When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear. - Thomas Sowell
Joined April 2016
- Tweets13.8K
- Following210
- Followers374
- Likes15.1K
Rational Alien retweeted
British Politician Fires Back at Mehdi Hasan: “If Islam Is So Peaceful, Why Does Saudi Arabia Execute People for Apostasy?”
Speaker: My side of the argument is regularly told that we are demonising Islam and whipping up fear of Islam.
But let me tell you what actually whips up fears of Islam.
9/11. The London bombings. Madrid. Mumbai. Bali. Death for apostasy. Death for blasphemy. Death for adultery. Death for homosexuality. Gender discrimination. Child marriage. Beheadings. Imprisonment for being raped.
The murder of Theo van Gogh. Death threats. Sharia patrols. Polygamous marriages.
This is what causes fear of Islam. It is not me.
We'll be told this is just the extreme fringe of Islam.
Well, look at Saudi Arabia the birthplace of Islam and custodian of its holy sites.
People are executed for blasphemy and apostasy.
But apparently, that's the extreme fringe?
Calling Saudi Arabia the extreme fringe of Islam is like calling the Vatican the extreme fringe of Catholicism. Sorry, it just doesn't work.
Then we're told violent Muslims have misunderstood Islam.
Saudi Arabia has misunderstood. Iran has misunderstood. Yemen has misunderstood.
Has there ever been a more spectacularly misunderstood religion than Islam?
I'm constantly told that I need to respect Islam. But I'm under no greater obligation to respect Islam than any other belief.
I am under no obligation to make compromises with an ideology I simply don't see as peaceful.
Why don't I see it as peaceful? Because of the evidence.
If I look around the world and see the countries where Islam calls the shots, all I see is brutality and violence imposed by the state.
Rational Alien retweeted
We used to value the sharing of ideas, and the challenging of them. We used to talk about being able to disagree with what people said while defending to the death their right to say it. We used to consider ourselves a largely secular society with a robust ability to criticise religion and even the religious.
We used to understand that the people seeking to control speech, beyond basic limits like incitement to violence, were the villains
Now we live in a society where the police will interrogate the intentions behind what you say (essentially interrogating your thinking) and they will use the law to try and control you if someone’s feelings are hurt.
Their FEELINGS. As if there aren’t people online whose feelings are hurt by literally everything
The response to the police contacting Kellie-Jay for this tweet, from some who ought to know better, is to say that she has been pushing the limits, or saying too many controversial things anyway. As if that justifies this kind of police overreach.
As though it isn’t terrifying that the police can do this to a citizen for a TWEET and an OPINION.
Are you so unintelligent that you need the police to arrest your ideological opponents instead of you robustly challenging them?
Do you really believe opinions you don’t like should be criminal offences?
And why are we all allowing the police such power to involve themselves when even they agree there is no definite crime?
I guarantee a tweet that began “we have Christian fatigue” wouldn’t have resulted in the law getting involved.
And that would have been correct.
Just as if someone wrote “we have English fatigue” I wouldn’t be feverishly dialling 999 to report my heart was saddened
We have Muslim fatigue.
The gang rapes.
The terrorism.
The killing of little girls who enjoy music.
The hatred of women and girls.
The special courts.
The anti semitism.
The hate preachers.
The marches.
The violence.
The call to prayer.
The public prayers.
The complaining about christian preachers.
The pauses in football games for skipping lunch.
The nicabs.
The school kids visiting mosques.
The ramadan lights.
The ramadan messages on TV and by public figures. The cruel slaughter.
The hatred of the West.
The hatred of women.
The barbarism.
The inbreeding.
The censorship.
The two tier justice.
The capture of our institutions.
We're tired of it.
Islam is a vile woman hating cousin marrying child rape appeasing death cult.
Rational Alien retweeted
I wrote a new piece about women’s rights and whether or not I want trans people dead. (Spoiler: I don’t)👇
jkrowling.com/opinions/an-up…
Rational Alien retweeted
CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS 12 WERE BEING GANG RAPED AND SOLD BY PAKISTANI MEN IN OLDHAM. GIRLS OF 13 AND 14, KNOWN TO THE POLICE, WERE BEING DRAGGED OFF THE STREET INTO THE TOWN'S SHISHA BARS WHERE ROOMS WERE RENTED OUT BY THE HOUR. THE POLICE AND THE COUNCIL KNEW WHAT THOSE PREMISES WERE.
Instead of closing down a network of child rape dens and rescuing these children, the 2011 police strategy for tackling Oldham's Pakistani rape gangs listed managing the force's reputation and the far right among its priorities.
The specialist team set up to protect these girls was kept out of the operations against the shisha bars. Police intelligence placing exploited children inside those premises was not passed to the officers responsible for them.
In 2014 the leader of Oldham Council wrote on his blog that the abuse of children in the town was predominantly Pakistani men targeting white girls. He knew, and he was prepared to say it on his blog read by a handful of people. He never stood up in Oldham's council chamber and confronted what was being done to those children.
Anyone surprised why the rapes carried on regardless?
RIVENDELL HOUSE WAS A CHILD BROTHEL BUILT BY OLDHAM COUNCIL
In 2007 Oldham Council took the girls most at risk from these men and put them together under one roof, in a six-bed home called Rivendell House. The council's own staff admitted its location was not ideal. Burnham's reviewers accepted that housing girls already being exploited in the same building could draw the abusers to it.
A former care worker reported that in 2010 Pakistani men drove round and round the home waiting for the girls to come out, and that staff were not allowed to stop them leaving. The worker passed this to the police and the safeguarding board. Nothing was done.
The state gathered sexually exploited children in one building. The men knew where to find them. What Oldham Council built was a child brothel, staffed and paid for by the taxpayer. When the care worker went public in 2014, the council hired a consultant to investigate the allegations. Burnham's reviewers relied on the consultant's report and the word of the staff who had been accused of complicity. It dismissed the whistleblower.
THEY LIED TO THE BBC ABOUT THE SHISHA BARS
In 2013 a chief inspector warned that the risks in the shisha bars were massive. When his email reached the BBC, the reaction at the top of the council and the police was alarm at how much the journalist knew. They told the BBC there were just two pieces of intelligence.
This was a lie.
Their own officers had filed several intelligence reports in 2011 and 2012 tying exploited girls to those premises. The police held intelligence naming the children and the places they were being taken. They kept it from the specialist officers whose job was to protect them.
