A Daily Mail article that reported the then-head of the Special Intelligence Service (MI6/SIS), along with his wife and disgraced former royal Andrew, dining with serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein – after Epstein was convicted of paedophilia – has disappeared from the Mail’s website. And from all archiving services.

The Mail reported in 2015 that:

In February 2011, the head of MI6, Sir John Sawers, and his wife, Shelley, attended a dinner party at Jeffrey Epstein’s townhouse in New York, an event also attended by Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell. ​ This meeting was first revealed by The Mail on Sunday in 2015, sparking controversy due to the security risks of the intelligence chief associating with a known sex offender.

Why did the head of MI6, Sir John Sawers attend a dinner with Epstein, Maxwell, and Prince Andrew at Epstein’s New York townhouse, after Epstein had been convicted of child sex abuse?

Why did Sawers go on to broker a deal between Palantir and UK govt, in 2019?

We need answers pic.twitter.com/vf9zcSP20k

Advertisement

— Jon Harding (@_i0n) February 19, 2026

Screenshot saved here in case the original X post is deleted.

Epstein meeting article seems to disappear

However, the url for that article – https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2894345/Head-MI6-dined-paedophile-billionaire-Jeffrey-Epstein-s-townhouse-Prince-Andrew-massage-girl-friend.html – now routes to an anodyne article about billionaire Elon Musk’s electric vehicles. The change appears to have been a rewrite of the page and a re-routing of the original link to the ‘new’, bland one:

Jon Harding, who noted the original 2015 post while it was still active, pointed out yesterday that the post is now gone and asked – presumably rhetorically – “Why would MI6 want to scrub this”.

Head of MI6 dined at paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein’s townhouse with Prince Andrew and his ‘massage girl’ friend

Author: Simon Walters

Date: January 3, 2015

Original URL (Likely Broken): https://t.co/r5LoCRjU5l

Why would MI6 want to scrub this

Advertisement

— Jon Harding (@_i0n) March 7, 2026

(Screenshot here).

While the post was still live, Harding pointed out that AI platforms, including X’s ‘Grok’, both confirmed the Sawers-Epstein reports one day – but the next, were acting as if they’d never heard of it:

Grok only wants to talk about this, todayhttps://t.co/zkeiXcfvRU pic.twitter.com/NZJFr1Wi6W

— Jon Harding (@_i0n) February 21, 2026

Advertisement

Web searches and searches of archive.org and archive.li similarly now reveal zero relevant results, except for pointers back to Harding’s threads – with the archiving sites merely offering an option to save the now-scrubbed replacement:

John Sawers later brokered a deal between the UK government and notorious US spy firm Palantir, a company whose founders appear around 4,500 times in the Epstein files released so far – reportedly only around two percent of the total.

Sawers also appears in the latest files released, with a redacted sender emailing Epstein with a link to a Telegraph article mentioning Sawer meeting with Ehud Barak, a close associate of Epstein whom now-deceased victim Virginia Giuffre accused of raping her – apparently brutally.

Sawers is now an adviser at arms industry-funded, security services-aligned think-tank Chatham House and a visiting professor at the Israel-aligned King’s College London.

Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli spy as well as serial rapist and trafficker or children and young women, and almost certainly even worse. He was convicted of paedophilia in 2008, three years before the reported dinner with Sawer and his wife.

Read Jon Harding’s threads here and here, as long as they remain online.

Skwawkbox writer Steve Walker is not, never has been, and never will be suicidal and does not use drugs.

Featured image via the Canary

Film critics are quitting the Toronto Film Critics Association (TFCA) in droves after the association censored a pro-Palestine acceptance speech by indigenous actor and filmmaker Elle-Máijá Tailfeathers. Tailfeathers returned her TFCA award in protest at the censorship and more than a third of TFCA members have already resigned in solidarity. TFCA president Johanna Schneller has stepped down.

Tailfeathers had been unable to attend the 2 March awards ceremony in person to accept her Best Supporting Performance in a Canadian Film ward. She had sent in a pre-recorded video speech but wrote to TFCA after the ceremony to point out that it had edited the footage, without her knowledge or approval, to remove references to Palestine. The section edited out said:

my heart continues to be with the people of Palestine who are experiencing this ongoing genocide, and thank you to anyone in this industry who’s been brave enough to say anything.

Toronto Film Critics Association censorship

Among the TFCA members who have left it in protest are Toronto Film Festival programmer Norm Wilner and critics Nathalie Atkinson, Sarah-Tai Black, Kathleen Newman-Bremang, Bill Chambers, Alicia Fletcher, Barry Hertz, Peter Knegt, Saffron Maeve, Angelo Murreda, Adam Nayman, Andrew Parker, Jose Teodoro, Winnie Wang, and Radheyan Simonpillai.

