ompassion for people who are offended by opinions. If they’re upset by what I say, unless it is genuinely insulting, I do not care. I think they are contemptible.
And as for the Bar Standards Board, I don’t think my opinions or those of any other barrister should be any concern of theirs.
a “trans lesbian” with a sexual interest in “age play.”
Wimbridge maintained a profile on the internet’s leading fetish community, FetLife, where he expressed a sexual interest in humiliation, BDSM, schoolgirl fetishes, redheads, polyamory, age play, and public sexual acts.
Lovely. "Age play".
As JK Rowling comments: "I wonder what it is about a movement campaigning to allow men into protected spaces for women and girls that might attract sexual predators. A mystery for the ages."
No wonder LGB want a split from the Ts.
ina central secretariat, and Wang Yi, director of the party’s central foreign affairs commission, appeared “meager and shabby” compared to Chinese media coverage.
Documentary editors also drew fire for including footage of Kim waiting in line with other world leaders during China’s 80th anniversary victory day celebrations. While Kim received second-to-last reception from Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife Peng Liyuan — directly before Russian President Vladimir Putin — indicating China’s highest-level treatment, showing Kim waiting in line was deemed damaging to the supreme leader’s image.
The supreme leader does not wait.
The Taliban has banned 140+ books written by women in Afghan universities. Texts that ranged from safety protocols in chemistry, botany, to literature.
The last traces of Afghan women in academia erased under “sharia law.” The future of the country is dystopia.
— Sara Wahedi (@SaraWahedi) September 22, 2025
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Added:
Women and girls are not pulled out of Afghanistan earthquake rubble because men won’t touch them.
Afghan women cant be doctor and cant go to male doctor and Afghan women dont have rights to learn.
What are these meassges to world? pic.twitter.com/s6cRXYwZWq— WDI.Afghanistan (@WDIAfghanistan1) September 22, 2025
olitical lodestar of soft-left governments – the vague sense that it's 'the right thing to do'.
unique to the UK; it reflects a broader international consensus that has become ideologically and diplomatically entrenched: humanitarian suffering in Gaza is to be framed as an Israeli failure, regardless of the facts. Any Palestinian terrorists deliberately causing suffering to their own are to be ignored at all costs.
But the facts are stubborn. This latest incident is not a deviation. On Saturday, reports confirmed by Cogat, Israel’s military coordination body for the territories, described another deliberate sabotage of aid efforts: Hamas terrorists are said to have fired at UN teams working to open a new humanitarian corridor in southern Gaza. Armed men seized UN vehicles and reportedly used them to blockade roads meant to carry food and medicine. It is all part of a deliberate strategy to obstruct aid distribution in order to engineer a crisis and externalise blame.
If Israel were truly trying to starve Gaza, why would it coordinate with the UN to open new routes for food and shelter supplies? Why would it allow in therapeutic nutrition and medical equipment that is then stolen or intercepted en route by Palestinian terrorists? The uncomfortable truth is that Israel’s logistical and military apparatus has, despite the war, continued to facilitate aid, often at the expense of its own operational freedom, in a desperate attempt to separate civilians from combatants. It is the terror groups embedded within the civilian population who blur that line.
There is a deeper rot exposed here: the moral degradation of the aid discourse itself. Humanitarian law is predicated on neutrality and civilian protection. But in Gaza, that framework is regularly distorted by a UN system unwilling to hold Palestinian actors accountable, either out of fear, political alignment, or institutional corruption. The result is grotesque: children are being deprived of food by the very actors who claim to be their protectors, shielded from scrutiny by a media and diplomatic class that prefers to heap condemnation on the democratic, free nation acting to remove that very evil which threatens both Israelis and its own population.
The UN – notably the UNRWA – are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Meanwhile, Britain, France and others press forward with plans to ‘recognise’ an imaginary Palestinian state – an impossible and undesirable entity that in its current form exists only as an idea, not as a functioning polity. And what is the fantasy state they are recognising? One in which a terror group starves the country’s children for political point-scoring? That obstructs aid corridors with armed force? That creates and exploits its own population’s misery as a weapon of diplomacy? To recognise this as a state is to recognise the strategy of hostage governance. It is to endorse a political culture in which children’s hunger is not a crisis to be solved, but a tool to be cynically and ruthlessly engineered and leveraged.
If that is the foundation upon which Europe intends to recognise statehood, then it is not recognising a future of peace and sovereignty, but entrenching a system of impunity, cruelty, and permanent conflict.
Charlie Kirk's wife Erika forgave the man who shot her husband at a funeral which a leftist influencer is comparing to a Nazi rally.
