Selective approach to international law

The left pointing parties in the UK claim to be upholders of international law. Whenever the UN, an international Court or the EU expresses an opinion or passes a resolution hostile to UK interests they side with the international lawyers.

This leads to absurd contradictions and self harm. They decide to give away the Chagos islands and loads of money based on some UN advisory statement. They ignore the rights of the Chagos islanders a previous Labour government threw off the islands. They  waste our money on a court case to suppress the islanders assertion of their rights and their wish to keep the islands British.

It is surely illegal to smuggle drugs into the US, to rig an election, to so harm people that millions flee a country to seek refuge elsewhere, to deal in illegal weapons, so how can these international laws be enforced? Why do the left not complain about all this damaging lawlessness?

It is illegal to travel by unlicensed dangerous boat. It is illegal to put a child’s life at risk in an unlicensed boat . It is illegal to seek entry to the UK without documents and a basis to claim a right to enter. Why not improve enforcement of these international laws?

Why do these international law lovers regard the human rights of an illegal migrant as more important than the human rights of a legally settled UK citizen who does not want large scale illegal migration?

Democratic societies need a rule of law that is fair and fairly enforced. Too many today see the government and left wing parties selecting parts of international  law that  harm the UK whilst failing to enforce laws against violent crime, sexual assault, illegal migration and drug trading.

 

73 Comments

  1. Stred
    January 5, 2026

    The UK has international lawyers as PM and AG, with a civil service operating international law. The Conservative PM Theresa May signed the UN Migration Pact which agreed that economic migrants will be treated as though they are refugees and assisted to arrive and be housed and receive benefits, housing and healthcare. This is what the Home Office, Border Force and the Foreign Office is carrying out.

    Reply
    1. Ian Wragg
      January 5, 2026

      Correct. For years the government of all stripes has been against the people. Starting with Bliar opening our borders to rub the rights noses in. Trouble is we’ve never had a Right party in government to reverse these policies.
      The Left have infiltrated all aspects of public life and it will take a Herculean task to remove them.
      Trump is succeeding and America is all the better for it.
      International Law (whatever that is), is used as a stick to beat us with energetically applied by the likes of 2TK and Hermer. No doubt Hermer will be offering his services pro bono to assist the Venezuelan president.

      Reply
      1. Berkshire Alan.
        January 5, 2026

        Ian agreed, it started way backing the early 1960’s with LSE type people being recruited into politics, the civil service teaching, etc etc..

        Reply
    2. Donna
      January 5, 2026

      Correct. And we are “taking our fair share” which is why the Establishment is doing nothing to stop the boats and is cooperating so closely with the French Authorities.

      Reply
      1. Diane
        January 5, 2026

        But we are not taking enough according to a UN individual’s recent opinion ” 40.000 is nothing ” ( Isn’t it near to 62000+ since Labour came to power – that we know about. )
        Guardian today: 80 asylum seekers detained in preparation for being returned to France under the UK’s controversial one in, one out scheme have called on U N bodies to investigate their treatment since arriving in small boats. Those detainees have compiled a document apparently. A report on conditions and treatment at the Harmondsworth Immigration Removal Centre. They are claiming fear, humiliation & psychological distress at the hands of the Home Office since their arrival in small boats. ( Hopefully though our taxes are ensuring they have at a minimum a bed to rest in, food daily to avoid hunger and warmth to avoid being freezing cold in this
        current harsh weather )

        Reply
    3. Peter
      January 5, 2026

      The UK is no longer powerful enough to do as it pleases like Trump. Palmerston is long gone.

      Even then, Trump’s interventions are highly selective. It’s back to the old days of the banana wars. Maybe he is mainly watching North and South America, but Greenland is also in his target.

      Reply
      1. Peter
        January 5, 2026

        General Smedley Butler of the US Marine Corps is once again relevant. He was the most decorated marine of his time.

        After his retirement he said this :-

        “I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer; a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

        Reply
  2. Ian Wragg
    January 5, 2026

    Now winter is upon us at this moment we are generating 62% of demand using gas and nuclear. Bizarrely we are exporting to France and Norway using precious gas which is in short supply. I’m of the opinion that NESO wants to engineer power cuts as an excuse to do an about tirn on net stupid policies.