Senior police officers, senior council officers and the politicians agreed among themselves that the danger to these children was being exaggerated and would be used by the far right. Some admitted the council was also worried about scaring off investment in the town.
Children were being raped in those buildings while the people responsible for them discussed the town's reputation.
The journalist, whose father was a senior figure in the Labour Party, then participated in the cover up.
ANDY BURNHAM'S REVIEW WAS BUILT TO CLEAR OLDHAM COUNCIL AND THE POLICE
In 2019, as a direct result of the work of former councillor Warren Bates working alongside Raja Miah and the first of the rabble, the council leader asked Andy Burnham for a review.
We published what we had. The shisha bars, the children's homes and the taxis were our allegations, and Burnham's review was built around them. Its authors admit they began by reading our evidence.
When they asked to interview me, I agreed on one condition. That my testimony be given in Oldham's council chamber and streamed live to the public. They refused, because they would only hear it in private where they would take selective notes.
Five years later, they published a report that filed everything we had exposed under allegations made on social media, and told Oldham there was no cover-up. Burnham put his name to it and told the people of Oldham there had been no cover-up.
At the time we called Burnham's Assurance Review a cover up. In 2025, under immense pressure, even Andy Burnham was forced to admit to his review's failings.
THE COVER-UP MUST BE INVESTIGATED UNDER OATH
The national inquiry must examine Oldham with its full statutory powers, and it must not be confined to the boundaries Burnham's review accepted. It must cover the schools, the youth clubs, the children's homes and every year the gangs were operating.
Greater Manchester Police must hand over every record it kept from Burnham's reviewers. Oldham Council must release every document it redacted. Andy Burnham, the former council leaders and the senior officers who handled the shisha bar intelligence must be called to give evidence under oath.
The girls of Rivendell House, the girls in the shisha bars and the girls dragged in to cars outside school gates were failed by every institution that should have protected them. Then they were told by a review that could not see the evidence that nobody covered anything up. They are owed the truth, and only a statutory inquiry has the power to get it.
THE PRIME MINISTER ANDY BURNHAM MUST BE SUMMONED BEFORE THE NATIONAL INQUIRY. ANYTHING LESS THAN THIS JUST CONTINUES THE COVER UP.
_________
Unfortunately, we are reaching the end of the road where I can continue working this way.
The paid subscriptions have stalled. Worse, tens of thousands of people are now reading these articles without even joining the free mailing list. The audience is growing, but the number of people actually standing behind the work is not growing with it.
This is becoming impossible to sustain.
You know what we are up against. The mainstream media will not touch my work. Institutions I investigate do not volunteer their records. Politicians do not suddenly decide to hold themselves to account.
And yet, despite all of that, we forced the national inquiry. We did that because enough ordinary people refused to go away.
But getting the inquiry was never the end of this campaign. In many ways it was only the beginning. Now we have to watch where it goes, what it investigates, which places it avoids, which witnesses it calls, which records it obtains and whether the same institutions that failed these children are allowed to control the story again.
Nobody else is going to do that work for us. And I cannot do it indefinitely working on my own. That is why I keep talking about 50,000 committed subscribers.
It is not a vanity number. I did not pluck it out of the air. With fifty thousand people with me means when we uncover something important, it does not depend on a newspaper editor, a television producer or an algorithm deciding whether you are allowed to see it.
It gives us reach they cannot easily shut down.
But there is another reason. I need to build a proper backroom operation around this work. At the moment I am investigating, researching, writing, publishing, producing the videos, running the newsletter, dealing with the technology and then starting again. It is unsustainable.
I need people behind me who can take care of the technical and production work so that I can spend my time doing the thing I do best. That is why we have been pushing so hard for new paid subscribers.
🔴 SIGN UP HERE
👉 redwallandtherabble.co.uk
If you read my work and want it to continue, I need your help. Sign up for free. There are no paywalls to access any of my work. If you can afford the £3 a month or £30 for the year, please become a paid subscriber.
We forced the inquiry. Now we need the numbers to make sure they cannot control what happens next.
Raja Miah MBE
Rational Alien retweeted
It’s so odd, isn’t it? Watching footage of a drag artist wandering around the BBC Look North office, going from desk to desk, gently scolding members of staff in a performance that doesn’t strike me as particularly funny, I couldn’t help wondering why this sort of thing is considered perfectly acceptable.
Imagine someone dressing up as a crude caricature of a Chinese person and going around making racially stereotypical jokes. There would quite rightly be outrage. Blackface would be utterly unthinkable, and you’d probably be on rocky ground even putting on a kilt and pretending to be a drunken Scotsman.
Yet dressing up as an exaggerated, often grotesque caricature of a woman is apparently not just acceptable but something to be celebrated.
It genuinely feels as though women are the last group it’s still permissible to mock and degrade. And while misogyny is hardly confined to one side of the political spectrum, what I find particularly astonishing is that this sort of thing is enthusiastically embraced by the supposedly progressive left.
Women are being attacked from both sides. On the one hand, there’s the familiar misogyny of right-wing incel lunatics. On the other, there’s a progressive movement that celebrates exaggerated stereotypes of femininity as portrayed by men while simultaneously treating the biological reality of being an actual woman as though it’s some sort of mutable, contested concept.
And here we have the BBC, an organisation that prides itself on its supposedly enlightened values, apparently happy to indulge in precisely this sort of thing.
I sometimes feel as though I’m trapped in a fever dream. How on earth did the modern left, which once regarded itself as the champion of women’s rights, become so spectacularly regressive?
Rational Alien retweeted
Millions of Afghan girls are denied an education while American universities debate “Islamic feminism.” The contrast couldn't be starker.
More than 2.4 million Afghan girls are shut out of school by religious decree, while American universities teach "Islamic feminism" as coursework.
@Ayaan asks: where is the department of Islamic feminism in Kabul?
URL: ayaan.restoringthewest.com/i…
#RestoringTheWest #Feminism #Academia
Rational Alien retweeted
Three years later, why are we still afraid to call October 7 what is was?
Why have we become so afraid to call evil what it is?
The deliberate murder, rape and torture of innocent civilians should not become morally complicated simply because acknowledging it makes people uncomfortable.
You can debate politics. You can debate history. You can debate what should happen next.
But there should be no debate about whether deliberately targeting innocent human beings is wrong.
We should never be afraid to condemn terrorism.
Watch my full conversation with @TudorDixon at the link in the comments!
Rational Alien retweeted
Green anti-Zionists have realised an ambition long-harboured by the far left: the establishment of an Islamist-leftist political party. Whatever the eventual fate of the Green Party, be in no doubt: Islamist-leftism is here to stay.
