Enlightened Navigator

World War Eleven - Michael Deacon

Sat, 02 May 2026 08:53:33 GMT

Is this the funniest political gaffe of all time?

In these dark times, we should thank anti-Trump firebrand Ilhan Omar for bringing us some much-needed joy. Albeit by mistake.
We all make mistakes. Few of us, however, can have made one quite as gloriously entertaining as this, by Ilhan Omar – the Trump-hating Left-wing firebrand who sits in the US Congress.

Footage going viral online this week shows her reading from a scripted statement, in which she was supposed to say: “The last time the Alien Enemies Act was invoked, it was used to detain and deport German, Japanese and Italian immigrants during World War II.” Unfortunately, though, it would appear that Ms Omar is unfamiliar with Roman numerals.

Because instead, she solemnly intoned the immortal words: “during World War Eleven”.

Now, I appreciate that politicians are busy people, which is why they often get their aides to write their speeches for them. Before delivering such a speech, however, it’s generally a good idea to give the text a careful read-through. On this occasion, I suspect, Ms Omar did not do this. Because if she had, she would surely have paused to ask herself certain questions.

For example: “There have been 11 world wars? Gee, I’m pretty sure I’ve only heard of two. When did these other nine world wars take place? And how come no one talks about them as much as they talk about the first couple? Were World Wars Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, 10 and 11 all over very quickly, and therefore not particularly memorable? Or were they all so horrendously traumatic that no one can bear even to mention them?

“Man, I wish I’d paid more attention in high school history class. Guess I’d better go google these nine lesser-known world wars, just in case the press ask me questions after my speech. After all, I wouldn’t want anyone to think I’m some kind of idiot.”

At any rate, I very much hope that Ms Omar has now realised her unfortunate error. Otherwise, she could be in for further embarrassment, the next time she speaks out against the president.

“That moron Trump had better stop bombing Iran. If not, he could easily start World War 12.”

The trouble with having too much sex

Step aside, Sir Mick Jagger. Move over, Mick Hucknall. Because there’s a new challenger for the title of Most Prolific Lover in Pop.

Ray J is an American singer and rapper. And while being interviewed on a podcast this week, he claimed to have slept with no fewer than 12,500 women.

Well, it certainly sounds an impressive figure. Especially once you stop to consider the maths.

Mr J is 45 years old. So if he began at 18 – which is the age of consent in California, where he grew up – that means he’s slept with an average of 1.26 women a day. Bear in mind, though, that he’s been married since 2016. So, if he’s been faithful to his wife, it means that throughout his years as a bachelor he slept with 2.01 women a day.

There’s no denying that this is a remarkable rate. All the same, I can’t help wondering how much he really enjoyed it. Call me a prude, but after a while, sleeping with two brand new women every single day of your life must surely grow somewhat wearing. Some days, in fact, it must feel downright inconvenient.

Imagine it’s Christmas Day. You’ve just sat down with all the family, ready to tuck into the turkey – when, after glancing out of the window, you sigh, and say: “Sorry, everyone, but please may I be excused from the table? It’s just that there’s a couple of young ladies standing outside our front door. I can’t make them wait, it’s snowing outside.”

“Oh, do come off it, Ray darling. I know you’re the hip-hop scene’s most celebrated lothario, but we’re about to eat Christmas lunch. Can’t you just tell them to come back in the morning? If you don’t sleep with two women today, you can always sleep with four women tomorrow, in order to maintain your average.”

“Yes, but I’d hate to disappoint these poor young ladies. Especially as it’s Christmas. I promise, I’ll be back in five minutes.”

“Oh, go on then. After all, this is the season of giving.”

Who’s bad?

The new film about the life of Michael Jackson has just enjoyed the most successful opening weekend of any biopic in Hollywood history. Personally, I must confess that I’m a touch surprised by its popularity. This is because, as had been widely reported in advance, the film does not depict, or even refer to, the period during which Jackson was accused of sexually abusing underage boys.

I for one tend to feel that this is rather a major omission, for a biopic. I don’t suppose many people in the year 2026 would pay to see a biopic of Jimmy Savile which focused entirely on his pioneering work as a disc jockey, and ended with him triumphantly receiving his knighthood. Most cinema-goers, I imagine, would regard such a portrayal of Savile’s life as being somewhat incomplete.

Of course, Jackson was never convicted of any crimes against children, and always maintained his innocence. None the less, I can’t help recalling an old joke of Jimmy Carr’s.

“I’m not saying Michael Jackson is guilty. But if I were a billionaire paedophile, I’d definitely have a funfair in my back garden.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/05/02/is-this-the-funniest-political-gaffe-of-all-time-ilhan-omar/

This is the famous video

comments

Шобла тижня, епізод 41. Ой у лicочку, ой та на дубо́чку, два дрони сиділи, та i говорили

Fri, 01 May 2026 19:28:41 GMT

И чего кацапы бегают от дронов. Только умрут уставши.

comments

What a beautiful outstanding leader the Green Party has!

Fri, 01 May 2026 10:31:51 GMT

Zak Polanski aka David Poulden is angry that the police had to kick that Somali thug who stabbed to Jews near a synagogue to make him to release his knife. Even his own party leadership turned on him.

Senior members of Zack Polanski’s party have turned on him in a row over his response to the Golders Green stabbings.

The Green Party leader faced criticism from his Welsh counterpart and a former deputy leader over a social media post he shared about Wednesday’s attacks.

Mr Polanski was also condemned by campaigners, who accused him of “using anti-Semitism as a political football”.

He re-shared a post on X criticising officers for kicking a Tasered suspect after two Jewish men were stabbed on Wednesday.

Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police commissioner, responded by taking the unusual step of writing to Mr Polanski, saying that his criticism would “inflame tensions” and amplify “us-and-them rhetoric”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/05/01/polanskis-party-turns-on-him-over-golders-green-row/

comments

What the hell “a little bit of a ceasefire” means?

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 08:02:49 GMT

tRump again had a “very good” phone call with Vladimir Putin for 90 minutes.
"We had a good talk, I’ve known him a long time,” the US president told reporters, adding that Putin had suggested “a little bit of a ceasefire” in the war. “And I think he might do that,” he added."
О чем можно говорить с Хуйлом полтора часа? Если только Донни получал instructions from his handler.
Трамп озабочен, что Хуйло не сможет провести свой парад на 9 мая?
Пусть занимается Ираном и Ормузским проливом. Нефть уже 126 за бочку и не собирается падать. Поскорее бы ноябрь и новый Конгресс, который не будет так лизать жопу рыжему деду, так как этот. Какой там у него рейтинг - даже ниже Байденовского, не так ли?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/04/29/trump-discussed-ukraine-ceasefire-very-good-call-putin-war/

comments

Is Millibrain stark raving mad?

Wed, 29 Apr 2026 20:36:09 GMT

I think he is.

I think he is. Now he wants to ban tumble driers. When this bloody government will stop to meddle into people's lives?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/ed-miliband-bans-traditional-tumble-dryers-net-zero-drive/

comments

There's no limit to the Left's stupidity, greed and hate of those who succeed

Wed, 29 Apr 2026 18:10:22 GMT

Michael Deacon
The Left’s loathing of success will destroy Britain

If we obey the Greens’ proposal to ‘tax the rich’, there won’t be enough billionaires left in the country to fund our bloated state.
Solving Britain’s problems is actually very simple. Or so Zack Polanski’s Greens seem to think. All we need to do, explain those celebrated experts in economics, is to “tax the billionaires”. Then we will magically have all the money we could possibly need. We’ll be able to give every town a new hospital, every child a free sex change and every asylum seeker a suite at the Ritz.

