Source link

At this point, AI video generation has gotten so good it can be hard to clock it from visuals alone. This means you have to use context clues. And this is all pretty embarrassing for the Mail on Sunday’s Dan Hodges, because the following video is all context clues:

“More of this, please”

We screen-grabbed the post from the award-winning Hodges because he’s no doubt going to delete it at some point. The video he was replying to can be seen here:

“UK Police are NOT playing
They just full-send tackle scooter thieves in the middle of London ” pic.twitter.com/9qMXUVOkcB

— Seleman (@Eromosele6) August 23, 2026

Advertisement

The video features a series of scenes in which scores of big, burly policemen tackle bag-snatching teenagers on e-scooters. We’re going to go through them to explain why Hodges should have spotted they weren’t real:

• Scene 1: We know we said AI visuals can be indistinguishable from reality, but that isn’t the case here. What begins as two hooded teens on a scooter morphs into one hooded teen on a scooter. The scene ends with four police cars materialising as two on-foot officers tackle the perp to the ground. There are so many officers in fact that it feels like they spawned out of nowhere like in Grand Theft Auto.
• Scene 2: Some visual problems again, as the rider’s right leg turns from black to white before spawning a third leg. Once again, four police cars materialise – two of which randomly accelerate away from the criminals. The scene ends with a violent mid-air tackle; this time with the officer seeming to hang in the air for a moment before dropping.
• Scene 3: A lad on a crosser is flying down the street. Although this is supposed to be a police chase, the scene begins with the police car leading the race before the lad on the crosser overtakes. This time the scene ends when an on-foot officer kicks the lad off his bike. Although the bike is travelling at what must be 40mph, the officer is able to kick the lad off without any knockback.

It quickly gets worse

• Scene 4: Two lads on an e-scooter snatch a bag. Within seconds, three on-foot officers run over and tackle them, begging the question: why did they attempt the robbery with three officers mere metres away? A police car pulls up seconds later, making their decision look even worse.
• Scene 5: Two lads on a moped. Yet again, it’s supposed to be a chase, but there are multiple cars ahead of the alleged criminals. The car that’s behind them pulls up alongside and the driver opens his door and kicks them through his window. It’s hard to express how bad this looks — especially as the two lads morph into one after they’re kicked off the bike.
• Scene 6: Another lad on a crosser; this time with a police officer running behind him. For whatever reason, the alleged criminal decides not to floor it, allowing the officer to catch up. This ends up being a poor decision, because the officer leaps into the air, spins around three times, and kicks the lad in the back of the head. This would almost certainly count as assault with a deadly weapon — especially as the video claims the officer is a “Former Kung Fu Champion”.

Mail — Shameful

It would be embarrassing enough if Mail columnist Hodges mistook one of these videos for being real; the fact that he sat through all six and didn’t realise something was amiss is frankly astounding. As such, it’s no wonder people are ripping the piss out of him in the replies:

“Excellent. More of this please.” pic.twitter.com/naHGDHsJl4

— Adam Sellers (@YisraelChaiAdam) August 23, 2026

The clampdown on three-legged thieves is long overdue. pic.twitter.com/40H93pSPYL

— Citizen K (@PrimeShade) August 23, 2026

Advertisement

Featured image via AI

By Willem Moore

Source link

At this point, there are very few people in Britain who think Donald Trump is acting in anyone’s interests besides his own. As such, the following post from Reform UK’s Nadhim Zahawi might be the most embarrassing thing he’s ever said:

Important thread below. Many suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome insist the President has no strategy on Iran. The analysis below suggests otherwise, his strategy is working and could force meaningful concessions from Tehran.

For decades, the Iranian regime has used… https://t.co/5CVvQoLPMN

— Nadhim Zahawi (@nadhimzahawi) August 22, 2026

Advertisement

Humiliation ritual

The full post from Zahawi reads:

Important thread below. Many suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome insist the President has no strategy on Iran. The analysis below suggests otherwise, his strategy is working and could force meaningful concessions from Tehran.

