Month: November 2019

Via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made prudent remarks recently when he said the United States is no longer a uni-power and that it must recognize the reality of China as an equal rival.

The furor over a new law passed by the US this week regarding Hong Kong and undermining Beijing’s authority underlines Kissinger’s warning.

If the US cannot find some modus vivendi with China, then the outcome could be a catastrophic conflict worst than any previous world war, he admonished.

Speaking publicly in New York on November 14, the veteran diplomat urged the US and China to resolve their ongoing economic tensions cooperatively and mutually, adding:

“It is no longer possible to think that one side can dominate the other.”

A key remark made by Kissinger was the following:

“So those countries that used to be exceptional and used to be unique, have to get used to the fact that they have a rival.”

In other words, he is negating the erroneous consensus held in Washington which asserts that the US is somehow “exceptional”, a “uni-power” and the “indispensable nation”. This consensus has grown since the early 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union, when the US viewed itself as the sole super-power. That morphed into a more virulent ideology of “full-spectrum dominance”. Thence, the past three decades of unrelenting US criminal wars and regime-change operations across the planet, throwing the whole world into chaos.

Kissinger’s frank assessment is a breath of fresh air amid the stale and impossibly arrogant self-regard held by too many American politicians who view their nation as an unparalleled power which brooks no other.

The seasoned statesman, who is 96-years-old and retains an admirable acumen for international politics, ended his remarks on an optimistic note by saying: “I am confident the leaders on both sides [US and China] will realize the future of the world depends on the two sides working out solutions and managing the inevitable difficulties.”

Aptly, Kissinger’s caution about danger of conflict was reiterated separately by veteran journalist John Pilger, who warned in an exclusive interview for Strategic Culture Foundation this week that, presumed “American exceptionalism is driving the world to war.”

Henry Kissinger is indeed a controversial figure. Many US scholars regard him as one of the most outstanding Secretaries of State during the post-Second World War period. He served in the Nixon and Ford administrations during the 1970s and went on to write tomes about geopolitics and international relations. Against that, his reputation was badly tarnished by the US war in Vietnam and the horrendous civilian death toll from relentless aerial bombing across Indochina, believed to have been countenanced by Kissinger.

Kissinger has also been accused of supporting the military coup in Chile in 1973 against elected President Allende, and for backing the dirty war by Argentina’s fascist generals during the 1970s against workers and leftists.

To his credit, however, Kissinger was and is a practitioner of “realpolitik” which views international relations through a pragmatic lens. Another realpolitik US state planner was the late Zbigniew Brzezinski, who died in 2017 at the age of 89. Both advocated a policy of detente with the Soviet Union and China.

President Richard Nixon’s groundbreaking visit to China in 1972 is credited to the advice given by Kissinger who was then National Security Advisor to the White House.

That same year, the US and the Soviet Union signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty, also under the guidance of Kissinger on the American side. The US would later withdrew from the treaty in 2002, a move which has presaged a long deterioration in bilateral relations between the US and Russia to the present day.

For all their faults, at least people like Kissinger and Brzezinski were motivated by practical goal-orientated policy. They were willing to engage with adversaries to find some modus vivendi. Such an attitude is too often missing in recent Washington administrations which seem to be guided by an ideology of unipolar dominance by the US over the rest of the world. The current Washington consensus is one of hyper-ideological unrealism and hubris, which leads to a zero-sum mentality of antagonism towards China and Russia.

At times, President Donald Trump appears to subscribe to realpolitik pragmatism. At other times, he swings to the hyper-ideological mentality as expressed by his Vice President Mike Pence, as well as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Mike Esper. The latter has labeled China as the US’s “greatest long-term threat”.

This week President Trump signed into law “The Human Rights and Democracy Bill”, which will impose sanctions on China over alleged repression in its Hong Kong territory. Beijing has reacted furiously to the legislation, condemning it as a violation of its sovereignty.

This is exactly the kind of baleful move that Kissinger warned against in order to avoid a further poisoning in bilateral relations already tense from the past 16 months of US-China trade war.