I must admit, it does sound marvellously straightforward. There is, however, one small question that I’d like to ask the Greens. How many billionaires do they think Britain has?

In case they don’t know, perhaps I should help them out. According to the most recent edition of The Sunday Times Rich List, the answer is 156. Not a huge number, is it? To put it in context, it’s comfortably less than half the number of people who typically attend Scottish League Two football matches at the home of East Kilbride.

The Greens, of course, will retort that each of those 156 people has absolutely pots of money. Well, yes. A lot for any one individual, certainly. But the problem is as follows. Imagine that a Green government were to seize literally every penny of the combined wealth of those 156 billionaires. If the figures in The Sunday Times Rich List are correct, do you know how much money this would give Prime Minister Polanski to spend? Roughly enough to pay this country’s welfare bill for two years. And then that would be it. All of that money would be gone.

Then what would the Green government do? How would it fund the following year’s welfare bill? It wouldn’t be easy, especially given that, as a result of the Greens’ actions, the welfare bill would have grown even bigger – because those 156 penniless ex-billionaires would presumably now be claiming benefits too. Assuming, of course, that they hadn’t all immediately fled Britain the moment Polanski entered No 10.

Then again, perhaps I’m looking at this the wrong way. Let’s face it, the Greens aren’t pledging to “tax the billionaires” because they seriously think it will fix Britain’s finances – they’re doing it purely because they loathe success. And the way things are going, that loathing will be this country’s ruin.

The Left has always peddled the politics of envy. But never more spitefully than they do today. And for proof, consider this all-too-telling exchange from Tuesday night’s TV debate between the leaders of Scotland’s political parties.

During a row about the economy, Lord Offord of Garvel – the multimillionaire leader of Reform’s Scottish wing – informed his opponents on the Left: “In a 40-year business career, I’ve employed hundreds of thousands of people, and paid £45m in tax.” Now, how do you suppose his opponents on the Left responded to this remark? Did they thank him for creating so many jobs? Or for contributing such vast sums to the state, thus helping fund the NHS, schools and benefits for the unemployed?

No, of course they didn’t. Instead, Ross Greer, the leader of the Scottish Greens, told him that Scotland needs “fewer people like you”, and berated him for owning six homes. Meanwhile, Anas Sarwar, the leader of Scottish Labour, accused him of being “entitled”.

Evidently, they considered the £45m in tax he’d paid to be nowhere near enough – he should be surrendering far more of his wealth. And not just his money, but his property, too.

“You don’t need six homes,” spat Greer. “You don’t even need two homes. Surely if we’re to tackle the housing emergency, super-rich elite individuals like you should be giving up some of those homes so people who desperately need a roof over their head actually have somewhere to live.”

The way Greer said it, you would think Scotland’s housing shortage was somehow Lord Offord’s fault – as if, had he not bought his half-a-dozen palatial mansions, the homeless could have bought them instead.

Again, though, there’s no point hunting for logic in this nonsense. Because it isn’t there. The aim of such tirades is simply to whip up grievance, bitterness and resentment. To make ordinary voters think that, if their country’s in a mess, it’s only because “the rich” are not paying their “fair share”. Even though, according to figures from last year, the richest 0.1 per cent in Britain pay more income tax than the bottom 50 per cent combined.

Naturally, I’m not suggesting that the nation’s few dozen remaining billionaires require our sympathy – I’m sure they can cope perfectly well without it. All I’m saying is that, if we’re to stand any chance of reviving Britain’s fortunes, we need more people who are rich and successful, not fewer. Even if achieving this will make the Left more resentful than ever.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/29/left-hatred-success-destroy-britain/

comments

The King's speech in the US Congress

Wed, 29 Apr 2026 09:09:15 GMT

“I would like, if I may, to take this opportunity to express my particular gratitude to you all for the great honour of addressing this joint meeting of Congress and, on behalf of the Queen and myself, to thank the American people for welcoming us to the United States to mark this semi quincentennial year of the Declaration of Independence.

“And for all of that time, our destinies as nations have been interlinked.

“As Oscar Wilde said, ‘We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language’.

“So, ladies and gentlemen, we meet in times of great uncertainty, in times of conflict from Europe to the Middle East which pose immense challenges for the international community and whose impact is felt in communities the length and breadth of our own countries.

“We meet, too, in the aftermath of the incident not far from this great building that sought to harm the leadership of your nation and to foment wider fear and discord.

“Let me say with unshakeable resolve: such acts of violence will never succeed.

“Whatever our differences, whatever disagreements we may have, we stand united in our commitment to uphold democracy, to protect all our people from harm, and to salute the courage of those who daily risk their lives in the service of our countries.

“Standing here today, it is hard not to feel the weight of history on my shoulder because the modern relationship between our two nations and our own peoples spans not merely 250 years, but over four centuries.

“It is extraordinary to think that I am the nineteenth in our line of sovereigns to study, with daily attention, the affairs of America.

“So, I come here today with the highest respect for the United States Congress, this citadel of democracy created to represent the voice of all American people to advance sacred rights and freedoms.

“Speaking in this renowned chamber of debate and deliberation, I cannot help but think of my late mother, Queen Elizabeth, who, in 1991, was also afforded this signal honour and similarly spoke under the watchful eye of the Statue of Freedom above us.

“Today, I am here on this great occasion in the life of our nations to express the highest regard and friendship of the British people to the people of the United States.

“As you may know, when I address my own Parliament at Westminster, we still follow an age-old tradition and take a member of Parliament ‘hostage’, holding him or her at Buckingham Palace until I am safely returned.

“These days, we look after our ‘guest’ rather well – to the point that they often do not want to leave.

“I don’t know, Mr Speaker, if there were any volunteers for that role here today?

“As I look back across the centuries, Mr Speaker, there emerge certain patterns, certain self-evident truths from which we can learn and draw mutual strength.

“With the spirit of 1776 in our minds, we can perhaps agree that we do not always agree – at least in the first instance.

“Indeed, the very principle on which your Congress was founded – no taxation without representation – was at once a fundamental disagreement between us, and at the same time a shared democratic value which you inherited from us.

“Ours is a partnership born out of dispute, but no less strong for it, so perhaps, in this example, we can discern that our nations are in fact instinctively like-minded – a product of the common democratic, legal and social traditions in which our governance is rooted to this day.

“Drawing on these values and traditions, time and again, our two countries have always found ways to come together.

“And by jove, Mr Speaker, when we have found that way to agree, what great change is brought about – not just for the benefit of our peoples, but of all peoples.

“This, I believe, is the special ingredient in our relationship.

“As President Trump himself observed during his state visit to Britain last autumn, ‘The bond of kinship and identity between America and the United Kingdom is priceless and eternal.

“It is irreplaceable and unbreakable.’

“Mr Speaker, this is by no means my first visit to Washington DC – the capital of this great republic.

“It is in fact my 20th visit to the United States, and my first as King and head of the Commonwealth.

“This is a city which symbolises a period in our shared history, or what Charles Dickens might have called ‘A Tale of Two Georges’: the first President, George Washington, and my five-times Great Grandfather, King George III.

“King George never set foot in America and, please rest assured, I am not here as part of some cunning rearguard action.

“The Founding Fathers were bold and imaginative rebels with a cause.

“250 years ago, or, as we say in the United Kingdom ‘just the other day’, they declared Independence.

“By balancing contending forces and drawing strength in diversity, they united 13 disparate colonies to forge a nation on the revolutionary idea of ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’.

“They carried with them, and carried forward, the great inheritance of the British Enlightenment – as well as the ideals which had an even deeper history in English common law and Magna Carta.

“These roots run deep, and they are still vital.

