Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Politics

Brit Awards 2026: Host Jack Whitehall Jokes About BBC Baftas Drama

Published

on

Brit Awards 2026: Host Jack Whitehall Jokes About BBC Baftas Drama

Brit Awards host Jack Whitehall made it clear early on during this year’s ceremony that he would not be pulling any punches.

As part of his introductory monologue on Saturday night, the comic delivered jibes about several of the A-list nominees, including chart-topper Alex Warren (“what you get if you order Ed Sheeran on Temu”), Mark Ronson (“like if Nick Grimshaw had worked out how to use Garage Band”), Album Of The Year contender Lily Allen (“her album was launched into the charts like a torpedo – only this torpedo didn’t sink a ship, it destroyed a Harbour), performer Robbie Williams (“he’s had more comebacks than his hairline”) and “Songwriter Of The Year… 1996” recipient Noel Gallagher.

Once the pair delivered their rather subdued acceptance speeches, Jack pointed out to viewers that as the night progressed, the ceremony could well get more raucous, meaning “there may be some swearing”.

“But don’t worry, we’ve got the best in the business on the bleep button tonight,” he added. “It’s the guy who did the Baftas. Nothing gets past him.”

Advertisement

Jack was, of course, referring to the scrutiny the BBC has been under for the last week, after they included an uncensored racist slur in their coverage of this year’s Baftas ceremony, which aired on Sunday night on a two-hour time delay.

The incident occurred when Tourette’s syndrome campaigner John Davidson – attending the ceremony alongside the cast and crew of I Swear, the award-winning film based on his life story – experienced an involuntary tic while Sinners actors Michael B Jordan and Delroy Lindo were presenting on stage, resulting in him shouting the N-word from his seat.

Meanwhile, after Delroy Lindo expressed disappointment at how Bafta handled the incident, the film body issued its own apology, accepting “full responsibility” for what transpired.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Adam Thomas Addresses David Haye I’m A Celebrity South Africa Row

Published

on

David Haye

I’m A Celebrity campmate Adam Thomas has spoken out about feeling “pushed to my limits” by co-star David Haye during their stint on the reality show’s All Stars special.

Adam and David were among the famous faces who took part in the second season of I’m A Celebrity: South Africa, which was filmed last year and is currently airing on ITV1.

Over the course of the series, the retired pro boxer has generated a whole lot of controversy for his overzealous approach to the game, his treatment of his fellow contestants and his comments about his girlfriend, Sian Osborne.

In the most recent instalment on Friday night, viewers saw David lambasting Adam for sitting out a Bushtucker Trial on medical grounds, after a flare-up of his psoriatic arthritis.

Advertisement

During the episode, David branded Adam “useless”, claiming that as a “grown-arse man” he should have taken part in the challenge.

The pair then clashed again when Adam sneaking chocolate into the camp for the team to share resulted in them losing out on food later on, which David had earned during that day’s trial.

Adam then offered to have less of the rations than his campmates, which David branded a “hollow gesture”.

On Sunday, the Emmerdale star posted a picture of himself in the I’m A Celebrity: South Africa camp, admitting that the “picture breaks my heart, as I know on the inside what I was dealing with”.

Advertisement

“Truth be told, I thought it was all my fault,” he said. “I now know that’s not the reality…”

David Haye

Adam wrote: “My time in I’m a Celebrity South Africa was one of the toughest things I’ve ever been through, physically, mentally, and emotionally. Watching it back hasn’t been easy at all.

“There were moments I felt pushed to my absolute limit, and if I’m honest, times I didn’t even recognise myself. Living with arthritis is something I don’t really talk about, as much as I should do… but in there it really took its toll.

“My biggest fight was pretending to put on a brave face and trying to hide the pain! That can be exhausting within itself. There were days my body just didn’t want to keep going, but I did. I won’t sit here and say I handled everything perfectly, because I didn’t.

“I wish I spoke up for myself sooner. I wish I stood my ground instead of trying to keep the peace, but I’ve learned that being kind doesn’t mean being weak, and sometimes it takes going through tough moments to find your voice.”

Advertisement

He continued: “Since coming out, I’ve taken time to process everything, and I’m in a much better place now. I let go of the anger, had the conversations I needed to have, and chose peace.

“What I’m most proud of, is at times like this I wanted to walk, I wanted to quit but I didn’t. Even when I wanted to walk away, even when it felt like too much, I never give up! and that means everything to me.”

Adam added: “He broke me in there, he pushed me to my limits, and I’ve told David this and he’s apologised and that’s that! I’ve moved on now, am not one to hold a grudge.

“But thank you for all your lovely messages and all the kind words. We all face people and situations that try to break us, but sometimes those moments are what rebuild you stronger than ever. Be kind.”

