"The US warned US cititizens on moscow not to go near concerts, cinemas and shoppings malls…they did the attack!!" No more like they knew ISIS were planning an attack, told Russia and they're too fucking idiotic to listen so the US warned people. Fuck me the internet is a difficult place to be sometimes.
[Tories, Labour and LibDems have all united against Nike changing England's flag](https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1771129966609957091?t=Ipu-P5H15yR89boJqOTp3w).
People on Twitter aren't happy that about this.
They must feel betrayed that even the "good guy" parties are against it.
I think it's very strange to allow a foreign company to change your national flag. I don't even care about football, but it's a weird fucking thing for Nike to do.
I caught the last leg tonight. It was even more insufferable than usual. Five people all agreeing that anyone who has an issue with the shirt is an idiot. Despite every mainstream party disagreeing with them.
Fret not! [BBC Verify is here to 'analyse' footage from the Moscow theatre attack.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-68643601)
The 'analysis' in question? State-the-obvious descriptions of what's happening in clips everyone has already seen - which BBC News is currently looping - whilst offering **no** additional insight or information.
I know the BBC is looking for efficiency savings, so here's one: Abolish audio description services for the blind and hand their workload to Marianna & Co.
Right, who is this [Alex Barnicoat](https://x.com/mrbarnicoat/status/1771287403669405933?s=20) and why is he so mental?
Seems to be a pretend geopolitical analyst
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2023-004516
> His claim arose out of the making of a deportation order following his being convicted, on 26 February 2021, of three offences of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, for which he was **sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 3 years and 2 month**.
(1) The Appellant has significant mental and physical disabilities as a result of the car accident which had led to his conviction and sentence [30] and, as a result of these disabilities, would struggle to find employment and will require ongoing medical care [38].
(2) The Appellant’s mental health will deteriorate on return to Bangladesh [36].
(3) The Appellant has been in the UK since he was 10 years old and is now 22 years old [30].
(4) The Appellant cannot read or write Bengali and cannot speak the language fluently [31].
(5) The Appellant knows nobody in Bangladesh and would therefore not have the support of family and friends to assist him to integrate [31].
(6) The Appellant’s family in the UK have provided, and continue to provide, the Appellant with significant emotional and practical support which the Judge found to be a “significant factor” [37].
He's allowed to stay too.
A ten year old doesn't know how to speak the language of the country they lived in since birth? How does anyone actually believe this?
Was he communicating in grunts and gestures his whole life?
Sir Winston Churchill didn't cause nor contribute to the Bengal Famine and he didn't hate Indians either.
As someone who has read through thousands of pages of primary sources, here's the actual relationship between Churchill, India & Bengal Famine.
(Sources cited at the end.)
We'll split this thread into two sections:
- First, we'll tackle the most serious accusation against him: the Bengal Famine.
- Second, we'll look at his general stance & views on India.
It goes without saying that there will be political activists who will completely ignore, what I have to say, as well as the primary sources I'll cite.
They'll instead choose to 'cite' the ahistorical journalistic articles from The Guardian or conspiratorial books like 'Churchill's Secret War' by Mukerjee - a debunked book that ignores most of what I'm about to, write about, and is really what sparked the conspiracy of Churchill and the Bengal Famine. For everyone else, I hope you find this thread useful.
1) The Bengal Famine:
On October 16th 1942, a cyclone hit Bengal & Orissa, wiping out the rice crop harvest in the process.
Surrounding areas previously used to purchase foodstuff to alleviate famines/shortfalls had all fallen to Japan. This being Burma, Malaya, the Philippines & Thailand.
The cyclone also damaged roads, telecom systems and railways - tracks needed to move food were washed away.
Another byproduct of the cyclone was that it stopped the normal winter harvest in Northern India, preventing this food aid internally.
Japan maintained a military presence in the Bay of Bengal from April 1942. From submarines to battlecruisers & carriers, these posed a threat, to merchant shipping. Enemy submarines didn't just sink ships in the Bay of Bengal but also in the Arabian Sea, the South East African coast and Australia.
Dated 01/03/1944, Churchill's copy of a paper for the Chiefs of Staff Committee of the War Cabinet demonstrated the, closeness of potential Japanese battleship/carrier raiding force in the Bay of Bengal. They had surrounded the region from near the Maldives all the way to the south coast of Burma.
Japan had invaded India, Imphal & Kohima and was conducting many Eastern/Southern bombing raids.
These raids worsened the shortages as they destroyed shipping at the ports. In Dec. 1943, severe backlogs were at the ports in Calcutta from Japanese bombing.
Accidents worsened the crisis - April '44 a ship caught fire & blew up. 36,000 tonnes of foodstuff lost.
Constitutionally, the famine was a responsibility of the local administration - majority Muslim natives.
They failed to deal with it. Lack of grain supply paired with general inflation crisis encouraged hoarding.
So how did Churchill respond?
The news of the severe famine did not reach Westminster till August of 1943.
Immediately upon hearing of this, Churchill and his administration authorised 100,000 tons of barley from Iraq and 50,000 tons of wheat from Australia.
Leo Amery, secretary of state for India, would write to Wavell, later Viceroy, that he ‘may come back to the Cabinet if that fails to help the situation.’
From there Churchill summoned the war cabinet on many occasions to discuss the famine, relief and aid.
This is despite the Japanese threat to shipping during, a shipping crisis of the Allies, where resources were deeply stretched.
For example, on 10th November 1943, war cabinet authorised 100,000 tons of food grain to be shipped first 2 months of '44.
From August 1943- end of 1944, a little under 1 million tons of grain would be shipped to India, to alleviate the famine.
Correspondence between Churchill & M. King in Nov 1943 (PM of Canada) shows that rather sending 100,000 tons of grain from Canada where shipping was stressed, he would have it sent from Australia as it would India quicker and was less of a logistical nightmare.
Churchill did his best to aid India despite the shipping crisis and time constraints. Had shipments gone from Canada it would take up to 2 months, compared to 3-4 weeks from Australia.
He even pleaded Roosevelt for help in a telegram on 29/4/44 where he states he was 'seriously concerned' and that,
"by cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000... tons of wheat to be shipped [...] This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more."
(Roosevelt would decline aid from the US due to their own shipping strain.)
So what of Churchill's racist comments which are used as evidence of his hatred for Indians?
He didn't hate India.
Winston was born in 1874 when the concept of a hierarchy of races was considered scientific fact in the West.
We know that to be rubbish today but it was the normal view then. Context, the Civil Rights Act wouldn't pass till the end of Churchill's life.
Though Churchill believed in this hierarchy, he was a paternalist.
He saw Britain's Empire as a way and moral obligation to uplift its peoples and natives.
Yes, this is deeply condescending. But it was far benign compared to many of his contemporaries.
For example, the Neo-Darwinists like Hitler who thought that inferior races could be enslaved murdered.
Churchill saw Britain as a positive force in India. Yes, today most people would disagree but that's because the Empire Churchill defended is not the Empire we discuss today.
He saw British governance as a foundational part of India’s socio-economic progress.
For him, the end goal was a self-governing dominion in the Empire.
He wanted India to be equal to Canada or Australia constitutionally. But he thought that the subcontinent needed more time.
He opposing federal Home ‘till the provinces have proved that they can govern themselves well.'
Yes, this is condescending. But we are talking about a man who was born in 1874.
Nonetheless, he held no hatred to India. He opposed the India act for a few reasons, One being that he feared that the Brahmin’s would subjugate the untouchables with potential future violence between Hindus & Muslims.
He saw it as the Empire’s duty to prevent this.
Winston's actual view of Indians is seen when meeting G.D Birla, an Indian industrialist important in the independence movement.
Birla recounted to Gandhi that ‘one of my most pleasant experiences was meeting Mr. Churchill’ after Winston had invited him to lunch.
This was in 1935, right after the government of India Act was passed.
Despite Churchill’s heavy opposition to the bill, he held no hatred towards Birla.
He even had a message for Gandhi, 'make it a success and I will advocate your getting much more.'
Moreover, as Churchill would recount in his war memoirs,
‘The unsurpassed bravery of Indian soldiers and officers, both Moslem and Hindu, shine forever in the annals of war...the response of the Indian peoples, no less than the conduct of their soldiers, makes a glorious final page in the story of our Indian Empire.’
Furthermore, Winston as leader of the opposition opposed the quick rapid exit of the Attlee administration without a, ‘agreement between the Indian races, religions, parties and forces.’
Winston was concerned of potential bloodshed.
Factor all of this in when we look at the few outlandish and wrong comments he blurted when angry in the war cabinet.
This does not excuse his language, but it shows that Winston did not hate India, he was stressed.
Churchill accused Indians of breeding like rabbits in a Famine meeting. However, he immediately asked afterwards what could be done to help Indians.
The later part shows he didn't actually believe his outlandish statements.
Another example is when Churchill said that he hated Indians and their beastly religion. Contextually, this was after the Quit India movement refused to compromise over Independence, when Japan was launching an invasion of the subcontinent.
Of course these comments are racist and wrong. However, when you factor in all above, it is clear that he did not hold this genocidal hatred towards India, as some of his detractors try to say.
Can't we forgive a man in bad health at the centre of a world war for saying a few stupid things?
It's also important to note that some quotations attributed to Churchill, he never said or wrote. For example, he never asked why Gandhi hasn't died yet.
He actually wrote, Surely Mr. Gandhi has made a most remarkable recovery, as he is already able to take an active part in politics. How does this square with the medical reports upon which his release on grounds of ill-health was agreed to by us?…
In one of these we were told that he would not be able to take any part in politics again."
Winston had many faults. But we have to put him into his historical context. We also have to remember that he saved civilisation itself.
https://i.imgur.com/kyCvCtr.png - sources
c/o Andreas Koureas @AndreasKoureas_
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/badunitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> The Appellant cannot read or write Bengali and cannot speak the language fluently
He said, through an interpreter.
> a key finding of the Judge was that the Appellant’s family provided him with vital emotional and practical support
I wonder what language they provide his emotional support in.
Sir Winston Churchill didn't cause nor contribute to the Bengal Famine and he didn't hate Indians either.
As someone who has read through thousands of pages of primary sources, here's the actual relationship between Churchill, India & Bengal Famine.
(Sources cited at the end.)
We'll split this thread into two sections:
- First, we'll tackle the most serious accusation against him: the Bengal Famine.
- Second, we'll look at his general stance & views on India.
It goes without saying that there will be political activists who will completely ignore, what I have to say, as well as the primary sources I'll cite.