“Our Declaration of Rights of 1689 was not only the foundation of our constitutional monarchy, but also provided the source of so many of the principles reiterated, often verbatim, in the American Bill of Rights of 1791.

“And those roots go even further back in our history: the US Supreme Court Historical Society has calculated that Magna Carta is cited in at least 160 Supreme Court cases since 1789, not least as the foundation of the principle that executive power is subject to checks and balances.

“This is the reason why there stands a stone, by the River Thames at Runnymede where Magna Carta was signed in the year 1215.

“This stone records that an acre of that ancient and historic site was given to the United States of America by the people of the United Kingdom, to symbolise our shared resolve in support of liberty, and in memory of President John F Kennedy.

“Distinguished members of the 119th Congress, it is here in these very halls that this spirit of liberty and the promise of America’s founders is present in every session and every vote cast.

“Not by the will of one, but by the deliberation of many, representing the living mosaic of the United States.

“In both of our countries, it is the very fact of our vibrant, diverse and free societies that gives us our collective strength, including to support victims of some of the ills that, so tragically, exist in both our societies today.

“And, Mr Speaker, for many here – and for myself – the Christian faith is a firm anchor and daily inspiration that guides us not only personally, but together as members of our community.

“Having devoted a large part of my life to interfaith relationships and greater understanding, it is that faith in the triumph of light over darkness which I have found confirmed countless times.

“Through it I am inspired by the profound respect that develops as people of different faiths grow in their understanding of each other.

“It is why it is my hope – my prayer – that, in these turbulent times, working together and with our international partners, we can stem the beating of ploughshares into swords.

“I am mindful that we are still in the season of Easter, the season that most strengthens my hope.

“It is why I believe, with all my heart, that the essence of our two nations is a generosity of spirit and a duty to foster compassion, to promote peace, to deepen mutual understanding and to value all people, of all faiths, and of none.

“The alliance that our two nations have built over the centuries, and for which we are profoundly grateful to the American people, is truly unique.

“And that alliance is part of what Henry Kissinger described as Kennedy’s ‘soaring vision’ of an Atlantic partnership based on twin pillars: Europe and America.

“That partnership, I believe Mr Speaker, is more important today than it has ever been.

“The first reigning British sovereign to set foot in America was my grandfather, King George VI.

“He visited in 1939 with my beloved grandmother, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother.

“The forces of fascism in Europe were on the march, and some time before the United States had joined us in the defence of freedom.

“Our shared values prevailed.

“Today, we find ourselves in a new era, but those values remain.

“It is an era that is, in many ways, more volatile and more dangerous than the world to which my late mother spoke, in this chamber, in 1991.

“The challenges we face are too great for any one nation to bear alone.

“But in this unpredictable environment, our alliance cannot rest on past achievements, or assume that foundational principles simply endure.

“As my Prime Minister said last month: ‘ours is an indispensable partnership. We must not disregard everything that has sustained us for the last eighty years. Instead, we must build on it’.

“Renewal today starts with security.

“The United Kingdom recognises that the threats we face demand a transformation in British defence.

“That is why our country, in order to be fit for the future, has committed to the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War – during part of which, over 50 years ago, I served with immense pride in the Royal Navy, following in the naval footsteps of my father, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh; my grandfather, King George VI; my great uncle, Lord Mountbatten; and my great grandfather, King George V.

“This year, of course, also marks the 25th anniversary of 9/11.

“This atrocity was a defining moment for America and your pain and shock were felt around the whole world.

“During my visit to New York, my wife and I will again pay our respects to the victims, the families, and the bravery shown in the face of terrible loss. We stood with you then.

“And we stand with you now in solemn remembrance of a day that shall never be forgotten.

“In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, when Nato invoked Article Five for the first time, and the United Nations Security Council was united in the face of terror, we answered the call together – as our people have done so for more than a century, shoulder to shoulder, through two World Wars, the Cold War, Afghanistan and moments that have defined our shared security.

“Today, Mr Speaker, that same, unyielding resolve is needed for the defence of Ukraine and her most courageous people.

“It is needed in order to secure a truly just and lasting peace.

“From the depths of the Atlantic to the disastrously melting ice-caps of the Arctic, the commitment and expertise of the United States Armed Forces and its allies lie at the heart of Nato, pledged to each other’s defence, protecting our citizens and interests, keeping North Americans and Europeans safe from our common adversaries.

“Our defence, intelligence and security ties are hardwired together through relationships measured not in years, but in decades.

“Today, thousands of US service personnel, defence officials and their families are stationed in the United Kingdom, as British personnel serve with equal pride across 30 American states.

“We are building F-35s together.

“And we have agreed the most ambitious submarine programme in history, Aukus.

“And we do so in partnership with Australia, a country of which I am also immensely proud to serve as sovereign.

“We do not embark on these remarkable endeavours together out of sentiment.

“We do so because they build greater shared resilience for the future, so making our citizens safer for generations to come.

“Our common ideals were not only crucial for liberty and equality, they are also the foundation of our shared prosperity.

“The rule of law: the certainty of stable and accessible rules, an independent judiciary resolving disputes and delivering impartial justice.

“These features created the conditions for centuries of unmatched economic growth in our two countries.

“This is why our governments are concluding new economic and technology agreements – to write the next chapter of our joint prosperity and ensure that British and American ingenuity continues to lead the world.

“Our nations are combining talent and resources in the technologies of tomorrow: our new partnerships in nuclear fusion and quantum computing, and in AI and drug discovery, holding the promise of saving countless lives.

“More broadly, we celebrate the 430 billion dollars in annual trade that continues to grow, the 1.7 trillion dollars in mutual investment that fuels that innovation, and the millions of jobs on both sides of the Atlantic supported across both economies.

“These are strong foundations on which to continue to build, for generations yet unborn.

“Our ties in education, research, and cultural exchange empower citizens and future leaders of both countries.

“The Marshall Scholarship, named after the great General George Marshall, and the Association of which I am so proud to be patron, are emblematic of the connection between our two countries.

“Since its founding, more than 2,300 scholarships have been awarded, opening doors for Americans from all walks of life to study at the United Kingdom’s leading universities.

“So as we look toward the next 250 years, we must also reflect on our shared responsibility to safeguard nature, our most precious and irreplaceable asset.

“Millennia before our nations existed, before any border drawn, the mountains of Scotland and Appalachia were one, a single, continuous range, forged in the ancient collision of continents.

“The natural wonders of the United States of America are indeed a unique asset, and generations of Americans have risen to this calling: indigenous, political and civic leaders, people in rural communities and cities alike, have all helped to protect and nurture what President Theodore Roosevelt called ‘the glorious heritage’ of this land’s extraordinary natural splendour, on which so much of its prosperity has always depended.

“Yet even as we celebrate the beauty that surrounds us, our generation must decide how to address the collapse of critical natural systems which threatens far more than the harmony and essential diversity of nature.

“We ignore at our peril the fact that these natural systems, in other words, nature’s own economy, provide the foundation for our prosperity and our national security.

“The story of the United Kingdom and the United States is, at its heart, a story of reconciliation, renewal and remarkable partnership.

“From the bitter divisions of 250 years ago, we forged a friendship that has grown into one of the most consequential alliances in human history.

“I pray with all my heart that our alliance will continue to defend our shared values, with our partners in Europe and the Commonwealth, and across the world, and that we ignore the clarion calls to become ever more inward-looking.

“Mr Speaker, Mr Vice-President, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, America’s words carry weight and meaning, as they have since Independence.

“The actions of this great nation matter even more.

“President Lincoln understood this so well, with his reflection in the magisterial Gettysburg Address that the world may little note what we say, but will never forget what we do.

“And so, to the United States of America, on your 250th birthday, let our two countries rededicate ourselves to each other in the selfless service of our peoples and of all the peoples of the world.

