Politics
Alexander Bowen: Why does Starmer think the ‘faithist’ place for Bishops is staying in the House of Lords?
Alexander Bowen is a trainee economist based in Belgium, specialising in public policy assessment, and a policy fellow at a British think tank.
The Hereditataries are no more – or at least in a month and a half, when this sitting closes, they will be no more. Gone with these hereditary peers then is the last of our living link with 1341 – the first Parliament to meet with the Church and the Peerage separated from the rest.
These peers had survived five religious settlements, four civil wars, one in which the other chamber disbanded it for being “useless and dangerous” and executed its de facto leader, the transition from farm to factory, however many ‘people’s budgets’, and even, unlike for example Saddam-Hussein, Tony Blair, but they could not survive Keir Starmer. After one thousand years it would be Keir Starmer who would stand up for the working man’s right to be quasi-useful in a quasi-useful body – so long as said working man had furnished him with quasi-tailored suits or quasi-effective comms advice.
I, for what it’s worth largely agree with these governing crusaders, in outcome if not in spirit, the presence of hereditary peers was indeed largely bizarre. Appeals to the ‘living embodiments of one-thousand years of history’ and tales of the Norman Conquest are pleasant enough, when the Bayeux Tapestry arrives in London I shall be one of the first in the egregiously long queue, but the legitimacy and purpose of a governing system is defined by the outcomes it delivers for the era in which it operates not by the symbols it once devised. Those outcomes are, as I think we can clearly see, in the category of ‘not good’ at best.
Where I object however to Keir’s culling is in its inconsistency. If our great modernisers are to commit to their own long march through the House of Lords, removing the 92 hereditary peers, then ought they not on their own principles – that these Lords were unrepresentive, unelected, appointed elites with little merit – turn their weapons to the Lords Spiritual? Do they really serve any greater purpose? Why then do they remain?
On any historic basis they ought to be a perfect target for a Labour government committed to symbolic scalps – fox hunters, hereditaries, private schools, farmers with excessively large landholdings. Do Bishops in their Palaces not warrant the same treatment? Was the Church of England not once said to be the Conservative Party at prayer? If for Sieyès Starmer the third estate is everything then why only dismantle the second?
It is, I think, largely because the Church of England has for its part adopted a kind of ecclesiastical Starmerism – doing much to win over those with little interest in it, and little to keep those who have been its demographic. As a shadow for Starmer’s 12 per cent approval, the Church enjoys its 2 per cent attendance.
It is an idea mostly clearly embodied in the concept of ‘Faithism’, that is the belief that faith underpins communities, and their religious practices are, if not identical, largely interchangeable with history condensed into peculiarities.
It is a vision of religion I find slightly bizarre, not least because it seems to be underpinned by assuming your own view of religion is the view of religion, but it is a position that is at least rational. That we have special privileges that we would like to keep and that we can only reasonably defend them amongst our sort if we also extend them to sufficiently docile ‘co-religionists’. It is a kind of spiritual rent seeking – collaboration, potentially sincere, but nonetheless defined by a common attempt to ward off secularism. Like all cartels however, it is not one designed to serve the public interest.
Now I would not presume to know what is in the public’s interest as far as religion is concerned, faith cannot be measured nor evidenced, that is after all the point of faith, but it is at least worth looking at what the alternative to ecclesiastical Starmerism looks like. France and Québec offer that alternative – an alternative where instead of all faiths being privileged, none are.
France for its part defines itself as a secular country and actually means it. The Jules Ferry Laws remove religion from state schools – applied to Britain it means no more lying to nuns to try and get into a better school through the religious quota and no more Trojan Horses. The 1905 Law on Separation of Church and State – apply it to Britain and it means no more religious symbols in the public place, no more religious organisations for civil servants, no more voting in Churches or campaigning in mosques, and it means religious figures being as accountable as anyone else for inciting hatred.
Keep going further to 2004’s law banning conspicuous religious symbols in schools or 2021’s separatism law letting the government supervise and shutter religious groups that attack the basic values of France. Québec for its part has Bill 21 – preventing public religious affiliation by state employees, Bill 94 – preventing public religious affiliation by anyone who interacts with schoolchildren, and now Bill 9 banning public prayer.
That latter bill may be one well worth taking note of given the most discussed subject of the last week – Nick Timothy’s call to ban the public iftar in Trafalgar Square, a position that was naturally criticised by the Church of England’s faithist leaders. Nick Timothy, whatever one thinks of his specific conclusion and whatever wants to propose as a speculative motivation, though I don’t frankly think it particularly matters, is at least asking the right question. If the public square is our collective good, can it be privatised for one faith even temporarily?
The Church of England in preserving its privileges may say yes, but the rest of us needn’t.
Morgan McSweeney is the man who manoeuvred Keir Starmer into power. At one time, this was something McSweeney could brag about; now it’s like admitting to being the guy who shat in the pool.
