- “Starmer skips grooming gangs vote in latest sign Government wavering on inquiry” – Keir Starmer and members of his Cabinet failed to vote on an amendment calling for the Government to set up a national inquiry into rape gangs, despite ordering his MPs to vote against it, reports the Independent.
- “Andy Burnham says there should be national inquiry into grooming gangs” – Labour’s stance on a national inquiry into rape gangs has descended into chaos after Andy Burnham insisted that there should be one, says the Mail.
- “Grooming gangs survivor urges Government to launch national inquiry” – A grooming gang survivor has called for a national inquiry and demanded action from Keir Starmer in an interview on the Telegraph’s Daily T podcast.
- “What real justice would look like for grooming gang victims” – If our politicians could finally imprison, punish, deport and expel, we might just stop being the laughing stock of America, says Douglas Murray in the Spectator.
- “MPs must discuss rape gangs’ ethnicity, says whistleblower’s aide” – A former aide to Ann Cryer, the MP who raised the alarm about grooming gangs in 2002, says that the “vacuum” left by politicians not talking about the attackers’ ethnicity has been filled by Elon Musk, according to the Times.
- “How Rotherham bosses have reinvented themselves since grooming scandal” – Rotherham council bosses who were criticised in the fallout from the rape gangs scandal now hold positions as government advisers and executive coaches, reveals the Times.
- “‘Who’ll join my war against liberalism?’” – We do not need a public inquiry to inform us that we have been consistently lied to for decades, says Rod Liddle in the Spectator. What we need is an implacable determination to identify the liars and remove them from office.
- “The ultimate immigration taboo has just been broken” – It is time to admit that, indeed, not all cultures are equally valid, says Guy Dampier in the Telegraph.
- “Elon Musk tweets probed by counter-extremism unit amid fears over risk to U.K.” – The Government’s counter-extremism unit has been assessing the risk posed to Britain by tweets shared by Musk in recent weeks, reports the Mirror.
- “Reeves flies to China as U.K. braces for further market turmoil” – Rachel Reeves was accused of having “fled to China” rather than explain how she will help the U.K.’s “flatlining” economy after borrowing costs hit a 27-year high, says the Standard.
- “Labour Britain is the new ‘PIGS’ of the global markets” – The U.K. has carelessly exposed itself as the weakest link in the G7 at a perilous moment, writes Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in the Telegraph.
- “Britain should scrap Chagos Islands deal, former Navy chief says” – The former head of the Navy says that the deal to give sovereignty over a vital military base to Mauritius is “irresponsible”, according to the Times.
- “Time is running out to heal the scars of ‘Boriswave’” – A wave of low-skilled migration is about to become eligible for indefinite leave to remain – and crush the public finances, warns Sam Ashworth-Hayes in the Telegraph.
- “Downing Street ‘considering candidates to replace Tulip Siddiq’” – Senior allies of Keir Starmer are considering candidates to replace Treasury minister Tulip Siddiq if she is forced to quit over links to her aunt’s ousted Bangladeshi regime, reports the Times.
- “Truss sends Starmer cease and desist letter over claim she ‘crashed the economy’” – Liz Truss has sent a cease and desist letter to Keir Starmer, threatening him with a defamation suit if he doesn’t claiming she crashed the economy, says BBC News.
- “Starmer’s rule has barely begun and already we’re on the verge of blackouts” – Power cuts or a run on sterling? Myriad disasters could destroy Keir. But who will pick up the pieces? wonders David Frost in the Telegraph.
- “How does Keir Starmer sleep at night?” – In the New Conservative, Dr. Roger Watson paints Keir Starmer as a conscienceless opportunist.
- “Keir Starmer, school harmer” – This government is seeking to destroy the policies that have given children the best education possible, writes Michael Gove in the Spectator.
- “Huge mistake to weaken academies in schools bill, warns Labour MP” – A Labour grandee has blasted her party’s attempts to overhaul the school system, accusing ministers of prioritising political wrangling over children’s welfare, reports the Times.
- “Dr. Magnus Jones at PAU!” – On Substack, Alain Wolf lampoons academic bureaucracy, following Dr. Magnus Jones as he clashes with Paine Anglia University’s obsession with acronyms.
- “Net Zero is driving up energy prices, admits Bank of England official” – The Bank of England’s Deputy Governor says that households and businesses are paying more for energy because of so-called carbon permits, which require power plants to pay for each tonne of carbon dioxide they emit, according to the Telegraph.
