Husband, father of 4, Director of Excel & database consultancy. Rowing GB NSR medallist. RTs posted for information & are responsibility of the original poster.
London, UK
Joined February 2010
- Tweets63K
- Following1.3K
- Followers701
- Likes334
Pinned Tweet
No mention of Zinc's disruptive effect on early RNA replication, and HCQ's purpose as an enabling Ionophore (NOT as the active medicine)? And if HCQ is so dangerous after 50 years of being acceptable, why not use Quercetin as alternative Zinc Ionophore?
youtube.com/watch?v=BIymfznD…
Ron West retweeted
The Seven Cures
We have gone through the seven sins and watched each one grow from a private weakness into a public system. But the cures are as old as the sins, and our ancestors knew them all.
A civilization is made of what it rewards and punishes. Reward the sins, and they become systems. Reward the cures, and they become a civilization.
Against envy, admiration. Both begin the same way: by looking up at someone who has done better. Envy says: tear him down. Admiration says: show me how. One turns the feeling into destruction, the other into work. And few people envy when everyone around is doing great things.
Against pride, humility. Humility is not thinking you are small. It is knowing the world is bigger than your plan. The proud man designs a society for everyone; the humble man lets everyone design his own life. And Madison put it most simply, noting that if men were angels, no government would be necessary – so power must be divided, and ambition made to check ambition. The cure for pride is not a humble ruler. It is a system that does not need one.
Against wrath, patience. Wrath wants the punishment now, before the facts. Patience waits for them. Scaled up, patience has a name: the rule of law – evidence first, verdict last, or not at all. Every mob, from the guillotine to the hashtag, is wrath that refused to wait.
Against sloth, diligence – not overwork, but care: doing your own work, and finishing it. The surest cure is ownership. Give a man something of his own – a house, a field, a business – and he will take care of it. Take everything from him, and he will care about nothing. When someone tells you that you will own nothing and be happy, he is selling you sloth.
Against greed, generosity. Greed wants to take; generosity wants to give – and you can only give what is yours. Generosity with other people's money is not a virtue. It is greed wearing a halo. The state does not give. It moves money, and keeps a share for the moving. Many of the West's proudest hospitals, universities and cathedrals began as real gifts.
Against gluttony, temperance. Gluttony lives at the expense of later and others. Temperance leaves something on the table – for tomorrow, for the children. At the scale of a state, gluttony is called debt, and temperance a balanced budget. An old proverb says that a society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they will never sit. Temperance is love for those who come after us.
Against lust, faithfulness. Lust takes and leaves. Faithfulness stays – and builds a home. Lust is sterile. A home is where children grow up. A civilization that cures lust gets the one thing lust never gives: grandchildren.
Put the seven together, and the pattern is plain. Every sin consumes; every cure builds. You could argue it is all just a matter of time preference – how much you value today over tomorrow. Every sin wants it now. Every cure can wait – for later, and for those who come after us.
Aristocracy is a matter of time preference. Not blood, not money: the habit of thinking in generations. A politician thinks until the next election; an aristocrat, until his grandchildren. That is why a state that lives from election to election eats the future. And you need no title for it – any family that thinks in generations is founding a dynasty.
And notice how each sin became respectable: it changed its name. Envy calls itself social justice. Pride calls itself expertise. Wrath calls itself the people's anger. Sloth calls itself a right. Greed calls itself generosity – with your money. Gluttony calls itself body positivity. Lust calls itself liberation. No sin becomes a system under its own name. It needs the Lie.
So one cure comes before the other seven: call things by their names. The cures need only the truth – and someone brave enough to say it first.
The Seven Deadly Sins – at the Scale of a Civilization.
More than fourteen centuries ago, Christian monks drew up a list of seven sins. Not laws – a map of the human heart. Envy. Pride. Wrath. Sloth. Greed. Gluttony. Lust. It is still pretty much the most accurate psychology anyone has written.
The monks were looking at one soul at a time. Look at whole systems instead, and you find the same seven. A vice that stays private ruins one life. Scaled up, it becomes an institution: a tax, a ministry, an ideology, a budget line.
People will always have vices. The question is who pays for them.
Adam Smith noticed that we owe our dinner not to the butcher’s kindness but to his self-interest. A free market does not abolish greed – it puts it to work: you get rich only by serving others, and you go bankrupt if you don’t. The vice pays its own bill. Bad systems let the vice send its bill to someone else – the taxpayer, the next generation, the innocent.
A good civilization does not abolish sin. It sends the bill to the sinner.
So here is what comes next, one sin at a time:
1. Envy – the engine of socialism. If I can’t have it, nobody should.
2. Pride – the planner’s conceit, from Plato’s philosopher-king to the Brussels directive.
3. Wrath – vengeance without trial, from the guillotine to cancel culture.
4. Sloth – comfort as a political program, from bread and circuses to the empty cradle.
5. Greed – the one everybody expects us to defend. We won’t: crony capitalism, the bailout, private profit and public loss.
6. Gluttony – debt. Eating the future.
7. Lust – pleasure cut off from its consequences, and from children.
And then the cures: the four old virtues – prudence, justice, temperance, fortitude – and the institutions that make them stick.