In an email to TFCA members, Simonpillai rejected the organisation’s excuse that time constraints forced the edit, and wrote that he was leaving because the only tampered speech was the only one by an indigenous artist in the whole ceremony:

Unfortunately, I can’t in good faith participate in an organization that kicked off the awards ceremony with a land acknowledgement, and then proceeded to minimize the sole acceptance speech delivered by an Indigenous artist.

Timing has never been an issue in the past, and certainly wasn’t when it comes to the speeches, presentations and video montages at the ceremony in question. If it were an issue, it should have been communicated clearly with the artist, whose speech seemed to be the only one that was visibly edited.

The future of the TFCA is now in doubt after decades of prominence in Canada’s film industry.

The outrage is not the first in the 2026 arts world. Author Arundhati Roy boycotted the Berlinale in February 2026 over “jaw-dropping” comments demanding silence from filmmakers over Gaza. A month earlier, the Adelaide Writers’ Week was cancelled completely because almost all of its writers pulled out over its committee’s decision to ban a Palestinian-Australian writer, supposedly because of the Bondi beach attack that had nothing to do with Palestine or Palestinians. Most of the festival’s board members resigned in disgrace. In 2025, protests by performers and staff forced Britain’s Royal Opera to cancel a planned 2026 production run of Tosca by the Israeli National Opera.

Featured image via the Canary

Green Party deputy leader Mothin Ali has slammed establishment politicians for their role in amplifying “blatant racism” and helping it turn into:

a torrent of Islamophobic abuse and death threats that have left me and my family fearing for our lives.

Mothin Ali: ‘escalation of blatant racism by those in power’

Writing in the National, Ali said:

In a Britain where the politics of fear and division are gaining ground – and where parties like Reform UK thrive on narratives about who does and does not belong – some politicians have discovered that scapegoating minorities is easier than solving real problems.

And after he attended a Stop The War Coalition protest amid the illegal and unprovoked US-Israeli assault on Iran, he faced that himself as:

parliament and the media have spread false claims that I was “protesting in support of the ayatollah”.

But he stressed that:

Speaking out against conflict – especially in the wake of the strike on an Iranian school that killed more than 175 schoolgirls and teachers – should never be treated as suspicious. In a healthy democracy, it is exactly what engaged citizenship demands.

That doesn’t seem to be the belief of establishment politicians, however. Because:

After Conservative MP Alec Shelbrooke used parliamentary privilege to make false claims about me, those allegations were amplified by political figures, including the Prime Minister, and echoed across parts of the right-wing media and social media.

He called this:

faux outrage and blatant racism. And in this case, escalation by those in power.

He then suggested a link between politicians’ actions and the death threats he has received since then, saying:

In that kind of climate, it is hardly surprising that political disagreement spills beyond debate and into intimidation.

The “integrity of British democracy” is at stake

Just as it is wrong (and antisemitic) to suggest all Jewish people support the actions of Israel, it is equally wrong (and Islamophobic) to push the view that all Muslim people support the actions of Iran or any other Muslim state. And Ali highlighted that there is no justification for such an assertion.

As he explained:

A recent Opinium poll commissioned by the Concordia Forum found that 85% of British Muslims believe democracy is the best form of government – significantly higher than the general population (71%).

Seven in 10 say they are completely or mostly loyal to Britain, compared with only half of the wider public. And 94% believe everyone should be treated equally under the law, regardless of faith.

Although establishment voices try to push people into black and white positions, Ali insisted that opposing war does not automatically mean you “sympathise with the regime on the other side”. And he added:

we must reject the politics of loyalty tests and rediscover something more difficult but far healthier: the ability to hold two moral truths at once.

You can oppose authoritarian regimes and still grieve for innocent lives lost in war. You can criticise foreign governments without being accused of betraying your own country. And you can listen to Muslim voices in Britain not as suspects, but as fellow citizens participating in the same democratic conversation.

Advertisement

The “integrity of British democracy”, he stressed, depends on our ability to have robust debate and disagree peacefully. But he also emphasised that:

disagreement must not slide into dehumanisation.

Featured image via YouTube screenshot

The Centre for Media Monitoring analysed 40,913 articles from 2025, uncovering a paper trail of anti-Muslim reporting. The independent media watchdog, reviewing content from 30 major UK-registered news organisations, predictably found that far-right outlets are the prime purveyors of anti-Muslim propaganda.

They found that:

nearly half of all articles referencing Muslims or Islam in 2025 contained some degree of bias.