For decades, the Iranian regime has used proxies to destabilise the region and turn sovereign nations into states beholden to Tehran. It has also relentlessly pursued the capability to build a nuclear weapon. That era may now be over.

The combination of [Donald Trump], [Marco Rubio], and [Scott Bessent] may go down as one of the most effective foreign-policy teams in modern American history. Previous administrations enabled Iran to wreak havoc across the Middle East, destroying countless lives and livelihoods.

Advertisement

You don’t need to be a military genius to see that the US and Israel’s war on Iran has been a disaster. Ways in which it’s been a disaster include:

• The completely unnecessary loss of life.
• Iran has held off the US with significantly less costly weapons, exposing the global defence industry for the racket it is.
• The US and their allies are running out of interceptor missiles that could leave them exposed.
• Iran has more leverage now than ever following its closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
• The war is incredibly unpopular with American voters.
• Trump’s constant flip-flopping on the ceasefire deal with Iran has made the US look clownish and untrustworthy (which it is).
• We’ve already experienced inflation as a result of the war with more set to come.

Only a buffoon could look at this situation and think there is a “strategy” at play.

Further humiliation

Zahawi was responding to a thread from researcher and analyst Hamidreza Azizi. We know that Zahawi didn’t actually understand what he was reading, because Azizi responded as follows:

Not necessarily. And that’s where the whole discussion about strategy becomes important, because a strategy has to take into account various possible futures, i.e., scenarios. People like Ghalibaf and Pezeshkian are those who were already in favor of a diplomatic solution. They were the ones engaged in the negotiations and the signing of the MOU, and they are still defending it. You don’t need more pressure to push them toward concessions.

The challenge is that the failure of the MOU has already strengthened the hand of the hardline core around Mojtaba Khamenei, who believe that no diplomatic agreement with Trump — or with the United States more broadly — can last. What they are pushing for within the system is greater escalation, especially given the upcoming midterm elections in the United States, so that Trump feels the pain and is forced either to withdraw or make further concessions.

One can reasonably question the logic and eventual success of such an approach, but this is the reality among a powerful faction within the Iranian establishment. So, differing views within the Iranian leadership should not be mistaken for a general tilt toward a diplomatic solution. The outcome could be exactly the opposite.

Advertisement

Reform — Sucking up

Trump’s war on Iran is incredibly unpopular with Britons; as is Trump himself. If Nadhim Zahawi thinks it’s in his best interests to suck up to the man and his disastrous war, we’re certainly not going to stop him. In fact, we’d encourage him to do so. We’d even say doing so makes him just as much of a strategic genius as Trump.

Featured image via Henry Nicholls / Andrew Harnik

By Willem Moore

Source link

On 17 August, we learned that PM Andy Burnham had inadvertently been exchanging text messages with a hoaxer. This seemed odd at the time, because you’d assume the prime minister has all his contacts vetted. As it turns out, the number was vetted in a way — namely in the sense that it came from what should have been a trusted source — David Lammy.

In future, this source may not be so trusted:

EXCL: David Lammy gave the PM the phone number of the con artist pretending to be Donald Trump’s chief-of-staff.

Andy Burnham exchanged several messages with the hoaxer.

Advertisement

The blunder was a big embarrassment for the new PM.https://t.co/MBwckTChq4

— Kate Ferguson (@kateferguson4) August 22, 2026

David Lammy — Embarrassing

The person Burnham thought he was communicating with was White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. You’d assume Downing Street would have a rolodex or database containing all the relevant phone numbers for politicians and appointees the world over. Instead, our PM is seemingly reliant on one of his MPs having the number. This is a bad system in normal circumstances; it’s especially bad when you factor in the existence of malicious actors.

Following the revelation that Burnham had been in contact with a fake Susie Wiles, the BBC reported:

It is understood the communication between Burnham and the person posing as Wiles was in the form of messages and there was no conversation between the two.

“No messages of significance” were exchanged and the texts were “quickly reported to the appropriate authorities” once they were believed to be suspicious, sources said.

Downing Street did not say when the messages were exchanged, or how many there were, nor whether they were over WhatsApp or another system.