Me in the @spectator.
spectator.com/article/the-le…
Rational Alien retweeted
Worth watching: "It is not a genocide; it is a counterattack in a war."
This should be pushed far and wide. Watched in every college class in the U.S. Thank you @billmaher The moral confusion is gross. "It is not a genocide, it is a counterattack in a war...Gaza equals genocide is a lie, an easily provable lie (as I have argued from first hand observations in Gaza). The fact that so many democrats go along with it is to me the party's worse moment since they undid reconstruction after the civil war...words have meaning...genocide, kill or try to kill an entire people, you can't just change the definition of genocide to mean counterattack in a war where people including civilians die, that's every war..."
Rational Alien retweeted
This is not the 19-year-old girl who was buried to her neck and stoned to death in Afghanistan
This photo is of Zarmina, a victim of the Taliban that is burned into the memory of all of us old enough to have lived through that moment. Zarmina was the mother of seven, and her husband savagely beat her and their two eldest two daughters nightly. They finally reached their breaking point and killed him.
The Taliban tortured and beat Zarmina for 3 years in prison. And then, on November 16, 1999, the Taliban made her kneel on the penalty spot in Kabul’s Olympic Stadium and one of her husband’s relatives shot her through the head in front of 30,000 people. Brave activists from The Revolutionary Association of Women of Afghanistan, smuggled a harrowing video clip out of the country.
And as for Zarmina’s children? Under Islamic law, the 16 and 14-year-old daughters were given to the husband’s brother. He sold them into sex slavery to a man in Khost, then a Taliban stronghold. The haggling over the price for the girls is what had delayed their mother’s execution.
Zarmina’s corpse lay unclaimed for 20 days in the morgue. Her own mother was afraid to collect her daughter’s body. Zarmina eventually was buried in an unmarked grave north of Kabul.
That barbaric Taliban lost power after 9/11. We hoped they were relegated to the dust bin of notorious history. But after America left the country in 2021, a new generation Taliban returned and began enforcing again their medieval version of Islamic fundamentalism. Girls banned from school. Women banned from work, parks, even raising their voices. Men in charge no matter what they do to women.
Sharia law under the Taliban is a poisonous ideology that has nothing but contempt for women. And in 2026, we get the silence as we did in 1999 from the people who never stop lecturing the rest of us about “women’s rights.”
Rational Alien retweeted
If you’re going to migrate to a country that is proudly a melting pot, you have to want to melt.
Rational Alien retweeted
A woman was hanged in Iran yesterday who had endured repeated physical and sexual abuse by her husband who also allowed his ‘associates/friends’ to assault her.
To put this in context, Ruth Ellis was the last woman executed in the UK in 1955. She was granted a posthumous pardon by King Charles III in July 2026.
Her death sentence now acknowledges the profound historic injustice of her hanging and recognizing the severe domestic abuse she suffered.
Executed at age 28 after a 20-minute jury verdict, Ellis's original trial did not account for the impact of prolonged intimate partner violence and abuse on her mental state. Her case became a major catalyst in the eventual abolition of capital punishment in the UK.
Not a such consideration by the barbaric Islamic regime in Iran ⬇️
Islamic Republic in Iran hangs 24-Year-old woman who defended herself from sexual assault
Yesterday the regime executed Marziyeh Neyri yesterday, a young woman who was forced into marriage at age 17 and hanged for fighting back against her attacker.
Marziyeh was 18 years old when her husband's associate attempted to sexually assault her in her own home, in front of her husband. She grabbed a kitchen knife to defend herself. Her husband died in the struggle.
She told the court she had been repeatedly assaulted by her husband's associates before that day. Iran's courts didn't care.
The regime rejected her self-defense claim. Her attacker, who survived, took the stand and called her a murderer. The court believed him over her.
She was sentenced to death.
No clemency. No mercy. The sentence was carried out at Chubindar Prison in Qazvin.
Marziyeh Neyri never had a chance. Forced into marriage as a child under Iran's Islamic laws, she spent the few years of her adult life in a courtroom, fighting for her life after defending it.
She lost.
This is the Sharia Laws in Islamic Republic of Iran where a woman can be hanged for surviving.
💔
Rational Alien retweeted
Islamic Republic in Iran hangs 24-Year-old woman who defended herself from sexual assault
Yesterday the regime executed Marziyeh Neyri yesterday, a young woman who was forced into marriage at age 17 and hanged for fighting back against her attacker.
Marziyeh was 18 years old when her husband's associate attempted to sexually assault her in her own home, in front of her husband. She grabbed a kitchen knife to defend herself. Her husband died in the struggle.
She told the court she had been repeatedly assaulted by her husband's associates before that day. Iran's courts didn't care.
The regime rejected her self-defense claim. Her attacker, who survived, took the stand and called her a murderer. The court believed him over her.
She was sentenced to death.
No clemency. No mercy. The sentence was carried out at Chubindar Prison in Qazvin.
Marziyeh Neyri never had a chance. Forced into marriage as a child under Iran's Islamic laws, she spent the few years of her adult life in a courtroom, fighting for her life after defending it.
She lost.
This is the Sharia Laws in Islamic Republic of Iran where a woman can be hanged for surviving.
💔
Rational Alien retweeted
To those who say "it's her choice" I used to say the same thing about my own Hijab.
I was covered head to toe. Even on the beach. Even with my male relatives. And when people challenged me, I said: this is my choice. You know why? Because the other option was burning in hell, hung by my hair for eternity. That's what they taught me since childhood.
Yes, let me repeat it for you to just understand about our version of “freedom of choice.” I grew up in an Islamist culture that gave me two options. Cover yourself and go to heaven. Or don't cover, and be hanged by your hair and burned in hell.
Like when someone puts a gun to your head and says "you can go left or right", technically, yes, that's a choice.
I picked heaven. I called it freedom. And I believed it, because that's what happens when fear is all you've ever known.
And if you think I shouldn't be telling you my story, I don't care. I really, genuinely, from the bottom of my heart, don't care. The women still living under that "choice"? I care about them.
#LetUsTalk
Rational Alien retweeted
'These attacks don’t happen because of an impossible-to-define misanthropy, they happen because their perpetrators believe we should live in a caliphate and it is their duty to bring this about using violence'.