Not satisfied with bringing his own party to the point of electoral oblivion, McSweeney is now rumoured to have his sights set on Ukraine:
EXC w/@Gabriel_Pogrund
Morgan McSweeney will attend a security conference in Ukraine this month as he considers his post-Downing Street career
He is understood to be compelled by the question of how AI will affect the next election in Ukraine, which he believes will be one of…
— Lara Spirit (@lara_spirit) April 11, 2026
Haven’t the people of Ukraine suffered enough?
Morgan McSwAIny
The above post finishes:
He is understood to be compelled by the question of how AI will affect the next election in Ukraine, which he believes will be one of the most consequential in recent European history
Friends believe he is interested in helping Zelensky in any future contest
Oh, we’re sure McSweeney is interested in how AI will affect the Ukrainian election. And by that, we mean we’re sure the wretched, little weasel will be the one using AI to affect the Ukrainian election.
McSweeney, 48, is particularly interested in the role AI could play in elections in Ukraine. According to the International Panel on the Information Environment, an independent group of Swiss-based scientists, AI was used in more than 80 per cent of elections in 2024, when a record number of countries held contests.
It’s difficult to understand what this means, because there are multiple technologies we now refer to as ‘AI’. The reality is it’s probably closer to 100%, because Western politicians are inherently lazy and feckless people, which means many of them are using ChatGPT to write emails and respond to constituents.
The Times added:
Russia, along with China and Iran, has a well-documented history of using the technology to disrupt elections, particularly using “deepfake” videos and bogus images, which the average voter may find difficult to identify.
Russia, China, and Iran, is it?
Is there another country which has famously leaned into AI?
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) May 3, 2025
The Trump regime have also used AI to present a false impression of its political enemies:
AI is definitely a problem, but let’s be real; that problem isn’t limited to the countries that the newspaper people tell us to be scared of.
Morgan McSweeney’s History
The Times added:
In 2024 a Russian operation used AI and other tools to mount a disinformation campaign in Romania, leading a court to nullify the results of the first round. A Russian campaign also created fake videos in last year’s presidential elections in Poland that suggested Ukrainian refugees were planning to disrupt voting.
Give McSweeney’s record, do you think he’ll be countering disinformation, or do you think he’ll be generating his own?
If you’re unfamiliar with said record, here’s what Paul Holden wrote in The Fraud:
McSweeney joined Labour in the mid-1990s as a receptionist and then a member of the party’s media operations. During the 2001 election he was given the task of feeding data into Peter Mandelson’s famed Excalibur computer that stored information to be used by the party’s rebuttal unit.
He was storing information to use against political enemies, in other words — using cutting edge technology to enact Mandelson’s ‘dark arts‘.
Is this the guy we want to be experimenting with how to use AI in elections?
Holden also wrote:
McSweeney is a long-time protégé of Peter Mandelson, the architect of New Labour who, in February 2017, publicly bragged that he was “working every day” to bring down Corbyn’s elected leadership. That doesn’t sound very unifying. Mandelson has been quoted saying of McSweeney:
“I don’t know who and how and when he was invented, but whoever it was . . . they will find their place in heaven.”
If Peter Mandelson or Morgan McSweeney make it to heaven, we’re pretty sure that means all known religions are wrong, because clearly righteousness was never the point.
Holden additionally noted:
McSweeney explained that the Labour Together Project had two missions: first, it had to prepare for when Corbyn eventually stepped down, identifying and developing a candidate who could swoop in to take Corbyn’s place. This role would eventually be played by Keir Starmer. …
Second, Labour Together had to “ensure” that Corbyn “lost badly”, according to Maguire and Pogrund. Only Corbyn’s resounding defeat in a general election would remove him from the scene and trigger a new leadership contest.
That’s correct; Labour bigwig McSweeney sought to ensure Labour lost a general election.
How could anyone could trust this rat to help them fight an election campaign?
Featured image via Kremlin (Wikimedia)
Victoria Derbyshire has slapped down Tucker Carlson after he claimed it was “not legal” in the UK to criticise Israel.
The right-wing podcaster made the bizarre allegation as he admitted Britain has “been shafted” by Donald Trump’s administration.
He had earlier accused the US president of being “a slave” to Israel over the Iran war.
Carlson, a former close ally of Trump, made his comments during an appearance on BBC 1′s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme.
He said: “It is illegal, it is a crime for which you can be arrested in Britain right now criticising Israel.
“If you say you’re for Palestine Action you can be arrested, a lot of people have been arrested, so in other words it is not legal in Britain to criticise another country.”
Derbyshire interrupted to tell him: “That is not true.”
Carlson replied: “I’m sorry, what is not true about that? Have people not been arrested in Britain for criticising Israel? They certainly have been. There’s video tape of it.”
But Derbyshire hit back: “Palestine Action is a proscribed group, it is banned.”
Carlson said: “Why is it banned? It is banned because the Israeli government wanted it banned. I often criticise Britain, but I love Britain. I have family there and I don’t think Britons understand just how badly they have been shafted by the United States, and I am ashamed of that.
“I hope that our next president strikes a far more conciliatory tone with Britain and tries to help Britain because there are a lot of problems that will be incredibly obvious by the time of the next presidential election.”
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.