“God bless the United States and the United Kingdom.”

comments

Как похорошело Туапсе за годы СВО!

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 18:18:15 GMT

Пыпа заявил , что глава Краснодарского края сообщил ему об отсутствии серьезных проблем в Туапсе.

Значит это "не серьёзная проблема" или вообще не проблема.

comments

Political violence is all the rage for the left

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 08:26:33 GMT

Melanie Phillips
A recent podcast produced by The New York Times suggested that petty theft might be “the new political protest”. The paper’s culture editor, Nadja Spiegelman, coined the term “microlooting” for the phenomenon of people stealing small things from big corporations like Whole Foods. This was described as political resistance against “immoral laws” — namely, that some people become billionaires.
Agreeing that he would “pirate”, ie steal, “music from an indie band”, the immensely influential radical Hasan Piker said he was “pro-piracy all the way”. On whether he would steal from the Louvre, he opined: “We’ve got to get back to cool crimes like that: bank robberies, stealing priceless artefacts, things of that nature.
In Britain, the Greens’ leader Zack Polanski said something similar. People living in poverty were forced to steal, he declared, because they “had no other option”.
There’s now a shoplifting “resistance” movement, Take Back Power, whose adherents steal food from supermarkets and give it to food banks. Activists claim that “liberating” produce is “non-violent action to resist the super-rich”. But being cool doesn’t end at freeing the carrot.
In December 2024 Brian Thompson, the chief executive of United Healthcare, was shot in the back and killed in a New York street. Piker said many “understand” Luigi Mangione, the man charged with murdering him, because Thompson himself was guilty of “social murder”.
Many others cheered Thompson’s killing, expressing their hatred of the “corrupt” health insurance industry. On social media, Thompson was mocked and vilified while Mangione was elevated to folk-hero status. Girls wore “Free Luigi” T-shirts at his pre-trial hearing, while “Cougars for Luigi” and “Latinas for Mangione” sprang up.
The frightening thing is that so many people either support or are indifferent to such monstrous nihilism. Piker has an enormous following among the young. This month, the influencer, who has lamented the fall of the Soviet Union, produced roaring applause when he told the Yale Political Union that the “American empire” is fading fast and “we must end it”.
Other statements that have made Piker such a hero include: “America deserved 9/11”; on landlords who don’t rent out their property: “Murder those motherf***ers in the streets, let the streets soak in their f***ing red capitalist blood”; on Senator Rick Scott, who headed a hospital chain that pleaded guilty to fraud but who was never charged with any crime: “If you cared about Medicare fraud, you would kill Rick Scott”; and much more in this vein.
Yet Piker is lionised by the Democratic Party, whose midterm candidates are campaigning with him by their side. The Democrats and political extremists are morphing alarmingly into each other.
Cole Tomas Allen, who allegedly set out to kill Trump administration officials at the White House correspondents’ dinner on Saturday evening, has reportedly echoed in his social media posts the incessant demonisation of opponents and calls for violence that increasingly emanate from the Democratic Party.
Last year, Lenawee County Democrats in Michigan denounced Donald Trump and immigration officials as Nazis and said Trump supporters should be hanged. Michigan Democrats displayed a sign that equated Maga supporters with Nazis and reproduced a coded sign for murdering Trump.
Allen is a graduate of the California Institute of Technology and was “teacher of the month” at his tutoring service. In a dismal finding, the American Political Perspectives Survey has shown that those with graduate degrees are twice as likely to support political violence as those with a high school diploma or less. Support for political violence is also highest among those identifying as “very liberal”.
The two are connected. The education system is dominated by the ideological left, which has always been attracted to violence. Mainstream liberal politics is now moving in the direction of intimidatory and violent street mobs demonstrating over the “omnicause” of Gaza, climate change and capitalism.
These baleful developments are the result of several things. The rule of law is based on the consent of the people. That consent is being eroded because of a loss of faith in the democratic system and the political mainstream.
Education, meanwhile, has increasingly imploded into anti-West propaganda and the implicit approval of political violence. Among many of the educated young, Nietzsche is a pin-up. His tragic warning against nihilism has been reimagined as an endorsement.
Religion has been junked for a supposed age of reason. But reason has given way to imbecility.
In Britain, the Polanski agenda — pro-wealth tax/prostitution/nationalising Donald Trump’s golf courses, anti-Nato/landlords/national borders — would embarrass a politically savvy 14-year-old.
Morality has been replaced by ideology. Thus the rich can do no right and the poor no wrong. Stealing is justified if it poses as concern for the oppressed. Morality no longer consists of rules to constrain selfish appetites but means taking positions against what personally offends you.
So for another New York Times podcast participant, Jia Tolentino, getting iced coffee in a plastic cup or taking a plane flight for pleasure was selfish and immoral, but blowing up a pipeline should be legal. As Spiegelman sighed: “It is so hard to live ethically in an unethical society”.
You could die laughing. Representative democracy and the law-abiding order it upholds are in serious trouble.
https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/political-violence-all-rage-left-clhrhzxj2

comments

На просторах Флибусты

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 20:45:09 GMT

Комментаторов, которые пишут в отзывах "расса" и "рассовый" в аду ждёт отдельный котел. А их там легион.
А аот этот стишок я спер из отзыва, а МТА (если вы помните, что значит эта аббревиатура), пишущих в подобном стиле намерено.

"Нижеподписавшийся
Волка повстречал.
Вышеупомянутый
Громко зарычал.

А вокруг все цветики
Просто благодать.
По причине этого
Жалко пропадать.

Нижеподписавшийся
Крикнул: «Караул!»
И на полной скорости
К речке драпанул.

Вышеупомянутый,
Голодом томим,
В том же направлении
Кинулся за ним.

К счастью, тут охотничек
Мимо проходил,
Каковой впоследствии
Волка застрелил.

Нижеподписавшийся
Просит за спасение
Выразить охотничку
Это поздравление!"

Еще меня бесят особи мужского пола, оставляющие отзывы типа "бабское писево" и при этом восторгающиеся писевом про бравых спецназовцев или отставных ментов с навыками рукопашного боя, которые одним махом семерых побивахом, которым " гадит англичанка" или "пендосы" и переигрывают Цусиму, восстанавливают великую российскую империю или дают очень ценные советы товарищу Сталину. Такого добра там навалом. Поэтому мой черный список приближается к лимиту, к сожалению авторы этих шедевров в него уже не помещаются.

comments

The Telegraph cartoon April 27, 2026

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 16:09:52 GMT

Our disgusting slime of Attorney General "Lord" Hermer

comments

The green lunacy

Sun, 26 Apr 2026 17:31:18 GMT

Ben Marlow

'You’re destroying the economy’: how Labour killed Britain’s thriving chemical industry

Rapid deindustrialisation is a threat to the economy and risks leaving the UK reliant on imports

Tim Carter slows the car to a crawl, eventually pulling over to allow for the full scale of what lies out of the window to be taken in. The sprawling Wilton petrochemicals site where he works, south of the River Tees, once thrummed with activity.

Opened in 1949 by chemicals powerhouse ICI, it quickly became one of Britain’s most important technical hubs, helping to propel the North East to the vanguard of advanced manufacturing.

Yet on a warm Tuesday morning in April, the 2,000-acre complex has the feel of a graveyard.

Framed by a bright blue sky, the skeletons of once-mighty industrial giants are dotted across the horizon in every direction – fossils from an era when Britain could still rely on such production strongholds to provide the building blocks that power a civilised, modern economy.

The plant that Carter oversees as operations site manager is at risk of being added to the casualty list, further degrading Britain’s capacity to produce what industrialists call “foundational chemicals”.

