Far-right Reform UK have re-hashed a failed plan to use the navy to stop channel migrants. The scheme was tried and discredited years ago, yet leading Reform figures are trying to promote it. Another day, another batshit fascist idea. And they even based it on recent events in Morocco.

The Guardian reported on 3 July that Farage had claimed:

his party would launch the “largest military operation in the English Channel since world war two” to prevent small boat crossings.

Needless to say, Farage and co are currently under the hammer about massive, shady donations. Internal crises are usually when dubious UK politicians start invoking A) racism and B) World War Two.

The Royal Navy is there to protect this country from invasion and that is what I intend to use it for. pic.twitter.com/jbvTUTEzZR

— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) August 3, 2026

Ever cynical, Farage cited a recent incident in Ceuta, Morocco:

Pointing to unrest at the Spain-Morocco border, he said the Royal Navy would be sent to the Channel to intercept all dinghies carrying asylum seekers should his party win power at the next general election.

You can read about that incident, which saw tens of thousands of migrants enter the Spanish colony, right here.

Naturally, Farage gave this a ridiculous name: “Operation Fortress”.

Operation Fortress? More like Operation Dumbass

For their party, the UK military seem to have absolutely no intention of basing what they do on an opinion Nige has pulled out of his arse.

The plan indicates:

that navy offshore patrol vessels (OPVs), instead of the Border Force’s fleet of five cutters and six patrol ships, would “close on and shadow” dinghies in the Channel.

One former navy commander described the plan as

an incredible waste of a military asset, to do a Border Force or ferrying job with a specialist warship.

In fact, the navy HAS been called in before. The result was a failure. The Guardian said:

In 2022, Boris Johnson’s government launched Operation Isotrope, which the then home secretary, Priti Patel, said would attempt to make crossing the Channel “unviable”.

Adding:

A tentative plan for “pushbacks” – where ships are used to force small boats to turn around back towards France – was abandoned after concerns from military figures that it would be impractical, dangerous, and leave naval officers open to legal action.

One problem is that maritime law demands people in need are rescued from the water, and the rescuers must not “create conditions for putting them in distress.”

Britain is being invaded.

It’s time to respond accordingly. pic.twitter.com/wv0Ln2RiPh

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) August 3, 2026

Farage also insisted:

the French government would be expected to accept the returned asylum seekers, claiming he had spoken to unnamed French politicians about the plans.

He presented no evidence he had spoken to anyone.

Reform: war with France anyone?

Actual experts did not seem to agree that Farage’s plan could work. Oxford University’s Migration Observatory researcher Peter Walsh said:

If the UK returned asylum seekers to France without its permission, one plausible scenario is that this would have major diplomatic consequences, prompting France to suspend existing cooperation such as intelligence sharing and beach patrols in northern France.

Adding:

It is possible it would attempt to repel the British ships to prevent further returns.

Farage and his cronies might relish a war with France on nostalgia grounds. Few others would.

Leading immigration barrister Colin Yeo said:

it should be “utterly obvious” that such a move would be a violation of French sovereignty and an illegal act of international aggression.

A French government official said:

The [French] government would clearly not expect a key ally such as the UK to infringe on territory or waters without consent.

Once again Reform UK have managed to look like weird racists and massive grifters at the same time. Funny that. The correct response to channel crossings is a mix of proper safe routes and a genuine response to the crises which cause people to flee to the UK. Like with the rest of the UK’s problems, Reform have nothing to offer.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

Source link

15 year old Mohammad Suleiman Hamed, was detained by genocidal Israel. Because he suffered no previous health conditions, his family was surprised by a call from Physicians for Human Rights, informing them their son would undergo surgery in the hospital. Hamed is now unconscious, on life support in the intensive care unit of the “Israeli” Shaare Zedek Medical Centre, in occupied Jerusalem.

Israel carrying out systematic torture

Hamed, from the town of Tuqu, Southeast of Bethlehem in the occupied West Bank, was held in the juvenile section of Ofer Prison. He has endured torture, starvation, abuse, denial of family and International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) visits, and medical neglect.

In April he contracted scabies. Due to intentional denial of medical treatment his condition deteriorated significantly. By July, he developed a severe fever and was transferred to the prison clinic. Examinations showed he had developed a urinary tract infection, and was suffering from high levels of blood sugar.

According to the Palestinian Prisoners Society (PPS), Hamed was transferred to the “Israel’s” Shaare Zedek Medical Centre on 20 July. This is because Ramla Prison Clinic had refused to admit him because he had scabies. Despite his serious condition, occupation prison authorities returned him to Ofer Prison, where he was given antibiotics. He stayed there for four days, but his condition continued to deteriorate.

Spreading infection

Hamed was then transferred back to Shaare Zedek Medical Centre, where examinations found the infection had spread to several organs, including his heart and brain. On 27 July, the 15 year old underwent open-heart surgery, without his parents present, and suffered neurological damage. Several parts of his body were affected, including his right foot, which doctors say may require amputation.