- “Fake it until you break it” – On Substack, David Turver slams the delusional energy elites, showing how their reckless reliance on unreliable wind power almost plunged us into blackout chaos on Wednesday.
- “The case against a ‘climate emergency’” – Scary climate predictions are made by the same kind of computer models that brought us the Covid hysteria, writes Lionel Shriver in the Spectator.
- “The truth about the LA wildfires ” – In the Spectator, Ross Clark reveals that Hollywood’s wildfire drama is fuelled more by suburban sprawl and disrupted natural fire cycles than climate change.
- “Farewell Justin Trudeau, the last of the lockdown tyrants” – In the Spectator, Toby Young says that the Canadian PM’s departure is due to the collapsing authority of the global technocratic elite.
- “The MHRA papers – part six” – On the TTE Substack, Dr. Tom Jefferson and Prof. Carl Heneghan expose how the Expert Working Group scrambled to manage Dr. Mike Yeadon’s vaccine comments while secretly discussing the Comirnaty vaccine’s troubling spread.
- “U.S. health chiefs admit jab is bad for under-fours – but keep on pushing it” – In TCW, Sally Beck reveals U.S. health chiefs still push Pfizer’s Covid jab for under-fours, despite data showing it raises infection risk.
- “How Moderna hid the death of a child in a Covid vaccine clinical trial – even as it seemed to disclose the trial’s results” – On Substack, Alex Berenson reveals how Moderna buried the death of a child in its KidCOVE trial, selectively publishing data to keep the truth hidden and protect its vaccine’s image.
- “Italian journalist, 29, is freed after spending weeks in Iranian jail” – An Italian journalist left to languish in an Iranian prison for three weeks has returned home amid speculation she was released in exchange for an Iranian engineer held in Italy and accused of terrorism, reports the Mail.
- “We are not Nazis, AfD leader tells Musk” – Elon Musk has urged German voters to get behind Alternative for Germany in next month’s national election during a broadcast with the party’s leader, says the Telegraph.
- “SNP Government could boycott Twitter, FM warns” – The Spectator’s Steerpike reacts to hints from SNP’s John Swinney that they might quit Twitter over Musk’s antics.
- “Left-wing economists were wildly wrong about Javier Milei and his libertarian agenda for Argentina” – On his International Liberty blog, Dan Mitchell highlights how Left-wing economists, including Thomas Piketty and Gabriel Zucman, predicted economic ruin under Javier Milei’s libertarian policies in Argentina, only to be proven wrong.
- “Leading journalist calls Zuckerberg’s free speech announcement ‘an invitation to genocide’, EU parliamentarians petition for actions to mitigate the ‘systemic risk’ of Elon Musk and other lunacies” – Germany in particular and the EU in general are losing their minds about American social media and it isn’t funny anymore, says Eugyppius on Substack.
- “It’s OK to say trans people are mentally ill, says Facebook” – Facebook will allow users to say trans and gay users are “mentally ill” as Mark Zuckerberg rewrites his social media empire’s moderation rules, reports the Telegraph.
- “The tyranny of woke censorship is finally over – and it’s all thanks to Donald Trump” – Mark Zuckerberg’s pledge to ‘restore’ free speech on social media is a bid to please the President-elect, says Michael Deacon in the Telegraph.
- “How claims of Left-wing bias threaten to crush the fact-checking machine” – Social media’s “arbiters of truth” face an uncertain future, writes James Warrington in the Telegraph.
- “Zuck amok?” – Zuckerberg’s move to ditch biased third-party “fact-checkers” is a final blow to an industry that has long served as a paid mouthpiece for the powerful, says CheckMate on Substack.
- “Don’t mourn the fact-checkers” – Misguided decisions and the superiority of crowdsourcing mean Zuckerberg was right to change direction. But he must also keep Trump at arm’s length, warns Jacob Mchangama on the Persuasion Substack.
- “‘It’s always the ‘we know best’ attitude that is the problem’” – Addressing the Lords, Jon Moynihan warns that the coming years of Labour government will be one long, failed experiment in ’industrial strategy’.
If you have any tips for inclusion in the round-up, email us here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So when a gas-fired power station pays 50% more for the gas they need to generate electricity, who gets the extra money? The government, I assume? How is this accounted for in public finance? At a guess they deny it’s a tax (no, no it’s a ‘duty’, not a tax) but it must go into the Treasury as some sort of income. Or does it disappear into one of Reeves’ black holes?