One discerns the difference between Kissinger and more recent US politicians: the former has copious historical knowledge and appreciation of other cultures. His shrewd, wily, maybe even Machiavellian streak, informs Kissinger to acknowledge and respect other powers in a complex world. That is contrasted with the puritanical banality and ignorance manifest in Trump’s administration and in the Congress.

Greeting Kissinger last Friday, November 22, during a visit to Beijing, President Xi Jinping thanked him for his historic contribution in normalizing US-China relations during 1970s.

“At present, Sino-US relations are at a critical juncture facing some difficulties and challenges,” said Xi, calling on the two countries to deepen communication on strategic issues. It was an echo of the realpolitik views Kissinger had enunciated the week before.

While sharing a public stage with Kissinger, the Chinese leader added:

“The two sides should proceed from the fundamental interests of the two peoples and the people of the world, respect each other, seek common ground while reserving differences, pursue win-win results in cooperation, and promote bilateral ties to develop in the right direction.”

Likewise, China and Russia have continually urged for a multipolar world order for cooperation and partnership in development. But the present and recent US governments refuse to contemplate any other order other than a presumed unipolar dominance. Hence the ongoing US trade strife with China and Washington’s relentless demonization of Russia.

This “exceptional” ideological mantra of the US is leading to more tensions, and ultimately is a path to the abyss.

Henry Kissinger gets it. It’s a pity America’s present crop of politicians and thinkers are so impoverished in their intellect.

A proposed amendment to a 30-year-old Virginia law would make it illegal to bring a firearm to any gathering if it can be proven that the goal was to ‘intimidate any person or group of persons by drilling, parading, or marching with any firearm.”

In short, if someone brings a firearm to a permitted event such as the ill-fated United the Right rally, and it can be argued that their goal was to intimidate Antifa counter-protesters as opposed to carrying in self-defense, that person could be subject to Class 5 felony charges under the amendment introduced by State Senator Louise Lucas (D-18th District).

The amendment stems from a lawsuit brought against Unite the Right organizer (and professional provocateur) Jason Kessler and several militia groups, accusing them of violating the state’s existing statute governing “unlawful paramilitary activity.” As a result of the lawsuit, “eleven named defendants had signed consent decrees in which they are “permanently enjoined from returning to Charlottesville, Virginia, as part of a unit of two or more persons acting in concert while armed with a firearm, weapon, shield, or any item whose purpose is to inflict bodily harm, at any demonstration, rally, protest, or march.”,” according to IREHR.

Of note, the statute does not declare tactical training illegal as has been reported elsewhere, as the existing law – which has been on the books more than 30 years – already makes it illegal if someone “teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device” if said training “will be employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder.“

Given that most firearms instruction is intended for self-defense in all situations and not specifically during “civil disorder,” we don’t envision Virginia authorities barging in on training courses anytime soon.

The amendment can be seen below. New portions are italicized.

SENATE BILL NO. 64

Offered January 8, 2020

Prefiled November 21, 2019

A BILL to amend and reenact §18.2-433.2 of the Code of Virginia, relating to paramilitary activities; penalty.

———-

Patron– Lucas

———-

Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

———-

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1. That §18.2-433.2 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as follows:

§18.2-433.2. Paramilitary activity prohibited; penalty.

A person shall be is guilty of unlawful paramilitary activity, punishable as a Class 5 felony if he:

1. Teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that such training will be employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder; or

2. Assembles with one or more persons for the purpose of training with, practicing with, or being instructed in the use of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, intending to employ such training for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder; or

3. Assembles with one or more persons with the intent of intimidating any person or group of persons by drilling, parading, or marching with any firearm, any explosive or incendiary device, or any components or combination thereof.

2. That the provisions of this act may result in a net increase in periods of imprisonment or commitment. Pursuant to §30-19.1:4 of the Code of Virginia, the estimated amount of the necessary appropriation cannot be determined for periods of imprisonment in state adult correctional facilities; therefore, Chapter 854 of the Acts of Assembly of 2019 requires the Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission to assign a minimum fiscal impact of $50,000. Pursuant to §30-19.1:4 of the Code of Virginia, the estimated amount of the necessary appropriation cannot be determined for periods of commitment to the custody of the Department of Juvenile Justice.