@Madz_Grant for The @spectator
spectator.com/article/its-th…
Rational Alien retweeted
This speech is precisely what 90 million Iranians have been screaming into the void about for the last 47 years. Post what ever you like about ‘western imperialism’, Trump, Israel, Netanyahu - and by all means advocate for the Palestinian people - but if the Islamic Republic of Iran is your hero then you have negated all human rights advocacy you claim to stand for. If the regime is “beautiful resistance” because you think they are “standing up for Palestine” - which most have now worked out is a political tool to keep them in power and keep them supported by idiots in the west - then you have unequivocally shown that you have the intellectual capacity of a gnat.
Rational Alien retweeted
Andy Burnham just promised to 'govern for all' outside Number 10. Here's what he didn't mention...
Andy Burnham is Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Read that sentence again. Let it settle in your bones. The man who covered up the industrial-scale rape of 250,000 British children. The man who left a hospital where 1,200 people died without a public inquiry. The man who wasted £100 million of your money on abandoned schemes. The man who wants 10,000 more asylum seekers from Sudan and Eritrea. The man who put terrorist-sympathising smear merchants in charge of Number 10.
This is not politics. This is the capture of a nation by a machine of betrayal. This is the complete file on how Andrew Murray Burnham failed his way to the top.
PART I: THE NHS BODY COUNT
Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust. Between 2005 and 2009, between 400 and 1,200 people died unnecessarily. Patients drank water from flower vases. They were left in soiled sheets. They died of thirst and neglect in a British hospital.
Andy Burnham became Health Secretary in June 2009. The families of the dead had one demand: a statutory public inquiry with full legal powers to compel witnesses and evidence. Burnham received 81 requests for this inquiry. He refused all 81. Instead, he appointed a limited independent inquiry chaired by Robert Francis QC. Held in private. Without the power to force testimony. Without the power to demand documents.
This was not incompetence. This was strategy. A limited inquiry admits failure without exposing the full rot. Burnham could express regret without revealing responsibility. He could promise change without delivering justice.
The families called it what it was: a cover-up. Julie Bailey, whose mother died at Stafford, called Burnham "grossly unsuitable" for leadership. The inquiry he refused could have saved lives. He chose his career over their children.
But Mid Staffordshire was not the only body count on his watch.
Morecambe Bay NHS Trust. Mothers and babies died. The Care Quality Commission, the regulator, found catastrophic failures. Then something strange happened. Baroness Young, chair of the CQC, gave evidence that pressure to "tone down" criticism "peaked under" Burnham's tenure as Health Secretary. Professor Sir Brian Jarman accused Labour ministers of "suppressing" work exposing problems. He called the Department of Health "a denial machine."
The pattern repeats. The regulator pressured. The criticism suppressed. The bodies buried. The minister promoted.
Then Hinchingbrooke Hospital. The first fully privatised NHS hospital in Britain. The process began under Burnham's watch in March 2010. The shortlist drawn up on the eve of the election. The contract signed by the Coalition in 2011. The hospital returned to the NHS in 2015 after Circle Health pulled out. Burnham now attacks Conservative NHS privatisation. He started the process himself.
This is the Burnham Method. Adopt the popular position. Act contrary in power. Express regret when safe.
PART II: THE PROPERTY CORRUPTION
The Greater Manchester Housing Investment Fund. £983 million of public money. The largest housing fund in the country. The promise: affordable homes for Mancunians. The reality: a feeding trough for developers.
Burnham's administration directed over £600 million to a single developer. Renaker. One company. Sixty percent of the entire fund. The £140 million loans were approved despite "inconsistent" viability reports. The Greater Manchester Combined Authority failed to obtain asset and liability statements from the developer. A report into these failures was suppressed for 13 months. The duty of candour was ignored.
Aubrey Weis, a wealthy landowner, challenged these loans in court. The Competition Appeal Tribunal ruled for the GMCA in 2025. The Court of Appeal heard the case in June 2026. Days before the Makerfield by-election that would make Burnham Prime Minister. The timing was not accidental. The corruption was not theoretical.
Then the donations. The 2026 campaign. £1,400 from Citybranch, a property developer. Burnham claims he never met the donor. The man who controlled £983 million in housing funds cannot remember meeting a property developer who gave him money.
The revolving door spins faster. James Purnell, Burnham's chief of staff in Number 10, was CEO of Flint Global. A lobbying firm. Clients include Huawei, Apple, BP, Amazon, Uber, Glencore. The man who advises the Prime Minister on policy spent years selling access to the same corporations. Transparency campaigners warned of conflicts of interest. Burnham appointed him anyway.
This is how it works. Public money flows to developers. Developers donate to campaigns. Campaigns win elections. Lobbyists write policy. The circle closes. You pay for it all.
PART III: THE RAPE COVER-UP
Operation Augusta. Manchester, 2003 to 2005. Police identified up to 100 men collecting girls from care homes like takeaway orders. At least 57 children in Manchester social services care, some as young as 12, were being gang-raped, trafficked, and tortured. Police had names. Police had addresses. Police had evidence.
The operation was shut down in 2005. Not because the danger passed. Not because the men stopped. Shut down because senior officers and Labour councillors were more afraid of "inflaming community tensions" than of protecting raped children. The perpetrators were predominantly Pakistani heritage Muslim men. The victims were white British girls. The decision was political. The children were abandoned.
Andy Burnham became Mayor of Greater Manchester in 2017. He commissioned independent reviews into historic child sexual exploitation in Manchester, Oldham, and Rochdale. The reviews confirmed widespread organised abuse. The reviews confirmed institutional failure. The reviews delivered no justice.
In 2024, the reviewers Malcolm Newsom and Gary Ridgway resigned. They alleged that authorities were "lawyering up" and obstructing the investigation. The duty of candour was missing. The cover-up continued.
Maggie Oliver knows the truth. She was the detective who blew the whistle on the Rochdale scandal. She worked with Burnham's reviews. She called the Oldham review "nothing less than a cover-up." She accused Burnham of failing to "grasp the nettle" on current failures. She saw the pattern: admit past failures to protect the present.
The numbers are staggering. The Rupert Lowe Rape Gang Inquiry Report, published June 2026, crowdfunded by 20,000 people, documented 250,000 young white British girls abused since the 1950s across 149 local authorities. The methods were torture. Girls as young as 11 collected from schools. Drugged with alcohol. Passed between men like currency. Taken to "red rooms" for daily gang rape. Trafficked to Pakistan. Forced to convert to Islam and marry rapists to legitimise pregnancies. Called "white trash" and "kuffar" by their abusers. The rape was racial. The rape was religious. The rape was targeted.
