Scarlett Maguire is a pollster, and founder of Merlin Strategy.

Donald Trump won the 2024 presidential election promising improvements to ordinary American’s cost of living and tough action on the border.

Even with public opinion split aggressively on partisan lines, there was still relative optimism about what he could achieve on those two key issues for the American public, and he began his second term in the White House with positive approval ratings on both issues.

However, American voters’ attitudes towards the controversial president have cooled significantly since then, and he has found himself going from positive territory to 12 points underwater on the issue of immigration, with some pollsters recording a net 29 negative swing. 

American voters now see Trump’s handling of immigration more negatively than positively, despite the fact that in many senses he has delivered on his election promises of ‘mass deportations’ and tighter control on the Southern Border. Border crossings are at historic lows, with the U.S. Border Patrol recorded roughly 86,000 attempted illegal crossings at the Southern border from February 2025-2026, compared to 956,000 the previous year.

ICE under Trump has deported far fewer than the 3 million people deported under Barack Obama, and there is no doubt that ordinary Americans wanted to see firm and decisive action when it came to tackling immigration and the Southern border, with 66 per cent supporting deportations of illegal immigrants at the beginning of 2025. However, a majority (53 per cent) now think that the Trump administration is doing ‘too much’ on deportations, compared to 10 per cent who say too little and 36 per cent who say the right amount. Democrats overwhelmingly feel that there has been too much (86 per cent) but in a more worrying sign for the administration 20 per cent of Republicans feel the same way, with Hispanic Republicans (a crucial part of Trump’s 2024 coalition) much more likely to agree (47 per cent).

Whilst this unease in public opinion may not be unsurprising after the fatal shooting of two US citizens during conflicts between protesters and law enforcement officers,  it does seem to be having significant political impact. Trump himself has even begun an uncharacteristic climb-down, agreeing to wind down the ICE operations in Minnesota and pledged an end to unwanted ICE surges.

Despite all this, it would be a mistake for Democrats to interpret these changes in public opinion as signs of an appetite for a dramatically more progressive immigration system. Republicans are still more trusted on the issue overall, and just 17 per cent of voters oppose deportations full stop. Many Americans have responded badly to an appearance and tone from the administration more than they have substantially changed their views on illegal migration.

What does this mean for politicians in the UK wishing to draw lessons from the US?

In this country, immigration regularly tops voters’ most important issues, jostling with the cost of living for top spot in the public’s priorities, especially amongst Conservative and Reform voters. Views of the British public towards immigration are actually harsher than those across the Atlantic. They are more likely to support deportations and less likely to think that diversity strengthens the society. Brits support deporting those who are here illegally by more than a 3-1 margin, and by a nearly 2-1 margin support a large decrease in the number of new migrants allowed to the country (this includes both legal and illegal), and more than twice as many think that immigration in the past 10 years has been bad for the country than good.

That being said, as we have seen in America, the British public are very sensitive to the tone and rhetoric of the debate. Whilst the median voter may now be in favour of deportations and hostile to the idea of increased migration, they are also wary of tone that appears too inflammatory and divisive.

At the end of last year, I conducted 20 hours of focus groups with members of the public about a wide range of issues, including immigration. Voters across the left and right are unhappy with the current migration system, however swing voters drawn from the centre and conservatives also respond badly to language on the subject that feels too ‘right-wing’ or ‘anti-immigration’ at the same time as supporting drastic changes to the migration system and huge reductions to numbers of both legal and illegal migrants. Many expressed concerns that the current levels of migration are felt to be unsustainable and feel that politicians have been unfairly prioritising concerns of migrants over British Citizens. However, many of these same voters also wanted to go out of their way to praise migrants who do contribute as ‘hard workers’ often in contrast to parts of the British population they feel are ‘too lazy’ to get a job. Many voters still up for grabs at the next election are looking for politicians to sound fair as well as tough.

Trump has had a talent for causing the world’s attention economy to revolve around his axis, and his second term in power has been no different. Voters, especially those on social media, frequently say they remember seeing more stories from the US than stories from home. As a consequence, Trump has an outsized importance on British voters’ psyche, and as the past 14 months have progressed much of the public appear increasingly wary of anything that seems to too closely mimic Trump’s America (although he still garners praise from many of his critics for ‘getting things done’.) Many considering Reform, especially women, are in fact alienated by a perception that they may be too close to MAGA, “I think he cosies up to Trump” “I think he and his party are starting to speak a lot of sense and attack areas that are of concern to the country. But then there is a little bit of nervousness at the same time, because he is a little bit intense… just a bit Trump-esque”.