These are the substances that are essential in the production of plastics, fertilisers, pharmaceuticals, industrial materials, most consumer goods and scores of other products that most of us take for granted..
Chemicals underpin 95pc of all manufactured goods. Yet, many other critical chemical facilities similar to Huntsman’s have vanished in recent years – victims of what the Ineos billionaire Sir Jim Ratcliffe has called “the deindustrialisation of the UK”.
However, despite its significance, bosses fear the hollowing out of the UK’s industrial base is in danger of almost being missed in the corridors of Westminster.

India’s Tata Chemicals pulled down the shutters permanently on its soda ash plant in Lostock, on the outskirts of Northwich, Cheshire, last year.

The decision not only brought to an end nearly 150 years of uninterrupted manufacturing on the site, but left Britain without its own supplies of sodium carbonate, a key ingredient in the manufacture of glass, paper, detergents, and to treat fresh water.

Tata’s plans were announced in 2024 but they didn’t appear in the national press until it was picked up by Sky News earlier this year.

Grant Pearson, chairman of Ensus, one of Britain’s last bioethanol producers, warns against complacency.

“If you don’t have a chemicals industry ... then you can’t have pharmaceutical production, aerospace production or car production,” he says.

“Without a core basic chemical manufacturing base, you’d end up with those businesses either moving overseas, or these industries totally reliant on overseas supply chains.”
.Punishing energy bills are being compounded by Ed Miliband’s obsession with reaching arbitrary net zero targets. Companies have been left contending with a mountain of government-imposed green levies and taxes including the climate change levy, renewables obligation and feed-in tariffs.

Elliott has dubbed it “decarbonisation through deindustrialisation,” and says it is no coincidence that a near 40pc fall in UK chemical production between between 2021 and 2024 was accompanied by a similar percentage reduction in the sector’s carbon emissions.
In February, the Chemicals Industry Association issued a fresh plea for “business-supportive policy”. Elliott said the collapse in output was the result of “successive government failures to support UK manufacturing”. Policy has been tantamount to “economic vandalism”, Elliott said.

Sir Jim suggested in December that carbon taxes are fundamentally flawed because “deindustrialising Britain achieves nothing for the environment. It merely shifts production and emissions elsewhere”.
Instead of slowing the charge towards net zero in the face of the Middle East crisis, Miliband and the Government have pledged to double down on renewables.

Calls to make Britain less reliant on foreign imports by fast-tracking new drilling licences in major North Sea fields such as Jackdaw and Rosebank have been dismissed. Instead, Labour believes the Iran energy shock is further proof that Britain needs to continue to move away from fossil fuels.
Could the thousands of jobs being lost to deindustrialisation be replaced by employment on green projects, as Labour claims?

South Korean steel specialist SeAH opened a wind power components factory down the road last year, but Mustapha is doubtful the sectors of the future can bring the same benefits as the heavy industry of old.

“Those jobs are for the educated few. The steelworks provided jobs for everybody. Look at those on the right,” he says pointing to a row of crumbling red brick buildings on the short journey to Wilton. “All this was built for the British Steel people.”

He remembers a pizza takeaway that used to serve the steelworkers. “They made thousands [of pounds] a night ... but that business is finished.” In Labour’s hands, the same may soon be said of British industry.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/04/26/britain-workshop-of-world-factories-fighting-their-lives/

comments

Countryside walks: today and a week ago

Sun, 26 Apr 2026 15:14:24 GMT

Still unspoiled beautiful Kent countryside

comments

Мадяр. Шобла тижня 40

Sat, 25 Apr 2026 14:56:53 GMT

comments

Michael Deacon is delightful as ever

Sat, 25 Apr 2026 07:06:18 GMT

Michael Deacon

Labour now has no choice but to ban the burka

And, embarrassingly for Sir Keir and co, it’s all their own fault

The Government hasn’t realised it yet, but it’s about to get itself into the most stupendously embarrassing tangle. This week ministers have announced that, to help catch criminals on police watchlists, facial recognition technology will now be used all over the country. On high streets throughout Britain, special cameras mounted on vans will scan the faces of pedestrians, and alert the police each time they identify a wanted man or woman.

I suspect that you can already spot the tiny potential flaw in this scheme. But since ministers apparently can’t, let’s be helpful, and spell it out for them.

Facial recognition technology, as you may well have deduced from its name, can only work if it’s possible to see someone’s face. Which means that, for this plan to stand any chance of success, the Government surely needs to ban members of the public from wearing face coverings. Such as, for example, balaclavas and surgical masks.

And oh yes, I almost forgot. The burka.

Which is why I say the Government will soon find itself facing a rather awkward dilemma. Option one: waste vast sums of taxpayers’ money on technology that criminals will be able to evade, simply by covering their faces. Or option two: enrage Muslim voters by doing something that the Green Party, not to mention the Government’s own backbench MPs, will inevitably denounce as Islamophobic, racist, hateful and bigoted. Which option do we suppose this Labour Government will choose?

I don’t know about you, but I reckon I can take a pretty good guess. In fact, now that I look at those two options again, maybe the Government won’t find the dilemma quite as agonising as I suggested. After all, since when have Labour ministers worried about wasting vast sums of taxpayers’ money?

On the whole, therefore, I think we may be reasonably confident that my guess is correct. Which means that the facial recognition technology is almost certainly pointless. Then again, at least one good thing may come of it.

Some enterprising film director can treat us to a 21st-century reboot of Eric Idle and Robbie Coltrane’s unforgettable comedy from 1990, Nuns on the Run. Except this time, the oafish male criminals will try to evade capture by dressing not in habits, but in an even more effective form of disguise.

Berks in Burkas. Coming soon to a cinema, and indeed a high street, near you.
Why do the Left love shoplifters?

On the other hand, not everyone who’s committed a crime is desperate to hide it. In fact, some people actively boast about it.

Take Jia Tolentino. She’s a 37-year-old Left-wing journalist from New York. And this week, during a New York Times podcast discussion entitled “The Rich Don’t Play By the Rules, So Why Should I?”, she proudly declared that “on several occasions” she has shoplifted from the Whole Foods supermarket chain – and that “I didn’t feel bad about it at all”.

She provided two reasons for her lack of remorse. First, because she’d done it to benefit someone in need (she gave the items she’d pinched to a woman from her “neighbourhood mutual aid group”). And second, because she disapproves of Whole Foods, as in her eyes it’s a nasty rich capitalist corporation, and therefore deserves to be – as she calls it – “microlooted”.

Remarkably, she seems to imagine that most Americans would admire what she did. “Stealing for need or purpose – it’s something that we understand and feel quite friendly toward,” she explained. “And I think if someone were, say, walking out of Whole Foods with an Ikea bag of whatever and giving it to the people sheltering underneath the scaffolding at the jail going up close by in Brooklyn, most people would agree… We love that in America.”

I was intrigued to hear this. Especially because, according to the Daily Mail, Ms Tolentino lives in a five-bedroom house in Brooklyn worth $2.2m (£1.6m). Which would suggest that she’s really rather rich herself.

So does that mean I’m entitled to go and “microloot” her house?

After all, if I stole all her most valuable possessions, I could give them to the people sheltering underneath the scaffolding at the jail going up close by in Brooklyn. That would plainly constitute “stealing for need or purpose”, so she would presumably applaud my noble effort to reduce inequality, and thank me for striking such a righteous blow against the over-privileged.

I can picture it now. “Oh, Mr Deacon, it’s so inspiring to see you stealing everything I own so that you can give it all to a pack of vagrants who will sell it to buy crack. We love that in America. Say, that Ikea bag you’ve stuffed with my family’s laptops, phones, games consoles and jewellery sure looks heavy. Let me help you carry it.”