It’s unclear why Burnham was able to quickly smell a rat when Lammy could not. Perhaps the fake Wiles behaved more suspiciously in conversation with Burnham; perhaps Lammy is just clueless.

“Massive headache”

News of Lammy’s involvement was broke by the Sun. According to a source who spoke with the Murdoch rag:

David Lammy thought he was currying favour with the new PM by getting them the phone number of one of the most powerful people in Washington.

If all this true, it’s a terrible look for everyone involved. It really doesn’t say much for the special relationship that our leader has to scrounge around for contact details like this. Saying that, the so-called ‘special relationship’ was always a propaganda tool to convince Britons we somehow got something out of being America’s lapdog:

Not since George W Bush and his "yo Blair" has there been a humiliation scene like this one. The heir of Churchill Atlee Wilson Callaghan Thatcher on his knees like a schoolboy sneak running around the school bully… https://t.co/rr57JCdqSr

— George Galloway (@georgegalloway) June 17, 2025

Advertisement

The Sun’s source added:

But it turned out to be the wrong one and the whole thing has turned into a massive headache for the PM.

It is a serious embarrassment for David.

And that’s putting it mildly.

What a mess

This situation begs a number of questions:

• How long has Lammy had the number for?
• Where did he get it from?
• To what degree was he communicating with the hoax caller?
• Who else did he give the number to?
• To what degree were they communicating with the hoax caller?

We’re using the term ‘hoax caller’, but potentially that’s diminishing the seriousness of all this. Obviously the government would want us to think it’s some prankster, but this could be a serious security breach.

What a mess.

On the plus side, don’t expect to see David Lammy – the man who tried to scrap jury trials – back in the Cabinet any time soon.

Featured image via PA Wire

By Willem Moore

Source link

Ireland — The Irish Council Against Blood Sports (ICABS) has denounced heritage minister James Browne for “shamefully [granting] 2026-27 licences for cruel hare coursing“. The activist group explain that the licences will mean that:

Thousands of hares will be cruelly netted from their habitats, manhandled, transported in crates to coursing enclosures, held in captivity for weeks or months and forced to run for their lives. All the hares will suffer fear and stress and some of those hit and mauled into the ground will sustain broken bones and die from their injuries.

During a coursing event, a terrified wild hare captured from its natural habitat must run, in fear for its life, from muzzled greyhounds while trapped in a confined area. Despite the protection from biting, hares are routinely killed, and dogs frequently injured. One recent horror story involved a hare at a Rathkeale and Limerick city coursing event, who:

…had to be put down by the vet as the femur was visible outside and not attached to the foot of the hare.

This was reported by the Minister of State for nature and biodiversity Christopher O’Sullivan, in response to a question by People Before Profit TD Paul Murphy.

O’Sullivan did his bit for nature and biodiversity by voting for the continued torture and killing of hares. Left-wing parties recently put forward a bill to outlaw the so-called ‘sport’, but were voted down by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Sinn Féin. The Republic of Ireland is one of only three European countries to still allow the barbaric practice. The others are Portugal and Spain.

Government in Ireland barely regulating barbaric ‘sport’

ICABS denounced both Browne and O’Sullivan, saying:

This is an insult to the majority in Ireland who want this barbaric bloodsport banned and it is a betrayal of the threatened Irish Hare, an icon of biodiversity. You should be protecting this species, not facilitating its persecution.

Browne licensed the clubs despite investigative journalist Patricia Devlin recently showing that the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM):

…inspected just four hare coursing events in five years

Devlin said that records she acquired:

…under Access to Information on the Environment (AIE) revealed that DAFM veterinary inspectors attended just four of around 200 coursing meetings between 2019 and 2023 – and none at all in 2021 or 2023.

She continued:

During those handful of inspections alone, 16 hares were recorded as being “hit” by dogs and one injured greyhound was euthanised.

She points out that DAFM claim to have the sport under “constant review” but “were absent from around 98% of events”. At all four events where they were present, hares were recorded as being struck by the dogs. One report recorded 10 hares killed, though DAFM blamed this on a clerical error. Yet the “inspection report released several years later” still had the original figure.