As such, promises of an ‘ICE-style’ deportation agency in the UK risks landing badly with voters, who may respond well to the substance at the same time as poorly to the style.

However, it would be wrong for more liberally minded politicians to interpret voters’ concerns about optics and rhetoric as an indication of more progressive views.

There is, if anything, a stronger desire amongst the British electorate for significant changes to the migration system than there is in the US (which is a large part of the reason for Reform’s overwhelming lead when it comes to which party would be best to handle it), at the same time as significantly less appetite for an approach that appears too inflammatory for the sake of it.

Sir John Redwood is a former MP for Wokingham and a former Secretary of State for Wales, he now sits in the House of Lords.

The Attorney General intervenes widely across government and has considerable influence through being a trusted advisor of the Prime Minister.

Sir Keir Starmer himself as a former government lawyer approaches many problems by asking what the law, Treaties and internal law requires him to do. The problem is the lawyers helping him often seem to give bad advice, and regularly give advice which is unpopular with the public. Voters are fed up with international lawyers telling us what we must do  often favouring the foreigner at the expense of the UK national interest.

We can see bad law leading the Prime Minister astray over the Chagos islands.

First the government asserted that the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice that we should give the islands to Mauritius would soon result in the UK losing a binding case in the Court. They would then  order us to give the islands away on worse terms . We were told to settle before such an embarrassment. So why hadn’t these lawyers read our Treaty joining the International Court system? This clearly states that the Court cannot make a binding judgement against us on Commonwealth or defence matters. Diego Garcia and Mauritius are in both reserved categories. Many months have passed since we were told the ICJ would tell us what to do, but so far they have not tried such a move.

Worried no doubt by being told this, Ministers shifted to the UN Law of the Sea. Here they had not read far enough into the Treaty when we joined. Clause 298 gives us a clear opt out for defence matters, which our base at Diego Garcia most clearly is. The UK has always reserved the right to exempt defence matters from the Treaty jurisdiction.

These lawyers are usually particularly hot at defending the rights of former colonists of the previous colonising powers like the UK. So why did they announce the giveaway of the Chagos islands without bothering to consult the Chagos islanders. They should have been particularly careful as it was a previous Labour government that evicted the Chagossians from their homeland against their will. When the government did get round to talking to the islanders, now UK citizens, they discovered they do not want their islands given away to Mauritius. The Chagossians want the islands to stay British. So why didn’t this matter?

Worse still, when a few of the islanders decided as UK citizens to return to this British territory the UK government ordered them off their islands. More bad law, as they rapidly lost in Court with a finding they could not order them out. Many of us were particularly angry about this development. Here was a government which said it could not stop illegal migrants with no connection arriving in the UK, yet thought it could stop UK citizens returning to UK land where they originally lived.

The lawyers in the government have done a particularly bad job with illegal arrivals into  the UK. They promised to smash the gangs and stop people arriving here by boat. It should have been a law enforcement issue. Many of those arriving had paid money for an illegal boat trip to criminals who were probably not paying tax and were breaking the safety rules of boat travel. They often arrived without documents to say who they are, how old they are and where they came from.

Instead of the government lawyers strengthening the law to prevent this law breaking they weakened it. They removed the recently legislated but not enforced  provision that no-one arriving legally could then claim asylum. This  could have made a big difference to the numbers coming.

No wonder people are frustrated.

The truth is we elect a Prime Minister and government to tackle the problems of our day. This may well require changing the law. With a large majority this government could have changed the law on migration to get numbers down. Instead it changed the law so numbers rose. We expect our elected government to stand up for UK interests abroad, not to give in to any foreign power or court who want us to pay up and to surrender our assets. When negotiating new Treaties we only want to sign ones where we get a benefit, and where there is a clear exit clause if circumstances change.

The government is negotiating to give more money to the EU and to put us under more of their power to make laws for us. They fail to make a convincing case of how this could possibly help us. They refuse to show Parliament the texts of a new Agreement which will undermine our Brexit freedoms. Why do these lawyers want the EU to make our laws for us, when we will have no effective voice and no vote over what they wish to impose? The UK economy is not short of laws and rules. Importing more from the EU and paying them more money  is more likely to slow our growth further. It will be yet another burden on taxpayers.