    Reply
    1. Donna
      January 5, 2026

      Chris Whitty’s remarks, reported in the DT yesterday, were interesting. Not because of the content (people should put a bit of bleach in water they intend to drink if water supplies are severely disrupted) but because he “warned” about potential blackouts.

      They know what’s coming and are rolling the pitch.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        January 5, 2026

        Or boil it, but then perhaps you will have no gas or electricity either and wood burning will be banned perhaps. Has Whitty looked at the dire mRNA vaccine damage figures from Japan broken down by vaccines status – perhaps he can explain why the UK ones (doubtless similarly damning) are still being hidden from the public? The reason is I assume that they are equally damning!

        Reply
      2. miami.mode
        January 5, 2026

        It was revealed that the Americans “turned off” all the lights in Caracas. Ed Miliband may well prove useful if we need to undertake any similar sort of operation. Perhaps they used him as a consultant!

        Reply
    2. Ian Wragg
      January 5, 2026

      Very interesting watching the National Grid today. As we have 10gw of wind we are generating 50.85gw. Of this 5gw is solar which will start to disappear soon.
      We are exporting 2.5gw and there’s absolutely nothing left in the locker. Demand like this on a windless evening means will be short by approx 6gw as it will be unlikely imports can fill the shortfall.
      Professor Whitless us onto something advising drinking bleach.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        January 5, 2026

        People keep saying Trump advised drinking bleach for Covid. He did no such thing if you see what he actually said, any more than Gove said “we have had enough of experts”! But your enemies will chop and edit! As the BBC did with the Trump multi Bn legal claim!

        Reply
  3. Sakara Gold
    January 5, 2026

    Trump’s refusal to embrace renewable energy and reduce America’s dependence on imports of fossil fuels has led to last weekend’s completely illegal interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs. Trump wants Venezuela’s oil and has already seized several oil tankers.

    The UK’s wind and solar installations have reduced the amount of expensive gas and other fossil fuels we have to import as the N Sea runs down. The sooner we ban ICE cars and go for BEV’s, the better

    Reply
    1. Ian Wragg
      January 5, 2026

      SG. See todays generation. Now 70% gas and nuclear. How do you propose to fill that gap when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.

      Reply
      1. Mickey Taking
        January 5, 2026

        and when France refuses to pass us 10% of our needs via the cables, or Putin severs them?

        Reply
    2. Berkshire Alan.
      January 5, 2026

      SG
      No standby power then ?

      Reply
    3. Lifelogic
      January 5, 2026

      Mr Gold – Trump is not “failing to embrace” so called “renewable energy” he just does not want unfair subsidies and rigged markets for it. Solar in sunny areas of the states (where they often need summer electricity for aircon, refridgeration etc. in the summer) can make a lot of sense if the panels are cheap enought and last long enough to get a payback. Rather less sense in the Nothern and rather cloudy UK where there is rather little demand for summer electricity.

      Note wind and solar Worldwide provide less than 15% of electricity and less than 4% of total human enegy use so almost irrelevant overall Sakara! Note also that it is intermittent and thus needs backup which make gas etc. electricity production rather less efficient as it has to be ramped up and down for the benefit of “renewables”. So even these low figure are exaggerations when properly accounted for. The intermittent enegy it provides is worth far less than on demand electricty as it is very expensive indeed to store electricity.

      Let us hope that Venezuela will get back to some sort of sensible government to benefit the people & without too much bloodshed. Might be good if Starmer started to consider UK voters and tax payers for a change.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        January 5, 2026

        Though note the panels can easily be damages by hail stones and storms. See the pictures of the virtually new ones hugely damaged in Anglesey or many other places! Not much of an investment unless they last 25 years min.

        Reply
        1. Lifelogic
          January 5, 2026

          How much to finance, insure solar panels for say 25 years of useful life from storm damage, theft, hail and to clean them regularly, recycle them and to connect them up and maintain the power link! Is this more than the low value of the intermittent summer daytime energy they produce?

          Reply
          1. Berkshire Alan.
            January 5, 2026

            Indeed all this work needed, and people then place them on 2 story roofs.
            Has anyone completed an actual real percentage return (including servicing, replacement, etc etc) on Capital employed with regards to Solar Panels, which typically need complete replacement after 25 years, which is the industry suggested life span.