Adding to the incompetence or indifference about how the archaic bloodsport is regulated, government bodies weren’t able to make up their minds about whose responsibility hare coursing is. Both the National Parks and Wildlife Service and DAFM told Devlin the ‘sport’ fell within the purview of the other.

No tolerance for people who entertain themselves with cruelty

ICABS have recently argued that heritage minister Browne has the right to refuse “all hare coursing licences” on the basis that he is:

…entitled to apply “the precautionary principle” to protect a species.

This follows a High Court decision which ruled that a previous heritage minister, Malcolm Noonan, acted lawfully in 2023 when he banned shooting of four species of duck to ensure their conservation. The National Association of Regional Game Councils challenged the decision, on behalf of their members, whose chosen pastime is apparently murdering endangered birds. However:

The judge ruled the minister had powers to take whatever steps were deemed necessary to maintain the populations of wild birds at satisfactory levels.

The minister’s powers were not:

…circumscribed by any requirement to take any economic or recreational factors into account in making his decision.

Bloodsports practitioners typically tend to exaggerate the economic contribution of these cruel activities. As for the recreational side, in the year 2026, no consideration should be shown to people who choose to entertain themselves by tormenting and murdering other sentient creatures.

77% of the Irish public seem to feel that way about hare coursing, meaning Browne’s recent licensing decision has shown disdain for animal wellbeing, and democracy.

Featured image via the Canary

By Robert Freeman

Source link

Over the past few months, Reform UK and its politicians have embroiled themselves in a never-ending series of scandals. With their polling simultaneously dipping and rumours that Nigel Farage could walk away, this has predictably led to infighting among the party’s bigwigs. The latest development on that front has been the suggestion that ex-Tory Suella Braverman is apparently on ‘resignation watch’:

Apparently – i.e the Sun's Harry Cole has said – there is friction among senior Reform figures (golly gosh!), placing Braverman on 'resignation watch'.https://t.co/bNImKuVQyX https://t.co/L7nmxFY39i

— Moyra Grant (@moyra_grant) August 23, 2026

Braverman has now denied she’s on the verge of quitting. Some have taken this as confirmation the media is making up stories; others have shrugged at her denials and said: ‘well she would say that, wouldn’t she?‘

Suella Braverman on resignation watch

The suggestion that Braverman is considering her position came from longtime Sun journalist and editor Harry Cole. If the name ‘Harry Cole’ rings a bell, you’re no doubt remembering him as the man who said this (as immortalised by the WayBack Machine):

According to Cole, Reform insiders told him that Braverman is so obviously unhappy in her position that the party is closely watching. The worry, apparently, is that she could quit at any moment. She presumably can’t defect, however, as the Tories’ Kemi Badenoch described her as follows:

Badenoch says Reform defectors ‘some of the most dishonest people I have met’ https://t.co/nO4tQ3OgUW

— Reform UK Exposed (@reformexposed) August 23, 2026

She also couldn’t defect to Restore Britain, because the party is full of hardcore white supremacists who wouldn’t tolerate a Person of Colour dictating their political direction.

Braverman herself has denied the accusations, putting the following to Cole:

The piece is literally calling for an end to division…….

— Harry Cole (@MrHarryCole) August 22, 2026

Cole would later ask Braverman to clarify what specifically she was denying. Braverman replied:

What you’ve written about me is categorically wrong. I’m setting the record straight.

And you didn’t check with me before you wrote it- which is a real shame as I would have corrected you.

Advertisement

If Reform insiders are quietly watching Suella Braverman without her knowledge, she isn’t in a position to deny that. She could deny she’s unhappy, obviously, which is presumably what she’s doing. This still doesn’t rule out the possibility she seems unhappy enough to warrant observation, though; it also doesn’t rule out the possibility that she’s lying.

