Reform UK’s candidate in the Aberdeenshire South by-election is Jo Hart. And as you’d expect for a Reform candidate, she has some opinions that fall outside the mainstream:

Fair enough

In a video posted online by the Scotsman, an interviewer puts the following to Hart:

I wanted to ask about some of your past comments on social media. You’ve obviously had a certain amount of scrutiny about this. You called Hollywood actors Satanic worshipping trash. You made comments that appeared to suggest that 5G masks had negative health impacts. You called the Royal family benefit scroungers. ‘Fuck the Royals. Make Lizzie the last’. Do you regret these comments?

Hart laughed before responding:

Well, first off, let’s address the Royal one. That was a post that was shared and my actual sentiment was about was it appropriate to be spending money on the Jubilee right now after COVID when so many professional people were queuing at food banks? And the post that I shared was a public post and so it was taken totally out of context.

We suspect she could drum up some support with stuff like this — especially in Scotland, which isn’t known for its fealty to the crown.

Hart continued:

Then when it comes to the whole Satanic worship thing, you know, having banter with your friends, you know, you can then refer to things like Epstein Files and everything. So, I mean, let’s just have banter. It’s just a flippant comment.

We hate to say it, but we’re not going to pull her up here either. There are certainly enough celebrities with connections to Epstein and the like to warrant such “banter”. There are also many celebrities who are demonic themselves, like Kevin Spacey or the guy who wanted to eat people.

5G

With the next part of Hart’s response, we get to something we can criticise:

And with 5G, there’s not much research being done on that in a very long time about the effects of 5G on health. So I think that’s an area that could be looked into a little bit more as well.

In response, the interviewer asked:

So you think 5G masts do potentially have negative impacts on health?

Hart responded:

We don’t know what the long-term effects are, so I think we need to just look into it a little bit more.

The thing is, we actually have researched this already. As Full Fact reported:

The ICNIRP says: ‘‘A considerable amount of research has been conducted on the relationship between RF EMFs [radiofrequency electromagnetic fields] and health outcomes such as headaches, concentration difficulty, sleep quality, cognitive function, cardiovascular effects, etc. This research has not shown any such health effects.’’

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) also monitors for evidence of any health effects caused by electromagnetic fields including radio frequencies. It states that “the overall exposure is expected to remain low relative to guidelines and, as such, there should be no consequences for public health”.

Additionally, this technology has not been shown to increase the risk of cancer and non-ionising radiation does not damage DNA.

Trust no one (specially if they’re Reform)

People should be mistrustful of new technologies and the corporations pushing them. For a good example of this, you should watch the Veritasium documentary on Asbestos, which documents the companies that covered up its ill effects:

If the asbestos thing happened today, the general public wouldn’t just have suspicions; there’d be widespread knowledge of the impacts. That’s because the internet allows us to share our experiences and diagnoses in a fashion which was impossible in days gone by.

For an example of a modern company doing what it can to cover up negative health effects, you should look to something like AI companies burying stories about ‘AI psychosis‘:

When a teenage boy told ChatGPT about his suicide plans, it said: “I won’t try to talk you out of your feelings.” His family is suing after ChatGPT actively discouraged him from seeking help, offered to help him write a suicide note and even advised him on his noose setup. pic.twitter.com/pRijpY1jYV

— Angela Yang (@Angela_Y_Yang) August 26, 2025

So yes, we do need politicians who are suspicious, but we also need politicians who know when to stop being suspicious. And Jo Hart does not appear to be such a politician.

Featured image via The Scotsman

By Willem Moore

Source link

On 2 June, Nigel Farage made a special announcement in which he argued that white people are the real victims of racism in the UK. The speech was in response to the murder of Henry Nowak, whose murderer Vickrum Digwa had just been sentenced.