    4. Sam
      January 5, 2026

      Strange how our energy here in the UK is several times more expensive compared to America SG.
      By your logic it should be the other way round.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        January 5, 2026

        +1

        Reply
    5. Mickey Taking
      January 5, 2026

      The tankers had sanctions on materials they were transporting.

      Reply
    6. IanT
      January 5, 2026

      Cheap energy is key to economic success, be that in AI, Steel production, Chemicals or Heavy Industry.

      Trump understands this whereas Milliband clearly does not. Venezuelan oil is going to be extracted and used, whether that is by the US or China. Trump has decided that it is going to be the US it seems.
      Let us assume (it’s not hard to do) that the US and China are in a struggle for global dominance. Currently, there is an uneasy balance, as the US is dependent upon cheap Chinese imports (and Taiwanese chips) and China needs the West to buy it’s exports. Both are trying to lessen those dependencies, with the US ‘re-shoring’ manufacturing (where the use of tarifs is then logical) and by the Chinese growing it’s internal marketplace (albeit they have a demographic issue from their “one child” era) and external influence (Belt & Road).

      The World is gradually taking sides SG and neither ‘side’ is interested in Net Zero (except as a market opportunity). China has built renewables as part of it’s energy strategy but has also invested hugely in fossil power too – to power it’s factories and heavy industries. They have also (wisely) cornered the market in rare earths and can build competively priced EVs (PCs on wheels) that has bypassed the need to develop ICE technology that can compete with the established (Western) car brands. But EVs are just one example of where the West has (or will) become dependant on China. Look around you – so much is made in China (or has key components that are). This includes of course all those solar panels and wind turbines you are so keen on…

      Now consider how vulnerable this makes us to any future potential ‘disruption’. Whatever the truth of Climate Change and it’s (potential) impacts, the fact is that neither the US, China, India or any of the major developing countries (such as Indonesia) has any intention of allowing their economic (or strategic) interests to be damaged by concepts such as Net Zero. Starmer and Miliband (the EU, the BBC etc) can pontificate all they wish, it will not change the brutal truth that no one else (who matters) is listening!

      By all means build Solar/Wind, IF the business doing so can compete in the energy markets without government or (enforced) consumer subsidies. But otherwise, assume that we urgently need to look to our economic and national survival before anything else. The EU is already discovering that when it comes down to matters of self preservation, governments will always put their own interests first and just give Brussles the two fingers.
      The UK cannot afford the “luxury” of Net Zero for so many reasons. We have far larger & immediate problems than Climate Change and it’s time everyone (including you) woke up to this hard fact or we are going to be in much deeper trouble than we already are…

      Reply
    7. Stred
      January 5, 2026

      The USA is the 3rd largest exporter of crude oil, behind Saudi 1st and Russia 2nd. It has greatly increased oil production.

      https://share.google/aimode/pd04sdROeOd3IelfJ

      Reply
    8. Lifelogic
      January 5, 2026

      “The sooner we ban ICE cars and go for BEV’s, the better“

      Better for whom? Keeping your old ICE car is far better for CO2 reductions if that bothers you (it shouldn’t). We have no spare low carbon electricity to charge the EVs anyway! Vastly cheaper too. A new EV is likely to cost about £1 a mile in finance, depreciation, maint, ins, tyres… My old ICE cars about 30p a mile and about 13p of that is tax on fuel which EVs do not pay (yet)!

      Reply
  4. Donna
    January 5, 2026

    “International Law” is how a One World Government and Global Socialism is being imposed. Of course the lefties in the Establishment and particularly this Government supports it. They do not believe in Nations.

    Unfortunately the British Establishment and their Legacy Parties of Lib Lab and CON, have all promoted it and passed/supported National Laws to transfer power to the International Institutions which are imposing Global Socialism and prioritising the interests of foreign criminals above those of the British people.

    Until very recently the Not-a-Conservative-Party has been actively supporting the process; PM Cameron fought to keep us in the EU; PM May accepted the UN Refugee Convention; Johnson passed a weak BRINO; Sunak refused to leave the ECHR.

    Now we’re supposed to believe that the Party has had a Damascene conversion, yet all the above remain in it. So I’m not convinced.