They also identified, in their words, “broader structural weakness” across Britain’s media landscape.

A distinct cluster of right-wing outlets is responsible for the most severe and persistent harmful coverage: The Spectator, GB News, The Telegraph, Jewish Chronicle & The Daily Mail are the worst offenders across almost all categories. #SofM2025 pic.twitter.com/W8qpRvSZe7

— The Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) (@cfmmuk) March 9, 2026

Advertisement

It found countless examples of “systematic editorial hostility” from certain outlets with a clear an anti-Muslim agenda. It cited the Spectator as an example, reporting that one in four of its articles  were “very biased.”

The current Spectator editor, appointed in September 2024, is the former Tory MP Michael Gove. The proud Zionist has repeatedly denied Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, and  asserts that Israeli influence in Britain should grow even further, despite the significant influence the pro-Israel lobby wields over UK politics.

Part of Israel’s alliance and ideological overlap with Western fascists is largely driven by their shared aim of attacking Muslims and progressives. For Israel, these groups represent a threat to Israel’s impunity, particularly for speaking out against its war crimes. As for the UK-fascist camp, these groups are an obstacle to them gaining power.

The Telegraph and the Mail – both hard-right outlets – may not have been quite as fervently anti-Muslim in 2025, proportionally speaking. In contrast, because their output was much larger, the reach of their biased content was that much greater.

Meanwhile, in terms of sheer volume, The Telegraph published the largest number of severely biased articles about Muslims in 2025, followed by the Daily Mail. #SofM2025 pic.twitter.com/KieiNFy332

— The Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) (@cfmmuk) March 9, 2026

The study also found that GB News, the latest kid on the block as far as hateful far-right propaganda is concerned, was “among the worst performers.” It earned the top rank for publishing “sweeping generalisations” about Muslims at 39 percent.

As the centre explains:

The Telegraph, Daily Mail, and GB News together account for 956 ‘Very Biased’ articles 46.8% of all such content. These three outlets shape nearly half of the most extreme biased discourse

Omission of context is a problem across the mainstream media, not just on the right

The centres’ study also underlines the absence of contextual detail across the articles included in their sample:

Contextual omission is the most widespread form of problematic coverage […] 44% of biased articles contained contextual omission, making it the most common harmful journalistic practice identified in the study. Unlike other bias categories, this issue appears across the media spectrum, suggesting a broader structural weakness in UK journalism.

The most widespread failure across ALL outlets? Omitting context. Found in 44% of biased articles, this is not just a right-wing problem. It reflects a structural weakness in British journalism that editors across the board must urgently address. #SofM2025 pic.twitter.com/UwO1slIfgQ

— The Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) (@cfmmuk) March 9, 2026

The result, as the centres notes, amounts to a failure to provide:

information, perspectives, or voices that would clarify or provide greater context to the issue being discussed.

And it wasn’t just outlets on the far-right failing to provide appropriate context.

One particularly problematic group of media outlets in this respect was “international wire services”. While organisations like Associated Press, Reuters, and AFP displayed only “moderate” bias, the fact that “hundreds of outlets globally” use their content has resulted in:

moderate levels of negative framing or contextual omission in wire service reporting carry a disproportionate real-world impact, thereby embedding harmful narratives throughout the broader media ecosystem.

Rizwana Hamid, the director of Centre for Media Monitoring asserted that:

When entire communities are repeatedly framed through lenses of suspicion or threat, it inevitably shapes public attitudes, political debate and the everyday lives of British Muslims

The wider picture

The centre surprising found lower levels of anti-Muslim bias across BBC coverage. However, this doesn’t let the BBC off the hook, having demonstrated multiple instances of anti-Palestinian bias. And this has inevitably fed into the idea that the mass murder of a predominantly Muslim group isn’t a big deal.

This was documented in the centres’ 2025 report on BBC reporting bias during Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Needless to say, they found that although Israeli occupation forces had killed at least 34 times more Palestinians, Israelis received 33 times more coverage.

Across the broader British media spectrum, this downplaying of Muslim deaths continues. Mainstream news organisations prioritise Israeli deaths while underplaying non-Israeli deaths:

Lebanese die, Israelis are killed https://t.co/nvLRuuKeUj

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) March 9, 2026

Sky News deleted this tweet

Which is a reminder why we need to log and record every example of dehumanisation on @archivegenocide

The archive webpage extracts and stores all data, preserving it for the future. pic.twitter.com/rNlFxMtgCK

— Philip Proudfoot (@PhilipProudfoot) March 8, 2026

Advertisement

You rewrote it and still didn’t fix it. Here you go. https://t.co/QGf74GTvWU pic.twitter.com/jUFZ9UyHHv

— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) March 9, 2026

In case you can’t tell by reading this post, Israel killed almost 400 people, including 83 children, in Lebanon this week. https://t.co/gKG6RbD4db

— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) March 8, 2026

The report is a welcome contribution to a growing body of literature that paints of picture of rising hatred towards muslims. This rise mirrors the increasing Islamophobic attacks and hate crimes in recent years, and Muslim communities rightfully feel fearful of the situation.

