pi3141

PM's decision to recognise a state of Palestine could lead to UK paying £2trillion in reparations 22:01, 20 Sep 2025, updated 01:11, 21 Sep 2025 By GABRIEL MILLARD-CLOTHIER, POLITICAL REPORTER Keir Starmer's controversial decision to recognise a state of Palestine could lead to demands for the UK to pay more than £2 trillion in reparations to the country, legal experts have said. Sir Keir has said the UK will press ahead with the move, which is expected to be announced ahead of his visit to the UN this week, unless Israel meets certain conditions, including agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza and reviving the prospect of a two-state solution. It has been condemned by Tory leader Kemi Badenoch for 'rewarding terrorism', while the US Government says that it will have 'disastrous consequences'. Now legal experts have warned that it could also be a costly decision – because the new country would ask for eye-watering damages in compensation for land 'taken from the Palestinian people' when Britain relinquished control of the region after the Second World War. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who has a long history of threatening to sue Britain, is demanding 'reparations in accordance with international law' based on the value of the land which was under British rule between 1917 and 1948. Some international law experts have described £2 trillion, roughly the size of Britain's total economy, as a 'good place to start'. Families of the hostages abducted by Hamas in the October 7 attacks have written to the Prime Minister to condemn the decision, which they claim has 'dramatically complicated' efforts to be reunited with their relatives. In an open letter to Sir Keir, they said: 'Your regrettable announcement of the UK's intention to recognise a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly has dramatically complicated efforts to bring home our loved ones. 'Hamas has already celebrated the UK's decision as a victory and reneged on a ceasefire deal. We write to you with a simple plea - do not take this step until our loved ones are home and in our arms.' Ilay David, brother of hostage Evyatar David, who was seen emaciated in a Hamas video last month, said: 'Giving this recognition is like saying to Hamas: "It is OK, you can keep starving the hostages, you can keep using them as human shields." This kind of recognition gives Hamas power to be stubborn in negotiations. That is the last thing we need right now.' Criticism also came from Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, who said: 'Hamas and a Palestinian state are inseparable for now. This is typical of Starmer, he can't really decide where he stands. 'Whatever the caveats in his statement, this announcement is a surrender to terrorism and a betrayal of Israel.' It is expected the government will look to impose sanctions on Hamas, after Sir Keir said during a joint conference with Donald Trump last week that the terror group could have no part in running an independent Palestine. This is a reckless policy that undermines prospects for peace,' wrote Ms Stefanik and Mr Scott. 'It sets the dangerous precedent that violence, not diplomacy, is the most expedient means for terrorist groups like Hamas to achieve their political aims.' Tory justice spokesman Robert Jenrick says reparations for Palestine would amount to 'Chagos 2.0', in reference to Sir Keir's surrender of the islands to Mauritius – which leaked government documents reveal will cost UK taxpayers more than £35 billion to rent back from them. Britain handed over the territory in the Indian Ocean in response to pressure from international courts, which pro-Israeli lawyers warn could act as a precedent. The campaign group called Britain Owes Palestine has demanded an apology from Britain for 'war crimes' in the region. Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy once supported calls for reparations for slavery, saying: 'As a Caribbean people, we are not going to forget our history. We don't want to just hear an apology, we want reparations,' while the Government's lawyer-in-chief, Lord Hermer, has given legal assistance to nations seeking reparations for slavery. Lord Hermer's advice resulted in a 'ten-point plan for reparations', as former colonies seek to seize up to £18trillion in compensation from the UK. Mr Jenrick said: 'Not a penny of taxpayer money should be spent on so-called reparations. This is a load of ahistorical nonsense. Britain was, and remains, a force for good in the world – these ridiculous demands should be brushed aside. 'Lord Hermer spent his career working against British interests. 'Now Starmer's appointed him to work at the heart of government and he's undermining Britain from within – whether the Chagos surrender or the betrayal of veterans who served in Northern Ireland. 'He simply cannot be trusted and should be sacked.' Link - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15118203/PMs-decision-recognise-state-Palestine-UK-2trillion-reparations.html Destroy our society with immigration, wreck our economy, hand over control to multinational corporations of our housing, food and industries, then introduce Socialism as the cure. Digital ID and Digital Currency for Totalitarian control. Socialists wet dream.

