Tag: politics

Overton in the UK

It appears Niles Farage has belatedly realized that Restore is going to eat Reform’s lunch if he keeps calling them racists and Nazis and antisemites instead of supporting their resistance to the violent, decades-long assault on the British nation by Clown World and its various foreign invaders:

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has taken to Substack to accuse the British government of infecting the UK with “deep anti-white racism.” He also published damning racism and crime statistics in an essay, much of which would have been previously unspeakable.

Farage announced his migration to the platform on Saturday, saying that the move to Substack would allow him to speak directly to the British public without “the mainstream media constantly distort[ing] what I say.” One day later, Farage used this new platform to unleash a 7,000-word tirade against the British state, which, he argued, has become “a two tier state against white people.”

Farage took aim at decades of British policy that he says have unfairly benefited minorities and discriminated against white Britons. He highlighted Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies in healthcare, education, policing, and the military that he insists have been implemented to disadvantage white patients, students, and applicants, and promised to repeal the 2010 Equality Act which, in his words, ensures that “anti-Whiteness is institutionalised into every aspect of public life.”

In healthcare, the NHS prioritizes “ethnic minority communities” and “vulnerable migrants” for accelerated diagnosis and treatment, despite white Britons having the highest mortality rate of all the UK’s ethnic groups. In education, the poorest white Britons have the lowest outcomes of any demographic, yet are lectured about their “white privilege” and their “responsibility” to reduce racism, and sidelined when applying for university in favor of black students with lower exam scores, Farage said. In policing, he claimed, agencies across the country have adopted “race action plans” and done away with stop-and-frisk policies that seemingly target black men – even though at 13% of London’s population, this demographic is responsible for 61% of knife murder in the British capital.

Farage is, quite literally, a gatekeeper. I don’t trust anyone who stands with Clown World against anyone that the Clown Worlder’s are calling anything, because no one is dumb enough to keep falling for the same deceitful rhetoric after 65+ straight years of it. But he’s vastly preferable to the frauds of the Conservative Party and the lunatics of Labour.

And I suspect the realization that he could have kept out Barnham if he hadn’t ostracized the people who are now the Reform Party has scared him a little straight. Because the real contest going forward isn’t Labour vs Conservative, but Reform vs Restore. And since things will continue to get worse before they get better, and because Farage is a one-man operation without a successor, Restore is the better bet in the long run.

Because there is no way anyone can vote their way out of this sort of government:

As the Director of Public Prosecutions, current Prime Minister Keir Starmer let off 13,000 suspected Muslim rape gang members and paedophiles with WARNING LETTERS. Meanwhile he has actual British subjects jailed for social media posts & mean words.

This is what happens when you establish an international empire ruling over foreign nations. The more-enterprising, more-capable, and more-corruptible foreigners inevitably gravitate to the capital and eventually take over. Starmer isn’t English or even British. He is an Irishman married to a Jew.

DISCUSS ON SG

Migrants for the Pro-Immigration Voters

The migrant camp policy of what is now the most powerful party in the UK is absolutely brilliant and its principle of calling the Left on its nonsensical and societally-destructive voting should be adopted by every nationalist party in the West across a wide range of policies:

We need to talk about Reform’s camp policy. I’m not talking about their policy of hiring lots of camp men. They do do that. I’m talking about their policy of putting migrant camps in Green Party areas. Lots of people on the left have said that this is appalling and disgusting. It’s punishing left-wing voters. It’s like, yeah, it is appalling and disgusting, but how can it be punishing left-wing voters? This is what you’ve been doing to other people for years, and you’ve always said that migrants are enriching. They’re our greatest strength! So, why aren’t you delighted that they’re being moved to your areas?

And lots of people in the right have criticized it as well. They’ve said, “Well, this is unfair on right-wing people who live in those areas, and this is just trollling and and this is doing something for attention.” But listen, the right-wing people were going to get those migrants anyway. It’s just now there’s a mechanism for stopping the flow. This is a way to change people’s minds and change people’s behaviors. Specifically, left-wing people who think that we should have open borders and who up until now have been completely insulated from the consequences of those open borders. Let’s have a look at the policy.