The Palestinian Prisoners’ Club is urging international bodies to intervene and ensure medical care for Palestinian detainees in Israeli prison.

15-year-old detainee underwent open-heart surgery while in Israeli custody without his family's permission.

It also reported that… pic.twitter.com/H3mbSwPWnU

Advertisement

— Quds News Network (@QudsNen) July 31, 2026

Israel occupation evading responsibility

Since 30 July, following intervention from Physicians for Human Rights, family visits have been permitted for Hamed. This comes after occupation authorities decided to release him, because of his extremely critical condition. According to the PPS, they did this to evade any responsibility for their crimes. Hamed remains unconscious in the intensive care unit, and doctors are waiting for him to stabilise before they can assess the extent of damage caused to his body.

Mohammed Hamed’s case is not unique. It is one of the thousands faced by Palestinian political prisoners. In March 2025, 17 year old Walid Ahmad became the first Palestinian under the age of 18 to be martyred by the occupation in its prison system. He had scabies, and likely died from extreme malnutrition caused by starvation. He was arrested during a night time raid on his home in Silwad, and spent six months in detention without charge or trial.

Walid Ahmad died after just six months in detention

Ahmad also had no prior health issues before his arrest on 30 September 2024. He lost consciousness while in Megiddo Prison, on 22 March 2025, and was declared dead when he was transferred to the prison clinic. He had been denied family and lawyer visits.

It's been reported that an Israeli court ruled Walid Ahmad, a Palestinian child who died while detained in an Israeli prison, was 'likely starved'. He was held for six months without charge.

Sadly, such ill-treatment is not unusual. It is unconscionable that any child should be… pic.twitter.com/6bTuLXVkK2

— Save the Children UK (@savechildrenuk) March 26, 2026

Advertisement

Malek Hani Jibril, 30, is also from the town of Tuqu. He was shot and arrested by Israeli occupation forces (IOF) at the “300” military checkpoint in July. Subsequent surgery resulted in the amputation of his right foot. He remains in detention.

Prisoners fear requesting treatment

Israeli occupation authorities have systematically targeted Palestinian political prisoners by starving and torturing them, and denying them healthcare until they reach critical or irreversible stages. They are then released in an attempt to evade legal and criminal responsibility for the abuses they have committed against them. This has led to an unprecedented spread of diseases and injuries among them.

There are huge challenges when it comes to monitoring the health conditions of prisoners and obtaining their medical files. Not only is this due to inaction and procedures imposed by the “Israeli” authorities. It is also down to the reluctance of many prisoners to request treatment, due to fear of being subjected to further attacks and abuse.

The PPS says limb amputations have become one of the most serious issues currently being experienced by prisoners. Many detainees are shot before being arrested, which can then lead to amputation. In addition, some Palestinians have experienced a limb amputation and are then arrested later on. They too are deprived of the necessary healthcare and medical support to meet their basic needs inside prison.

More than 100 Palestinian prisoners have been killed in “Israeli” custody since October 2023. The occupation currently holds approximately 9400 Palestinian prisoners, including 350 Palestinian children.

Featured image via author

By Charlie Jaay

Source link

The NHS’s contract with Palantir is controversial for a number of reasons – not least because the US spy-tech company is supporting Israel’s genocide. Another issue with the contract is that the technology Palantir provides may not actually produce any benefits. And as the Financial Times (FT) are now reporting, the NHS is having to change how it evaluates Palantir’s effectiveness in response to wide-ranging criticisms:

The pressure is mounting.
Now is the time to act.

Join over 83,000 people and message your local NHS Trust to say no to Palantirhttps://t.co/PsCDnjsTBl pic.twitter.com/mUhXXBbTaH

— Good Law Project (@GoodLawProject) August 3, 2026

Advertisement

Palantir metrics of success

As reported by the FT, the NHS has been using disputed metrics to measure the success of the Palantir Federated Data Platform (FDP) which is designed to link different data sets:

Emails obtained by the FT via a freedom of information request show the health service intends to modify how it calculates two of its headline figures about the performance of the Federated Data Platform in the next quarterly update, more than a year after the data was first published.

Hospitals using the FDP have claimed to have:

delivered 110,000 additional operations and that they have registered a 15 per cent reduction in discharge delays.

One criticism of the figure is that the figure could be explained by the seasonal variation. This is because the figures relate to the six months after the FDP’s adoption.

The FT have previously uncovered errors in a “key underlying dataset”. This ultimately led to an investigation from the UK statistics watchdog.

Politicians commenting on the latest development include Ben Coleman (Labour MP / House of Commons Health and Social Care Select Committee):

It’s shocking that the NHS published claims about Palantir’s positive impact on patients even after its own staff raised concerns about the methodology being used.

Next March, Palantir’s contract comes to an end unless the government extends it — and given growing questions about Palantir’s effectiveness, can an extension really be justified?

Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat / House of Commons Health and Social Care Select Committee) also spoke out:

I have been calling for these numbers to be independently verified for some time now, and this is evidence that we cannot rely on them.