JACK ANDERTON: Housing illegal migrants in student accommodation is the final proof that young Britons like me are being robbed of our future by an incompetent, self-serving political class Keir Starmer's 'one-in, one-out' policy always looked optimistic – but now it's in total disarray. Just two illegal migrants have been sent back to France this week, though hundreds continue to arrive here every week – and more than 50,000 since Labour came to power last July. Amid a rising public backlash – and far too timid to take Donald Trump's advice to deploy the Royal Navy to stop the boats – the Prime Minister is scrambling for alternatives. Most people already know the Government is billeting thousands of migrants in 'houses of multiple occupancy' (HMOs), while Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood plans to place others in barracks on ex-military bases. This proposal was suggested recently by Reform UK, who I work with as a political consultant. But now a third, more secretive move is underway: to house migrants in student accommodation. A few days ago it emerged that the Home Office is planning to convert Mary Morris House in Leeds, a hall of residence with 247 bedrooms currently housing fee-paying students, into taxpayer-funded accommodation for illegal arrivals. In Aberdeen, some migrants from Iran, Somalia and Eritrea have been shifted from a Hilton hotel to two former student halls near the city centre – a move that sparked protests this week. And the idea isn't even new: last year, the Tory government leased luxury student blocks in Huddersfield, West Yorkshire – complete with a cinema room and gym – into housing for almost 700 migrants. More than 150 students who signed tenancy agreements were thrown out a week before term began. The Home Office had earmarked £358million to use the Huddersfield buildings until 2034, according to the National Audit Office (although the Government insists the actual cost was lower). In the meantime, despite taxpayers having spent a reported £7million leasing the blocks, they remain empty, with reports a decision on moving migrants there is 'months away'. Whatever happens, it should be obvious housing illegal arrivals in such sites is a dangerous policy – and an attack on young people's prospects and safety. It is being enacted without any mandate or consultation with those who will suffer its effects. I was at my own university, King's College London, during the Covid years of 2019 to 2022. The undergraduate experience mostly consisted of a couple of hours of weekly Zoom classes in a small box room, along with a heavily reduced social calendar owing to endless lockdowns. For this, we emerged tens of thousands of pounds in debt. But, luckily, we did not have to share our campuses with unvetted men from distant lands, many of whom could have posed a threat to our safety – and especially to that of female students. Only this week, it emerged a 42-year-old Egyptian illegal migrant and convicted terrorist had raped a woman in Hyde Park, central London, while living in Britain at taxpayers' expense. Data obtained by the Centre for Migration Control has meanwhile shown that Afghans and Eritreans, who comprise a large proportion of illegal arrivals, are 20 times more likely to be convicted of sexual offences than Britons. This summer's protests in Epping, Essex, were sparked by the arrest of Ethiopian Hadush Kebatu, who had been living in a hotel requisitioned for boat arrivals. Kebatu was found guilty of sexually assaulting and harassing a teenage girl. To place large numbers of young male migrants close to young students – some of whom will inevitably get drunk and walk home late at night in a vulnerable state – displays a total lack of concern for their wellbeing. It is a classic example of life under 'two-tier Keir', where the wellbeing of migrants takes priority. The truth is that this approach is entirely typical of a political class that has again and again acted directly against the interests of younger voters. Consider the financial aspect alone: already, according to the National Union of Students, one-third of students struggle to afford housing. In London, the average annual student rent of £13,595 is higher than the maximum loan of £13,348, leaving many unable to afford basic living costs. Now the Home Office will be using the taxes paid by these students to bid against them for their own accommodation in halls and HMOs. This will only drive up rents. Overall, it is not a good time to be young in Britain – and perhaps especially to be a graduate. Hundreds of thousands who recently left university – including those earning only £27,295 per year – are paying a marginal tax rate of 55 per cent, the Centre for Policy Studies think-tank says. Labour's hike to employers' National Insurance has cut the availability of jobs, while AI is decimating graduate roles in even blue-chip City firms. Gen Z (those aged roughly 15 to 29) are set to be the first generation in modern history to be poorer than their parents: a sign of a country in deep decline. Pay in Britain has largely stagnated since 2008, though it has surged in America, and many young Britons are fleeing to the opportunities available in low-tax havens such as Dubai. Given all this, it should be no surprise that young people are becoming more politically motivated than ever. Many, like me, believe the answers are to be found in Reform and other nascent outfits on the Right, while