The study confirm what the Canary has long argued – mainstream outlets, particularly those on the right, are stoking an increasingly volatile political climate with biased coverage that endangers the Muslim community.

Holding these outlets accountable is crucial in confronting this reality and ensuring that the safety of Muslims forces of hate and division do not prevail.

Featured image via the Canary

Nigel Farage has ‘invested‘ in Kwasi Kwarteng’s Bitcoin company, Stack BTC. Yes, the Reform UK Leader has given Liz Truss’ failed Chancellor £215,000 for some fucking reason.

Farage is a longtime fan of cryptocurrency, presumably because it’s as real as most of his policies.

Speaking about the investment, man of the people, Farage, said:

I have long been one of the UK’s few political advocates for bitcoin, recognising the role digital currencies will play in the future of business and finance.

Farage up to no good? Surely not

He apparently bought 4.3 million shares of Stack BTC at 5p a share. This was all done through his company Thorn In The Side, which he’s regularly used to reduce his own tax bill.

The huge amount Farage has pumped into Stack BTC means he also owns a significant share of the company at 6.3%. Kwateng and his wife together only own 5.4% of the company.

Then there’s the fact of where Farage’s own investment comes from. Reform UK has received over £12 million in donations from Crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne. We’ve heard of a circular economy, but this is ridiculous.

But it doesn’t stop there, Stack BTC’s biggest investor is Paul Withers. The co-founder of the precious metals trader Direct Bullion previously paid Farage in gold coins for advertising investments.

As the Canary’s Alex/Rose Cocker reported:

Reform are not a party of the common man. They are not a friend of the everyday resident of the UK just trying to get by. As their donation history – and Farage’s flip-flopping talking points – makes clear, the party is wrapped around the finger of anyone they think will launch them to power.

Conman

Whilst rich conmen like Farage shill for crypto, the facts speak for themselves. Partly thanks to Trump’s tariffs, the value of cryptocurrency has fallen by 23% this year alone.

At the end of the day, Farage is going to keep playing businessman as seriously as he’s playing politician. Because let’s face it, he’s so rich, the consequences of the country being lured in by Reform won’t hit people like him.

Featured image via the Canary

Twice as many people in Scotland (41%) support the Windfall Tax than oppose it (19%), with support cutting across all political parties and across all parts of the country, according to new polling.

The Windfall Tax (Energy Profits Levy) was levied on oil and gas companies operating in the UK in May 2022. This was in response to record oil and gas industry profits and the rapid increase in energy costs following the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

New surge in energy costs

The polling took place in mid-February, before the US and Israel set about plunging west Asia into turmoil. In recent days, wholesale energy costs have surged 30% year on year as a result of conflict in the Middle East and sit at levels last seen in winter 2022/23.

New analysis by 350.org shows that Europe effectively paid around €1.4bn extra for gas in the first week following price spikes triggered by the war against Iran, highlighting the financial cost and risks of the continent’s continued dependence on fossil fuels.

Gas prices in Europe rose sharply after the conflict began, jumping from around €30 per megawatt hour (MWh) to roughly €50 per MWh and higher as markets reacted to instability affecting global energy supplies. And oil prices have also shot up as supplies come under attack and restriction.

Campaigners say the figures show how geopolitical crises linked to fossil fuels rapidly translate into higher costs for households and businesses across Europe. If this crisis continues, fossil fuel prices are likely to rise even higher.

Andreas Sieber, head of policy at 350.org, said:

This is not an energy crisis, this is a fossil fuel crisis. In the first week alone since the Iran war, Europe has lost €1.4bn to higher gas prices. Instead of losing billions to fossil fuel price spikes, Europe needs to accelerate the energy transition that will lead to lower bills and strengthen energy security.

Continued instability will lead to further volatility in global fuel markets, meaning households will face additional energy price pressures in the months ahead unless structural changes are made. Then the sun and the wind don’t send bills, they also don’t have to travel through the Strait of Hormuz.

Advertisement

To put the scale of the loss into perspective, €1.4bn would be enough to install solar power for at least 500,000 homes across Europe, permanently lowering energy bills and reducing exposure to volatile fossil fuel markets.