Farage promoted a message of hate despite Nowak’s family requesting politicians not use the murder to promote division. Farage is still trying to push division, but given the Nazi rally which followed his first speech, he’s now squirming when he does so:

WATCH: Nigel Farage is repeatedly heckled by MPs as he calls on Keir Starmer to end "two-tier policing"

Starmer: "His response has been to appeal for rage. That’s his response to a father who lost his son & asked for this not to happen… it shows exactly who he is" #PMQs pic.twitter.com/cLGAGBHkIu

Advertisement

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) June 3, 2026

Farage — Hate monger

In the clip above, Farage says:

In the horrendous circumstances of Henry Novak’s death, can I urge the Prime Minister to consider this? It is now clear to growing millions in this country that we’re living under two-tier policing. The instructions that are given to police officers from police bosses are clear and written down in ink. It says you must treat different ethnic groups in different ways.

The police at the scene handcuffed a laid-out Nowak despite his claims to have been stabbed. His attacker, meanwhile, argued that he was the one to have been assaulted. A regular person encountering this scene could have been forgiven for believing Digwa, as Nowak appeared drunk, and most attackers would have fled the scene rather than lying about their victim’s injuries. These officers could and should have done more, though, and they certainly should have confirmed if Nowak had sustained injuries before handcuffing him.

The fact that these police were inept, however, is not a sign that the British police are institutionally racist against white people. The available evidence we have shows the precise opposite, in fact. Many UK police officers are certainly incompetent and / or malicious, but cherry picking this one case to push a white supremacist narrative is just evil.

Farage finished:

That, apart from the upset and the anger at the circumstances of his death, the anger that you saw spilling out in Southampton last night, and which is in danger of getting considerably worse if the public lose trust in being treated fairly by the police. Can he take some action, end this divisive practice of two-tier policing and make sure that all British citizens are treated the same?

Squirming

Responding to Farage, PM Keir Starmer said:

Mr Speaker, I don’t believe there’s two-tier policing in this country. I’m really shocked that he pretends to have respect for Henry’s family and then acts in this way. They are a grieving family…

A grieving family have asked us not to respond in the way that the leader of Reform has responded. They’ve asked us not to. They have lost their son in the most appalling circumstance. They make a simple plea of us as human beings to please not exploit that. That is their plea to us.

Advertisement

Farage had looked impassioned when he spoke, but he squirmed as he got his answer, as well he should.

Starmer continued:

We all need to reflect on those words of Henry’s father. My response, and the response of others, to be fair, has been focused on the lessons to be learned so we can deliver justice. His response has been to appeal for rage. Rage.

Starmer was referencing when Farage advised his followers to ignore the wishes of Nowak’s family:

Nigel Farage says he will write to request a review of the sentence of Henry Nowak’s killer to toughen it up.

Adds:

“Henry Nowak’s family have responded to his murder with dignity.

“I suggest the rest of us respond with pure cold hard rage.”

— Kate Ferguson (@kateferguson4) June 2, 2026

Advertisement

This “rage” would bubble over in Southampton later that day:

Dozens of bricks being thrown pic.twitter.com/VwPXkfZlmR

— Taj Ali (@Taj_Ali1) June 2, 2026

Advertisement

Opportunism

Starmer finished:

That’s his response to a father who’s lost his son and asked for that not to happen. Exploiting this tragedy to create grievance and division… would be wrong in any circumstances, but to do it when the family are expressly saying, please don’t, is unforgivable. It shows exactly who he is.

While we rarely agree with Starmer, it’s undoubtedly true that we’re seeing more of Farage’s true self every day. Let’s hope this violent posh boy never gets his hands on the reins of power.

Featured image via Politics UK

By Willem Moore

Source link

The UK government has released more emails from Peter Mandelson when he was ambassador to the US. Among them are two that show Mandelson was trying to create closer links between the UK government and the dubious US tech company, Palantir.