The government seems determined to widen the growing gap between itself and the public on Chagos, on immigration and soon also on the EU re set. A government of the lawyers by the lawyers for the lawyers seems too often to find against the UK, its taxpayers and voters. It wants to assert the rights of the EU, of China, of Mauritius to the detriment of our country. No wonder the government becomes ever more unpopular. No wonder as it racks up the bills to pay foreign governments the tax burden gets worse.

President Donald Trump on Tuesday declared a war on fraud during his State of the Union address and announced that he was putting Vice President JD Vance in charge of it.

But many of the president’s critics were quick to argue that the real fraud was coming from inside the White House.

Trump has faced extensive allegations of fraud over the years.

In 2019, Trump had to pay $2 million to eight charities after admitting that he misused funds raised by his Donald J. Trump Foundation, which was dissolved as part of the settlement.

In 2018, he agreed to pay $25 million to settle allegations of fraud by his Trump University, although he did not admit to any wrongdoing.

Given that history, Trump’s critics had some advice on where Vance could start his work as he leads the war on fraud:

Blues-infused vampire horror film Sinners took home three bronze masks at this year’s BAFTAs, after taking box office charts by storm during its initial release.

With the three awards, Sinners has become the most highly-decorated movie by a Black director – Ryan Coogler – in BAFTA history. This is, of course, a colossal achievement, and every one was rightly deserved (and then some). In particular, the movie took best original screenplay for Coogler’s extraordinary script.

The only problem is that this is the year of the Common Era 20-goddamn-26. How the fuck am I writing ‘first Black winner’ for any category in 2026?

Sinners gets 13 nominations, 3 awards

The awards ceremony was held at the Royal Festival Hall in London on Sunday 22 February. Sinners, a historical horror set in Jim Crow-era Mississippi, was nominated for 13 categories. These included leading actor, casting, cinematography, editing, costume design, make-up and hair, production design, and sound.

In themselves, those 13 nominations are another record for a film by a Black director. However, it was still one less than the Leonardo DiCaprio-fronted One Battle After Another, which took six BAFTA wins this year. Incidentally, One Battle has drawn intense criticism for its stereotype-laden depiction of Black women.

Along with Coogler’s award, Wunmi Mosaku won best supporting actor for her role as Sinners’ Hoodoo priestess, Annie. Composer Ludwig Göransson also took home best original score for the film’s centuries-spanning soundtrack.

‘Feeling seen’

Along with its slick storytelling and gorgeous camerawork, Sinners also drew high praise for its palpable love of Black culture – historical, contemporary and future. Taking the stage to accept his award, Coogler spoke about the importance of community and care for the subject matter of his writing:

I come from a community that loves me. They made me believe that I could do this, that I could be a writer. And it was amazing to be accepted into the community of film actors, the community of Los Angeles … For all the writers out there, when y’all look at that blank page, think of who you love, think of anybody who you’ve seen in pain that you identify with and wish they felt better and let that love motivate you. I’ll be forever grateful for this, thank you all.

Likewise, at the winner’s press conference, Mosaku stated that:

It always feels good when you feel like your story and your experience is being represented with integrity and creativity.

In particular, she talked about the personal importance of hearing:

the response of black women feeling seen, loved, valued, treasured, and the power of our ancestry and the spirituality.

For me, seeing that response made me realise how lonely I felt and all of a sudden these women were in my life who I’d never met, I felt a kinship to.

An ongoing battle

I really can’t speak highly enough about how beautiful this movie looked, how moving its soundtrack was, how well the actors embodied their characters. Seriously, if you haven’t watched it yet, do it.

But the fact that Sinners had to be this extraordinary in order to attain this level of recognition at the BAFTAs – and still come second to the somewhat-confused One Battle After Another. 

This speaks to a major problem within these prestigious awards – namely, the judges really prefer to give them to a white guys, if at all possible.

Just six years ago, all 20 candidates for both best lead and supporting actor were white. And, in the same year, not a single woman was nominated for best director (or any of the six years before that). Then, in 2023, all 49 winners across every category were white.

The previous record-holder for most BAFTAs for a film by a Black director was Steve McQueen’s 12 Years a Slave, which received two masks back in 2014. It came joint third with The Great Gatsby, and behind both American Hustle and Gravity. 

A systematic issue

Director Ryan Coogler is also up for best original screenplay at this year’s Oscars. Likewise, Sinners itself is also up for a record-breaking 16 nominations at the prestigious US academy award ceremony.

The one previous Black screenwriter to win the Oscar for best original screenplay was Jordan Peele, for Get Out. Coincidentally, Get Out was also a horror centering on the idea of whiteness exerting control over Black bodies.