Oil and gas companies profit from crisis-driven price spikes, while households and other businesses absorb higher prices. A windfall tax on carbon majors could protect families now while funding simple renewable solutions, from balcony solar to electric bikes, that lower bills permanently and give people control over their own energy.

Energy firms have seen their share prices rise over 7% in the last month (compared to the FTSE 100 rise of 0.43%). This includes North Sea operators who have lobbied heavily to scrap the windfall tax.

A spokesperson for the End Fuel Poverty Coalition said:

Despite the intense lobbying by the oil and gas industry – and their political allies – the Windfall Tax retains the support of the public.

It’s no surprise that twice as many Scots are in favour of the tax than oppose it and nearly a fifth say that they strongly support the measure.

As long as people see the disparity between their own living conditions and the huge profits made by energy firms, this support will continue.

Cross-party support for windfall tax

The survey spoke to over two thousand adults in Scotland in a poll that reflects the political make-up of the nation’s voters. It revealed that Scottish voters from all parties supported the windfall tax.

Support for the windfall tax is highest among people intending to use their Holyrood list vote for the SNP (48%), Labour (53%), Liberal Democrat (61%) and Green (47%). Conservative and Reform UK voters were more likely to support the tax than oppose it (Conservatives 37% support, 34% oppose; Reform UK 32% support, 30% oppose). Similar results were found among constituency voting intention.

Frazer Scott, chief executive of Energy Action Scotland, commented:

Energy companies continue to make excessive profits at the expense of people – people who cannot heat their homes to a safe level and are burdened by £5.5bn of unrepayable domestic energy debt.

Until there is reform that puts people at the heart of the energy system it is right for big business to put its fair share back to help those that need it most.

Jamie Livingstone, head of Oxfam Scotland, said:

People aren’t daft; they know that the companies that have polluted our politics and plundered our planet shouldn’t be let off the hook for the spiralling climate destruction they continue to cause.

Energy giants have racked up years of eye-watering profits. Politicians must ensure they pick up more, not less, of the tab for the shift to a clean energy future instead of leaving hard pressed Scots and communities globally facing famine and floods to foot the bill.

Advertisement

Fossil fuel companies helped light the fire and continue to fuel it, so it’s only fair they help pay to put it out.

Friends of the Earth Scotland oil and gas campaigns manager Rosie Hampton commented:

With the conflict in the Middle East, energy companies could again be making the windfall profits that have caused the cost-of-living pain and suffering in the last five years. People will be rightly worried about household energy bills soaring again as greedy oil giants capitalise on the violence.

We must not forget that this tax will go to supporting the NHS, educating children and protecting our environment so any politicians calling for the tax to end are demanding less support for vital public services.

Previous End Fuel Poverty Coalition research found that just a handful of energy firms have made around £40bn in UK profits in the last two years, even with the Energy Profits Levy in place.

The government has committed to phasing out the tax by 2030 to be replaced by a new tax regime for the sector.

Featured image via the Canary

On 2 March 2026, Hezbollah fired a missile salvo from the south of Lebanon towards Israel. The rockets were reportedly intercepted before reaching occupied Palestinian territory. Militarily, the strike achieved little. Politically, however, it carried a clear declaration of intent: after fifteen months of restraint and over 15,400 Israeli ceasefire violations, the Lebanese resistance was signalling its readiness to fight.

Lebanon at risk

The response from the Lebanese government was immediate — and revealing.

Just one day later, on 3 March, the government led by the US-backed president Joseph Aoun and the US-backed PM Nawaf Salam moved to outlaw Hezbollah’s military wing. The decision raised obvious questions. if Hezbollah’s weapons were legal before, then why had the government spent all this time and resources trying to disarm Hezbollah over the past year? If Hezbollah’s weapons were already illegal, why convene a cabinet meeting to restate the obvious?

The answer to those questions arrived very quickly.

On the very same day, reports emerged that Lebanese Armed Forces checkpoints were intercepting young men attempting to reach southern Lebanon with weapons. These men were trying to join the defence against the nascent Israeli invasion. Around 12 were detained.

These checkpoints were put in place after the Lebanese army had evacuated its bases and positions in the south earlier. The government justified the decision bluntly: confronting the Israeli army would be “suicide”.

Israel advances into Lebanese territory. The Lebanese army withdraws, clearing the way for the invasion. And when civilians attempt to defend their own land, they are stopped by that same army.

Then came the final nail into this coffin

On Sunday 8 March, 3 of those 12 young men were brought before Lebanon’s military court. Their charge: carrying weapons.

What this really means? Anyone attempting to resist the Israeli invasion will be treated as a criminal by the Lebanese regime.

A chronicle of governments serving occupation

History has seen this pattern before. Governments under occupation often turn their institutions against their own people.