It is time to replace Palantir in the NHS and to seriously question their presence in the rest of the UK government.

“Say no”

The Good Law Project have a petition calling for the government to end its contract with Palantir. The petition is approaching 100,000 signatures, and it reads:

NHS England is rolling out software to run our health records from Palantir – a US spy-tech firm that has supported mass deportation in the US and enabled genocide in Gaza.

One of Palantir’s founders is also openly against the NHS. Peter Thiel claimed it “makes people sick” and said that the British people love the NHS because we’re suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

We can’t let a company like this take control of our healthcare system.

Advertisement

But we can fight back right now. We’ve set up a simple tool so you can find out if your local NHS trust has started using the software, and then send an email demanding they say no to Palantir.

With the government putting NHS trusts under pressure to adopt the software, we need to act right now. If you want to keep Palantir out of our NHS, send an email to your local trust and James Murray, secretary of state for health.

Drop Palantir

Ministers have the option to trigger a break clause with Palantir in 2027. It’s vital that they take advantage of this, to protect the reputation of the NHS. It will also show that Britons will not tolerate companies that back genocide.

Featured image via Cory Doctorow

By Willem Moore

Source link

Prime Minister Andy Burnham has outlined a range of areas he would like to see greater spending in. (Alamy)

4 min read3 hr

Andy Burnham has set out some major ambitions for government since entering office. Experts look at how he could pay for them.

Advertisement

The new Prime Minister was keen to hit the ground running when he succeeded Keir Starmer in No 10 last month, promising quick action to help people cope with cost-of-living pressures. He announced that he would take VAT off electricity bills, cap bus fares at £2, and reduce business rates for pubs and restaurants.

When it comes to longer-term policy, Burnham has promised to end rough sleeping and reform adult social care. His vision for the latter, bringing it more in line with NHS provision, is estimated to cost billions of pounds of additional spending every year. The new PM is also under pressure to increase defence spending in response to global security threats.

At the same time, the PM has pledged to stick to the government’s fiscal rules and 2024 manifesto pledges not to raise income tax, national insurance and VAT. 

Advertisement

This has raised questions about how Burnham will fund his plans for government.

Many details will not be confirmed until Wednesday, 28 October, when Chancellor John Healey delivers the first Budget of the Burnham Labour government. Healey, who resigned as defence secretary during the final weeks of the Starmer government over defence spending, has said that the Autumn Budget will be “built on fiscal discipline”.

What are Burnham’s options?

Carsten Jung, leader of the economy team at the Institute for Public Policy Research think tank (IPPR), argued that Burnham and Healey have inherited a better economic picture than Starmer and former chancellor Rachel Reeves faced.

Advertisement

“Rachel Reeves, for all of her strategic mistakes, really fixed the public finances,” said Jung. 

“What she inherited from Jeremy Hunt [her Tory chancellor predecessor] was unsustainable. It was based on cuts to departmental spending which weren’t sustainable. So she went to the painful exercise of increasing taxes to fix that.

“What Andy Burnham inherits is a much better funded state, and he also has headroom against the fiscal rules he inherited, which makes it less dire.”

However, he said that borrowing money to fund government spending could be riskier for Burnham than it was for Starmer due to “jittery” markets and a more precarious global picture. The Bank of England recently warned that it may be forced to raise interest rates later this year if the US war with Iran escalates, which in turn would make borrowing more expensive. 

Advertisement

Jung said that one option available to the government is to increase tax on wealth to bring it closer to tax on earnings, highlighting capital gains tax. 

As things stand, people are charged either 18 per cent or 24 per cent on profit they make when selling, gifting or disposing of an asset that has increased in value, such as a second home. Burnham could increase Treasury revenues by aligning capital gains tax rates with income tax bands of 20, 40 and 45 per cent.

Elsewhere, examples of pro-growth policies according to Jung include the Treasury investing more in “leading industries” in the UK as well as “boosting entrepreneurship” while closing tax loopholes. 

Isabel Stockton, researcher at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), said Burnham’s ambitions can be split into two categories: those that are less fiscally challenging, such as the cost-of-living measures he announced in his first few days in office, and policies with greater economic implications, like defence spending and adult social care.

Advertisement

Stockton agreed with Jung that borrowing more money would be “difficult” and “risky” for Burnham as it could push the new government close to breaching its fiscal rules, leaving him with two broad options: raising tax and cutting spending elsewhere.

Burnham has already said that the country must get “really serious” about reducing welfare spending to fund priorities like greater defence spending.

Stockton also suggested that the Labour government explore using the National Wealth Fund as a way of boosting spending power –  it was launched under Starmer in 2024 to “mobilise billions of pounds of investment” in UK “clean energy and growth industries”. 

By the end of the current parliament, the NWF should be on track to have capitalised with almost £30bn – with government funds directed to “resources to finance economic activity that supports additional private investment”, opening up investment options for the government. 