Strictly speaking inflation is not caused by price rises butthe other way around. Inflaton is caused by monetary conditions of too much money compared with the output. Rising energy prices would be associated with spending reductions and therefore lower prices on other things if the money supply was controlled properly.
Of course, rising prices of such an essential and large budget item as energy does make people poorer, but that I suspect is part of the plan. Certainly the elites don’t care that we are poorer.
It’s a tax, pure and simple
Explanations please as to how senior members of the Labour Cabinet thought they could brass neck their way out of not voting on the Grooming Inquiry. Obviously they wanted an Inquiry stopped because it would shed too much light into who really supports Labour, and lends them their postal votes unquestioningly. But how did they think the optics of abstention would play? Or do they really just not care?
The Labour front bench don’t care particularly about the victims, they are just the costs of propping up Labour governments both national and local. The other point is that they have ensured that they do not need to rely on the Nuremberg defence when we put these barstewards in court and facing life in prison. Their grunts (MPs) will of course expect to be able to use this defence on the grounds that they voted under a three line whip. Basically the grunts can do the porridge for Kneel and co.
Ain’t life grand?
Thursday Morning Windsor Rd & London Road Ascot
Britain should scrap Chagos Islands deal, former Navy chief says
Say what you like about Lord West, he at least tried to stop the constant chopping of Britain’s conventional deterrent while still serving, the results of that chopping now plain for all to see: yet another war in Europe; the end of the European post war ‘Long Peace’.
‘In 1986, while working on the Naval Staff at the Ministry of Defence, West left documents detailing large cuts to the Navy on a canal towpath. These documents were recovered and then published by a journalist from The Mail on Sunday……He explained that they had fallen from his coat pocket whilst walking a friend’s dog.’
Of course they did!
This is what is now going to happen to the U.S. Department of Defence under President Trump:
‘….confront the painful fact that the U.S. military has failed. That failure is demonstrated by two decades of losing wars in the Middle East…….top DoD leaders who preferred playing politics over winning wars and a defense procurement, production, and repair system, particularly for the Navy, that’s simply broken.’
‘There’s plenty of talent inside the Pentagon, but there’s also a lot of dead wood. This is the failed system that disciplined nobody for the disastrous retreat from Kabul in August 2021 (save the cashiering of one Marine lieutenant colonel who dared to speak the truth about President Joe Biden’s Afghan debacle). Instead, the Pentagon handed out a bunch of medals.’
‘When you reward failure, you get more of it.’
‘….inform all serving three- and four-star generals and admirals that they are out of a job immediately, effective Jan. 20. Any of them who want to stay on the job will write a one-page memo using normal fonts explaining why they should be retained.
If it’s a convincing case, they stay. Otherwise, they are retired at once, free to cash in with defense contractors while enjoying generous military pensions, as they certainly will.
The U.S. military has lots of talented one- and two-star generals and admirals, plus colonels and Navy captains, who are perfectly capable of stepping up to take the places of our failed senior military leaders.
……do the same with the Pentagon’s top civilians, the leading members of the Senior Executive Service. There’s lots of dead wood there, too. Clear the way for talent that wants to win wars, not play politics while rotting the military with DEI.
The problem is failed leadership, not the rank-and-file military members who defend us and this country all over the world. Purge the Pentagon’s topmost ranks, then systemic reform becomes possible. It’s hardly an insurmountable task. All it needs is the presidential pen.
There are only about 40 four-star general officers and 160 three-star general officers on active duty. If Trump is serious about changing how the Pentagon does business, that’s where to start at once.’
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/courage-strength-optimism/3275819/trump-get-tough-pentagon-top-ranks/
In Britain’s case, our military is so small, there should be no Officers above the rank of Divisional Commander: two stars.
Britain must drink from that very same bottle of woodworm purgative, but, in our case, the purgative should be applied not just within the MoD but across the whole Whitehall piece…..
Systemic reform is required.
Clue: The U.S.Marine Corps, a Corps with a history and traditions in no way inferior to those of the British Armed Forces, is exactly the same size as the entire British Armed Forces. It operates very effectively as a single service.
Imagine the savings in numbers of civil servants, staff officers within the MoD by chopping the three services staffs within the MoD, keeping only a (truncated) staff for the Chief of the Defence Staff….