I have to be honest here. I couldn’t ever imagine the possibility of the Green Party leading an opinion poll.
Ever.
I would’ve bet my vital organs on Liz Truss returning to Number 10 in a blaze of glory before a load of sensible tree-huggers topped any UK opinion poll.
But the Green Party has quite clearly changed and it looks far closer to the broad church that Labour once claimed to be.
If the Green Party continues to open its doors to people from across the left, its chances of winning some form of power increase tenfold.
The Green Party surge
Labour is now a fully-fledged centre-right government, and it has narrowed its base considerably. This is why the Green surge is happening.
So, where is the ceiling for the Greens? If we use a national projection of the upcoming local elections, could we get an idea of where and how the Greens can make serious inroads into Labour heartlands?
And where does Your Party fit in to all of this? Or are they still electing a steering group to form a committee to vote on the best method of having a vote on something that needs a committee to vote for?
Don’t fucking ask me. I know nothing.
Just for one moment, take a look at where we are, and I will tell you why I think Britain needs the Green Party.
Back in April, last year, YouGov asked Britons where they would place themselves on the political spectrum.
About 29% identify on the left (including “slightly/fairly/very left-wing”), 26% on the right, 22% in the centre, and the rest, amusingly, don’t actually know. That’s nearly a third of the electorate that claim to be a lefty.
For arguments sake, let’s split that 22% that describe themselves as centrists, straight down the middle. This would take the left vote to around 40% and pretty much in-line with Jeremy Corbyn’s 2017 general election vote share.
Reinvigorating the left
Britain needs the Green Party.
With the painfully slow emergence of new left projects, some on the left have already moved to the Greens under its recent “eco-populist” shift. This really shouldn’t be seen as a problem because this pluralism strengthens the broader movement.
The Greens provide an organised, electorally viable home for eco-conscious socialists who want to fight Labour’s shift to the right and the dark forces of capitalism without waiting for the perfect socialist vehicle.
Importantly, the Greens stop the left from being reduced to a single personality or party, and they demonstrate that left ideas can win, quite comfortably, outside of the Labour brand.
Britain needs the Green Party.
I get why some people might view the Greens as insufficiently class-focused or too liberal on certain issues. I have voiced my own concerns in the past.
But the dominant view today — reflected in calls for tactical co-operation — is that Britain’s dire situation requires every left force pulling in the same direction, particularly where policies overlap.
The Greens are not the main engine of socialist transformation, but they are an essential part of the ecosystem that will make it possible. Without them, the left would be narrower, and considerably easier for centrists and the right to dismiss as outdated or unrealistic.
Humiliating Labour
Britain needs the Green Party.
Keir Starmer’s Labour has purged the left, worshipped fiscal rules, ramped up arms spending, and turned foreign policy into whatever Trump demands, but with added ‘principles’.
The Greens continue to humiliate Labour in councils and by-elections, forcing the centrists to pretend they care about Palestine, poor people, or those who aren’t in focus groups.
Jeremy Corbyn’s given them the nod because he knows without that constant pain in the arse on their left flank, Labour would sprint right so fast they’d overtake the Tories and start privatising the NHS for “efficiency savings”.
Britain needs the Green Party.
Let’s be completely honest here. Some corners of the left treat just transition like that awkward relative at Christmas — mentioned once then ignored.
The Greens have been banging on about fracking, airport expansions, and a world without nukes for decades. And right now, they are the reason we can’t just slap a red rosette on endless growth and call it socialism.
Plus, they do actually win on local stuff — cycle lanes, council housing, community energy — while the rest of us are still arguing about manifestos from 2019 and socialist purity.
The Green Party is like that friend who actually brings reusable carrier bags to the revolution.
They’re certainly not perfect and some of their activists do treat lentils as a personality trait, but they’re well organised, they win seats, and they help keep the broader left ecosystem alive.
We need the Green Party
Britain needs the Green Party.
Love him or not, Mr Polanski has become the necessary voice reminding us that when the sea levels rise, it won’t just be the Tories getting wet — we’ll all be in it together, up to our fucking necks in Thames Water sewage.
I believe we need to have some proper Greens in the mix rather than watch Starmer and Farage try, and fail to negotiate with the tide.
In my humble opinion, Britain needs the Green Party.
Featured image via the Canary
‘End Medical Misogyny’ is the title of a new campaign by Mumsnet, the women’s internet forum. It is based on a comprehensive study into the chronic dismissal of women who seek medical assistance from the NHS – particularly for conditions that solely affect females, such as polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis and adenomyosis.
The study examined more than a decade’s worth of posts from Mumsnet users. Close to 100,000 posts to the forum between 2015 and 2025 contain language consistent with women experiencing ‘dismissal, disbelief or de-prioritisation’ in the public-healthcare system. The stories range from being gaslit about the presence of symptoms to being left with debilitating uterine pain for years without answers.