Authored by ‘Lance Welton’ via VDare.com,

Scientific fraud – falsifying scientific data or manipulating the scientific evaluation process – has become a serious problem. At best, it is a threat to public confidence in science. At worst, if the fraud is not revealed, then public policy could be shaped by bogus data. This problem is universal. But there are distinct national patterns. In particular, fraud is endemic in non-Western countries—and among non-Western scientists who immigrate here.

The most infamous scientific fraudster of recent years did come from the West: the Dutch social psychologist Diederik Stapel. At the time of writing, he has had to retract 58 scientific articles in which he made up or manipulated his data. Significantly, many of these were politically useful from a Leftist perspective, such as the claim that a dirty, untidy environment made people more racist or that people who eat meat are more selfish than vegetarians. [RETRACTED ARTICLE. Coping with chaos: how disordered contexts promote stereotyping and discrimination, By D. Stapel & S. Lindenberg, Science, 2011]

Clearly, any sensible scholar is going to be very cautious about citing anything ever written by Diederik Stapel, even if it has not been retracted. Indeed, lay readers should be careful to ask for the author of any Leftism-helpful social psychology finding, when told about it by acquaintances, lest its author turn out to be Diederik Stapel.

But—breaking news—microbiologist Elizabeth Bik just went public alleging astonishingly massive scientific fraud, between 2004 and 2019, among academics at Annamalai University in Tamil Nadu in India. This may lead to the retraction of up to 200 papers by microbiologists at the university.[ Research fraud in over 200 Annamalai University papers, alleges US scholar,  by Megha Kaveri,The News Minute, November 15, 2019]

And this is much more typical. Scientists from some countries are systematically more inclined to make up data or corrupt the peer-review process, than are scientists from others.

In the peer-review process, an academic journal sends a study out to other academics for scholarly evaluation. Many scientists research extremely narrow fields, meaning there are very few people in the world who are qualified to judge the merits of their studies. Consequently, when scientists submit an article to a journal, they are often asked to nominate potential peer-reviewers, and also to provide their email addresses.

A conscientious editor would check who these nominees were and make an informed choice as to whether they were suitable reviewers. But apparently many editors, even of prestigious journals, do not practice due diligence.

Corrupt researchers realize this. Accordingly, they invent a couple of fictitious researchers and provide emails to which they—the study’s authors—have access. Sometimes they give real researchers’ names, but create a new email, bogus addresses for them. They are then able to peer-review their own papers and recommend that they be accepted.  Journal editors have gradually got wise to this ruse and are able to see that the that IP address of the author and reviewer are the same, leading to the corrupt scientist being caught out.

There are clear national differences in this practice. The world leader: China. Between 2012 and 2016, 276 studies by Chinese academics were retracted for fake peer review. In a distant second place was Taiwan, with 73, followed by Iran, with 65, South Korea, 33, Pakistan, 19, and India, 16. [The Economy of Fraud in Academic Publishing in China, by Mini Gu, WENR, April 3, 2019].

In terms of fake peer review per head of population, these figures suggest that the most corrupt country, by far, is Taiwan (population 23 million) then Iran, then South Korea.

In other words, you should be generally cautious about trusting the accuracy of scientific papers authored by scholars from these countries.

Author Mini Gu notes some systemic factors behind this corruption. In much of Northeast Asia, as well as in the developing world, many scientists are, in effect, “on commission.” If they land an article in a high-impact academic journal, then they get paid much more than if it is published in a less prestigious journal. Without publishing these articles their salaries are extremely low. Not only are they paid “by result,” but they also paid “per article,” naturally pushing them towards quantity over quality.

Even Western academics must publish a certain number of articles every few years for their contracts to be renewed. But the pressure here is extreme.  We can understand how corruption will result. It ranges from self-plagiarism—presenting, essentially, the same paper as though it were two different ones—to the much more serious issue of simply making data up.

A useful leader board on the latter is maintained by the website Retraction Watch . It lists the 32 scientists who have had to retract the most papers for scientific fraud of various kinds. Being slightly woke itself, Retraction Watch gloats that “We note that all but one of the top 32 are men, which agrees with the general findings of a 2013 paper suggesting that men are more likely to have papers retracted for fraud.” But, needless to say, it doesn’t say anything about the national origins of its top 32 most prolific retractors.