others are surrendering to the reheated Corbynism of the ultra-Left, and to a Green Party obsessed with Gaza and trans rights. And still the migrants come. Of the 3.1million non-EU nationals that arrived in Britain between 2018 and 2024, just 16 per cent came to work, according to the Tory MP Neil O'Brien. In London, 48 per cent of all social housing is occupied by foreign-born 'heads of household'. Last year alone, almost 950,000 people arrived in Britain – while just 217,000 homes were built in the same period. The inevitable result is that the proportion of young people able to afford their own homes or to start a family will only continue to shrink, worsening Britain's ongoing 'fertility collapse'. Meanwhile, this year alone, the state pension will see payouts rise by £561 thanks to the unaffordable triple lock. It has never been clearer that young Britons like me are being robbed of our future by an incompetent, self-serving political class. Many of my generation are increasingly vocal about the sorry state in which Labour and the Tories have left our country. And they may well feel that being forced to share their university campus with illegal migrants is the last straw. Link - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-15115161/JACK-ANDERTON-Housing-illegal-migrants-young-Britons-robbed-future.html

Don't recognise Palestinian state, US tells Starmer as Kemi Badenoch says move would give Hamas 'a reward for terrorism' 09:51, 20 Sep 2025 By JADA BAS, TRAINEE REPORTER US leaders have urged Keir Starmer not to recognise a Palestinian state over fears the 'deeply troubling' move could reward Hamas. The prime minister announced plans to legitimise a state in July, saying he would do so during the UN General Assembly meeting in September if Israel did not take 'substantive steps' towards peace in Gaza. Congressional Republican officials have sent a letter to the UK, France, Canada, Australia and other key allies, calling on them to oppose Starmer's efforts, as he is expected to announce the UK's formal recognition as early as Sunday. 'This is a reckless policy that undermines prospects for peace,' wrote chairwoman Elise Stefanik and Senator Rick Scott. 'It sets the dangerous precedent that violence, not diplomacy, is the most expedient means for terrorist groups like Hamas to achieve their political aims.' The letter was backed by US House of Representatives speaker Mike Johnson, who said: 'It is baffling and deeply troubling to reward Hamas with statehood before they have returned every hostage.' The US's stance is echoed by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who accused the Prime Minister of giving Hamas a 'reward for terrorism', writing in The Daily Telegraph she would 'never apologise for standing by Israel when it strikes back against terrorism'. She added Labour's foreign policy was to 'condemn our allies, indulge our adversaries and hand away our sovereignty'. Sir Keir intends to recognise a Palestinian state on Sunday, the day before the UN General Assembly's general debate begins in New York, according to the Times. There has been no ceasefire and the situation in Gaza has deteriorated, with a declaration of a famine in Gaza City and the expansion of Israeli military operations. Link - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15116901/recognise-Palestinian-state-US-Starmer-Kemi-Badenoch-Hamas-terrorism.html Keir Starmer is condemned for 'utter nonsense' claim that digital ID will stop the boats Campaigners have criticised the government's claim that digital identification cards will stop small boat migrants crossing the channel. Sir Keir Starmer is ploughing ahead with plans to introduce the scheme in line with efforts to overhaul the country's asylum and immigration system and reduce crossings in the Channel. The PM has been 'exploring' the idea in recent weeks, although finer details of the scheme are supposedly still being ironed out, according to the Financial Times. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Pat McFadden has suggested digital ID cards could help tackle the record numbers of small boat crossings and could serve as a deterrent for migrants. But critics have rubbished the claim as 'utter nonsense', and accused Starmer of 'gaslighting' the public in order to gain support for the plans, which could be announced as early as the Labour conference next week. Alan Miller, co founder of the campaign group The Together Association, said: 'Pat McFadden said It's going to stop the boats. How is that going to work?' What are they going to do give everyone smart phones?' he added in a video on social media. 'They are gas lighting us, it's nonsense.' Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has voiced similar doubts, saying: 'I think as a way of helping to control immigration, it is not really going to solve the problem.' Rebecca Vincent, of Big Brother Watch, said earlier this month: 'While Downing Street is scrambling to be seen as doing something about illegal immigration, we are sleepwalking into a dystopian nightmare where the entire population will be forced through myriad digital checkpoints to go about our everyday lives. 