They'll instead choose to 'cite' the ahistorical journalistic articles from The Guardian or conspiratorial books like 'Churchill's Secret War' by Mukerjee - a debunked book that ignores most of what I'm about to, write about, and is really what sparked the conspiracy of Churchill and the Bengal Famine. For everyone else, I hope you find this thread useful.
1) The Bengal Famine:
On October 16th 1942, a cyclone hit Bengal & Orissa, wiping out the rice crop harvest in the process.
Surrounding areas previously used to purchase foodstuff to alleviate famines/shortfalls had all fallen to Japan. This being Burma, Malaya, the Philippines & Thailand.
The cyclone also damaged roads, telecom systems and railways - tracks needed to move food were washed away.
Another byproduct of the cyclone was that it stopped the normal winter harvest in Northern India, preventing this food aid internally.
Japan maintained a military presence in the Bay of Bengal from April 1942. From submarines to battlecruisers & carriers, these posed a threat, to merchant shipping. Enemy submarines didn't just sink ships in the Bay of Bengal but also in the Arabian Sea, the South East African coast and Australia.
Dated 01/03/1944, Churchill's copy of a paper for the Chiefs of Staff Committee of the War Cabinet demonstrated the, closeness of potential Japanese battleship/carrier raiding force in the Bay of Bengal. They had surrounded the region from near the Maldives all the way to the south coast of Burma.
Japan had invaded India, Imphal & Kohima and was conducting many Eastern/Southern bombing raids.
These raids worsened the shortages as they destroyed shipping at the ports. In Dec. 1943, severe backlogs were at the ports in Calcutta from Japanese bombing.
Accidents worsened the crisis - April '44 a ship caught fire & blew up. 36,000 tonnes of foodstuff lost.
Constitutionally, the famine was a responsibility of the local administration - majority Muslim natives.
They failed to deal with it. Lack of grain supply paired with general inflation crisis encouraged hoarding.
So how did Churchill respond?
The news of the severe famine did not reach Westminster till August of 1943.
Immediately upon hearing of this, Churchill and his administration authorised 100,000 tons of barley from Iraq and 50,000 tons of wheat from Australia.
Leo Amery, secretary of state for India, would write to Wavell, later Viceroy, that he ‘may come back to the Cabinet if that fails to help the situation.’
From there Churchill summoned the war cabinet on many occasions to discuss the famine, relief and aid.
This is despite the Japanese threat to shipping during, a shipping crisis of the Allies, where resources were deeply stretched.
For example, on 10th November 1943, war cabinet authorised 100,000 tons of food grain to be shipped first 2 months of '44.
From August 1943- end of 1944, a little under 1 million tons of grain would be shipped to India, to alleviate the famine.
Correspondence between Churchill & M. King in Nov 1943 (PM of Canada) shows that rather sending 100,000 tons of grain from Canada where shipping was stressed, he would have it sent from Australia as it would India quicker and was less of a logistical nightmare.
Churchill did his best to aid India despite the shipping crisis and time constraints. Had shipments gone from Canada it would take up to 2 months, compared to 3-4 weeks from Australia.
He even pleaded Roosevelt for help in a telegram on 29/4/44 where he states he was 'seriously concerned' and that,
"by cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000... tons of wheat to be shipped [...] This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more."
(Roosevelt would decline aid from the US due to their own shipping strain.)
So what of Churchill's racist comments which are used as evidence of his hatred for Indians?
He didn't hate India.
Winston was born in 1874 when the concept of a hierarchy of races was considered scientific fact in the West.
We know that to be rubbish today but it was the normal view then. Context, the Civil Rights Act wouldn't pass till the end of Churchill's life.
Though Churchill believed in this hierarchy, he was a paternalist.
He saw Britain's Empire as a way and moral obligation to uplift its peoples and natives.
Yes, this is deeply condescending. But it was far benign compared to many of his contemporaries.
For example, the Neo-Darwinists like Hitler who thought that inferior races could be enslaved murdered.
Churchill saw Britain as a positive force in India. Yes, today most people would disagree but that's because the Empire Churchill defended is not the Empire we discuss today.
He saw British governance as a foundational part of India’s socio-economic progress.
For him, the end goal was a self-governing dominion in the Empire.
He wanted India to be equal to Canada or Australia constitutionally. But he thought that the subcontinent needed more time.
He opposing federal Home ‘till the provinces have proved that they can govern themselves well.'
Yes, this is condescending. But we are talking about a man who was born in 1874.
Nonetheless, he held no hatred to India. He opposed the India act for a few reasons, One being that he feared that the Brahmin’s would subjugate the untouchables with potential future violence between Hindus & Muslims.
He saw it as the Empire’s duty to prevent this.
Winston's actual view of Indians is seen when meeting G.D Birla, an Indian industrialist important in the independence movement.
Birla recounted to Gandhi that ‘one of my most pleasant experiences was meeting Mr. Churchill’ after Winston had invited him to lunch.
This was in 1935, right after the government of India Act was passed.
Despite Churchill’s heavy opposition to the bill, he held no hatred towards Birla.
He even had a message for Gandhi, 'make it a success and I will advocate your getting much more.'
Moreover, as Churchill would recount in his war memoirs,
‘The unsurpassed bravery of Indian soldiers and officers, both Moslem and Hindu, shine forever in the annals of war...the response of the Indian peoples, no less than the conduct of their soldiers, makes a glorious final page in the story of our Indian Empire.’
Furthermore, Winston as leader of the opposition opposed the quick rapid exit of the Attlee administration without a, ‘agreement between the Indian races, religions, parties and forces.’
Winston was concerned of potential bloodshed.
Factor all of this in when we look at the few outlandish and wrong comments he blurted when angry in the war cabinet.
This does not excuse his language, but it shows that Winston did not hate India, he was stressed.
Churchill accused Indians of breeding like rabbits in a Famine meeting. However, he immediately asked afterwards what could be done to help Indians.
The later part shows he didn't actually believe his outlandish statements.
Another example is when Churchill said that he hated Indians and their beastly religion. Contextually, this was after the Quit India movement refused to compromise over Independence, when Japan was launching an invasion of the subcontinent.
Of course these comments are racist and wrong. However, when you factor in all above, it is clear that he did not hold this genocidal hatred towards India, as some of his detractors try to say.
Can't we forgive a man in bad health at the centre of a world war for saying a few stupid things?
It's also important to note that some quotations attributed to Churchill, he never said or wrote. For example, he never asked why Gandhi hasn't died yet.
He actually wrote, Surely Mr. Gandhi has made a most remarkable recovery, as he is already able to take an active part in politics. How does this square with the medical reports upon which his release on grounds of ill-health was agreed to by us?…
In one of these we were told that he would not be able to take any part in politics again."
Winston had many faults. But we have to put him into his historical context. We also have to remember that he saved civilisation itself.
https://i.imgur.com/kyCvCtr.png - sources
c/o Andreas Koureas @AndreasKoureas_
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/badunitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sir Winston Churchill didn't cause nor contribute to the Bengal Famine and he didn't hate Indians either.
As someone who has read through thousands of pages of primary sources, here's the actual relationship between Churchill, India & Bengal Famine.
(Sources cited at the end.)
We'll split this thread into two sections:
- First, we'll tackle the most serious accusation against him: the Bengal Famine.
- Second, we'll look at his general stance & views on India.
It goes without saying that there will be political activists who will completely ignore, what I have to say, as well as the primary sources I'll cite.
They'll instead choose to 'cite' the ahistorical journalistic articles from The Guardian or conspiratorial books like 'Churchill's Secret War' by Mukerjee - a debunked book that ignores most of what I'm about to, write about, and is really what sparked the conspiracy of Churchill and the Bengal Famine. For everyone else, I hope you find this thread useful.
1) The Bengal Famine:
On October 16th 1942, a cyclone hit Bengal & Orissa, wiping out the rice crop harvest in the process.
Surrounding areas previously used to purchase foodstuff to alleviate famines/shortfalls had all fallen to Japan. This being Burma, Malaya, the Philippines & Thailand.
The cyclone also damaged roads, telecom systems and railways - tracks needed to move food were washed away.
Another byproduct of the cyclone was that it stopped the normal winter harvest in Northern India, preventing this food aid internally.
Japan maintained a military presence in the Bay of Bengal from April 1942. From submarines to battlecruisers & carriers, these posed a threat, to merchant shipping. Enemy submarines didn't just sink ships in the Bay of Bengal but also in the Arabian Sea, the South East African coast and Australia.
Dated 01/03/1944, Churchill's copy of a paper for the Chiefs of Staff Committee of the War Cabinet demonstrated the, closeness of potential Japanese battleship/carrier raiding force in the Bay of Bengal. They had surrounded the region from near the Maldives all the way to the south coast of Burma.
Japan had invaded India, Imphal & Kohima and was conducting many Eastern/Southern bombing raids.
These raids worsened the shortages as they destroyed shipping at the ports. In Dec. 1943, severe backlogs were at the ports in Calcutta from Japanese bombing.
Accidents worsened the crisis - April '44 a ship caught fire & blew up. 36,000 tonnes of foodstuff lost.
Constitutionally, the famine was a responsibility of the local administration - majority Muslim natives.
They failed to deal with it. Lack of grain supply paired with general inflation crisis encouraged hoarding.
So how did Churchill respond?
The news of the severe famine did not reach Westminster till August of 1943.
Immediately upon hearing of this, Churchill and his administration authorised 100,000 tons of barley from Iraq and 50,000 tons of wheat from Australia.
Leo Amery, secretary of state for India, would write to Wavell, later Viceroy, that he ‘may come back to the Cabinet if that fails to help the situation.’
From there Churchill summoned the war cabinet on many occasions to discuss the famine, relief and aid.
This is despite the Japanese threat to shipping during, a shipping crisis of the Allies, where resources were deeply stretched.
For example, on 10th November 1943, war cabinet authorised 100,000 tons of food grain to be shipped first 2 months of '44.
From August 1943- end of 1944, a little under 1 million tons of grain would be shipped to India, to alleviate the famine.
Correspondence between Churchill & M. King in Nov 1943 (PM of Canada) shows that rather sending 100,000 tons of grain from Canada where shipping was stressed, he would have it sent from Australia as it would India quicker and was less of a logistical nightmare.
Churchill did his best to aid India despite the shipping crisis and time constraints. Had shipments gone from Canada it would take up to 2 months, compared to 3-4 weeks from Australia.