Now, it’s clear that the failed Uni Party era is over. And there is a battle for the soul of our country between Reform and the Greens. That’s why today we announce an important new policy. In order to deport all illegal migrants in Britain, we’re going to need to detain tens of thousands at a time. Migrants will not be able to leave these detention centers and each will be held there for a couple of weeks before being deported.

So here’s our promise. A reform government will not put any migrant detention centers in any constituency with a Reform MP. We will not put them where Reform controls the council. And of the remaining areas, we will prioritize Green parliamentary constituencies and Green-controlled councils to put those migrant detention centers. That means areas like right here in Brighton.

Put simply, if you vote in a Reform council or a Reform MP, we guarantee you will not have a migrant detention center near you. However, if you vote Green, there’s a very good chance that you will. This way, everyone gets what they vote for.

Let them complain all they like. If you vote for open borders, then you get all the immigrants. No more sending them off to small towns in Iowa or Idaho. If you vote for data centers, then you get one built in your town. If you vote for windmills, they get built near your house. If you vote to release the crazies from the asylums, you get the homeless shelters in your neighborhoods. If you vote for the early release of violent offenders, then they are released in your town.

The principle is not even remotely unfair. To the contrary, it’s the most fair and democratic outcome possible. We know that pro-military voters have no problem with military bases in their areas; Congressmen even compete with each other to get military bases built in their districts. It’s long past time to call out the moronic Left on their actions and force them to live with the consequences of their wicked idiocy.

DISCUSS ON SG

Israel Washes its Hands

The War of the Epstein Alliance can be safely regarded as lost now, as the Israelis are already trying to wash their hands of responsibility for the USA attacking Iran and defending Israel despite the war being observably against the interests of the American people.

US President Donald Trump made the decision to attack Iran after his meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Mar-a-Lago in late December 2025, but the foundations for that decision had been laid long beforehand, and much of them had nothing to do with Israel or Netanyahu. Conversations with a long list of diplomatic and security officials, Israelis, Americans and diplomats from the region, reveal a clear picture: The man in the White House had a top-tier strategic goal, to topple or decisively weaken the regime in Iran.

Moreover, reports published, among others, in The New York Times and The Washington Post, claiming that Netanyahu had “dragged” Trump and the US into war, partly by arguing that the regime could be brought down, are plainly wrong. The conversations I held indicate that at least some senior Trump administration officials, and Trump himself, were the ones who assessed that the regime could be toppled, while the Israeli team presented a far more cautious assessment on this issue.

A note: Such reporting by the two newspapers mentioned above was not surprising. Both took an anti-war line, consistent with their unfavorable coverage of the Trump administration and Netanyahu’s policies. In this case, according to a US official, they were fed by sources in certain departments at the State Department and the War Department who dislike what they see as the overly close ties between Jerusalem and Washington, certainly when it comes to Middle East policy…

 The fall of the regime in Iran would greatly ease the disarming of Hezbollah and the dismantling of its status in Lebanon, leave Hamas and Islamic Jihad without financial backing, and most likely bring down the Houthi regime in Yemen as well. But even before the war, and especially now, it is clear that this is an overly ambitious goal, certainly in the short term. The current focus, on the one hand, is preventing an agreement that would allow the regime to recover militarily, certainly on the nuclear and missile issues. Without an agreement, Israel supports further intensification of sanctions and economic warfare against Iran until it is completely paralyzed, alongside readiness for the resumption of the war in the near term, this time with a focus on strategic targets such as power stations.

The pointing of the finger at Israel as the party that pushed the US into the strike is therefore only partially correct. In practice, this was a purely American decision, based on an understanding that the regime poses a threat to America and the entire West, and certainly to US interests in the Middle East. Israel assisted with precise intelligence, on the nuclear and missile programs, on Iranian attacks against American targets, and on what happened during and after the protests. The clear convergence of interests with the US is what brought about the joint war, even if its end remains unclear.

I find this version of events less interesting for its attempt at revising history and more useful for indicating that at least some of the parties responsible for the war are attempting to avoid being held culpable for it, which is a very reliable indicator that the war failed to accomplish their goals and is expected to be considered something that is worthy of blame rather than praise.

This, in turn, indicates that everyone involved in prosecuting it is going to be highly motivated to bring it to an end sooner rather than later. The last oil tankers have already delivered their loads. The economic bite of the failed war is only beginning to be felt, and the blame game hasn’t even truly begun yet. The political fallout from it will not be insignificant, as the massive turnover in UK politics very likely demonstrates.

