Rant

This Story Will Make Your Blood Boil. 😡 Duncan called into Jeremy Vine to talk about benefits. He’s 56, paid into the system since he was 18, and recently had to take six months off work after being diagnosed with cancer and needed help. He was refused. He got nothing. No help at all. He’s now back at work while still fighting cancer, and he wants to know why. He says what’s the point of the system if it isn’t there when you actually need it? Jeremy actually asked a decent question for once: if he’s paid tax all his life, why isn’t he at the front of the queue to reclaim his own money when he runs into trouble? Why does the system seem to prefer people who have never paid any tax at all? Good question. Somebody should be made to answer it. The welfare bill is bigger than ever, anyone and everyone seems to be claiming. Strangers turn up in boats and get given everything for free, yet a man who has worked all his life, paid into the system, and is genuinely ill gets turned down when he needs help. How is that fair? It’s not. It’s a disgrace!

Stop 🛑 dezinformacji i manipulacji międzynarodowymi mediami przez polski Rząd. Skierowałem właśnie do ministra @MSWiA_GOV_PL @MKierwinski interpelację o następującej treści: Szanowny Panie Ministrze, Podczas konferencji prasowej która odbyła się dnia 7.11.2026 stwierdził Pan, że zamachowiec który dokonał masakry w Krakowie był „zafascynowany ideologiami skrajnie prawicowymi”. Pana słowa następnie były cytowane oraz parafrazowane przez wszystkie czołowe media na świecie: tezę o tym, że zamachowcem była osoba o skrajnie prawicowych poglądach powieliły m.in. BBC, CNN, Reuters, Bloomberg, The Washington Post, Guardian, The Telegraph oraz AFP. Wykorzystana została również ona przez @BMeinl Beate Meinl-Reisinger, austriacką Minister Spraw Zagranicznych. Napływające z wielu źródeł doniesienia świadczą o tym, że poglądy zamachowca były skrajnie odmienne od poglądów uznawanych za prawicowe oraz że angażował się on m.in. w proaborcyjne protesty środowisk feministycznych. Świadczy to o tym, że w tak newralgicznym dla Polski momencie, rozsiewał Pan dezinformację w celu uzyskania korzyści przez reprezentowane przez Pana środowisko polityczne. W związku z powyższym, zwracam się do Pana o odpowiedź na następujące pytania: 1. Czy tezę o fascynacji prawicowymi ideologiami przez zamachowca przedstawił pan na polecenie lub sugestię Premiera Donalda Tuska? 2. Na bazie jakich konkretnie informacji którymi pan dysponował, publicznie zaprezentował pan tę tezę? Kto panu przekazał te informacje? Proszę o wskazanie konkretnej instytucji oraz osoby jej reprezentującej. 3. W jaki sposób zamierza Pan sprostować przekazane przez Pana fałszywe informacje? Czy wyda Pan oficjalne oświadczenie oraz skieruje prośbę o sprostowanie podanej przez Pana dezinformacji bezpośrednio do wymienionych wyżej mediow?

This is the most jaw-dropping 4 minutes and 21 seconds you will watch this year. Nicole Shanahan — ex-wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin, former running mate of RFK Jr., and someone who personally signed nine-figure philanthropy checks — just went full whistleblower on the entire Silicon Valley “tech wife mafia” and how they were used. Her exact words (full clip attached): “I don’t think many of the tech mafia wives realize… they were used to set the groundwork for what Klaus Schwab calls The Great Reset. Their money especially was being conscripted through a network of NGO advisors, Hollywood, Davos, and their own companies. A really small group of people… completely blind to how their groundwork is being used to enable these Great Reset policies.” Then she turns the knife inward: “These women find their meaning through philanthropic work. I really believed I was helping Black communities and indigenous communities rise up. But now the problems have gotten worse. Crime worse. Mental health worse. The whole model is broken. At the end of the day they always go: ‘But climate change.’ Social justice + climate change — it gets progressive women 100% of the time.” She even says many now believe the biggest “climate change issues” are actually geoengineering issues. This isn’t some random podcast bro. This is a woman who lived in the mansions, sat on the boards, flew private to Davos parties… and is now saying: “We were the useful idiots.”

The Free Speech Union exposed that all five members of the Working Group tasked with drafting the official definition of Islamophobia had troubling links to Islamist organisations, including the Muslim Council of Britain and MEND. The Working Group held a consultation so people could help shape what became the “anti-Muslim hostility” definition. Given the public interest, the FSU asked which groups and individuals had been consulted. Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy submitted a Freedom of Information request. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) replied that it had deleted all the responses — in what appears to be against the Government’s own data policy. The FSU then threatened Angela Rayner’s department with legal action. Now the department’s most senior civil servant says the responses do exist and remain on its data system, but the department will not disclose who was consulted. So what is going on? Were we told the responses had been deleted to conceal the fact that Islamist extremists had the chance to influence the definition? We are now told that an Islamophobia tsar will be announced imminently. Given Rayner and her department’s record, who on earth could it be?

I haven't had a chance to read this BBC article until now as I've been busy all day, but allegations of government doom-mongering aside, I am a bit of a civil defence/resilience nerd. A few things caught my eye: "An example of this is the new communication system being adopted by the emergency services, which will replace radio comms with mobile phone network technology, says Lord Harris, 'so if the mobile phone goes down it will also impact on emergency services communications'." The system the Beeb is referring to here is ESN (Emergency Services Network - known within policing as "ESWhen?"), which is supposed to be replacing the old system, Airwave. I used Airwave in a previous life, and even back then we were being told ESN was imminently coming (it's currently nine years late). But I digress… ESN is built on EE Business commercial 4G/5G mobile infrastructure, whereas Airwave uses dedicated TETRA (Terrestrial Trunked Radio) technology, which is seen as outdated. Which do you think will be the more reliable option in an emergency? Well, the one we’re getting rid of, of course. In essence, if 4G/5G were to go down post-ESN rollout (whenever that happens), the emergency services would lose all ability to communicate effectively and quickly. Madness. "The current urgency for disaster planning is coming at an interesting moment for technology we used to rely on. The UK's copper wire landline system - which would work even in a power cut - will be switched off on 31 January 2027." Why are we ditching the copper wire landline system? It clearly serves a purpose in the event of failure of other systems. I keep saying that analogue systems work when digital systems fail. Cash works when cards don't. Landline telephones work when mobile phones are down (assuming it's not a power issue). Many such examples. Why on earth are we ditching a reliable system - one which can withstand even a power cut - like the copper wire landline? "The future of FM radio is also under government review." Again, why?! We've already ditched long wave (in June of this year, when BBC Radio 4's long wave service on 198 kHz officially ceased transmissions). We know that FM will work when DAB and internet radio don't. During the post-Cold War optimism of the 1990s and 2000s, we dismantled pretty much our entire civil defence/contingency infrastructure in Britain - a terrible decision in hindsight. But we know that the legacy analogue systems we still have (such as copper wire telephone systems and FM radio) will still serve us well when all our exciting modern technology fails us. So why in God's name are we getting rid of these systems? I often think about public warning systems. When we dismantled all our civil defence infrastructure, we physically removed our air raid sirens (alongside leaving bunkers to rot, among other things). But that's not a problem, right? Because now we have the "Emergency Alerts" system (which I, perhaps controversially, support - if it's not misused by the state). But that, much like the new ESN, will only work if 4G/5G works! We have myriad professionals working within the civil contingencies and preparedness arena in government - why is, as it seems, nobody thinking of this stuff?