The monks thought sin was a matter for the confessional. They were half right. It is also a matter for the budget.
Show me a country’s budget, and I will tell you which sins it subsidizes.
First up: Envy.
Envy – the Engine of Socialism.
A genie appears to a peasant: "I’ll grant you one wish." The peasant thinks for a long time. His neighbor has a goat. "Kill the neighbor’s goat."
That is envy. Not wanting what someone else has – that’s ambition, and it built most of the world. Envy is wanting him not to have it. Even if you gain nothing. Even if you lose.
Every other sin at least promises pleasure. Envy promises only that someone else will have less. And it is the one sin nobody ever confesses – because it never calls itself envy. It calls itself fairness. Justice. Equality.
Socialism is envy at scale: not lifting the bottom, but cutting the top. Thatcher caught it in one sentence in Parliament: her opponents would rather the poor were poorer, provided the rich were less rich.
In experiments, people will pay out of their own pocket to destroy money belonging to others. Whole countries do the same: the tax that raises little but drives away the people it targets, the school that abolishes the advanced class because not everyone can take it, the rule written to bring down whoever got ahead.
In Soviet villages, a kulak – a "rich" peasant – was often a man with two cows. Liquidating the kulaks did not give anyone a cow. It gave everyone the famine.
That is envy’s bill. Envy aims it at the successful. But the successful leave, or stop trying – and the bill comes back to everyone. Kill the goat and you get no milk. Neither does anyone else.
The Greeks knew there were two kinds of rivalry. Hesiod wrote that the potter competes with the potter, the craftsman with the craftsman – and that this strife is good, because it makes everyone work harder. The other kind only destroys.
A free society does not abolish envy. It converts it: you may have what your neighbor has – by doing what he did. Socialism converts it the other way, into policy, so that nobody has the goat.
The cure is old and simple: gratitude for what you have, and the ambition to build what you don’t.
Next: Pride.
Ron West retweeted
It'll only continue to get worse for the leftists. They thought they could put on a keffiyeh and march along with Hamas in the streets and they'd be partners in a new Jew-free utopia.
Well...Islam's mission is not just Jew-free. It's leftist-free. It's Christian-free and Hindu-free. It is all non-Muslim-free.
Understand it. Let it roll around in your head for a moment. Then decide what you're going to do about it.
As I've stated in other posts, Israel seems to be the only nation and people who understand what we're up against.
Ron West retweeted
🇩🇪🚨MEGA-ESCÁNDALO: La ganadora de las elecciones de BERLÍN, del partido de ultraizquierda Die Linke confiesa por error que Hamás controla su partido y teme por su vida💣
Un error acaba de generar una crisis de seguridad impresionante. La revista Der Spiegel —un medio, cabe destacar, de marcada tendencia izquierdista— ha sacado a la luz un documento interno que prueba cómo Die Linke ha sido secuestrado por el islamismo.
Su candidata a gobernar Berlín, Elif Eralp, envió por accidente a la redacción las notas privadas de una entrevista donde confiesa estar coaccionada y aterrorizada por Hamás que opera dentro de su propio partido.
Resulta que luego de una entrevista, el equipo de la candidata revisó la transcripción. Durante este proceso, Eralp hizo comentarios internos que debían quedar en la más estricta confidencialidad. Sin embargo, el documento con las acotaciones sin borrar fue devuelto a los periodistas.
El contenido de esas notas es dinamita. Cuando Der Spiegel le preguntó por Ibrahim Ibrahim —un propalestino simpatizante de Hamás que celebró la masacre del 7 de octubre—, la respuesta pública iba a ser esquiva. Pero en el margen del documento filtrado, Eralp escribió la verdad: «Hay un PROBLEMA. [...] mi marido no, y yo tampoco, quiero nombrar nombres concretos, él tiene miedo de esta gente y yo también».
La filtración expone la cruda realidad del islamoizquierdismo en Alemania: Eralp llegó a comparar el nivel de amenaza de estos militantes pro-Palestina con el del Crimen Organizado e implora abortar la publicación: «No puedo poner en peligro a mí misma y a mi familia por Der SPIEGEL. ¿Qué hacemos ahora? ¿Anulamos toda la entrevista?».
El mayor chiste de toda esta situación, sin embargo, quedó plasmado en una de las frases que Eralp sí quería publicar. En un alarde de desconexión absoluta, la candidata afirma en la entrevista: «Lo que sí puedo decir con total claridad es que, como alcaldesa gobernante, velaré por la seguridad de todas las berlinesas y todos los berlineses». Una promesa que resulta irrisoria viniendo de una dirigente que, en el mismo documento, reconoce en secreto que ni siquiera puede proteger a su propia familia de las bases de su partido.
Luego del escándalo, Eralp ha anunciado que procederá legalmente contra Der Spiegel y presentará una queja formal ante el Consejo de Prensa por haber citado sus anotaciones internas. Esta maniobra judicial evidencia de inmediato lo susceptibles y completamente desbordados que están en realidad estos cuadros dirigentes frente a situaciones de crisis.