Trouble brewing

Of course, it’s entirely possible that Cole made the story up; that or the person feeding him the gossip was doing so with an agenda. As commentator Dan Hodges noted, though:

By my reckoning in the past week senior Reform figures have claimed journalists from the Spectator, the Daily Mail, the Mail on Sunday, the Sun, the Times and the I Paper have all independently invented broadly the same stories about internal infighting within the party…

— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) August 22, 2026

Advertisement

Many have noted that Cole is sympathetic to Reform UK and its agenda. At the same time, Cole is one of Rupert Murdoch’s longest-serving lackeys, and the Murdoch press has been hammering Reform recently. Most obviously, this has materialised via the Times’ investigative reports into Reform’s various donation scandals.

While this reporting does seem to be genuine and worthy, the notable thing is that much of it is stuff we’ve broadly known for years – i.e. that for whatever reason, the Times has just now deemed it worthy of coverage. Many speculate this is because Reform and its politicians have shown they lack the ability to effectively manage decline as the Tories did. The risk is that if things deteriorate too quickly, people may rise up and overthrow the capitalist class – the class which has profited from this managed decline, and which includes people like Rupert Murdoch.

Regardless of what’s happening, anyway, we’re more than happy to sit back and watch these two sides tear chunks out of one another.

Featured image via Bridport News

By Willem Moore

Source link

This may not surprise anyone at this point, but Donald Trump’s latest financial disclosure has given many the impression that he’s insider trading at an unprecedented level:

Trump Made Over 1,000 Stock Trades in June Worth $78M–$263M, Ethics Filing Shows

— NewsWire (@NewsWire_US) August 22, 2026

Rampant

In the US, alleged insider trading is far from a partisan activity. Perhaps the most notorious of the alleged inside traders is Nancy Pelosi, who we reported on in November 2025. A stock tracker which launched in 2024 showed that Pelosi was realising 54% gains on her portfolio – a percentage which far exceeded most hedge funds. As we said at the time:

If Pelosi is not in fact an insider trader, she’s simply so good at it that she can beat professionals despite working full-time in a notably stressful field of work.

And as Benzinga reported:

The former Speaker of the House of Representatives’ impressive results are highly controversial and we only know about them because of the information made public through the STOCK Act, passed in 2012. This law requires members of Congress to share details about any stock trades worth over $1,000 within 30 to 45 days. The goal of the law was to stop insider trading and make things more transparent. And while that hasn’t exactly happened, the disclosures have inspired investors to copy lawmakers’ trades.

As bad as Pelosi allegedly is, however, the scale that Trump is operating on is something else entirely. This led to the following accusation from tech YouTuber Jerry Rig Everything:

Donald Trump just made more money in one month via insider trading than Nancy Pelosi did in 37 years. https://t.co/eyFAu5BuI7

— JerryRigEverything (@ZacksJerryRig) August 23, 2026

Trump trades

Meidas Touch drew attention to the following from Trump’s disclosure:

Trump reported a staggering 1,051 trades in his June financial disclosure. Here are two of the more curious ones:

— June 18: Bought $250K–$500K in Boeing, the same day the Navy awarded Boeing an $880 million contract for P-8A training systems.

Advertisement

— June 23: Bought $15K–$50K in SpaceX, the same day NASA recorded a $425.6 million award to SpaceX.

While Trump is clearly doing well for himself, he’s not doing well for the country:

The Trump economy: $40tn debt, 6.7% mortgages and $5 diesel https://t.co/9SKepLrG8S

— Financial Times (@FT) August 22, 2026

Advertisement

If you’re just waking up to the tariff news – this is a good summary of the trade chaos Trump has created…and why#onpoli #cdnpoli https://t.co/EsY55NPtUW

— Catherine Fife (@CFifeKW) August 22, 2026

Unsurprisingly, Trump is warning that the Democrats will impeach him if his party performs poorly in the midterm elections:

Trump: I’ll be impeached if I lose the midterms

— NewsWire (@NewsWire_US) August 22, 2026

It’s unclear what Trump’s strategy is besides complaining. His war on Iran and the resulting inflation is very unpopular; as are his tariff wars and the resulting inflation. Americans also don’t like the insider trading which he appears to be gleefully and sloppily engaging in (allegedly).

The only move he’s making which seems designed to generate mass appeal is the following, and let’s be real; this looks terrible too:

MYSTERY MEAT: Trump says he struck a deal to flood the U.S. with cheaper foreign beef.

There’s just one problem: He refuses to tell Americans which countries the beef is coming from.

Advertisement

And U.S. ranchers are furious. https://t.co/xtjFb43rnp

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) August 21, 2026

His mystery meat gambit looks even worse coming in the middle of an unprecedented number of food recalls:

Jesus Christ, I expanded the tweet and the list is a fucking mile long https://t.co/YkTZL12Ngz

— bunny sanders (@whatbunnysaid) August 19, 2026

Slippery slopes

Will US politicians eventually hold Trump and his cronies accountable for his allegedly criminal behaviour? That remains to be seen. But if they don’t, expect politicians to keep pushing the boundaries of what they can get away with.

Featured image via Harry Benson / Kevin Dietsch

By Willem Moore

Source link

Israeli settler violence — The most striking thing about the cruelty of so-called ‘Israel’ is perhaps the cowardice with which it is exercised. The Gaza holocaust is one giant act of spinelessness, bombarding from afar a captive population for over 1000 days like fish being shot in a barrel. Now a Zionist thug has exemplified that tendency once more, by attacking a Palestinian amputee of advanced years from behind as he hobbles away on crutches.

Middle East Eye have the video, and diplomatically refer to the gutless terrorist as a “settler”. It’s a strange term to use. Tea leaves ‘settle’ at the bottom of a mug. The Zionist colonisation project is not an equivalently benign and natural process. These people are not ‘settlers’ — they are land thieves, waging a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian people.

Attack victim lost leg to previous Israeli settler violence

The victim is Saeed al-Amour, whose amputation is horrifyingly the result of a previous vile attack by another group of pogrom enthusiasts. Al-Amour was the focus of a Channel 4 News report more than a year ago.

On 17 April 2025, cameras captured him again trying to defend his land from armed thugs, allowed to continue unimpeded by the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF). Despite being unarmed, a land thief shot him in the leg, as others pinned his son Elias down helpless nearby. As a result of the attack, Al-Amour lost his leg. ‘Israeli’ authorities charged the Palestinian man and his son with violent disorder, despite footage clearly showing they were not the aggressors. They paid a £2,000 fine to escape jail.

WAFA news agency reports that the most recent attack happened on August 22:

…in the village of Khirbet al-Rakeez, located in Masafer Yatta, south of Hebron

They say:

The attack left al-Amour with multiple injuries and bruises, prompting Palestine Red Crescent crews to transport him to Yatta Governmental Hospital for medical treatment.

Again Al-Amour is being criminalised despite being the victim, with WAFA adding:

[Activist Osama] Makhamreh further reported that Israeli occupation forces subsequently raided al-Amour’s home, searched the premises, vandalized its contents, and confiscated the family’s mobile phones.

West’s failure to sanction ‘Israel’ means the terror continues

The IOF and land thieves continue to make life unliveable for Palestinians in the West Bank. Earlier this week, the Canary’s Charlie Jaay reported on Zionist criminality in Hebron. A Palestinian family described the terror they endure constantly:

About 7.30pm, just before sunset, a group of settlers was roaming Tel Rumeida with the intention of attacking the Palestinian residents. They started throwing stones at our house. My wife and I were inside so, fearing we would be hit by stones and attacked, we had to lock ourselves in the house and wait.

Tel Aviv continues to push ahead with illegal colonial outposts that slice up Palestine into small disconnected fragments. The United Nations warned the apartheid entity’s plan for “1,200 new housing units” would:

…effectively sever the connection between occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank and bisect north and south, triggering severe consequences for the territorial integrity of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and present an existential threat to the two-State solution.

Leading ‘Israeli’ politicians have been open about destroying any possibility of ‘two states’, making it clear they intend to steal all of Palestine. Western governments continue with mere words and trivial punishment of individuals like war criminal Bezalel Smotrich. He responds by brazenly mocking Britain.

The year between Channel 4’s coverage of land thieves destroying Saeed Al-Amour’s leg, and the latest brutal and cowardly attack on him, is emblematic of this failure to act. Despite the horrors revealed to us daily, complicit states take no meaningful action, meaning we are only left with fresh outrages piled upon those that went before.

Featured image via the Canary

By Robert Freeman

Source link

Mark Ruffalo has hit back at Paramount after they accused him of ‘antisemitism’. The attack followed Ruffalo’s criticism of a potential merger which would result in Paramount and the Ellison family owning a significant percentage of all US media:

The best part about the Zionists trying to attack Mark Ruffalo is that now tons of Americans will see the connection between Paramount and genocide. https://t.co/FbfrUlahFn

— Marxist Mark & The Socialist Bunch (@MarxistBunch) August 22, 2026

Paramount importance

The man who owns Paramount and tech company Oracle is Larry Ellison. In the UK, Ellison is best known for his links to Tony Blair, the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), and Digital ID.

Well this isn’t terrifying at all. Here’s Blair talking to Oracles Larry Ellison.

"Citizens will be on their best behavior because we're constantly watching & recording everything that's going on."

Now you can see why Starmer is so keen on digital ID

Advertisement

pic.twitter.com/sZuB0tj02p

— Bernie (@Artemisfornow) September 28, 2025

Larry’s son David also works in the family business. David is a failed actor who later turned his hand to movie production. Notoriously, he’s the man who greenlit many of the big budget streaming movies you either:

• Didn’t watch.
• Barely remember.

If the Paramount merger goes ahead, these soulless husks will be in charge of a significant percentage of all creative and informative media in the US. And this is something Ruffalo saw fit to draw attention to, resulting in Paramount smearing him.

Smeared

Paramount is currently aiming to buy out Warner Bros. for $111bn. Ruffalo is among the many critics of the deal. And as part of his criticism, he drew attention to tech company Oracle’s links to Israel and the ongoing genocide.

The CEO of the American technology company Oracle boasts about the services it provides to the Israeli occupation army, which uses them to kill us. She even boasts about the fact that several of her employees work with the occupation army! pic.twitter.com/D4WAGT090J

— Hamza Ali (@HamzaAli340214) August 21, 2026

Given that Larry Ellison owns both Paramount and Oracle, Ruffalo’s point is a fair one to make. In response, Paramount issued the following statement:

We are, as always, troubled when antisemitic tropes are invoked in purported service of a business dispute. Words like ‘genocide’ and ‘apartheid,’ applied to a corporate transaction, aren’t just wrong — they’re a bridge too far, and they cheapen the very real suffering those words are meant to describe. This doesn’t deserve a response in kind — and to be clear, we don’t tolerate prejudice of any kind, against anyone.

Ruffalo responded as follows:

The accusation that I am antisemitic is appalling and fundamentally dishonest. Criticizing the actions of the Israeli prime minister, a military technology contract, or the executives who supply it is not the same as criticizing Jewish people. This critical and necessary dialogue is then dishonestly framed as being anti-Israel. To be clear, my views come from my own political convictions and should never be interpreted as hostility toward Jewish people, for whom I have deep love and respect. Everything I know about acting, activism, and humanism has been profoundly shaped by the Jewish friends, colleagues, and loved ones who have been integral and family throughout every point of my life.

This merger has real consequences for real people, and for the entire country. Scrutinizing the Ellisons, including Oracle’s business built on data, surveillance technology and government contracts, and the serious threat to editorial freedom and the loss of a livelihood for thousands of families, is fair and necessary. The $111 billion deal would hand one family control over CNN, HBO and Warner Bros., backed in part by foreign money whose influence on editorial decisions has never been fully explained to the public.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have called for serious national security review, and regulators still haven’t given the public a real answer. Until they do, the merger shouldn’t move forward. Now is the time to dive boldly into all these issues, not step back or concede.

Mark Ruffalo — Consolidation

Mark Ruffalo and pro-Palestinian advocates are far from the only ones criticising the potential merger. L.A. County is warning it could cost the area $2.78bn in lost economic value. In other words, the only people this merger is good for are the Ellisons, and the authoritarian politicians in the US and Israel who will no doubt enjoy active PR from this increasingly bloated media empire.

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

5 min read18 min

Our data shows there is political ground to be won in not stopping at mayors and regions.

Advertisement

Take back control. One of the most effective yet divisive pieces of political messaging in recent memory. Whatever you think of its use during the Brexit campaign, you’d be hard pushed to find a phrase which better describes the political mood of the country over the past decade.

It manifests in all sorts of different ways. Anger at the impact of private equity and multinational companies on the fabric of our public services and places. Frustration that the state can’t fulfil seemingly basic functions, like repairing potholes. And, of course, a sense that the state doesn’t have control of our borders, starkly exemplified by the debate on small boat crossings. Together, a widespread feeling that people have less and less ability to shape what’s going on in the world around them.

The best way to respond to this public sentiment today is through a persistent focus on the ‘last mile’ of devolution, not just devolution to mayors and regions, but down to the community level. If done well, there’s political ground to be won. The ‘take back control’ sentiment shows up in data all over the place, and the newly published findings from the government’s Community Engagement Survey are no different.

Advertisement

The survey shows a big jump in the number of people who feel it’s important to have the ability to influence decisions affecting their local area. Three in five place importance on this, up nine percent on last year. We’re Right Here’s polling finds that, when looking at where this comes from, 84 per cent of people feel they have little or no control over important decisions affecting their neighbourhood and community. Put simply, people increasingly value local influence, but most feel they do not have it.

So, how to capitalise on this politically? Politicians of different stripes have tried to respond to this in a range of ways. With Andy Burnham installed in No 10 (and of course Heron House), you could be forgiven for thinking that the PM is already well out ahead of this. Devolution has never been more fashionable and ‘rewiring the state’ is the talk of Westminster.

True, but does the current approach capture what the call to “take back control” is reaching for? Our analysis of the Community Engagement Survey shows no discernible difference in people’s perceived ability to influence local decisions between those in areas with devolution and those without. The suggestion is, as important as it is for our national growth story, not all devolution gives people that sense of local control, the feeling that they can actually shape things.

This is where the untapped opportunity lies – if Burnham can see Pride in Place not merely as a standalone programme, but as a governing ethos which captures the spirit of his administration

Advertisement

The Community Engagement Survey and other polling and survey work consistently show a stark difference between how positive people feel about their local area, and how negative they feel about the country at large.

The Keir Starmer government understood this. It was the political logic at the heart of Pride in Place. It went something like: if we can harness people’s pride in their local area, and help build it further, we’ll receive political benefit as a result. This resulted in a £5bn programme of funding for 300 ‘doubly disadvantaged’ neighbourhoods across the country. Residents and communities were given the power to decide how £20m is spent in their neighbourhood over the next decade. Giving people the power and the tools to take back control.

Despite its radical premise, given the hyper-local focus of the fund, it currently only serves less than 5 per cent of the population. The Starmer administration also struggled to join the programme up with a wider message. Burham is a very different politician and much more comfortable exercising a form of ‘progressive communitarianism’ which we saw in action via his Live Well agenda in Greater Manchester. This is where the untapped opportunity lies – if Burnham can see Pride in Place not merely as a standalone programme, but as a governing ethos which captures the spirit of his administration.

Advertisement

We’ve started to see Burnham dance close to this in his focus on restoring pride in local high streets, accurately identifying its political potency. But people do not just want better places, and the power to stop high street uses they don’t want. They want a greater say in what happens in their local area.

In an essay for Power to Change, We’re Right Here and the UCL Policy Lab last year, Burnham set out this vision himself: “The country is crying out for change. But not just any change. People don’t want more promises from on high. They want to be part of something. They want to be seen, heard, and trusted.”

To harness the opportunity that’s there in front of it, the new administration should ask itself three questions. Is our agenda thinking as much about the ‘last mile’ of devolution as the first 100? How can we apply the principles of Pride in Place to a much wider sweep of government policy? And, ultimately, is the change we’re creating something where people can be ‘part of something’?  

 

Advertisement

Nick Plumb is Director of Policy and Insight at Power to Change and was a board member of the High Streets Task Force from 2022 to 2024

Source link