In an unprecedented action, more than 130 leading scholars and public figures are risking arrest on terror charges after writing an open letter to the Court of Appeal concerning Palestine Action.

The letter, dated 24 April 2026, simply reads:

We oppose genocide, we support Palestine Action.

The words that have become synonymous with the campaign to Lift the Ban.

Sally Rooney, Greta Thunberg, and Judith Butler were among the first to put their names to this defiant declaration. Joining them are prominent artists and musicians such as Nadine Shah, Brian Eno, Massive Attack’s Robert Del Naja, the actor Billy Howle, writers China Miéville, Lina Meruane and Tariq Ali, and political activists like Lindsey German of Stop the War and Vijay Prashad of the Tricontinental Institute.

The letter is on the Defend our Juries website. And there’s also a sign-on form that allows anyone who supports the scholars’ action to add their name.

Professors and researchers from University of Oxford, University of Cambridge, London School of Economics, Durham University, University of Warwick, University of Exeter and many other UK universities pledge their support for Palestine Action.

The list of signatories includes several senior professors of law: Yvette Russell from University of Bristol, Maria Aristodemou from Birkbeck, and Neve Gordon FacSS, Penny Green FacSS, and Hans Lindahl all from Queen Mary University of London.

Other prominent UK-based professors on the list are Nicola Pratt the president of the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies and Eyal Weizman the founding director of Forensic Architecture.

The letter exposes the paradox of terror charges

If the police proceed to arrest these scholars on terror charges, it’ll further expose the authoritarian nature of the ban. But if they don’t, the more than 3,000 previous arrests of people for saying precisely the same thing will appear not just unlawful but arbitrary and discriminatory.

Today’s action by the scholars is organised by a number of academic critics of the ongoing genocide in Palestine. Many of them are signatories to previous open letters hosted by the group Protest is not Terrorism.

Over the last couple of years Israel has destroyed all of Gaza’s universities and killed scores of Palestinian scholars. Given the UK’s increasingly authoritarian response to anti-genocide protest, the organisers of this letter did not circulate it among colleagues in the West Bank.

Nevertheless, Palestinian academic voices are still represented by Abdaljawad Omar (Birzeit University), Karma Nabulsi (University of Oxford) and Rashid Khalidi (Columbia University), author of perhaps the most widely read recent history of the century-long war against Palestine.

Many well known international figures and political thinkers have signed the letter in solidarity. These include Verónica Gago (Professor of Social Sciences at University of Buenos Aires), Michael Hardt (Professor of Literature, Duke University) and Jacques Rancière (Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, University of Paris 8).

The letter arrives just days before the government’s appeal to uphold its unlawful proscription of Palestine Action comes before the Royal Courts of Justice on 28-29 April.

With more expected to sign the letter over the weekend, the scholars’ defiance is further evidence that the public does not support the government’s attempts to ban legitimate and necessary action to prevent a genocide.

Signatories comment

Penny Green, Professor of Law and Globalisation at Queen Mary University of London, said:

It is both indefensible and revealing that peaceful protesters opposing genocide are being branded as terrorists while the Labour government, itself complicit in Israel’s state terror, avoids all accountability.

Neve Gordon, Professor of International Law at Queen Mary University of London, said:

Instead of meeting its legal obligations as set by the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law, Keir Starmer’s government has been providing military and diplomatic support to Israel as it perpetrates atrocity crimes while simultaneously silencing the messenger by proscribing Palestine Action as a terrorist group.

The decision to appeal the ruling rendering the proscription unlawful is yet another sign of the government’s moral bankruptcy.

Catherine Rottenberg, Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at Goldsmiths University of London, said:

With the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing in Palestine and an illegal and horrific war raging in the Middle East, the insistence on proscribing a direct action group is not merely absurd, it is absolutely unconscionable.

In the name of defending freedom and democracy, our government is undermining both democracy and freedom. We the people must stand up and defend our freedoms, with Palestine Action as our most urgent test case.

Advertisement

Peter Hallward, Professor of Philosophy at London’s Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy, said:

For anyone familiar with even a few strands of post-war European thought, it’s almost incomprehensible to think that we have so quickly forgotten a principle that once commanded universal and uncontroversial assent – that ‘never again’ really means what it says. Never, ever, anywhere. Especially not with our collusion!