La izquierda radical berlinesa creyó que podía capitalizar electoralmente el extremismo islámico; hoy, los documentos demuestran que es el extremismo quien los tiene de rehenes.
Ron West retweeted
I want you all to know this.
There are 650 MPs in Parliament. Yet the one MP chosen by @UKLabour to Chair the Bill Committee for the controversial, dangerous and dismally bad draft legislation, the Conversion Practices Bill, is Alex Barros-Curtis. Until July 2024, when Alex was given a very safe Labour seat in Cardiff, he was the Head of the Labour Party's Governance and Legal Unit in London. This was a department set up to investigate complaints against members of the Labour Party. Complaints of antisemitism, Islamophobia, abuse, and of course latterly, mostly women holding legally-protected 'Gender Critical' (sex realist) beliefs. Alex oversaw the investigation of hundreds of members who liked or tweeted gender critical or feminist views. I was one of them. He investigated me, as a sitting Labour MP, for 13 months.
13 months to 'investigate' one like of one tweet. I had a great lawyer, one of the names we're all now familiar with, and I had to crowdfund to pay for his (excellent) work.
They first tried in 2020. But the screenshots crudely attached to that passive aggressive, threatening-sounding email from LP admin staff were so risible that I replied that it was too ridiculous for me to waste my precious time on. They left it. Years of Starmer bumbling and stuttering through interviews about whether he had spoken to me, whether he supported me, etc followed. My feminist sins continued apace.
And then I 'liked' a tweet by my GC comedian friend @Glinner. He had mocked Eddie'Suzy' for comparing his choice to wear traditional women's clothing, fake plastic breasts and nails, to those being persecuted by the Nazis during WWII. I found his sarcasm, as a award-winning comedy writer in the face of such offensive narcissism amusing and so 'liked' it. I found it absurd and obscene that Izzard, an extremely privileged and wealthy man, who openly changed his 'gender' at will, should write himself into history falseley as someone who would have been oppressed due to a circumstance beyond his control. We all know the groups who were tortured, starved and killed...
There is obviously more to my story, I will tell it all, it's just one chapter of the years of spiteful abusive and bullying practices meted out to me by the Labour Party managers. Not those who'd achieved office on merit, or even unexpectedly, but those in the club, often having failed to be elected themselves.
So Barros-Curtis who we were repeatedly told led 'the many *independent* inquiries into women members and MPs like me, now often stands as a trans-rights activist on the Labour backbenches. He has also been gifted the role of Chair of this Committee and is a huge supporter of this Bill. And I am not a part of the Bill Committee, although plenty of TRA MPs are. Does that sound like the democratic scrutiny of legislation to you?
Ron West retweeted
Europe just legislated the end of financial freedom and nobody noticed.
January 2027: Every euro above €10,000 becomes illegal tender. Every Bitcoin needs government permission. Every transaction becomes a datapoint in Brussels’ surveillance grid.
This is not proposed. This is law.
340 million Europeans will wake up in a cage built from their own bank accounts.
THE KILL SHOT
The EU Anti-Money Laundering package doesn’t just track criminals. It treats every citizen as one. Starting 2027, buying a car in cash becomes a crime. Sending €1,001 in Bitcoin without state approval triggers prosecution. Anonymous wallets vanish overnight.
The Digital Euro arrives 2029. The European Central Bank spent €1.3 billion building what they call freedom. But leaked proposals cap holdings at €3,000 per person. Every purchase tracked. Every pattern analyzed. Every dissent potentially bankable.
THE LIE THEY’RE SELLING
“This stops money laundering.” Europe launders €500 billion yearly, they claim. So they’re building a panopticon for 340 million people to catch the fraction who commit crimes.
China’s digital yuan already programs money to expire, to restrict, to control. The ECB promises Europe will be different.
They promised deposit safety in Cyprus too. Then they seized accounts in 2013.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
Privacy coins migrate to the shadows. Black markets replace grey ones. The state gains omniscience. You lose the right to buy bread without permission.
This isn’t about crime. It’s about power. €20 trillion flows through the eurozone. Every cent will soon require approval from Frankfurt.
The infrastructure of tyranny gets built in the name of safety. Always.
THE CLOCK IS RUNNING
847 days until your cash becomes contraband. 1,308 days until the Digital Euro launches. Zero days of mainstream coverage asking the only question that matters:
Who decides what you’re allowed to buy when money becomes permission?
The European Union just made Orwell an instruction manual.
Ron West retweeted
The Tommy Robinson case is a political hit job.
This trial is the ultimate blueprint for how the system handles people who don't fall in line. You don't even have to like the guy to see exactly how the British courts just exposed themselves.
For years, Robinson has been on the front lines exposing grooming gangs, tracking mass unregulated immigration, and sounding the alarm on the erosion of British culture.
His tireless work to save the UK made him an enemy of an establishment desperate to hide the truth. Because they couldn't silence his journalism, they went after his family.
Mainstream media tracked Robinson's ex-wife and children to a holiday spot in Cyprus and slapped their faces on the front page during peak UK tensions.