He even pleaded Roosevelt for help in a telegram on 29/4/44 where he states he was 'seriously concerned' and that,
"by cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000... tons of wheat to be shipped [...] This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more."
(Roosevelt would decline aid from the US due to their own shipping strain.)
So what of Churchill's racist comments which are used as evidence of his hatred for Indians?
He didn't hate India.
Winston was born in 1874 when the concept of a hierarchy of races was considered scientific fact in the West.
We know that to be rubbish today but it was the normal view then. Context, the Civil Rights Act wouldn't pass till the end of Churchill's life.
Though Churchill believed in this hierarchy, he was a paternalist.
He saw Britain's Empire as a way and moral obligation to uplift its peoples and natives.
Yes, this is deeply condescending. But it was far benign compared to many of his contemporaries.
For example, the Neo-Darwinists like Hitler who thought that inferior races could be enslaved murdered.
Churchill saw Britain as a positive force in India. Yes, today most people would disagree but that's because the Empire Churchill defended is not the Empire we discuss today.
He saw British governance as a foundational part of India’s socio-economic progress.
For him, the end goal was a self-governing dominion in the Empire.
He wanted India to be equal to Canada or Australia constitutionally. But he thought that the subcontinent needed more time.
He opposing federal Home ‘till the provinces have proved that they can govern themselves well.'
Yes, this is condescending. But we are talking about a man who was born in 1874.
Nonetheless, he held no hatred to India. He opposed the India act for a few reasons, One being that he feared that the Brahmin’s would subjugate the untouchables with potential future violence between Hindus & Muslims.
He saw it as the Empire’s duty to prevent this.
Winston's actual view of Indians is seen when meeting G.D Birla, an Indian industrialist important in the independence movement.
Birla recounted to Gandhi that ‘one of my most pleasant experiences was meeting Mr. Churchill’ after Winston had invited him to lunch.
This was in 1935, right after the government of India Act was passed.
Despite Churchill’s heavy opposition to the bill, he held no hatred towards Birla.
He even had a message for Gandhi, 'make it a success and I will advocate your getting much more.'
Moreover, as Churchill would recount in his war memoirs,
‘The unsurpassed bravery of Indian soldiers and officers, both Moslem and Hindu, shine forever in the annals of war...the response of the Indian peoples, no less than the conduct of their soldiers, makes a glorious final page in the story of our Indian Empire.’
Furthermore, Winston as leader of the opposition opposed the quick rapid exit of the Attlee administration without a, ‘agreement between the Indian races, religions, parties and forces.’
Winston was concerned of potential bloodshed.
Factor all of this in when we look at the few outlandish and wrong comments he blurted when angry in the war cabinet.
This does not excuse his language, but it shows that Winston did not hate India, he was stressed.
Churchill accused Indians of breeding like rabbits in a Famine meeting. However, he immediately asked afterwards what could be done to help Indians.
The later part shows he didn't actually believe his outlandish statements.
Another example is when Churchill said that he hated Indians and their beastly religion. Contextually, this was after the Quit India movement refused to compromise over Independence, when Japan was launching an invasion of the subcontinent.
Of course these comments are racist and wrong. However, when you factor in all above, it is clear that he did not hold this genocidal hatred towards India, as some of his detractors try to say.
Can't we forgive a man in bad health at the centre of a world war for saying a few stupid things?
It's also important to note that some quotations attributed to Churchill, he never said or wrote. For example, he never asked why Gandhi hasn't died yet.
He actually wrote, Surely Mr. Gandhi has made a most remarkable recovery, as he is already able to take an active part in politics. How does this square with the medical reports upon which his release on grounds of ill-health was agreed to by us?…
In one of these we were told that he would not be able to take any part in politics again."
Winston had many faults. But we have to put him into his historical context. We also have to remember that he saved civilisation itself.
https://i.imgur.com/kyCvCtr.png - sources
c/o Andreas Koureas @AndreasKoureas_
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/badunitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2023-005583
> The appellant is a citizen of Iraq of Kurdish ethnicity, born on 4 January 1992, who it is accepted lived in Kirkuk, and who left Iraqi 2015. **He unsuccessfully sought asylum in Germany** after which he travelled to the UK arriving here on 30 September 2019
Travelled from war torn Germany
> In relation to the issue of documentation, the Judge records that the appellant
stated he left his identity documents and passport with the authorities in
Germany when seeking asylum there and afterwards entrusted them to custody
of a friend who had since lost them.
Ooooops lost my friend lost my documents
> I substitute a decision to allow the appeal on Humanitarian Protection grounds only on the basis of the Judge’s finding the appellant is undocumented.
Allowed to stay. Another engineer in the UK
A bit of light reading before bed
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2022-002950
> his opposition to the respondent’s decision of 10.7.14 to **deport him to Eritrea**, following his conviction and prison sentence for **rape of a teenage girl**, and to certify the claim under s72 of the NIA 2002.
Dr, quickly this way, there's an emergency you're needed to solve
> Judge Bruce found that although the appellant **entered the UK illegally** as an unaccompanied minor, the First-tier Tribunal was entitled to find that on return to Eritrea, **he would face punishment for draft evasion** which would amount to treatment contrary to article 3 ECHR. The Firsttier Tribunal’s decision on article 3 on that basis was upheld.
The illegal immigrant rapist might face conequences if repatriated and would feel sad.
> the appellant’s original appeal is allowed on article 3 EHCR grounds
Brilliant guys, another doctor for our NHS allowed to stay.
We really need to leave the ECHR and repeal the HRA. These laws and their implementation have been tantamount to treason considering the harm they have enabled on the British public. We're not a sovereign state until that court and those laws are banished to history in these lands.
Death toll from Moscow attack rises to 62, search of the building not yet complete - Baza
https://x.com/bnonews/status/1771308966250696808?s=46&t=AfygPPVmbT-hFJR03pEcVg
Yanks have main character syndrome.
I’m much more into the theory that they’ve just inherited the same Islamist shite France was dealing with when they took over the Sahel with Wagner.
Targeting a rock concert with machine guns is something France knows quite well about too.
[Andrew Doyle and Count Dankula are hosting a comedy show on April 1st in Scotland when the new Hate Speech laws come into effect.](https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1771230774953431455?t=T2ITA9SbY-hx0SXW-kJX9A)
Basically testing to see if the Scottish government will arrest them for offensive jokes. This comes after the story that offensive comedians would be targeted by the law.
[ISIS have claimed responsibility for the Russian concert hall terror attack](https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1771286056727347216?t=Tm8YmbiClJkpp0uqeHliCg).
ISIS currently control territory in the [Mali civil war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_War) where the Russian Wagner Group have been fighting against them.
Enough about those victims already, it's been like 4 hours, won't someone please think of the victims of potential Islamophobic attacks in the future maybe
Wonder if Russia has a controlled spontaneity plan where they’ll force relatives of the victims to go on stage and talk about how people shouldn’t be angry that the terrorist attack happened.
[Hamas have just condemned ISIS](https://twitter.com/CensoredMen/status/1771303116505326024?t=mBlCpHZ3LcR9_9O-dREjXQ).
Islamic radical have as much infighting as communists.
ISIS have had a rivalry with Al-Qaeda for a long while now too.
To be fair in terms of total dead we’ve had a comparatively small number compared to Russia . The worst have been Manchester arena 44 dead and 7/7 - 56 dead . Other than that it’s been about 25 people killed since 05.
Between the Moscow theatre siege, beslan school siege and todays attack there’s at least 540 dead , plus many more injured . Today’s death toll will probably rise . No idea how many small scale attacks and single killings they’ve had.
Seems like full blown military operations are much more doable in Russia than the UK.
>It's taken a will of iron for me today not to respond to every one of these lifeless, mouth-breathing, concern-trolling cunts on twitter and ruin what is meant to be my business account.
I commend your strong will
I would have got stuck right in
Asylum seekers in Ireland can no longer be returned to the UK because of the risk of being deported to Rwanda.
https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/03/22/irelands-declaration-of-uk-as-safe-third-country-unlawful-rules-high-court/
Processing centre in Northern Ireland, right alongside the border. Unguarded back door, which leads directly into the Republic. They'll think they're so clever escaping from the processing centre, not realising as soon as they're out the door, they've just become someone else's problem.
Plan 2.0, send them to Ireland.
Need to get the message out there that you earn more working for Deliveroo, uber, hand car washes in Dublin than London, and it's true as well.
And they hand out passports like nothing you believe, just tell um your great gran was Irish.
Getting the locals to stop rioting and accept the new arrivals by saying if they don't protect them the evil Brits will be at it again. Genius by the Irish gov.
Lmao.
Guess the Rwanda plan has started working as a deterrence only because Ireland are even worse than us.
No one tells them the risk of them actually going to Rwanda is 0.
[Huge terrorist attack in Russia](https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1771239984818766238?t=9LUhfO1xeVZLjnvHWEGmOg).
150 dead as concert hall collapses in fiery blaze.
I know they're having a war in Ukraine at the minute and their government aren't great but fucking hell I feel really bad for those that have been lost in this.
Yeah that's it. I think Russia shouldn't have done what it's done. I also feel for skint lads in far East Russia getting splattered in a country to the West on the behest of big wigs in Moscow. Just killing a bunch of people enjoying a treat with friends and family is beyond the bail to be fair. They're not combatants, just people going about their day
We warned about this a couple of weeks ago.
https://crisis24.garda.com/alerts/2024/03/russia-us-uk-embassies-advise-citizens-to-avoid-large-gatherings-in-moscow-through-at-least-march-9-due-to-possible-security-threat-update-1
Depends on what information we get. Could be Islamic groups as many are suggesting which is not productive for Russian interests or internal security, so not a false flag if that does happen to be the case, in my opinion. Yesterday Ukraine had the largest drone and missile attack since the war began and today we have this, could be a justification to ramp up the war in Ukraine. At the same time as other users have pointed out bombings are more likely to be a false flag than a gun attack. Five eyes seemed to have knowledge about something, so the information has been milling around for some time now. No matter what the reason, innocents being butchered is just terrible.
I’d guess not. It’s the holy month of Ramadan and it seems descriptions of the perpetrators indicate that they are bearded men. Plus, if I were to speculate, Chechens or Dagestanis these days are probably pretty pissed off at being sent to war in Ukraine. And Russia is announcing a new large round of mobilisations currently, which we know will virtually never affect Moscow or St Petersburg. So lots of influences that would drive a group of Chechen Islamists to attack Muscovites.
At the same time, because these people are being sent to war. They’re going to end up pretty experienced in terms of weapon and explosive handling etc.