The institutional collapse was total. Police called victims "prostitutes." Social services placed children in trafficking hubs. NHS recorded genital injuries in children then discharged them without safeguarding. Schools excluded victims instead of protecting them. Taxi licensing renewed permits for drivers who transported children to rape houses.
Burnham's response? He called critics "desperate." He dismissed Reform UK's allegations as "smears." He stood by his record. His record is 250,000 victims and no justice.
Then there is Bev Craig. Executive Member for Adult Social Care in Manchester from 2017 to 2021. While Burnham commissioned his reviews, Craig oversaw the same adult social services that the Lowe Report says undermined parents, placed children in trafficking hubs, closed cases despite clear exploitation indicators, called victims "prostitutes," offered contraception instead of protection. She knew where the bodies were buried because she helped bury them.
In December 2021, council leader Richard Leese stepped down after 25 years covering the Operation Augusta period. His chosen successor? Bev Craig. The woman who oversaw the failures became the leader. Then Burnham's Deputy Mayor for Economy. Then the Labour candidate for Greater Manchester Mayor in July 2026. The coronation complete. Burnham to Prime Minister. Craig to Mayor. The rape gang inquiry investigating their city while they seize national power.
PART IV: THE OPEN BORDERS BETRAYAL
"Open Borders Andy." "Open Borders Burnham." The Reform UK nickname that sticks because the record supports it.
The double game is simple. Tough talk for election cameras. Soft reality for policy. In 2024 and 2025, Burnham made sceptical noises about mass migration. He supported some of Shabana Mahmood's reforms. He talked about ending hotel accommodation. The Critic saw through it immediately: "Suspect on immigration." "Embraces state multiculturalism." The nickname fits the record better than the messaging.
The record is clear. Burnham opposed longer waits for permanent settlement. He backed attacks on Indefinite Leave to Remain reforms. He supported ending "no recourse to public funds" restrictions. He wants asylum seekers working while claims are processed. This creates a magnetic pull factor for illegal entry. Why risk the Channel when you can work legally while waiting?
Then the bombshell. Reform UK's Zia Yusuf revealed Burnham's plans. Direct relocation of more than 10,000 additional asylum seekers from overseas. Specifically high-arrival nationalities like Sudan and Eritrea. Reversal of delays on permanent status for the post-2021 "Boriswave" cohort. Potentially granting benefits and family sponsorship rights to hundreds of thousands at catastrophic fiscal cost.
The Greater Manchester Combined Authority under Burnham spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on schemes helping migrants, including refugees, access housing, benefits, and services. Your taxes. Their priority. While British citizens sleep rough. While veterans wait for housing. While your grandmother waits for a hip replacement.
Nigel Farage has publicly blamed Burnham for the North West receiving a disproportionate share of asylum seekers. The "Open Borders Burnham" label is not rhetoric. It is description. The North West has cheaper housing costs. Long-standing Home Office policy places asylum seekers where rent is low. Burnham did not create the policy. But he did not fight it. He welcomed it. He built his "progressive" brand on it.
As Prime Minister, Burnham avoided immigration entirely in early speeches. He listens only to "insane open borders backbench MPs." Same soft policies. New face. Worse crisis. The borders remain open. The boats keep coming. The bill keeps rising. And Burnham is in Downing Street.
PART V: THE ISLAMIST SOFTNESS
Prevent. The UK's primary counter-terrorism safeguarding tool. The system that identifies vulnerable individuals at risk of radicalisation. The shield against Islamist terrorism.
In 2016, as Shadow Home Secretary, Andy Burnham called Prevent "toxic." He compared the reporting duty to internment in Northern Ireland. He said it made Muslims feel spied upon and unfairly targeted. He argued it risked creating the conditions for extremism to flourish. He wanted it scrapped or overhauled. This is not criticism. This is dismantling the main tool against Islamist radicalisation.
Then MEND. Muslim Engagement and Development. A group later named by Communities Secretary Michael Gove as having an "Islamist orientation." MEND hosted speakers supporting physical punishment for Jews, gay people, and minority sects. The Labour Party cut ties with MEND. Burnham did not. He endorsed MEND campaigns. He spoke at MEND fringe events. He platformed the group while it spread extremism.
Then CAGE. The organisation that praised "Jihadi John." The group that defended individuals linked to extremism. In 2021, Burnham co-hosted an interfaith iftar with the Ramadan Tent Project. Keir Starmer had withdrawn from the same event due to the group's CEO backing CAGE. Burnham stayed. Burnham hosted. The Muslim vote matters more than counter-terrorism concerns.
The Manchester Arena bombing. 22 May 2017. Salman Abedi. Islamist terrorist. 22 dead. 1,017 injured. The worst terrorist attack in Britain since 7/7. Burnham's response? Community cohesion. Avoid "Islamophobia." Prioritise relations. Do not confront. Do not name. The "Islamist-appeasing" accusations stick because the pattern is clear: the Muslim vote over border control, community relations over confronting political Islam, cohesion over courage.
The grooming gangs connect here too. The 250,000 victims. The predominantly Pakistani heritage perpetrators. The honour/shame clan codes. The targeting of white British girls as "kuffar." Burnham commissioned weak reviews. He avoided statutory public inquiries. The Muslim voting blocs of Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale mattered more than raped children. The pattern repeats. The community protected. The victims abandoned.
PART VI: THE STATE CAPTURE
July 2026. Andy Burnham becomes Prime Minister. His first appointments reveal everything.
Alison Phillips. Board member of Hope Not Hate Limited. The private company arm of Hope Not Hate. The same Hope Not Hate that faced Charity Commission investigations for political activity. The same Hope Not Hate that employed Liron Velleman, convicted of attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child. Phillips made Director of Transition in Burnham's Number 10. Her job: avoid the "early mistakes that befell Starmer."
Matthew McGregor. Former Director of Campaigns and Communications at Hope Not Hate. Made Director of Political Strategy in Burnham's Number 10. The man who ran smear campaigns now controls government political strategy.
Think about what this means. A man who ran Hope Not Hate's operations now controls the Prime Minister's political strategy. A woman who sat on Hope Not Hate's board while they faced regulatory investigations now controls the Prime Minister's transition. Anna Turley, former Hope Not Hate director, is already Labour Party Chair.
Hope Not Hate is not a charity. It is the continuation of Searchlight, a communist militant operation founded in 1964. It uses charitable status to launder taxpayer money into political warfare. It employs convicted child sex offenders. It uses blackmail, deception, and alleged drug supply to manufacture sources. It collaborates with the BBC to target political enemies. It spreads misinformation during civil unrest.