'Mandatory digital ID… will not stop small boat crossings, but it will create a burden on the already law-abiding population to prove our right to be here. It will turn Britain into a "Papers, please" society.' Meanwhile, Gracie Bradley of Liberty said a new scheme was 'likely to be even more intrusive, insecure and discriminatory' than the Labour government's failed 2006 plan to bring in ID cards. Former Labour prime minister Tony Blair's nascent card scheme was scrapped by the incoming Coalition government in 2010. Ms Bradley added that an 'expensive and unjustified ID scheme… threatens our rights'. Sources told the FT that the government is considering giving digital IDs to all people legally entitled to reside in Britain, whether citizens or those with legal immigration status. The digital ID could then be used for employment verification and rental agreements, though the government may still narrow the scope or revisit the plan, they added. A government spokesperson said Britain was committed to expanding the use of technology to make it easier for people to access services, pointing to existing systems such as e-visas and the NHS app. Link - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15117501/Keir-Starmer-nonsense-claim-digital-ID-stop-boats.html UK to unveil crypto rules early next year The new Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer will present the framework, focusing on regulating stablecoins, staking services, and cryptocurrencies. The United Kingdom is set to finalise a draft regulatory framework for crypto assets by early next year, according to Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Tulip Siddiq. Speaking at the Tokenisation Summit in London on 21 November, Siddiq outlined plans for a streamlined approach to regulating stablecoins, staking services, and cryptocurrencies. The new Labour government, under Prime Minister Keir Starmer, will present the framework, replacing earlier Conservative-led initiatives disrupted by a general election. Siddiq emphasised the importance of removing legal uncertainties, particularly around staking services, which the government does not intend to classify as “collective investment schemes.” This move aims to avoid unnecessary restrictions. Stablecoin legislation, which began in 2023, will also be part of the new framework, though it was never anticipated before 2025. The UK faces mounting pressure to establish itself as a competitive crypto hub, especially with the European Union’s MiCA regulations taking full effect this year and the US expected to adopt a more crypto-friendly stance under President-elect Donald Trump. Critics have often blamed the Financial Conduct Authority for the UK’s perceived regulatory hurdles, but the upcoming framework seeks to enhance clarity and foster innovation in the growing crypto sector. Link - https://dig.watch/updates/uk-to-unveil-crypto-rules-early-next-year Stablecoin - a joint venture between government and Bank of England I've made the connection before - Islam, Iran, Syria, Lebanon etc are intimately tied to Russia and China. Communists. Labour are Fabians. Fabianism is hard-core socialism bordering on Communism. Labour opened our borders with Blair and Mandelson determined to make Britain multicultural. Starmer is allowing and actively blocking deportations of illegal immigrants whom a substantial number are hard-core Muslims from Iran etc who are tied to Russia and China. The government just dropped a spying case that involved China. The government is opening up ties to China while America is trying to position itself able to bomb China. Recognizing a Palestinian state takes radical Islam, backed by communism, closer to a global caliphate. Starmer now wants to introduce Digital ID like China has. Socialists want to destroy Capitalism with its property ownership and free markets and introduce state ownership of everything with strict social controls like digital ID. Labour want a multicultural society because all the immigrants will forever vote Labour meaning they more often come to power than they have historically. They will destroy British society, our economy and our sovereignty in order to bring in socialism or even communism and they are using Islamic refugees and some inept economic policies to do it. Would good is recognizing a state that has no legitimate government. Would good is Digital ID for stopping boats? What good is borrowing and spending more for repaying debts and reducing a black hole in the economy. What good is there in writing a Bill giving Border Force the power to return boats but telling them not to do so. They can't be this inept. We had 1000 more turn up in boats yesterday. We've deported 3 and that means we've also allowed 3 more in from France. 1 in 1 out. But the 1 in must come from France with legal right to apply. So we are still filling up our society with extra economic burden when we can't afford it. Smash the gangs was a lie. Handing Israel over to terrorists is nuts, unless your trying to impress your friends - Russia, China and Islam. Introducing Digital ID to stop the boats while ordering Border to security to continue bringing the boats in and refusing to address EHCR and our Human Rights laws to prevent entry is a deliberate policy to NOT stop the boats. Plans for Digital currency is still pushing forward. We got a muslim mayor of London refusing to acknowledge the existence of Muslim grooming gangs. We got Sharia Patrols in our cities and the media and government silent on it while they state in Parliament we should accept the existence of Sharia Courts as religious tolerance. They are intentionally destroying our way of life to usher in a new order. A dystopian, socialist order. We are living in dangerous times.

