violence at BLM protests? Ignored. Violence at Proud Boy protests? Counted. Likewise, riots were generally excluded, with the exception of Jan. 6.

You get the pattern.

It turns out that if you count the Jan. 6 riots but not the Black Lives Matter riots, then the Right is infinitely more violent than the Left. If you don’t count racist black men mowing down a bunch of white people as a left-wing racist murder, but you do count a suicidal kid with President Donald Trump on his “hit list” killing two white strangers as a right-wing racist murder, then you can get results that appeal to the liberal media.

After a nihilistic left-wing extremist assassinated conservative activist Charlie Kirk for his political beliefs, liberals rushed to deny that left-wing political violence is a problem and claim that the real problem is right-wing domestic terrorism. At their disposal, Democrats in Congress and the media had multiple studies, supposedly proving that right-wingers are responsible for many times more political killings, attacks, and hate incidents than left-wingers and Islamists combined.

“Data isn’t vibes,” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) posted above a pair of pie charts showing that “right-wing extremists” are responsible for 80% of all “incidents” and 75% of all “killings,” and “left-wing extremists” are only to blame for a tiny sliver of the violence.

Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic responded to worries about left-wing violence by posting at conservatives, “Please do let actual facts get in the way of your conclusions about political violence.”

These liberals’ “actual facts” and “data” are two studies purporting to count and compare the extremist or political violence by the different sides.

“Between 2013 and 2022, right-wingers committed the vast majority of political murders,” said liberal columnist Eric Levitz of Vox. “If you actually care about political violence, you should not spread wild lies about it.”

Levitz and Omar cited the Anti-Defamation League, which has published studies on extremism for years. Filipovic cited a study by libertarian Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute. The Center for Strategic and International Studies published its own study, and a liberal academic study called “The Prosecution Project” asks similar questions.

The major news media cited all four studies and reported that they found exactly what reporters and commentators would want to find: conservatives are far more violent and murderous than liberals.

These quantitative studies are worthy of consideration because our memories of headlines can leave false impressions, especially in a day and age when media diets can be so siloed, either by choice or by default. But upon even light examination, the bold claims fall apart.

The first problem is that these studies do not show what the commentary on them claims. A deeper problem with these studies is their conceit of being objective data when they are really subjective research. What counts as “extremist violence” or “political violence” is a judgment call. Who is really motivated by ideology over madness is a judgment call. Some calls are easy. On the tough calls, most of these researchers seemed to err on the side that would support their ideological prior suppositions.

The studies fall prey to poor methodology and questionable judgment calls, and the media accounts of them are even worse.

The Authors

The Prosecution Project is the brainchild of University of Cincinnati assistant professor Michael Loadenthal, whose intellectual approach is helpful in interrogating the various studies touted these days.

The Economist and former CNN and Washington Post journalist Chris Cilizza rely on it. So does Bloomberg News, which cited the project as showing “Islamists and those on the political right to be the main culprits of U.S. terrorist attacks over the past three decades, with leftists accounting for a relatively small portion.”

Loadenthal is a left-wing academic (one of his papers is titled “Operation Splash Back!: Queering Animal Liberation Through the Contributions of Neo-Insurrectionist Queers“) who sees his job as inculcating a “decolonial framework” into his students’ thinking. “Queering the nation” is another way he describes his life’s work.

Notably, Loadenthal is explicitly pro-violence: In an article in the Peace Chronicle, the magazine of the Peace & Justice Studies Association, he notes that one of his central goals is “to advance the argument that violence as a response to colonialism is expected and just.”

That is, “emancipatory violence” — violence directed at oppressors — is good and just. (This, of course, is exactly the sort of mentality that could justify killing a political commentator and activist you hold to be a “fascist” or a bigot.)

The project is an exercise in critical theory, “countering dominant narratives,” to borrow a phrase from Loadenthal. The U.S. media and academia are controlled by the Left, and their dominant narrative, as we’ve seen in recent days, is that the Right is far more violent than the Left.

A critical approach involves examining the biases of those who craft the dominant narrative.

For the Prosecution Project, such an analysis is simple: This is the project of a radical-left academic who wants to justify left-wing violence.

The other projects are not so obviously biased, but the authors all lean left or at least closer to the Democratic Party than to the Republican Party. If we are to take Loadenthal’s scholarship seriously, we need to consider this bias as part of a critical reading of the studies.

The ADL is run by Jonathan Greenblatt, a former political appointee of former President Barack Obama. Under Greenblatt’s leadership, ADL has ventured far away from its purported aim of fighting antisemitism and has become more purely partisan and ideological. For instance, the organization petitioned the courts to force the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns, to violate its consciences and provide contraception coverage to its employees.

CSIS is much more centrist, including Democrats and Republicans in its leadership.

Nowrasteh is not a liberal but a libertarian who sometimes sides with the Right and sometimes with the Left. Because immigration is Nowrasteh’s main concern and because he describes himself as a globalist and elitist, he often ends up on the Democratic side of things in the era of Trump, an immigration restrictionist who rails against globalists and elitists.

Now to the substance and methods of those studies.

What Are They Actually Counting (and Ignoring)?

Levitz, posturing as something of a fact-checker, said ADL’s study showed “right-wingers committed the vast majority of political murders.” But the data he provided didn’t even try to make that claim.

If you read ADL’s methodology notes, the organization doesn’t claim to be tracking “political murders” as Levitz falsely claimed, but murders “by people associated with a variety of domestic extremist movements.”

That may sound like a thin distinction, but it really matters, especially on the ADL study. A “political murder” would be the assassination of Kirk. Murders “by people associated with a variety of domestic extremist movements” is a far larger category. If a KKK member murders his wife, that is a murder by a person associated with a domestic extremist movement.

It turns out that this sort of apolitical murder by extremist-associated people is a massive portion of the ADL’s study.

For instance, Aidan Ingalls was an obviously disturbed and suicidal boy who planned a school shooting and made a “hit list” of people he wanted to assassinate, including Trump. A few years later, Ingalls shot two random strangers — an elderly white couple on a pier.

ADL counted this as a “right-wing extremist” killing in the chart Levitz posted, because “police found swastikas and other white supremacist markings on the gun he used.” That’s obviously inapt, but it’s even more obviously not what Levitz called it: a right-wing “political murder.”

For another example, Jesse James Sullivan of New Hampshire in 2024 shot and killed his half-brother, who was white. Sullivan, during an earlier stint in prison, joined a prison gang.

Washington Post columnist Megan McArdle deconstructed ADL’s 2021 study and suggested that ADL overrepresented white supremacist killings. Violent criminals in prison have incentives to join gangs, often organized along racial lines. Those who join the white gangs are easily recognizable by the swastika tattoos they get. When they leave prison, every violent crime they commit now counts as “right-wing” violence in the ADL’s tally.

ADL includes plenty of “non-ideological” yet “extremist-associated” killings. It explained: “Extremists can also commit murders while engaging in non-ideological criminal activities ranging from home invasions to domestic violence. In some cases, extremists may commit a murder, the motive for which is never revealed. We include all these types of killings in this report.”

Half of the killings ADL has tracked over the past decade are nonideological, and those are disproportionately classified as “right-wing” killings.