In Nazi-occupied France, the Vichy regime collaborated with the occupier and persecuted the resistance. In southern Lebanon during Israel’s occupation, the South Lebanon Army under Antoine Lahad served Israeli interests against its own population.

If it’s not treason to remove the army from defensive positions during an invasion, actively preventing citizens from defending their country — and prosecuting them for it — must surely be treason!

Vichy France wasn’t an extraordinary thing that has never happened before and will not happen again.

Marshal Philippe Pétain isn’t an exceptional human being. This is what you get when you have a civilian government under military occupation. A treacherous government that serves the interests of the occupation against the interests of its own people.

So the question now that arises is: who is occupying Lebanon?

The immediate answer to that question seems obvious: Israel. And indeed Israel continues to violate Lebanese sovereignty with regular incursions and attacks — holds the Lebanese Chebaa Farms, Kafarshouba Hills and the 10 Ghajar villages, and has occupied 5 points inside Lebanon where it built advanced military outposts right after the ceasefire was signed.

But the deeper answer to the question lies somewhere else

All clear, you can come out

In Lebanon stands one of the largest diplomatic compounds on earth: the United States Embassy Beirut. Built in the town of Aoukar, just north of Beirut, in a country barely larger than the West Midlands, the embassy is a shrine to Washington’s influence over Lebanese political life.

The Lebanese people are being targeted with US made bombs, dropped by US made airplanes, funded by US-taxpayer’s money, enabled by the orange man in Washington. While the Lebanese government is obeying every US order — placing its sovereignty and right to monopolise violence at risk.

The US occupation of Lebanon is getting harder and harder to ignore.

Featured image via the Canary

According to Deadline, Warner Bros executives have had a tense meeting with the BBC following their choice to air a racial slur during their broadcast of the BAFTAs. The racial slur refers to the n-word involuntarily shouted by tourettes campaigner John Davidson. The preventable incident triggered deep upset for Black and disabled communities.

The BBC have a lot to answer for over this horrible incident. John Davidson could not control his use of the slur, as involuntary and inappropriate outbursts can occur due to coprolalia, a socially stigmatising symptom of Tourette’s syndrome. Likewise, the pain felt by members of the Black community who heard such a derogatory slur – especially at such a poignant time – cannot be forgotten. Many communities were effectively slapped in the face in the aftermath of this egregious broadcasting failure.

Responsibility instead lies wholly with the BBC, which cut numerous other slurs but chose to keep this one, making what many see as an incredibly divisive and polarising editorial decision by the state broadcaster.

EXCLUSIVE: Amid ongoing reviews into the debacle that led to a racial slur at the BAFTA Film Awards airing on British television, Deadline hears of a difficult meeting between Warner Bros. and the BBC.

Three sources familiar with the encounter said ‘Sinners’ studio Warner Bros.… pic.twitter.com/Ma5oB7OcWD

Advertisement

— Deadline (@DEADLINE) March 6, 2026

BBC face ‘furious’ Warner Bros

Deadline cite three sources close to the encounter between the BBC and Warner Bros bosses who stated that “grave concerns” were raised about the decision to air the deeply offensive slur. At the meeting, Deadline reported that:

Warner Bros demanded to know what steps the BBC will take to prevent a similar incident from happening again. “They were furious,” said one person briefed on the encounter, which took place last week. Warner executives had initially sought a meeting with the BBC on the Monday following the ceremony, but were left frustrated when the gathering did not materialize.

They added:

Deadline has pieced together different accounts, and it appears as though the incident stemmed from miscommunication on the night. The BBC and producer Penny Lane did not hear the racial slur from their position in the outside broadcast truck, but later caught and cut a second incident, in which Davidson again said the N-word when Sinners star Wunmi Mosaku collected her Supporting Actress prize.

The BBC have since apologised for their failure in a published statement. They said there had been a ‘serious mistake’ and subsequently removed it from iPlayer. Furthermore, they have confirmed their executive complaints team will conduct a ‘fast-tracked investigation’ into the incident with the broadcaster once again marking its own homework.

However, the BBC team’s excuse for the ‘miscommunication’ falls flat. They pointed to another incident where Davidson directed the slur at Wunmi Mosaku during her Sinners award acceptance, claiming they thought this was the incident in question. Apparently, removing one n-word slur proves they recognised its harm and heeded Warner Bros’ request to cut it. They just didn’t notice the other one, ‘whoopsie daisy’ say the BBC.