Half of those surveyed believe they have been ‘dismissed, ignored or not believed by an NHS professional because of their sex’. Sixty-four per cent said they have been ‘explicitly told their pain or symptoms were “normal” or “in their head”’. A further 68 per cent believed the NHS fails to take women’s health concerns seriously. Disregard of pain was described as a ‘dominant feature’ among women in the dataset. Many report being treated as if their pain was ‘tolerable, expected or insufficiently urgent’.
I spoke to Elle, 33, whose experience mirrors these findings. ‘I first noticed symptoms when I was 16’, she said of her adenomyosis, a condition that causes the uterus to swell to up twice its normal size, and is often accompanied by excessive bleeding and severe pain.
‘When I was 19, I was told the contraceptive pill would help with my heavy periods, but the pain part was ignored entirely. When I was 30, a shortage of the pill meant I could no longer get it, and all of the symptoms returned tenfold once I stopped. For two years, I went to the doctors again and again, only to be given different types of contraception. Every time I asked if we could get to the root of the issue and fix it, I was ignored.’
Though adenomyosis affects up to 35 per cent of women, Elle had never heard of it. Her story reflects that of many young women for whom hormonal contraception – due to its effect of masking certain symptoms – is presented as a ‘fix-all’ solution, while the possibility of an underlying issue is waved away. By the time Elle managed to procure a pelvic ultrasound, she had been living with chronic pain for 16 years.
The experience of having to ‘fight’ for a diagnosis was shared by 31-year-old Nicole. Nicole only recently discovered she has hypothalamic amenorrhoea (HA), a hormonal condition which prevents ovulation. Every time she came off birth control, she would lose her period, sometimes for up to nine months at a time. ‘I was told it was “normal”’, she tells me.
‘But years passed, and I was still being told to “wait and see”. Advice was always “if you’re not trying to conceive right now, just go back on the pill”. I had never heard of HA and only came across it through doing my own research. Even when I was telling doctors I believed I had HA, I really had to fight to see an endocrinologist who could confirm. If I hadn’t been so insistent, I might still be living in the dark with no idea my condition is actually reversible.’
The Mumsnet study compiles many experiences like Elle and Nicole’s. Those who did receive treatment hardly fared any better: some describe being left ‘screaming’ in pain during unauthorised internal examinations, crying for anaesthesia during cervical cautery, and being told to stop ‘making a fuss’ while suffering an internal haemorrhage. In a first-world country, it should be absurd to hear of such things. Yet in the NHS, such stories are routine.
Predictably, since the report’s emergence, the phrase ‘medical misogyny’ has been parrotted with fervour, including by health secretary Wes Streeting. ‘Medical misogyny has no place within our NHS’, he promised.
One has to wonder, though, if this misses the point. Misogyny denotes an ingrained prejudice. This is not to say women haven’t encountered male doctors who were genuinely sexist – one participant in the study described being asked by a male gynaecologist (on the morning of her operation, no less) if she was sure the pain wasn’t just in her head. He even asked her husband for consent before sterilising her. But it doesn’t appear that the majority of such cases, whether in the Mumsnet study or elsewhere, can be easily blamed on malice towards women.
This is demonstrated by the crisis engulfing NHS maternity services. Despite over 99 per cent of midwives in the UK being female in March 2017, NHS England has had a £27 billion legal bill for negligent maternity treatment hanging over its head since 2019. In these instances, mothers were denied pain relief, subjected to unnecessary procedures and neglected after surgery – almost exclusively by other women.
Of course, if it’s an example of real misogyny we seek, we need look no further than the medical world’s ongoing failure to confirm what a woman even is. For years, the NHS assigned trans and nonbinary individuals (ie, men) to wards based on their ‘gender identity’. Meanwhile, Endometriosis South Coast, a charity claiming to support women with the painful and life-altering condition, just appointed a biological male as its parliamentary representative. UN Women, an organisation with the power to impact women’s health policy around the globe, selected a biological male – transgender model Munroe Bergdorf – as its first UK champion. I won’t linger too long on these stupidities, however – for once, it would be nice to talk about women’s issues without having to make reference to the men who pretend to be them.
British women clearly require a much higher standard of care than they’re getting. For my part, I’d like to see this remedied not only with much-needed improvement in ‘bedside manner’, but also by affording uterine conditions the level of research that their prevalence warrants. It is inexcusable that there have been more studies into male pattern baldness than into endometriosis, an incurable condition that can cause severe pain and infertility.
The NHS has been failing the British public for years. But the systemic neglect of women’s health is a new low. This is a scandal we must not stand for.
Georgina Mumford is a content producer at spiked.
On Saturday 11 April, the Independent published what may be an alarming headline to some:
Labour faces a green apocalypse at the local elections
By ‘some‘, we of course mean ‘the Starmer loyalists and councillors who are about to lose their jobs‘. And for them, the following message from the Green Party’s Zack Polanski almost certainly hasn’t helped:
Yes. That’s the plan.https://t.co/0qbagSvIYp pic.twitter.com/TSWfw2AKof
— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) April 11, 2026
Starmergeddon coming from Polanski
The piece Polanski was responding to was written by the Independent’s chief political commentator John Rentoul. The Independent was considered left-leaning back in the day, but has never recovered that reputation since it backed the Tory-Lib Dem coalition in the 2015 election.