UPDATE: Local National Guard HIMARS artillery unit deployed to ME for a year is home now – they literally fired off everything they could find, painted so many fire mission marks on their launchers that they’re no longer camouflage, and have now sent 90% of their people home. The 10% that remain are working on getting the broken-down launchers out of the desert and onto ships back to the US. This gives me confidence that the war is over by default, and we are out of ammunition.

DISCUSS ON SG

Wipeout UK

The headline is the way in which Labour was destroyed in the local elections in the United Kingdom. But the real news is the continuing demolition of the Conservative Party, which is being rightly rejected by Reform voters in response to its refusal to stop immigration and start repatriating the invaders.

The final results aren’t in yet, as only one-half of the local council elections have reported yet, but with both Labour and the Tories below the LibDems and Reform nearly doubling the Conservative vote, it’s very clear that the direction the two major parties have been dragging the UK since the Tony Blair years has been a very unpopular and antidemocratic one.

UPDATE: The results are even worse for Labour than had been anticipated.

The Red Wall Labour MP summed up the mood. ‘It’s not carnage. It’s f***ing carnage.’ The results are still coming in. But it’s not going to get any better. The pattern is set. In Labour’s former Northern heartlands, the party has not been defeated. Or even routed. It’s simply ceased to exist. The only councils where the party has been able to cling on are where only a third of the seats were up for election.

DISCUSS ON SG

Trump in the Epstein Files

Congressman Ted Lieu (D:CA): “Donald Trump is in the Epstein files thousands and thousands of times. In those files, there are highly disturbing allegations — allegations — of Donald Trump raping children and threatening to kill children.”

I could not be less interested in anyone from the Trump administration or professional Republican circles complaining about Democratic Party liars or pointing to past false accusations. There is a very easy way to prove that these accusations are false: release the Epstein files and documents and videos and pictures in their entirety.

Anything short of that is a) unacceptable and b) suspicious. No amount of evasion and explanation and justification is going to make this go away. If I was accused of such crimes, I wouldn’t even hesitate to put everything out there and make it absolutely clear who was guilty of these things and who was not.

Only the wicked need to hide in the dark.

DISCUSS ON SG

Desperation in Defeat

Clown World appears to be losing any sense of perspective as its grasp on global power continues to slip away. None of these reports can be considered highly reliable, but there do appear to be some signs that we may be on the verge of finding out if nukes are real or not.

  1. In the last 24 hours, the U.S. military blasted out nearly 100 Emergency Action Messages (EAM’s) on its High-Frequency Global Communications System (HFGCS). These are the encrypted orders sent to nuclear submarines, strategic bombers, and missile launch crews. On a normal day, you get about 10. The Pentagon has issued ZERO public statement.
  2. A recent Wall Street Journal article — Behind Trump’s Public Bravado on the War, He Grapples With His Own Fears — reports that Trump’s spate of bizarre, vulgar, threatening posts on social media, e.g., threatening to end Iran as a civilization (implying the use of nuclear weapons), is simply a negotiating ploy — i.e., convince the Iranians that he is unstable and could do anything in order to convince Iran to make concessions. If that is genuinely Trump’s intention, it has backfired spectacularly. It has raised legitimate questions about his mental competence. Although Trump reportedly is terrified of getting bogged down in another forever war that he once vowed he would never do, I think he will order a new round of attacks in hopes that he will break Iran’s will to resist.
  3. On Saturday night, US Joint Chiefs of Staff Air Force general Dan Caine stormed out of an emergency meeting with Trump. Insiders indicate that Trump wanted to evoke the nuclear codes as a deterrence against Iran during the ceasefire talks in Islamabad. But General Caine refused and invoked the US Uniform Code of Military Justice, the UCMJ, claiming specifically Article 92, covering Failure to Obey. Inside the military we call that the “duty to refuse” clause, that if given an unlawful order, we have a duty to refuse… Apparently, the Joint Chiefs of Staff went ahead and invoked the Article 92 clause.
  4. The US military has abandoned its last base in Syria and Russian warships are now docking in Syria.

Could be legit, could be cover for invoking the removal of the Short Fat Trump, could be both, or it could be fake. Either way, things do appear to be moving toward some kind of short-term resolution in the next month.