A skittish BBC has censored a speech from BAFTA winner Akinola Davies Jr. Ending his acceptance speech with “free Palestine”, Davies Jr had expressed solidarity with all people who have to leave their countries and who suffer genocide.

Because the BBC had left a racist slur elsewhere in its BAFTA coverage, critics highlighted how its editorial inconsistency showed its “hierarchy of racism“.

BBC censorship of a prominent Black voice

Akinola Davies Jr and his brother Wale Davies won the best debut BAFTA for their film My Father’s Shadow. And Davies Jr had previously told the BBC that the production was so important because “there’s an absence of my story” in popular discourse.

The BBC, however, clearly thought viewers shouldn’t hear what he had to say at the BAFTA award ceremony.

The state propaganda outlet cut Davies Jr’s comments about migration, genocide, and Palestine in its coverage. As Far Out Magazine explained:

during the television broadcast of the annual ceremony – that runs roughly 30 minutes behind the actual event – the political remark was seamlessly cut.

Free Palestine Cut, The N-Word Aired: Racist Priorities Exposed

Convenient how the BAFTA & the BBC can surgically cut Akinola Davies Jr’s “Free Palestine” yet broadcast the N-word. There’s a hierarchy of racism there.

And the apology, “Sorry if anyone was offended” IF? The… pic.twitter.com/LeDvfgrNWR

— Save Our Citizenships 🔻 (@LetsStopC9) February 23, 2026

Advertisement

BAFTA itself put out the full comment. And it spread widely online too:

Akinola Davies at the BAFTAs “To all those whose parents migrated to obtain a better life for their children, to the economic migrant, the conflict migrant, those under occupation.. those experiencing genocide, you matter.. for Nigeria, London, the Congo, Sudan, free Palestine” pic.twitter.com/YQuZUTU3yy

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) February 23, 2026

@GMB
The BBC cutting “Free Palestine” from Akinola Davies Jr at the Baftas, but then broadcasts a racial slur, is all you need to know.#gmb pic.twitter.com/haFR04OZKE

— Martin Burslam 🇵🇸🍉 🟨🟥🏍 (@NeonLuvBar) February 23, 2026

The BBC had made a clear choice to censor Davies Jr’s words, despite acknowledging online the applause he had received for his message:

The BBC cut Akinola Davies Jr’s BAFTA speech in its broadcast. But it did mention his “Free Palestine” finish, along with other comments, in its online newsfeed.https://t.co/9D87HT8rFx pic.twitter.com/0F6w6M5pXk

— Ed Sykes (@OsoSabioUK) February 23, 2026

A spokesperson for the BBC argued that it had to make choices in order to fit coverage of the live three-hour event into a two-hour slot. But the outlet’s efforts to avoid political comments (particularly those going against the line of the British state) have been clear.

Film as a bridge to help process collective trauma

Co-winner Wale Davies insisted after receiving the award that:

film gives us the opportunity to create a more inclusive world

“To live this human experience is a political one.”

Akinola Davies Jr & Wale Davies, winners of best British debut at the #EEBAFTAs for My Father’s Shadow, respond to a question about the political responsibilities of high-profile film creatives. pic.twitter.com/KutquqPu2O

Advertisement

— Screen International (@Screendaily) February 22, 2026

And photographer Misan Harriman called the BAFTA winners:

a new vanguard of storytellers that the world needs now more than ever

My Father’s Shadow is a seminal love letter to Nigeria, as never seen before, written by sons of the soil with grace and intention. Wale Davies and Akinola Davies Jr represent a new vanguard of storytellers that the world needs now more than ever. It was my honour to observe… pic.twitter.com/UhGw6DMqO0

— Misan Harriman (@misanharriman) February 23, 2026

Davies Jr had previously spoken of the experience of British-Nigerians, lamenting that:

As a community we don’t really talk about collective grief or collective trauma.

This film presents a bridge for both generations to connect and for people to understand what their parents went through.

My Father’s Shadow explores family life during times of political repression and unrest.

In his BAFTA acceptance speech, Davies Jr had said:

To all those whose parents migrated to obtain a better life for their children. To the economic migrant, the conflict migrant, those under occupation, dictatorship, persecution, and those experiencing genocide. You matter. Your stories matter more than ever. Your dreams are an act of resistance.

To those watching at home: archive your loved ones, archive your stories yesterday, today, and forever. For Nigeria, for London, the Congo, Sudan. Free Palestine!