In his piece, Rentoul wrote:
I suspect that the commentary will overshoot, in that one two-party system, Tory vs Labour, will not be replaced overnight by another, Reform vs Green. As I wrote last week, both Reform and the Greens have ceilings to their support. Farage’s party is not considered respectable and Polanski’s is not considered realistic by enough people to make the total eclipse of the old parties possible yet.
We’ve certainly seen evidence of Reform having a ceiling. The party rose to 30%+ in the polls, but has dipped below that since it accepted a mass exodus of ex-Tories:
The truth about the Greens under Polanski is it’s difficult to say where their ceiling is.
Let’s be real; until about six months ago, we all thought their ceiling was something like 10%. The fact that they’re now leading in some polls means we have to reconsider everything:
‼️BREAKING | Greens surge into LEAD (1st!!)
🟢 Grn: 21.4% (+2.1)
➡️ Ref: 20.9% (-1.4)
🔵 Con: 20.5% (+0.2)
🔴 Lab: 17.0% (-0.4)
🟠 Lib: 9.2% (-1.9)Poll: @LordAPolls, 26-30 Mar (+/- vs 19-23 Feb) pic.twitter.com/oDVw4cDaFC
— Stats for Lefties 🍉🏳️⚧️ (@LeftieStats) April 5, 2026
Rentoul also said of Polanski and the Greens’ surge:
How should Labour respond? There are two possible answers that will dominate the discussion on 8 May, which I think are both mistaken. One is to replace Starmer. That will have to be done at some point, but as long as the most likely replacement is Angela Rayner I do not think it would help. The other is to copy the Green Party’s policies.
Rentoul went on to say:
Instead of panicking and indulging in a leadership crisis or lurching to the left, Labour needs strategic patience, dealing with the difficult world situation as best it can, explaining the trade-offs and compromises needed. Reform has already peaked in the opinion polls, and the limits of the promises that won it control of several councils last year are becoming more evident. If the Greens win control of councils with a slate of untried paper candidates, they, too, will come up against the constraints of power.
The Greens are not ready to replace the Labour Party yet.
Labour and the UK at large are in a moment of crisis, in which it’s become clear to everyone that the longstanding ways of doing things don’t work; that the system we live under exists solely to direct wealth upwards, and that there’s very little wealth left to be lost.
As you’d expect, then, a UK political commentator is advising that the party of government should simply fiddle while Rome burns.
The status quo is dead
Our political leaders and commentators can bury their heads in the sand all they like, but the rest of us don’t have that choice.
We’re forced to confront the world as it is because the world is a confrontational force that demands our attention.
We feel it every time our bills increase; we feel it when our retirement age slips further and further away; we feel it when our loved ones suffer as they wait for hospital appointments which may never come.
At the same time, we do hope Labour listen to Rentoul over Polanski. It’s horrible advice, of course, but it will at least ensure it’s clear to everyone what Labour actually stand for.
Because let’s be real; Labour will never deliver actual change, but there is a risk they’ll offer enough phony to promise to retain what’s left of their dwindling vote share.
Featured image via Canva
Tucker Carlson has said Donald Trump is a “slave” to Israel over his decision to go to war in Iran.
The right-wing podcaster’s comments came as talks between the US and Tehran aimed at ending the conflict broke down without agreement.
Carlson, a former close ally of Trump, said the war was “the single biggest mistake that any American president in my lifetime has made”.
The US president, alongside Israel, launched military action against Iran on February 28.
Despite declaring victory on numerous occasions since then, the regime in Tehran remains in place, and has triggered a global economic crisis by effectively blockading the Strait of Hormuz.
On BBC 1′s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, Carlson said: “The whole thing is a fantasy. The United States went to war in Iran in order to effect regime change, to throw out the people who run the country and collapse it, at the behest and then the demand of Israel, and that’s a demand the Israelis have made of the US government for decades.
“President Trump fell for it, did it, and I think he recognised immediately that it was a mistake and that it is very difficult to extricate yourself from a war like this once it has begun.
“I think the net effect, and I think the president himself has said this, is at best to leave the regime in place, give that regime control over commodities that flow through the Strait [of Hormuz], in effect to make Iran more powerful than it was on February 27.”
Asked by presenter Victoria Derbyshire what his relationship is like with Trump now, Carlson said: “I feel sorry for him, as I do for all slaves. He is not free in this moment at all to do what is best for himself or his country.
“He’s not free and we learned that yesterday when Donald Trump announced a ceasefire, clearly with relief, and made its terms public and then that ceasefire ended within two hours because Israel potentially violated the terms by attacking not just southern Lebanon but the city of Beirut.”
Derbyshire then asked him: “Are you saying he’s a slave to Benjamin Netanyahu?”
Carlson replied: “I don’t think it’s as simple as he’s under the control of Netanyahu, but you could summarise it that way and you wouldn’t be totally inaccurate.
“We know this because the single biggest mistake that Trump or any American president in my lifetime has made was going to war with Iran in an effort to change its regime.”