    Reply Endless repetition of old history. Today’s Conservatives are pro repeal of the ECHR and big changes in energy and immigration policy

    Reply
    1. Mickey Taking
      January 5, 2026

      Millions think it would be repeating the erroneous exercise with the same result. I don’t believe the ‘new’ policies, we witnessed to our cost what promises got broken before.

      Reply
      1. miami.mode
        January 5, 2026

        Agreed Mick. It would be useful to know the stances taken by current Tory MPs in the past and ask them if they have definitely had a change of heart and if they have changed then for what reason.

        Reply
    2. Original Richard
      January 5, 2026

      Reply to reply:

      With no major changes to Conservative MPs/candidates I suspect that a majority of the electorate will simply not believe that the Conservatives have completely reversed their beliefs to be a member of the EU, follow the ECHR and pursue Net Zero and mass immigration.

      Reply There will be lots of new candidates who will be supporters of current policies

      Reply
      1. Mickey Taking
        January 5, 2026

        reply to reply …or merely paying lip service to the current policies, without knowing what happens if power should be won. We witnessed incredible turnaround of policies once the two parties got power.

        Reply
        1. Jazz
          January 5, 2026

          This is correct, Theresa May ” No deal 8s better than a bad deal” – Grieves et al
          Cameron immigration
          Priti Patel giving that Egyptian hater of all things British a passport
          Agreeing to terrible deals with the EU after Brexit, that massively favour the EU.
          However in education the Free Schools, K Birbalsingh,climbing the league tables in Maths and English – these are achievements that the Tories enabled, that they can be proud of.
          Getting Brexit done, however badly, means that a future Government can implement it as hard or soft as they would like.

          Reply
  5. Wanderer
    January 5, 2026

    The WW2 victors wanted future world order on their terms. Their lawyers provided a framework and their bureaucrats created an expanding apparatus to achieve it (International law, UN, charters etc).

    Powerful nations continued to significantly shape, influence and manipulate this system to align with their interests. They often ignored or only selectively complied with it too (the “rules based international order” principle).

    In the last decade or so their system to maintain order to their benefit has run away from them. This is largely due to the march of the Left through the institutions (both international, but more importantly national ones in the west).

    Now, International law provides a great means for leftists to undermine us, egged on and encouraged by nations that benefit from our self-harm.

    We could leave the existing system of International law, but that won’t do us much good unless we get our own house in order. Time is definitely running out.

    Reply
    1. miami.mode
      January 5, 2026

      The current situation could almost be traced back to WW2. New international laws, European coal and steel agreement, desperate shortage of labour in Britain to rebuild damage due to the loss of so many men and the consequent immigration.

      Reply
  6. Lifelogic
    January 5, 2026

    A selective approach to international law and an appalling Two Tier Kier approach to UK law – especially the Pakistani rape gangs and migrant sex assualts. Have any officials, teachers, social workers, police, CPS workers been prosecuted or even lost their jobs over this yet?

    We have had truly appalling PMs since the appalling fake Tory MPs chose ERM fiaxco John Major over Thatcher. May buried the Tories almost a deaply as Cameron/May/Boris/Sunak have. But Keir (and his truly appalling team) are surely the most appalling government in my lifetime.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      January 5, 2026

      Does international law mean anything with no enforcement? So “international law” is largely decided who has the most fire power!

      Trump has helpfully total Starmer what to do – ditch the net zero hoax, control the borders, drill baby drill, deter crime, get rid of the nasty London Mayor, cut taxes, cut red tape, spend more on defence, no men in women’s sport, ditch DEI and the woke lunacy, have free speech, ditch two tier justice… alas he is not listening. I suppose it is unlikely Trump will rescue the UK by arresting Starmer!

      I see that in Northern Ireland they are trying to ram the Irish Language down people throats, a country where hardly anyone speak the language for political reasons. I doubt this divide agenda will go well. How long before Sadiq Khan does the same for the Urdu language in London? Diversity is out strength and what Britain is as Sir Kier likes to lie!

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        January 5, 2026

        Even Companies House now bombard me with Welsh in addition to English, rather a waste of electricity and my time in sending and storing all this extra data for perhaps the 0.001% of the population of the UK who speak fluent welsh and less fluent English! Perhaps not even a high as that! It would be more use in French, Mandarin, Spanish, Polish, Erdu, Arabic… given the numbers!