And now its operatives run the British government.
PART VII: THE METHOD
The Burnham Method is consistent across every scandal. Five steps. Recognisable. Repeatable.
Step One: Adopt the popular position. NHS defender. Civil liberties champion. Hillsborough campaigner. The man of the people.
Step Two: Act contrary when in power. Privatise NHS services. Implement ID cards. Suppress inquiries. Waste public money.
Step Three: Use limited inquiries. Avoid statutory public inquiries. Appoint friendly reviewers. Control the scope. Control the timing. Admit past failures to protect present power.
Step Four: Surround with lobbyists. Burson Marsteller. Flint Global. James Purnell. The revolving door spins. Access is sold. Policy is written.
Step Five: Express regret when safe. Years later. When politically convenient. When the damage is done. The apology tours begin.
The contradictions are stark. NHS defender who presided over mass death. Civil liberties champion who implemented ID cards. Anti-surveillance while voting for ID cards. Pro-union while appointing a chief of staff from a union-busting firm. Anti-privatisation while starting the Hinchingbrooke process. Pro-inquiry while voting against Iraq War investigations. Anti-war while voting for Iraq. Transparency while surrounded by non-transparent lobbyists. Man of the people while a career politician since age 24 with a Cambridge education.
PART VIII: THE MONEY
June 24, 2026. The day after the Makerfield by-election made Burnham Prime Minister. Two companies incorporated. Same day. Same address.
Office of Andy Burnham Ltd. Company number 17299283. Director: Andrew Murray Burnham. Correspondence address: 71 to 75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9JQ.
Andy Burnham for Leader Ltd. Company number 17300460. Director: Andrew Murray Burnham. Correspondence address: 71 to 75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9JQ.
Both verified by RAPID FORMATIONS LIMITED ACSP on June 19, 2026. Both active. Both controlled by the Prime Minister.
The funding tells the story. March to April 2026. £20,000 from trade unions. £10,000 from Fire Brigades Union. £5,000 from Communication Workers Union. £5,000 from Unison. The union paymasters. Then £1,400 from Citybranch, a property developer. The developer donor. The man who controlled £983 million in housing funds cannot remember meeting a property developer who gave him money.
The MPs' expenses scandal adds texture. The £215,000 London flat purchased in 2005, part-funded by taxpayer ACA claims. The IKEA receipt including a bathrobe, claimed as a "genuine oversight" and repaid. The spousal involvement. Marie France van Heel, his wife, "regularly in touch with fees office to negotiate claims." The June 2006 refusal when the fees office rejected covering both London and constituency mortgages as it breached rules. The 2010 leasing out of the flat when mortgage claims were banned, joking it was to avoid divorce.
The 2023 speeding conviction. 78mph in a 40mph zone. 95% over the limit. £1,984 fine. Six points. Rules for thee, not for me. The public safety champion endangering the public.
PART IX: THE FABIAN WOLF
The Burnham Method is not accidental. It is Fabian strategy, perfected over 140 years.
The Fabian Society was founded in 1884. Britain's oldest socialist think tank. The intellectual engine room of the Labour Party. Their strategy is "permeation" the slow, relentless infiltration of every lever of power until socialism becomes the default setting of British society. Not through revolution. Through a thousand quiet administrative changes. Laws. Regulations. Cultural shifts.
Their original coat of arms: A wolf in sheep's clothing. They have since changed it to a tortoise ("slow and steady progress") but the original symbol tells the truth.
Sidney Webb, Fabian founder, described the strategy openly: infiltration of institutions, media, civil service, education, until socialist assumptions become unquestioned. Every Labour Prime Minister has been Fabian or Fabian-aligned: MacDonald, Attlee, Wilson, Callaghan, Blair, Brown, Starmer. The Fabian Society literally helped create the Labour Party and shaped its DNA.
Andy Burnham is the latest vessel. While not publicly listed as a card-carrying member, the affiliation is deep and documented:
Contributed to Fabian publications: "Leading Labour: The Fabian Essays" (August 2015) alongside Yvette Cooper, Jeremy Corbyn, and Liz Kendall
Keynote speaker at Fabian events: Regular addresses on homelessness, mental health, and devolution
Fabian policy influence: The "Burnham approach" to devolution is explicitly praised in Fabian Society publications
Ideological alignment: Described as "soft left" the Fabian sweet spot between revolutionary socialism and Blairite neoliberalism
The Fabian Burnham Method explains everything. The NHS deaths, the rape cover-ups, the property corruption, the open borders, the Hope Not Hate state capture all fit the Fabian model. Not dramatic revolution. Quiet administrative betrayal. A thousand small failures that accumulate into catastrophe. The wolf eating the sheep while wearing its skin.
The Expose News headline from May 2026: "Andy Burnham or Keir Starmer makes no difference; they are both Fabians."
They are correct. The leader changes. The Fabian agenda endures. Burnham is Prime Minister now. The wolf is in Downing Street. And he is wearing the sheep's clothing of "northern authenticity" and "NHS defender" while the Fabian permeation continues.
THE CONCLUSION
Andy Burnham is not a politician. He is a catastrophe wearing a suit. He is the Fabian wolf in sheep's clothing. He is the man who covered up the rape of 250,000 British children. He is the man who left 1,200 NHS patients to die without a public inquiry. He is the man who wasted £100 million of your money on abandoned schemes. He is the man who wants 10,000 more asylum seekers from Sudan and Eritrea. He is the man who called Prevent "toxic" while terrorists plotted. He is the man who put Hope Not Hate operatives in charge of Number 10. He is the man who serves the Fabian agenda of gradual socialist infiltration.
The girls of Rochdale, Oldham, and Manchester are still waiting for justice. The families of Mid Staffordshire are still waiting for answers. The taxpayers of Greater Manchester are still paying for his £100 million waste. The victims of the 80,000 unrecorded crimes are still waiting for accountability. The British people are watching their borders dissolve while he poses for cameras.
Burnham is not in Manchester anymore. He is in Downing Street. And he brought his record of failure with him. The Fabian wolf has entered the fold.
The question is not who Andy Burnham is. The question is: how long will you let him stay?
