This is who Palantir is and how it thinks. Pure EVIL.

She's a 94 year old Jewish human rights lawyer. She's been arrested under terrorism legislation for opposing genocide. The least we can do is to listen.

Why is the BBC news highlighting Netanyahu's praise for the passengers and crew of the Fly Dubai aeroplane when he should be in the Hague.

The bias of @BBCr4today is blatant Today they are obsessed with pushing the scrapping of the pension triple lock They are contemptuous of a suggestion for a wealth tax And they are SILENT on Ed Miliband declaring that the Palestine protestors are RIGHT After years of Today treating the protestors with contempt

The reason for the triple lock is that the state pension is the lowest in Europe. Lower than Romania. Lower than Albania. Lower than Macedonia.

LABOUR: un-freeze income tax thresholds at the upcoming budget - put more money back in to people's pockets. @BBCBreakfast

The front page of @ScotNational tomorrow is what every UK newspaper front page should look like. But, as throughout the entirety of the genocide, it stands alone with a moral backbone, not afraid to tell the truth about the horrors the rest of the press whitewash.

A double lie here from Ed Miliband: 1. He doesn't need to wait for the Supreme Court to rule on Palestine Action's proscription. The Burnham government could overturn the decision tomorrow if it so chose. 2. Miliband says no one's intent was to criminalise "grannies and vicars" for holding up signs. He's right. That's because the Starmer government imagined it could misuse terrorism laws to intimidate the respectable, white middle classes into silence on genocide. The plan was to leave "brown" people isolated and exposed to the full force of the law if they raised their voices in protest. The Labour government hoped to associate in the public's mind opposition to genocide with supposed Islamic extremism. It massively underestimated public revulsion at the genocide and the UK's complicity. Don't expect anyone in the establishment media, including Andrew Marr, to highlight either of these very obvious and salient points.

why the obsession with the triple lock Robert ? I will tell you. Because it deflects attention away from every sort of wealth tax on individuals & corporates, and the hiding of profit hence tax by various means. Do your job !!

Nick Clegg is now worth an estimated £100m and has joined the board of a data centre company with ambitions to become a $1trn hyperscaler. So propping up a Tory-led austerity coalition seems to have worked out quite well for the guy.

This speech conveniently ignores the fact that this Labour government - under Andy Burnham - is still selling arms to Israel, refuses to call what’s happening in Gaza a genocide, has announced sanctions that won’t make any meaningful difference, and is locking up pensioners for holding signs opposing genocide and authoritarianism. Stop gaslighting the British public, @EdMiliband.

I've always seen the House of Lords as a feudal anachronism. But appointing establishment worthies unelected lawmakers for life and then allowing corporations bidding for huge public contracts to hire them on telephone number salaries is obviously as bent as a nine-bob note.

I’ve just signed the petition on the council’s website asking the council not to renew its contract with Palantir. Pressure mounts on Coventry council amid 'significant concerns' over controversial contract coventrytelegraph.net/news/c…