Advertisement

Even hosts Ant and Dec have spoken out about David’s conduct on the current series of I’m A Celebrity: South Africa, suggesting that his conduct has “crossed the line from banter”.

Because the All Star run was pre-recorded, I’m A Celebrity viewers won’t have any say in who stays and goes until the live final, when fans will be able to crown their champion via public vote.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

The case for a UK-EU resilience partnership

Published

on

The case for a UK-EU resilience partnership

Jannike Wachowiak makes the case for a UK-EU resilience partnership as a way to both help the two sides be better prepared and able to respond to certain crises and to provide much needed impetus to the UK-EU reset. 

The first post-Brexit UK-EU summit, held in 2025, provided a roadmap of measures intended to soften the edges of the Brexit deal negotiated by Boris Johnson. The second is pencilled in for the summer, and its primary function is clear: to get ongoing talks on agrifood-trade, emission trading and a youth experience scheme over the line. Yet a summit that merely deals with outstanding business is one that is not doing its job. As well as closing negotiations already underway, it is important, not least to maintain a sense of momentum about the UK-EU ‘reset’, to lock the two sides into a continuing process.

Absent new ideas, it will be hard to avoid the impression that the reset is beginning to run out of steam. Various ideas have been suggested – ranging from the UK joining Creative Europe to a UK-EU Industrial Cooperation Council – that would build on the Common Understanding without crossing red lines.

Another idea that would fit the bill, and which has received precious little attention, is the possibility of forming a UK-EU ‘resilience partnership’ to ensure both sides are better prepared and able to respond to certain crises.

Advertisement

Pandemics, wars and climate emergencies like floods, wildfires and severe storms are increasingly common, and cannot be contained in one country. These externalities create precisely the kind of rationale that underpins cooperation among neighbours. What is more, the effects of these crises are increasingly visible to citizens. In 2025, Portugal and Spain experienced the worst wildfires since records began, and across England 6.3 million properties are based in areas at risk of flooding. And most of us have first-hand experience of a global pandemic. This should make crisis preparedness and response an uncontroversial area for cooperation.

And there is a global dimension to this. The Trump administration is pulling the US out of the multilateral global health and climate security systems, with significant cuts to domestic and international crisis prevention programmes. On the day of his inauguration, President Trump ordered the US’ withdrawal from the World Health Organisation, and a year later he announced the US would withdraw from another 66 international organisations, treaties and agencies, many of which are climate-related. This creates a clear need for Europeans to fill the vacuum bilaterally and globally.

Part of the response could be a ‘Resilience Partnership’ to enhance collective resilience and preparedness. This could have several components. The two sides might want to set up a dedicated ‘Health and Climate Security Dialogue ‘to both share information and explore how to build on existing cooperation, including the UK’s association to the EU’s Critical Medicines Alliances and medical research and innovation under the Horizon Programme.

The UK-EU Security and Defence Partnership from May 2025 encourages closer cooperation in these areas, but without going into specifics. The EU and Canada are already a step ahead, with a dedicated ‘Health Dialogue’ set up in 2021, and the promise of a ‘Climate Security Dialogue’ to share climate data and analysis. Given the global dimension, there could be an incentive to create links between the EU’s various dialogues with like-minded partners.

Advertisement

A dedicated EU-UK dialogue could be a launching pad for more formalised ties. For instance to consider whether to include the UK in the activities of the European Climate and Health Observatory. The observatory was set up in 2021, is managed by the Commission and European Environment Agency, and supports 38 members and cooperating countries in preparing for and adapting to the impacts of climate change on human health.

Another possibility would be UK association to the EU Civil Protection Programme. This helps to mobilise resources (like response teams and equipment) and knowledge to support countries affected by war and natural disasters. The largest operation to date has been in support of Ukraine, and the mechanism has also recently been used to coordinate consular support for citizens stranded in the Middle East.

The UK used to be an active and reliable member of the Civil Protection Programme and contributed to 14 emergency operations between 2014 and 2020. Post-Brexit, it could seek association. The programme is open to non-EU member states and includes ten participating countries ranging from Moldova to Norway to Ukraine.

Exploring a ‘Resilience Partnership’ along those lines would an easy win. It would give renewed impetus to the bilateral relationship and make it clear that the reset is ongoing. For the UK, it fits into the government’s preference for incremental progress and does not cross its red lines. For the EU, ‘resilience’ is one of four areas which it wants to see strengthened in its relations vis-à-vis the UK (as outlined in the Commission’s 2024-2029 political guidelines).