And seems Mandelson attended this event with Louis Mosley, boss of Palantir UK and his client at Global Counsel. Noteworthy as we were told that mitigations on Mandelson’s appointment included no one-on-one meetings with former clients. pic.twitter.com/q5G722DKDk

— Ethan Shone (@EJShone93) June 1, 2026

Mandelson…

Palantir is a defence contractor that’s involved in many ongoing atrocities around the world.

Its ongoing contracts includes mass surveillance, Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities. Oh, and for some reason it’s also involved in the NHS, a service that’s designed to save people’s lives not to spy on/ murder them.

Palantir’s involvement in the NHS has attracted significant controversy, which is why MPs debated our partnership with the US tech abomination in April.

In 2023, Palantir walked away with a seven-year NHS contract without competition, Yanar Alkayat wrote for the Canary.

(The same kind of mates’ rates for the £240 million Ministry of Defence deal). Data handling, trust and transparency are the major concerns.

MPs speaking out included Iqbal Mohamed, who said:

If it looks evil, if it smells evil and if it behaves evil, then it is evil.

The UK government’s unseemly and secretive ties with Palantir don’t end with the newly unearthed emails. Starmer had off-the-books meetings with the murderous tech company earlier this year.

There is no public record of the Palantir briefing attended by Keir Starmer and Peter Mandelson in February 2025 despite the Ministerial Code requiring Starmer to publish details of meetings with external organisations

No 10 says the event was not a meeting and did not require…

Advertisement

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) April 25, 2026

Green Party leader, Zack Polanski, highlighted the following in response to the revelations:

'He was not allowed unsupervised access to former clients’

Is that why Keir Starmer had to accompany Mandelson to their secret meeting with Palantir? https://t.co/okv96wnhDk

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) April 18, 2026

This is the problem with the revolving door between politics and corporations. No matter how many rules and regulations you introduce, these crooked operators simply contort themselves around them.

Follow the money

Speaking to the Canary, independent MP, Jeremy Corbyn, said the following about the influence of money and corporations on the UK:

The Donaldson debate today in Parliament is going to be interesting and I’ll certainly be there giving my views on his behaviour and the way in which wealth, power, money connections end up influencing decisively Labour and British politics. But the real issue is actually much wider and much deeper.

There needs to be an independent public inquiry into the influence of money, of connections, of how decisions are made and what influence they have on parties and on government. Parliament is in no position to undertake that inquiry because MPs are so involved in it all, with money being donated to campaigns, to running MPs’ offices, to supporting putative ministers and later on ministers themselves.

So we need a big clean-up on politics. That means getting the money out of it — getting the involvement out of it.

Palantir is an example of this. Palantir was introduced into the system by Mandelson and others, now deeply lodged into the civil service systems and now claiming that they are the saviors of our National Health Service. Sorry, no.

Advertisement

We need publicly owned, publicly run and publicly accountable data systems within our National Health Service, not owned by an American-based company called Palantir.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Canary (@thecanaryuk)

The latest Mandelson emails are interesting, but they don’t tell us much we didn’t already know about Mandelson. And importantly, they don’t tell us anything Starmer didn’t know about Mandelson when he hired him as ambassador to the US.

Featured image via Leon Neal/ Getty Images

By Willem Moore

Source link

The operators of a Barcelona spa for lesbians have gone viral after denying entry to two US-Israeli women because of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

The women then tried — antisemitically — to claim that being Zionist and Jewish are the same thing as they attempt to cast themselves as the victims. One also tried to claim she had been pushed.

The argument didn’t wash and staff continued to politely refuse them admission, with a full refund.

Spa team: ‘We don’t condone genocide here’

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by The New Arab (@thenewarab)

Always the victims

Israelis have a track record of feigning being the victim of violence to try to criminalise principled opposition to Israel’s crimes. Like in Nice, France, in March.

And in the US last year.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Wissam Nassar (@wissamgaza)

Featured image via Mario Marco/ Getty Images

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Source link

US anti-genocide journalist Cenk Uygur was interviewed on LBC with Shelagh Fogarty this week. The Starmer regime had just cancelled the UK visas of Uygur and fellow commentator Hasan Piker.