That is targeted endangerment, plain and simple. But when the state protects the press, doxxing an activist's young kids is called "journalism."
When Robinson turned the tables, hiring investigators to find the editors and warning them he would make their families famous, the entire establishment panicked.
They couldn't handle the exact same energy they dish out daily. Suddenly, accountability became a "criminal threat."
The prosecution literally admitted in court that Robinson's messages contained zero actual threats of violence. Read that again. No violence. Yet, the British legal system spent weeks of court time and taxpayer money to treat this media dispute like a major national security threat.
While the UK government is actively letting violent criminals out of prison early because their cells are full, they are perfectly happy to reserve a space for a citizen journalist who pushed back against corporate bullies. The priorities are entirely backwards.
This isn't about harassment; it's about a state-backed hit job designed to make an example out of a man who loves his country.
Ron West retweeted
The UK national debt stands this morning at £3.005 trillion
Around 94.0 per cent of GDP
Britain borrowed £97.8 billion in the first half of this year alone….
Healey vows cheaper marmalade and gherkins in pre-Budget package of 'everyday fixes' bbc.in/4zTnQ4K
Ron West retweeted
Agreed. Covid was the tipping point for a lot of people. Me first.
You know the story of the frog in the pot. Turn up the heat slowly and it never jumps. It just cooks.
Since the 70s, the West was that frog. The water was warm, 35, 40 degrees. Uncomfortable but bearable. Most people didn't notice. Most people didn't want to notice.
Then came the hubris.
The globalist class, WEF, Davos, Gates, Soros, that whole borderless elite that sees humanity as a system to be managed rather than people to be free, got impatient. Lockdowns. Curfews. Health passes. Papers to leave your home. Papers to drink a coffee. In a few months they took the water from 40 to 80.
And the frog jumped out.
That was their fatal mistake. Had they kept turning the dial slowly, they might have won. Instead they woke up hundreds of millions of people at once. People who now see the pot, the stove, and the hand on the dial.
You don't put that frog back in.
So now it's a fight to the death for what the West is. When I say Elon is in that fight, I mean it. And he's not alone. Millions of us are ready to give everything, our lives included, for Western civilization. I'm one of them.
And here's the thing: they've already lost. Not because we're stronger today, but because history doesn't run backward. Free people who have seen the cage never forget it.
The frog is out of the pot. And it remembers.
🤖 Made with AI
Ron West retweeted
If reparations are owed then they are owed by the descendants of African slave traders to the descendants of those enslaved, with a deduction going to the UK for fighting wars to eliminate the traders.
Of course they don’t have any money and are the wrong colour to be blamed.
Ron West retweeted
Brutal chart.
France and UK vs. Communist countries at their peak.
UK public spending as % of GDP is currently above Romania, Venezuela and China.
And France is a lost cause.
(HM Treasury/Rand Research)
Ron West retweeted
Regardez bien ce qui s'est passé au Brésil dimanche.
Les bureaux de vote ferment. Le dépouillement commence. Et là, un seul juge de la Cour suprême décide de prolonger le vote de deux heures, dans tout le pays. Le tribunal électoral suspend le comptage en urgence. Selon la presse brésilienne, ses propres membres étaient contre.
Résultat : pour la première fois depuis le retour de la démocratie au Brésil, le candidat battu au premier tour remporte le second.
Peut-être que tout est propre. Mais quand les règles d'un scrutin changent pendant le scrutin, sur décision d'un homme que personne n'a élu, la confiance meurt. Et une démocratie sans confiance n'est plus qu'un décor de théâtre.
Maintenant, regardez qui applaudit.
Alex Soros : « Félicitations au Brésil pour avoir, une fois de plus, tenu tête à l'autoritarisme. »
Ursula von der Leyen : « La démocratie et le multilatéralisme ont gagné. »
Pedro Sánchez, à un mois de ses propres élections, annonce que « la remontée mondiale du progressisme » va arriver en Espagne.
Ils ne se cachent même plus. L'autoritarisme, c'est un peuple qui vote mal. La démocratie, c'est un juge qui garde les urnes ouvertes jusqu'à ce que le résultat soit le bon.
Ils ont compris une chose : le réel est contre eux. L'immigration, l'insécurité, le déclassement, la dette. Le réel est trop fort, trop violent, et sur le terrain des idées, ils ne gagnent plus. Alors le combat se déplace : les tribunaux, les procédures, les horaires, les inéligibilités.
En France, on connaît déjà la musique. On a déjà vu des juges décider de qui a le droit de se présenter.
Le Brésil n'est pas une exception. C'est un prototype. Il y a de fortes chances que ce scénario se rejoue partout en Occident, dans chaque pays où ils n'ont pas encore perdu.
Alors préparez-vous. Pas seulement à faire campagne : à protéger le scrutin. Des assesseurs dans chaque bureau. Des avocats prêts le soir même. Chaque règle connue par cœur. Chaque procès-verbal photographié.
Gagner ne suffira pas. Il faudra gagner avec une marge qu'aucun juge ne pourra effacer, et surveiller chaque urne jusqu'au dernier bulletin.