Featured image via the Canary

According to Novara’s Harriet Williamson, the Greens have accused Labour of the following:

NEW: Green source says “Labour’s desperation has led them into an alliance with Tommy Robinson” 👀 pic.twitter.com/V6Sa2RW1Pk

— Harriet Williamson (@harriepw) February 23, 2026

To explain, we’ll need to tell you about the Greens’ Urdu video:

“Unholy alliance”

As part of their Gorton & Denton by-election campaign, the Greens put out a campaign video in Urdu:

Manchester Gorton & Denton by-election Green Party message in Urdu for residents. Vote Hannah Spencer. Vote Green 💚Thursday 26th February. Polls open 7am to 10pm. #votegreen pic.twitter.com/5O3T030ga9

— Muslim Greens (@muslim_greens) February 23, 2026

Why did they do this?

Because a decent number of people in Gorton & Denton speak Urdu.

Why are people upset?

Because some people really, really like being upset.

🥀 Labour’s smear of the day is…

🟩 The Greens doing a video in Urdu!

💪 We’re proud that we are making election information more accessible in a proud multi cultural community.

🚨 There is no barrel Labour won’t scrape. Desperation.

Advertisement

🤔 Due to Mandelson being arrested?

— Manchester Green Party 🐝 (@McrGreenParty) February 23, 2026

The Greens have also said:

Not all voters speak English as their first language so of course Greens wish to be inclusive. Our approach has been praised by locals who love their diverse community.

Greens have been outspoken about the Labour Government’s foreign policy failure over Gaza and it is well known that many voters wish to send a message to Labour at this by-election for very many reasons.

Advertisement

The by-election remains a close race between Reform and the Greens.

As the Greens claim above, Labour are apparently also among those who are upset:

NEW: A Green Party source said Labour are busy briefing against the Greens’ Urdu video because they’re pissed about “getting demolished in the social media game” – and it’s “no surprise” this “comes the very day Peter Mandelson is arrested”

— Harriet Williamson (@harriepw) February 23, 2026

Economist Ashok Kumar said the following:

Tommy Robinson is repeating almost word for word what Labour HQ is briefing against the Greens for producing an advert in Urdu. Labour circulate Bengali election videos in my neighbourhood in Tower Hamlets. Such shallow opportunists. How low will they go? pic.twitter.com/SFj2bXGp8N

— Ashok Kumar | 🇵🇸 (@broseph_stalin) February 23, 2026

Ask yourself this

If you’re one of the people who are upset by the Urdu video, ask yourself the following:

1. Have you ever been on holiday?
2. Did you encounter the English language?
3. Did you find that friendly and helpful?

If the answers are ‘yes’, ‘yes’, and ‘yes’, you should consider shutting up forever.

And before you point out you were a tourist and not a resident, come on – admit it – you’ve considered becoming an expat in Spain – you’re that sort of person – and you would be furious if you the local chippy served ‘pescado y patatas fritas’ instead of ‘fish and chips’.

Bad politics

If Labour are attacking the Greens for reaching out to local communities, it’s probably not going to do them any favours. Let’s face it; the residents who are upset about the Urdu video are going to vote Reform, so all Labour will do is push more potential voters towards the Greens.

Featured image via Number 10 (Flickr)

The Conservatives are currently pushing forward with a policy they argue will begin to address the student loans crisis crippling adults across the country. Party leader Kemi Badenoch insists that reducing the amount paid by plan 2 students is the way to do it. However, Martin Lewis slammed Badenoch for this selective and poorly thought-through policy on Good Morning Britain (GMB) yesterday morning.

Last night, historian Sir Anthony Seldon told Victoria Derbyshire that Lewis had his full support. Going further, Seldon argued all student debt should be wiped, rejecting the idea that any course is a “dead end” for young people. Finally, the respected historian urged the government to bring in the ‘Money Saving Expert’ to fix the system within a record four weeks.

This highlights that politicians can find solutions when they choose to act, and it shows that resolving the student loans crisis depends on political decisions, not inevitability.

Watch this from Historian Sir Anthony Seldon 👏

➡️ Calls to wipe student debt and pay for it out of general taxation

Advertisement

➡️ Bring in Martin Lewis and give him four weeks to find a solution

➡️ There are no dead end courses eg the arts, stresses universities are so much more,… pic.twitter.com/clIeo9u1tR

— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) February 23, 2026

Martin Lewis is right

We wrote yesterday about Lewis’ masterclass on GMB in challenging an MP. The money saving expert ran holes through Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch’s latest policy billed to address the student debt crisis. Don’t get me wrong, as a plan 2 myself, I support her plans to wipe student debt. But there is much more to be done, as Martin Lewis rightly pointed out.