Advertisement

For both sides, it would be a pragmatic step forward which could be easily sold to the public. Last but not least, it would further build trust and provide a sense of solidarity which could help pave the ground for other steps further down the line.

By Jannike Wachowiak, Research Associate, UK in a Changing Europe.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Prime Minister Keir Starmer Faces Make Or Break Commons Test

Published

on

Prime Minister Keir Starmer Faces Make Or Break Commons Test

Keir Starmer will battle to save his job as he faces MPs amid calls for him to resign over the Peter Mandelson vetting scandal.

A Labour peer is among those demanding the prime minister quit after it was revealed the shamed former US ambassador failed security vetting before taking up the plumb diplomatic role.

Starmer said he was “furious” that he was not told that Olly Robbins, the top civil servant in the Foreign Office, had ultimately cleared Mandelson to carry out the job.

The PM only found out last Tuesday – and Robbins was sacked on Thursday night.

Advertisement

Starmer has been accused of lying to parliament and the public for previously stating that all of the appropriate vetting processes had been followed before Mandelson was appointed.

He will make a Commons statement on Monday before facing questions from MPs about what he knew and when.

Supporters of Olly Robbins have insisted he was legally precluded from telling the PM that Mandelson had failed the security vetting, but that has been denied by Downing Street.

“No law stops civil servants sensibly flagging UK Security Vetting recommendations, while rightly protecting detailed sensitive vetting information, to allow Ministers to make judgements on appointments or on explaining matters to Parliament,” the government said.

Advertisement

Scottish secretary Douglas Alexander told Sky News: “There are rightfully and reasonably important questions that need to be answered today. Keir Starmer’s going to set out all the facts. The right place for those questions to be answered are at the despatch box in the House of Commons.

“But we saw the leader of the opposition, as recently as Friday, claiming that the prime minister lied.

“That central contention that he wilfully and intentionally misled parliament and the public now relies, given what has emerged since then, relies on what would need to be a growing conspiracy, not just of every minister involved in this process, but of a growing list of civil servants.

“These judgments matter, and in that sense people need to reach a judgment in the round. The right place to do that’s in the House of Commons this afternoon, and the prime minister will set out his case.”

Advertisement

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Louis Tomlinson Unfollows Zayn Malik On Instagram Amid Altercation Reports

Published

on

Zayn Malik and Louis Tomlinson began shooting their documentary last year

Louis Tomlinson appears to have severed ties with his former One Direction bandmate Zayn Malik amid reports of a physical altercation between the two of them.

In October last year, it was reported that Louis and Zayn – whose tumultuous relationship is well-documented – were planning on putting their differences aside and filming a new three-part travelogue series for Netflix, which would see them travelling across America together while trying to mend their friendship.

However, over the weekend, The Sun reported that Netflix had “axed” the series after Zayn allegedly punched Louis during a heated row.

Zayn Malik and Louis Tomlinson began shooting their documentary last year
Zayn Malik and Louis Tomlinson began shooting their documentary last year

The tabloid claimed that the punch came after Zayn made a comment about Louis’ late mum, Johannah Deakin, who died of leukaemia in December 2016.

Louis previously disclosed that it had been among his mum’s dying wishes for him to reconcile with Zayn, with whom he’d been close during their time in One Direction, but fell out when the Pillowtalk singer quit the band at the height of their fame.

Advertisement

HuffPost UK has contacted reps for Louis, Zayn and Netflix for comment.

While neither party has commented publicly on the reports yet, fans have spotted that Louis has now unfollowed Zayn on Instagram, as have his sisters.

Director Nicola B Marsh also reshared a photo of The Sun’s front page about the alleged altercation on her Instagram story, commenting: “There goes the last year of work.”

An official press release for the documentary claimed that it would have seen Louis and Zayn taking part in a road trip of “reconnection, exploration and a lot of laughter”, with Variety reporting that it would feature “intimate conversations about life, love, loss and fatherhood”.

Advertisement

Louis and Zayn were bandmates for around five years, being put into a boyband with Harry Styles, Niall Horan and the late Liam Payne after auditioning for the talent show The X Factor as solo performers.

Zayn left 1D in 2015, after which the band remained together as a four-piece for one final album, before going their separate ways the following year.

Before filming got underway on their travel series, Louis and Zayn had last been seen together at the funeral of Liam Payne in 2024.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Politics Home | Wes Streeting made 63 promises. With 2,000 lives at stake each year, why is there still no plan?

Published

on

Wes Streeting made 63 promises. With 2,000 lives at stake each year, why is there still no plan?
Wes Streeting made 63 promises. With 2,000 lives at stake each year, why is there still no plan?