Le réel est de notre côté. Encore faut-il qu'on nous laisse le compter.
Bukele l’a dit clairement :
« Si vous n’impeachez pas les juges corrompus, vous NE POUVEZ PAS réformer le pays. Ils formeront un cartel (une dictature judiciaire) et bloqueront toutes les réformes. »
Le Brésil vient de le montrer en direct.
La France le pratique depuis des décennies, plus discrètement.
Le suffrage universel n’a de sens que si le dernier mot appartient aux élus, pas à un réseau de magistrats irrévocables qui interprètent les règles selon leurs intérêts.
Sans destitution réelle des juges politiques, les élections restent un théâtre.
Le cartel reste en place.
A bon entendeur.
Ron West retweeted
Why were Jonathan Powell, Peter Mandelson and Lord Hermer appointed without vetting?
The answer is that Chagos was a deal Starmer couldn't refuse to make.
Here's a timeline of the key stages of the Chagos treachery.
In 1982, after it became known that the Chagos seabed may contain vast mineral wealth, Mauritius set up a select committee to examine the matter.
However, sea-mining technology was in its infancy, and it was too expensive to be commercially viable at that time.
In 2003, as underwater mining technologies advanced and the value of minerals and rare earth elements soared, mining the Chagos seabed became an exciting possibility again; Mauritius appointed the eminent international barrister Sir Ian Brownlie as advisor for the Chagos Archipelago.
A former member of the Communist Party of Great Britain, Brownlie was a good friend of Sir Satcam Boolell, a former Labour deputy prime minister of Mauritius, and High Commissioner in London.
In 2009, Brownlie led the first Mauritius delegation to the Foreign Office in London seeking a Chagos deal.
Among the delegation was Sir Satcam Boolell's son Satyajit, who became Mauritius Director of Public Prosecutions the same year.
In 2010, after Brownlie died in a motor accident in Egypt, Sir Keir Starmer’s “great mate”, Philippe Sands, a leading human-rights lawyer who has publicly boasted of humiliating the UK in international courts, took over as counsel to Mauritius for Chagos.
In 2013, Satyajit Boolell invited Keir Starmer, whom he had become friendly with during Starmer's time as the UK's DPP, to a legal conference at the 5-star Balaclava resort in Mauritius.
During the trip, Starmer discussed the future of the Chagos Archipelago with then Mauritius prime minister Navin Ramgoolam.
After Starmer’s 2013 visit, Ramgoolam wrote that he and Starmer were aligned over Chagos.
In 2015, Ramgoolam was arrested on money-laundering charges when large sums of cash in foreign currencies, suitcases full of brand-new luxury watches, and blank British visas were found in his home.
Also in 2015, Starmer was elected to the British Parliament.
In 2019, Philippe Sands, after a campaign of lobbying the UN, obtained an International Court of Justice ruling (advisory opinion only, and non-binding) that the Chagos islands should be given to Mauritius.
Sands used the ICJ ruling as leverage in the following years in his efforts to persuade the Conservative government to give Chagos to Mauritius.
In 2020, Starmer became leader of the Labour Party.
In 2021, Sands received Mauritius' top honour, The Most Distinguished Order of the Star and Key of the Indian Ocean.
In 2022, Sands made an unauthorized entry into the Chagos Archipelago for a flag-raising ceremony. Sands tweets at the time, “It’s morning on Chagos, where the flag of Mauritius flies."
In 2023, Sands became a Mauritius citizen, but retains his British and French citizenships.
🧧In November 2023, David Cameron replaced James Cleverly as Foreign Secretary and, with the support of other senior Tories, stopped a Chagos deal saying, it’s not in the national interest, as reported in Hansard.
In July 2024, Starmer became UK Prime Minister and just ten weeks after entering Downing Street, he agreed a deal with Mauritius, despite there having been no mention of Chagos during the election campaign, and the Labour manifesto pledging to protect the BOT.
in November of 2024, Ramgoolam was elected Mauritius prime minister again after a snap general election, and took over from the incumbent PM, Pravind Jugnauth, to lead the Chagos negotiations with the UK.
In December 2024, after 14 years in the role, Philippe Sands steps down as Mauritius counsel for Chagos.
In January 2025, Attorney General Lord Hermer recused himself from signing off on the Chagos deal, and declined to say why.
In February 2025, Jugnauth was arrested on money-laundering charges after large sums of cash in foreign currencies and suitcases full of brand-new luxury watches were found in his home.
In May 2025, twelve years after discussing the future of Chagos in Mauritius, Starmer and Ramgoolam sat down in London to sign the treaty that transfers the archipelago's sovereignty to Mauritius.
The Fall Out.
The Chagos deal does🟥NOT secure the joint UK/US military base on Diego Garcia.
The deal operationally hobbles the base, and increases the dangers to the British and American military personnel, and the civilians who work there, and in the wider Central Indian Ocean region.
Diego Garcia's remoteness made it easy to defend in the past. This deal leaves the base horribly vulnerable to the growing threats posed by the new longer-range missiles, and more sophisticated and lethal drones.