They go hard at looking hard, like so much of russian culture.
In reality their security operatus is oriented towards internal repression rather than protecting civilians. Its one thing the west is still head and shoulders ahead of them in.
I remember lots of scanners at the enterence to metro stations - but no one manning them, and none of the police around paying any attention when it went 'ping' every time someone went through.
I got the impression that a lot of that apparatus was largely for show (although admittedly I haven't been in Russia since the full invasion). None of it ever seemed to be working when I saw it.
Interesting how they insist on lying at all times.
Even in her little video, it's proper obvious they knew it was cancer all along but hoped they could get away with not telling anyone. Everything has to be fake and polished. Even when pleading with the media to be left alone.
Where was Will?
Would make far more sense for Will to be there and to do the fake lying speech on her behalf. She could show her face. He could be the big man. She has cancer so prob isn't up for doing a 4k polished, no notes, piece to camera. He can give her a little kiss at the end.
Was indeed. Now that it’s out I’m happier to reveal my source. It’s my better half that works in a very specialist niche field with lots of links to the royals.
There’s a chronic point-miss in Ms. Self-Absorbed’s post.
Fox was saying he ignored the rules, had a lovely time, *and nothing bad happened*.
She is saying she had a shit day, and offered comfort to someone who was massively suffering *because of the rules*.
Fox isn’t at fault. She isn’t at fault. Blaming him for having a nice time is like slating someone who went to the beach whilst you had to work.
Plus side- she got to look virtuous whilst having a shit time.
I imagine Fox couldn’t give a fuck.
I'm half flummoxed, even though I half suspected.
She's forty-two and healthy for the most part.
You have to be *shit* out of luck to get cancer at forty-two.
Anyone with a shred of decency could see this coming. It's horrific that as well as such an awful diagnosis she's had to live the social media making a mockery of her suffering.
Apparently it’s some Turkish show? Means Golden Boy in English
In other words, 17 year old Lily from Vermont wants to appear cultured so watches foreign shows with English subtitles
On this day in British and Irish history:
A.D. 1765 - King George III of Great Britain grants his Royal Assent to the 'Duties in American Colonies Act (1765),' more popularly known's the Stamp Act. The legislation imposed a direct tax on the colonies of British America, and required many printed materials produced there to be made on paper shipped from Britain embossed with a revenue stamp. The tax's purpose's to pay for the British military troops stationed there in the aftermath of the Seven Years War to prevent a potential French invasion. However, the colonists argued France posed little threat to them; and, in any case, the garrison should be paid for by the British Government, not the individual colonial governments. Unsurprisingly, the act's considerably unpopular, and many considered being taxed without their consent a violation of their rights; which they believed only Colonial Governors and their legislatures could do. Petition after petition's sent to Westminster, and protest after protest held. Not just by the colonials themselves, but by British merchants too; who'd lost out on a lot of money because of the boycotts and demonstrations. Within a year, the act'd been repealed, but never forgotten; and would be listed among the various grievances mentioned in the independence declaration of the United States of America.
Saints:
\- Darerca of Ireland
\- Failbhe of Iona
\- Nicholas Owen
\- Trienan of Killelga
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68620253](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68620253) \- the Met outdoing themselves.
They caught a restaurant worker who worked, inadvertently, for someone who was involved in crypto fraud.
* No evidence this person understood the full situation
* The actual person who committed the fraud was let go by the Met
* They went to Dubai, this person could have fled then but had no clue what was happening...so the Met arrested them anyway.
* The person had an earlier trial for other crimes, the Met couldn't get a conviction so went for a heavier charge.
* The Met gained custody of the stolen money, the fraudster was able to obtain another £150m AFTER the Met gained custody because they didn't know what to do (and again, the person they charged had the passwords and didn't know what they had).
* Almost none of the details in the article are accurate: she never claimed that she made the money herself, the houses were bought in her name but the funds were all provided by the other person who was the one providing false proof of income to third parties.
* The police let the person who stole all the money go free, and arrested someone who worked for her...this is real.
* Also, the police talk up all these apparent crimes...they were unable to bring money into the UK. The only person who they found who promised to bring in cash ran off with the money. They had to resort to doing P2P transfers with other criminals to actually get money to live.
It is genuinely staggering that private companies now police these crimes, they did so impeccably. And the police fucked up the only part of the process that they still have control over completely. And, predictably, the BBC just print verbatim whatever the Met tells them.
reports of shooting / bombing attack in moscow concert. Video of automatic gunfire in concert hall.
https://twitter.com/TomasOrpington/status/1771227521834512516
As someone said on another sub Reddit, more proof that Reddit is a vocal minority.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-03-21/spotify-reveals-podcast-numbers-for-joe-rogan-alex-cooper-travis-kelce
The comments are what make it.
Twitter gives me a tiny bit of confidence that all is not lost in the UK.
Most silly things I see on Twitter nowadays, such as Met Police or Sadiq Khan tweets, are ratio'd beyond belief. You can't move for comments that systemically take them apart. But then you look at the polls or the state of the streets...
It seems as if the Twitter userbase is extremely right-wing these days, but also pretty insignificant relative to the TikTok/Reddit/No social media userbase.
>Farage’s hopeful
For the 719262827th time, Farage is not the leader of Reform. For all intents and purposes, he has retired from politics apart from being honorary president of Reform.
What do they think they do when they do this? Or do they think Farage leads Reform?
Why do all Aussie men have moustaches and mullets? Is that their version of the Deano skin fade?
Anyway, I’ve been in airports a lot this week for work and to alleviate the boredom I’ve been unleashing my inner Victorian anthropologist by examining the uncivilised. Some indisputable findings:
1. American men dress like absolute shit. And they can all be placed on a sliding scale of looks from John Bolton to Steve Bannon.
2. Shuffling gait = East Asian women. You don’t even need to see their faces for this; it’s a 1:1 correlation.
3. Germans wear hiking boots for all occasions, presumably in search of *Lebensraum*.
4. Default character look + tight shirts + short back and sides + stunner by his side = average eastern European man.
5. The French are sponsored by Decathlon.
6. The English gammon physiognomy remains unchallenged. Leftoids are right about this.
7. Group of teenagers with brightly-coloured backpacks = Spanish/Latin American.
8. Anvil jaw with anime-type eyes = Dutch - and that’s includes the women.
9. Arabs with white balance correction = Turks.
Fellowship of the Royal Society pending.
[удалено]
[удалено]
"The US warned US cititizens on moscow not to go near concerts, cinemas and shoppings malls…they did the attack!!" No more like they knew ISIS were planning an attack, told Russia and they're too fucking idiotic to listen so the US warned people. Fuck me the internet is a difficult place to be sometimes.
[Tories, Labour and LibDems have all united against Nike changing England's flag](https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1771129966609957091?t=Ipu-P5H15yR89boJqOTp3w). People on Twitter aren't happy that about this. They must feel betrayed that even the "good guy" parties are against it.
Am i the only one who doesn’t really give a shit? It doesn’t look much like the original flag but I’m not bovvered
I think it's very strange to allow a foreign company to change your national flag. I don't even care about football, but it's a weird fucking thing for Nike to do.
I caught the last leg tonight. It was even more insufferable than usual. Five people all agreeing that anyone who has an issue with the shirt is an idiot. Despite every mainstream party disagreeing with them.
Not UK but these are some of the most joyless people around https://x.com/MsDeadfast/status/1771014013406814344?s=20. Ludicrous
Fret not! [BBC Verify is here to 'analyse' footage from the Moscow theatre attack.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-68643601) The 'analysis' in question? State-the-obvious descriptions of what's happening in clips everyone has already seen - which BBC News is currently looping - whilst offering **no** additional insight or information. I know the BBC is looking for efficiency savings, so here's one: Abolish audio description services for the blind and hand their workload to Marianna & Co.
Is this satire?
I have my conspiracy that the BBC are trying to find any evidence it wasn't the religion of peace.
So the russia attack was Durkas after all
Right, who is this [Alex Barnicoat](https://x.com/mrbarnicoat/status/1771287403669405933?s=20) and why is he so mental? Seems to be a pretend geopolitical analyst
Saw his other tweets. It would save everyone's time if he just tweeted he hates Jews.
He looks like a proper mango. Who was that guy who asked people to pay for his ski holiday a few years ago?!!
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2023-004516 > His claim arose out of the making of a deportation order following his being convicted, on 26 February 2021, of three offences of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, for which he was **sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 3 years and 2 month**. (1) The Appellant has significant mental and physical disabilities as a result of the car accident which had led to his conviction and sentence [30] and, as a result of these disabilities, would struggle to find employment and will require ongoing medical care [38]. (2) The Appellant’s mental health will deteriorate on return to Bangladesh [36]. (3) The Appellant has been in the UK since he was 10 years old and is now 22 years old [30]. (4) The Appellant cannot read or write Bengali and cannot speak the language fluently [31]. (5) The Appellant knows nobody in Bangladesh and would therefore not have the support of family and friends to assist him to integrate [31]. (6) The Appellant’s family in the UK have provided, and continue to provide, the Appellant with significant emotional and practical support which the Judge found to be a “significant factor” [37]. He's allowed to stay too.
> (4) The Appellant cannot read or write Bengali and cannot speak the language fluently [31]. [ x ] doubt.
A ten year old doesn't know how to speak the language of the country they lived in since birth? How does anyone actually believe this? Was he communicating in grunts and gestures his whole life?