Martin Wolf used his FT column this morning to demand that Labour increase taxes in this country. He did not do so to address the crisis of inequality that we face. He did not suggest this need arises because of the urgent necessity of redistributing to those in need. He said that raising taxes was essential because spending cannot be cut and “the [Chancellor] needs to create a fiscal path that credibly reduces the ratio of net public debt to GDP, so re-creating some of the room the country lost over two decades of crisis. This will mean a substantial fiscal tightening. The current fiscal rules are not enough.” As if to emphasise the point, Wolf concluded his article by saying, “Fiscal credibility is not a luxury. A government that does not deliver it is walking naked.” In presenting his case, Wolf also argues for increases in income taxes, by implication generally, and VAT, which is, of course, just about the most regressive tax of all. The message is, then, quite clear and comes in three parts. The first is that people must brace themselves to pay more tax. The second is that they must, despite this, expect nothing more from the government, even though they are already disenchanted with its failure to meet their obvious needs. Thirdly, all of this is supposed to be required so that the government can, to use a metaphor, put some money aside for a rainy day, whilst coincidentally keeping the City of London happy. It takes little decoding to work out the real message. It is that Wolf thinks that the bond markets rule. He thinks they must have their way. He believes that the price of them doing so must be borne by ordinary people, and by those who will be made unemployed as a consequence of the actions that he proposes. He thinks that the economy must be slowed, because that is the inevitable consequence of what he is recommending. He believes that the sacrifices that will result, whether from the failure to manage climate change, or to deliver the homes that people need, or to provide the training, healthcare and support that people will require if they are to join the current toxic neoliberal world of work, let alone meet the needs of an ageing population, must be made to support defence spending and the need for the government to accumulate reserves so that it might have the funds required in the event of crisis. The problem with Wolf’s argument is that we are in crisis. The world is already at war, led by the leading rogue states in the world, which are the USA and Israel. We are already paying the price of that. Austerity is already denying people the services they need. There is already rising political tension that threatens democracy, which is being exploited by the far right of politics, with which it increasingly seems that the City of London and the FT are aligned. If you wanted to promote fascism in the UK, Wolf’s plan is a blueprint to follow. And all of this rests on completely false economics. Wolf's foundational assumption is that the household analogy applies. The fact is that it does not. That analogy is. a myth, and a dangerous one. The government is not like a household. In fact, in almost every imaginable situation, it has to act in ways that are the opposite of any household. Despite his supposed intelligence, and the fact that he has written for the FT longer than most of its readers have been alive, Wolf does not know that. It is his belief that, like a household, the government must raise funds through taxation or borrowing before it can spend. That is not true. The government creates money when it spends. The capacity to pay tax and to save arises from the spending that the government creates, and the money that it puts into circulation. What is more, what he calls borrowing is no such thing. It is saving, and nothing more or less than that. It is already the money the country has put aside to deposit in a safe place in case the proverbial rainy day arrives. It is deposited in a place which the government provides. But Wolf does not understand that. And so he gets quite literally everything that he says wrong. In his world, the goal of government is to run a neat balance sheet. And the purpose of politics is to balance the government’s cash flow Whilst the interest group that the government is meant to serve is the City of London. None of those is true. Politics is about three things. It is about meeting the needs of people. It is about defending people from attack, including from those who would seek to threaten their well-being by forcing up petrol, diesel, gas, electricity and food prices. And it is about protecting people from those who would abuse them, and most especially those with power and finance who would exploit those without either. Wolf’s ideology does not facilitate the meeting of needs. It does not protect people from attack. And it serves the interests of those who abuse, and not those who are abused. In this life, we have to choose whose side we are on. Wolf has made his choice. He serves the forces of oppression. I am only interested in serving the forces of liberation for those who need to live with freedom from fear, which is the state to which far too many have been consigned by neoliberalism and its proponents. That is a decision we all have to make. And the need to do so is growing by the day.

Here we go again. And note how when the BBC (as they would), ask @JohnHealey_MP about scrapping the Triple Lock he refers to it as a ‘WELFARE’ cost’. But the state pension isn’t welfare. It isn’t a ‘benefit’. It’s ours by right provided we have made the requisite NICs down the years. That’s what we were always told. But they are clearly trying to move the goalposts. bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6jd…

Mark Zuckerberg is trying to fix the Brazilian election in 8 days. He has suspended the accounts of President Lula on Instagram and Facebook. These criminals need to be in jail.

WTAF is this from Palantir’s founder Peter Thiel?! “If you’re evil, you’re at least competent. And if you’re evil you’re not bad. And therefore you’re actually kind of good, because you’re at least getting something done.” THIS is who the government are selling our NHS data to!

UK Chancellor can increase income tax personal allowance by £3000 a yr. Basic rate taxpayers boosted by £600 a yr. Millions helped. Gains to higher rate taxpayers can be clawed back £30bn cost can be met by ending bank subsidies, £100bn in the last 3 yrs leftfootforward.org/2026/09/…

Portugal decriminalised drugs in 2001 and subsequently treated drug abuse as a public health issue. Between 1999 and 2016 deaths from overdose fell by 92%.

It's a good job Danny Tommo wasn't peacefully holding a placard while he was taking a Stanley knife to a dinghy, because he'd be facing terrorism charges then