The significance today of the SCOTUS ruling later

In Britain, in the middle of the night before the Last Supper at the other end of the day, are the issues of age verification (or digital ID) rollout, Starmer's speech to "the nation" and that of other toothless "leaders", plus the appalling state of the NHS.

Across the pond are the Artemis rocket thing, approaching Easter, plus a most critical piece of condtitutional law before SCOTUS today, hours from now.  Some screenshots sum up the state of play:

Just looking at the last item above here ... Alito is staunch conservative, Thomas is too, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are the newbies and are "often" but not always conservative, meaning for the western nation first.

The problem is the leftist Barrett, while Epstein compromised Roberts will vote with the Demonrats.  The significance of the application to SCOTUS, causing Trump to actually be in the gallery yesterday, is that it snuffs out foreign freeloaders, just as with the Windrushers and boat people here.

The argument of the EO is those capitalised words above ... if the proposal is approved, 5/4 ... and it's down to Barrett now today, then flying in from Kenya or British Guiana in our case (Gina Miller) is not sufficient for citizenship ... the person must embrace the law of the land, uncompromised.

Meaning, a Chinese woman can't rock in, or a Moose Limb, have a child and then go back to Chinese or Moose Limb jurisdiction, whilst eligible to US benefits.

It's down to Barrett ... which way the raving leftist, appointed by Trump ... votes.  What we know is she hates Trump with full TDS. Will that win out ... or the good of the nation?

Is It The Same Tracking App That The Police Refuse To Use To Find Your Stolen Phone?

The father of massacred Nottingham student Barnaby Webber watched in horror on a tracking app as his son's phone moved - to a police station. David Webber had heard a man and woman had been killed but he could not reach Barnaby, and when he phoned police, they refused to speak to him. Panicking that something was wrong, Mr Webber told the public inquiry into the Nottingham attacks how dread set in as he and the 19-year-old's mother Emma followed his location on the Find My Phone app.

A handy little app, except when you expect it to help the police recover your stolen phone and here, it once again showed up their utter dereliction of the duty we, the public, fondly believe they have to us:

He said: 'I phoned the police, and said who I was, and I said who my son was, and I remember a distinct change in tone from the lady I was speaking to.'

That was a result of the penny dropping, and the realisation she couldn't get away with lying to you as her colleagues were assiduously doing to other bereaved families:

Mrs Webber told the inquiry: 'We're spending far too much time worrying about discrimination and segregation and doing the wrong thing because somebody's of a certain colour or certain religion. 

'If you're dangerous, you're dangerous, and it does not matter what colour you are or where you're from.' 

To a normal person, that's undoubtedly true. But it seems we no longer employ them in rhe modern police farce. We employ the easily moulded, or the frankly criminal: 

She also condemned police officers who accessed footage from the attacks and discussed it on WhatsApp. She said: 'Reading the content of that WhatsApp message, it was so destructive, so destroying, so awful. 'The author of that message chose to refer to our children as being "properly butchered" and "innards out" and everything. That's disgusting and grotesque.'

And to anyone who tries to excuse this as 'typical banter to cope with a stressful job' I'll remind you that they should have known this wasn't acceptable. 

Diversity is such a blessing

How representative is each screenshot of its scene? I'm not in London at M&S foodhall, nor in Bradford, nor wherever other shots are taken.

All right ... I'm in a fairly non-diverse, tough area where I live, where the thugs are still of our species, it's hubcap territory ... not healthy for diversity, plus I'm not in a town. But I do recall being in a cafe near Micklethwaite, a more aspiring middle-middle to upper-middle class area ... quite genteel inside that cafe, chatting away ... when suddenly a busload piled in and all were "diverse", every last one, plus their behaviour was as in the upper shot above.

Marks & Sparks foodhall ... goodness me!  I say nuffink more.  I'm looking straight at the Uniparty though ... LibLabConGreenReform ... and I do have things to say.

You Think You Despise Journalists...?