And imagine how popular that would be at an operational level, provided all operational formations keep their current uniforms and traditions that do so much for esprit de corps; morale, fighting spirit……
But the big savings are now outside the British Defence Ministry.
Approximately 69% of all civil servants work in the DWP, HMRC, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Home Office (HO).
And the NHS?
The NHS in England is not one single organisation. It is made up of hundreds of different organisations of differing sizes, at central, national, regional, and local levels with different roles and responsibilities.
‘Our central projection, in a scenario that assumes relatively slow reductions in the time spent in hospital, is that around 314,000 more full-time equivalent NHS staff would be needed over and above existing vacancies in England in 2030/31 (relative to 2021/22), to deliver 2018/19 rates of care.
This compares to a projection of 488,000 more full-time equivalent staff being needed in 2030/31, drawn from our October 2021 projections that did not account for potential productivity improvements.’
The Health Foundation
So, just within the NHS in England, productivity improvements could reduce the workforce by 40% while keeping front line operational staff unchanged.
Does Mr Musk have a ‘Mini Me’?
I’ve been thinking about the islands as I’m currently in Cape Verde. Places like these don’t make much sense as countries as they are going to struggle to be self sustaining and they only really make sense as strategic outposts that some rich country is willing to support and subsidise. The islands, like Cape Verde, were empty before the colonial era.
Very good points! I’d never thought of far-flung islands in that way before.
St Kilda, in the Outer Hebrides, was evacuated in 1930 as life had become unsustainable. Cape Verde is a lot bigger so there’s more critical mass but it’s pretty barren, not much grows, it rains very little and I don’t think they have much in the way of natural resources. They could try to make money from something other than tourism but it’s an uphill task with poor infrastructure, education and not much stable history behind them. I don’t know much about the Chagos Islands, perhaps they are more hospitable. I think a lot of the British Overseas Territories are reliant on visits from the Royal Navy and support from HMG – I think the Falklands, South Georgia, Tristan da Cunha, Pitcairn. It makes sense for us to support them as they are our people and potentially strategically useful places, ditto the Chagos. But giving them to Mauritius with bloody nine billion pounds is just nuts. Mauritius surely has issues of its own, it’s not West Germany FFS.
Question? Are people not fed up with the bullshit?
An enquiry?
Enquiries are a quintessential British way of sweeping the crimes of the establishment under the carpet.
The outcome is completely rigged from the outset. Nobody’s fault, lessons to be learned, those who acted did so in the correct way based on the knowledge and circumstances at the time blah blah blah.
It’s all so incredibly predictable and tiresome.
I’m fed up. So is my wife. So I imagine are people who post here, and other similar forums I frequent. Some of that fed-upness I think manifested itself in the Brexit vote. Some of that in the vote for Trump. What we lack is a point of focus. The political leaders who represent us are largely still steeped in “moderation”.
I agree. There is more than enough evidence available to put a couple of hundred of the principle perps in court and proper trials, with honest judges, not Kneel’s current bent mobsters would provide more detail and evidence than any taxpayer funded “enquiry.”
And save money.
And expensive
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-08/russia-doesn-t-hold-all-the-cards-in-ukraine-austin-says?leadSource=uverify%20wall
Ukraine has effectively destroyed two-thirds of Russia’s military resources.” – U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin in a press conference yesterday
“Russia will have to invest a lot of land forces to hold it,” he said.
‘By the 1980s, the Warsaw Treaty Organization was beset by problems related to the economic slowdown in all Eastern European countries.’
‘The USSR’s economy was in trouble due to the war in Afghanistan, outdated industries, and food shortages.’
Today’s state the bleeding obvious topical debate question:
Why is it like deja vu all over again today in Russia?
More bleating by the perenially ill informed Bloomberg.
What exactly does it mean to “effectively destroy”? What about the resources they ineffectively destroyed? Would it be historically correct to say, in 1943 Hitler ineffectively conquered Stalingrad? No, not really. So it’s a silly gap filling word used by liars.
Mr Austin is, of course, trumpeting the success of the U.S. strategy that he set out in April 2022: to weaken Russia so that it could no longer invade its neighbours.
That strategy has been a runaway success. Consequently, President Trump will be tempted to stick with it.
So Mr Austin has a point, then.
For example, the British Army’s policy is to recover immobilised tanks and repair them. Ukraine does the same.