1. Yoshitaka Fujii (total retractions: 183) See also: Final report of investigating committee, our reporting, additional coverage

2. Joachim Boldt (97) See also: Editors-in-chief statement, our coverage

3. Yoshihiro Sato (87) See also: our coverage

4. Jun Iwamoto (69) See also: our coverage

5. Diederik Stapel (58) See also: our coverage

6. Yuhji Saitoh (53)  See also: our coverage

7. Adrian Maxim (48) See also: our coverage

8. Chen-Yuan (Peter) Chen (43) See also: SAGE, our coverage

9. Fazlul Sarkar (41) See also: our coverage

10. Hua Zhong (41) See also: journal notice

11. Shigeaki Kato (40) See also: our coverage

12. James Hunton (37) See also: our coverage

13. Hyung-In Moon (35) See also: our coverage

14. Naoki Mori (32) See also: our coverage

15. Jan Hendrik Schön (32) See also: our coverage

16. Soon-Gi Shin (30) See also: our coverage

17. Tao Liu (29) See also: our coverage

18. Bharat Aggarwal (28) See also: our coverage

19. Cheng-Wu Chen (28) See also: our coverage

20. A Salar Elahi (27) See also: our coverage

21. Ali Nazari (27) See also: our coverage

22. Richard L E Barnett (26) See also: our coverage

23. Antonio Orlandi (26) See also: our coverage

24. Shahaboddin Shamshirband (26) See also: our coverage

25. Prashant K Sharma (26) See also: our coverage

26. Rashmi Madhuri (24) See also: our coverage

27. Scott Reuben (24) See also: our coverage

28. Thomas M Rosica (23) See also: our coverage

29. Alfredo Fusco (22) See also: our coverage

30. M Ghoranneviss (22) See also: our coverage

31. Anil K Jaiswal (22) See also: our coverage

32. Gilson Khang (22) See also: our coverage

However, the results parallel, quite well, retractions for corrupting the peer-review process. Thus six of these scientists are Japanese, 4 are Indian, 3 are Iranian, 3 are South Korean, 3 are from the USA, 2 are Taiwanese, 2 are Chinese. Interestingly, some of these Third World scientists have corrupted other countries, most notably the USA. Indian Bharat Aggarwal was based at the University of Texas.  Fazlul Sarkar, originally from Iran, was at Wayne State University in Detroit.[Researcher Fazlul Sarkar Has 12 More Papers Retracted, by Sukanya Charuchandra, The Scientist Magazine, September 17, 2018]

Note that one of the people on the list was Taiwanese education minister Wei-ling Chiang! He was forced to resign in 2014 when his role in a peer-review corruption ring was unearthed. [Peer Review Scandal Takes Down Taiwanese Minister, by Yu-Tzu Chiu, IEEE Spectrum, July 16, 2014]

The corruption of science in countries like India, Iran and China is unsurprising. They either have low average IQs and/or are poor and these factors tend to predict corruption. (This tendency is discussed by Richard Lynn & Tatu Vanhanen in their 2012 book Intelligence, pages 152-157).

Quite why scientific corruption should be so prevalent in high IQ and wealthy Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea is less clear. One suggestion: they are strongly shame-oriented—saving face is all important—rather than guilt-oriented, like the West, where individual conscience will sometimes stop people from doing things even when they can get away with them.  Shame cultures arguably lead people to be dishonest in order to achieve much prized social status, in a way that they wouldn’t otherwise be [Science as a Matter of Honour: How Accused Scientists Deal with Scientific Fraud in Japan, by Pablo Pellegrini, Science and Engineering Ethics, 2018].

Put simply, some countries are more prone to scientific corruption—and so are people from those countries. I reported a while ago on how trust in universities may be gradually undermined by Political Correctness and the driving of genius scientists from universities due to increasing female dominance of academe.

Perhaps the habit of importing scientists from non-Western countries will be further nail in the coffin of universities.