We wrote yesterday:

On Good Morning Britain, money saving expert Martin Lewis pushed back firmly against Kemi Badenoch. Pointing out her blatant oversight, Lewis confronted her misguided approach to the student loan crisis affecting workers across the country. In doing so, Lewis gave a master class in how politicians should be rigorously challenged on policies that impact working people’s everyday lives.

Rather than accepting the Tories headline-grabbing promises, he instead pressed for meaningful solutions. In fact, his challenge was so robust that he managed to get Kemi’s commitment to a direct discussion focused on reforms that would genuinely benefit students.

Contrary to the Conservatives’ policy being dangled like a carrot to voters, historian Anthony Seldon has called for all student debt to be wiped. He went further, urging the government to accept that it must stop treating students as a source of profit. Instead, Seldon argued that they already contribute to the economy through the skills and expertise they develop at university.

Furthermore, Seldon emphasised that higher education is about far more than achieving high grades or obtaining a certificate. After all, it is a formative experience where young people develop vital life and social skills. Also, it’s essential for improving critical analysis skills with young people engaging in progressive, informed debate.

Basically, university education adds quality and value to people’s lives. Unless that value is stripped away by exorbitant interest rates on impossible levels of debt, of course.

Scrap all student debt: no hierarchies

This issue once again exposes how neoliberals within British society have persistently structured the system to advantage some groups over others. As a result, we have seen entrenching hierarchies in both access and opportunity, whilst inequality soars. Badenoch’s proposed fix would only deepen resentment and fuel anger among young people. After all, we understand that pain and frustration are relative to the individual. However, in this case, that pain is being felt by huge swathes of the population, not confined to a narrow few on Plan 2.

As Seldon and Lewis astutely argue, any solution that is not universal merely kicks the can further down the road. Student loans would remain a source of profit, while the government would continue to risk disenfranchising young people from the opportunity to connect, collaborate and grow alongside their peers.

Featured image via the Canary

Green party deputy leader Mothin Ali has hit back at Israel lobby-funded Starmeroid MP David Taylor. Taylor had quoted notoriously Islamophobic, pro-Israel ‘X’ account ‘Habibi’ to attack Ali. It was part of the Israel lobby’s flailing attempt to revive the ‘Labour antisemitism’ scam against the Greens for daring to debate whether to support international law on Palestinian resistance.

Taylor went for Ali after the Habibi account used an X post to try to mock the Greens. With the typical Zionist lack of self-awareness, the troll didn’t realise that what it was using to attack Ali is 100% true and aligned with the majority of Britons’ disgust with Israel’s genocide and the Labour party’s collaboration in it. Ali’s post also demonstrates the kind of plain-speaking politics most voters would welcome compared to the evasiveness of mainstream political parties:

David Taylor has form

Taylor’s own record, unsurprisingly, is scarcely any better than Habibi’s. He joined the Israel lobby’s attempts to remove anti-genocide hero Francesca Albanese from her voluntary UN post advocating for Palestinians. He promoted the Starmer regime’s unlawful ban on Palestine Action – and wants it extending to the Islamic Human Rights Commission for being ‘anti-British’ by opposing war. He opposed a report criticising Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians and pushed for war with Iran to protect Israel. He publicly called for military strikes on Iran in February 2025 to protect Mossad-controlled mobs. And he opposed the government creating an official definition of Islamophobia – one that almost exactly mirrors the ‘IHRA’ antisemitism definition he supports.

True to form, Jewish News libel-machine Lee Harpin joined in the attack on Ali, though he used a different tack, citing supposed horror at Ali’s “repeated engagement” with Muslim news site 5Pillars.

But like his party boss, Mothin Ali knows to come out fighting when the Israel lobby revs up its smear machine. He hit back in uncompromising style, telling Taylor that his post showed “exactly why you’re called the genocide party” and pointing out the racism of the ‘Habibi’ account Taylor quoted:

This is exactly why you’re called the genocide party! Labour MPs now agree with extreme racists and islamophobes, like there’s no difference between them!

Anyway how much did you get? https://t.co/nPzuc2C3pU

— Mothin Ali (@MothinAli) February 24, 2026

What a very welcome difference to the ‘apologise and apologise again’ response to pro-Israel smears that killed Corbyn’s Labour.

Featured image via the Canary