There’s more reason to doubt ADL’s findings: It consistently tosses ambiguous cases in the right-wing pile.

One example: A Black man named Corey Cobb-Bey, who identifies as a Muslim, killed a policeman in 2024. ADL called this a right-wing ideological killing because his specific sect, the Moorish Science Temple, has “ties to the sovereign citizen movement.”

Just as important is who is not included.

Darrell Brooks was a black man and a budding rapper who drove a car into a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin, killing six people and injuring dozens. His Facebook profile showed he was racially motivated and a supporter of BLM. One post showed the middle-finger emoji and the words “The old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT.” Brooks posted anti-police content and made posts about white privilege.

Where did this BLM supporter murdering white people show up in ADL’s study? He didn’t. It simply never mentioned the mass killing in its 2021 report.

Audrey Hale, a 28-year-old woman who identifies as a man, went into a Christian school and killed six children. She railed against white privilege and chose her target — her former elementary school — in part because it was Christian. In her manifesto, she railed against parents whose “conservative religion” makes them reject gender transitions. She also railed against white people and “privilege.”

Hale’s crimes do not show up in ADL’s 2023 report. Brooks and Hale were obviously mentally ill, and so it’s fair to say theirs weren’t ideological or extremist crimes. But it’s hard to ignore a transgender shooter who railed against conservative Christian parents shooting up a Christian school, while you count a white kid who wanted to kill Trump killing two random white strangers as a white supremacist crime.

Yet that’s exactly the way the ADL study works.

A Clear Pattern

The four studies cited these days have different methodologies, all of which call into question their accuracy, even-handedness, or relevance to the question of right-wing political violence.

For instance, CSIS excluded violence at protests, but made an exception for that rule and included violence at the Charlottesville protests populated by white supremacists. Violence at BLM protests? Ignored. Violence at Proud Boy protests? Counted. Likewise, riots were generally excluded, with the exception of Jan. 6.

You get the pattern.
Likewise, the TPP study excluded obvious examples of left-wing violence, including when BLM protesters torched the Minneapolis Police Department.
Nowrasteh’s study is sounder, mostly because he admits the inherent subjectivity of the judgment calls and the fuzzy borders around what counts as a terrorist killing.

“The motivated reader can slice and dice these numbers in different ways, count marginal hate crimes as politically motivated terrorist attacks, assign different ideological motivations to the individual attacker,” Nowrasteh notes. His most important conclusion is this: “The number of deaths in politically motivated terrorist attacks is so tiny that any statistical analysis is extremely fragile.”

This is a sound retort to those who paint Kirk’s assassination as part of a tide of rising left-wing political violence. On the other hand, Nowrasteh looks only at killings, leaving open the interpretation that this assassination is the culmination of a rising tide of left-wing violence: From desecrating churches and destroying pro-life crisis pregnancy centers to an aborted plot to assassinate conservative justices in order to save Roe v. Wade, eventually the “anti-hate” culture war on the left led to this.

What Nowrasteh clearly didn’t show is a plague of right-wing political violence.

Democrats and the liberal media have long had a self-image of data-grounded, “reality-based,” believers in “The Science.” Thus, it’s gratifying to them to wave studies and pie charts proving the other side is a bunch of terrorists. But those studies don’t show what the liberals would want them to show.

Links - 28th July 2026 (1 - Palestine/Middle East Peace)