Yet Fogarty was determined to ignore the obvious and was seemingly oblivious to how that would backfire. So she told Uygur blithely: “Nobody in this country thinks you can’t criticise Israel”.

Yes, she actually said that out loud.

Fogarty ignores Uygur’s ban for opposing barbarism

Uygur’s response was immediate: “Well I just got banned for it”.

The clip was promptly posted by Green party candidate, Mark Adderley, who knows a thing or two about being attacked and penalised for criticising Israel and its crimes.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Mark Adderley (@mark_adderley)

Fogarty’s agenda was clear, of course. She was trying to associate properly severe condemnation of Israel with incitement and hate speech against Jews generally, which it plainly is not.

Jews are not Israel, Israel is not all Jews. Suggesting otherwise is antisemitic, but it’s a tactic frequently employed by Israel advocates and apologists. Uygur wasn’t having it and rightly so.

That it comes from Fogarty and LBC is entirely predictable. She has sneered at anti-genocide protesters as juveniles who need to “grow up” and swore at a caller who pointed out Israel is committing genocide.

Nevertheless, being predictable doesn’t make it any more acceptable (or less stupid) to tell someone just banned from the UK for criticising Israel that “nobody” in the UK thinks criticism of Israel is penalised.

Featured image via Rich Polk/Getty Images for Politicon

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Residents from the Wyndham & Comber, Brandon 2 and Brandon 3 estates in Southwark will formally launch a new campaign at a public event on 3 June. It’s calling for urgent action on unsafe housing conditions.

The Southwark Group of Tenants Organisations and health justice organisation Medact are supporting the campaign. It highlights the serious health impacts of ongoing housing disrepair. This can include:

• Unreliable heating and hot water.
• Damp.
• Mould.
• Leaks.
• Overheating.
• Structural defects.

The launch event will bring together residents, community organisations, local stakeholders and health advocates to share experiences, present residents’ demands, and discuss solutions to long-standing housing problems affecting the estates.

Residents say poor housing conditions are harming both physical and mental health, particularly for older people, children and those with existing health conditions.

A resident representative said:

We are living in homes that are having a real impact on our health every day. No one should have to deal with repeated loss of heating and hot water, or live with damp and mould that makes people ill. This campaign is about making sure our experiences are heard and acted on.

Southwark residents report repeated heating and hot water breakdowns alongside ongoing disrepair in their homes. Many say these conditions have contributed to respiratory problems, stress, sleep disruption and worsening mental health.

Medact, a health justice organisation working with health professionals and communities, is supporting the campaign as part of its work on the social determinants of health. A Medact representative said:

Housing is a fundamental determinant of health. When homes are not safe, dry, and warm, people’s health suffers. This collaboration brings together lived experience and public health expertise to push for meaningful change.

The event will also include a community social for residents and attendees to connect and build support across the local community.

The campaign is led by tenants and residents from the Wyndham & Comber, Brandon 2 and Brandon 3 estates as part of the Wyndham Heat Network Action Group.

The Southwark Group of Tenants Organisations supports tenant and resident groups across the borough.

Medact is a UK-based health justice organisation that campaigns to tackle unsafe housing.

Poor housing conditions, including damp, mould and inadequate heating, are widely linked to poor health outcomes and health inequalities.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

UK Athletics has been fined £350,000 after pleading guilty to corporate manslaughter over the 2017 death of Paralympian Abdullah Hayayei.

Hayayei was killed while training in London ahead of the World Para Athletics Championships.

The case has exposed glaring lapses in event safety and prompted fresh scrutiny of how major sporting bodies manage risk for visiting athletes.

Hayayei, a 36‑year‑old thrower from the United Arab Emirates, had competed at the 2016 Paralympic Games in Rio, and was preparing at the Newham Leisure Centre when a metal throwing cage collapsed on him.