David Lammy says this sends an immediate message to the gangs. Starmer said he will smash the gangs - and he has. When the gangs realise they can bring over 200 people a day, but we will send 1 a week back - that will smash their business model. Who would pay to come here knowing there is a 1 in 200 chance they will be sent back? Nobody would take that risk. Would they.

Yes. We have deferred responsibility for to long. Now is the time to accept individual responsibility. We can no longer vote for people who we think or hope align to our values, and we should not longer accept big business telling us what's best. The car industry told us for years Petrol was the best choice. But we know now it suppressed other fuels and sold us inefficient engines to maximize profit at the cost of our environment. Supermarkets told us they have the buying power to reduce food costs while agriculture told us mass farming with chemicals would improve our food supply. There are many more examples but I'll have turned out to be false and manipulated to again maximize profits to corporations. We need small farmers, small markets, independent shops, more skills, trades people and investors, engineers etc. We need less centralization, local power generation, small scale nuclear reactors, we need manufacturing jobs. We need to completely change the education system and our political system as well as our legal system. We need to get rid of Shareholders who prioritize themselves over the workforce and the good of the company. We need to look again at many aspects of our system and I believe nationalize water, energy and transport industries. We need yo refund the military drastically. I'm seeing footage of UFO's being fired on by military - not in my fucking name. Why do they get to choose the response to possible contact and why is that response to destroy! It's time to drop the 'old ways' Men in military uniforms or billionaires telling us how society should be - now it's our turn to tell them.

This is a f*king joke. Policy paper Nationality and Borders Bill: Border Force powers to stop and seize small boats factsheet Updated 13 October 2023 What’s the problem? We are seeing an unacceptable rise in irregular arrivals from France. These crossings are dangerous, with overloaded boats and busy shipping lanes. The recent tragic events in the Channel with at least 27 men, women and children losing their lives trying to cross the English Channel has sharply brought into focus the need to take action. The British public have had enough of seeing people die in the Channel while ruthless criminal gangs profit from their misery. These crossings are also unnecessary because France is a safe country and people should claim asylum there rather than risk their lives at the hands of criminal smugglers. 2. What does the Nationality and Borders Bill do to strengthen Border Force powers? Providing Border Force with powers to stop and redirect vessels suspected of carrying irregular arrivals out of UK seas or return them to where their sea journey began. Vessels used to facilitate irregular entry by sea to the UK will be able to be seized wherever they are encountered and, quickly disposed of including through donation to charities if appropriate. Putting beyond doubt Border Force’s ability to proactively search unaccompanied containers where there may be irregular entrants hiding in them rather than at present, encountering persons while searching for commodities. The Nationality and Borders Bill does not change the government’s approach to existing obligations under international maritime law, including the duty to protect lives at sea. Organisations and individuals will be able to continue to rescue those in distress at sea as they do now. As is the case today, seafarers should contact the coastguard if they see a vessel in distress and help if they are able to. Seafarers will be protected if they were unable to contact the coastguard for a good reason, such as their phone running out of battery or there not being enough time. 3. What difference will new maritime powers make? Current powers were not designed to combat the significant growth in the use of small boats over the past 2/3 years. The Bill provides greater clarity on being able to use maritime powers to divert vessels out of UK waters, it extends the territoriality scope allowing stop and divert powers to be exercised in international waters and, subject to agreement, in foreign states’ waters, and will for the first time allow intercepted  migrant  vessels to be taken to a non-UK port such as the country the migrants’ vessel started in. Finally, the bill provides far greater flexibility for the seizure and disposal of vessels used to cross the Channel illegally.  The powers do not mean the UK will fail to abide by its international obligations and although there will be no requirement in the new powers to do this, we do not intend to return vessels to another foreign state without first notifying them. Link - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nationality-and-borders-bill-border-force-powers-to-stop-and-seize-small-boats-factsheet/nationality-and-borders-bill-border-force-powers-to-stop-and-seize-small-boats-factsheet So what does it mean? To my mind, the Border Force now has the powers to confiscate small boats. They also have the power to turn the boats around. But they won't do that. The government says it will not turn the boats around unless it speaks to France first. So Border Force would have to stop the small boat in the shipping lanes or international waters. Call base, request a phone call to France to let them know they are turning a boat back, through dangerous shipping lanes. When Border Force encounter a small boat, they really must view those aboard as being in need of assistance, according to the guidance. To hold them back for an hour or two and then send them back would endanger those aboard. So they still 'rescue' them, but now they can give the confiscated boats to charity. If there are people entering illegally, among the refugees, they get higher sentences, but if everyone claims asylum, that is legal and they will provide accommodation and legal assistance. The government will make it easier to allow asylum seekers to bring family members across. The government is proud that so far the UK has taken more asylum seekers than any other European country. The charities will get a financial boost selling the boats.