DISCUSS ON SG

The MAGA Catastrophe

MAGA was supposed to be the alternative to the neocon-infested GOP, but it turned out to be MIGA, which thereby cements the probability that there will be no political fix for the USA prior to the anticipated failure in the 2033 timeframe.

There were two schools of thought on the Spanish Right in the lead-up to the civil war: Accidentalism and Catastrophism. Accidentalists believed that the serious issues facing the Spanish Republic were not baked into the institution itself, but rather an accident that could be attributed to the early Marxist bent of the first government. The Republic had gotten off on the wrong foot, but Conservatives could and would steer the ship in the right direction once they peacefully won political power through the electoral process and formed a government capable of addressing the Right’s concerns regarding government attacks on the Church and private property. They were strictly committed to following the rule of law and operating within the constitutional framework.

The second group believed the Republic was a catastrophe from the start, and that there could be no saving the Republic from itself. They asserted that the Left would never recognize any non-Leftist government, no matter how much they claimed to uphold the rule of law, because the problem was not with the Republic’s legalistic procedures but rather with the fact that the entire system was merely a facade to facilitate a Socialist and eventually Communist state that would permanently exclude Conservatives from power.

These two camps were largely united in their politics but divided in how to engage in politics. One pursued reform, while the other waited for an opportunity to overthrow the system itself once enough of the Right realized that there would be no voting their way out of this mess. After the Right won the 1933 elections and were met with: 1) Legalistic stonewalling when they attempted to form a government, and 2) An attempted Left-wing revolution in Asturias in 1934, the Catastrophists were proven to be correct.

As a general rule, the social and political optimists are wrong and the technogical optimists are right.

DISCUSS ON SG

AIPAC Rejects Peace

To precisely no one’s surprise, AIPAC wouldn’t permit the Fake Trump administration to accept the peace deal offered by Iran under the aegis of the Pakistani moderators:

There were three Iranian conditions that the US refused to accept: Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz, an end to Israel’s attack on Lebanon and Hezbollah, unfreezing of Iran’s assets and retaining sovereignty over its supply of enriched uranium…

Iran will not initiate new military actions against Israel or the US… They will wait to absorb the first blow and then launch a massive retaliation. I think they now understand that the US is too much under the control of the Zionist lobby to act in the interest of the people of the United States.

Iran’s demand that the US vacate its bases in the Gulf will be achieved by force… Iran will hit the remaining bases and make them uninhabitable for the US military going forward. The Saudis and the UAE will have to make a choice this week… Seek reconciliation with Iran and survive or side with the US and Israel and face economic destruction.

The real action that will put the most pressure on Trump will start on Monday morning when the US stock market takes a nose dive… again… and the price of oil heads back up into triple digit territory. JD Vance actually did Iran a favor by breaking off first and walking away. This paints Iran in a very favorable light in the eyes of the global south, i.e., Iran was willing to negotiate, but the US refused to engage in good faith negotiations and bailed.

Iran doesn’t have any problem agreeing to a fight to the death with Israel. That’s a war they know they are going to win. The Israelis presumably believed they could sever Iran from Hezbollah since they’ve been successful dividing the Arabs for 80 years, but Persians are not Arabs and the Iranians have presumably learned from watching Israel methodically divide, conquer, and expand over the decades.

This obvious failure to put American national interests first will rightly kill Republican chances in the mid-terms and cement the complete failure of Trump’s presidency. He’s gone from one of the best presidents in US history to one of the worst, and his legacy will be losing the war that ended US global dominance; his only consolation will be that historians will eventually admit that it wasn’t even him in the White House.

There is no longer even any pretense of the war being against Iran; what is the US national interest in permitting Israel to invade and occupy Lebanon? It will be interesting to see how things proceed now that there is no reason for China and Russia to desist from providing more aid and more active support to Iran and helping the Iranian people decisively win their war against an enemy that has now established itself as the imperialist aggressor in the region.

I didn’t see any real benefit to Iran to agreeing to talk to the US representatives, particularly in light of the outcome of the previous two talks. But what they have managed to achieve through them is proving to the American people that the US government is prioritizing the interests of Israel, and not their own national interests.