2026-07-28T09:28:00.000+08:00

No Jews Allowed—Again - "Take the bookstore in Flensburg, Germany. In September 2025, its owner put a sign in its window reading: “JEWS are banned from here!!!! Nothing personal. Not even antisemitism. I just can’t stand you.” When asked about his new policy, the owner proudly told journalists that his Jewish ban was a natural reaction to Israel’s supposed crimes in Gaza. Examples of Jews being banned from restaurants and bars in 2025 are almost too numerous to count. In Naples an Israeli couple was kicked out of a restaurant after the owner heard them talking about Israel: “Zionists are not welcome here,” he declared. Far from being embarrassed, the restaurant owner proudly defended his actions as a stand for Palestinian rights. Three British Jewish couples were called baby-killers expelled from a taverna in the Greek island of Naxos after the owner realized they were Jews. In Vigo, Spain, several Israelis were kicked out of a bar while the manager screamed “you kill people then you go on vacation - get out of here.” Israeli cellist Amit Peled and two friends were told to leave a restaurant in Vienna after a waiter overheard them speaking Hebrew together. The owner of a restaurant in Thailand posted a video of himself shouting “Free Palestine!” and ordering a group of Israeli customers to leave. In Oakland, California, a coffee shop refused to serve customers who looked visibly Jewish on at least two ocassions. The House of Blues in Chicago cancelled a concert by the American Jewish singer Matisyahu last year over vaguely-defined “safety concerns.” It was thought that the presence of a proudly Jewish singer might offend people and spark violence - so Matisyahu was silenced instead. Venues in Santa Fe and Tucson also claimed the Jewish singer was too dangerous to host."
One cope is that many of these are about banning Israelis, so that proves none of this is anti-Semitism. Ironically, left wingers used to oppose discrimination based on country of origin and they still claim that "people's existence cannot be political" when ramming through whatever trans laws and policies they demand
Israeli children refused access to leisure park in southern France - "The manager of a leisure park in southern France has been detained for alleged religious discrimination after a group of Israeli children were refused access. The children, aged eight to 16, were on holiday in Spain and had made a reservation for Thursday to use the Tyrovol zipline adventure park in Porté-Puymorens... The French prosecutor’s office said the manager initially told some people he was refusing the group access on the grounds of “personal beliefs” before offering different explanations to others... “A line was crossed. We are appalled,” said Perla Danan, president of the Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions in the Languedoc-Roussillon region. “It started with graffiti, insults and physical attacks and now it’s literally a ban on children aged eight to 16,” Danan said, adding that it reminded her of the “no Jews or dogs allowed” sign during the Holocaust. “France’s values have been violated,” she said. Jean-Philippe Augé, the mayor of Porté-Puymorens, which has about 100 residents, said “the DNA of our community is based on a sense of sharing and fraternity”. He added that the incident had caused “utter astonishment” in the village. The Jewish Observatory of France also expressed “deep outrage” in a statement on Friday. “Such an act of discrimination, targeting minors exclusively on the basis of their nationality and origin, is extremely serious and undermines the fundamental principles of the republic.” Discrimination based on religion is an offence punishable by up to three years in prison in France. There was a sharp increase in antisemitic incidents reported in 2023 after the 7 October Hamas attacks in Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. These included physical assaults, threats, vandalism and harassment, prompting alarm among Jewish communities and leaders. This month Emmanuel Macron promised to punish an act of “antisemitic hatred” after the felling of an olive tree planted in memory of a young French Jewish man who was tortured to death in 2006."
No hotel room for Jews? Investigators probe antisemitism case in Bavaria - "An Israeli traveller tried to book a hotel in Bavaria but was turned away. The reason given, according to a screenshot circulating on social media: they were being refused because of their Jewish background... "A hotel replied to an Israeli as follows: 'Sorry, there are no Jews allowed in our hotel'," wrote Talya Lador"
Marc Gordon - "EVERYONE IS WELCOME BUT YOU.
A coffee shop in New York, upon hearing that a Jewish congressman had stopped by for a coffee, posted the following to their Instagram account. "Hey Congressman Dan Goldman, we see that you stopped by our shop today for a coffee. Do you see how it doesn't taste like genocide juice? Or are you still having a hard time telling the difference? We don't serve racists, fascists, homophobes, genocide enablers, or anyone in between. Don't ever come to Poetica.” Aside from whatever your personal views on geopolitics might be, I would like to share three important pieces of advice for any business owner who read that quote and thought to themselves “I would have done the same.” First, your business should not be a platform for your ideologies and world views. Unless you want to cheer for your local sports team or honour a national holiday, keep quiet. Your business should be a safe haven for everyone regardless of their religion, gender, or the colour of their skin. When you call out a specific group, you are letting every other group know anyone who doesn’t align with your views is not welcome. This is not just bad for business but can ruin your relationship with your existing customers and community. Second, the internet never forgets. Poetica Coffee deleted the post before taking down their Instagram account as it became flooded with angry comments. But it’s too late. Their comments will live forever in news, social media, and blog posts. I can’t believe I still have to say this in 2026, but businesses should not treat their social media accounts as dinner at home with close friends. The world will hear you and know who you are. Unless you’re prepared to stand by your posts regardless of the consequences, put your phone down and keep your opinions to yourself. Third, don’t hide behind marketing. The Poetica Coffee website says “Mehmon, the Uzbek concept of the sacred guest, means that whoever walks through the door is treated with unconditional dignity. Not as a customer. Not as a transaction. As someone who arrived and deserves to be welcomed.” However, their actions demonstrate they believe the exact opposite. Create authentic marketing by making it a reflection of who you are – not what you think others want you to be. (Especially if you’re blatantly racist.) If you’re in New York, I would suggest visiting Russ & Daughters. They’ve been making everyone feel welcome for over 100 years."
Ahmed pak 🇵🇰 on X - "On June 4th 1967, I was a Jordanian. On June 5th 1967, I became a Palestinian. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum. We were Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then, all of a sudden, we were Palestinians. We removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag. When I finally realised the lies and myths I was taught, I felt it was my duty as a righteous person to speak out. Walid Shoebat Former Muslim and PLO Terrorist."
Quetzal Writes 🇺🇲| 🇬🇹 on X - "I was once at a bar in Berkeley and Palestine came up because of course it did. Stated my views and the girl who brought it up kept getting flustered. Telling me she is Jewish and if *she* thinks Israel shouldn't exist, why should I? She was genuinely flabbergasted when I told her that to me, this was simply geopolitics. There is no benefit to Hamas leadership for the West and that I have no sympathy for guerilla terrorism, all of which had nothing to do with her ancestry. She kept repeating that she's Jewish and I almost felt bad for her. Like I could tell this was her big reveal, her trump card in these conversations, unused to not seeing someone back down because she was on the verge of tears. Was a very bizarre experience."
Left wingers love demonising and silencing women who are pro-choice and right wing black people too
Dr. Maalouf ‏ on X - "After losing World War II, Germany lost 25% of all its territory and 14 million Germans were ethnically cleansed from Eastern Europe. And yet, there hasn’t been a single case of Germans hijacking planes, blowing themselves up, or committing terrorist attacks like Palestinians."