The 1948 Convention remains categorically binding on us all, and it obliges us to ‘prevent and punish’ genocide by all the necessary means at our disposal.

If our government refuses to honour this obligation it is up to us to insist on it.

Başak Ertür, a Reader at Goldsmiths’ Centre for Research Architecture, said:

The use of the sharpest end of criminal law against people who inconvenience political power by acting with conscience is a textbook feature of authoritarianism. I’ve been wary of signing collective letters since I was put on trial in Turkey some years ago, along with hundreds of others, for adding my name to the Academics for Peace petition in 2016.

But the proscription of Palestine Action by executive fiat seems to me no less preposterous than what I have experienced, and therefore it feels exactly right that I now sign this letter, because indeed, I do oppose genocide and therefore support Palestine Action.

A spokesperson for Defend our Juries said:

The scholars who have signed this letter have spent their lives analysing complex political situations and moral problems and today have decided to put their liberty and reputations on the line because saving lives is not terrorism.

If the police start arresting these scholars on terrorism charges for peaceful expressions of political speech the state’s authoritarianism will be fully exposed. But if they don’t, the arrests of more than 3,000 people for saying precisely the same thing will be shown to be not just unlawful but also discriminatory.

We applaud the signatories of today’s letter in joining thousands of people who have publicly declared their support for Palestine Action.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

The US State Department’s official page on its illegal war with Iran admits it launched the war at Israel’s request. It also adds that it has confirmed this repeatedly to the United Nations:

US in bed with Israel

Not that this is any surprise to anyone paying attention, but it’s nice to see it admitted. ‘Operation Epic Fury’ has been dubbed ‘Operation Epstein Distraction‘ for Trump appearing to launch it to divert media attention from his ‘alleged’ crimes committed with the ‘deceased’ serial child-rapist. But as Epstein was/is an Israeli spy, there’s really no conflict between the two positions.

‘Request’ is doing some heavy lifting, though. Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted that Israel manoeuvred Trump into the war. Netanyahu’s furious visit to jolt Trump into action has led many to conclude that the wanted Israeli war criminal threatened to release some of Epstein’s worst info on Trump to twist his arm. Certainly that’s what ex-Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben-Menashe believes.

Even Trump’s ‘MAGA’ base in the US is getting tired of Trump’s ‘Israel first’ policies, however. So seeing it in print that the US is wasting hundreds of billions and most of its weapon stocks to appease Benjamin Netanyahu and his imperial ambitions is not likely to fly too well.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Source link

The Assisted Dying Bill has finally been pronounced dead, as it has run out of time to become law.

17 months after it was rushed through in the House of Commons, the horrendous bill, which could usher in euthanisation for disabled people, has failed in the Lords.

The Bill has been a farce from start to finish, something rushed through parliament because Keir Starmer made a promise to dying TV personality Esther Rantzen. The bill was spearheaded by MP Kim Leadbeater, who at every turn silenced opposition and painted them as anti-choice. When in fact, for the most part, they were disabled people terrified for their community.

Leadbeater making an arse of herself and the Assisted Dying Bill

In light of the Assisted Dying Bill failing, Leadbeater made a bizarre statement:

It is a choice, it’s a bit like gay marriage isn’t it? Marry who you want to marry, love who you want to love. It’s nothing to do with anybody else

Gay marriage isn’t a choice, it’s a right. Much like the way disabled people have the right to not be forced to kill ourselves by a system that won’t support us and family who make us feel like burdens.

The bill had such a whistle-stop tour in the Commons that it was barely even fucking written before MPs were made to vote on it. This felt like a deliberate choice as it meant those opposed had less time to scrutinise the bill.

When it made it to the committee stage, they tried to exclude disabled campaigners fighting against it.  The biggest red flag of the committee was when it excluded one of it own disabled members who opposed the Assisted Dying Bill. Due to Kim Leadbeater insisting the committee held long hours, Naz Shah was forced to leave a session early after her hearing aids ran out of battery. This again felt deliberate.

Lords criticised for doing their job

When it reached the Lord’s stage, so many people wanted to speak that the debate had to be spread out over two days. But despite two-thirds of the speakers being against the bill, it progressed to the committee stage. The committee was again corrupt as fuck, as it restricted evidence.