Professor Neil Gittoes, Chair of the Board of Trustees



Professor Neil Gittoes, Chair of the Board of Trustees
| Royal Osteoporosis Society

Advertisement

Ministers have committed 63 times to rolling out early diagnosis services for osteoporosis. Nearly two years on, there is still no delivery plan, no milestones and no sign of rollout, while 2,000 people die each year

Two years ago, the Health Secretary promised people with osteoporosis life-saving early diagnosis clinics. He has repeated that promise 63 times – yet nothing has changed. And for every year that ministers delay, another 2,000 people die needlessly.

People with osteoporosis have been overlooked for decades, driven by the mistaken belief that broken bones are a normal part of ageing rather than a treatable medical condition. This cruel disease silently weakens bones until they can break from coughs, sneezes or even a hug. For someone with osteoporosis, a fall from standing height can be enough to break a hip. Half of women over 50 will experience fractures due to the condition, alongside one in five men.

Advertisement

I meet grandmothers terrified to lift a newborn baby for fear their bones could shatter, and women in early menopause who are told by GPs they have the bones of an 80-year-old.

Yet help exists. Safe, effective treatments costing as little as £1 a week can restore independence and save lives. So why are millions still missing out?

The answer is a brutal postcode lottery. Half of NHS Trusts still lack Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) – specialist clinics that identify patients and get them onto treatment before it’s too late. Without them, the consequences are devastating. A broken hip is often a death sentence – killing over a quarter of patients within a year.  

Advertisement

During the 2024 general election campaign, this community was given hope for the first time. All three main parties proposed a national rollout of FLS clinics to every area by 2030. Since then, Reform and the Greens have added their support, too.

Wes Streeting went furthest: he promised that a plan for national rollout would be one of his first acts in government. But two years on, no plan has been delivered. And we’ve seen no new clinics at all.

Around 60 NHS Trusts in England still lack Fracture Liaison Services. A national rollout takes time and requires steady progress year by year. Ministers would have needed to deliver FLS to around 24 Trusts by now to stay on track for full rollout by 2030. Instead, delivery stands at zero.

In opposition, Wes Streeting described delays to these clinics as a “betrayal of patients.” With nearly two years now passed, we’ve had more delay under this government than the last.

Advertisement

And delay costs lives. Around 2,000 people die each year following hip fractures that these clinics prevent. In the time since this promise was made, 4,000 lives have been lost waiting for rollout.

Meanwhile, the NHS has spent £150m treating avoidable fractures since the election – far more than it would have cost to put these preventative clinics in place. This isn’t just a missed opportunity. It’s a failure that is harming patients right now.

We should be making progress. More than 60 countries already are. New Zealand has just rolled out these services to cover 99 per cent of its population, while Japan has quadrupled FLS in three years. In Wales, ministers made FLS a national priority and mandated that, within five years, each service should develop the bandwidth to treat every citizen aged over 50 in their area.

By 2030, therefore, it will be markedly safer to grow old in Wales than in England. There is no excuse for England falling so far behind.

Advertisement

Ministers point to a very small investment in bone scanners, made to honour a separate (very welcome) election promise. But a scan without treatment saves no one. Without assessment and follow-up through Fracture Liaison Services, patients remain at high risk of another fracture.

Worse still, uncertainty from Whitehall is pushing fracture prevention locally into reverse. Some areas have paused their own plans, expecting a national rollout that has yet to materialise.

Ultimately, the question is about political will. Ministers have made the commitment. They’ve repeated it 63 times. They know it will save lives and money. Why won’t they deliver it? People with osteoporosis have waited long enough. After decades of neglect, they were promised change.

If the promise is broken, it will deepen the sense that their lives simply don’t matter.

Advertisement

We stand ready to work with the government to achieve the outcome they promised. We won’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. If a credible plan is published, we’ll get behind it and help ministers get those clinics set up.

But progress starts with a plan.  

During the election, people with osteoporosis were promised change. Two years on, they’re still waiting. So I ask the Health Secretary Wes Streeting directly: will you now publish the plan for the life-saving bone clinics you promised?

 For more information, visit theros.org.uk/StillNoPlan

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Helen Whately: The Welfare bill is more than twice what we spend on our own defence – that can’t go on

Published

on

Helen Whately is the Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

We cannot defend Britain with an ever-expanding welfare budget.

That statement last week might have escaped notice — but for the fact that it was made by Lord George Robertson: former Labour Defence Secretary, Labour Peer, and Labour-appointed author of the Government’s Strategic Defence Review.

Lord Robertson is not someone you’d expect to cause trouble for our beleaguered Prime Minister. But like many of us, he has run out of patience. And as former Secretary General of NATO, he knows the consequences more than most.

Advertisement

Britain’s welfare spending is now undermining our ability to defend ourselves.