SOURCES
NHS Scandals and Deaths:
Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry (Francis Inquiry 2010)
Julie Bailey, Cure the NHS, statements on Burnham's "gross unsuitability"
Baroness Young evidence to CQC on pressure to "tone down" criticism
Professor Sir Brian Jarman statements on Department of Health as "denial machine"
Hinchingbrooke Hospital privatisation timeline (Department of Health 2010, Circle Health contract 2011, NHS return 2015)
Property Corruption and Renaker:
Competition Appeal Tribunal ruling (2025) and Court of Appeal hearing (June 2026)
Greater Manchester Housing Investment Fund documentation (£983 million total)
Electoral Commission donation records: Citybranch £1,400 (2026)
James Purnell appointment and Flint Global client list (Huawei, Apple, BP, Amazon, Uber, Glencore)
Rape Cover-Up and Grooming Gangs:
Operation Augusta police files (2003-2005)
Rupert Lowe Rape Gang Inquiry Report (June 2026, 219 pages, crowdfunded £600,000)
Maggie Oliver whistleblower statements to Times Radio and The Telegraph ("cover-up," "failed to grasp the nettle")
Malcolm Newsom and Gary Ridgway resignation from Burnham's reviews (2024)
Bev Craig career timeline: Executive Member for Adult Social Care (2017-2021), Council Leader (December 2021), Deputy Mayor (2021-2026), Labour candidate for Mayor (July 2026)
Open Borders and Immigration:
The Critic, May 2026: "Andy Burnham's immigration double game"
Reform UK and Zia Yusuf statements on 10,000 additional asylum seekers and reversal of permanent status delays
Nigel Farage statements on "Open Borders Burnham" and North West asylum dispersal
Burnham support for asylum seeker work rights and ending "no recourse to public funds"
Islamist Softness and Prevent:
Andy Burnham 2016 statements as Shadow Home Secretary calling Prevent "toxic" and comparing to internment
Michael Gove House of Commons statement on MEND "Islamist orientation"
Burnham MEND fringe event attendance and endorsement records
Ramadan Tent Project iftar 2021 and Keir Starmer withdrawal
Manchester Arena bombing inquiry and Burnham "community cohesion" response
Hope Not Hate State Capture:
Companies House: Office of Andy Burnham Ltd (17299283) and Andy Burnham for Leader Ltd (17300460), incorporated 24 June 2026
Alison Phillips appointment as Director of Transition, Burnham Number 10
Matthew McGregor appointment as Director of Political Strategy, Burnham Number 10
Anna Turley Labour Party Chair and former Hope Not Hate director
Charity Commission investigations into Hope Not Hate (2024, 2025)
Liron Velleman conviction (January 2026) for attempted sexual communication with a child
Fabian Society Connection:
Fabian Society: "Leading Labour: The Fabian Essays" (August 2015)
Fabian Society publications praising "The Burnham approach" to devolution
The Expose News, May 2026: "Andy Burnham or Keir Starmer makes no difference; they are both Fabians"
Sidney Webb "permeation" strategy documentation
Fabian Society coat of arms history (wolf in sheep's clothing)
Personal Corruption and Expenses:
MPs' expenses scandal documentation (Telegraph 2009): bathrobe, spousal involvement, £215,000 flat
Companies House: Leigh BPT Limited (08786493), dissolved, Burnham director 2013-2016
Speeding conviction 2023: 78mph in 40mph zone, £1,984 fine, 6 points
Electoral Commission: trade union donations 2026 (Fire Brigades Union £10,000, Communication Workers Union £5,000, Unison £5,000)
Rational Alien retweeted
This is gender apartheid, blatant women’s right’s violations , full blown manifestation of Islamic misogyny and systemic erosion of Afghan women.
Where is the outrage?!
In Herat, women are being taken from the streets because of how they are dressed, families are searching for daughters who vanished into vans and protesters demanding their return have been met with bullets.
Read more: independent.co.uk/voices/tal…
Rational Alien retweeted
Aujourd'hui je déconstruis la déconstruction.
La déconstruction est le virus mental le plus efficace jamais conçu contre une civilisation. Il a été fabriqué en France entre 1966 et 1980 par trois hommes : Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze. Il a été exporté aux États-Unis, hybridé avec le puritanisme racial américain, et il est revenu trente ans plus tard sous le nom de wokisme paralyser l'Occident entier. Voici comment il fonctionne, et pourquoi il faut le détruire.
La thèse est simple. Toute vérité n'est qu'un rapport de pouvoir déguisé. Tout texte sacré, toute loi, toute science, toute norme, toute hiérarchie, toute identité, toute institution cache en réalité une domination. Déconstruire, c'est montrer le rapport de force sous le vernis du vrai. C'est arracher le masque. C'est "démasquer".
Formulé comme ça, ça paraît inoffensif. Voire utile. Qui n'aime pas un peu d'esprit critique ? Le piège est là. La déconstruction se présente comme une méthode. Elle est en réalité une ontologie. Elle ne dit pas seulement "interrogeons les normes", elle dit "il n'y a *que* des rapports de pouvoir". La différence est civilisationnelle.
Une société qui interroge ses normes reste debout. Une société qui croit que ses normes ne sont *rien d'autre* que de la domination s'effondre. Parce qu'elle ne peut plus rien défendre. Plus une frontière, plus une loi, plus une science, plus une langue, plus une histoire, plus une biologie, plus une famille. Tout devient suspect. Tout devient négociable. Tout devient "construit donc déconstructible".
C'est la première raison pour laquelle c'est un virus. Il s'auto-réplique. Une fois inoculé, il transforme tout ce qu'il touche en cible. La science est patriarcale, donc déconstruisons-la. Le langage est colonial, donc réinventons-le. La méritocratie est raciste, donc abolissons-la. Le sexe est une construction, donc choisissons-le. Il n'y a plus de roc. Tout est sable.
Deuxième raison. Le virus est *non-falsifiable*. Si vous défendez une norme, c'est que vous êtes l'oppresseur. Si vous niez être oppresseur, c'est la preuve de votre privilège inconscient. Si vous citez des faits, vos faits sont contaminés par le pouvoir qui les a produits. Si vous citez la raison, la raison elle-même est blanche, masculine, occidentale. Il n'y a aucune sortie possible. Le système est conçu pour rendre toute objection irrecevable par définition.
C'est exactement la structure d'une secte. Et c'est exactement ce qui s'est installé dans les universités, les RH, les médias, les administrations, les conseils d'administration depuis vingt ans.