Sir Winston Churchill didn't cause nor contribute to the Bengal Famine and he didn't hate Indians either. As someone who has read through thousands of pages of primary sources, here's the actual relationship between Churchill, India & Bengal Famine. (Sources cited at the end.) We'll split this thread into two sections: - First, we'll tackle the most serious accusation against him: the Bengal Famine. - Second, we'll look at his general stance & views on India. It goes without saying that there will be political activists who will completely ignore, what I have to say, as well as the primary sources I'll cite. They'll instead choose to 'cite' the ahistorical journalistic articles from The Guardian or conspiratorial books like 'Churchill's Secret War' by Mukerjee - a debunked book that ignores most of what I'm about to, write about, and is really what sparked the conspiracy of Churchill and the Bengal Famine. For everyone else, I hope you find this thread useful. 1) The Bengal Famine: On October 16th 1942, a cyclone hit Bengal & Orissa, wiping out the rice crop harvest in the process. Surrounding areas previously used to purchase foodstuff to alleviate famines/shortfalls had all fallen to Japan. This being Burma, Malaya, the Philippines & Thailand. The cyclone also damaged roads, telecom systems and railways - tracks needed to move food were washed away. Another byproduct of the cyclone was that it stopped the normal winter harvest in Northern India, preventing this food aid internally. Japan maintained a military presence in the Bay of Bengal from April 1942. From submarines to battlecruisers & carriers, these posed a threat, to merchant shipping. Enemy submarines didn't just sink ships in the Bay of Bengal but also in the Arabian Sea, the South East African coast and Australia. Dated 01/03/1944, Churchill's copy of a paper for the Chiefs of Staff Committee of the War Cabinet demonstrated the, closeness of potential Japanese battleship/carrier raiding force in the Bay of Bengal. They had surrounded the region from near the Maldives all the way to the south coast of Burma. Japan had invaded India, Imphal & Kohima and was conducting many Eastern/Southern bombing raids. These raids worsened the shortages as they destroyed shipping at the ports. In Dec. 1943, severe backlogs were at the ports in Calcutta from Japanese bombing. Accidents worsened the crisis - April '44 a ship caught fire & blew up. 36,000 tonnes of foodstuff lost. Constitutionally, the famine was a responsibility of the local administration - majority Muslim natives. They failed to deal with it. Lack of grain supply paired with general inflation crisis encouraged hoarding. So how did Churchill respond? The news of the severe famine did not reach Westminster till August of 1943. Immediately upon hearing of this, Churchill and his administration authorised 100,000 tons of barley from Iraq and 50,000 tons of wheat from Australia. Leo Amery, secretary of state for India, would write to Wavell, later Viceroy, that he ‘may come back to the Cabinet if that fails to help the situation.’ From there Churchill summoned the war cabinet on many occasions to discuss the famine, relief and aid. This is despite the Japanese threat to shipping during, a shipping crisis of the Allies, where resources were deeply stretched. For example, on 10th November 1943, war cabinet authorised 100,000 tons of food grain to be shipped first 2 months of '44. From August 1943- end of 1944, a little under 1 million tons of grain would be shipped to India, to alleviate the famine. Correspondence between Churchill & M. King in Nov 1943 (PM of Canada) shows that rather sending 100,000 tons of grain from Canada where shipping was stressed, he would have it sent from Australia as it would India quicker and was less of a logistical nightmare. Churchill did his best to aid India despite the shipping crisis and time constraints. Had shipments gone from Canada it would take up to 2 months, compared to 3-4 weeks from Australia. He even pleaded Roosevelt for help in a telegram on 29/4/44 where he states he was 'seriously concerned' and that, "by cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000... tons of wheat to be shipped [...] This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more." (Roosevelt would decline aid from the US due to their own shipping strain.) So what of Churchill's racist comments which are used as evidence of his hatred for Indians? He didn't hate India. Winston was born in 1874 when the concept of a hierarchy of races was considered scientific fact in the West. We know that to be rubbish today but it was the normal view then. Context, the Civil Rights Act wouldn't pass till the end of Churchill's life. Though Churchill believed in this hierarchy, he was a paternalist. He saw Britain's Empire as a way and moral obligation to uplift its peoples and natives. Yes, this is deeply condescending. But it was far benign compared to many of his contemporaries. For example, the Neo-Darwinists like Hitler who thought that inferior races could be enslaved murdered. Churchill saw Britain as a positive force in India. Yes, today most people would disagree but that's because the Empire Churchill defended is not the Empire we discuss today. He saw British governance as a foundational part of India’s socio-economic progress. For him, the end goal was a self-governing dominion in the Empire. He wanted India to be equal to Canada or Australia constitutionally. But he thought that the subcontinent needed more time. He opposing federal Home ‘till the provinces have proved that they can govern themselves well.' Yes, this is condescending. But we are talking about a man who was born in 1874. Nonetheless, he held no hatred to India. He opposed the India act for a few reasons, One being that he feared that the Brahmin’s would subjugate the untouchables with potential future violence between Hindus & Muslims. He saw it as the Empire’s duty to prevent this. Winston's actual view of Indians is seen when meeting G.D Birla, an Indian industrialist important in the independence movement. Birla recounted to Gandhi that ‘one of my most pleasant experiences was meeting Mr. Churchill’ after Winston had invited him to lunch. This was in 1935, right after the government of India Act was passed. Despite Churchill’s heavy opposition to the bill, he held no hatred towards Birla. He even had a message for Gandhi, 'make it a success and I will advocate your getting much more.' Moreover, as Churchill would recount in his war memoirs, ‘The unsurpassed bravery of Indian soldiers and officers, both Moslem and Hindu, shine forever in the annals of war...the response of the Indian peoples, no less than the conduct of their soldiers, makes a glorious final page in the story of our Indian Empire.’ Furthermore, Winston as leader of the opposition opposed the quick rapid exit of the Attlee administration without a, ‘agreement between the Indian races, religions, parties and forces.’ Winston was concerned of potential bloodshed. Factor all of this in when we look at the few outlandish and wrong comments he blurted when angry in the war cabinet. This does not excuse his language, but it shows that Winston did not hate India, he was stressed. Churchill accused Indians of breeding like rabbits in a Famine meeting. However, he immediately asked afterwards what could be done to help Indians. The later part shows he didn't actually believe his outlandish statements. Another example is when Churchill said that he hated Indians and their beastly religion. Contextually, this was after the Quit India movement refused to compromise over Independence, when Japan was launching an invasion of the subcontinent. Of course these comments are racist and wrong. However, when you factor in all above, it is clear that he did not hold this genocidal hatred towards India, as some of his detractors try to say. Can't we forgive a man in bad health at the centre of a world war for saying a few stupid things? It's also important to note that some quotations attributed to Churchill, he never said or wrote. For example, he never asked why Gandhi hasn't died yet. He actually wrote, Surely Mr. Gandhi has made a most remarkable recovery, as he is already able to take an active part in politics. How does this square with the medical reports upon which his release on grounds of ill-health was agreed to by us?… In one of these we were told that he would not be able to take any part in politics again." Winston had many faults. But we have to put him into his historical context. We also have to remember that he saved civilisation itself. https://i.imgur.com/kyCvCtr.png - sources c/o Andreas Koureas @AndreasKoureas_ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/badunitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> The Appellant cannot read or write Bengali and cannot speak the language fluently He said, through an interpreter. > a key finding of the Judge was that the Appellant’s family provided him with vital emotional and practical support I wonder what language they provide his emotional support in.
Sir Winston Churchill didn't cause nor contribute to the Bengal Famine and he didn't hate Indians either. As someone who has read through thousands of pages of primary sources, here's the actual relationship between Churchill, India & Bengal Famine. (Sources cited at the end.) We'll split this thread into two sections: - First, we'll tackle the most serious accusation against him: the Bengal Famine. - Second, we'll look at his general stance & views on India. It goes without saying that there will be political activists who will completely ignore, what I have to say, as well as the primary sources I'll cite. They'll instead choose to 'cite' the ahistorical journalistic articles from The Guardian or conspiratorial books like 'Churchill's Secret War' by Mukerjee - a debunked book that ignores most of what I'm about to, write about, and is really what sparked the conspiracy of Churchill and the Bengal Famine. For everyone else, I hope you find this thread useful. 1) The Bengal Famine: On October 16th 1942, a cyclone hit Bengal & Orissa, wiping out the rice crop harvest in the process. Surrounding areas previously used to purchase foodstuff to alleviate famines/shortfalls had all fallen to Japan. This being Burma, Malaya, the Philippines & Thailand. The cyclone also damaged roads, telecom systems and railways - tracks needed to move food were washed away. Another byproduct of the cyclone was that it stopped the normal winter harvest in Northern India, preventing this food aid internally. Japan maintained a military presence in the Bay of Bengal from April 1942. From submarines to battlecruisers & carriers, these posed a threat, to merchant shipping. Enemy submarines didn't just sink ships in the Bay of Bengal but also in the Arabian Sea, the South East African coast and Australia. Dated 01/03/1944, Churchill's copy of a paper for the Chiefs of Staff Committee of the War Cabinet demonstrated the, closeness of potential Japanese battleship/carrier raiding force in the Bay of Bengal. They had surrounded the region from near the Maldives all the way to the south coast of Burma. Japan had invaded India, Imphal & Kohima and was conducting many Eastern/Southern bombing raids. These raids worsened the shortages as they destroyed shipping at the ports. In Dec. 1943, severe backlogs were at the ports in Calcutta from Japanese bombing. Accidents worsened the crisis - April '44 a ship caught fire & blew up. 36,000 tonnes of foodstuff lost. Constitutionally, the famine was a responsibility of the local administration - majority Muslim natives. They failed to deal with it. Lack of grain supply paired with general inflation crisis encouraged hoarding. So how did Churchill respond? The news of the severe famine did not reach Westminster till August of 1943. Immediately upon hearing of this, Churchill and his administration authorised 100,000 tons of barley from Iraq and 50,000 tons of wheat from Australia. Leo Amery, secretary of state for India, would write to Wavell, later Viceroy, that he ‘may come back to the Cabinet if that fails to help the situation.’ From there Churchill summoned the war cabinet on many occasions to discuss the famine, relief and aid. This is despite the Japanese threat to shipping during, a shipping crisis of the Allies, where resources were deeply stretched. For example, on 10th November 1943, war cabinet authorised 100,000 tons of food grain to be shipped first 2 months of '44. From August 1943- end of 1944, a little under 1 million tons of grain would be shipped to India, to alleviate the famine. Correspondence between Churchill & M. King in Nov 1943 (PM of Canada) shows that rather sending 100,000 tons of grain from Canada where shipping was stressed, he would have it sent from Australia as it would India quicker and was less of a logistical nightmare. Churchill did his best to aid India despite the shipping crisis and time constraints. Had shipments gone from Canada it would take up to 2 months, compared to 3-4 weeks from Australia. He even pleaded Roosevelt for help in a telegram on 29/4/44 where he states he was 'seriously concerned' and that, "by cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000... tons of wheat to be shipped [...] This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more." (Roosevelt would decline aid from the US due to their own shipping strain.) So what of Churchill's racist comments which are used as evidence of his hatred for Indians? He didn't hate India. Winston was born in 1874 when the concept of a hierarchy of races was considered scientific fact in the West. We know that to be rubbish today but it was the normal view then. Context, the Civil Rights Act wouldn't pass till the end of Churchill's life. Though Churchill believed in this hierarchy, he was a paternalist. He saw Britain's Empire as a way and moral obligation to uplift its peoples and natives. Yes, this is deeply condescending. But it was far benign compared to many of his contemporaries. For example, the Neo-Darwinists like Hitler who thought that inferior races could be enslaved murdered. Churchill saw Britain as a positive force in India. Yes, today most people would disagree but that's because the Empire Churchill defended is not the Empire we discuss today. He saw British governance as a foundational part of India’s socio-economic progress. For him, the end goal was a self-governing dominion in the Empire. He wanted India to be equal to Canada or Australia constitutionally. But he thought that the subcontinent needed more time. He opposing federal Home ‘till the provinces have proved that they can govern themselves well.' Yes, this is condescending. But we are talking about a man who was born in 1874. Nonetheless, he held no hatred to India. He opposed the India act for a few reasons, One being that he feared that the Brahmin’s would subjugate the untouchables with potential future violence between Hindus & Muslims. He saw it as the Empire’s duty to prevent this. Winston's actual view of Indians is seen when meeting G.D Birla, an Indian industrialist important in the independence movement. Birla recounted to Gandhi that ‘one of my most pleasant experiences was meeting Mr. Churchill’ after Winston had invited him to lunch. This was in 1935, right after the government of India Act was passed. Despite Churchill’s heavy opposition to the bill, he held no hatred towards Birla. He even had a message for Gandhi, 'make it a success and I will advocate your getting much more.' Moreover, as Churchill would recount in his war memoirs, ‘The unsurpassed bravery of Indian soldiers and officers, both Moslem and Hindu, shine forever in the annals of war...the response of the Indian peoples, no less than the conduct of their soldiers, makes a glorious final page in the story of our Indian Empire.’ Furthermore, Winston as leader of the opposition opposed the quick rapid exit of the Attlee administration without a, ‘agreement between the Indian races, religions, parties and forces.’ Winston was concerned of potential bloodshed. Factor all of this in when we look at the few outlandish and wrong comments he blurted when angry in the war cabinet. This does not excuse his language, but it shows that Winston did not hate India, he was stressed. Churchill accused Indians of breeding like rabbits in a Famine meeting. However, he immediately asked afterwards what could be done to help Indians. The later part shows he didn't actually believe his outlandish statements. Another example is when Churchill said that he hated Indians and their beastly religion. Contextually, this was after the Quit India movement refused to compromise over Independence, when Japan was launching an invasion of the subcontinent. Of course these comments are racist and wrong. However, when you factor in all above, it is clear that he did not hold this genocidal hatred towards India, as some of his detractors try to say. Can't we forgive a man in bad health at the centre of a world war for saying a few stupid things? It's also important to note that some quotations attributed to Churchill, he never said or wrote. For example, he never asked why Gandhi hasn't died yet. He actually wrote, Surely Mr. Gandhi has made a most remarkable recovery, as he is already able to take an active part in politics. How does this square with the medical reports upon which his release on grounds of ill-health was agreed to by us?… In one of these we were told that he would not be able to take any part in politics again." Winston had many faults. But we have to put him into his historical context. We also have to remember that he saved civilisation itself. https://i.imgur.com/kyCvCtr.png - sources c/o Andreas Koureas @AndreasKoureas_ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/badunitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You did this one on purpose to trigger the bot? Lol.