Olivia Reingold on X - "Some of the loudest voices against Israel are Jews. A study of one of them: Catherine Bock, a Jewish Voice for Peace member, I recently met while reporting in Vermont. She told me her parents were Holocaust survivors—then said that they were both Christian. The Nazis had discovered that her “great-grandparents or somebody” was Jewish through old church records, she said. She added that no one in her family was raised Jewish. And yet, she has introduced herself as a Jew before the Burlington City Council. Why? “Because they listen more,” she responded flatly. “I say, okay, my parents are Holocaust survivors. And I think they listen better.” She said that people whose grandparents were lucky enough to have been born in the U.S. are often the ones “screaming anti-Semitism.” “They haven't had any Holocaust experience. And I have. And yet, I don't feel at all traumatized by it.” In the past few years, she told me she had joined a Burlington synagogue because she “wanted a fob” for easier access to the building, where she bakes bread once a month. When speaking with the rabbi, she said she told him her story—to which he replied: “that’s Jewish enough.” She turned to me, stunned. “I’m feeling like that is a pretty prejudiced type of way. Because if I hadn't had that story, if I'd just been me, I don't look Jewish, I don't know a thing about Judaism, I would have had to get educated, learn Judaism, and convert.” In short: she found it “prejudiced” that some people are considered Jewish and others are not. That reflects a striking misunderstanding of Jewish identity—and of how religious belonging generally works. Next time you encounter a Jewish Voice for Peace activist, remember Catherine."
MEMRI on X - "Linda Sarsour at NYC DSA Rally: We’re Cleaning Up Congress; Candidates Standing Unequivocally for a Free Palestine Are Winning Elections Across America; NY State Senate Candidate Aber Kawas: The People in Queens Want a Free Palestine"
Jeb Fain on X - "The singular obsession many leftists have with Israel/Palestine is a legitimate mental illness at this point. It’s definitely not creepy to be exclusively focused on one global conflict (that just happens to involve Jews) halfway around the globe while running for state senate."
Heidi Bachram on X - "Irish author Sally Rooney gave a speech last night blaming Israel for the rise of fascism and the far right in Europe and concluding that the “liberation of Palestine represents the liberation of the world”. How very 1930s Europe of her to blame the Jews for everything."
Corrected Media on X - "In June, 1964, an Egyptian opportunist on the payroll of the Muslim Brotherhood held up a Jordanian flag with the star removed, and so began 3,000 years of ‘Palestinian history’."
Meme - Jonathan Eric Lewis @LewisJonathanE: "Let me get this straight. Ireland provides refuge to a Palestinian from Gaza, who gets feted in the corridors of power and he then uses his newfound privilege to harass Jewish-owned restaurants in Dublin, launching an online campaign against their businesses. And the "pro-Palestinian" movement in Ireland is cool with this? But don't you dare say that Ireland has an antisemitism problem"
Abubaker Abed @AbubakerAbedW: "I hope people across the world organise a campaign against any pro-Israel, pro-genocide businesses. Visit or at least review the place 1 on Google to destroy them and then leave negative comments. This is very effective and helpful. It can really hit them so hard. Start now!"
Meme - Max @MaxNordau: "The Jews turned the Land of Israel from a backwater into a livable place. Their prosperity led to the immigration of 500,000 Arabs, who then tried to genocide them in 1948. Biggest. Mistake. Ever."
"The Jews point with pride to the fact that over 500,000 Arabs, in the 12 years between 1932 and 1944, came into Palestine to take advantage of living conditions existing in no other Arab state. This is the only country in the Near and Middle East where an Arab middle class is in existence. - ROBERT F. KENNEDY. The Boston Past, 1948"
Meme - Muslim: "We have a religious right to kill you and take the land you live on!"
Jew: "sounds like I have a right to kill you in self defense"
Muslim: "nooo! that's genocide! ethnic cleansing! u only wanna kill Palestinians to take their land in the name of religion!!"
Dr. Sabreena Ghaffar-Siddiqui on X - "I honestly don’t care how Palestinians resist their own annihilation. A Palestinian father could wrap himself in a bomb vest and jump into a crowd of violent Israeli “settlers” and I wouldn’t condemn him. I’d call him a heroic man. Because I know that if a rabid mob forced themselves into my home after destroying everything and everyone else dear to me already, and tried to murder my children the way they murdered all the other children in the town, I’d protect them by ANY means necessary. I don’t care if they have a Star of David tattooed on their neck or a Nazi flag."
The same people who claim Israel must respond "proportionately" whenever its attacked give a blank cheque to Palestinians and terrorism supporters to kill as many Israelis and Jews as they want
Mahathir Said Singapore Shouldn't Exist. Anti-Zionists Say the Same About Israel. - "In 2022, former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad suggested Malaysia “should demand not just that Pedra Branca, or Pulau Batu Puteh, be given back to us, we should also demand Singapore as well as the Riau Islands, as they are Tanah Melayu (Malay land)”. While he walked it back, most Singaporeans do not need a lecture to understand why that is profoundly offensive. Singapore’s own existence, of course, is a product of colonial boundary-drawing, a territorial carve-out from a British empire that no longer exists. The insult suggested that Singapore’s existence as a sovereign nation is somehow conditional. It implies that the country we belong to is not really ours, and that others may dismiss our nationhood as a historical mistake to be undone. Imagine someone saying: “I have nothing against Singaporeans. I respect them as a people. I just don’t believe Singapore should exist as a sovereign state. It really belongs to Malaysia.“ Few Singaporeans would regard that as a neutral distinction. Instead, we would immediately understand that denying a nation’s right to exist is a denial of our legitimacy as a people... Israel’s history is obviously very different from Singapore’s. But the underlying principle is the same: we cannot neatly separate a people’s dignity from their right to exist politically... Britain, far from sponsoring Jewish settlement, actively restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine after 1939, including the survivors of the Holocaust. The accusation of being an imperialist or colonial power seeks to exploit anti-colonial sentiment, but is ultimately maladapted. Further, that it is applied selectively to Jewish nationalism while Palestinian nationalism is treated as self-evidently legitimate is, again, an asymmetry that demands explanation. The problem goes beyond anti-Zionism. Too often, we do not just import foreign conflicts; we import the language that comes with them, dividing the world too quickly into oppressors and oppressed before we have seriously weighed the facts... There is one further irony worth naming. Anti-Zionists invoke the displacement of earlier people groups and colonial boundary-drawing to deny Israel’s legitimacy. Yet nobody questions the borders of Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, most of the modern Middle East, and yes, even Singapore – borders drawn by Britain and France less than a century ago. Neither are tears shed for those displaced by the Ottoman Empire, or the Empires preceding, nor for the Bugis and Orang Laut of Singapore. Consider harder, more egregious cases: the displacement of the natives of Canada, USA, Australia and New Zealand. Nobody demands the dissolution of any of these states on those grounds... What begins as opposition to “Zionism” often becomes hostility toward “Zionists.” And before long, “Zionist” becomes a label used broadly enough to morally indict Jews as a whole... The consistency test is available to anyone willing to apply it. If you have advocated for Kurdish statehood, marched for Tibetan autonomy, or insisted on Palestinian self-determination, you are operating from a principle: that a people’s dignity is inseparable from their right to exist politically. If you are operating from that principle consistently, then you already know where the logic leads. The only question is whether you are willing to follow it when the people being denied that right are Jews."