Sinners Star Wunmi Mosaku Says She ‘Can’t Forgive’ BBC For Keeping Racial Slur In Bafta Broadcast: ‘Brought Tears To My Eyes’https://t.co/MODMsyqrFB

— Britannia Daily (@BritanniaDailyy) March 2, 2026

On the other hand, this could indicate that no one at BAFTA, BBC or Penny Lane Studios really saw the incident as significantly offensive or upsetting to warrant removal. After all, surely this pretty notable incident would have stuck in some minds at the very least if they had.

Deadline further reported that Warner Bros and the BBC held discussions immediately after the BAFTAs and agreed to remove it from iPlayer. They recognised that the slur had been missed by producer Penny Lane as soon as it went live. But, yet again, the BBC were rather disingenuous in their feigned horror given it stayed up until midday the following day. This gave ample time for division to mount, leaving various already embattled communities once again feeling appalled.

It is difficult to get away from the allegation that the BBC team were aware of this specific n-word incident and simply saw more value in airing it. After all, they managed to catch other slurs from Davidson on the night. And, on one of the biggest nights in British television it is entirely unacceptable that someone from the team simply didn’t hear the slur.

Stolen moment

Nevertheless, we cannot ignore that the actions taken to address the harm caused have simply ended up reducing coverage of what should have been a powerful moment for disabled and Black communities.

Both groups lost vital and long-overdue visibility that signaled significant progress in the industry. After all, people with Tourette’s often face exclusion due to the social stigma surrounding their condition, while BAFTA made history as Sinners’ Ryan Coogler became the first Black director to win – earning 13 nominations for the Jim Crow-era horror film. All whilst racism and bigotry are rising just as quickly as Reform and Restore’s pockets get ever heavier.

Thus, multiple communities have been utterly failed by the BBC.

Humility and accountability, not evasion.

Pretending this was an oversight or accident simply does not cut it. The timelines from meetings and conversations between Warner Bros and the BBC show the varying responses. By all accounts, Warner Bros were furious. Meanwhile, the BBC have dragged their feet and failed to respond adequately.

The fact the ceremony is still not available on iPlayer says it all: a night that should have celebrated the massively long-overdue appreciation of multiple marginalised communities has still not been rectified.

Featured image via screenshot

Around 50 activists from the Peter Tatchell Foundation and partner groups protested outside Westminster Abbey during the Commonwealth service. They shouted for King Charles to apologise for his predecessor monarchs imposing anti-LGBTQ+ laws on colonies across the British Empire.

Campaigners from Uganda, Bangladesh and other Commonwealth nations, gathered outside the abbey. They highlighted the fact that 29 Commonwealth countries still criminalise same-sex relationships. Nearly all of these laws derive from Britain’s colonial-era penal codes. Most former colonies retained these statutes after independence.

The LGBTQ+ campaigners from Commonwealth countries where being gay is still a crime marched to Buckingham Palace to deliver a formal letter to Charles. It urges him, as head of the Commonwealth, to uphold the Commonwealth Charter, speak out for LGBTQ+ equality and apologise for previous monarchs authorising the imposition of anti-LGBTQ+ laws on Britain’s colonies. These laws continue to cause great harm to LGBTQ+ people.

You can read the letter here.

Peter Tatchell, director of the Peter Tatchell Foundation, said:

The criminalisation of LGBT+ people across most of the Commonwealth was imposed through British colonial rule and in the name of successive monarchs. These laws were exported from Westminster and embedded in penal codes in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and Pacific.

An apology from the King would not interfere in the sovereignty of Commonwealth nations. It would acknowledge historical truth and be consistent with the human rights principles of the Commonwealth Charter. Decriminalisation is not Western interference – criminalisation was.

Abbey Kiwanuka, Ugandan LGBTQ+ activist from Out and Proud African LGBTI, said:

In Uganda and elsewhere, politicians often claim anti-gay laws defend ‘African values.’ But these laws were introduced by British colonial authorities. They are not indigenous traditions — they are colonial exports.

When the Head of the Commonwealth acknowledges this history, it strengthens our human rights struggle. An apology would give hope to LGBTs facing imprisonment, violence and discrimination.

Advertisement

The Peter Tatchell Foundation is urging the Commonwealth to live up to its Charter commitment to equality, human rights and dignity for all.

Featured image via The Peter Tatchell Foundation

Iran’s Assembly of Experts cast their votes and announced their election of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s successor. After much deliberation, they have chosen Mojtaba Khamenei, the second-eldest son of the former supreme leader killed in the first round of offensive US-Israeli strikes. This is no doubt a thorn in the side of the American Trump administration.

An inauguration ceremony held on 9 March during which members of the security apparatus, including the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Artesh (conventional armed forces), and the Basij, all pledged their allegiance to the new head of state.