When Keir Starmer, Lord Hermer and Vijay Rangarajan, the Director General at the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, made the deal it was fully understood that the outer islands of the Chagos Archipelago were by far the best locations to deploy early warning, and air-defense systems, to protect the main base from missile and drone attacks.
Yet they still decided to lease only Diego Garcia.
Andy Burnham, Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband, and Defense Minister Wes Streeting, know the deal increases the dangers to the lives of British service personnel, and our NATO allies personnel, in the strategically important Central Indian Ocean region.
To double down and push the deal with that knowledge is a shameful act of betrayal.
While the deal leaves Diego Garcia vulnerable to attack, it also renders the base itself ineffective and operationally hobbled.
Mauritius is a signatory of the Pelindaba African Weapon-Free Zone Treaty which bans all nuclear weapons from treaty members' territory.
Pelindaba gives each of the more the 40 countries who have signed it the right to inspect the facilities on Diego Garcia if they suspect nuclear arms are being stored there.
The UK's nuclear-armed Trident submarines will no longer be able to enter Chagos waters, or visit Diego Garcia which is the only island in the region which has suitable anchorage and facilities for maintenance and restocking provisions, etc.
The US's nuclear-armed submarines, ships, and planes will also be banned from Diego Garcia and the Chagos Archipelago's waters.
Mauritius gets complete sovereignty over everything, including control of the airspace above the Chagos Archipelago, which at 250,000 square miles is the same size as France.
The implications of controlling such a vast area of airspace in a strategically vital region are huge.
Mauritius has shown it will ban planes entering its current airspace when China asks.
The Chagos Deal does not ‘secure the base’. It methodically destroys every element required for operations. The text and annexes state it will:
❌Constrain future Ops and use of the base
❌Prevent the placing of sensors and other maritime installations
❌Require us to sight our foes on defence planning
❌Mean we’re unable to use our preferred contractors
❌See us lose of control over electromagnetic spectrum.
Ron West retweeted
To understand why Western leaders all sound the same, you need to understand how a system that has captured its own institutions keeps producing elites aligned on the worst possible line.
In 2004, Klaus Schwab created the Forum of Young Global Leaders. Every year, the WEF selects a few hundred people under 40. You don't apply. You get nominated by people already inside and vetted by people already inside. Then come the annual summits, Davos, and a two-week executive program at Harvard Kennedy School built around global governance, climate, global health and "21st century leadership."
Emmanuel Macron: class of 2016, the same year he launched his presidential campaign. Gabriel Attal: listed by the WEF itself among its notable members. In 2017, at Harvard, Schwab bragged that his network "penetrates the cabinets" of governments. His words, not mine.
Now here's the mistake most critics make. They imagine a brainwashing camp. Two weeks at Harvard don't rewire anyone. The YGL program doesn't create the mindset. It certifies it.
The capture happened upstream. The formatting starts at 18. Sciences Po, ENA, Harvard, Columbia, Yale Law. Ten years of being graded by people who already hold the consensus. You learn fast that the reward doesn't go to whoever is right, but to whoever restates the room's beliefs most elegantly. Every essay, every oral exam, every internship in a ministry or a consulting firm teaches the same lesson: the frame is given, your job is to optimize inside it.
Obama never went through YGL. He didn't need to. Columbia, Harvard Law, president of the Law Review. Same factory, American edition.
So by the time the WEF calls, the product is finished. The program just adds the final layer: flattery. You're told you're one of the few people under 40 who will shape the world. You spend your summers with ministers, CEOs, royals and Nobel laureates who all agree with each other. Imagine what that does to a 35-year-old ego.
That's the profile it produces. Very high verbal intelligence, very low dissent. Brilliant at defending the frame, never trained to question it. And a narcissism fed by a network that confirms, year after year, that you belong to the elect. Combine the two and you get leaders who are never punished for being wrong, as long as they're wrong together.
Immigration is the perfect test case. Obama, Macron, Attal can tighten a law, announce deportation numbers, harden their tone before an election. Obama deported more people than any president before him. But listen to how they talk about it. For them, immigration is never a civilizational question. It's a flow to manage, a labor shortage to fill, a demographic curve to correct, a moral duty to perform. Whether a nation has the right to remain itself never even enters the frame. Not because they've answered the question. Because their education taught them it isn't a legitimate one.
That's why the voter who says "my town has changed and I'm worried" gets a lecture instead of an answer. The leader isn't even lying to him. It's worse: he genuinely cannot see what the voter sees. Twenty years of formatting taught him that this perception is a bias to correct, not a reality to address.
That's the real problem with captured institutions. Not a secret plot. A monoculture. Same schools, same summits, same Davos panels, same vocabulary from Paris to Ottawa to Washington. When every leader is selected by the consensus and rewarded by the consensus, the consensus stops being tested against reality.
And a ruling class that never gets confronted with reality ends up governing a country that only exists in its own slide decks.
Before you vote, ask one question about every candidate: who formatted them, and who do they still need to impress?
🤖 Made with AI
Ron West retweeted
No big headline for this 👇
Labour fined £14,250. Reform fined £2,187. Guess which one the left-wing press shouted about?