You don't despise them enough:

A hospital patient who managed to talk a man out of detonating a bomb in a maternity wing said the would-be attacker “asked for a cuddle” before standing down.

And the article concentrates on the bravery of the man who stopped the attacker…oh, no, my mistake, it does its best to humanise the man who tried to blow up a hospital ward because he had a grudge against the nurses:

Nathan Newby, who stopped an atrocity through an act of kindness, spoke publicly for the first time about his encounter with Mohammad Farooq before receiving the George Medal for bravery.

Farooq, a clinical support worker who took a viable pressure cooker bomb into St James’s hospital in Leeds intending to “kill as many nurses as possible” was jailed for at least 37 years last year. After asking for a cuddle, Farooq told Newby to “phone the police before I change my mind”.

Newby, 35, from Leeds, said he thought Farooq was “probably a nice guy” who was “going through bad things at the time”, and saw himself as someone who was “just in the right place at the right time”.

Typical British self-effacing response to honours, but why the excuses on behalf of utter barbarity? And why make the latter such a feature of the article? 

During his trial, Farooq was called “a self-radicalised lone wolf terrorist”, inspired by the so-called Islamic State group, but also chose the hospital as a target as he had been a clinical support worker there and had a long-running grievance with nurses on his ward.

He said Farooq seemed “normal”, adding: “I don’t judge anybody. Everybody’s different and unique in their own ways aren’t they? I didn’t judge him.”

The State did. Rightly so. Has the 'nudge unit' been at this chap like they tried with the victims of Valdo Calocane? 

Smart euthanasia

As we contemplate, on Palm Sunday, the next ratchetted move on the Reform politburo's part, supporters nicely duped by Nige's controllers:

... so also Dr David McGrogan, Associate Professor of Law at Northumbria Law School, writes at Lord Toby's site about smart meters and how they are planned to control the population during the increasingly chemtrail induced new cold climate, along with other gems such as bovaer halal beef and poisoned land and rivers:

I was thinking about this the other day when reading, as one tends to do over a nice lunch at the local Italian bistro with a pizza and a glass of red, a 2015 position paper on ‘Making the electricity system more flexible and delivering the benefits for consumers’. This was issued by Ofgem (the quango which regulates the energy market in the UK) at the start of the ongoing process to transform our energy market into one governed by “energy smart appliances”. 

These, for those who have been paying attention, are electric devices (your fridge, your washing machine, your EV charger, etc.) which are able to respond to ‘load control’ signals issued through the internet, and thereby reduce or delay energy consumption. Or, to put it more bluntly, appliances which can be controlled remotely so as to limit how much electricity households are able to use. Coming soon to a kitchen near you.

The last time I wrote about this issue in substance was in 2023, not long before the Energy Act 2023 was enacted. That statute created the legal framework within which the use of energy smart appliances could be mandated and regulated. We now find ourselves entering the next stage: gradual implementation. A draft set of regulations, the Energy Smart Appliances Regulations 2026, is currently making its way through Parliament. This, we are told, is the “first phase“.

And so it goes.  Better on the Continent, in far-eastern Europe, downunder or on the American continent?  In a few isolated countries, yes, e.g. Hungary or El Salvador, plus there are signs Europe itself is starting to awaken from its duped state. Some hope. 🍿🍿🍿

Some stats and lists

Sometimes it's necessary to note as many snippets as possible, rather than one long narrative, in order to get an overview.  For example:

Of Course You Did, Because Empty Gestures Are Your Raison d’etre ...

The BBC is 'celebrating' the smoking ban, because of course it is...

Kerr is back at the Calderwood Inn in East Kilbride - a place of special significance not just because it's where he met his wife. It was in this cosy South Lanarkshire pub on the morning of 26 March 2006 that he officially launched the smoking ban. 

"Sadly I had to drink an orange juice because the press were here," Kerr tells BBC Scotland News.

Because the press would be utterly astonished by an MP who drinks and folled by a glass of orange juice... 