Troisième raison. Le virus s'auto-réfute mais ne s'auto-détruit pas. Si toute vérité est pouvoir, alors la phrase "toute vérité est pouvoir" est elle-même du pouvoir, donc sans valeur. Logiquement, la déconstruction se mord la queue dès la première phrase. Mais elle s'en moque. Parce qu'elle n'a jamais cherché la cohérence. Elle cherche l'efficacité politique. Et son efficacité politique est immense. Elle désarme ses ennemis et arme ses militants. Elle paralyse le défenseur et libère l'attaquant. C'est une arme asymétrique parfaite.
Quatrième raison. Le virus produit des humains diminués. Une génération entière a appris à déconstruire et n'a jamais appris à construire. Elle sait soupçonner, jamais admirer. Elle voit le pouvoir partout et la beauté nulle part. Elle peut produire mille pages sur le caractère opprimant de Shakespeare et zéro ligne qui vaille la peine d'être lue dans cent ans. Elle a confondu l'intelligence critique avec la pose critique. Elle est stérile par construction. Un esprit nourri à la déconstruction est un esprit qui ne sait plus rien édifier.
Cinquième raison, la plus grave. Une civilisation se tient debout sur trois piliers. La croyance qu'une vérité est accessible à la raison. La croyance qu'un bien se distingue d'un mal. La croyance qu'un héritage mérite d'être transmis. La déconstruction a méthodiquement dynamité les trois. Pas par méchanceté. Par jeu intellectuel, par fascination du soupçon, par haine de la bourgeoisie qui avait nourri ses prophètes. Mais le résultat est là. Une civilisation qui ne croit plus en sa vérité, ni en son bien, ni en son héritage ne se défend pas. Elle s'excuse en attendant la fin.
Voilà ce qu'on a fait. Voilà ce qu'il faut nommer.
La bonne nouvelle, c'est qu'un virus mental ne survit que tant qu'on lui cède l'autorité du discours. Il meurt dès qu'on cesse de jouer son jeu. Dès qu'on réaffirme tranquillement qu'il existe une vérité, un beau, un bien, un héritage. Dès qu'on cesse de demander la permission aux déconstructeurs pour bâtir. Dès qu'on refait. Dès qu'on transmet. Dès qu'on crée.
Les bâtisseurs ont toujours le dernier mot sur les commentateurs. Toujours. Parce qu'à la fin il reste ce qui est construit, et rien de ce qui a été déconstruit.
Alors aujourd'hui je déconstruis la déconstruction. Et demain je construis.
Je veux présenter mes excuses, au nom des Français, pour avoir enfanté la French Theory (qui a enfanté la pire des merdes idéologiques : le wokisme).
Nous avons donné au monde Descartes, Pascal, Tocqueville. Et puis, dans les ruines intellectuelles de l'après-68, nous avons donné Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze. Trois hommes brillants qui ont fabriqué, dans l'élégance de notre langue, l'arme idéologique qui paralyse aujourd'hui l'Occident.
Il faut comprendre ce qu'ils ont fait. Foucault a enseigné que la vérité n'existe pas, qu'il n'y a que des rapports de pouvoir déguisés en savoir. Que la science, la raison, la justice, l'institution médicale, l'école, la prison, la sexualité, tout n'est qu'une mise en scène de la domination. Derrida a enseigné que les textes n'ont pas de sens stable, que tout signifiant glisse, que toute lecture est une trahison, que l'auteur est mort et que le lecteur règne. Deleuze a enseigné qu'il fallait préférer le rhizome à l'arbre, le nomade au sédentaire, le désir à la loi, le devenir à l'être, la différence à l'identité.
Pris isolément, ce sont des thèses discutables. Combinées, exportées, vulgarisées, elles forment un système. Et ce système est un poison.
Car voici ce qui s'est passé. Ces textes, illisibles en France, ont traversé l'Atlantique. Les départements de Yale, de Berkeley, de Columbia les ont absorbés dans les années 80. Ils y ont trouvé un terreau qui n'existait pas chez nous : le puritanisme américain, sa culpabilité raciale, son obsession identitaire. La French Theory s'est mariée à ce substrat, et l'enfant de ce mariage s'appelle le wokisme.
Judith Butler lit Foucault et invente le genre performatif. Edward Said lit Foucault et invente le post-colonialisme académique. Kimberlé Crenshaw hérite du cadre et invente l'intersectionnalité. À chaque étape, la matrice est française : il n'y a pas de vérité, il n'y a que du pouvoir, donc toute hiérarchie est suspecte, toute institution est oppressive, toute norme est violence, toute identité est construite donc négociable, toute majorité est coupable.
Voilà comment trois philosophes parisiens, qui n'ont probablement jamais imaginé leurs conséquences pratiques, ont fourni le logiciel d'exploitation à une génération entière d'activistes, de bureaucrates universitaires, de DRH, de journalistes, de législateurs. Voilà comment on a obtenu une civilisation qui ne sait plus dire si une femme est une femme, si sa propre histoire mérite d'être défendue, si le mérite existe, si la vérité se distingue de l'opinion.
C'est de la merde pour une raison simple, et il faut la dire calmement. Une civilisation se tient debout sur trois piliers : la croyance qu'il existe une vérité accessible à la raison, la croyance qu'il existe un bien distinct du mal, la croyance qu'il existe un héritage à transmettre. La French Theory a entrepris de dynamiter les trois. Pas par méchanceté. Par jeu intellectuel, par fascination du soupçon, par haine de la bourgeoisie qui les avait nourris. Mais le résultat est là. Une génération entière a appris à déconstruire et n'a jamais appris à construire. Une génération entière sait soupçonner et ne sait plus admirer. Une génération entière voit le pouvoir partout et la beauté nulle part.
Je m'excuse parce que nous, Français, avons une responsabilité particulière. C'est notre langue, nos universités, nos éditeurs, notre prestige qui ont donné à ce nihilisme son emballage chic. Sans la légitimité de la Sorbonne et de Vincennes, ces idées n'auraient jamais traversé l'océan. Nous avons exporté le doute comme d'autres exportent des armes.
Ce qui se construit maintenant, en silicon valley, dans les labos d'IA, dans les startups, dans les ateliers, dans tous les lieux où des gens fabriquent encore des choses au lieu de les déconstruire, c'est la réponse. Une civilisation se reconstruit par les bâtisseurs, pas par les commentateurs. Par ceux qui croient que la vérité existe et qu'elle vaut qu'on s'y consacre. Par ceux qui assument une hiérarchie du beau, du vrai, du bon, et qui n'ont pas honte de la transmettre.
Alors pardon. Et au travail.