Come to think of it, maybe it’s not just her possessions that I should redistribute. In our own country we have ever-soaring numbers of asylum seekers in urgent need of accommodation. And, although I’m sure they’re not ungrateful to be given a hotel room in Scunthorpe or Stoke, I bet they’d much prefer a $2.2m house in New York.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/25/labour-now-has-no-choice-but-to-ban-the-burka/

comments

The Times cartoon, April 25, 2026

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 18:47:15 GMT

Our hapless and spineless Prime Minister

comments

The Telegraph cartoon April 24, 2026

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 12:32:12 GMT

Our hapless Prime Minister: a dead man walking

comments

Crazy celebrity pop singer takes his daughter to North Korea on family holidays

Thu, 23 Apr 2026 11:56:56 GMT

Michael Deacon

Damon Albarn takes his daughter to North Korea on family holidays. Is he mad?

Want a ‘politically aware’ child? Skip the water slides and follow the Britpop elite to Pyongyang for two weeks of state-sponsored brutality
When I was a child, I used to grumble bitterly when my parents took me on camping holidays in Scotland. The midges, the rain, the cramped little tent, the week-long withdrawal from TV – how I whined and moaned.

Today, though, I feel I owe my parents an apology. I really shouldn’t have been so ungrateful. Because I now see that it could have been a lot worse.

After all, just look where Damon Albarn from Blur took his offspring.

Albarn has only one child – a daughter named Missy, who’s 26. And, while being interviewed by podcaster, Adam Buxton, this week, the Britpop singer was asked whether he’d ever worried about making her life “too easy”. You know, with him being a multimillionaire celebrity who could afford to indulge her every whim and shield her from all life’s hardships. His answer?

“I probably am a bit guilty of that in some ways, but I’ve also been very hard on my daughter [in terms of] culture and education,” said Albarn. “Like, family holidays in North Korea.”

Noting his interviewer’s air of incredulity, he confirmed that yes, he was being serious. And it was clear that he felt the experience had done his daughter good. Missy, he believes, is “more politically aware than a lot of people in her generation”.
Well, that’s certainly nice to hear. But I have to confess, it doesn’t sound like my own idea of a blissful family holiday. Still, I mustn’t be narrow-minded. Perhaps I should ask my 12-year-old son if he fancies trying it this summer.

“Now, darling, I know we normally go to family-friendly resorts in places like Greece and Cyprus. But this year, I thought we might book somewhere a little different. How about two weeks in the terrifyingly dystopian communist dictatorship of North Korea? There possibly won’t be quite so many water slides, and the all-inclusive buffet might not be as well-stocked, but it will do wonders for your political awareness. Admittedly, there does tend to be a fair amount of blood-drenched state brutality, but not to worry, because I’m sure our heavily armed escorts from the regime won’t allow us to see any of that.”

“Hmm. I’m not sure, Dad. Couldn’t we go somewhere a bit more relaxing? Like, say, Tehran?”

Speaking of which, the war in Iran is expected to cause severe shortages of jet fuel. And as a result, the public has been warned that their summer holidays abroad could be cancelled.

Obviously, this would be a terrible disappointment for most families. I can’t help wondering, though, whether the children of any major British pop stars might actually be a touch relieved.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/23/blur-daughter-north-korea/

comments

Labour government and human rights lawyers are protecting terrorists

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 18:53:58 GMT

Michael Deacon

Islamist terrorists now have more ‘human rights’ than we do

By protecting an al-Qaeda plotter from torture while ignoring our right not to be blown up, the law is turning Britain into a jihadi haven.
Down in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden will be kicking himself. After 9/11, he hid in Pakistan. But that, he must now realise, was his fatal mistake.

Instead, he should have moved to Britain. If he had, he’d have been perfectly safe. In fact, he wouldn’t even have had to bother hiding because he could simply have told a judge that removing him would breach his human rights.

On the face of it, such a scenario may sound just a tiny bit far-fetched. But consider this. In 2012, a Bangladeshi national named Shah Rahman was jailed – along with three other UK-based terrorists inspired by al-Qaeda – for plotting to bomb the London Stock Exchange. This week, however, we learnt that his story has the most flabbergasting addendum.

After he was eventually released from prison, Rahman applied for asylum. Thanks to the small matter of his terror conviction, this plea was rejected. Yet he was still allowed to remain in the UK. Why? Because it was ruled that sending him back to Bangladesh would – yes, you guessed it – breach his human rights. To be specific, it would violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which provides an absolute right of protection from “torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

Well, I can’t tell you how relieved I was to read that. Imagine how awful it would be if a foreign extremist who plotted a major terror attack on our country were to come to some kind of harm. How distressing it is to picture this poor, vulnerable, would-be al-Qaeda bomber being treated in a fashion that he might consider degrading. Why, I can hardly bear to think about it.

Then again, it may be that not everyone shares my sympathies. Last year, the polling firm, JL Partners, asked the British public whether they would support the deportation of serious foreign criminals, such as rapists and paedophiles, even if deportation would put those foreign criminals in danger of being tortured. And you’ll never guess how the British public responded. An overwhelming majority said they’d be perfectly happy to risk such an outcome, thank you very much. As for the very small minority who disagreed, I don’t know how many of them were thinking, “No, I don’t want foreign paedophiles to be tortured abroad. I want to torture them here, myself.”

At any rate, the results of that poll make it fair to surmise that most British people, given the choice, would quite like to deport Rahman. Because, not unreasonably, they could argue, “Yes, Article 3 protects his ‘human right’ not to be tortured. But what about our ‘human right’ not to be blown up by an extremist fanatic? Or at least, our ‘human right’ to live in a country that is able to get rid of extremist fanatics, rather than forcing us to live alongside them? Why should we have to put up with laws which seem to leave Islamist terrorists with more ‘human rights’ than the rest of us?”

All good questions. To which the Tories and Reform will doubtless offer a straightforward answer – as both of those parties have pledged to withdraw Britain from the ECHR, mainly in order to prevent farces like this one.

Admittedly, the pledge horrifies many politicians on the Left, who, as always, have the best interests of foreign criminals close at heart. And it may well be that some of these politicians’ constituents feel rather anxious about losing the protections of the ECHR. In which case, I politely ask them to consider living by the following rule of thumb.

If you don’t want to be deported to a country that might do nasty things to you, don’t plot a devastating terrorist attack on the country you’re currently living in. Just a small thought.

For the time being, however, we’re obliged to continue with a system which graciously permits gentlemen such as Rahman to remain in our midst, safe from harm. Which is why I imagine that poor old Bin Laden is currently feeling terribly foolish. As the flames of damnation lick higher, he’ll be suffering from the most agonising esprit d’escalier, as he dwells on what he should have said.

“Come on, Your Honour. You can’t possibly hand me over to those mean and horrid Americans. Don’t mass-murdering jihadi psychopaths have a right to a family life in the UK? After all, everyone else on the planet does.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/22/islamist-terrorists-more-human-rights-we-do/

comments

It all goes according to the plan

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:04:26 GMT

There is an uncanny similarity between Putin's sycophants who claim that his "Special Military Operation" goes according to the plan and Trump's sycophants who insist that Iran war was meticulously planned.

‘It’s all a giant clusterf---’: Inside Trump’s floundering Iran peace process

US president increasingly relying on loyalists who paint ‘rose-coloured view’ of conflict, say White House insiders
Connor Stringer
An army of yes men, in thrall to Donald Trump’s shifts of temper and short attention span, is hampering any prospect of peace with Iran. And with the president’s indefinite extension of a ceasefire being announced on Tuesday, a day after he threatened to resume bombing, the White House’s claims of success are running out of road, insiders say.