The state exists first and foremost to keep us safe, yet we spend only 2.4 per cent of GDP on defence. As NATO members we have pledged to reach 5% by 2035 — a level we have surpassed not on defence, but on working-age welfare. Annual working-age welfare spending is now £140bn and rising, against a mere £50bn on defence.

The comments below will say “it happened under your watch” — and indeed it did. Under Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron and May, because the decline in defence spending goes back to the end of the Cold War. Only when Russia invaded Ukraine did our defence spending – under Boris – seriously step up.

Meanwhile, welfare has kept growing. Working-age welfare went from 2–3 per cent of GDP in the early 1980s to 6 per cent after the 2008 crash. We brought it back to 4.5 per cent pre-Covid; it has since risen to 5.3 per cent.

Advertisement

The nature of welfare has also changed.

When the modern welfare state was built after WWII, support was limited and often short-term — unemployment cover for those who’d paid National Insurance, or temporary sickness relief. Old age benefits were drawn on by fewer people, for less time. Means-tested benefits were a last resort and stigmatised.

Now, the fastest-growing part of the welfare bill is health and disability. More people are assessed as unable to work and go onto benefits; few ever come off them. The welfare state is no longer a stopgap or safety net. For a growing number of people, it is a permanent alternative to work.

Part of the problem is structural. Most public spending is controlled through departmental budgets, with Ministers and Permanent Secretaries forced to balance priorities and operate within limits. Welfare is demand-led: eligibility is set, and anyone who qualifies gets it. As caseloads grow, spending rises automatically. There’s no pressure to keep to a budget, but infinite jeopardy for any Secretary of State who dares make savings.

Advertisement

Add shifting social attitudes. Claiming benefits used to carry a sense of shame. More common now is entitlement — ‘it’s my right’ — without any commensurate responsibility. Meanwhile, working families are going without holidays, deferring purchases, furnishing their homes from charity shops, all the while paying taxes to fund others to have things they cannot afford.

We’ve reached a tipping point. As one constituent wrote to me recently: “You work so hard — and for what?

Unless something changes, the UK will spend £650 billion on working-age welfare by the end of the decade, against less than £300 billion on defence.

The war in the Middle East has left us exposed. “We are underprepared. We are underinsured. We are under attack. We are not safe” — Lord Robertson again.

Advertisement

We have to grip welfare spending so we can invest in defence. That’s clear to me. But to Labour?

Labour MPs have been celebrating the lifting of the two-child benefit cap at a cost of over £3 billion a year. The prospect of weaker-than-ever Starmer persuading his backbenchers to vote for welfare cuts in the months ahead is laughable.

Except this is no laughing matter. The security of our country is at stake.

Serious times need serious leadership. We cannot keep spending more on Welfare, funding millions to stay at home with anxiety and ADHD, while starving Defence.

Advertisement

As Kemi Badenoch has said, whether we like it or not, we are in this war. We must tell the truth. We live in a world that has become more dangerous- and we must change our priorities.

I have already identified £23 billion of welfare savings: restricting benefits to foreigners, stopping sickness benefits for anxiety and ADHD, reforming Motability, returning to face-to-face assessments. I am not stopping there.

A country where those who can work do work will be a stronger country. We have drifted from a culture of “I can because I must” to a culture of “I can’t” — stripping people of agency and turning them into victims. It is time to turn that around. To invest in the defence of the realm over the benefit state. We can, because we must.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Colonial settlers raid villages in the occupied West Bank

Published

on

Settlers

Settlers

On 18 April, in Khirbet Abu Falah, northeast of Ramallah in the occupied West Bank, up to 100 settlers gathered at an outpost just outside the village. This was a new outpost, only established a few days previously.

Illegal colonists and Israeli occupation forces coordinate to storm the villages of Khirbet Abu Falah and al Mughayyir

Some of the settlers tried to go down the hill from the outpost to attack houses in the village, but residents gathered to protect their properties.

Shortly after this, Israeli occupation forces (IOF) raided several homes in Abu Falah, assaulting and detaining several residents. The settlers then spread out around several areas of the village, and also went to al Mughayyir, although no attacks were reported.

On the evening of the same day, during one of the daily IOF raids on al Mughayyir, occupation soldiers assaulted two young Palestinian children.

Advertisement

Seven-year-old Abdallah Abu Alia, and eight-year-old Mohammed Abu Alia, were playing in the street near their home with a group of children. When they heard the military vehicle approaching, most of the children ran away, but Abdallah and Mohammed remained where they were.

IOF intimidate and assault seven and eight year old children

The military intimidated, threatened and pushed around the two children, and then told them to stay seated on the ground while they drove away.