Emergency services pronounced him dead at the scene. The tragedy cut short a promising athletic career and left a community demanding answers about preventable failures.

UK Athletics investigation: What was found?

A joint police and health and safety investigation uncovered a critical defect: the stabilising metal lattice base plates for the discus cage were missing.

That absence left the equipment dangerously unstable. Prosecutors argued the condition of the apparatus amounted to gross negligence in safety management by the organisation responsible for the event.

UK Athletics admitted liability in court, entering a guilty plea to corporate manslaughter in February. The organisation was ordered to pay the fine and an additional £44,000 in court costs.

Separately, the head of sport for the 2017 championships, Keith Davies, pleaded guilty to an offence under the Health and Safety at Work Act and received a community order with 175 hours of unpaid work.

Official response and accountability

The Crown Prosecution Service was blunt in its assessment:

There can be no doubt that UK Athletics were grossly negligent in their safety management, which caused the death of a talented athlete.

Prosecutors said equipment had been left in a “seriously unsafe condition” and that Hayayei’s death was avoidable.

UK Athletics issued a statement expressing deep sorrow and acknowledging failings.

The governing body said it had focused on learning from the incident and strengthening standards and safeguards across the sport. The organisation’s apology stopped short of undoing the harm but signalled a commitment to reform.

Legal and organisational consequences

The fine and criminal conviction mark a significant moment for sports governance in the UK. Corporate manslaughter convictions against sporting bodies are rare and carry reputational as well as financial consequences.

The sentence against Davies underscores that individual managers can also face personal accountability when safety systems fail.

For UK Athletics, the ruling will likely trigger internal reviews, policy overhauls, and tighter oversight of event operations. Insurance costs, supplier contracts, and venue checks are all areas that will come under renewed attention.

The case sets a precedent that event organisers cannot treat safety as a box‑ticking exercise; lapses can lead to criminal liability.

Wider implications for sport and visiting athletes

The death of an international athlete on home soil raises questions about how organisers protect competitors, especially those who travel from abroad and rely on hosts for safe facilities. Visiting athletes often lack local knowledge about venues and depend on organisers to ensure equipment and infrastructure meet standards.

Event hosts must now reckon with the reputational risk of inadequate safety regimes. National federations, local authorities, and venue operators will face pressure to demonstrate robust inspection regimes, clear chains of responsibility, and documented maintenance procedures. The case also highlights the need for transparent reporting and independent checks ahead of major competitions.

The human cost

Beyond legal penalties and policy changes, the human toll remains central. Hayayei’s family and teammates have lost a son, friend, and a competitor.

Financial fines and public statements cannot replace a life. The case is a reminder that safety failures have victims and that accountability must include support for those left behind.

There is also an equality dimension. Smaller federations and athletes from less resourced countries may be disproportionately affected when safety standards slip. Ensuring consistent protections for all competitors, regardless of origin, is a moral as well as legal imperative for international sport.

What should change for UK Athletics?

The ruling points to several practical steps organisers should take to reduce risk:

• Rigorous equipment checks before and during events, with documented sign‑offs
• Clear lines of responsibility so that venue managers, event staff, and governing bodies know who inspects and signs off on safety
• Independent audits for high‑risk apparatus and temporary installations
• Training and accountability for staff and volunteers on safety protocols
• Support mechanisms for athletes and families affected by incidents, including transparent communication and compensation pathways

These measures are not novel, but the Hayayei case shows they must be enforced consistently and treated as non‑negotiable.

The long view for UK Athletics

The fine and convictions close one chapter but open another: a period of reckoning for event safety in athletics. UK Athletics has been punished and publicly shamed, and now the sport faces the task of rebuilding trust.

That will require more than policy changes, it will demand cultural change, investment in safety, and a willingness to accept responsibility when systems fail.

For athletes who travel to compete, the message must be clear: organisers are accountable for their safety. For governing bodies, the lesson is equally stark, negligence has consequences, and the cost of complacency can be a life.