        Reply
        1. Berkshire Alan.
          January 5, 2026

          Lifelogic
          I see it is being reported that only 2,000,000 Directors and Company owners, out of 7,000,000 who need to, have completed and signed up to the new Companies House reporting system, with the deadline now passed.
          All due to the complicated and dire new computer registration system they have tried to introduce, which is so user unfriendly, that many including myself have given up for the time being.
          I was informed that It does not even work with Apple Safari system. !

          Reply
  7. Mark B
    January 5, 2026

    Good morning.

    It is illegal to enter a country uninvited and without the proper documents and yet, this and previous governments have not prosecuted these criminals. In fact, I would state that they have aided in the illegal practice of human trafficking.

    It is also illegal to flood a country with migrants, both legal and illegal, if not the intent but the outcome that the indigenous population would be a minority over time.

    Where is the so called international law when real crimes are being committed.

    Reply
    1. Donna
      January 5, 2026

      It’s obvious that the Government is colluding in the importation of the criminal migrants.

      Reply
    2. Stred
      January 5, 2026

      The UN Migration Pact reverses the illegality of national law. It’s what Starmer and Hermer instruct the civil service and local authorities to follow. Next they are planning to build council housing with priority for migrants.

      Reply
    3. Dave Andrews
      January 5, 2026

      It’s not illegal once they claim asylum, which is what they invariably do. You need to create a law that states any asylum application by a migrant coming from a safe country has to be made at a British consulate in that country. Travel from that safe country is illegal without asylum being granted.

      Reply
  8. Mick
    January 5, 2026

    Why do these international law lovers regard the human rights of an illegal migrant as more important than the human rights of a legally settled UK citizen who does not want large scale illegal migration?
    What I cannot understand is why these illegals are entitled to free human rights lawyers because you can bet your bottom dollar if I needed a lawyer I’d stand more chance of winning the lottery , stop all the assistance and freebies then watch the numbers of illegals coming here but that’s not going to happen under this government or the tories because there parties are full of money grabbing leaches sorry I mean lawyers

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      January 5, 2026

      £7000 in damaged for some “mistreatment” of violent criminal compenation and £240K in (just one sides legal costs) – what sort of a mad legal system to we have!

      But not just the lawyers cui bono – all sort of people, companies and vested interest and MP and political lobbying “consultants” immorally benefit from our appalling systems of law, justice, immigration, government and over-regulation.

      Reply
  9. Berkshire Alan.
    January 5, 2026

    Quite simply double standards, do what I say not what I do syndrome.
    The introduction of more and more complicated laws and treaties do not help, instead of clearing up muddy waters, they tend to stir it up even more, and make it more muddy than before.
    The more the law changes and becomes more complex, the more common-sense disappears.

    Reply
  10. Rod Evans
    January 5, 2026

    The constant use of ‘International Law’ by government agencies and their legal advisors, is a system deliberately used to avoid making changes the native population has demanded.
    There is no such thing as international law when a nation decides it is not valid.
    The USA will not adopt or accept any legal position where its domestic laws are subservient to so called international law. That same mindset of national legal sovereignty prevails in all countries except the left leaning and now hyper litigious West. India, China, Russia, Israel, all Muslim countries, plus all dictatorships ignore international law when it compromises state actions. It is used only when those insisting it is honoured are using it as a shield or to be vexatious.
    The EU is an advocate for international law as it helps that undemocratic bureaucracy to claim authority under the guise of law. The UN is an advocate for exactly the same reason.
    Trump has shown yet again that USA domestic authority will always override international objections when it chooses to act.
    The major developed nations of the World, i.e. the majority of world population have no truck with international law. Only the weak and feeble, those who lack real power, advocate submission to International Law.
    Those LibDem shills and Labour demonstrators claiming taking a dictator like Maduro down is wrong should be given the opportunity to take their feelings to the American Naval Fleet off the coast of Venezuela. Give the activists a serviceable armed vessel, tell them to go make their point where the action is.
    Good luck to them.

    Reply
  11. Ian B
    January 5, 2026

    Laws, real Laws especially within democracies are created, amended and repealed through elected representatives. No other law can exist without democratic ongoing oversite.

    There is no such thing as UN Law or International Law. There are a bunch of norms some call them treaties that exist to server mutual interest for a mutually reciprocated purpose, but both parties have to be seen to and be mutually in agreement.