Shortly after this incident, 33-year-old Ghaith Abu Naim was attacked in his car. He was in Marj Saya, on the road between Abu Falah and al Mughayyir. He was driving home from work when settlers on a quad bike — supplied by the “Israeli” government — drove alongside his car and started throwing stones. They then attacked him with an iron bar, injuring his shoulder and damaging his car. A relative of Abu Naim told us he used to leave for work at 9 am but, fearing the constant attacks from the settlers and the IOF, he now leaves home two hours earlier each morning.

On the night of 18 April, Turmus Ayya — which is also in northeast Ramallah and adjacent to the villages of Abu Falah and al Mughayyir, was also attacked by settlers. Dozens of these terrorists entered the village, from the direction of the nearby outpost, and set fire to the home of a Palestinian family.

Advertisement

They also torched a vehicle, before being confronted by unarmed residents and forced to leave.

Threatening graffiti left by settlers

Settlers also spray-painted the words “revenge” and “Regards from Abu Falah” in Hebrew, on the wall of a building in the village.

In the past two months, three outposts have been established in the Abu Falah and al Mughayyir area. All are in Area B, on privately owned Palestinian land. One of these outposts was set up on private land in the al Khaleel valley, close to al Mughayyir, when the Abu Najer family was forcibly displaced due to settler violence. Another outpost is in a Palestinian home in Abu Falah, which settlers took by force and established on 8 March. This was the day after three Palestinians were killed in the village, by the IOF and settlers. The third and most recent outpost, mentioned at the beginning of this article, is on a hill at the edge of Abu Falah.

The attacks, from both the illegal Jewish settlers and the IOF are relentless and Palestinians have no one they can turn to for protection. Every day, somewhere in the West Bank, Palestinians have their property destroyed or stolen, or are forcibly displaced, injured or killed.

Advertisement

At the time of writing, on 19 April, settlers stole more than 150 sheep belonging to al Mughayyir resident Anis Mahmoud Abu Alia. Although they were confronted by villagers, the IOF protected the settlers as they left the area. Several hours later, the village was again stormed by the IOF, who beat a child and fired tear gas at residents.

Featured image via the Canary

By Charlie Jaay

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

The Nazi pug, 10 years on

Published

on

The Nazi pug, 10 years on

Ten years ago this week, Mark Meechan – aka Count Dankula – posted a joke video to his little-watched YouTube channel. It showed his girlfriend’s pet pug, Buddha, performing Nazi salutes and responding to the phrase, ‘Gas the Jews’. The skit went viral – and also caught the attention of the Scottish authorities, who had Dankula arrested, thrown in a police cell and eventually convicted for his ‘grossly offensive’ video. spiked’s Fraser Myers caught up with the now notorious ‘speech criminal’ to find out whether Count Dankula may have had the last laugh.

Plus: watch spiked’s classic documentary, The Curious Case of the Nazi Pug, presented by Andrew Doyle, to get the full story here.

Join us for the spiked summit, our biggest ever live event, on Saturday 27 June in Westminster, featuring Konstantin Kisin, Lionel Shriver, Katharine Birbalsingh, Toby Young, Allison Pearson, Brendan O’Neill, Tom Slater and more speakers to be announced. Get tickets here.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Kash Patel denies claim he’s paranoid & drunk on the job

Published

on

Images of Kash Patel

Images of Kash Patel

Kash Patel — Clearly, people who are suffering from alcoholism and poor mental health should receive support. Part of this help should be ensuring they’re not actively in charge of law enforcement agencies.

And yet:

Kash Patel has now responded to the claims made against him.

You may be unsurprised to discover his response has reassured precisely no one.

Febrile Bottle Inspector

The article from the Atlantic contained revelations like the following:

Advertisement

In Friday, April 10, as FBI Director Kash Patel was preparing to leave work for the weekend, he struggled to log into an internal computer system. He quickly became convinced that he had been locked out, and he panicked, frantically calling aides and allies to announce that he had been fired by the White House, according to nine people familiar with his outreach. Two of these people described his behavior as a “freak-out.”

It would later turn out that a simple technical error had locked Patel out. This was something he could have confirmed himself if he hadn’t gone all Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas.

I’m going to be completely real and admit that I did once react to being locked out of my work computer by freaking out and assuming I’d been fired. This, of course, is why I’m not pursuing a senior administrative position within the FBI. That and all the terrible stuff they do (more on that in a bit).

The Atlantic also reported:

The IT-lockout episode is emblematic of Patel’s tumultuous tenure as director of the FBI: He is erratic, suspicious of others, and prone to jumping to conclusions before he has necessary evidence, according to the more than two dozen

People are saying that “jumping to conclusions before he has necessary evidence” should rule him out of an FBI position; clearly those people are unfamiliar with the work this agency does.