Elsewhere in the interview, Carlson also denied that he is an anti-semite.
He said: “Unlike the UK, we have a first amendment. So if I was an anti-semite I guess I would just say so at this point, I don’t know why I would lie about it.
“But I have opposed it in public consistently for my entire public life.”
Carlson added: “Doubtless there are anti-semites who don’t like Israel. I’m not an anti-semite, I don’t hate Israel.
“The Israeli government steered the United States into a war that hurts the United States and the world. I’m offended by that, I didn’t want it and I’m mad about it now.
“I have every right to feel that way, that does not make me an anti-semite.”
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.
The Met Police have confirmed 523 arrests in Trafalgar Square on Saturday 11 April, where Defend Our Juries protesters staged a silent vigil against the genocide and the unlawful use of terrorism laws to silence opposition to the genocide.
This brings the total number of arrests for defying the Palestine Action ban from 2,779 to over 3,302.
Defend Our Juries out again
In March, the Met announced that the number of arrests for proscription offences relating to Palestine Action since the ban came into effect in July 2025, was 2,779 arrests.
The Met chose to make the arrests on 11 April despite the High Court ruling in February that the proscription of Palestine Action was unlawful as a violation of the democratic rights to free speech and peaceful assembly. Leading legal figures warned the Met that arrests at this peaceful vigil would be unlawful in light of the High Court ruling, pending the Court of Appeal hearing on 28 and 29 April.
Many of the Defend Our Juries supporters arrested were older or disabled people, with ages ranging from 18 to 87.
Arrestees included Robert Del Naja, the artist and musician from Massive Attack. The arrests took the number of terrorism arrests for quietly holding cardboard signs to over 3,300 since 5 July 2025.
Earlier in the day, a former Met police chief told BBC Radio 4 that arresting these peaceful protestors creates optics which are “very challenging for the police” and that there “will be a huge amount of people who have sympathy with what is going on with the views of Palestine Action”.
Bad optics
The Met Police’s mass arrests of Defend Our Juries protestors come despite their stating publicly in February that they would not arrest people for holding signs, given the illegality of the proscription order. They said at the time that not arresting people, pending the Government’s appeal, was “the most proportionate approach we can take”. On 25 March, for unclear reasons, they announced a U-turn on this policy.
Meanwhile, the Devon and Cornwall Police undermined the Met’s decision by refusing to make arrests under the Terrorism Act in Truro on 11 April. Protesters in Truro held exactly the same sign as protesters in London and police chose not to arrest, whereas the Met arrested 523 people.
Former Met Police chief superintendent, Dal Babu, previously said on BBC Radio 4:
I think the difficulty is, when you’ve got 700 or 800 people who are willing to be arrested, that just isn’t practical. The optics of this will be very challenging for the police.
It will present some significant difficulties for the police in terms of how they manage it and also be aware of the fact there will be a huge amount of people who have sympathy with what is going on with the views of Palestine Action.
“Surreal”
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said:
It is truly surreal that over 500 people have been arrested for defying a ban the High Court has declared unlawful. An already absurdly authoritarian measure has now descended even further into farce ahead of the Court of Appeal hearing this month.
The Met Police has inexplicably reversed its position that, in light of the High Court ruling and pending the Government’s attempt to appeal, it would not arrest peaceful protesters defying the ban. Leading legal figures warned these arrests could themselves be unlawful, and the Met now seems destined to face legal challenge over what may amount to hundreds, if not thousands of unlawful arrests.
The fact that Devon and Cornwall Police chose not to arrest protesters yesterday for holding the exact same signs only deepens the chaos surrounding the unlawful ban on Palestine Action and underlines a simple truth: this ban is unenforceable.
It’s obvious to every sane observer that the Israeli and US governments are committing war crimes in Gaza, the West Bank, Iran and in Lebanon. Instead of standing up to these atrocities, which are already having dire consequences for the British public, Keir Starmer’s government supports them, including by criminalising peaceful protest against these heinous crimes.
Everyone who cares for democracy and the rule of law should be appalled by what is happening, and should ask themselves what they can do personally to prevent the descent into fascism.
Featured image via Marly Lyman
Engaging in “mentally active” activities versus “mentally passive” ones while sitting or lounging may affect your risk for dementia, according to a recent study.
In a study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine last month, researchers evaluated over 20,000 adult participants in Sweden, most of whom were women. Researchers administered a baseline questionnaire to participants in 1997 to assess their mentally passive sedentary behaviours, such as watching TV and listening to music. They also assessed their mentally active sedentary behaviours, such as office work or knitting and sewing. Their light and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity was also assessed using questionnaires. The participants were evaluated for incident dementia nearly two decades later.
The study found that mentally passive sedentary behaviour ― for example, watching TV ― was associated with a higher incidence of dementia. But adding mentally active sedentary behaviour (needlepointing, anyone?) showed promising outcomes.
Researchers found that each additional hour of mentally active sedentary behaviour a day was associated with a 4% lower risk of dementia — and that adding mentally active sedentary behaviour showed a higher protective effect for participants aged 50 to 64.