Russia does not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8wIKhujASE
Russian military thought is still dominated by World War II outlook and this means strike for fifty kilometers and then allow the next fresh unit to past through . Modern weapons need fuel and repair capabilities far greater than has been demonstrated by the Russian Army so far in this conflict. Troops have been seen scrounging food because rations have not been brought up. Damaged vehicles have been stripped of ammunition and parts to keep other systems in the fight.
Issue No. 10 of the Russian magazine Material and Technical Support has been made publicly accessible, featuring an article on the Russian army’s experience with tanks and other armoured vehicles in its ongoing full-scale war against Ukraine. The central takeaway from this publication is that the actual repairability of Russian tanks is 3-5 times lower than what is claimed in official manuals.
Fire control systems in T-72 and T-80 tanks have non-interchangeable components. Additionally, there are as many as seven different engine types used in Russian armour, further complicating logistics and repairs.
Russian defence contractors are struggling to source workers as working-age men are conscripted to the military, The Bell reported. With no one to fill key roles, there are about 160,000 available positions at defence firms. “The shortfall is not only due to increased demand, but also dwindling supply,”
Hitler ineffectively conquered Ukraine, Dec. 1941-Oct 1944……
Mr Austin is, of course, trumpeting the success of the U.S. strategy that he set out in April 2022: to weaken Russia so that it could no longer invade its neighbours. That strategy has been a runaway success.
One could firstly ask why the US should apply a strategy ‘to no longer invade neighbours’ to any other country than itself: there is truly no country in the world that is so happy to invade its neighbours, far and wide, than USA. USA’s Middle East invasions were, according to some, instigated by Netanyahu/Israel but USA has never hesitated to invade any country if it thought it would serve its goal of achieving or retaining global hegemony.
Lloyd Austin has always outright lied on the state of the war in Ukraine and Russia’s leadership has ensured the country’s economy has not only survived but even profited, despite all the sanctions and rather pathetic attempted demonstrations of military superiority propagated by the West.
I cannot remember the numbers quoted but Russia produces at least 100 brand new tanks per month, not to mention countless other military systems and masses of ammunition – something no country in the world can challenge, not even USA. But the new age of drone warfare has demonstrated that tanks have in many instances outlived their usefulness and it is interesting that Iran, for example, apparently prefers an Air Force consisting of thousands of drones rather than owning a few incredibly expensive fighter jets.
There are still high numbers of volunteers for the Russian armed forces – around one thousand per month – but the impressive Russian leadership is careful to ensure the Russian economy remains on a good footing. If only UK had such good leadership!
In the meantime, Russia continues to advance on all fronts in Ukraine, despite all the biased reporting you quote.
‘…..an increase in annual output from about 40 before February 2022 to a wartime output of 60–70 for 2023, with possibly even more to be produced over the course of 2024. Based on this pattern, the production rate from 2025 could be more than 90 annually.
‘In December 2023, then-defence minister Sergey Shoigu said 1,530 tanks had been delivered in that year. Shoigu’s figure has gained widespread attention, given the lack of other information. It is, however, open to misinterpretation. 1,180–1,280 of the total 2023 ‘production’ figure was drawn from tanks in store. Moreover, this figure does not account for tanks that could have been stored in garages and are not visible in satellite imagery. Russian tank-storage bases could have a garage capacity of about 1,600 MBTs, and it is difficult to know whether these storage spaces contain other types of vehicles or are simply empty.
The difference between Shoigu’s figure and the assessment of the ‘production’ number drawn from in-store stocks is 350, but it is possible that the number of newly built tanks is lower than that if there were additional refurbishments based on tanks stored in garages.
There are also other factors to bear in mind. Firstly, assuming that the pre-invasion 1:3 new-build-to-upgrade ratio remains the same, then production of newly built T-90Ms could be as low as between 23–28 for 2024. What this means is that the current production of T-90Ms is mostly reliant on the number of upgradeable T-90As, of which stocks are dwindling. An open-source analyst suggests that there were only 50 T-90As still in store as of late 2023. These were in addition to the figure of about 100 T-90As in active service as of early of 2024.
Secondly, the degree to which the export-build programme has been repurposed remains unclear. T-90 tanks intended for the export market appear to have been diverted to the operation in Ukraine, with visual evidence that T-90S MBTs intended for India have been used by Russian forces in Ukraine.