Sharia Patrols.

It is, and only a complete change of philosophy or ethics coupled with a renogotiation of our relationship to this world and each other will save it. They have kept us in a state of tribalism for too long. We need to ascend mentally. We need to grow up.

Sarah Pochin MP asked if Sharia Law and Sharia Courts should be recognized in law. Labour MP Sarah Sackman responded they should by allowed as part of religious tolerance which is a British value. Basically the Labour government argued for the right for Sharia Courts to operate in UK. She argued Jewish and Christian people can choose a court of faith, therefore so should Muslims be allowed to. Thing is, Christian values align with our society. A Muslim Woman could be taken to Sharia Court, say for adultery, and the ruling death by stoning, can be carried out abroad. This in not in line with our values. Similarly Sharia Courts have been criticized for not protecting women being abused. The MP says people can choose to go to these Courts of Faith, but come on, does she really believe a Muslim woman suffering abuse will choose to go to Sharia Court and not a UK court? No, she will be ordered, coerced or forced to go to Sharia Court by family and community members for an Islamic trial, because we infidels don't understand Islamic laws and they won't want dirty laundry aired in British Courts. If a Muslim Woman doesn't want to wear a Burkha that her husband is forcing her to wear, going to a UK court will rule in her favour, going to Sharia Court they will automatically enforce their erroneous belief that she should wear it. So again, the husband, family and community members will force her to go to Sharia. If she walks away from Islam, it's the death penalty for apostasy. What guarantees can the MP Sarah Sackman give that a woman will not be forced or coerced to go to Sharia Court and can instead choose UK courts. What guarantees can the MP give that the husband will obey the UK ruling and not at some point in the future take her to another country under the guise of a holiday to be murdered in keeping with Sharia Law? She can give absolutely none. Therefore I accuse the Labour government of enabling abuse and oppression under the excuse of Religious tolerance. It's disgusting. To any Muslim woman being pushed into these extreme Islamic beliefs by family or husband can look to our government of fairness, justice and tolerance and realize, there is no help for them.

Posted on Facebook, felt it was worthy of sharing. There are certain names and institutions on this Earth that carry more than bricks, uniforms, or symbols. They carry spells. One of those names is the Salvation Army. I was drawn twice in Dublin to its buildings, and the pull was not because of the charity work inside. It was the heaviness. The frequency was constrictive, as if a net were woven through the walls. What became clear is that the organisation itself was never built on pure service. It was built on an inversion. Think about the name: Salvation Army. One word that speaks of freedom, married to another that speaks of hierarchy and war. By binding the two together, a hidden contract was seeded: freedom through obedience, salvation through submission. The phrase itself became a word-spell, one that spread across the globe, shaping the charity into a militarised Christian structure. Behind the brass bands and red shields, three layers of distortion worked in the field. First, the military tie-in, the Army always had links to colonial authority, intelligence, and control. Second, the poverty contracts, food and shelter were given, but always with an energetic price. Dependency was created, not liberation. And third, the mimic Christ overlay salvation was turned into a bargain, a guilt-based transaction instead of a birthright. And yet, inside this framework, real people served with genuine love. Volunteers who cooked meals, played music, handed out blankets many of them gave from their hearts. Those acts were real, and they remain untouched by the corruption of the system. They were simply siphoned into a grid that twisted them for other ends. This week, that grid has been cleared. Not just in Dublin, but everywhere. The mimic overlays, contracts, and false authority tied to the Salvation Army have been dissolved at the field level. Even the name itself, once an active spell, has been stripped of its charge. What remains are neutral shells of buildings and the pure memories of human kindness that were once caught in the net. This matters because we are in a time when old institutions are collapsing, not only in the physical but in the unseen layers where their power was held. When a structure like this is neutralised, it frees the souls who were bound by its contracts and restores dignity to those who gave with good intention. It also reminds us of a simple truth: service never needs uniforms, slogans, or hierarchies. True service is free, spontaneous, and rooted in love. As these networks unravel, we are called to embody that freedom ourselves. To give without debt. To love without condition. To refuse every false bargain dressed up as salvation. The collective is no longer bound to these spells. The clearing is done. Now it is up to each of us to live the truth that remains. Aurion