Left wingers do actually demand the dissolution of white countries, so
Meme - Eitan Fischberger @EFischberger: "This was the top of the New York Times last night. The first thing every reader sees the moment they land on the homepage of the most influential news outlet on earth. All three stories about Israel. There is a famous communications scholar named Maxwell McCombs who developed what is now called the "agenda setting theory." His core finding is simple: The press is not very good at telling people what to think. It is extraordinarily good, however, at telling people what to think ABOUT. And what the New York Times has decided you should think about, every single day, multiple times a day, forever and always, is Israel. You cannot saturate the most influential newsroom in the English language with relentless coverage of one small country and then act surprised when the public becomes similarly hyper-fixated with it. The animosity we constantly see is the predictable output of editorial selection, repeated daily, until it becomes the background music of how people think about the Jewish state."
"Pentagon Sees Growing Espionage Threat From Israel. Israeli Strike Kills 3 Lebanese Soldiers, Days After Truce Was Signed. Infant Killed as Israeli Military Fires on Car in West Bank, Palestinian Officials Say"
Terrorism supporter logic - the NYT is pro Israel
Meme - Hen Mazzig @HenMazzig: "An anti-Zionist Jew wrote about how awful Zionism is. Then her interview was cancelled suddenly. Instead of support, the people she's marketing to told her "to go to hell for trying to salvage the Jewish image during Judeo Nazism at large." This is what gets me about anti-Zionist Jews. They are absolutely free to believe what they want, but when we tell them that there are anti- Zionists using Zionism as an excuse to be antisemitic they never believe us. And, every single time, they have to learn the hard way, usually after trying to throw Zionist Jews under the bus. Because, to some, there is no such thing as a good Jew."
eman: red triangle @eemaanishere: "Center your stupid Jewish feelings and get banned anyway award. Hope all these profiteering spin doctors go to hell for trying to salvage the jewish image during judeo nazism at large"
KWANGRESS: "Molly Crabapple, Artist & Author of 'Here Where We Live Is Our Country: The Story of the Jewish Bund' shared via instagram that Channel 4 News cancelled her interview on short notice."
Leopards eating people's faces is only for people who threaten the left wing agenda
Meme - "Neglect your HOUSE and This Will Take Over *cockroaches*
Neglect your COUNTRY, and This Will Take Over *Muslim men praying on sidewalk waving Palestinian flag, with loudhailer*"
Mike Fegelman on X - "For years, Israel has been vilified for “targeting journalists” in Gaza. Now @pressfreedom has removed more names from its list after admitting said "journalist" participated in combat. That should be a major media scandal. Instead, the same outlets that helped spread the accusation against Israel will quietly move on to the next libel."
Massey College fellow resigns after he says he was asked to let 'advisory committee' vet antisemitism conference - "University of Toronto law professor Peter Biro has resigned his fellowship from Massey College after he says the institution wanted an “advisory committee” to vet an antisemitism conference he was organizing. “A good portion of Canadian society is utterly oblivious to the fact that our current age represents the next great transmutation of jew-hatred in human history,” Biro wrote in his resignation letter dated May 31. “That only underscores the critical importance of this conference.”... Biro wrote that Massey’s concerns stemmed from a lack of coordination with the college and questions surrounding the appropriateness of “partner organizations.” The conference was due to be co-hosted with the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights. Biro dismissed the Massey College president’s concerns as “absolutely false,” writing that everything was developed with “full cooperation with and the full contemporaneous knowledge of the Principal, beginning in mid-January and continuing through to May 27.” He wrote that he had previously chaired and participated in other conferences at Massey without any issue... Michael Geist, a University of Ottawa law professor, called the incident “an important story of what appears to be an attempt by leadership at Massey College to censor a major conference on antisemitism.” “Massey College, much like Mark Carney, had a chance to lead, but both failed to meet the moment,” Geist wrote in an X post on Wednesday, referring to the prime minister’s recent visit to a Toronto synagogue to address antisemitism in Canada earlier this week. “The stain on Massey College will not come off as easily.” University of Toronto chemistry professor Dvira Segal commented on Geist’s post, saying, “Our academic institutions and government are willing to address antisemitism only insofar as the discussion sanitizes the connection between Judaism and the land of Israel.” “That clearly is the oversight they wanted, that the conference not touch the historical, cultural, and religious connections of Jews to the land of Israel, nor the extent to which the denial and politicized erasure of those ties has become a modern form of antisemitism,” Segal wrote. Biro said that life on campus at the University of Toronto, where he is an adjunct professor, has materially changed in recent years, particularly after the Hamas atrocities of October 7. “There’s been a radical change in the atmosphere and in the civic culture of campus,” he told the Post on Thursday. “But it’s a microcosm of what’s occurring in the broader society, accentuated significantly on campuses across the country. And U of T is no exception.” Biro said the changing spirit of academic life has been driven by higher education shifting “from being a research institution, particularly in the social sciences, to being a driver of social justice agendas.” “Activism has supplanted truth-seeking as the dominant spirit and driving force of much of the work, both on the research side, (and) even on the teaching side,” he said. “Israel vilification has become the currency, cornerstone and language of much of what transpires in the social sciences.”"
Almost half of Muslim Americans have favorable view of Hamas, new survey shows - "Almost half of Muslim Americans support the terror group Hamas, while views of Israelis have soured since 2022 amongst Republicans and Democrats, a bombshell new poll found The startling survey also found that young Americans of all religions are now far more likely to hold favorable views of Palestinians over Israelis, marking a drastic change since Hamas’ deadly Oct. 7 rampage. Some 44% of Muslim American respondents expressed a favorable opinion of the terror group, compared to 17% of black Protestants, just 4% of white evangelical Protestants, and 8% of Catholics, according to a Pew Research Center survey published Thursday... Younger Americans across all religious groups — and especially Democrats — were far more likely to have positive views of Hamas and the Palestinian people as opposed to the Israeli people and its government... Across the board, some 13% of adult respondents under 30 expressed a favorable view of Hamas, including 16% of young Democrats and a shocking 11% of young Republicans."
Damn Amish who refuse to assimilate!
Weird, we're told no one supports Hamas
Hussain Abdul-Hussain on X - "Pew poll showing 44 percent of Muslims in America support Hamas squares with Palestinian polls, as surveyed by the Palestinian PCPSR-Polling and Survey Research. As recently as October 2025, one in every two Palestinians thought that October 7 was a correct move and opposed the two-state solution (meaning they want all the land, from the river to the sea, as Muslim Arab Palestine). Also, a plurality of 43 percent of Palestinians thought "armed struggle" was the way to an independent Palestine (again, from the river to the sea with Israel vanishing). Rahm Emanuel this week delivered a speech in Tel Avi in which he blamed Israeli supporters of Greater Israel -- meaning Mandate Palestine, unlike how most Arabs understand it to mean from the Nile to the Euphrates -- of perpetuating the conflict with Palestinians, blaming Israel for not arriving at a two-state solution. Given Pews's numbers on Muslim American support of Hamas and PCPSR's numbers on Palestinian opposition to two state, support of Hamas and October 7, the question to Rahm is: How? How can Israel make peace with a Muslim population whose majority rejects it?"