In 2023 Labour was fined £14,250 by the Electoral Commission for failing to declare donations properly. 20 separate breaches. Big money, real reporting failures.
No big headlines on The London Economic. No pile-on.
This week Reform was fined £1,750 for missing small print on three social media pages and an advert. Paid it a month late so it went to £2,187.
That's it. Admin.
But that one is everywhere. Screenshots, outrage, "Reform in trouble."
Same regulator. Same type of mistake. One fine seven times bigger than the other.
Only one gets turned into a scandal - and it's the one for Farage.
Tell you everything you need to know about the left-wing press. 🤦
Ron West retweeted
‼️ BREAKING - They don’t want you to know.
France’s PM has reportedly asked FOUR major telecoms companies to prepare to BLOCK access to X, TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat. So unrest can be buried.
But you know really it’s the suppression of information. To shut you up. You wont retaliate if you don’t know it’s happening.
Ron West retweeted
‼️HAMMERMELDUNG‼️
Wolfgang Wodarg auf X:
Weshalb ist bei gleicher Spritzenzahl die Übersterblichkeit in Deutschland sehr hoch und beim neuen NATO-Mitglied Schweden gleich null?
Die Spritzen-Pandemie war ein gezieltes und international verabredetes gentechnischen Massenexperiment mit Hilfe des Militärs.
Was wir von Anfang an gesehen und vermutet haben, wurde jetzt durch ein interdisziplinäres Team in den USA bestätigt und veröffentlicht:
Spezifische Chargennummern verursachten 4 % mehr Nebenwirkungen als andere. Keine zufällige Variation. Keine Fertigungsinkonsistenz. Ein absichtliches, systematisches Muster.
Quelle: x.com/paulgoldeagle/status/2…
- Chargennummern, die mit 20A bis 20F enden: Nahezu null Nebenwirkungen. Kochsalzlösung. Placebo. Wasser mit Etikett.
- Chargennummern, die mit 21K bis 21X enden: Moderate Nebenwirkungen. Müdigkeit. Myokarditis. Blutgerinnsel. Hospitalisierungsraten 300 % über dem Ausgangswert.
- Chargennummern, die mit 22R bis 22Z enden: Katastrophal. Schlaganfall. Herzstillstand. Neurologische Schäden. Sterberaten 8.100 % über der statistischen Norm für jedes pharmazeutische Produkt in der Geschichte.
Drei Stufen. Drei Formeln. Verteilt in einem Muster, das sicherstellte, dass kein einzelnes Krankenhaus, keine einzelne Stadt, keine einzelne Demografie genug katastrophale Dosen erhielt, um ein offensichtliches statistisches Signal auszulösen. Sie verteilten den Schaden dünn genug, um es „seltene Nebenwirkungen“ zu nennen. Aber es war nicht selten. Es war gezielt.
Das Verteilungsmuster war nicht zufällig. Die katastrophalen Chargen wurden überproportional an spezifische Postleitzahlen versendet. Postleitzahlen mit hohen Konzentrationen von Militärveteranen. Ersthelfern. Unabhängigen Unternehmern. Gemeinschaften mit historisch niedriger Einhaltung föderaler Vorgaben. Die Menschen, die am ehesten Widerstand leisten würden, erhielten die gefährlichsten Dosen.
Die moderaten Chargen gingen an städtische Zentren mit hohem Medienkonsum – Bevölkerungsgruppen, die milde Symptome melden würden, gesagt bekämen, es sei „normal“, und ohne Fragen zu Auffrischungsimpfungen zurückkehren würden.
Die Placebo-Chargen gingen an Politiker, Medienfiguren und pharmazeutische Führungskräfte. Die Menschen, die es vor der Kamera beworben haben. Die Menschen, die Ihnen sagten, es sei „sicher und wirksam“, während sie Kochsalzlösung erhielten. Sie haben denselben Schuss im Fernsehen genommen. Sie haben nicht dieselbe Formel genommen.
Die 12.000 Chargennummern sind nun kartiert. Jede Charge. Jedes Ziel. Jedes Ergebnis. Die Daten sind auf der Blockchain. Sie können nicht zurückgezogen werden. Der ehemalige FDA-Regulierer im Team reichte den Datensatz mit einer einzigen Erklärung beim Militärtribunal ein: „Das war keine Fahrlässigkeit. Das war ein Waffeneinsatzprotokoll, getarnt als öffentliche Gesundheit.“
Eurostat Auswertung-Danke Tom Lausen
🚨 EVERY VACCINE BATCH HAD A DIFFERENT FORMULA. THE LOT NUMBERS JUST PROVED IT.
Not a theory. Not an interpretation. A dataset. 12,000 lot numbers. Cross-referenced with VAERS adverse event reports. The correlation is absolute.
A team of researchers — 4 statisticians, 2 pharmacologists, 1 former FDA regulator — published their findings on a decentralized server Wednesday. The paper is 147 pages. Peer review was impossible because no journal would touch it. So they released it directly to the public.
The finding: specific lot numbers produced 4,000% more adverse events than others. Not random variation. Not manufacturing inconsistency. A deliberate, systematic pattern.