    But there is no Law in these instances, there is no court for these situation, just a mutually agreed talking shop were differences can be aired.

    Reply
  12. Ian B
    January 5, 2026

    “It is illegal to travel by unlicensed dangerous boat. It is illegal to put a child’s life at risk in an unlicensed boat . It is illegal to seek entry to the UK without documents and a basis to claim a right to enter. Why not improve enforcement of these international laws?”

    I am not so sure about the international bit(there is no world government, or democracy), but all the above is embedded, not amended or repealed in UK Law by the UK Parliament. The UK Authorities at every level Parliament down to the RNLI all ignore and refuse the UK to have Laws – is there any surprise when others in other areas break UK Law. I am of course missing the point, the UK is a 2 Tier Society, a them and us Society as far as Parliament is concerned

    Reply
  13. iain gill
    January 5, 2026

    goes with the selective approach to national law though,
    Being Complicit, Aware, Failing to report… gang rape of children is already criminal, yet whole communities do it and are never brought to book.
    Being in positions of authority, police, social workers, etc and knowing about it, and doing nothing about it, is already against the law but none of the many who have done this have been brought to court.
    and so much more

    Reply
    1. Stred
      January 5, 2026

      The previous head of the CPS, which ignored the failure to act against the gangs and Saville is now our Prime Minister.

      Reply
    2. iain gill
      January 5, 2026

      In the news, three men who protested because a young girl was raped by an illegal migrant have been jailed for LONGER than the illegal migrant rapist.
      Says it all about the state of this country.

      Reply
  14. William Long
    January 5, 2026

    It is the same logic that takes the view that belonging to the EU must be better than relying on what we can do for ourselves: it must be better to be part of a bigger organisation, because that makes me look bigger, and I do not have to bother to take the trouble to work out what is best for me, or in the case of a Government, my people.

    Reply
  15. Bloke
    January 5, 2026

    If the current UK government were tried by a fair court, it would be sentenced to solitary confinement out of office for decades.
    Labour has no appeal and just 1,138 days before the people of the UK decide their fate by 15 Aug 2029 at the latest.
    The 8 June 2017 and 12 December 2019 elections were 1,138 days apart.
    Labour lost on both occasions.
    However, Labour has a preference for postponing elections.

    Reply
  16. glen cullen
    January 5, 2026

    A fine example would be the ‘Paris Agreement’

    Reply
  17. glen cullen
    January 5, 2026

    The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion and the UN General Assembly Resolution on the Chagos Islands are not legally binding …..however the UK refer to them as LAW

    Reply
  18. Harry MacMillion
    January 5, 2026

    A very well justified precis of how the socialist mind is usually on the wrong side of logic.

    It shouldn’t come as a surprise to know that socialists cannot differentiate between survival and non-survival actions to the same degree that the rest of us can.

    For some reason they feel comfortable with international law – it just means they don’t have too much to think about, and if challenged they can throw a tizzy or get out their name-calling book.

    Let’s remember, from history, Socialists create non-survival situations, deliberately – their minds are wired that way.

    Reply
  19. rose
    January 5, 2026

    No-one could be more lawless, both domestically and internationally, than the Ayatollahs and the IRGC. Yet our islamized, left wing media have all but blacked them out, even in their final days. They can’t even flee to their bases in Venezuela now and start up a new Gaza though Hezbollah has been preparing that.

    Reply
  20. iain gill
    January 5, 2026

    given that China is flooding the UK with cheap, mainly electric, cars then I think the UK should offer an apology to Japan who we forced to open factories in the UK by threatening them with real and threatened tariffs and quotas.
    what is the “green” credentials of cars made in a country using cheap electricity (no mad Ed Miliband style measures to be seen), and shipped so far around the world?
    why are we supporting the communist Chinese regime like this?
    why are MOD staff banned from having work conversations in these cars, due to worries the Chinese have systematically bugged them on massive scale?