Links - 27th July 2026 (2 - Harris-Walz)

2026-07-27T17:49:00.000+08:00

Thread by @QuasLacrimas on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "Listening to Harris postmortem podcast now - one interesting point Harris flaks raise is they knew they needed to pivot to the center on several issues, but they judged attempting wouldn’t be credible, would only draw attention to how leftwing her actual policy commitments are. Plouffe says the top five people on the Harris campaign spend hundreds(??) of hours trying to decide how to respond to the they/them ad. The Dem flaks believe that the Trump campaign was explicitly targeting the they/them ad at blacks in Philly and Atlanta markets, but they seem to imply the ultimate effect of the ad was not on blacks but (therefore by implication) on whites. They don’t say this outright but trans issue was tough for them because real problem was voters both (1) hated the Biden/Harris trans policy, and (2) hated that it was a higher policy priority than the economy. I can see how it’s hard to run “I don’t care” ads
Lol. Remember how a few weeks ago Trump’s non-campaign led GOTV effort was pathetically, historically bad? Now it is “so well coordinated it must be criminal”. This is so bizarre. They are so frustrated by the coordination issue. Apparently Dem non-profits are really terrible. Maybe this is why everyone got 30 text messages a day and dozens of flyers, it wasn’t a deliberate strategy but a clusterfudge? (They seem shocked that GOP orgs could take turns doing certain states on alternate weeks or something, so Dems must have been unable to divide tasks)
They are discussing dumb podcast stuff now, so I’m just stewing about how mendacious Dems/journos are. They were gaslighting everyone about how Trump was going to flop because of the “weird” GOTV strategy while privately seething about how good it was.
The Cheneys / neocons / generals / CIA stuff was apparently how the Dem flaks think about median voter theory. They knew they needed to peel away right-leaning voters, didn’t want to debate policy, and thought ex-GOP hawks was the right way to do it. Strange! Subtext in this whole conversation is all of these flaks knew the economy and especially inflation was a major issue. Zero ambivalence, none of this sad inflation denialism low-level Dem loyalists on twitter feel compelled to engage in
A motif they keep returning to, and one lady is now hitting explicitly, is they think the Harris campaign did “well” because the swing to Trump was way harder in non-battleground states (where they weren’t campaigning). Idk if that’s right, but it’s a reasonable cope
Another theme they return to again and again is “not enough time”. The Harris campaign apparently had shamefully time-intensive management practices - everything burnt time, apparently nothing could be delegated to subordinates despite the huge size of their staff
Earlier they were talking about how the initial weeks of the campaign were dead bc they needed to re-plan the convention. First that’s stupid, second we know they didn’t do it carefully because they didn’t even bother to rewrite the damn DNC platform, ctrl-F “Biden” … so they must have been dealing with truly criminal shiftlessness and malfeasance from low-level campaign staff. They also discuss internal pushback on ads in a way that suggests all kinds of griping were elevated to the top level… what? That’s a choice and imo a terrible one
All right that’s it. Many ppl are asking, this is Pod Save America “Top Harris Staff reveal what went wrong” (the one where Plouffe admits in the first few minutes their polling always had Kamala behind in all the battleground states)"
Weird how the public polls all claimed the candidates were neck and neck
Jake Schneider on X - "Yes, I made this compilation. Yes, it is my proudest accomplishment this cycle. Walz is a freak."
Stephen L. Miller on X - "It's incredible how much I saw this montage spread online to various platforms. It wasn't quite the they/them Trump ad but this montage post debate killed the Harris campaign's only strategy of "We are joy and they are weird." They had nothing after that. People saw Vance in the debate and then memes like spread online and went "Yeah he's not the weird one here.""
Meme - "Before Joy *Official Kamala Harris photo*
After Joy *Drunk Kamala Harris photo*"
Gunther Eagleman™ on X - "🚨HOLY SHT! A University of Kansas professor just blatantly said men “who won’t vote for Kamala” should be lined up and SH0T! WTF is wrong with people?"
University of Kansas lecturer leaves after viral remark - "The University of Kansas announced Friday that an instructor is no longer employed there after a video showed him “making a highly inappropriate comment in his classroom suggesting violence against individuals for their personal views.” University officials didn’t name the instructor, but the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has identified him as Phillip Lowcock, a health sport and exercise science lecturer who allegedly made an offhand comment in class that men who wouldn't vote for a woman for president should be shot. By Friday, Lowcock's profile page was no longer on the university's website... Libs of TikTok, a conservative X account with 3.6 million followers, posted an undated classroom video allegedly of Lowcock telling students that “what frustrates me—there are going to be some males in our society that will refuse to vote for a potential female president because they don’t think females are smart enough to be president.” The man in the half-minute-long video then says, “We can line all those guys up and shoot them. They clearly don’t understand the way the world works.” He immediately follows that with “Did I say that? Scratch that from the recording. I don’t want the deans hearing that I said that.”"
So much joy. Love Trumps Hate
Meme - CNN Opinion: "The whiteness of Trump's White House interns is absurd and speaks volumes"
Governor Tim Walz @GovTimWalz: "Fresh haircut and meeting with my cabinet makes for a pretty darn good day. *all white people*"
Meme - "The lefts new insane strategy is to say Trump is in hiding"
Greg Price @greg_price11: "Media appearances since becoming their party’s nominee for president: Trump: 59 Kamala: 26"
Dustin Grage on X - "🚨 Another massive fraud scandal is unfolding under Gov. Tim Walz in Minnesota.
• 62 child care centers under investigation
• 56 cases of child endangerment
• Some centers had zero kids enrolled but still got millions
Officials flagged it two years ago, but Walz did nothing."
Meme - WCCO | CBS News Minnesota @WCCO: "Trump falsely accuses Harris of donating to Minnesota Freedom Fund, bailing out "dangerous criminals""
Readers added context they thought people might want to know: "On June 1, 2020, at 3:34PM Minnesota Time, Kamala Harris tweeted "If you're able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota." The tweet contained a donation link. This tweet has not been deleted and is available at:"
Meme - "Kamala: He's probably thinking about other women.
Doug: Why did she want me to sleep with Trump?"
Kamala Harris: "I already told my husband: On January 20, 2025, he will sleep with the next president of the United States."
Meme - Ryan Shead @RyanShead: "My name is Ryan. I'm a 42 years old husband, father, and veteran. I voted for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz to protect my daughter's right to choose. How about you? #HarrisWalz2024"
Alex Becker: "Let me get this straight... The single most important thing in this election to you...of all things.... Is your daughter being able to be raw dogged without consequence? Nice."
Johnny U on X - "KAMALAS CALIFORNIA . banned straws, but handed out drug needles ... Labeled gun groups as terrorists ,but allowed antifa to riot . Left veterans homeless ,but gave free housing to illegals . Prosecuted misgendering ,but let illegals walk for murder. DEMOCRAT AMERICA !"
Shaun Maguire on X - "In the Presidential debate Trump said crime was up under Harris. The moderator fact checked him claiming the FBI’s data says crime was down. The FBI just quietly updated their 2022 crime stats and it turns out Trump was right. This has happened so many times"
Meme - Narinder @narindertweets: "I don't think she is a strong enough candidate. Trump will win with her." (Jul 21, 2024, 1:17PM)
Oli London @OliLondonTV: "What do you think of Kamala Harris?" (Jul 21, 2024, 4:10PM)
Narinder Kaur @narindertweets: "A THREAT to Trump."
DC_Draino on X - "The people saying “No Kings” just supported a POTUS candidate that never ran in the Democrat primary Kamala was forced upon them and they clapped like trained seals"
Jason D. Meister 🇺🇸 on X - "Imagine throwing a “No Kings” protest after your party refused to hold a primary, coronated Kamala without a single vote, sued to keep RFK Jr. off the ballot, and attempted to remove Trump from state ballots only after your illegal lawfare scheme failed. If there was a modern day monarchy in America there would be one party you could point to. The Democrats."
Meme - NPCs: "I understand the assignment"
Left wingers are so clueless that they don't realise they're embodying the NPC meme
Kamala Harris was ‘just not good at her job,’ say angry Biden aides - "Joe Biden’s former aides have attacked Kamala Harris saying she “knows nothing” and was “out of her depth” after she laid into the former president. The row was triggered by the publication of an excerpt from Ms Harris’s memoir 107 Days, in which she branded Mr Biden’s second presidential run “recklessness”... Now, his aides have hit back, telling Axios: “Vice-president Harris was simply not good at the job. “She had basically zero substantive role in any of the administration’s key work streams, and instead would just dive bomb in for stilted photo ops that exposed how out of depth she was”... Ms Harris was the first Democrat to lose the popular vote since John Kerry in 2004. Axios spoke to a dozen aides who accused Ms Harris of trying to blame Mr Biden for her defeat, with some saying she was using party resources to promote her new book. In the book Ms Harris accused Biden aides of briefing against her while she was in the White House, with stories appearing about the high turnover of staff in her office and her handling of the immigration crisis at the southern border... The feuding was inevitable, Christopher Galdieri, professor of politics at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire, told the Telegraph. “With 20/20 hindsight, it’s clear that Democrats would have been better off if Biden had decided not to run for another term much earlier than he actually did, and it’s in Harris’s interest to distance herself from Biden and his decision to run for a second term for as long as he did. “And it’s no secret that Harris had a difficult time settling into her role as VP, largely because, as the junior member of the ticket, there wasn’t that much the White House needed her for, in contrast to the elder statesman role we’ve seen from prior VPs like Dick Cheney and Biden himself under Obama.” Jeff Weaver, a leading Democratic strategist, told The Telegraph that the blame for the defeat should be laid at the door of the party hierarchy. “I wish people who were speaking out now had spoken out, but it could have been a different something to have had a regular nominating process and nominated a candidate who could have beaten Trump,” he told the Telegraph. “Whenever party insiders substitute their judgment for the judgment of voters, we lose. This happened in 2016 when party insiders rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders, and we lost,” added Mr Weaver, who worked on the Bernie Sanders campaigns in 2016 and 2020, as well as Dean Phillips’ bid for the White House in 2024. “It happened in 2024 when party insiders rigged the system to protect Joe Biden, and we lost there, too. So if you want to pick a candidate who’s going to be popular with voters, you let the voters pick the candidate, and we’ll have much more success.”"