This is the contrast that is turning the country away from progressive/leftist liberalism. https://t.co/4gFwau7LXw
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) September 21, 2025
oung Gazans torturing and maiming while video-calling their parents, hoping for an outburst of filial pride. One can’t help thinking of the words of Umberto Eco’s line in The Prague Cemetery: “People are never so completely and enthusiastically evil as when they act out of religious conviction.”
Afterwards, Hamas leaders helpfully came on to the airwaves to explain that they would commit mass murder again and again, if they had half a chance, not so they could kill some Jews, but all Jews, as proclaimed in their charter. This isn’t a series of abstract words but the galvanising force of a group that won power in Gaza through a democratic vote and has since ruled as a totalitarian dictatorship: indoctrinating kids, torturing critics, snaffling the funds lavished on them to build an infrastructure of tunnels and hideouts under hospitals and schools — more labyrinthine than the London Underground — so that any counterattack by Israel would kill as many of their own citizens as possible. Human shields is the conventional term, but scarcely does justice to the requisite evil.
So why were they so happy a month ago after the British prime minister — the leader of a nation of huge symbolic significance, given the UK’s role in the foundation of Israel 80 or so years ago — gave what was billed as a “significant speech” from the lectern at Downing Street? Well, this was the moment that paved the way for the statement on Sunday for the UK to “recognise” a Palestinian state.
An interesting word, that: “recognise”. As I write these words, I am unclear about the borders of this state, its government, how it will operate, or what we are supposed to make of the fact that hostages within this putative jurisdiction are still being held in horrific conditions.
This, by the way, was the Hamas response to Sir Keir Starmer’s statement, perhaps the greatest evocation of glee from within the terrorist group in months. “The fruits of October 7 are what caused the entire world to open its eyes to the Palestinian issue — and they are moving towards it with force,” Ghazi Hamad, a senior operative, said. “That is, that the Palestinian people are a people who deserve a country. The initiative by several countries to recognise a Palestinian state is one of the fruits of October 7. We have proven that victory over Israel is not impossible, and our weapons are a symbol of Palestinian honour.”
So there you have it: Hamas regards the British policy as an explicit vindication of mass murder, of gaining by killing. And it isn’t just this group of psychopaths who see it in these terms. Security insiders tell me that other jihadi networks also regard official British policy as an exoneration of terrorism as they busily recruit across the Middle East via propaganda pumped out daily over social media. One might call it appeasement, although I am not sure this quite does justice to the strategic and moral pusillanimity of what we’re seeing, not just from the British government but the French, Canadians and more….
Palestinian Rejectionism, Not Statehood, Fuels the Conflict
Several European countries, led by France, are expected to formally recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations in New York. Their leaders justify the move by claiming it will advance peace in the Middle East,…
— Dr. Adi Schwartz (@Adi_Schwartz) September 21, 2025
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Worth reading in full, but the essential point: "They are reinforcing the illusion that the absence of a Palestinian state is the root of the conflict, when in fact it is the refusal to accept a Jewish one."
Added:
It is a curious aspect that so many countries keep wanting for the Palestinians the one thing they have never wanted for themselves – a state – at least not one that shares a border with the sovereign state of the Jewish people.
One might wonder why so many refuse to give…
— Dr. Einat Wilf (@EinatWilf) September 21, 2025
Jenny Lindsay in the Times on where we are now – talking to members of the support group for gender-critical gay men who have to gather in secret:
Alan lives in a small town. Meeting other gay men is not easy. He was recently banned from the gay dating app Grindr. I ask why. “Well, I put in my profile I’m not attracted to women, y’see, and apparently that’s awfully offensive.”
Though he laughs, Danny pulls out his phone to show me the Grindr profile of a young “gay trans man” (a female who identifies as a gay male). “That’s what we’re dealing with. He gets chucked off, and she gets to stay?”
Having lived through it, Joe judges this trend as part of “the most existential crisis facing gay men since Aids”.
He is referring not just to the younger men’s gall that gay men are being pushed to reframe their sexualities to accommodate females. Joe is profoundly angered that, as a “fey child”, he might have been pushed to consider himself trans if he had been born today.
Modern gay culture feels “oppressive”, he says. It is a word used repeatedly throughout the day….
In between the free-flowing ales, the laughter, the camaraderie and solace, Joe summed up the feelings of the group, lamenting: “Having to meet in secret, fearing loss of employment for who we are. Having been through the whole gay liberation experience, it’s absolutely enraging to find myself back here again.”
And that's why the LGB needs to split from the T.