He was quite superb in this . Whistle and I'll Come To You (1968) youtu.be/gtTzxP03Dfw?si=CcJf… via @YouTube

Wouldn’t be the first time he paid people off to lie! Do some research or is anything more than a paragraph too much for your pea sized brain?!

Iran Has Just Told Us How It Intends to Fight the West For years Britain has treated the Iranian threat as a collection of separate problems. An assassination plot here. An extremist charity there. Intimidation of an Iranian dissident somewhere else. A demonstration carrying the Ayatollah's portrait. Each incident is investigated and filed away. Put them together and a more troubling picture emerges. The IRGC has now supplied another piece. In an open letter to the American people (see link), it singled out "the scholars, the students, and the members of the media". The choice matters. Iran's most powerful military organisation has identified universities, student politics and journalism as audiences worth addressing directly inside the country it regards as its principal enemy. Nobody needs to pretend every student activist is an Iranian agent or every academic takes instructions from Tehran. That would be absurd. The more important question is why the IRGC believes these institutions provide fertile ground for its message. Its letter speaks in a vocabulary already familiar in Western political debate: distrust of government, hostility towards Israel, racial grievance, American decline and suspicion of Western power. Tehran doesn't need to teach the West a new language. It has learned to speak one already circulating here. Britain has seen the harder edge of the same strategy. MI5 has warned of more than 20 potentially lethal Iran-backed plots in recent years involving assassination, kidnapping and intimidation. Lord Walney's recent report describes a network of British charities with alleged links to Iranian state institutions and the IRGC, spreading Khomeinist ideology while some have benefited from Gift Aid. Iranian dissidents and journalists have been threatened on British soil. The Government designated the IRGC under new state-threat powers in July. Now consider RAF Fairford. Five British men were arrested after suspicious activity near the American airbase used during operations against Iran. On Wednesday, Burnham told the BBC there were "strong indications that Iran played a part in what happened over the weekend at RAF Fairford." The next day, a dual British-Iranian man was arrested in Westminster on suspicion of preparing terrorist acts, as part of the same investigation. Police are examining possible foreign-state involvement. No Iranian direction has been established and Tehran denies involvement. Those facts matter: suspicion must never be presented as proof, and the Prime Minister's words now sit inside that same unresolved picture. But they also sit inside a security picture that can no longer sensibly be examined incident by incident. Iran has spent decades developing methods that operate at different levels simultaneously. At one end lie covert plots, proxies and criminal intermediaries. Further along are religious and charitable organisations, political networks and influence operations. At the softer end comes propaganda directed at people who may have no connection with Iran whatsoever but whose existing beliefs can be harnessed to Tehran's advantage. This is where Western openness becomes both strength and vulnerability. A hostile state does not need thousands of agents when democratic societies provide universities, charities, demonstrations, social media and political movements through which ideas travel freely. It needs only to understand where the pressure points lie, cultivate useful relationships where possible, amplify existing grievances and exploit divisions already present. The IRGC's letter should therefore be read less for what it says about America than for what it reveals about Iran. Tehran has studied Western society closely. It knows which arguments resonate, which institutions shape opinion and which divisions can be widened. While Britain has spent years debating individual incidents, Iran has been thinking in networks. We should start doing the same. img9.irna.ir/d/r2/2026/09/29…

Tucker saying he wishes Hitler had won World War II was absolutely on my 2026 bingo card

Do you think Ed millibands an idiot?

BREAKING: It can now be revealed that a “freelance journalist” working for the ABC was actually a major Hamas terrorist. Roshdi Sarraj filed video for ABC 7.30. Sarah Ferguson signed off with condolences and called his death a “passing”. The ABC remembered him as a professional. The IDF now lists him as a military operative in Hamas’s armed terrorist wing. His brother Mahmoud, a Palestinian Press Agency reporter killed in a drone strike, is also on the same list. This is not one bad hire. The IDF has published a database of 170 Gazans presented to the world as journalists and media workers who it says served in the military wings of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups. 118 of them are confirmed Hamas terrorists.Another 50 are with Islamic Jihad. 17 took part in the October 7 massacre. Some held command roles. Some worked for Reuters, AP, AFP, CNN, the BBC and the ABC. The press card was the uniform. Australia’s public broadcaster employed him, aired his footage, then eulogised him. AIJAC’s Colin Rubenstein called it exactly what it is: “more proof ABC Gaza coverage dumped impartiality, then spent months breathlessly mourning so called journalists who were legitimate military targets” The Antisemitism Royal Commission is already examining the ABC’s role in the rise of Jew hatred here. Gavin Fang has already admitted the UN “babies starving” line was a bad mistake. This is worse. Your taxes paid for the tribute. Hamas got the martyr poster. Australians got the sermon. Defund the propaganda. Name every terrorist the ABC called a “journalist”

I’m not surprised that American legacy media has completely ignored the IDF’s exposé of 170 Gazan "journalists" who were actually operatives in the military wings of terrorist organizations. But it's still worth shaming them. These outlets treat the smallest, least consequential details of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as front-page news when the story makes Israel look bad. A trailer goes up in a settlement. Israelis and Palestinians scuffle somewhere. A Knesset member says something foolish. Yet a release like the one the IDF published yesterday — one that should force a serious rethink of how the war in Gaza, and the death toll of “journalists,” has been understood — is passed over entirely. Every time I start to think that getting news from social media has been a disaster for civilization, the mainstream press steps in to remind us how profoundly terrible it is, and that it doesn't deserve even one second of our time.

Highly interconnected, but not a certainty. Why not on this occasion?

Thinking out loud! 💭 I don’t understand this mentality. If you already accept that Hamas is a terrorist group, how do you expect Palestinians to regain agency and eventually have their own state while Hamas remains in control? It just doesn’t follow logically. Or is the assumption that granting Palestinian statehood somehow makes Hamas disappear and suddenly say, “Okay, we’ll put down our weapons now”? 🤨 Fairy tales don’t exist in geopolitics. 🤦🏻

Thank you for your unsolicited advice.

I'm saying it wasn't done. retard