After that it was back to the Lords, where Charlie Falconer attempted to stop debate at every turn, whilst also digging himself an even bigger hole. Despite him being for the Assisted Dying Bill, Falconer exposed that pregnant women and poor people would be allowed assisted deaths.

The excuse for it being rushed through the Commons was that it would be scrutinised in the Lords, but when the Lords attempted to scrutinise it they were accused of filibustering and there was outrage

Opposition to Assisted Dying Bill painted as heartless, but that’s not true

At every turn, the ‘for’ side painted concerned disabled people as heartless bastards who wanted your nan to die in pain. As both a disabled person and someone who’s been there, this couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Nobody wants to see people forced to live their last days in pain, but assisted dying wouldn’t fix that. In fact, it would divert money from palliative care, which is already in a dire state.

It also doesn’t need saying just how much of a fucking state the Department of Work and Pensions is and how much they’re making disabled people feel like burdens. Something, by the way, the government said would be a cause for assisted dying.

Disabled and terminally ill people have been pitted against each other from the beginning, but it’s simply not true that we’re enemies. Everyone should have access to the care they need at the end of life, but throwing disabled people under the bus was never going to help that.

No dignity in dying until disabled people have dignity in life

In an ideal world, everyone should get a good death free from pain, but in a world that will assist disabled people to die before it assists them to live, this just isn’t possible.

It’s fucking fantastic news that the Assisted Dying Bill has failed today, but the fact that disabled voices were continuously silenced or shouted down throughout the whole debacle shows the horrendous fight we still have on our hands to be able to live with dignity.

Until then, there can never be a law which allows us to be killed off so easily.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rachel Charlton-Dailey

Source link

To mark World Day for Animals in Laboratories on 24 April, two PETA “pigs” turned up near the UK parliament. Covered in “bloody wounds”, they were slumped over a giant biological waste bin. It read “Keir: Experiments on Animals Are Bloody Cruel. Bin them!” and had “entrails” and “clinical waste” overflowing out of it. Meanwhile a “dog” wearing “forced inhalation apparatus” lay dumped in front of it.

The action follows the release of new footage from inside UK laboratories. This shows animals suffering in experiments that go on every day. They include pigs with test substances being applied to deliberately inflicted wounds, and dogs forced to inhale toxic substances.

PETA’s senior campaigns manager Kate Werner says:

Subjecting millions of mice, dogs, monkeys, and other animals to cruel and unreliable experiments that do nothing to advance human health is totally senseless. The government must expedite its commitment to end costly and defunct experiments on animals, and PETA is calling for an immediate switch to humane, state-of-the-art methods that actually save human lives.

In 2024, more than 2.6 million procedures were carried out on animals. The majority of these were ‘basic’ or curiosity-driven research rather than being required by law. The animals were bled, poisoned, starved, isolated, mutilated, or otherwise subjected to psychological suffering and physical pain in British laboratories. Millions more were bred and discarded as “surplus” because, for example, they were not of the desired sex or lacked certain disease characteristics.

The majority of “highly promising” basic science discoveries are based on animal experiments, yet more than 90% of these fail to lead to treatment for humans.

Featured image via PETA

By The Canary

Source link

Prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi are quickly becoming an economic and political force, accruing multi-billion dollar valuations and drawing support from key officials in the Trump administration.

But backlash to the platforms is spreading — in Washington and in state capitals — with accusations of insider trading following White House military action in Venezuela and Iran and dogging several midterm election campaigns.

Fault lines over who is in charge of regulation are already emerging, with several frontline Democrats pushing to rein in the companies. In March, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order barring appointed state officials from using insider information to place bets on prediction markets. Regulation discussions are ongoing in other states, including Arizona and Massachusetts.

Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, meanwhile, is an adviser for both Kalshi and Polymarket. And both companies are spending big to win over the country’s political class, with Polymarket opening a pop-up bar on K Street, among other efforts. Both platforms did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Here are some of the most recent incidents that have piqued the anxiety of state and federal lawmakers.

The capture of Nicolás Maduro

Federal authorities on Thursday announced the arrest of a U.S. Army special forces soldier they accused of using confidential information to place more than a dozen bets on Polymarket tied to the January capture of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro.

Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a 38-year-old soldier who helped plan the Caracas operation, spent roughly $33,000 on the bets, earning more than $400,000 in payouts, the Justice Department said. Authorities charged him with unlawfully using confidential government information for personal gain, among other alleged offenses.

The operation saw U.S. forces capture Maduro overnight in his bedroom, before flying the longtime Venezuelan leader to New York City to face narco-terrorism charges.

Van Dyke’s alleged actions took advantage of that mission, the government officials argue.

“Our men and women in uniform are trusted with classified information in order to accomplish their mission as safely and effectively as possible, and are prohibited from using this highly sensitive information for personal financial gain,” acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement Thursday. “Widespread access to prediction markets is a relatively new phenomenon, but federal laws protecting national security information fully apply.”

U.S.-Iran ceasefire

In the hours before President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire with Iran in early April, at least 50 newly created Polymarket accounts spent thousands betting on a temporary peace, according to an Associated Press report.

One account, created just 12 minutes before Trump’s Truth Social announcement, made $48,500 on a $31,908 bet that a ceasefire would occur. Another cashed out for a profit of $200,000, the AP reported.

Polymarket also took heat after the U.S.’s initial strikes on Iran, with “six suspected insiders” placing bets on the attacks just before they took place, according to Blockchain company Bubblemaps, taking home more than $1 million.

Israeli authorities, meanwhile, charged two people in February for using classified information to place bets about military operations on Polymarket, according to NPR.

Congressional bets

On Wednesday, Kalshi announced that it was suspending three 2026 congressional candidates from the platform for betting on their own races. Minnesota Democrat Matthew Klein, Texas Republican Ezekiel Enriquez and Virginia Senate candidate Mark Moran were each given five-year bans and faced fines or penalties ranging from roughly $500 to more than $6,000.

Klein, who is running to replace outgoing House lawmaker Angie Craig in Minnesota’s 2nd District, issued an apology on X.

“This was a mistake, and I apologize,” he wrote. “My experience, like many other Minnesotans, points to the need for clearer rules and regulations for these types of markets.”

Enriquez has not appeared to publicly comment on his wager or suspension.

Moran, a former “FBoy Island” contestant who is running a long-shot bid to challenge Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) in Virginia, took a different tack, writing on X that he wanted to be caught.

“I traded $100 on myself, knowing this would happen (also knowing that I wouldn’t be vying for the democratic nomination) and the attention it would create to highlight how this company is destroying young men and as Senator I will go after Kalshi and impose significant penalties on them – 25% – a vice tax – to pay down our national debt,” he said.

Playing with Mother Nature

Several Polymarket traders made thousands of dollars in profits for accurately predicting sudden, anomalous spikes in the temperature at Paris’ Charles De Gaulle airport April 15, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Météo-France, the country’s weather service, is now investigating the incident, which could be tied to tampering.

MrBeast’s editor

In February, Kalshi reported Artem Kaptur, an editor for MrBeast, one of the world’s biggest influencers and most popular YouTube creators, to federal authorities for allegedly trading “on material, non-public information he obtained because of his employment” regarding the celebrity’s YouTube videos.

Kalshi suspended Kaptur from its platform for two years and imposed a financial penalty of more than $20,000. He was fired in March.

Source link

Six days after Israel’s bombardment of Beirut on ‘Black Wednesday’, 8 April 2026, the UK government issued a rare statement condemning the Israeli airstrikes.

In its Joint Foreign Ministers’ Statement of 14 April, the Foreign Office wrote:

We also condemn in the strongest terms the massive Israeli strikes on Lebanon which… resulted in the death of more than 350 persons and wounded more than 1,000.

The statement marks a discursive shift, albeit subtle, towards Israeli attacks. In the ‘Black Wednesday’ attack, Israel struck the capital city over 100 times in ten minutes – despite a ceasefire agreement. In condemning specific airstrikes, the UK government made a rare departure from its previous condemnations of Israel.

The UK’s statements have seldom condemned specific airstrikes by Israel. One rare instance was condemnation of Israel’s bombing of UK-ally Qatar, in September 2025. Most other instances relate to Israeli land theft, settler-colony construction and annexation in the West Bank.