The study also found that replacing one hour of mentally passive sedentary behaviour with one hour of active sedentary behaviour was associated with a 7% decreased risk. What’s more, adding one hour of mentally active sedentary behaviour, while maintaining the same passive sedentary behaviour and light and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, was associated with a 11% decrease in incident dementia risk.
Researchers noted that the study had some limitations. For starters, the study began in 1997, before the vast introduction of smartphones, social media and video streaming — which are now very common ways people engage in sedentary behaviour.
Dr. Hussein Yassine, a professor of neurology at the University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, emphasised to NBC News that phone and social media usage, which are considered mentally passive behaviours, may pose risks to our ability to concentrate.
“It’s going to be affecting your ability to process information and potentially build synapses in certain areas in the brain that help with concentrating,” Yassine told the outlet. “So the next time you have a serious task or you need to concentrate, you’re less capable because your brain networks have been hijacked by this passive reception.”
Among several other limitations cited in the study: Researchers pointed out that cognitive assessments were not done at the start, and it’s possible the sample may have included more prevalent cases of dementia, which may have resulted in a bias in the results.
Justin Paget via Getty Images
Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician and clinical associate professor at George Washington University and CNN wellness expert, told CNN that one explanation for the results of the study could be due to the fact that “the brain benefits from being challenged.”
“Cognitive engagement helps maintain neural connections and may support what’s called cognitive reserve, which is the brain’s ability to adapt and compensate for changes over time,” she said. “When people spend long periods in activities that require very little mental effort, those pathways may not be stimulated in the same way. Over the course of months and years, that lack of engagement could contribute to decline in memory and thinking.”
Wen cautioned, though, that the study doesn’t prove cause and effect.
“It’s possible that people with better baseline cognitive function are more likely to choose mentally engaging activities,” she said. “So, while the findings are compelling, they should be interpreted as an association rather than proof that choosing passive activities directly leads to dementia.”
Research has shown that engaging in mentally stimulating activities, in addition to staying physically active, can be beneficial for your brain health.
Dr. Dylan Wint, director of the Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, previously emphasised the importance of strengthening the brain in an interview with HuffPost.
“You could try brain games, a new hobby, taking a class at a college or community centre, or learning a new language or instrument,” Wint said. “When determining whether an activity can have some cognitive benefit, what’s most important is that you are challenged and learning.”
At approximately 4am on Sunday, 12th April, three people from the direct action group People Against Genocide successfully evaded security and stormed the Keysight Technologies research and development plant in Hampshire:
Once inside, the activists destroyed computers, servers and machinery, directly linked to the murder of Palestinian, Lebanese, and Iranian civilians.
All three were arrested inside the factory:
Keysight Technologies: complicit in Israel’s genocide
US-owned Keysight Technologies manufactures radar and electronic warfare systems for military use. They supply UAV Tactical Systems (U-TacS), a drone factory which is now entirely owned by Elbit Systems, Israel’s biggest weapons maker.
Amongst other drones, U-TacS are responsible for developing the Watchkeeper drone, based on Elbit’s Hermes 450 drone, which has been central to the ongoing genocide in Gaza, and linked to the killing of seven aid workers from the World Central Kitchen in April 2024. They have been used to surveil and kill innocent citizens across West Asia, on behalf of the Israeli regime, and other genocidal regimes around the world.
As well as supplying Israeli weapons firm Elbit Systems, Keysight Technologies works with the US Army, US Air Force and US weapons companies, including Lockheed Martin. Keysight Technologies also specialises in 5G technology for military applications. The firm collaborates with Lockheed Martin on a 5G military solution called ‘5G.MIL Unified Network Solutions’ which provides a high-speed connection for weaponry and military applications used by the US military. Keysight Technologies also has a manufacturing plant in Israel.
In addition to Elbit weapons being used to kill thousands in Gaza, Lebanon and Iran, the Israeli weapons firm also made a $2.3billion deal with the UAE, which is accused of arming the Congolese genocide.
Shutting it down
Keysight Technologies has been targeted for some time by anti-genocide activists, with several previous actions at their site at Winnerish in Berkshire, as well as Keysight facilities in Scotland. So far, rather than cutting their ties to Elbit, which supplies the Israeli military with 85% of their killer drone fleet, Keysight has chosen to invest millions in infrastructure and security.
A spokesperson for People Against Genocide said:
Keysight Technologies makes a killing by supplying the necessary components for the weapons used to commit mass murder in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran and the Congo. By dismantling Keysight’s research and development site, we are taking necessary direct action against the US and Israeli military industrial complex, responsible for the killing of people across West Asia and in the Congo.
So long as they are directly involved in genocide, we will continue to target this murderous company, exposing their role in supplying the Israeli and US military, and shutting them down.
One action taker said:
Keysight Technologies is a key supplier of Elbit Systems, who are are supplying and supporting the genocidal Israeli army. Wherever there’s genocide, Elbit Systems is involved. They’ll participate in any and every other illegal war. Their tag line is “battle-tested” on the Palestinian people. That is their marketing line.