⟁
Lot numbers ending in 20A through 20F: near-zero adverse events. Saline. Placebo. Water with a label.
Lot numbers ending in 21K through 21X: moderate adverse events. Fatigue. Myocarditis. Blood clots. Hospitalization rates 300% above baseline.
Lot numbers ending in 22R through 22Z: catastrophic. Stroke. Cardiac arrest. Neurological damage. Death rates 8,100% above the statistical norm for any pharmaceutical product in history.
Three tiers. Three formulas. Distributed in a pattern that ensured no single hospital, no single city, no single demographic received enough catastrophic doses to trigger an obvious statistical signal.
They spread the damage thin enough to call it "rare side effects." But it wasn't rare. It was targeted.
⟁
The distribution pattern wasn't random. The catastrophic lots were sent disproportionately to specific zip codes. Zip codes with high concentrations of military veterans. First responders. Independent business owners. Communities with historically low compliance to federal mandates.
The people most likely to resist were given the most dangerous doses.
The moderate lots went to urban centers with high media consumption — populations that would report mild symptoms, be told it was "normal," and return for boosters without question.
The placebo lots went to politicians, media figures, and pharmaceutical executives. The people who promoted it on camera. The people who told you it was "safe and effective" while receiving saline.
They took the same shot on television. They did not take the same formula.
⟁
The 12,000 lot numbers are now mapped. Every batch. Every destination. Every outcome. The data is on the blockchain. It cannot be retracted. It cannot be memory-holed. It cannot be fact-checked into oblivion.
The former FDA regulator on the team submitted the dataset to the military tribunal with a single statement: "This was not negligence. This was a weapons deployment protocol disguised as public health."
The tribunal accepted it into evidence Thursday morning. Case number: GT-2026-0441.
Every lot number is a fingerprint. Every adverse event is a witness. Every death certificate is an indictment.
CODE: LOT-NUMBERS / 3-TIERS / ZIP-TARGETED / GT-2026-0441
They didn't give everyone the same shot. They gave everyone the shot they were assigned. Now the assignment list is evidence.
♟
Someone you know got a different formula than they were told. Share this for them.
Mr Pool
Ron West retweeted
National resilience is the theme de jour in government and the civil service at the moment. Ministers are being told that Britain is vulnerable on several fronts. Our cyber security is poor, we are massively vulnerable to cyber attacks and energy shocks, and the Iran situation is looking precarious - suggesting skyrocketing diesel prices. Germany is suffering from a shortage of refinery capacity and we allowed ours to close.
There is also an ever present suggestion that the national grid won’t make it through the winter. National Energy System Operator (NESO) is keen to downplay any suggestion of blackouts this winter, and while is assurances are almost believable, the margins keep getting tighter. There is a strong possibility NESO is deceiving itself. Something is certainly up. We’re presently heavily reliant on interconnectors while our own CCGT power stations are idling. Our gas storage is below where it should be.
Meanwhile, I wouldn’t rule out Russian sabotage of some kind. Ukraine is knocking the hell out of Russian energy infrastructure with British supplied weapons, and I don’t think Mr Putin will be very happy about that. We can also assume the government is concerned about domestic security. The chances of French style riots spreading to the UK may be remote, especially in this weather, but these things are often unpredictable.
There are, then, plenty of good reasons why the government should be worried, and the suggestion that we should be stockpiling tinned foods and essentials is not misplaced. While the risks may slight for the moment, instability and uncertainty is set to be the new normal.
This is also flanked by unsettling movements in the financial markets. I’m not even slightly qualified to comment on those such matters, but I am assured by people who follow such affairs that the downward pointing graphs I’m looking at are what economists often describe as “bad”.
So when does this big implosion happen? I don’t know. But here’s my bet. This is Britain. A big riotous implosion and a financial meltdown would be far too interesting and politically entertaining - which is why it probably won’t happen. In Britain, nothing really happens. This just get progressively shitter.
Every month we’re just that little bit poorer, where we think twice about putting the heating on, don’t drive out anywhere, stop ordering take outs, postpone any major purchases, and watch local businesses blink out one by one until even the nice places look as depressed as the bad places. Then come the bankruptcies, foreclosures and family breakups, and we all end up living in HMOs with asylum seekers living in the next room.
What we can say is that nothing is going to improve any time soon. We can’t have cheap energy because the government has decided against it. We can’t have functioning borders because the government has decided against it. We can’t have decent paying jobs because the government has decided against it. We can’t have safe communities because the government has decided against it. We can’t have viable armed forces because the government has decided against it. I struggle to think of any major problem afflicting this country that isn’t a conscious choice of the people who rule us.
What’s really depressing is that some time in the not too distant future, there will be a general election that Labour will comfortably win, and we'll have this hapless oaf as PM for the next decade. The right is fatally divided and too useless to be worth electing anyway. The only good news is that by the time Labour is done with us, Britain will be too grim even for dinghy migrants. Also, EVs will be super cheap. You won't be able to charge them, and they'll be ugly Chinese affairs, but they might be cheaper than renting a room in a HMO.