Several explosions rocked a TPC Group Southeast Texas chemical manufacturing plant in the hours leading up to Thanksgiving, which could have a profound effect on the production of synthetic rubber used primarily in the automotive industry heading into the end of the year.

There were zero fatalities, but more than 50,000 people within a 4 mile radius of the blast were ordered to evacuate, according to FreightWaves. The first explosion happened at about 1AM on the day before Thanksgiving, injuring three people. 

TPC Group said on its website: “TPC Group – is working with the authorities and are forming a team to complete a full investigation and root cause examination once the event has been mitigated.”

There were 30 people at the plant when the first explosion occurred. Additional explosions continued throughout the afternoon of November 27 and fires continued to burn throughout Thanksgiving day. Local officials indicated they intended to let the fire burn out on its own. 

Jefferson County (Texas) Judge Jeff Branick said at a press conference: “I don’t think the focus is on putting the fire out, but letting the materials in there burn themselves out.”

Jefferson County is located about 95 miles east of Houston and the plant is located at Port Neches. The city runs “along the Beaumont-Sabine Pass ship channel near the Gulf of Mexico.”

The 218 acre plant produces butadiene and raffinate, and stores a gasoline additive called methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE).

Butadiene is used in synthetic rubber used for tires and automobile hoses and the TPC plant produces about 16% of the continent’s supply. Among TPC’s customers are Firestone Tires, Goodyear Tires and Dow Chemical. 

The company’s website says: “Combined production capacity for this facility is more than 900 million pounds per year [of butadiene and raffinate]. Logistics infrastructure capabilities [at the Port Neches site] include pipeline, barge, rail and tank car.”

“TPC has not yet determined the full impact on TPC’s plant, operations or financials. It is not clear at this time for how long the plant will be shut down,” the company concluded. 

Authored by William Suberg via CoinTelegraph.com,

Chinese cryptocurrency exchange IDAX has suspended deposits and withdrawals after its CEO allegedly disappeared.

In a blog post on Nov. 29, IDAX, which earlier this week warned it was seeing a run on withdrawals, said the whereabouts of Lei Guorong were currently unknown. 

image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

IDAX: cold wallet access “restricted”

“Since we have announced the announcement on November 24, IDAX Global CEO have gone missing with unknown cause and IDAX Global staffs were out of touch with IDAX Global CEO,” it reads.

The blog post continues that as a precaution, the company’s cold wallet was on lockdown to protect user funds:

“For this reason, access to Cold wallet which is stored almost all cryptocurrency balances on IDAX has been restricted so in effect, deposit/withdrawal service cannot be provided.”

IDAX did not directly link Lei with cold wallet access, nor did it suggest that users’ money was specifically at risk. 

Exchanges feel renewed pressure

The debacle follows a contentious period for cryptocurrency in China after authorities doubled down on the country’s 2017 trading ban last week. As Cointelegraph reported, a sweep saw the central bank vowing to “dispose of” any exchanges it found flouting the ban. 

IDAX stopped serving Chinese users at the start of the week. Its predicament nonetheless provides yet another example of the pitfalls involved when trusting a third party to store cryptocurrency.

Earlier this week, South Korean exchange Upbit likewise halted users’ access to funds after a suspicious transaction saw more than $50 million leave its books at once. 

While investors appear to be waking up to the risks, recent data shows that even institutional traders still overwhelmingly prefer trusting others with their funds.

Hong Kong police have threatened to use wooden bullets to disperse protesters, according to comments made by Police Commissioner Chris Tang at a Thursday tea gathering. 

The Hong Kong Free Press reports that the ‘wooden baton rounds’ cause more damage to the human body vs. rubber bullets. According to watchdog group Civil Rights Watch, Hong Kong police have also been using tear gas, bean bag rounds and other nonlethal weapons, which have resulted in multiple injuries. 

Police Senior Superintendent of the Operations Branch Wong Wai-shun said at a press conference on Friday that the force had adopted rubber bullets and replaced wood baton rounds 16 years ago, owing of their effectiveness.

But Wong denied that wooden bullets would cause more damage, and said the police will use different weapons wherever it was appropriate, and will use the minimum force necessary.