Recently the UAE who is heavily involved in genocide has signed a billion dollar contract with Elbit Systems. Elbit has been looking to the Congo genocide for business opportunities, and their bombs have been used in the Congo. All of the struggles are absolutely the same struggle, connected by the same genocidal maniacs.
Elbit Systems uses your tax money to make billions while you can’t afford healthcare, childcare, a holiday, groceries. “I support genocide” is legal. “I oppose genocide” makes you a terrorist. Now tell me who’s the real terrorist?
Featured image and additional images supplied
Wes Streeting has condemned Donald Trump’s “incendiary, provocative and outrageous” threat to destroy Iranian civilisation.
The health secretary accused the US president of using “rhetoric which people might find shocking” in the most outspoken attack on him so far by a government minister.
Streeting took aim at Trump after peace talks between America and Iran broke up without agreement.
Trump sparked an angry backlash last week when he claimed that “an entire civilisation will die tonight” unless Tehran re-opened the Strait of Hormuz.
A ceasefire was agreed at the last minute, but the vitally important waterway remains effectively blocked to oil traffic.
On Sky News on Sunday morning, Streeting said: “Over the course of the past week, President Trump has said some pretty bold, in Yes Minister language, incendiary, provocative, outrageous things on social media.
“I think we’ve all come to learn that you judge President Trump through what he does, not just what he says.”
Trump has also launched repeated attacks on Keir Starmer over the UK’s initial refusal to allow the US jets to use RAF bases to launch their attacks on Iran.
He said the prime minister was “no Winston Churchill” and has also compared him to his Hitler-appeasing predecessor Neville Chamberlain.
Streeting said the so-called special relationship had been “undoubtedly strained” by the split over Iran, but insisted the two countries still enjoyed a strong partnership.
He said: “We are old and close friends and we’ve got a shared outlook as democratic countries and we’ve got shared security interests.
“So all of that partnership continues to go on. The point I’m making is you have to distinguish between some of the rhetoric which people might find shocking, and then the reality.
“There were lots of people who went to bed earlier this week with President Trump threatening the end of Iranian civilisation, wondering what on earth would happen overnight, and woke up to a very different picture next morning.
“That’s the point we’re making. There’s a difference between what he says and what he does, and the prime minister has kept level-headed cool, calm leadership that I think the public have appreciated and respected.”
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.
Spartan Delta: Putting The Success Odds In Your Favor (OTCMKTS:DALXF)
Marie-Louise Eta Becomes First Woman to Manage Men’s Team in Europe’s Top Five Leagues
France starts moving government systems from Windows to Linux
Why Israel is blocking foreign journalists from entering
Bitcoin: We’re Entering The Most Dangerous Phase
Alan Cumming Brands Baftas Ceremony A ‘Triggering S**tshow’
Satoshi Bitcoin Wallet Dumps EVERYTHING! Why Crypto ISN’T DEAD (Send This To 1 Friend)
Finance, Banking core interest #astrology #jyotish #kundali #horoscope #banking #finance #moneymind
Achieving financial freedom isn’t permission to abandon your purpose on earth. #worldwide
-
Business7 days agoThree Gulf funds agree to back Paramount’s $81 billion takeover of Warner, WSJ reports
-
Politics2 days agoUS brings back mandatory military draft registration
-
Fashion2 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Veronica Beard
-
Tech5 days agoHow Long Can You Drive With Expired Registration? What Florida Law Says
-
Fashion6 days agoMassimo Dutti Offers Inspiration for Your Summer Mood Board
-
Sports2 days agoMan United discover Nico Schlotterbeck transfer fee as defender reaches Dortmund agreement
-
Fashion5 days agoLet’s Discuss: DEI in 2026
-
Crypto World3 days agoCanary Capital Files SEC Registration for PEPE ETF
-
Business2 days agoTesla Model Y Tops China Auto Sales in March 2026 With 39,827 Registrations, Beating Cheaper EVs and Gas Cars
-
Crypto World4 days agoBitcoin recovers as US and Iran Agree a Ceasefire Deal
-
Politics2 days agoMalcolm In The Middle OG Turned Down ‘Buckets Of Money’ To Appear In Reboot
-
Business2 days agoOpenAI Halts Stargate UK Data Centre Project Over Energy Costs and Copyright Row
-
Business20 hours agoIreland Fuel Protests Enter Day 5 as Blockades Spark Shortages and Government Prepares Support Package
-
Tech6 days agoItalian court says Netflix must refund customers up to $576 over price hikes
-
Tech6 days agoGamer Restores the Original PlayStation Portal From Two Decades Ago
-
Tech6 days agoSamsung just gave up on its own Messages app
-
Tech6 days agoHaier is betting big that your next TV purchase will be one of these
-
Tech6 days agoThe Xiaomi 17 Ultra has some impressive add-ons that make snapping photos really fun
-
Politics2 days agoLBC Presenter Mocks Trump Over Iran War Failures
-
Tech6 days agoSave $130 on the Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 Classic: rotating bezel, sleep coaching, and running coach for $369
You must be logged in to post a comment Login