DISCUSS ON SG

Why Trump Wants Out

Everyone who knew anything about military affairs knew that there was no strategic path to victory in Iran before the recent debacle even started:

In the Situation Room on Feb. 11, Mr. Netanyahu made a hard sell, suggesting that Iran was ripe for regime change and expressing the belief that a joint U.S.-Israeli mission could finally bring an end to the Islamic Republic.

At one point, the Israelis played for Mr. Trump a brief video that included a montage of potential new leaders who could take over the country if the hard-line government fell. Among those featured was Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last shah, now a Washington-based dissident who had tried to position himself as a secular leader who could shepherd Iran toward a post-theocratic government.

Mr. Netanyahu and his team outlined conditions they portrayed as pointing to near-certain victory:

Iran’s ballistic missile program could be destroyed in a few weeks. The regime would be so weakened that it could not choke off the Strait of Hormuz, and the likelihood that Iran would land blows against U.S. interests in neighboring countries was assessed as minimal.

Mr. Netanyahu delivered his presentation in a confident monotone. It seemed to land well with the most important person in the room, the American president.

Sounds good to me, Mr. Trump told the prime minister. To Mr. Netanyahu, this signaled a likely green light for a joint U.S.-Israeli operation.

Mr. Netanyahu’s presentations — and Mr. Trump’s positive response to them — created an urgent task for the U.S. intelligence community. Overnight, analysts worked to assess the viability of what the Israeli team had told the president.

The results of the U.S. intelligence analysis were shared the following day, Feb. 12, in another meeting for only American officials in the Situation Room. Before Mr. Trump arrived, two senior intelligence officials briefed the president’s inner circle.

The intelligence officials had deep expertise in U.S. military capabilities, and they knew the Iranian system and its players inside out.

The U.S. officials assessed that the first two objectives were achievable with American intelligence and military power. They assessed that the third and fourth parts of Mr. Netanyahu’s pitch, which included the possibility of the Kurds mounting a ground invasion of Iran, were detached from reality.

When Mr. Trump joined the meeting, Mr. Ratcliffe briefed him on the assessment. The C.I.A. director used one word to describe the Israeli prime minister’s regime change scenarios: “farcical”.

At that point, Mr. Rubio cut in. “In other words, it’s bullshit”, he said.

Mr. Ratcliffe added that given the unpredictability of events in any conflict, regime change could happen, but it should not be considered an achievable objective.

Several others jumped in, including Mr. Vance, just back from Azerbaijan, who also expressed strong skepticism about the prospect of regime change.

The president then turned to General Caine. “General, what do you think?”

General Caine replied: “Sir, this is, in my experience, standard operating procedure for the Israelis. They oversell, and their plans are not always well-developed. They know they need us, and that’s why they’re hard-selling”.

As the small team of advisers who were looped into the plans deliberated over the following days, General Caine shared with Mr. Trump and others the alarming military assessment that a major campaign against Iran would drastically deplete stockpiles of American weaponry, including missile interceptors, whose supply had been strained after years of support for Ukraine and Israel. General Caine saw no clear path to quickly replenishing these stockpiles.

He also flagged the enormous difficulty of securing the Strait of Hormuz and the risks of Iran blocking it. Mr. Trump had dismissed that possibility on the assumption that the regime would capitulate before it came to that. The president appeared to think it would be a very quick war — an impression that had been reinforced by the tepid response to the U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities in June.

In other words, the Trump administration had to relearn the lesson that one can’t believe anything the Israelis say the hard way, which the old officials of the British Mandate could have told them before 1948.

Nations always pursue their own interests, more often at the cost of their allies than of their enemies. But for some reason, people in power are very prone to forgetting that, particularly when they’ve been indoctrinated in the idea that nationhood is merely paperwork.

Anyhow, the fact that the blame game is already front-and-center in The New York Times is a healthy sign that US involvement in the war is over, regardless of what the Israelis and the Iranians do. The neocons will be doing everything they can to get the USA back in the war, but at this point, even the most gullible Christian Zionist has to realize that no amount of IDF-huffing is going to alter the geography or the missile stockpiles.

“I think we need to do it,” the president told the room. He said they had to make sure Iran could not have a nuclear weapon, and they had to ensure that Iran could not just shoot missiles at Israel or throughout the region.

Which only underlines what a complete failure their undeclared, unconstitutional war turned out to be.

DISCUSS ON SG