Weird. Left wingers kept telling us that Kamala Harris was super qualified
Kamala Harris’ memoir blames everyone for her failures but herself - "Once you scrape through the politician-y pabulum, they tell us two things: that Harris is incapable of taking responsibility – and that she was lying to us throughout her vice-presidency and her campaign about Joe Biden’s capacity to do his duty. The Atlantic has reprinted an excerpt of about 3,000 words from the Harris campaign memoir 107 Days. Judging by the extract, the book, like the campaign itself, conveniently glosses over Biden’s presidency by starting its account on the day that he dropped out of the race. But Harris still can’t resist settling scores and rewriting history. Relishing the role of victim, Harris seethes with grievance. Everything is someone else’s fault. Some of that aggrievement is aimed at the Biden White House, which she frames as mistrustful of her loyalty. Her enemies in the White House are everywhere, but always unnamed, and she never seems to ask whether the president knew what his own White House was doing. “When polls indicated that I was getting more popular,” she writes, “the people around him didn’t like the contrast that was emerging.” In fact, her standing in the polls was abysmal until Biden dropped out, at which point the party faithful resignedly rallied around her. Harris says that she couldn’t get her side of the story out because her press staff was too small, but then she complains that she was the first vice-president to have her own press pool, so there was too much unwelcome media coverage of what she was doing. By complaining that Biden’s “team didn’t get it” and undercut her while she was vice-president – refusing to rebut criticisms of her performance, treating her success as a threat – Harris is laying the groundwork to argue that it was the Biden political operation that lost the election – not Harris, whose own words were used to devastating effect in Trump campaign ads, and not the Biden-Harris record, of which Harris famously said that she couldn’t think of a thing she’d do differently. Doling out credit is another story. “Joe struggled to talk about reproductive rights in a way that met the gravity of the moment,” she says, and argues that Democrats did better than expected in the 2022 midterms due to her efforts, not his. Aside from shivving the Biden White House, Harris continually invokes race and gender as the reason why she believes she was treated unfairly... Harris now denounces Biden’s decision to run again: “‘It’s Joe and Jill’s decision.’ We all said that, like a mantra, as if we’d all been hypnotised.” Given that the vice-president is constitutionally responsible for deciding when the president is no longer able to serve, being “hypnotised” is not an endorsement of her competence... Why should Biden not have run? Was he no longer up to the job? Harris denies that there was any “big conspiracy at the White House to hide Joe Biden’s infirmity,” and offers “the truth as I lived it,” which is a neat rhetorical way of saying her account doesn’t need to be accurate or supported by evidence. We don’t know from the excerpts if we will get any actual first-hand stories of what Harris was doing to find out the truth of Biden’s capacity when she was out publicly smearing Robert Hur for saying that Biden seemed like a confused old man. “I don’t believe it was incapacity,” she now writes. “If I believed that, I would have said so.” Instead, she told us the opposite loudly and repeatedly. Harris says now that, “at 81, Joe got tired … the debate debacle happened right after two back-to-back trips to Europe and a flight to the West Coast for a Hollywood fundraiser.” Sorry, presidents travel to diplomatic meetings and fundraisers all the time. Biden landed back in Los Angeles from his European trip on June 15, 12 days before the debate, and returned to the East Coast the next day. He spent a weekend at the beach in Delaware followed by a full week at Camp David prepping for the debate. If he couldn’t speak coherently because he’d been abroad nearly two weeks earlier, that is incapacity. That’s the job, and he couldn’t do it. Harry Truman famously proclaimed when he was president that “the buck stops here” – on his desk. Biden has never taken responsibility for the failure of his presidency and the loss of the 2024 election. Judging by her initial salvo, Harris isn’t going to either. The buck never stops when everybody on the team thinks they can just print more of them."
Cabot Phillips on X - "Five pages into Kamala's new book and she's already blaming:
-Sexism
-Fox News
-Joe Biden"
Stephen L. Miller on X - "Low-key admission in Kamala Harris's book excerpts is that she and everybody in the White House knew about Joe Biden's condition and didn't say anything."
Clay Travis on X - "Kamala Harris says in her new book that Joe Biden running for re-election was reckless and shouldn’t have happened. So brave of her to say the opposite now of what she said for years."
Kamala Harris claims Biden’s team let her take fall for disastrous border crisis to halt her rising popularity
Kamala Harris: Choosing gay running mate was too risky - "The Democrat, who lost the race for the White House to Donald Trump, admitted Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, was not her first choice for a running mate, and that she would have preferred Pete Buttigieg, the then-transport secretary, to join her ticket... Mr Walz has since claimed he was chosen because he could “code talk to white guys”."
Peggy Flanagan on X - "The President had an opportunity to do the right thing. Even after unfathomable tragedy, he chooses to be callous and cruel. The President should take a page from Melissa Hortman's book: Leadership is found in unity, not division. Do better."
Dustin Grage on X - "Respectfully, Tim Walz has repeatedly referred to the President as a Nazi. Even after Trump was literally shot, Walz continued to call him a dictator and a threat to democracy. The President already condemned this—but don’t pretend to be outraged that Walz isn’t getting a call."
AF Post on X - "Kamala Harris said she called Gavin Newsom for an endorsement after Biden’s exit, but he brushed her off with a short text. Governor Newsom replied, “Hiking. Will call back,” and never followed up. Follow: @AFpost"
Meme - "Democrats are calling Kamala Harris's stepdaughter "The Liberal Sydney Sweeney." and I could not agree more."
John Fetterman pinpoints moment Democrats lost the election to Trump - "Outspoken US Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) said his party “lost the plot” — and the White House — when their then-leader Kamala Harris started calling President Trump a fascist. “When Vice President Harris referred to President Trump as a ‘fascist’ … I knew absolutely we lost the plot at that point,” Fetterman told Fox News’ “Hannity” on Wednesday night. “If you call the president or someone like a fascist, you are effectively calling the people who are going to vote for him … then they must be fascist too … or they support fascism and those things. And that is just not true.”... He also noted that spewing such hatred encourages violence — such as Charlie Kirk’s assassination. “I refuse to do those kinds of things because that kind of extreme kinds of rhetoric makes it easier for those kinds of extreme kinds of actions — even like what happened to poor Charlie Kirk,” he said. “I happen to know and love a lot of people that voted for the president and they are not fascist, they are not Nazis, they’re not trying to destroy the Constitution and all those things,” Fetterman added. “They just happen to have different priorities and they love our country in the same ways that Democrats do as well.”"
George Clooney: Kamala Harris was the wrong person to take on Trump - "When Mr Biden ended his re-election bid 11 days after Mr Clooney’s intervention amid widespread pressure, he named Ms Harris as his successor, and the Democrats quickly fell into line behind her. Mr Clooney endorsed Ms Harris just two days later, saying he was “so excited” to support the then-vice president in her “historic quest”. Among those who have criticised Mr Clooney for intervening in the selection process was the former president’s son, Hunter Biden, who blamed the actor for ending his father’s political career in an expletive-filled interview in July. The younger Biden said: “What right do you have to step on a man who’s given 52 years of his f---ing life to the service of this country and decide that you, George Clooney, are going to take out basically a full page ad in the f---ing New York Times to undermine the president.”"
"Do You Hold ALL Palestinians Culpable?" Douglas Murray on Israel-Hamas, Riots & More - YouTube - "The Harris-Walz Administration, it's totally unclear to me what they plan to do. Are they going to do anything? What what is their plan on inflation? I mean all you get is that Kamala Harris will say you know inflation is a really big problem and that's why it's a problem... it's possible that Kamala Harris and Tim Walz will get away with this, I'll tell you why. Because we have a good example in Britain. Almost nobody was running to the polls in Britain desperate to vote for uh um for our current prime minister... the way in which Starmer and the Labour Party came in was we'll say nothing about what we're going to do until after we get nobly voted into office and now of course we're being told about the tax"
Emmer calls Walz ‘Kamala’s emotional support animal’ - "House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) referred to Vice President Harris’s running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, as her “emotional support animal”"
Lindy Li on X - "Last year I said Kamala’s campaign was $20 million in debt Democrats called me a liar. Turns out I was right I also said the DNC was broke Democrats called me a liar again. Turns out they just took out a $15 million loan Still awaiting my apology. @hertake_podcast"