“The police will constantly review the effectiveness of our ammunition,” he said. –HKFP

The Civil Rights watchdog has accused police of abusing the use of crowd control weapons – in one instance blinding a reporter who was shot in the face.

“The police commissioner seeking to do more damage with non-live ammunition and non-lethal weapons is a violation to the spirit of the United Nations’s ‘Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials’ to avoid deaths and injuries caused by force,” said the group. 

Protesters have called for an investigation into police abuses as part of their multi-pronged demands. The movement began some five months ago in response to an extradition bill which would allow suspects in Hong Kong to be removed from the country to stand trial in communist courts. 

Over 5,800 people have been arrested during the protests, according to HKFP. Meanwhile, the police are recalling over 1,000 retired officers to staff the riots. 

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

After increasing for decades, American life expectancy is now facing an alarming decline thanks mainly to suicides of white working age men.

A study published by the journal JAMA, found that life expectancy in America increased from 1959 to 2014 but that the number plateaued in 2011 and began decreasing in 2014.

“The study… found that the decline is mostly among “working-age” Americans, or those ages 25 to 64,” reports Live Science.

“In this group, the risk of dying from drug abuse, suicide, hypertension and more than 30 other causes is increasing.”

The decline in life expectancy for working aged males has not been recorded in other developed countries and is a “distinctly American phenomenon,” according to study co-author Steven H. Woolf of Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine.

According to Lisa Britton, CNN’s coverage of the story omitted the crucial point that the decline was being driven by male suicides.

“CNN just did a piece on the declining life-expectancy rate in the US… and failed to mention it’s the MEN’s rate that is declining! Women have maintained a steady rate although there’s been an uptick in the women’s overdose rate (The Wash Post turned their story into that) Wow,” she tweeted.

As we discuss in the video below, the only demographic group that has seen a dramatic rise in suicides and “deaths of despair” is white, middle aged, working class men.

Despite this, the media and the culture still relentlessly blames that same demographic for both historical and contemporary societal ills, de-legitimizing their trauma under the rubric of “white privilege.”

*  *  *

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

A quick-thinking bystander who was inside London’s Fishmonger’s Hall when a deadly terrorist attack began grabbed a 5′ narwhal tusk off the wall and helped subdue a knife-wielding man who killed two pedestrians on London Bridge.

The attacker, said to be a recently-released terrorist prisoner believed to be wearing a fake suicide vest and a tracking tag, was taken down by the tusk-wielding hero and a man with a fire extinguisher before police shot him dead. 

Sources have told Sky News the suspect in the London Bridge attack was a recently-released terrorist prisoner believed to have been wearing a tag

— Sky News Breaking (@SkyNewsBreak) November 29, 2019

 

“A guy who was with us at Fishmongers Hall took a 5′ narwhale [sic] tusk from the wall and went out to confront the attacker,” tweeted Amy Coop.

A guy who was with us at Fishmongers Hall took a 5’ narwhale tusk from the wall and went out to confront the attacker. You can see him standing over the man (with what looks like a white pole) in the video. We were trying to help victims inside but that man’s a hero #LondonBridge

— Amy Coop (@theamycoop) November 29, 2019

Yup

— Amy Coop (@theamycoop) November 29, 2019

There it is. Unbelievable. pic.twitter.com/mWwavqCUMQ

— Adam Gatto (@adamgatto) November 29, 2019

When you wrestle a knife from a terrorist but remembered you picked up for the lads tonight. #LondonBridge #LondonBridgeAttack #LondonBridgeIncident #londonshooting pic.twitter.com/rpo8ZO5fgZ

— RWK (@firedeathpony) November 29, 2019

After police stepped in:

London bridge shooting #London #LondonBridge pic.twitter.com/H5RJQgh60u

— Jon Stewart (@JonStewartUK) November 29, 2019

Terrorism attacker lay dead on #Londonbridge 💪🇬🇧

Brilliant work by armed police pic.twitter.com/ScOqsyOFX6

— London Crime LDN (@CrimeLdn) November 29, 2019

Glad you’re okay. Also, this is legit the most bad ass thing I’ve ever heard.

— Tom Strachan (@tstrachanedit) November 29, 2019