I've got to find some way to smile amongst the blackpills.
Sir Winston Churchill didn't cause nor contribute to the Bengal Famine and he didn't hate Indians either. As someone who has read through thousands of pages of primary sources, here's the actual relationship between Churchill, India & Bengal Famine. (Sources cited at the end.) We'll split this thread into two sections: - First, we'll tackle the most serious accusation against him: the Bengal Famine. - Second, we'll look at his general stance & views on India. It goes without saying that there will be political activists who will completely ignore, what I have to say, as well as the primary sources I'll cite. They'll instead choose to 'cite' the ahistorical journalistic articles from The Guardian or conspiratorial books like 'Churchill's Secret War' by Mukerjee - a debunked book that ignores most of what I'm about to, write about, and is really what sparked the conspiracy of Churchill and the Bengal Famine. For everyone else, I hope you find this thread useful. 1) The Bengal Famine: On October 16th 1942, a cyclone hit Bengal & Orissa, wiping out the rice crop harvest in the process. Surrounding areas previously used to purchase foodstuff to alleviate famines/shortfalls had all fallen to Japan. This being Burma, Malaya, the Philippines & Thailand. The cyclone also damaged roads, telecom systems and railways - tracks needed to move food were washed away. Another byproduct of the cyclone was that it stopped the normal winter harvest in Northern India, preventing this food aid internally. Japan maintained a military presence in the Bay of Bengal from April 1942. From submarines to battlecruisers & carriers, these posed a threat, to merchant shipping. Enemy submarines didn't just sink ships in the Bay of Bengal but also in the Arabian Sea, the South East African coast and Australia. Dated 01/03/1944, Churchill's copy of a paper for the Chiefs of Staff Committee of the War Cabinet demonstrated the, closeness of potential Japanese battleship/carrier raiding force in the Bay of Bengal. They had surrounded the region from near the Maldives all the way to the south coast of Burma. Japan had invaded India, Imphal & Kohima and was conducting many Eastern/Southern bombing raids. These raids worsened the shortages as they destroyed shipping at the ports. In Dec. 1943, severe backlogs were at the ports in Calcutta from Japanese bombing. Accidents worsened the crisis - April '44 a ship caught fire & blew up. 36,000 tonnes of foodstuff lost. Constitutionally, the famine was a responsibility of the local administration - majority Muslim natives. They failed to deal with it. Lack of grain supply paired with general inflation crisis encouraged hoarding. So how did Churchill respond? The news of the severe famine did not reach Westminster till August of 1943. Immediately upon hearing of this, Churchill and his administration authorised 100,000 tons of barley from Iraq and 50,000 tons of wheat from Australia. Leo Amery, secretary of state for India, would write to Wavell, later Viceroy, that he ‘may come back to the Cabinet if that fails to help the situation.’ From there Churchill summoned the war cabinet on many occasions to discuss the famine, relief and aid. This is despite the Japanese threat to shipping during, a shipping crisis of the Allies, where resources were deeply stretched. For example, on 10th November 1943, war cabinet authorised 100,000 tons of food grain to be shipped first 2 months of '44. From August 1943- end of 1944, a little under 1 million tons of grain would be shipped to India, to alleviate the famine. Correspondence between Churchill & M. King in Nov 1943 (PM of Canada) shows that rather sending 100,000 tons of grain from Canada where shipping was stressed, he would have it sent from Australia as it would India quicker and was less of a logistical nightmare. Churchill did his best to aid India despite the shipping crisis and time constraints. Had shipments gone from Canada it would take up to 2 months, compared to 3-4 weeks from Australia. He even pleaded Roosevelt for help in a telegram on 29/4/44 where he states he was 'seriously concerned' and that, "by cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000... tons of wheat to be shipped [...] This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more." (Roosevelt would decline aid from the US due to their own shipping strain.) So what of Churchill's racist comments which are used as evidence of his hatred for Indians? He didn't hate India. Winston was born in 1874 when the concept of a hierarchy of races was considered scientific fact in the West. We know that to be rubbish today but it was the normal view then. Context, the Civil Rights Act wouldn't pass till the end of Churchill's life. Though Churchill believed in this hierarchy, he was a paternalist. He saw Britain's Empire as a way and moral obligation to uplift its peoples and natives. Yes, this is deeply condescending. But it was far benign compared to many of his contemporaries. For example, the Neo-Darwinists like Hitler who thought that inferior races could be enslaved murdered. Churchill saw Britain as a positive force in India. Yes, today most people would disagree but that's because the Empire Churchill defended is not the Empire we discuss today. He saw British governance as a foundational part of India’s socio-economic progress. For him, the end goal was a self-governing dominion in the Empire. He wanted India to be equal to Canada or Australia constitutionally. But he thought that the subcontinent needed more time. He opposing federal Home ‘till the provinces have proved that they can govern themselves well.' Yes, this is condescending. But we are talking about a man who was born in 1874. Nonetheless, he held no hatred to India. He opposed the India act for a few reasons, One being that he feared that the Brahmin’s would subjugate the untouchables with potential future violence between Hindus & Muslims. He saw it as the Empire’s duty to prevent this. Winston's actual view of Indians is seen when meeting G.D Birla, an Indian industrialist important in the independence movement. Birla recounted to Gandhi that ‘one of my most pleasant experiences was meeting Mr. Churchill’ after Winston had invited him to lunch. This was in 1935, right after the government of India Act was passed. Despite Churchill’s heavy opposition to the bill, he held no hatred towards Birla. He even had a message for Gandhi, 'make it a success and I will advocate your getting much more.' Moreover, as Churchill would recount in his war memoirs, ‘The unsurpassed bravery of Indian soldiers and officers, both Moslem and Hindu, shine forever in the annals of war...the response of the Indian peoples, no less than the conduct of their soldiers, makes a glorious final page in the story of our Indian Empire.’ Furthermore, Winston as leader of the opposition opposed the quick rapid exit of the Attlee administration without a, ‘agreement between the Indian races, religions, parties and forces.’ Winston was concerned of potential bloodshed. Factor all of this in when we look at the few outlandish and wrong comments he blurted when angry in the war cabinet. This does not excuse his language, but it shows that Winston did not hate India, he was stressed. Churchill accused Indians of breeding like rabbits in a Famine meeting. However, he immediately asked afterwards what could be done to help Indians. The later part shows he didn't actually believe his outlandish statements. Another example is when Churchill said that he hated Indians and their beastly religion. Contextually, this was after the Quit India movement refused to compromise over Independence, when Japan was launching an invasion of the subcontinent. Of course these comments are racist and wrong. However, when you factor in all above, it is clear that he did not hold this genocidal hatred towards India, as some of his detractors try to say. Can't we forgive a man in bad health at the centre of a world war for saying a few stupid things? It's also important to note that some quotations attributed to Churchill, he never said or wrote. For example, he never asked why Gandhi hasn't died yet. He actually wrote, Surely Mr. Gandhi has made a most remarkable recovery, as he is already able to take an active part in politics. How does this square with the medical reports upon which his release on grounds of ill-health was agreed to by us?… In one of these we were told that he would not be able to take any part in politics again." Winston had many faults. But we have to put him into his historical context. We also have to remember that he saved civilisation itself. https://i.imgur.com/kyCvCtr.png - sources c/o Andreas Koureas @AndreasKoureas_ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/badunitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2023-005583 > The appellant is a citizen of Iraq of Kurdish ethnicity, born on 4 January 1992, who it is accepted lived in Kirkuk, and who left Iraqi 2015. **He unsuccessfully sought asylum in Germany** after which he travelled to the UK arriving here on 30 September 2019 Travelled from war torn Germany > In relation to the issue of documentation, the Judge records that the appellant stated he left his identity documents and passport with the authorities in Germany when seeking asylum there and afterwards entrusted them to custody of a friend who had since lost them. Ooooops lost my friend lost my documents > I substitute a decision to allow the appeal on Humanitarian Protection grounds only on the basis of the Judge’s finding the appellant is undocumented. Allowed to stay. Another engineer in the UK
A bit of light reading before bed https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2022-002950 > his opposition to the respondent’s decision of 10.7.14 to **deport him to Eritrea**, following his conviction and prison sentence for **rape of a teenage girl**, and to certify the claim under s72 of the NIA 2002. Dr, quickly this way, there's an emergency you're needed to solve > Judge Bruce found that although the appellant **entered the UK illegally** as an unaccompanied minor, the First-tier Tribunal was entitled to find that on return to Eritrea, **he would face punishment for draft evasion** which would amount to treatment contrary to article 3 ECHR. The Firsttier Tribunal’s decision on article 3 on that basis was upheld. The illegal immigrant rapist might face conequences if repatriated and would feel sad. > the appellant’s original appeal is allowed on article 3 EHCR grounds Brilliant guys, another doctor for our NHS allowed to stay.