Advertisement

The Atlantic added:

Several officials told me that Patel’s drinking has been a recurring source of concern across the government. They said that he is known to drink to the point of obvious intoxication, in many cases at the private club Ned’s in Washington, D.C., while in the presence of White House and other administration staff. He is also known to drink to excess at the Poodle Room, in Las Vegas, where he frequently spends parts of his weekends. Early in his tenure, meetings and briefings had to be rescheduled for later in the day as a result of his alcohol-fueled nights, six current and former officials and others familiar with Patel’s schedule told me.

No wonder he’s paranoid if he’s got the beer fear.

Simultaneously, it’s no wonder he needs to drink if he’s anxious all the time.

It’s a vicious circle, and one which won’t  find remedy as long he’s in such a high-pressure position.

Advertisement

Kash Patel — Response and perspective

This is how Patel reacted:

Memo to the fake news – the only time I’ll ever actually be concerned about the hit piece lies you write about me will be when you stop. Keep talking, it means I’m doing exactly what I should be doing. And no amount of BS you write will ever deter this FBI from making America

Many responded in turn with images of Patel celebrating with the American Winter Olympic hockey team:

Patel also revealed new information in responding to the claims:

The question is this: is Patel is really not good enough for the FBI?

The actual FBI

In an article titled “How the FBI Created a Terrorist”, the Intercept wrote about how the FBI targeted a Muslim man with a schizoaffective disorder:

FBI employees talked about how Osmakac didn’t have any money, how he thought the U.S. spy satellites were watching him, and how he had no concept of what weapons cost on the black market.

The source of their amusement was also their primary source of concern. Osmakac was, in the FBI’s own words, “a retarded fool” who didn’t have any capacity to plan and execute an attack on his own. That was a challenge for the FBI.

Advertisement

The piece additionally reported:

In constructing the sting, FBI agents were in communication with prosecutors at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida, the transcripts show. The prosecutors needed the FBI to show Osmakac giving Amir Jones money for the weapons. Over several conversations, the FBI agents struggled to create a situation that would allow the penniless Osmakac to hand cash to the undercover agent.

“How do we come up with enough money for them to pay for everything?” asks FBI Special Agent Taylor Reed in one recording.

“Right now, we have money issues,” Amir admits in a separate conversation.

Their advantage was that Dabus, the informant, had given Osmakac a job. If they could get Dabus to pay Osmakac, and then make sure Osmakac used his paycheck to make a payment toward the weapons, the agents could satisfy the Justice Department. “Once he gives it to him, it’s his money, whether we orchestrated it or not,” Reed says.

Advertisement

Reading all that, you could wonder if it’s better for the FBI to be less efficient?

The reason it probably isn’t is that they’ll still do all the same reprehensible shit; they’ll just suffer fewer consequences, because no one in charge cares anymore.

Either way, Patel needs to be given the boot ASAP.

If you think he’s paranoid now, just wait until he finds out about the X-Files.

Advertisement

Featured image via Gage Skidmore (Wikimedia)

By Willem Moore

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Campaigners condemn GMP’s “despicable” “extreme violence” vs anti-fascist protesters

Published

on

Greater Manchester Police

Greater Manchester Police

Anti-fascist campaigners have condemned Greater Manchester Police’s “despicable” and “extreme” violence against peaceful activists protesting against yesterday’s white supremacist march in Manchester.

In a statement, the Northern Police Monitoring Project (NPMP) group and Resist Britain First slammed physical and chemical attacks on non-violent protesters by police concealing their identities and numbers — who then prevented paramedics and ambulances reaching their victims. The groups also pointed out that the force showed no apparent shortage of resource when it came to restricting and attacking anti-extremist counter-protesters — yet allowed fascist marchers to roam and attack with impunity:

Britain First March and the ‘Resist Britain First’ Counter Demonstration — Manchester City Centre, 18 April 2026

Today, the Northern Police Monitoring Project were present as Resist Britain First mobilised in significant numbers to oppose the racist and fascist group Britain First, as they marched through the centre of the city.

Advertisement

What we witnessed raises yet more serious and urgent concerns about the despicable conduct of Greater Manchester Police, and the many forces deployed alongside them from across the country.

AN EXTRAORDINARY DEPLOYMENT OF RESOURCE

At a time of deep and sustained austerity – when public services are being cut to the bone and communities across Greater Manchester are suffering – GMP showed no shortage of resources today. The scale of the policing was staggering.