‘Black Wednesday’ statement a rare intervention

The UK has only very rarely condemned Israeli action in Gaza. And when it has it has couched it in vague language, relating to “expansion of [Israel’s] military operation”, rather than specific attacks.

Despite Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, Iran and Lebanon, including an attack that destroyed a Tehran synagogue, the UK has still not taken meaningful diplomatic, intelligence, military or political action, despite enabling Israel in all domains.

Meanwhile, other nations and non-governmental organisations have had to shoulder the UK’s responsibility to act. In March this year, Belgium interdicted two UK shipments bound for Israel. They contained fire control systems and spare parts for military aircraft.

Separately, it has fallen on non-governmental organisations to investigate and notify the relevant authorities of travel by suspected Israeli war criminals.

Despite this, there is not a single known instance of the Met police questioning, let alone charging, Britons who have served in Israel’s genocide. And that’s despite the Met having dossiers on at least ten combatants.

It has since emerged that over 2,000 British nationals have served for Israel amid the Gaza genocide.

Commenting on the ‘Black Wednesday’ statement, Campaign Against Arms Trade research coordinator Sam Perlo-Freeman said:

In response to Israel’s ‘Black Wednesday’ massacre in Beirut, the Labour government issued a rare condemnation of specific Israeli airstrikes, when it has long preferred to be much vaguer. It is not lost on anyone but the ideologically fervent that the Israeli government is hell bent on terrorising the entire region, committing war crimes, ethnic cleansing and genocide – for over two and a half years now.

Israel appears to have no red lines governing its conduct, whether it’s the gang rape of Palestinian hostages, and celebration of its perpetrators, the bombing of synagogues, the systematic targeting of healthcare workers, torture of children, or ‘quadruple tapping’ healthcare workers.

Advertisement

The UK plays a pivotal role in enabling it all; whether in the F-35 programme, used by Israel to bombard Gaza and Iran, turning a blind eye to the 2,000+ Brits fighting in Gaza, drone component exports, or hosting Israelis who incite genocide – such as President Herzog.

And let us never forget that the 600+ Royal Air Force spy flights over Gaza, which gave Israel a surveillance capability that it didn’t have, and watched as British aid workers were assassinated.

The UK government has not a shred of moral fibre so long as it refuses to take meaningful action against Israel and halt its complicity in every domain. Until then, there remain serious questions as to whether its prime minister, defence minister, foreign minister and members of the armed forces should be hauled in front of a war crimes tribunal.

Featured image via YouTube / CNN-News18

By The Canary

Source link

With advancements in technology, some of which were established to a large extent in the 1990s, capitalism is long outdated. The thing is, people can be addicted to anything.

Some consumers are addicted to what David Graeber called “bullshit jobs” — labour that’s not necessary or fun, but exists for the sake of it. And on the other hand, people are, in a way, forced into such employment because of the system treating housing and essentials as assets for the rich to rent out. Meanwhile, capitalists are attached to money and power.

Capitalism vs autonomous vehicles

The technology has long been established to liberate people from bullshit jobs and build a society that is truly modern.

In the 1980s, scientist Ernst Dickmanns led a group of German engineers to develop the first autonomous vehicle that could navigate traffic on public roads. This was delivered in France in 1994, where a self-driving car took people from Charles de Gaulle airport to travel on a nearby motorway.

The thing is, the car could only navigate roads and environments that were predictable like a motorway. But the fact this happened over 30 years ago shows that capitalism may be lagging behind in technological development, given autonomous vehicles are still not widely available.

The current societal system could well not be optimal partly because patents prevent people from building upon established technology. German companies hold over half the patents for autonomous vehicles. And if you want to build an autonomous vehicle you cannot use any of those patented processes without a license. It’s true that there may be some benefits to this. For instance, new processes may be more efficient and bring new ground to the science. But if a process is established and works, it might make sense for more people to use it.

In the years after, developments in Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) technology have enabled self-driving cars to operate in increasingly chaotic environments. Such developments have also enabled autonomous hoovers, which have been around for decades, while robots can now use SLAM technology to fix your boiler.