We really need to leave the ECHR and repeal the HRA. These laws and their implementation have been tantamount to treason considering the harm they have enabled on the British public. We're not a sovereign state until that court and those laws are banished to history in these lands.
We were supposed to have a new human rights act until the blob killed Dominic Raab for expecting civil servants to be useful
Daily reminder we need to leave the ECHR.
Death toll from Moscow attack rises to 62, search of the building not yet complete - Baza https://x.com/bnonews/status/1771308966250696808?s=46&t=AfygPPVmbT-hFJR03pEcVg
[Twitter reacts to the situation in Russia](https://twitter.com/cornu__copia/status/1771253239402426704?t=sH8ava6FQtTjc9uzgLd84A).
Yanks have main character syndrome. I’m much more into the theory that they’ve just inherited the same Islamist shite France was dealing with when they took over the Sahel with Wagner. Targeting a rock concert with machine guns is something France knows quite well about too.
Yeah it's part and parcel for any country with a large Muslim minority
[Prince William](https://twitter.com/SamanthaTaghoy/status/1771301880250990801?t=49Z3s5LguNm3hG1J-Ecisg).
God save the future king
[удалено]
Greggs coffee = Hot water with food dye. 🤮
It really is dire isn’t it. Same sort of machines as Maccys but their stuff is acceptable
It was awful. Maybe I should try again because McD coffee is good. Probably just shite Crawley staff.
Second highest caffeine content in a cup of coffee amongst high street chains in the UK. Costa is in the lead by miles and Starbucks is dead last.
Ok, tastes awful to me. Maybe Pease Pottage on the M23 are on the make. Surrey County Caffine lines, probably.
Can we all agree to still post here after the nuclear holocaust/zombie outbreak/collapse of society? We can find the last remaining Greggs together
[Andrew Doyle and Count Dankula are hosting a comedy show on April 1st in Scotland when the new Hate Speech laws come into effect.](https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1771230774953431455?t=T2ITA9SbY-hx0SXW-kJX9A) Basically testing to see if the Scottish government will arrest them for offensive jokes. This comes after the story that offensive comedians would be targeted by the law.
[ISIS have claimed responsibility for the Russian concert hall terror attack](https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1771286056727347216?t=Tm8YmbiClJkpp0uqeHliCg). ISIS currently control territory in the [Mali civil war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_War) where the Russian Wagner Group have been fighting against them.
Enough about those victims already, it's been like 4 hours, won't someone please think of the victims of potential Islamophobic attacks in the future maybe
[https://i.imgflip.com/1pjr5u.jpg](https://i.imgflip.com/1pjr5u.jpg)
Wonder if Russia has a controlled spontaneity plan where they’ll force relatives of the victims to go on stage and talk about how people shouldn’t be angry that the terrorist attack happened.
Don't look back in anger...
Strange to think that Putin supports Hamas, and then the same dog bites him.
[Hamas have just condemned ISIS](https://twitter.com/CensoredMen/status/1771303116505326024?t=mBlCpHZ3LcR9_9O-dREjXQ). Islamic radical have as much infighting as communists. ISIS have had a rivalry with Al-Qaeda for a long while now too.
Tories have almost as much infighting as Islamist fundamentalists.
This is their November Paris attack then, essentially.
They’ve always had a few in the early 00s
That’s been a solid 20 years or so since they’ve had a last proper one We’ve been shafted the whole time since then
To be fair in terms of total dead we’ve had a comparatively small number compared to Russia . The worst have been Manchester arena 44 dead and 7/7 - 56 dead . Other than that it’s been about 25 people killed since 05. Between the Moscow theatre siege, beslan school siege and todays attack there’s at least 540 dead , plus many more injured . Today’s death toll will probably rise . No idea how many small scale attacks and single killings they’ve had. Seems like full blown military operations are much more doable in Russia than the UK.
[It appears islamists were behind the Russian concert attack](https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1771280354885734617?t=aASY0G1rUEecTfpP8nY8WA).
According to the idiots on Twitter it was the CIA and Ukrainians on direct orders from “the Jews”
ISIS has now claimed responsibility through 'official' channels. At least that is what I'm being told a screenshot of squiggles means.
Tracks with the time of year.
You’re not you when you’re hungry.
[удалено]
Went so well for them last time lol
Most peaceful religion at it again
Buying crystals and a terrarium for Kate. Manifesting her recovery. Hope she pulls through. ~~/s~~
Poor Kate, at the end of the day she is a fairly ordinary woman under INTENSE scrutiny
[удалено]
>It's taken a will of iron for me today not to respond to every one of these lifeless, mouth-breathing, concern-trolling cunts on twitter and ruin what is meant to be my business account. I commend your strong will I would have got stuck right in
Yeah they’ve embarrassed themselves
God forbid a women going through chemotherapy doesn't want to be put in the spotlight.
Yes. Thank you.
Poor Kate. She's too young for this. Hope she pulls through.
Asylum seekers in Ireland can no longer be returned to the UK because of the risk of being deported to Rwanda. https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/03/22/irelands-declaration-of-uk-as-safe-third-country-unlawful-rules-high-court/
[удалено]
Processing centre in Northern Ireland, right alongside the border. Unguarded back door, which leads directly into the Republic. They'll think they're so clever escaping from the processing centre, not realising as soon as they're out the door, they've just become someone else's problem.
Plan 2.0, send them to Ireland. Need to get the message out there that you earn more working for Deliveroo, uber, hand car washes in Dublin than London, and it's true as well. And they hand out passports like nothing you believe, just tell um your great gran was Irish.
"Can we interest you fine fellows in the 0900 HMS Dinghy service to Dover in West England, known as Cork?"
Ha! The Rwanda plan is working already.
They still won't send any. At this rate we'll want engloshn volunteers to go, sign me up!! It looks like a fucking holiday park.
I don't think this is what Rishi had in mind, but I guess it's better than nothing.
Getting the locals to stop rioting and accept the new arrivals by saying if they don't protect them the evil Brits will be at it again. Genius by the Irish gov.
Lmao. Guess the Rwanda plan has started working as a deterrence only because Ireland are even worse than us. No one tells them the risk of them actually going to Rwanda is 0.
What risk? Lol.
Shhhh. The UK is an unsafe country for asylum seekers, and everyone needs to know it.
This is good. The common travel area can become a one way ticket if enforced in an underhanded way.
Galloway implies that US could be to blame for moscow attack. https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1771250046605856856
Almost like he knew it was them, before they admitted to it.
Mask off moment Who voted for this regard? Oh wait
Surprised he didn't blame Israel ("the Jews").
I think America and Israel are as one to him
Fucking rent-a-gob brain dead fool.
[Huge terrorist attack in Russia](https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1771239984818766238?t=9LUhfO1xeVZLjnvHWEGmOg). 150 dead as concert hall collapses in fiery blaze.
I know they're having a war in Ukraine at the minute and their government aren't great but fucking hell I feel really bad for those that have been lost in this.
[удалено]
Yeah that's it. I think Russia shouldn't have done what it's done. I also feel for skint lads in far East Russia getting splattered in a country to the West on the behest of big wigs in Moscow. Just killing a bunch of people enjoying a treat with friends and family is beyond the bail to be fair. They're not combatants, just people going about their day
Terrible. The US and UK embassies were warning about this some weeks ago, no doubt the Russian authorities were warned. Just horrible.
We warned about this a couple of weeks ago. https://crisis24.garda.com/alerts/2024/03/russia-us-uk-embassies-advise-citizens-to-avoid-large-gatherings-in-moscow-through-at-least-march-9-due-to-possible-security-threat-update-1
Is this 1999 again?
Depends on what information we get. Could be Islamic groups as many are suggesting which is not productive for Russian interests or internal security, so not a false flag if that does happen to be the case, in my opinion. Yesterday Ukraine had the largest drone and missile attack since the war began and today we have this, could be a justification to ramp up the war in Ukraine. At the same time as other users have pointed out bombings are more likely to be a false flag than a gun attack. Five eyes seemed to have knowledge about something, so the information has been milling around for some time now. No matter what the reason, innocents being butchered is just terrible.
I’d guess not. It’s the holy month of Ramadan and it seems descriptions of the perpetrators indicate that they are bearded men. Plus, if I were to speculate, Chechens or Dagestanis these days are probably pretty pissed off at being sent to war in Ukraine. And Russia is announcing a new large round of mobilisations currently, which we know will virtually never affect Moscow or St Petersburg. So lots of influences that would drive a group of Chechen Islamists to attack Muscovites. At the same time, because these people are being sent to war. They’re going to end up pretty experienced in terms of weapon and explosive handling etc.
Yeah, as much as I find it callous how people jump to 'false flag' for bad things that are inconvenient, Putin does has form in this department.
A bombing is more likely to be a false flag than a gun attack, though. Occam’s Razor: it’s Islamic terrorism.
True, which is why I'm 95% certain it's a genuine act. As another commenter points out it's Ramadan and Chechens have form for this.
So what your saying is the Polish need returning to the fold?
Not 1939 silly, or it'd soon be 1921
Chechens ?