Featured Image via Warren Little/ Getty Images

By Faz Ali

Source link

No Man’s Land is a groundbreaking new docu-series from Rosie Turner. It explores what it means to live, love, and survive as a member of the LGBTQ+ community in regions where identity itself can be an act of defiance.

Told through dynamic “postcards” filmed around the world, including Thailand, Finland and Brazil, the series captures queer life in all its colour, complexity and courage.

‘No Man’s Land’ reveals queer resilience

The series follows Turner as she immerses herself in local communities. Each episode explores a country with a complex and evolving relationship with queer rights, from underground love stories and chosen families to activists and allies quietly fighting for change.

No Man’s Land reveals the resilience of queer individuals navigating systems designed to silence them. This series has been researched, produced, directed and shot entirely by a team of queer women.

This isn’t a polished travelogue: it’s raw journalism with a heartbeat, using filmmaking to capture both the unfiltered reality and surprisingly joyful portrait of global queer life.

The first public screening of No Man’s Land will take place at The Arzner, London’s only dedicated LGBTQ+ Cinema. You can watch a trailer on YouTube here.

First Public Screening: Sunday 5 July 2026
Doors open at 3pm | Screening at 4pm
The Arzner Cinema, 10 Bermondsey Square, London SE1 3UN

‘Brazil: The Paradox of Pride’

The Brazil episode explores the contradiction between Brazil’s vibrant queer culture and its ongoing violence and political tension surrounding LGBTQ+ rights.

Set across Rio de Janeiro during Carnaval preparations, Turner investigates how a country celebrated globally for its queer visibility and Pride culture can simultaneously remain one of the most dangerous places in the world for trans people.

The episode explores the intersections of religion, politics, poverty, race and queer identity in modern Brazil.

‘Finland: Allyship in the Arctic Circle’

Set in Rovaniemi on the edge of the Arctic Circle, the Finland episode explores allyship, community-building and queer visibility in one of Europe’s most progressive yet geographically isolated countries for LGBTQ+ rights.

Turner travels through Finnish Lapland meeting LGBTQ+ people and allies working to create safe, visible and connected spaces for queer communities in remote areas where visibility can often feel quieter and harder won.

The episode explores themes including trans healthcare, allyship, community organising and chosen family.

‘Thailand: The Edge of Freedom’

Set against the backdrop of Bangkok’s vibrant queer nightlife and Thailand’s recent legalisation of same-sex marriage, the Thailand episode examines the tension between the country’s progressive global image and the more complex realities experienced by LGBTQ+ people on the ground.

Turner journeys through Bangkok’s queer district, from Silom Soi 4 to The Stranger Bar, gaining intimate backstage access, in dressing rooms and during live performances. Through these spaces, the episode explores queer joy, performance culture and chosen family within the city’s nightlife scene.

Along the way, Turner meets activists, venue owners, educators and organisers who are challenging and reshaping conversations around sexuality, gender and queer visibility in modern Thailand.

The episode also delves into wider issues including sex tourism, censorship, sex education, and the gap between growing visibility and meaningful legal protection for LGBTQ+ communities.

Featured image and other images via No Man’s Land

By The Canary

Source link

A laughably tiny group of far-right dickheads failed to spark a civilian uprising in Darlington.

Organisers expected crowds to flock to the town centre after months of aggressive online campaigning. Instead their ridiculous AI-produced flyer, filled with face-painted lions and flags, attracted less than 10 people to the Joseph Pease statue.

Shoppers completely ignored the ignorant display of ‘patriotism’.

Darlington subjected to paper trail of hate

The failed rally follows months of aggressive online campaigning from local far-right figures in Darlington — who are not pleasant people.

The main instigator, David Haji Abbot, has spent months going on massive online tirades. Most of them would be quite funny if they weren’t so racist. Abbot introduces his racist rants while talking about worthy issues like housing, and insults anyone who doesn’t agree.