When it comes to autonomous vehicles that are active for public use, the ParkShuttle has been used in Rotterdam in the Netherlands since 1999. It is a self-driving bus that operates between Kralingse Zoom metro station in to Capelle aan den IJssel.

Autonomous farming

Farming could also be automated, providing us with food at zero labour cost. The first driverless tractor was demonstrated at Reading University in 1958, using a cable-guided system. Yet fast forward nearly 70 years later and only 5% of farms globally use self-driving tractors, according to research by McKinsey. In the 1990s, the first autonomous tractor without using underground cables was developed in the UK. It’s clear we could have used these advancements to progress in a more equitable manner.

Vertical and automated farming systems could deliver the infrastructure capable of producing enough food for everyone in the UK without anyone labouring away. This could also reduce the amount of food the UK imports (currently at 46%).

The appeal of vertical farming is that it creates the conditions to grow almost anything, anywhere. A University of Surrey study found that vertical farms offer 20 times the yield of traditional farms. It also found that changing the materials used could drop vertical farming emissions by 95%.

Elsewhere, people are already delivering automated farming. In China, there are unmanned farms with smart management systems, along with aerial and ground robots.

It’s obvious that an automated system that liberates people from labour that is unnecessary or not fun is available. But will we just continue with capitalism for the sake of it?

Featured image via the Canary

By James Wright

Source link

As many as 8 UK typhoon fighter jets, stationed in Qatar, could patrol the skies over the Straits of Hormuz as part of maritime operations — a stark reminder of the Royal Air Force’s (RAF) continuing role as colonial air police.

UK military headquarters in Northwood, north-west London, is hosting a 30-country summit to plan for the aftermath of Trump’s unlawful war against Iran.

The summit was organised by the UK and France, another former imperial power. The plan would see typhoon jets involved in “defensive” patrols, with the UK pledging to keep the strait open after the war has ended and mine-clearance support.

Legacy media reported that:

Eight of the fast jets are currently based in Qatar and a number were active in shooting down Shahed drones in defence of allied countries in the Gulf during the 38-day war in the Middle East that followed the US-Israel attack on Iran.

US-Israel attacked Iran first on 28 February without provocation. Iran was offering concessions in negotiations at the time. The Pentagon has since stated there was no imminent threat from Iran. And the UN’s atomic watchdog, the IAEA, has said there is no evidence Iran was developing a nuclear weapon.

The US has achieved none of its original war aims. Iran predictably closed the Straits of Hormuz, a vital oil channel, once attacked — creating a global energy crisis. Far from being defeated, Iran has said the war will continue until:

… the enemy’s inevitable and permanent humiliation, disgrace, regret, and surrender.

Trump came to power on an anti-war ‘America First’ ticket and now faces worldwide humiliation.

US doesn’t seem to care

Defence Secretary John Healey reportedly ‘dropped into’ the summit on 23 April. A joint statement with French defence minister Catherin Vautrin published that day said:

We are confident that real progress can be made. By building on our common purpose, strengthening multinational coordination and setting the conditions for effective collective action, we can help reopen the Strait, stabilize the global economy and protect our people.

It does not appear that the Trump administration is very interested in the summit. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth disparaged the meeting in a press conference in the US on 24 April, saying European leaders needed:

less fancy conferences… and get in a boat.

He added that “this is more their fight than ours.” An odd statement given the US-Israel unilaterally started the war amid negotiations with Iran which were progressing.

Colonial policing for the RAF, again

Once of the RAF’s key roles after WWI was as a colonial police force. As the RAF’s own museum states the post war era saw the RAF reduced in size.

The RAF was quickly reduced from its wartime strength of 204 squadrons to a mere 29 in March 1920. Seven existed as cadres and the remaining twenty two were under strength.

The locations of the surviving squadrons tell a story with remarkable resonance today:

Eight were in the United Kingdom, eight in India, six in Egypt, two in Ireland, two in Iraq, one in Malta, one in Palestine and one in Germany.

One of the reasons the force survived, the museum says, was that RAF leaders — like the father of modern air warfare, Hugh Trenchard — were smart political operators who quickly latched onto a new role for the service:

 and, perhaps most importantly, it was able to demonstrate the advantages of the aeroplane in providing a cheaper solution to the ever present task of pacifying rebellions in the more remote areas of the Empire.