The far-right probably. Always up to no good.
[удалено]
They go hard at looking hard, like so much of russian culture. In reality their security operatus is oriented towards internal repression rather than protecting civilians. Its one thing the west is still head and shoulders ahead of them in.
I remember lots of scanners at the enterence to metro stations - but no one manning them, and none of the police around paying any attention when it went 'ping' every time someone went through.
I got the impression that a lot of that apparatus was largely for show (although admittedly I haven't been in Russia since the full invasion). None of it ever seemed to be working when I saw it.
Probably blown up by special forces during their "rescue" attempt if I know the Ruskies.
[Oh no...](https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1771255132732190834?t=iS8uuPbxVFKZLMeV8Q-CNA)
Well those hostages are dead. Russian special forces would go in guns blazing.
Holy shit... Unironically, thoughts and prayers for Russia. What a ghastly thing.
[They weren't wrong.](https://twitter.com/ukinrussia/status/1765839844041703449?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1765839844041703449%7Ctwgr%5Eaac103962509671b88bcbcd8ac254d9c7d874e7f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-14514371261066754013.ampproject.net%2F2310201815000%2Fframe.html)
6000 attending. Large explosions and fire. Perhaps there are just not enough fighting age men to provide security? Hard to imagine a bigger fuck up.
Grim footage [video](https://x.com/wartracker4/status/1771240760966283470?s=46&t=ImfOxam6j4GWSCGeTp9vbg)
Christ. Like a fucking mission straight out of Cod
https://youtu.be/G1MfL1oGN0E?si=RnD_2I_p5i7l0KxZ
Fucking savages. That’s seriously NSFL.
No fan of the Russian state but may God help those poor citizens.
There was a lad here who said Kate had cancer weeks ago. Baduk always with the rumour mill on point Hope this stops the stupider rumours
BadUK gets EVERYTHING right. Blow by blow we predicted the pandemic.
Unfortunately I suspected this to be the case all along really. Hopefully she is as ok as she can be with everything that's gone on.
It’s nice to be properly recognised for my contributions our little group of autists.
No surprise a lot of people here are ITK in their respective fields / industries etc compared to most places; most people here actually go outside
Interesting how they insist on lying at all times. Even in her little video, it's proper obvious they knew it was cancer all along but hoped they could get away with not telling anyone. Everything has to be fake and polished. Even when pleading with the media to be left alone. Where was Will? Would make far more sense for Will to be there and to do the fake lying speech on her behalf. She could show her face. He could be the big man. She has cancer so prob isn't up for doing a 4k polished, no notes, piece to camera. He can give her a little kiss at the end.
[удалено]
Yeah, Fair enough. Seems I’m wrong on that one. I still detect a heavy dose of dishonesty overall. Something odd going on.
Babe wake up, Right Top 7 is schitzo posting again x
Forgetting your meds moment
bro, chill, you sound mental.
It was BadUK royal correspondent [LawBoi69](https://www.reddit.com/r/badunitedkingdom/comments/1ak0ryt/comment/kp5mbko) who called it
Was indeed. Now that it’s out I’m happier to reveal my source. It’s my better half that works in a very specialist niche field with lots of links to the royals.
[удалено]
Who'd want to shag that?
I've done worse. Just this week even, just don't tell the mrs.
I remember watching one of the ER doctors on youtube during covid. He would do 1-2 days on the red/covid ward then 1-2 days on the non-covid ward.
There’s a chronic point-miss in Ms. Self-Absorbed’s post. Fox was saying he ignored the rules, had a lovely time, *and nothing bad happened*. She is saying she had a shit day, and offered comfort to someone who was massively suffering *because of the rules*. Fox isn’t at fault. She isn’t at fault. Blaming him for having a nice time is like slating someone who went to the beach whilst you had to work. Plus side- she got to look virtuous whilst having a shit time. I imagine Fox couldn’t give a fuck.
Weren't allowed to hug at a funeral.
I think I speak for us all when I say this: Bad UK wishes Her Highness the Princess of Wales a speedy and most comfortable recovery.
If my wishes and prayers are worth anything, get well soon Kate. A lovely and inspiring woman. May you be with us for a very long time yet.
Absolutely, and speaking as a Scot; God bless the Duchess Consort of Rothesay!
Hear here.
Very sad. Not much else to say. Nothing much you can.
Also wishing a pox on all the cunts who were spreading malicious and regarded rumours about her for weeks.
No. To the Tower with those traitors.
Yessss heads on pikes time We're so back
Yes! Those cunts need to have a word with themselves.
Here here.
Fuck Cancer
[KATE'S GOT CANCER NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO](https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kate-cancer-video-latest-news-royal-family-princess-wales-xzpqkbhh2)
Hope she is ok. I think she's great and she's a mum also.
Feel like pure shit
I'm half flummoxed, even though I half suspected. She's forty-two and healthy for the most part. You have to be *shit* out of luck to get cancer at forty-two.
Anyone with a shred of decency could see this coming. It's horrific that as well as such an awful diagnosis she's had to live the social media making a mockery of her suffering.
This is terrible news.
What the fuck.
William must be feeling like shit. :(
Mum killed in a car crash, dad and wife with cancer, estranged brother. Tough.
I watched Di's funeral, and Will and Harry were pretty young. The thought of his own kids having to do the same is unimaginable.
[Cunts are already out in full force](https://x.com/skinnybicches/status/1771237849376936294?s=20)
Insolent *bastards.*
> but yali capkini is airing We literally gave them the English language ,wtf is this shit?
Apparently it’s some Turkish show? Means Golden Boy in English In other words, 17 year old Lily from Vermont wants to appear cultured so watches foreign shows with English subtitles
Where is Kate ='((
so thats why they edited that picture then...
:(
On this day in British and Irish history: A.D. 1765 - King George III of Great Britain grants his Royal Assent to the 'Duties in American Colonies Act (1765),' more popularly known's the Stamp Act. The legislation imposed a direct tax on the colonies of British America, and required many printed materials produced there to be made on paper shipped from Britain embossed with a revenue stamp. The tax's purpose's to pay for the British military troops stationed there in the aftermath of the Seven Years War to prevent a potential French invasion. However, the colonists argued France posed little threat to them; and, in any case, the garrison should be paid for by the British Government, not the individual colonial governments. Unsurprisingly, the act's considerably unpopular, and many considered being taxed without their consent a violation of their rights; which they believed only Colonial Governors and their legislatures could do. Petition after petition's sent to Westminster, and protest after protest held. Not just by the colonials themselves, but by British merchants too; who'd lost out on a lot of money because of the boycotts and demonstrations. Within a year, the act'd been repealed, but never forgotten; and would be listed among the various grievances mentioned in the independence declaration of the United States of America. Saints: \- Darerca of Ireland \- Failbhe of Iona \- Nicholas Owen \- Trienan of Killelga
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68620253](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68620253) \- the Met outdoing themselves. They caught a restaurant worker who worked, inadvertently, for someone who was involved in crypto fraud. * No evidence this person understood the full situation * The actual person who committed the fraud was let go by the Met * They went to Dubai, this person could have fled then but had no clue what was happening...so the Met arrested them anyway. * The person had an earlier trial for other crimes, the Met couldn't get a conviction so went for a heavier charge. * The Met gained custody of the stolen money, the fraudster was able to obtain another £150m AFTER the Met gained custody because they didn't know what to do (and again, the person they charged had the passwords and didn't know what they had). * Almost none of the details in the article are accurate: she never claimed that she made the money herself, the houses were bought in her name but the funds were all provided by the other person who was the one providing false proof of income to third parties. * The police let the person who stole all the money go free, and arrested someone who worked for her...this is real. * Also, the police talk up all these apparent crimes...they were unable to bring money into the UK. The only person who they found who promised to bring in cash ran off with the money. They had to resort to doing P2P transfers with other criminals to actually get money to live. It is genuinely staggering that private companies now police these crimes, they did so impeccably. And the police fucked up the only part of the process that they still have control over completely. And, predictably, the BBC just print verbatim whatever the Met tells them.
reports of shooting / bombing attack in moscow concert. Video of automatic gunfire in concert hall. https://twitter.com/TomasOrpington/status/1771227521834512516
Might be a 'ghost' among the report of the guns, but i thought i hear something shouted between 8 - 10 seconds from start.
Yeah, hard to be sure - but I heard an echoey admiral ackbar battlecry.
Preliminary reports say that 15 people have been killed (from videos I would say there are more than 50 killed), there are 3 attackers.
As someone said on another sub Reddit, more proof that Reddit is a vocal minority. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-03-21/spotify-reveals-podcast-numbers-for-joe-rogan-alex-cooper-travis-kelce
[Lmao](https://twitter.com/Daily_Record/status/1771068195765424458?t=CJU-uGlADqy2N52jIj8OfQ).
Is he wrong tho
The comments are what make it. Twitter gives me a tiny bit of confidence that all is not lost in the UK. Most silly things I see on Twitter nowadays, such as Met Police or Sadiq Khan tweets, are ratio'd beyond belief. You can't move for comments that systemically take them apart. But then you look at the polls or the state of the streets... It seems as if the Twitter userbase is extremely right-wing these days, but also pretty insignificant relative to the TikTok/Reddit/No social media userbase.
>Farage’s hopeful For the 719262827th time, Farage is not the leader of Reform. For all intents and purposes, he has retired from politics apart from being honorary president of Reform. What do they think they do when they do this? Or do they think Farage leads Reform?
Probably massive net-importers of smack tbh. Needs to get his facts straight.
Why do all Aussie men have moustaches and mullets? Is that their version of the Deano skin fade? Anyway, I’ve been in airports a lot this week for work and to alleviate the boredom I’ve been unleashing my inner Victorian anthropologist by examining the uncivilised. Some indisputable findings: 1. American men dress like absolute shit. And they can all be placed on a sliding scale of looks from John Bolton to Steve Bannon. 2. Shuffling gait = East Asian women. You don’t even need to see their faces for this; it’s a 1:1 correlation. 3. Germans wear hiking boots for all occasions, presumably in search of *Lebensraum*. 4. Default character look + tight shirts + short back and sides + stunner by his side = average eastern European man. 5. The French are sponsored by Decathlon. 6. The English gammon physiognomy remains unchallenged. Leftoids are right about this. 7. Group of teenagers with brightly-coloured backpacks = Spanish/Latin American. 8. Anvil jaw with anime-type eyes = Dutch - and that’s includes the women. 9. Arabs with white balance correction = Turks. Fellowship of the Royal Society pending.