In the past 48 hours alone, the US president claimed that a deal was “close”, before then saying it was out of reach. Typifying the confusion, JD Vance, the vice-president, was still at the White House, after Mr Trump said on Sunday that his deputy was heading to Pakistan for talks with Iranian negotiators.

Tehran, after days of stalling, moved first, saying it was pulling out of the peace process, which had been cratering for days.

Mr Trump’s subsequent statement came minutes after US stock markets had closed. With the war in its eighth week, the president backed off again, saying Iran would be given more time to come up with a peace proposal.

“No one in the administration seems to know what’s going on. What the plans are. What we’re even aiming for now. It’s all just a giant clusterf--- and there’s zero accountability, either,” a Trump-world source told The Telegraph.

Even Mr Trump’s closest aides are struggling to keep pace with his updates on Truth Social, which have generated a lot of noise but no discernible diplomatic progress.
No clear plan on Iran

On Sunday, Mike Waltz, the US ambassador to the United Nations, and Chris Wright, Mr Trump’s energy secretary, told morning news programmes that Mr Vance would be heading up negotiations in Islamabad.

At the same time, Mr Trump was telling reporters that his vice-president would not be travelling for security reasons, before changing tack and saying he was going to Pakistan after all.

Former officials say such actions indicate that the president is increasingly detached from the structures that typically guide an administration when conducting war operations.

Instead, Mr Trump relies on instincts and advice from a tight circle of loyalists who shape – and in some cases soften – the picture of the war.

Having long passed the “four to six weeks” he said the war would take, the constant mixed messaging and exaggerated claims about a deal point to one reality: there is no clear plan.

What once looked like a calculated campaign to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb has deteriorated into daily updates with no consistency.

Social media posts fired off by the president and Mohammad Ghalibaf, the Iranian parliament speaker, tend to shape the media narrative far more robustly than any comments made by cabinet ministers or even the president himself in various interviews.

The claims from Iran and the US remain at odds, reflecting that their respective demands have so far been irreconcilable.

Mr Trump’s actions indicate he has little patience for the long, structured national security meetings that traditionally anchor US decision-making during war. He prefers to react to events as they unfold, a style aides desperately tried to pry him away from during his first term.

“That is just not what happens anymore, Trump doesn’t like it, he feels constrained by it,” John Bolton, the president’s former national security adviser, told The Telegraph about the abandonment of traditional decision-making.

“It was more [of a] process in the first term because we were able to explain to him why it benefited him. Now he thinks he can do what he wants.”

Susie Wiles, Mr Trump’s all-powerful chief of staff, is said to have expressed concern that aides are giving the president “a rose-coloured view” of the war. But the stalemate between Iran and the US suggests she hasn’t been persuasive in changing the president’s unwavering view that all is going to plan.

“There is no one group in their command that speaks for the nation,” a source close to the president said.
One of Mr Trump’s closest allies when it comes to the conflict is Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary. He has framed the combat operations as divinely sanctioned, repeatedly invoking religious rhetoric removed from pragmatic tactics or war doctrine.

The president has even claimed that Mr Hegseth does not want the war to end, telling journalists, “Pete didn’t want [the war] to be settled”, and that he was one of the first to throw support behind the initial bombing campaign.

Mr Vance, an isolationist who voiced his displeasure with foreign wars throughout Mr Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, said little at the outset and has since been prevented from criticising the war effort by being tasked with negotiating peace.

Tulsi Gabbard, Mr Trump’s director of national intelligence, was also a fierce critic of foreign wars before the president appointed her to the cabinet. Reportedly already at risk of losing her position, she appears to be staying quiet.

The president is provided with daily videos of US military successes, but insiders say he has been shielded from the conflict’s misadventures, which include a US missile attack which reportedly killed more than 170 schoolchildren near its designated target.

Mr Trump and the Pentagon had said they were investigating the strike, which occurred during the early days of the war.

When not extolling the US military’s abilities, the president has sought to vent his frustration at European allies for not helping.

“There is panic and the White House realises that nobody is coming to rescue them, the Europeans aren’t going to step up. It has been deemed on him now that we have to get out of this,” a source added.

“His patience is short and he is telling people he doesn’t even want to deal with it anymore.”
‘His posts are causing chaos’

One source described how Mr Trump had become more irritable, claiming he was sleeping less and writing unchecked posts on Truth Social, as aides – who reportedly urged the president to curb his social media activity – have been unable to intervene.

But Truth Social was where his latest update was made – minutes after stocks close down on a day when oil prices again rose, nearing $100 (£74).

The president’s comments about the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic shipping lane, have only undermined efforts by Pakistan and others to strike a deal to end the war, a Gulf diplomatic source said.

“His posts are what are causing the chaos,” the diplomat said. “It’s good and bad but the bad has major effects. Behind every single tweet there is a reason for posting, often at the stock market.”

Behind the presidential podium in Cross Hall of the White House on April 1, Mr Trump addressed the nation and told the US that its military objectives were almost complete and that the war was “very close” to being over.

Yet, 21 days later – and 52 days since the first strikes were launched – the same roadblocks remain."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2026/04/21/white-house-iran-trump-war/

Local Trump sycophants like some Alex Shishkin and others are invited to comment.

comments

Looking at our current Parliament I recall the following speech:

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 19:22:28 GMT

"It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonoured by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice.

Ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government.

Ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess?

Ye have no more religion than my horse. Gold is your God. Which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defiled this sacred place, and turned the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?

Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation. You were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance.

Your country therefore calls upon me to cleanse this Augean stable, by putting a final period to your iniquitous proceedings in this House; and which by God's help, and the strength he has given me, I am now come to do.

I command ye therefore, upon the peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place.

Go, get you out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves be gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

In the name of God, go!"

Oliver Cromwell to the Rump of the Long Parliament.
It was told exactly 373 years ago but it is still quite timely.

comments

New Michael Deacon piece worth reading

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 14:23:32 GMT

Michael Deacon
According to The Guardian, families are being ‘torn apart’ by the ‘extreme’ Right-wing views of today’s pensioners. Seriously?
Here’s an idea for Louis Theroux. He’s just had a big hit with his Netflix documentary about “the manosphere”. So, as a sequel, perhaps he should make one about “the nanosphere”.

Because it’s not just young men who are being dangerously radicalised online. It’s old ladies.

Or at least, so I gather from The Guardian. At the weekend it ran a 3,736-word feature headlined, “‘I Feel Like I’m Losing Her’: The Families Torn Apart by Older Relatives Going Far-Right”. And it was all about how horrifying it is to see the political views of many “boomers” growing ever more “extreme”, under the influence of online “misinformation” – as well as AI-generated “nostalgia porn” about “how much better” life in Britain used to be.

Interviewees described their alarm at hearing their “boomer” parents express admiration for Nigel Farage, or ire over illegal immigration. One millennial woman said she “now thinks twice” about taking her children to her mother’s house, because she’s “nervous” that her mother “might say something offensive” about “small boats”. Meanwhile, a millennial man said he’d urged his mother, who is in her 60s, to cure herself of her Right-wing opinions by trying “therapy”. Frustratingly, she’d declined to take him up on this thoughtful suggestion.

Another interviewee – an academic in his early 50s – reported that his elderly parents have started supporting Reform, because they’ve been “radicalised” by “the discourse on immigration”. He complained: “It’s like they’ve lost the ability to think critically, so they’re in this sort of self-reinforcing cycle of ignorance. But they also can’t imagine they’re ignorant because they’re educated people who know about the world.”

Naturally I’m sure we all sympathise with these poor, worried Guardian readers. I hope they won’t think it insensitive, however, if I ask: are they quite certain that it’s only “boomers” whose “extreme” opinions are “tearing families apart”?