Khamenei out of the shadows

This choice of leader is about more than ‘keeping it in the family.’ Moreover, it laughs in the face of Trump for believing he could ever pull the levers of such a decision.

However, Mojtaba, a 56-year-old cleric and veteran of the Iraq-Iran war, is not the heavy-hitter his father was. He has never held an official title. He is widely known as the “man behind the curtain.”

Nevertheless, Iran’s shadow has come into full view. For years, pundits and US officials alike, long argued that Khamenei Sr. had “delegated” leadership responsibilities to Khamenei Jr. Khamenei junior is said to have been working in lockstep with IRGC and Basij commanders. In that sense, Mojtaba was the surest choice. The fatal strike on his father’s compound also killed his mother, wife, and son.

Trump’s backslide

Much to the dismay of Iran’s foes, for now, the “snake” – as they call it –  has grown a new head. Billions of dollars expended by warhawks in Washington and Tel Aviv salivating at the prospect of a rubbled Iran, and for what? All to land back on square one.

Is this the war Trump claims is going “very well”? Notwithstanding what the Republican cultish leader thinks or wants the world to think, Iran will not bow for his or anyone else’s convenience. The crowning of Mojtaba reminds those waging this unprovoked war of this fact.

It’s ultimately a one-finger salute to the Trump’s twin demands of:

More apparent than the fulfilment of either demand is the collision course America has set itself against. On the one hand, Trump has disavowed earlier calls of “regime change,” yet continues to demand the lead role in writing the next chapter of the country’s history.

While Trump has remained tight-lipped on the choice of Mojtaba, Trump-friendly US senator Lindsey Graham has said the appointment of the late Ayatollah’s son “is not the change we’re looking for” before calling him a “religious Nazi” and confirming the target placed on his back:

I believe it’s just a matter of time before he meets the same fate as that of his father — one of the most evil men on the planet.

When it comes to the future of the region and that of the Iranian people, the son of the late murderous ayatollah is not the change we’re looking for. He has lived large as the Iranian people have suffered and he’s been on the front lines of pushing hate because he too is a… https://t.co/UbBjxLmXRC

— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) March 8, 2026

Regime change is not a menu item

If history has taught us anything, capitulation is what the Iranian regime has resisted for almost 50 years. Azadeh Sobout, a research fellow at Queen’s University Belfast, delivered a blistering critique of America’s cavalier attitude. She also criticised the mischaracterisation of freedom as a cannonball tearing through civilian infrastructure:

We are being sold this binary idea that we either have to choose between dictatorship or bombardment, between destruction of submission.

If regime change were a choice on the menu, the people of countries trapped in America’s forever wars would have long ago requested that for America. The point Sobout makes, by calling out the duplicitous global system, is that America does what it wants with little regard for the consequences. Also, America shows little regard for the post-WWII rules-based system. As we now see, that system exists in name only:

I believe it’s the right of self determination to the people of Iran and other people in the region that have constantly been undermined.

Freedom, as the academic added, isn’t about:

destroying the remaining infrastructure of our societal and cultural spaces.

In the famous words of Iran’s former foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif:

World must stand up to US ‘bullying’, says Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif https://t.co/bojcx3MUR2 pic.twitter.com/JcbetObE1m

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) June 3, 2018

Advertisement

A man of the people, or the IRGC?

Back in Iran, opinions are divided over Mojtaba. In Shiraz, a major military production hub and Shi’ite seminary centre, and elsewhere, Khamenei Jr. was warmly received as Iran’s new supreme leader. Opposition has been quieter. In fact, dissent would be regarded as treason by law under war.

Mojtaba has been accused by some Iranians of suppressing anti-government protesters in January 2026, and engineering past presidential elections.

Others have cast him as the hereditary heir to Khamenei, arguing that his appointment runs counter to the tenets of the Islamic revolution of 1979.

More controversial is the IRGC-controlled business empire Mojtaba has inherited, including the state-owned Setad conglomerate – giving him control over assets valued at USD 95 billion. These include properties previously owned by dissidents stripped of their ownership rights.

His position within the IRGC network is important for the survival of Iran’s political system. At this tentative stage it is unclear whether he’ll emerge as a reformist character or toe the hardliner route. Either way, the message this broadcasts to America and the wider world is that Iran will not accept terms and conditions written in imperial blood. Only time will tell if Mojtaba can hold down the fort while the moat is on fire. More importantly, only time will tell if he can survive leadership decapitation.

What Mojtaba is unlikely to do – in the famous worlds of Khomeini, the founding father of the Islamic Republic – is to drink from the poisoned chalice. America is looking increasingly trapped in a long engagement, given surrender is not on the cards for Iran.

Featured image via the Canary