The Constitutional Conservative on X - "Tim Walz, who compared Trump to Hitler and calls MAGA nazis, claims that using the term retarded creates danger and leads to violence."
Tony Seruga on X - "I’m told Harris campaign is already using ActBlue money laundering scheme, $20 million from Johann Georg Wyss known as Hansjörg Wyss, born 19 September 1935, a Swiss billionaire, and was broken down into over 1,600,000 donations across 400,000 donors. Dirty! Dirty! Dirty!"
Christopher Gleason on X - "Where have we seen this before? There is zero chance on this planet that in 24 hours 880,000 mostly first time donors donated 80 million dollars to Kamala Harris. The woman who got less than 1% of the vote in 2020, has a 37% approval rating and is polling worse than Joe Biden. They are laundering money through ActBlue. How stupid do they think people are?"
Kamala Harris’ Viral ‘Coconut Tree’ Quote, Explained - "A bizarre quote by Vice President Kamala Harris—“You think you just fell out of a coconut tree?”—is going viral once again"
Amazon.com: Fear Sells Until You Stop Buying It Harris Walz Vote Kamala T-Shirt : Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry
This is so ironic.
Kamala Harris On 'Call Her Daddy' Podcast: No Laws Apply To MEN’S Bodies—FACT CHECK? - YouTube
Many laws affecting both men and women's bodies (e.g. on selling your kidneys), men are viewed as disposable, so laws that apply to their bodies like the draft don't count
One guest calls out the other's hysteria about the police arresting a doctor who has aborted an ectopic pregnancy - besides the law exempting abortions to save the mother's life, Texas only allows civil lawsuits about this
Minnesota Staff Fraud Reporting Commentary on X - "Ms. Harris, please listen to Minnesota State Employees who work everyday to deliver best services possible to our state & people who expect no less & pay our wages. Tim Walz has caused incredible harm to our state & agencies, retaliated against whistleblowers against fraud."
Minnesota Staff Fraud Reporting Commentary on X - "For public awareness, we did write to Kamala Harris and the DNC - multiple times - warning them about Tim Walz & his incompetence, fraud scandals and retaliation. We tried our best to keep the public informed as our tweets are public. Maybe Kamala Harris turned a blind eye to fraud like her running mate? Over the years, our messages have not changed. We need fraud to stop in Minnesota and good governance to be restored."
Why America Chose Trump: Inflation, Immigration, and the Democratic Brand - Blueprint - "The top reasons voters gave for not supporting Harris were that inflation was too high (+24), too many immigrants crossed the border (+23), and that Harris was too focused on cultural issues rather than helping the middle class (+17). Other high-testing reasons were that the debt rose too much under the Biden-Harris Administration (+13), and that Harris would be too similar to Joe Biden (+12). These concerns were similar across all demographic groups, including among Black and Latino voters, who both selected inflation as their top problem with Harris. For swing voters who eventually chose Trump, cultural issues ranked slightly higher than inflation (+28 and +23, respectively). The lowest-ranked concerns were that Harris wasn’t similar enough to Biden (-24), was too conservative (-23), and was too pro-Israel (-22)... Despite Harris’s clear pivot on economic messaging, she couldn’t escape her record, her incumbency, or her party’s reputation. The numbers tell an unforgiving truth: voters didn’t just want Harris to distance herself from Biden’s policies; they wanted Harris to distance herself from what they believe the Democratic Party has become. In the end, Harris couldn’t outrun her past or her party—perhaps it was a lack of time, but it was certainly a vice grip that proved impossible to escape... Neither criticisms from the left nor a longing for Biden were a major factor in why voters opposed Kamala Harris. Voters were crystal clear that they wanted more distance from Biden and the Democratic brand, not less."
This doesn't stop left wingers mocking the "pro-Palestine" crowd for boycotting Harris and getting Trump. Or indeed terrorism supporters for claiming that Harris lost for "supporting" "genocide" in Gaza. Basically left wingers work backwards from their desired conclusions
Facing The Music - "The American political party in power horribly misread the room. First, they banked on a frail Joe Biden until they couldn’t. Second, they failed to pick up on the changing cultural vibe rejecting their agenda of woke policies on issues like transsexual rights, criminal justice reform and open immigration. Look, when the state thinks parental rights take a back seat to the whims of a minor child’s desire to surgically change sex, you know you’ve gone too far. When “reform” of the criminal justice system throws the baby out with the bathwater — allowing more crime, not less — people will flee. And, when you are more concerned about using the term “illegal” than in stopping terrorists and gang members from flooding into communities, is it any wonder the electorate growls with mistrust? Yet, still there are those who cry out “why, oh why” isn’t Kamala Harris crushing it in the polls? Because people want their streets safe and secure. They don’t want their first-grade children coming home asking about the teacher’s aide who talks to them about gender disorientation. I understand the predicament Democrats were in. After the political assassination of Joe Biden, the political elite were left with the worst possible choice to carry-on. Kamala Harris may have perfectly lined up with the woke thinking of 2020. But she had to be re-made to fit the bill in 2024. That’s why her campaign spends so much time trying to erase her former self, which, lest we forget, is the classic San Francisco liberal. For example, 24 months ago Kamala made fun of the idea of a border wall. She called it “stupid.” On CNN yesterday she said she’s all for it because all “good ideas” should be implemented. The CNN host wasn’t buying the transformation and the people aren’t either. This version of Kamala Harris isn’t real. Meanwhile, for better or worse, Donald Trump’s still Donald Trump. Same guy now as when he hit the scene in 2016. Same guy who presided over economic prosperity without arresting political rivals or watering down the First Amendment by clamping down on “misinformation.” You don’t have to fall in love with Trump to know, at the very least, he is authentic. And, he has a good track record. By comparison, Trump resonates with voters. That’s the take-a-way.
Kamala Harris on X - "Donald Trump is surrendering to his advisors who won't allow him to debate with a live microphone. If his own team doesn't have confidence in him, the American people definitely can’t. We are running for President of the United States. Let’s debate in a transparent way—with the microphones on the whole time."
Xi Van Fleet on X - ".@KamalaHarris lies just like a Communist. We’ve watched your pathetic pre-recorded CNN interview, which was trimmed down from 45 minutes to 18 minutes when aired. You can’t even handle Dems own propaganda media! Who is scared of live debates?"