Advertisement

However, NWF is still funded by taxation and borrowing, and is run by the Treasury – meaning the challenges around scrutiny on tax and spend remain. 

Stockton told PoliticsHome the limitations Starmer’s government faced on taxation, spending, and spending cuts continue to exist, and remain challenging for Burnham’s government. 

“With any new government, it can make different choices, but it is going to be facing essentially the same constraints, especially given that he [Burnham] says he’s committed to the existing fiscal rules,” said Stockton.

“He says he’s committed to the Labour manifesto on tax, so that rules out quite a few things already. That means that the decisions are going to be difficult.”

Advertisement

 

Advertisement

Source link

Marco Rubio, Secretary of State for the USA, earlier this year at the Munich Security Conference called for the “return to brutal Western colonialism.” This explicit messaging from the Western ruling elite about its plans for the Global South should be unifying masses in countries like India more than it has.

Notably, protests in India are breaking out against the neo-liberal government everywhere and startlingly have also spread to the urban middle class.

Surbhi Kesar, who teaches at SOAS, called the participation of the “urban aspirational classes” as  “striking,” given their unfamiliarity with engagement with public causes and sustained interaction with people from different social locations.

But it reflects that the Indian post-1990s liberalisation-led growth is failing even those who benefited the most from it.

Marco Rubio comments juxtaposed with cockroach protests

The Gen Z protests, led by the ‘Cockroach Janta Party,’ have captured the media limelight. The name comes from India’s Chief Justice, who in May dismissed unemployed youth as “cockroaches” – an insult the protesters have embraced.

However, simmering beneath this surface-level attention has been widespread unrest fueled by unrelenting violence against Muslims and other minorities, the infamous ‘bulldozer raj,’ resource grabbing by government cronies (such as the Adani Group) to benefit US corporations like Google, and ongoing farmers’ protests.

Arundhati Roy, writing from Delhi, captured the moment:

The cockroaches are out and about. The farmers have begun marching to Delhi once more, this time to protest the India-US trade deal – the death warrant the government of India has slavishly agreed to sign on their behalf.

The challenge now is to connect these disparate protests into a unified struggle against this broader recolonization project that Rubio talked about.

Education as unifying factor

The student movement was successful, leading the education minister to resign. But they are still strong in their demands and have the power of mobilizing young people.

The President of the All India Students Association said:

We therefore make a promise: We will remain on the ground and continue to build movements for the revocation of NEP 2020 and against the privatisation and destruction of public education. We will struggle for an equal, socially just, publicly funded and democratic education system; for quality education as a right, not a privilege purchased by those who can afford it.

Education has been a pathway for upward mobility in India. And, Kesar explained that families in India have continued to invest heavily in education, including on professional degrees whose costs can exceed the annual expenditure of poorer households, even while graduate employment has failed to expand at the same pace.

US imperialism

Writing in Middle East Critique, Prabhat Patnaik argues that the recolonization of the Global South, as envisioned by the Trump administration will take the form of unequal trade treaties that impose captive markets on nations like India requiring them to import specific quantities of US goods while offering nothing in return.

According to Patnaik, while the monopoly bourgeoisie and certain segments of the urban middle class may be complicit in or even benefit from recolonization, the peasants, petty producers, workers, and agricultural laborers – those who have the most to lose – will resist.

Yet the protests sweeping India today – from students and farmers to the urban unemployed- suggest that even among those Patnaik identifies as potential beneficiaries, the failure of the neoliberal model is generating cracks, making a unified struggle against recolonization not just necessary but increasingly possible.

Featured image via the Canary

By Nandita Lal

Source link

The battle to become the country’s next progressive leader in the mold of Bernie Sanders is heating up ahead of Democrats’ direction-defining Michigan Senate primary.

Nowhere is the jockeying and strategy unfolding behind the scenes more pronounced than between Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Ro Khanna of California, who have taken disparate approaches to the midterms as they build out their political brands. Khanna’s go-everywhere mentality versus Ocasio-Cortez’s more selective involvement in key races this cycle will test their political acumen and relationships, potentially setting them up for a 2028 presidential race that could decide who will inherit the movement.

In much of Sanders’ inner circle, who comes next is pretty obvious, even as the wider progressive movement continues to clash over the answer.

“It’s always been clear that AOC is the heir,” one person close to Sanders who’s been involved in such conversations with him for years, granted anonymity to share their understanding of the private discussions. “Always.”

Yet within the broader Sanders coalition, there is plenty of behind-the-scenes posturing — and outright bickering — over who will ultimately take over for the Vermont senator. Khanna’s allies say Ocasio-Cortez is playing it too safe to be the next standard-bearer, with some prominent left-wing leaders irked by her sparing endorsement strategy.

Ocasio-Cortez’s and Khanna’s diverging paths are on full display in Michigan, where Democrats’ most contentious Senate primary is coming to a head Tuesday in a critical battleground that will have outsized importance in selecting Democrats’ next presidential nominee.