But he doesn’t just keep it in his echo chamber. To the annoyance of likely everyone in Darlington, Abbot constantly takes his ‘activism’ to the streets.

Abbot has actively financed a flag campaign, which I think he believes is a way of marking his territory.

A handwritten ledger from August 2025 shows he crowdfunded about £157 from 18 contributors. Receipts show he then went on to use the money to buy 30 large St Georges’ flags for £149.70 to shove on public infrastructure.

The unauthorised flag campaign has altered the local landscape and people aren’t happy. This movement has encouraged widespread antisocial behaviour. Crude red crosses have been painted on bollards, causing health and safety nightmares for Darlington Borough Council.

Hitting the legal wall

Eventually, the law quickly caught up with Abbot when he was served a severe legal warning from Darlington Council in January. Posting the letter on his own Facebook, Abbot went on a tirade of racist bullshit again.

The letter from the council revealed that climbing lampposts posed a severe public safety issue, obviously. It also told Abbot how the cost to remove and store flags are placed on local tax payers.

To top it all off, the letter revealed that utility workers were facing threats and intimidation from Abbot’s supporters. Simply for doing their job.

Then Abbot received a call from the police on 6 March for a Community Protection Notice Warning. Once again, Abbot documented this all on his very open Facebook profile.

Authorities ordered this rat to stop his behaviour immediately, especially in regards to his online tirades.

PC Whitfield allegedly noted that Abbot was sanctioned for his online hate-filled content that incited violence and disorder. Honestly, you want to take a look at Abbot’s socials. They are a total cesspit of ranting racism and insults.

The dude has terrorised a local Darlington Facebook group up until today, when he was kicked out for good. His replies were full of racism and ableism, leading to a permanent ban.

Democracy wins in Darlington

Abbot tried to maintain a laughably respectable façade after this. He wrote a formal complaint to Green Party councillor, Matthew Snedker. Abbot does this frequently. Almost feels like he has some kind of schoolboy crush to me given the number of times he contacts Snedker.

That complaint was about minor political fly-posting. Abbot also tried to use the Freedom of Information Act to prove Darlo backed his actions, which backfired massively.

The official data humiliated Abbot when the council revealed it had received 146 complaints demanding the England flags around Darlington to be removed. Only six people wrote to support them. So, 96% of responding residents rejected Abbot’s shitty flag campaign.

Abbot’s agitation also targets vulnerable groups. He regularly uses transphobic rhetoric online and even rocked up to a council meeting wearing a Union Jack suit when councillors debated single-sex spaces.

He looked ridiculous as Darlington Borough Council rejected the policy, dealing another blow for his far-right agenda for the town.

I was there, and after facing aggression from Abbot’s gang in the gallery, it was hilarious to see them so sad when their motion was batted down.

Abbot’s never worn a mask to slip

It was hilarious to see that all Abbot could muster after months of online campaigning was a measly handful of supporters. Wrapped in Temu Union Jacks and plastering the street in juvenile slogans, it was a huge turn-off for the people of Darlington.

These demonstrators used tired phrases like “Save our Kids” to try to trick passersby into joining them. It didn’t work. The population of the town rejects Abbot’s politics of hate and his ridiculous flags.

Although he initially claimed he was happy with the turnout, it appears when he slept on it, Abbot wasn’t happy at all. He launched into a furious rant the next day.

His online meltdown was delicious as he completely broke his police warning. Dropping the fake concern for Darlington’s heritage, he went back to his white nationalist rubbish to demand deportations again.

But guess what? Abbot has already publicised another march next month with another AI poster. This time there’s less face-painted lions and more boats. It appears he’s changing tact this time.

The complete collapse of the rally last weekend proves one thing though. Digital manipulation cannot defeat real community solidarity. As these weird online trolls go back to their caves to lick their wounds and regroup, antifascists are keeping an eye on their next move.

Featured images via Facebook

By Antifabot

Source link