Keir Starmer's first 'one in, one out' migrant flight cancelled after legal threats The first deportation of a Channel migrant under Sir Keir Starmer's "one in, one out" deal with France was cancelled at the last minute. By Steph Spyro, Deputy Political Editor 21:22, Mon, Sep 15, 2025 Updated: 21:26, Mon, Sep 15, 2025 Keir Starmer's first migrant flight under the "one in one out" scheme was cancelled at the last minute because of legal threats. One migrant was set to be flown from Heathrow to Paris on an Air France passenger flight on Monday but the flight was postponed amid protests by charities and threats of legal action, the Telegraph reported. The Home Office is understood to be planning to put him on another flight on Tuesday, with the French authorities preparing to accommodate him in a hotel in Roissy-en-France, in the north-eastern suburbs of Paris. British and French charities have launched a campaign to bombard Air France with phone calls, emails and social media messages urging them “not to agree to collaborate with the interior ministry and not to agree to deport these people on these flights”. A spokesman for Auberge des Migrants, a charity that supports migrants in northern France, said: “There were a lot of people who responded to this campaign and agreed to send emails asking for this collaboration with the Government to be stopped.” Lawyers are also advising many of the 90 Channel migrants who have been detained since the beginning of August ready for their enforced return to France. The Home Office has to give “generous” time extensions to the migrants to take legal advice on challenging their deportation as a result of a ruling against the Tory government’s thwarted Rwanda deportation scheme. Lawyers told the Telegraph said this suggested the legal process was taking longer than anticipated by the Government. Instead of a single charter flight carrying a significant group of migrants, the Home Office has opted for daily commercial flights of smaller numbers. Some 100 migrants were detained on arrival into the UK at the start of August before their names and details were passed to the French for approval. Most are understood to be from countries with high asylum grant rates but also those accounting for the highest number of crossings including Eritrea, Afghanistan and Sudan. Lawyers believe their cases could be challenged under their rights to a family life under article eight of the European Convention of Human Rights if they have relatives in the UK. Cases could be lodged on the grounds that they have been trafficked or suffer mental ill health. As part of the agreement, a similar number of asylum seekers from France will come to the UK. The first flight into Britain is scheduled for Saturday. Link - https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/2108924/migrants-small-boats-france-crossing From the article - Lawyers believe their cases could be challenged under their rights to a family life under article eight of the European Convention of Human Rights if they have family in UK. Why? They are not European citizens. Why does the EHCR apply to non Eurooeans? If this was International Law, there would be a case. It seems there is tenously a case IF they have family. But ultimately these charities, lawyers and our European governments are choosing to allow our legal rights as citizens of our countries to immediately be transferred to anyone who lands on our shores. Why?

My god I'm not advocating an open immigration policy if that means mass immigration. That is totally against my thoughts. We should continue to be a safe haven for the oppressed and allow economic migrants, who will contribute to our economy in any form, cleaners, nurses, laborers and skilled workers. If your oppressed and need help or are able to contribute to society there is a case to allow immigration. But everyone coming must understand they have to integrate into our society. I suspect most young men arriving on small boats do not think that way. Islam's stated aim is a worldwide caliphate under sharia law. That is not integration. I believe it is instructed in the Koran that a Muslim living in a non Islamic country must respect the countries laws and traditions and they are allowed to participate. Until there are enough Muslims concentrated in that country and then it is their duty to call for and work towards converting that country or society to Islam . Unless it's end times, then it is absolutely the duty of every Muslim to fight to establish the global caliphate. Again, that is not integration. I do not support immigrants that do not want to integrate but rather take over our country.