    Reply
    1. glen cullen
      January 5, 2026

      Spot On

      Reply
      1. iain gill
        January 5, 2026

        yep, stating the blooming obvious seems a skill rare in the media, happens here more often

        Reply
  21. Mickey Taking
    January 5, 2026

    New powers allowing mobile phones to be seized from illegal migrants without arresting them have come into force. The government said it will help gather intelligence on smuggling gangs organising small boat crossings to the UK. The Home Office said seizures will begin on Monday at the Manston migrant processing centre in Kent, with technology on site ready to download intelligence from devices.
    Officers will be able to demand that migrants remove their coats to search for phones and also check their mouths for SIM cards. The National Crime Agency said the information collected could speed up investigations into smuggling gangs.
    Border security minister Alex Norris said: “We promised to restore order and control to our borders, which means taking on the people smuggling networks behind this deadly trade. “That is exactly why we are implementing robust new laws with powerful offences to intercept, disrupt and dismantle these vile gangs faster than ever before and cut off their supply chains.”

    If all were arrested on arrival, possessions would be taken allowing this investigation begun immediately.
    Tortoise speed of this government defies belief.

    Reply I have consistently advised that all incoming people coming on an illegal boat should be asked to say who they paid for their boat trip, how they found out about it, and who drove the boat. Failure to say would result in the authorities taking the phone to find out for themselves. This should be backed up by arresting and charging the boat driver identified when Border Force intercepts the boat, and by officials acting as mystery shoppers to get details of forthcoming boats before they leave France.

    Reply
    1. Berkshire Alan.
      January 5, 2026

      I find it difficult to believe that no one has even tried to do this before now, it seems such an obvious first action to take. !
      The excuse given we are informed, is that you need to make an arrest before you can take/investigate the contents of someones phone. !
      Good grief were these illegals not even arrested on landing, pending further investigation.?
      This has been going on now for about 7 years, during that time has no one investigated the tens of thousands of phones these illegals are using for communication ?
      We really are making ourselves the laughing stock of the World.

      Reply
      1. Mickey Taking
        January 5, 2026

        Knowing everybody would be arrested/detained stripped of possessions would be a great deterrent.
        It has been clear all these years that the government of the day accepts the 40k to 50k illegals.

        Reply
  22. miami.mode
    January 5, 2026

    Donald Trump is almost personifying the Humpty Dumpty quote “When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”

    Reply
  23. kenneth
    January 5, 2026

    The BBC this morning were saying that the the U.S. may have broken “international law”.

    What international law?

    How can a democracy give way to a foriegn court?

    Reply
  24. Keith from Leeds
    January 5, 2026

    You are right. The lefty, liberal, woke Government, most of its MPs and the Establishment all love an international law that damages the UK. They all back any socialist regime, with no interest in the suffering of its people, hence their love of the Dictator, Maduro of Venezuela. They reveal themselves in hating freedom and democracy by loving any Dictator. They don’t care about people being oppressed, starving, tortured or murdered, as long as one of their favourite Dictators is doing it.
    How did we end up with such an incompetent, inadequate, insane, indictable, indistinct, indolent, inept, ineffectual, inefficient, inexcusable, inferior, infuriating, inhumane, insensate joke of a Government!!!!!!

    Reply
    1. Berkshire Alan.
      January 5, 2026

      Because they actually think they are intelligent and ingenious !

      Reply
  25. iain gill
    January 5, 2026

    Starmer gave 300 billion to Ukraine last month, gave them 5 billion today? meanwhile we cannot afford to heat our homes

    Reply
  26. iain gill
    January 5, 2026

    I see the farmers are blockading the supermarket warehouses round here with tractors, little bit of civil disobedience which will quickly get problematic for the government if we cannot get food in the shops.
    I expect more of the same.
    Lets see how the government BS when there is no food in the shops.

    Reply
  27. Bernie
    January 5, 2026

    So where is that special trade deal we were promised with the US – looks like the only deal President Trump is making these days in with Venezuela and Greenland.

    Reply
  28. Steve
    January 5, 2026

    International law is gone / finished for if we don’t stand up and protest what we see happening then we deserve what we get –

    Reply
  29. Peter Gardner
    January 6, 2026

    Natasha Hausdorff’s advice is that when a Lefty says something breaches international law, challenge them to say which one. It will leave them floundering. Might be worth trying that on Starmer. You could follow up with when will he intervene in Nigeria and other African states to save the lives of Christians being butchered and slaughtered by Islamists, and when will he intervene to help Israel defend itself against slaughter by the Islamists of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houtis, Iran and others.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.