Despite increases in the production of newly built tanks relative to peacetime output, supplying enough tanks to offset current attrition rates is likely to become more challenging, especially as the number of stored tanks that do not require significant refurbishment is dwindling.
The shortage of armoured vehicles is already affecting Russian operations. Russian forces are fielding fewer armored vehicles in the Pokrovsk and Kurakhove directions — the two operational directions with the highest intensity of fighting and where Russia has the densest concentrations of its forces — in favor of highly attritional, infantry-led assaults.
Russian forces have suffered high and unsustainable armored vehicle losses and have struggled to protect these vehicles from Ukrainian drones on the frontline over the last year, forcing Russian forces to increasingly limit and prioritize where and when to field armored vehicles and conduct mechanized assaults.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/01/10/bond-blow-up-warning-britain-must-get-act-together/
‘Speaking as someone who is in regular contact with investors from all parts of the world, I have seen first hand how perceptions of Britain have slid lower and lower with every policy mis-turn’
The FT puts it well:
https://www.ft.com/content/710436f5-5a83-461a-89cb-da604ad83a8a
‘There’s a big difference between borrowing lots of money in a suit and borrowing lots of money in a clown outfit and brandishing a supersized water pistol.’
‘..borrowing, in and of itself, is not necessarily a problem. More important to investors is how any borrowing is done, how it is presented and what it is for.’
This is not complicated:
‘…..political powers need to demonstrate the competence that keeps markets on side, and to eschew oversized shoes and multicoloured overalls in their wardrobes.’
‘Increasing taxes to solve a problem caused by too high taxes would be illogical and self defeating. However, cutting spending plans may be politically too costly for a party struggling in the polls’
Those poll struggles seem likely to worsen, particularly, as the splendid Madeline Grant puts it, if, all the while, that party continues to plonk itself back on the Labour benches ‘with the look of a toddler delighted by the warmth of a full nappy’
Hilarious, if the government’s performance all over wasn’t so frabjously, bovinely, quite staggeringly dumb…..
Watched the Patrick Christys show last night with the intensely annoying Barry Gardiner. Why does this sanctimonious xxxx think he is so much more intelligent than every other person on the planet and prove it by deliberately talking so slowly with over emphasis on certain words like a teacher in front of a remedial class at school.
Agreed. His sanctimony and smugness, is insufferable.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14267379/Labour-shambles-grooming-gangs-probe-Andy-Burnham-says-limited-national-inquiry-scandal-just-hours-Cabinet-minister-insists-idea-ruled-PM-open-minded-despite-ordering-MPs-block-one.html
Which means a proper enquiry will be dead and buried if Burnham ousts Starmer because he is up to his neck in this.
Could you please re-post and add the missing words. And check what you have written before posting it in future.
Could you please advise what further information you require? If you cannot understand my words you are on the wrong site.
“The truth about the LA wildfires ”
Please just have a look at the photos and drone footage of the devastation, in LA, Maui & Australia, and ask yourself why these houses were nowhere near any “forest”, why the steel in cars melted (at temperatures over 1000 degrees C) while trees were left standing right next to them with leaves still on, and grass still green, and plastic children’s toys untouched, like plastic in your microwave. And why all of these areas had been previously designated as future “Smart Cities” where people will be forced to live in skyscrapers.
In one of his best videos, Alex Jones discusses the real truth behind the wildfires in LA, Maui, and elsewhere, such as Australia. He calls it “Administrative Terrorism”:
THE LA FIRES ARE DELIBERATE: Learn How Administrative Warfare / Economic Terrorism Is Being Used By The Democratic Party & Leftist Institutions Worldwide To Covertly Destroy Cities As Part Of The Greatest Wealth Transfer In History
Astonishing video shows LA’s scorched earth: Mile after mile of smouldering ruins of what used to be multi million dollar mansions as fires still rage out of control | Daily Mail Online
Melted steel in cars but trees still standing.
How can a “forest fire” burn only houses and cars, but leave the “forest” still standing?
Insurance companies cancelled policies months before this latest land grab exercise.
https://www.newsweek.com/california-insurer-canceled-policies-months-before-los-angeles-wildfires-2011521
Still, I suppose the area will look nice for the 2028 Olympics after the rebuilding contracts have been dished out
“SNP Government could boycott Twitter, FM warns”
The picture at the top of this article: ‘SNP government practices Vulcan greeting: “Live long and prosper”‘.
Shame about Glasgow.