POLICE VIOLENCE AGAINST ANTIFASCIST PROTESTERS

Officers behaved thuggishly, with consistent and serious aggression and violence -overwhelmingly directed at antifascist counter-protesters, not at the far-right fascist marchers they were facilitating. This included numerous punches, kicks and violent attempts to remove masks, in some cases causing injuries, as well as repeated use of batons and PAVA spray, and the deployment of horses against protesters.

Advertisement

A number of officers were observed without visible badge numbers, in clear breach of police regulations. This is not an oversight -it is a pattern with a long and troubling history in public order policing. Officers who conceal their identity while using force are officers who believe they are answerable to nobody. Today’s behaviour suggests that belief is well founded.

The use of PAVA spray was particularly alarming. A chemical irritant that was only approved for police use in 2014, PAVA causes intense burning to the eyes, skin and respiratory tract – and poses serious risks to anyone with asthma or other respiratory conditions. It is not a neutral or routine tool.

It was deployed repeatedly, in significant volume, without warning, and without lawful justification. Officers were observed spraying PAVA into the eyes of antifascist demonstrators at close range, and in a number of cases deliberately attempting to remove eyewear from protesters – apparently with the sole intention of maximising the harm caused. This is not policing. This is targeted cruelty.

NO DUTY OF CARE

Advertisement

As people sustained serious injuries, officers were observed actively blocking medical assistance from assisting injured protesters. GMP appeared to have no regard whatsoever for its duty of care to those in its custody or in its presence – at least not if they are antifascists. This constitutes a serious breach of GMP’s legal obligations, whilst also making, clear that they function not to protect people, but to maintain and abuse control by any means necessary.

We also observed, not for the first time, the police’s disregard and disrespect for the protected role of Legal Observers. This is a serious concern given the important role that Legal Observers play in independently documenting and witnessing police conduct on behalf of those whose rights are at risk.

ENABLING FASCISM

Let us be clear about what today was really about. GMP’s operational priority was to facilitate a racist and fascist organisation marching through the centre of our city, and to suppress and contain any opposition to that march. This was the active enabling of fascism – using public money, public officers, and significant violence against the public. While antifascists were being punched, kicked and PAVA-sprayed, far-right streamers were left free to harass and incite antifascists, and film injured protesters receiving treatment. The contrast could not have been clearer: there should be no doubt about whose side the police are on. Despite this extraordinary effort, the antifascist counter-protest vastly outnumbered Britain First. The people of Manchester made their position clear.

Advertisement

The statement ended with a message for complicit corporate media – and for Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham, who has defended the police against accusations of misconduct and brutality:

MEDIA FAILURE

We are deeply concerned by the failure of local and national media to report critically on what happened today. Uncritically reproducing GMP press lines while ignoring the documented violence of officers is not journalism – it is the laundering of institutional propaganda. Equally, the failure to accurately report the scale of the antifascist mobilisation – which dwarfed Britain First in numbers – serves to falsely legitimise a movement that was comprehensively rejected by the people of Manchester today. The public deserves better.

A MESSAGE TO ANDY BURNHAM

Andy Burnham, as Mayor of Greater Manchester, has been a consistent and vocal advocate for GMP – championing ever-increasing budgets and defending the force at every turn. We ask him directly: is this what he wants to see? Officers injuring protesters, blocking medical care, and chaperoning an explicitly racist and fascist organisation through his city? He must answer for the institution he funds and champions.

Advertisement

POLICING AND FASCISM

Today made visible something that many already know: the line between policing and fascism is vanishingly thin. When the police protect fascists from the communities they threaten, we must name that for what it is.

WHO PROTECTS THE FASCISTS?
THE POLICE PROTECT THE FASCISTS.

The Canary’s reporters at the scene captured some appalling scenes of the police’s actions:

Advertisement
View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Canary (@thecanaryuk)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Leigh Evans (@leighcadno)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Canary (@thecanaryuk)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Barold (@just.barold)

In a separate statement, NPMP condemned the “extreme” police violence and said it is holding an event for victims in the city next Tuesday 21 April 2026:

NPMP Statement on the policing of the RBF counter demonstration on 18th April 2026

Solidarity with all those who came out yesterday, especially those harmed by the police 🖤

While we all saw the extreme violence used by the police, we also engaged in and witnessed may acts of community care and rapid solidarity responses. Our gratitude to each and every person who stood their ground, supported others, provided medical support, ran to get more medical supplies, helped people stay hydrated, get to safety and were holding formal medic and legal observer roles ✊🏽

If you were harmed by or witnessed the police violence and want/need to be in community or get some understanding around complaints processes — you are so welcome to join our community solidarity space! This Tuesday, 5.30-7.30, Windrush Centre. More info on our grid.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025