In the interests of balance, I suggest The Guardian run a follow-up piece, on what to do if your younger relatives are “going far-Left”. The author could interview pensioners who are distressed to hear their children and grandchildren spout unhinged views that are completely divorced from reality, such as “Zack Polanski would make a good prime minister”, or parrot misinformation they’ve picked up online, such as “women have penises”.

Oh, and one other thought. Maybe the piece could suggest that, if your “boomer” mother is quite a lot crosser about immigration than she used to be, it might be because immigration is quite a lot higher than it used to be. And, if she says that life in this country used to be better than it is now, it’s not necessarily because she’s been brainwashed by “nostalgia porn”. It might be because it actually did.
Even Britain’s loos are going down the pan

What a relief for Bridget Phillipson. For months, Labour’s minister for “women and equalities” has been under serious pressure to ban trans women (i.e., males) from using women’s public loos. Yet now, it seems, she needn’t worry.

Because, the way things are going, there soon won’t be any public loos left to ban them from.

In England, reports the Royal Society for Public Health, the number of these facilities has fallen by 14 per cent in the past decade. This means that there is now only one public lavatory for every 15,000 people.

This is of course a worrying state of affairs. But in particular, I should imagine, for the residents of Durham. Because they’ve got quite enough problems as it is.

Look away now if you’re eating breakfast. But six months ago, while strolling through the centre of that otherwise beautiful city, I was somewhat taken aback to see a sign from the council, sternly instructing people not to “defecate” in the street.

Still, it turns out that Durham isn’t alone, because in the past year similar signs have been erected in various other British cities, including London, Colchester and York. I find this a puzzling trend. Perhaps my memory deceives me, but I would swear that, when I was younger, councils didn’t feel the need to put up signs of this kind. In those days, it was taken for granted that the people of this country knew not to behave in such an utterly revolting manner.

Yet now, it appears, these signs are increasingly considered essential. I wonder what’s changed.

Here’s one theory. In January it was reported that a quarter of children starting primary school in 2025 hadn’t been toilet-trained. Could it be that their parents haven’t been toilet-trained, either?

Well, I suppose we shouldn’t rule it out. There is, however, an alternative possibility, which relates to another major change that has taken place in our country over recent years.

Then again, I’d better not go on, or The Guardian will call me a boomer.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/21/this-attack-on-boomers-exposes-hypocrisy-millennial-left/

comments

On April 21, 2026, we celebrate what would have been Queen Elizabeth II's 100th birthday

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 07:54:45 GMT

comments

The Telegraph cartoon April 21, 2026

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 07:46:52 GMT

Lier, lier, pants on fire!

comments

Trump is too deranged to continue in office

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 12:45:53 GMT

Mathew Parris
To say someone has lost his mind can carry a range of meanings. Accusations of mental instability may be merely a kind of insult, bandied around cheaply in politics, and not a serious diagnosis.But when I say the president of the United States is insane I must make clear that this is not meant as playground abuse. I mean Donald Trump is mentally ill; that he is of unsound mind; that he is suffering from substantial cognitive decline. I mean that were he in any lesser office than the American presidency, urgent discussions would be taking place among colleagues about his mental fitness for the post.Imagine he worked in a bank. Or as a British Airways pilot. Or as your local solicitor or GP. In none of these roles would he be allowed to keep working.
Among this president’s fellow leaders, there cannot be a friend or foe of the United States who would dare publicly acknowledge that the leader of the free world has lost his wits. Nor a single one who would privately deny it. I’ve been writing as much for more than a year, and with every month it becomes more urgent to repeat it. As we speak, he has plunged half a continent into murderous chaos and the world peers into the abyss of economic collapse.
An early and critical sign that somebody is of unsound mind is when they begin to act, react or communicate in ways that even at the most obvious level are not in their own interest. Lashing out in personal terms at the Pope, for example, if you lead a country with a huge Catholic population; in one breath declaring that another country’s nuclear capability has been destroyed, and in another declaring that it represents an immediate threat. Or posting on your Truth Social account an image of yourself in red and white robes with light shining from your hands healing the afflicted, with a fighter jet and American symbols in the background.
“Gaga” is a cruel word for a cruel affliction and age-related cognitive decline comes in many forms. If you are like ex-President Biden, you stumble gently around, falling over and forgetting things. If you’re his successor (or King Lear), your energy never flags and you start letting fly in all directions, contradicting yourself, firing people, promising the impossible and asserting the implausible, swinging wildly between aggression and self-pity.
The president has surrounded himself with a ragtag platoon of close collaborators who must see his derangement all too clearly but, should he fall, must fall with him, and so stay silent. Under the 25th amendment to the US constitution, his vice-president and cabinet could declare his incapacity for office. But they will not. Like those surrounding Joe Biden, they know the truth but say nothing.
There was a time when the most obvious explanation for this president’s otherwise inexplicable behaviour — that he was losing his wits — felt too shocking to contemplate. So commentators stroked their beards and devised theories, such as that he was a dealmaker who opened with a preposterous bid (seize Greenland) then negotiated down. Or that he was a genius for generating content on social media and so dominating the news. Or the “madman theory” — power through pretending to be mad. That the occupant of the White House was not pretending was still too terrible a leap for our imagination. It is no longer too terrible. The president has lost his mind and must be removed. This cannot happen until he begins losing the confidence of his own Republican Party. Then, after November’s midterm elections, a possibility may open up: impeachment.
Only the House of Representatives can start the process, by simple majority vote. The trial, however, is conducted in the Senate and for it to succeed a two-thirds majority of senators is required.
“Unfitness for office” is not among the named grounds for the impeachment of a president but “high crimes and misdemeanours” is, and the truth is that if the requisite majorities in both houses of Congress want to remove a president, the necessary misconduct will be found; so impeachment is more like our Commons “no-confidence” motions than a criminal trial.
And the further truth is that if the required Senate majority is to be obtained, a schism in this president’s party must open up. Twice impeached in his first term (the word refers to the process, not the verdict), Trump survived because Republican senators stuck together. In any future impeachment they will have to weigh up whether their party’s chances will be enhanced at the next presidential election, in 2028, by removing the incumbent now.
In a 100-member Senate, not many Republicans need to rebel for a two-thirds majority for convicting the president to be found; but it will have to be more than a few rogue senators. Even after the midterms the Republican bloc will remain substantial. The party would need a proper schism, a concerted movement by a discernible team, for the president’s internal party authority to be challenged. It may never happen, but if it does, then — believe me — we shall all be saying it was only ever a matter of time.
When a president is removed, his vice-president automatically succeeds to the role. So (assuming he aims to run for the presidency) JD Vance will have to make some difficult calculations if Trump hits serious turbulence this autumn. Take his chances by Trump’s side, or detach himself early?
I find Vance interesting. I hated his behaving towards President Zelensky like a bully’s sidekick. I find his forays into ethical philosophy deeply impressive: his argument about concentric circles of moral obligation is the missing paragraph Christ never supplied but which Christianity needs. Like all of us, he’s probably confused; but in intellectual reach he goes fathoms deeper than his president. It’s only a hunch, but mine is that Vance’s name will soon be surfacing quite often.
He will duck, and the more he ducks the more he will be noticed. Yet duck he must. Can and will Trump be successfully impeached? If he can, and is, Vance will become president for two years. Would that be a good footing for a run in 2028? Or would he do better to define himself properly, and soon, against a failing president?
Those who grasp a truth before its appointed arrival in political history must face hilarity, but we do not care: we know that in time everyone will be saying that evidence of Donald Trump’s personal disintegration was visible from the start. I say it now.
https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/trump-deranged-president-impeachment-srp6pmhmv

comments