Both representatives and Sanders have backed Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive former public health official who has surged in polls against establishment-backed Rep. Haley Stevens as he consolidates support among the left.

But only Ocasio-Cortez has appeared alongside Sanders in stumping for El-Sayed, with the two holding a joint rally in Lansing, Michigan, last month. Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders are featured prominently in one of El-Sayed’s closing television ads, in a key sign of who the campaign thinks can best help push him over the finish line.

Khanna, meanwhile, cut a separate digital fundraising appeal for El-Sayed and has campaigned for him without Sanders.

Sanders and Khanna do maintain a relationship — the California representative was a national co-chair of Sanders’ 2020 presidential bid — but there’s doubt within the Vermont independent’s orbit over how successful a Khanna presidential run would be or whether he’s best positioned to inherit the progressive throne, should Ocasio-Cortez choose not to run for president in 2028.

“Ro is basically already running, but not many are taking him too seriously as the movement’s next leader,” said another operative close to Sanders, granted anonymity to speak candidly.

In an interview, Khanna brushed off the notion that there’s a single heir to the Vermont senator’s progressive movement. “I believe that Sanders is going to have many successors over decades, and the key is to build a majoritarian progressivism that can win across the country,” he said.

Asked whether an Ocasio-Cortez presidential bid would change his calculus, he answered flatly: “No.” His decision, he says, will come “around Thanksgiving.”

A representative for Ocasio-Cortez declined to comment. Sanders, for his part, is trying to rise above the jockeying.

“The presidential election is in 2 years and 3 months,” Sanders said in a statement. “Let’s focus now on how we resolve the urgent issues facing our country. There is plenty of time to worry about possible presidential candidates.”

Why Sanders world sees AOC as the successor

Sanders, 84, and Ocasio-Cortez, 36, share a deeply personal bond their advisers say transcends politics but remains rooted in their shared ideals. They talk directly about key policy, political ideas and candidates to boost, and they even coordinated their endorsements around a group of New York democratic socialists and progressives who ultimately won House seats.

The two also share a circle of advisers, including Faiz Shakir and Mike Casca. Casca, a former long-time Sanders aide, now serves as Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff and plays a major role in shaping policy and political strategy. Shakir is an adviser to Sanders and executive director of More Perfect Union, a progressive nonprofit media organization.

“I’m sure there are a lot of people who are interested in being the next Bernie Sanders, I think he’d be less inclined to give them his endorsement” over Ocasio-Cortez, said a third person close to Sanders, who’s been involved in the conversations around his political and policy strategy for years, granted anonymity to discuss them.

Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have approached the midterms differently. The Vermont independent has worked to expand his endorsement roster and his presence on the campaign trail this year, which his allies see as an effort to cultivate a lasting generation of progressive leaders to carry on his movement. He often endorses early, acting as a validator for left-leaning candidates’ campaigns and platforms, while Ocasio-Cortez has been serving as more of a closer.

It’s a strategic shift for the New York Democrat, who used to get involved in races earlier — a calculus advisers say is a recognition of her ability to mobilize certain voting blocs, like communities of color and working-class voters, late in the game.

They don’t coordinate on every contest, but they have joined forces in several races — including El-Sayed’s Michigan Senate race and Sam Forstag’s House primary in Montana. Ocasio-Cortez called Sanders as soon as she decided to endorse El-Sayed and they immediately began planning a rally for him, according to a person familiar with the discussions and granted anonymity to describe the private conversations.

Earlier this year, Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez together also developed the leading progressive push to address artificial intelligence. Sanders was the first member of Congress to call for an AI moratorium, and he helped shape Ocasio-Cortez’s stance. The pair unveiled joint legislation in March to ban the rapid build up of data center construction.

Months later, the issue is now cutting across progressive and conservative voting blocs, is a preeminent policy issue on Capitol Hill and is at the heart of dozens of midterm races and even early 2028 presidential talk.

“Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and I understand what is at stake,” Sanders said as he introduced the AI moratorium bill alongside the New York Democrat this spring in the Senate.

Progressive candidates whose campaigns have received nods from both Ocasio-Cortez and Khanna say they are both key validators who carry different appeal.

Khanna has risen in prominence because of his push to release files on Jeffrey Epstein. And Ocasio-Cortez brings the kind of star power and nationalized spotlight that campaigns say is invaluable for growing candidates’ exposure, particularly among younger progressive voters who can be trickier to turn out.

“AOC’s very popular, she has a lot of grassroots support … all across the country,” said Adam Hamawy, who was endorsed by both representatives in his New Jersey House primary this spring. “Ro Khanna has not just progressives, but he’s had a strong stance against corruption. … There’s a lot of overlap but each of them have specific things that come together to paint a wider picture than if I just had one.”

Don’t count Ro out yet

Not everyone around Sanders is sold on Ocasio-Cortez as the heir apparent. Khanna allies argue he’s the one who has been putting in the work — and sticking his neck out for the progressive movement — by backing primary challengers to incumbents, getting out front on issues like the Epstein files, and recently traveling to the West Bank.

“People who are supporting her are supporting her more as a brand,” said one Khanna ally and Sanders world operative, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. “What does it mean to work with her? What does it mean for her to pass a bill? I don’t know her theory of change.”

There is fear Ocasio-Cortez is “weirdly isolating herself” over the years ahead of a 2028 decision, the operative added. “I could not tell you who AOC’s advisers are at this point [beyond Casca]. If you’re thinking of running for president, you want to be in an expansive, elevated, exciting space, not in a controlled environment.”

Ocasio-Cortez has been significantly more selective in her endorsements than either Khanna or Sanders, backing left-wing candidates across several competitive House primaries but steering clear of some of the messiest contests on the map, including Maine Senate and Wisconsin’s imploding gubernatorial primary.

That approach has drawn consternation from some on the left who say she’s playing it too safe given her political cachet, particularly as she declines to join other progressives in endorsing against incumbents — notably in her own backyard — even though that’s how she won her seat in 2018.

“Who cares about your win-loss ratio? What I care about is, are you trying to help fellow progressives or aren’t you?” said Cenk Uygur, a Khanna supporter who founded the progressive online network “The Young Turks” and Justice Democrats.

“AOC cares so much about her colleagues, and her colleagues are establishment Democrats. I don’t care about them. In fact, I’m opposed to them,” Uygur added. “I want them challenged in primaries.”

Khanna has worked to keep his own close ties to Sanders and his circle.

Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ 2016 campaign manager, now serves as a senior adviser to Khanna as he’s pushing to be a high-profile progressive leader and laying the framework for a possible 2028 presidential run.

“No two candidates are equal,” Weaver said. “But I think Ro Khanna has the chance to do what Bernie did, which is to have appeal beyond the Democratic base.”

Khanna has spent years trying to build the kind of early-state infrastructure a presidential campaign requires, traveling to early primary and battleground states to lay the organizational groundwork for a potential run. Since 2021, he has been working to assemble steering committees of 75 to 100 people in New Hampshire and Nevada, with another being built in South Carolina, while working with local political power players, according to Shannon Jackson, another longtime Sanders operative who is now consulting for Khanna.

Over the last week, the California representative has been on what he is calling an “new economic patriotism tour” through Pennsylvania, holding events in counties Trump carried like Erie, Luzerne and Cambria “There is a great desire for a bold, progressive vision that is going to call out an unfair and rigged political and economic system,” he told POLITICO. But the test, Khanna argued, is making that vision work “not just in the Bay Area, not just in Michigan, not just in progressive areas, but in places like Pennsylvania.”

Khanna has endorsed dozens of candidates up and down the ballot this year, wading into some of the most fraught Democratic House, Senate and gubernatorial primaries in the country.

That widespread involvement has produced a mixed track record with some high-profile losses, including Graham Platner’s disgraced exit from Maine’s Senate primary and Tom Steyer’s expensive loss in the California governor’s race. In the case of Platner, Khanna and Sanders endorsed the Maine progressive, while Ocasio-Cortez, notably, stayed out of the race altogether.

Khanna also has backed candidates against the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and establishment. For example, Khanna-endorsed progressive Matt Dunlap in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District successfully defeated the DCCC’s preferred candidate.

“There’s a difference between being a progressive in policies and being a progressive in action,” said Uygur. “And action requires you challenging the system, challenging the establishment. On those grounds, it’s not close. Ro Khanna is head and shoulders above every other Democrat.”

Source link

An Israeli has tried to get a Burger King employee in Breinigsville, Pennsylvania, sacked for saying “Free Palestine”.

In classic ‘always the victim’ fashion, Rami Feinstein filmed employees, then demanded to know from the food chain:

Are you a safe place for Jews right now?

The company said it is investigating the ‘incident’.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by PAL GLOBAL ECHO (@pal.global.echo)

Always the… you know the rest

The video sent the Israel lobby into apoplexy as it tried – of course – to cast Israelis as, you’ve guessed it, the victims.

Notwithstanding issues with US food production, Jews are safe in fast food chains – unlike Palestinians trying to eat amid Israel’s starvation siege of Gaza, where they are likely to be bombed or shot.

Solidarity with Ariana at Breinigsville Burger King. If the company has any spine and principles, she’ll be promoted.

Featured image via Instagram

By Skwawkbox

Source link

On Saturday 1 August, Donald Trump’s Truth Social launched a subscription-based service that gives paying customers “real-time” access to posts from its largest accounts. The social media platform is charging up to $100,000 a month for what it calls “market-moving” insights.

Critics have called the move an act of “brazen corruption”. Trump, a sitting US president, stands to profit by giving traders early access to the Truth Social posts. Those same traders could then profit from acting on subsequent changes in bonds, interest rates and stock prices.

‘Market-moving Truths’

Trump holds majority ownership of Truth Social via Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. He also happens to be the platform’s most significant user, with nearly 13 million followers. The president frequently posts major policy decisions on the site, often with profound implications for global markets.

Truth Social is calling its new feature ‘Truth API’ (i.e., application programming interface). Interim CEO Kevin McGurn stated that it provides:

a direct, licensed, real-time feed of the platform’s most market-moving Truths.

Trump’s often posts news of his administration to the platform before making it public elsewhere. Particularly when his posts have related to the war on Iran or tariffs, they’ve cause massive fluctuations in markets around the world.

‘Outrageous abuse of the President’s office’

On Tuesday 28 July, Democratic senators Adam Schiff and Elizabeth Warren requested that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) examine the service. In a letter to the SEC boss Paul Atkins, the two wrote:

This appears to be an outrageous abuse of the President’s office for his personal benefit that undermines everyday investors and the integrity of our markets, while enriching Wall Street and other wealthy insiders.

The senators are far from the only figures to highlight Trump’s corruption. Financial journalist James Surowiecki voiced his belief that the feature violates insider trading laws. He explained:

Trump is disclosing information (in this case, information about some of his future public statements as president, including statements about policy) that belongs to the US government in exchange for money. That violates his duty of trust and confidence to his employer (the govt), and is illegal. And anyone who pays for the feed is knowingly paying for misappropriated information, which is illegal as well.

Professor Kathleen Clark, of the Washington School of Law, said:

He’s selling expedited, privileged access to information about what he is doing as president. It’s yet more brazen corruption, an improper exploitation of government power to enrich himself.

Dean Baker, one of the founders of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, stated that:

the money that insider traders pocket is money taken from the 401(k)s and IRAs of normal people who work for a living.

Trump’s profiteering presidency

Of course, this level of profiteering and (alleged) corruption is hardly new for Trump’s presidency. On 15 July, Forbes reported that Trump:

took in $2.4 billion last year, according to a Forbes analysis, which overlayed his financial disclosure report with bond filings, securities documents and court records to pinpoint a more specific number than the “at least $2.2 billion” widely reported in recent weeks. The $2.4 billion figure, a combination of operating revenue and proceeds from asset sales, dwarfs the estimated $760 million Trump received in 2024. It is also 6,000 times the current U.S. presidential salary of $400,000.

The business magazine also stated that Trump Media shares rose 5.5%, landing at $10.39 just before closing. Since Trump’s return to office in 2025, shares in Trump Media plummeted by over 70%, equating to a loss of around $6bn for its shareholders.

Featured image via Britannica

By Grace

Source link

Cori Bush’s 2024 primary loss to Wesley Bell was heralded as a major defeat for the insurgent progressive movement.

Now, their rematch for Missouri’s 1st District two years later comes at a time when Bush and her allies seem to be winning the battle for the future of the Democratic Party.

The dueling factions in St. Louis highlight the growing tension over not just the domestic ideological divide in the Democratic Party, but the party’s — and country’s — stance on the U.S.’s longrunning relationship with Israel.

The former representative was among the first sitting members of Congress to call Israel’s actions in Gaza a “genocide” — and now she’s betting that her progressive bonafides and her criticism of the top U.S. ally will boost her to victory with the same electorate that punished her last cycle.

“One of us is of the people, by the people and for the people,” Bush said in a recent interview. “The other one is paid for by AIPAC. That’s the difference.”

Like two years ago, a group aligned with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is the largest outside spender in the race. The organization’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, has spent at least $2.1 million on advertising in the primary, according to ad tracking firm AdImpact.

Roughly half of all adults who identify as Democrats believe that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians, according to a July AP-NORC poll, an accusation that some human rights organizations have made but both the Israeli and American governments strongly deny.

And from Colorado to New York, several progressives have already tapped into voters’ frustrations with party leadership and successfully wielded their criticism of Israel’s government in order to win.

St. Louis is only one of several races on Tuesday testing the Democratic Party’s establishment: voters will also hit the polls in Michigan to cast their ballots for the progressive, Abdul El-Sayed, or the moderate Rep. Haley Stevens for an open Senate seat.

That race has also become a check for voters’ opposition to AIPAC. And some potential 2028 Democratic contenders have already sworn off accepting funding from AIPAC, another sign of the growing unwillingness to be aligned with the organization.

AIPAC and some Democrats have hit back, saying its critics within the Democratic Party have increasingly made the party inhospitable to those generally supportive of Israel.

In response to requests for comment, AIPAC shared a series of ads knocking Bush for her missed votes and her criticism of the Biden administration and former Vice President Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential bid. (In a recent debate, Bush claimed Bell delayed his endorsement of Harris, but both endorsed the former vice president on July 21, 2024, the same day she announced her candidacy.)

Bell unseated Bush two years ago with heavy financial backing from AIPAC, the country’s preeminent pro-Israel lobby. They’ve once again spent heavily on his behalf, and this time, he also comes into the race with establishment support — including endorsements from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and the Congressional Black Caucus PAC.

Bell and his allies have absolutely swamped Bush on the airwaves this year. In addition to UDP’s $2.1 million in ad spending, Bell’s campaign has followed closely behind at over $2 million, according to AdImpact, with over $700,000 more from another super PAC called New Democrat Majority.

Bush, meanwhile, has spent less than $200,000, according to the ad tracker. She boasts the backing of a progressive coalition that includes the Democratic Socialists of America, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and fellow “Squad” member Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.).

Bell has brushed aside the attacks that he’s being bolstered by AIPAC money.

“I think we all can agree that there’s too much money in politics, and I’m a vocal and public supporter of campaign finance reform,” Bell said in an interview. “What I’m not a fan of or a supporter of is singling out certain Americans and saying that they should not participate in our democratic process. That is where I would absolutely draw the line.”

Bell added that the difference between himself and Bush is that he can offer both support and criticism of allies.

“While I’m not the biggest fan of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu], I still believe that we have to stand with our allies,” Bell said. “That doesn’t mean we’re not going to disagree at times with our allies.”

Bell’s and Bush’s showdown in 2024 was arguably the biggest ideological battlefield for the party that year, outside of the discontent surrounding Biden and then Harris’ presidential bids from progressives critical of Israel.

But two years later, it is just one of many fights that has sprawled across the country. Progressive candidates have been racking up primary victories against establishment figures in a trend that some are calling the “Mamdani effect” after democratic socialist New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani took down Andrew Cuomo in both the 2025 primary and general elections.

Still, this year’s St. Louis rematch isn’t quite the marquee fight it was in 2024. Spending has trended down: Collectively nearly $20 million was dropped on the 2024 contest on advertising, according to AdImpact. That’s roughly four times more than this year’s total.

Usamah Andrabi, spokesperson for Justice Democrats, the progressive group that endorsed Bush earlier this cycle, attributed the broader, nationwide ideological fight to a base that has been “pushed to the edge of desperation by the Democratic Party itself.”

“The Democratic Party’s base woke up in January 2025 realizing that their party’s establishment was unfit, unprepared and frankly unwilling to fight back against Donald Trump and Republican extremists with the urgency the moment demanded,” Andrabi said.

Now, as St. Louis voters head to the polls on Tuesday, Bush cast the eventual outcome in dire terms.

“What is at stake,” Bush said, “is the affordability and the peace of every single person in this country.”

Source link

Brothers Andrew and Tristan Tate are facing extradition to the UK over alleged sexual offences, trafficking and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

As the Canary has covered, the pair’s lawyer has been behaving in disturbing and erratic ways in his efforts to defend them. This has now seen him spreading misinformation about the Tates’ alleged victims.

Andrew Tate's lawyer keeps repeating lies about Tate's alleged victims in the UK being caught "planning to extort Tate."

There is no evidence of this. This is an old Tate propaganda talking point from 2023 that he is digging up. pic.twitter.com/ENrIdF6v6N

Advertisement

— Gadget (@Gadget440) August 3, 2026

Tate brothers await extradition proceedings to the UK

The lawyer in question is Joseph McBride, who recently said:

Even if you accept all the allegations against them is true, the amount of good they’ve done for the world tremendously outweighs the bad.

On the allegations in question, the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service announced:

The CPS has decided to prosecute Andrew Tate, 39, with seven further counts of rape, three counts of arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation, three counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and 19 additional charges for offences relating to indecent images of a child and extreme pornography.

The CPS has decided to prosecute Tristan Tate, 38, with one count of sexual assault, two counts of rape and three counts of arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation.

In the video at the top, McBride says:

And the thing is, there’s a pattern that’s been going on for years. In England, they were accused of [sexual assault] a long time ago. And in England, when you’re accused of [sexual assault], the government will take the phones of the accusers as evidence. So they went through the girls’ phones and they found, basically, let’s extort Andrew Tate. And they declined to prosecute. They closed the case.

As journalist and YouTuber Gadget noted, however, there are multiple problems with this.

‘Tate propaganda’

The first problem is the voice note McBride is referencing. In it, the alleged victims discussed whether or not they should share the fact that Andrew Tate provided them with alcohol. The women were worried that if they did share this information, the police would use the fact that they were drinking to discredit them. According to Gadget, “This is what ended up happening”.

The second problem is that the women from the voice note have nothing to do with the alleged crimes the Tates may be extradited over. This is a pretty massive thing to be aware of, obviously.

Gadget also noted:

When McBride says they “tossed the case,” he is omitting some important context.

Earlier this year, Hertfordshire Police re-opened their criminal investigation into these allegations against Tate which had previously been “tossed.” And the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) launched an investigation into the conduct of the detectives behind the initial botched investigation.

Again, these four women are reportedly separate to the seven connected to the current charges for which the Tates are facing extradition to the UK.

Advertisement

Whether McBride likes it or not, his clients have a case to answer in the UK. He clearly seems to be worried about this too. If he wasn’t, he wouldn’t be relying on slander and misinformation.

Featured image via Associated Press/ Vadim Ghirda

By Willem Moore

Source link