Due diligence

Yes, I'm even questioning what "due diligence" involves. Yesterday, a post appeared on X by one JFK Jr who died in a plane crash in 1999. So ... obviously someone is using it as a pseudonym.  However, the information, if true, would be regarded as high grade.

Today, there's another up by "him" on Obama's soc-sec number.  Yes, an Assange type could access it but so could someone inside a letter agency.  In a similar way, a lady who seems to have been abused in an organised way in the 60s and 70s got her story out with the help of a Ted Gunderson, whom deep divers discovered was agency himself.

Throughout all these shenanigans, certain names, apart from corrupt pollies, started to come out.  One such name was Sid Gottlieb, a nasty piece of work, psychologist, who conducted experiments on humans, e.g. using LSD.  There was another called Jolyon West, another Ewen Cameron ... and so it went.

Cut to today and an item by names known as medical writers online:

https://www.reseaprojournals.com/journals/cardiovascular-research/archive/myocarditis-after-sars-cov-2-infection-and-covid-19-vaccination-epidemiology-outcomes-and-new-perspectives

https://x.com/P_McCulloughMD/status/2036782064955961616?s=20

What connection is there between PMcC and those back in the 60s/70s? None as far as I can glean ... until one looks at X's peculiar arrangement of quotes and comments. In short, he was quoting this company:

Why Don't People Want To Raise Their Own Children?

It was all going well. Charlotte, five, was chatting with an AI soft toy called Gabbo at a London play centre about her family, her drawing of a heart to represent them and what makes her happy. She even offered a couple of kisses to the £80 toy with a face like a computer screen. It was when she declared: “Gabbo, I love you”, that the fluent conversation came to an abrupt halt. “As a friendly reminder, please ensure interactions adhere to the guidelines provided,” said Gabbo, awkwardly crashing into its guardrails. “Let me know how you would like to proceed.”

All the warmth and compassion of a speak your weight machine, or indeed, our current Prime Minister. So, mums and dads, how about instead of letting Alexa-in-a-teddy raise your child, how about doing it the old fashioned way? 

The moment came during a University of Cambridge study into the growing number of AI-powered toys hitting shop shelves for early years children.

It's not all parents plonking their kiddy in front of a machine  - some outsource it to a third party to do it instead:

The developmental psychologists behind the study are calling for AI toys that “talk” with young children to be more tightly regulated “to ensure psychological safety by limiting toys’ ability to affirm friendship and other sensitive relational areas with young children”.“Because these toys can misread emotions or respond inappropriately, children may be left without comfort from the toy, and without emotional support from an adult, either,” said Dr Emily Goodacre, a developmental psychologist in the University of Cambridge’s faculty of education.

Whether you#re farming your kiddies out to 'early learning resources' or AI - enabled toys, I feel I must ask, as someone who has never wanted children, why did you even have them in the first place?
?

Consequences

First off ... in 1984/5, Yuri Bezmenov, Soviet defector, gave an interview on "demoralisation" of a society, the word used in a broad sense, from loss of moral compass to a feeling of helplessness down the track.

He said that producing such a result in a society was the result of long planning and it crosses generations, to the point that once the disease gets into families, schools, media, entertainment, the judiciary, medicine ... there's no coming back.

He added that people reach a point, esp. on the Left, where they can be presented with "authentic information" and those people are then unable to reason, to draw valid conclusions, to see that their behaviour has consequences.

Contrived, handed down non-reality, disguised as wisdom, or in other words ... narrative ... replaces real reasoning, mental health plummets and behaviour involves deep depression at core level, interspersed with lashing out.

One consequence for this girl below was set in motion long before the actual incident.  For a start, what on earth was she even doing on her own?  Part of the answer appears further down here.  She simply had not adjusted to new societal realities. Just as with Iryna on that subway train. No concept of danger whatever.  But much "independent, strong woman" about it ... cue disaster in 2025/6.

Or this: