Best Of

This is meta-meta-meta hilarious

Lots of Nigerians have moved to Ireland. Some of them are passionately anti-Muslim and as a result very pro Christendom and pro-western, in particular pro UK and USA

So now they have festivals in Southern Ireland where they parade the Union Jack

This has got rightwing Irish nationalists in a frenzy

“What the hell is going on in Ireland?

The country is becoming more and more unrecognisable.

The planters are literally rubbing in our faces that they are the new planters.”

https://x.com/patricej36/status/1949386918149681229?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The scriptwriting for the 2020s remains superb

Ultimately, identity politics collapses under the weight of its own contradictions.

Chairman Zia Yusuf says Reform will repeal the Online Safety Act if elected

Yet another reason to vote Reform

You do realise Reform were in favour of the bill and also they want to end anonymity on the internet.

Reform are a joke, but I will still vote for them.

That's how bad the rest are.

Remember when Rupert Lowe criticised Nigel Farage then Farage’s minions got the police involved.

Now just imagine what Farage will be like in power with the powers of the state.

Only low IQ people would vote for Reform.

But that's provable nonsense, because I am going to vote for Reform, and it is widely known, and accepted, that I am the most intelligent poster on the site. We had a long thread all about this, and that was the consensus we reached. This isn't me "blowing my own trumpet", it's a basic fact - begrudgingly acknowledged even by morons like @IanB2 and @kjh

So your logic does not prevail

My memory must be failing me as I recall the consensus was that you were an idiot.

I guess this lot will also be labelled antisemites too.

Israel committing genocide in Gaza, say Israel-based human rights groups

Reports detailing killing of children and elderly, forced displacement and starvation likely to add to pressure for action

Two leading human rights organisations based in Israel, B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights, say Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and the country’s western allies have a legal and moral duty to stop it.

In reports published on Monday, the two groups said Israel had targeted civilians in Gaza only because of their identity as Palestinians over nearly two years of war, causing severe and in some cases irreparable damage to Palestinian society.

Multiple international and Palestinian groups have already described the war as genocidal, but reports from two of Israel-Palestine’s most respected human rights organisations, who have for decades documented systemic abuses, is likely to add to pressure for action.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/28/israel-committing-genocide-in-gaza-say-israel-based-human-rights-groups

Like the man said, the Palestine Action neo-terrorists should stop waving placards and instead advertise starving babies in the American and Israeli press.

Although its interesting that the photo we have all seen is NOT a simple starving Gazan baby. As ever the spin is heroic.

Can't see the status quo going on much longer to be honest. Something is going to give.

It's fascinating. I mean tragic, ofc, but fascinating. If you listen to GHF et al, and look at some of the footage, then there seems to be plenty (if insufficient I have no doubt) of aid either being distributed (GHF) or waiting to be distributed (the stockpiles we see on X).

But then again there is apparently mass starvation with, today it was announced on the Beeb, Gazans not having eaten for days.

No journalists apparently mean that we can't verify. But there are plenty of cellphones in Gaza so I wonder why we are not seeing widespread footage of the starving masses. Certainly as the social media campaign of GHF et al is ramping up with footage and invited journalists events, usw.

Then again, pictures of that one poor baby with CF managed to convince the world's news outlets that there is mass starvation, so Hamas must be sitting back thinking our work here is done.

GHF aren't exactly unbiased reporters here. Here's the Times of Israel with an article on a GHF whistleblower: https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-us-contractor-says-he-saw-idf-commit-war-crimes-at-aid-sites-ghf-rejects-false-claims/

An American former contractor for the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) said in an interview that aired Friday that during his time working in Gaza, he saw Israeli soldiers and US contractors use “indiscriminate” force against civilians at aid sites, in what he described as “war crimes.”

Yeah, apparently a disgruntled ex-GHF employee but who knows. There is no doubt that GHF is (apparently) distributing up to 2m meals per day. And also telling that dismantling their effort was, again apparently, the second item on Hamas' ceasefire demand list.

Which, if it is indeed the case, makes perfect sense.

There is a coherent, indeed understandable narrative, whereby Hamas, in conjunction/collusion with the UN, wants to be in charge of food distribution in Gaza because this confers power on them (Hamas). Ceding that power to an external agency is very damaging. Hence the campaign to vilify GHF. Is this the case? Who knows. It is certainly credible to me.

But again, if I were Hamas I would be sitting back and high-fiving (if the two can be performed simultaneously) because they have without doubt won the PR battle such that people expect Michael Buerk to be parading around Beit Hanoun pointing out the starving masses. But he isn't. And no one else is. So it's interesting to wonder why this is.

Hamas seem able to pull the wool over the eyes of not just the UN, but Western journalists, European governments, Ehud Olmert and other Israeli opposition politicians, Israeli human rights organisations, and long-standing supporters of Israel like Edward Leigh, and Jonathan Sumption.

GHF might well be distributing a lot of food aid, but people have to run the risk of IDF members taking pot-shots at them, in order to obtain it.

Or how about this.

https://x.com/EFischberger/status/1949652071633859057?t=5G8rNMQW-iCQNfo1ivXS0A&s=19

Is it true, is it Israeli PR, is it AI?

It's pro-Israeli government PR: see https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-us-humanitarian-envoy-pans-israeli-claim-that-un-allowing-aid-to-amass-on-gaza-border/

If you read even the Israeli press rather than just following Twitter, you'd get a better picture of events.

You didn't seem to read the article.

Here is a (non-exhaustive, I bet) list of reasons the poor old UN can't deliver the aid. Wah wah wah. One of the below, admittedly might not be true.

When aid transport roads become too badly damaged by Israeli military operations, when there are insufficient deconfliction mechanisms in place to ensure that aid workers don’t accidentally get hit by IDF fire, when authorizations aren’t given by the army for aid to be picked up and delivered, when our chakras are out of sync, and when looting becomes increasingly widespread due to food insecurity, an environment is created where the UN is physically prevented from doing its job, the former US envoy elaborated.

Are you denying that the UN's ability to act in Gaza is at the mercy of the IDF, who control the territory and have a tendency to shoot first and ask questions later... or indeed just to shoot first and not bother with questions later?

You are parroting the Hamas talking points. You have no idea what is happening. All I see is the UN making all kinds of excuses for why they can't possibly deliver aid. All blaming the IDF and not one mention of Hamas. Do you find that strange.

The IDF control Gaza. They militarily defeated Hamas months ago. Those are the facts on the ground. Why is it strange, therefore, that the UN finds their main challenge being what Israel lets them do? You are the one who is dismissing reporting by Israeli newspapers as "Hamas talking points".

Guido hinting that the government will now crack down on VPNs

https://order-order.com/2025/07/28/exc-labour-could-ban-vpns-after-online-safety-act-surge/


Time to fetch the musket from the thatch

Once again the civil service show they haven’t a clue how the real world and technology works

Pretty sure this is intentional. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with computers will know what a VPN is, given the saturation advertising for them on YouTube, Facebook, etc. They've been used to bypass content restrictions for years.

The next step will be licences for VPNs. You'll have to prove to a government department that you need a VPN for professional use, and providers will need proof of official permission to sign you up or face penalties. Payment processors and app stores will be ordered to block non-conforming VPN providers.

Confronted with the act's huge problems Labour will absolutely double down and make it worse. Because worse from our perspective is better from theirs when you accept the OSA was never about child safety, it's about the government controlling what people can access.

(incidentally, the collateral damage has already started. A small forum I frequent where people chat about vintage computers has shut down because the guy who runs it in his spare time is unwilling to risk the draconian sanctions of the OSA should someone upload something even slightly 'child unsafe').

Yes, it is a catastrophe for free speech and democratic politics in the UK

The only question is, is it a deliberate catastrophe or an accidental catastrophe. Or perhaps a mix of both - nasty Woke bigots seizing the opportunity to silence us

Speak to the editor of The Spectator about this, his government passed this legislation.

On-topic question: When somebody says they "have to" do something because of the OSA how do we know this is not due to them taking an erroneous or absurdly risk-averse approach to it? Esp if they are an avowed opponent of the legislation.

Have a look at this.

The onus is no longer to remove ‘harmful’ content, it is to stop it being posted in the first place.

The illegal content duties are not just about removing existing illegal content; they are also about stopping it from appearing at all. Platforms need to think about how they design their sites to reduce the likelihood of them being used for criminal activity in the first place.

The kinds of illegal content and activity that platforms need to protect users from are set out in the Act, and this includes content relating to:

child sexual abuse
controlling or coercive behaviour
extreme sexual violence
extreme pornography
fraud
racially or religiously aggravated public order offences
inciting violence
illegal immigration and people smuggling
promoting or facilitating suicide
intimate image abuse
selling illegal drugs or weapons
sexual exploitation
terrorism

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer

promoting or facilitating suicide???

The Assisted Dying Bill does exactly that!

If the Assisted Dying Bill becomes law, then would that override the earlier Online Safety Act by changing what content is illegal?

On-topic question: When somebody says they "have to" do something because of the OSA how do we know this is not due to them taking an erroneous or absurdly risk-averse approach to it? Esp if they are an avowed opponent of the legislation.

Have a look at this.

The onus is no longer to remove ‘harmful’ content, it is to stop it being posted in the first place.

The illegal content duties are not just about removing existing illegal content; they are also about stopping it from appearing at all. Platforms need to think about how they design their sites to reduce the likelihood of them being used for criminal activity in the first place.

The kinds of illegal content and activity that platforms need to protect users from are set out in the Act, and this includes content relating to:

child sexual abuse
controlling or coercive behaviour
extreme sexual violence
extreme pornography
fraud
racially or religiously aggravated public order offences
inciting violence
illegal immigration and people smuggling
promoting or facilitating suicide
intimate image abuse
selling illegal drugs or weapons
sexual exploitation
terrorism

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer

promoting or facilitating suicide???

The Assisted Dying Bill does exactly that!

That's a very good point. Presumably the government, whenever it talks about its own legislation, is now infringing its own legislation