And that is exactly what the RAF did. The RAF Museum, however, leaves out a few details. The RAF bombed Kabul in 1919, what is now Somalia in 1920, and reportedly only supply shortages stopped it using mustard gas bombs in Iraq in 1924.

During a 1925 operation in Waziristan the RAF attacked civilian settlements. They used strafing, bombing and dropped propaganda leaflets — tactics recognisable in Lebanon, Gaza and elsewhere today.

The UK plans assumes peace will be achieved, and on terms favourable to the west. That is a very optimistic outlook, with Iran showing no sign of capitulation.

Nevertheless, Typhoons have been pledged to control some of the same airspace the RAF started policing over a century ago. And the reasons aren’t too different — ensuring colonialist dominance over a region western powers are desperate to hold onto.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

Source link

Party leader Zack Polanski has posted to social media that it’s “now clear” his Greens are “directly challenging” Reform. With multiple pollsters showing a narrowing lead between the two front-running parties, the seemingly bizarre prospect of voters crossing from the far right to the left has become a hot topic.

Polanski’s comments were prompted by an article published by the i on 23 April. It speculated on the slow decline of Reform’s popularity to its current 4-point-lead over the Greens. The i ran with the headline:

Has Reform peaked? Trump and Greens halt Farage’s march

At this point, we at the Canary would just like to say… good God we hope so.

‘Reform plateau?’

Just last week, a More in Common poll predicted a vote share of 25%. Though this later rose to 27%, the damage was already done. The 25% represented the far-right party’s lowest poll rating of the year, and More in Common asked if we had seen a “Reform plateau?”:

Reform UK are projected to win 324 seats, 57 fewer than in More in Common’s January model – and one MP short of a majority in the House of Commons, after a plateau in the polls.

Similarly, a 23 April poll from Find Out Now put Reform at 25%. This was just 4 points ahead of the Greens in second place. Interestingly, the numbers represented a 1-point loss for Farage’s coterie of racist gobshites, and a 1-point gain for Polanski’s party.

On the same day, Politico also pegged Reform at a 24% average, according to its “poll of polls”. This was the far-right party’s lowest predicted result since April 2025, and a long way from its 31% high last autumn.

Farage’s Trump problem

The i also highlighted that the popularity of Farage himself had also followed a similar downturn. YouGov, for instance, recently gave the wannabe-authoritarian leader a popularity rating of -38. Again, this represented his lowest score of the year.

For comparison, Polanski is currently the second most popular leader of any of the ‘Big 5′ parties, at -9. Meanwhile, Starmer comes dead last at -45, and the Lib Dems’ Ed Davey is out in front at -3. We guess being terminally inoffensive has its advantages after all.

More in Common senior executive Louis O’Geran speculated on the sudden downturn for both Reform and Farage:

The top reason people give for not voting for Reform is Nigel Farage’s connection to Trump. It’s just become more and more toxic.

Skawkbox also gave a similar analysis of a YouGov poll back on 10 March, writing:

interestingly, even among Reform’s voters, Reform’s closeness to Trump is hurting the limited-company-as-party.

While ‘pro-Trump’ is the largest self-identification among Reform supporters, it’s not an outright majority. Almost a quarter of them consider themselves to be ‘anti-Trump’ as well.

Farage has long maintained a close relationship with his fascist counterpart in the US. However, following Trump’s illegal war on Iran and the ensuing spike in the cost of living for the UK, that association has taken on a distinctly damaging air.

Pity that any of Trump’s other atrocities didn’t do the same, but what the hey.

Greens are directly challenging Reform

However, the i also mused that Trump wasn’t the only reason for Reform’s poor performance of late:

The Green Party of England and Wales may itself be partly responsible for Reform’s downturn. Zack Polanski’s party has risen inversely to Reform’s decline. In August 2025 – at Reform’s peak – the Greens were polling 9 per cent. Today they are on 16 per cent and contending with the Tories and Labour for second place.

Party leader Zack Polanski actually retweeted the above tidbit, along with a remark that:

It is now clear the Greens are directly challenging Reform.

People are fed up with the status quo and want change but Farage is offering them old Tory solutions and scapegoats the vulnerable.

Advertisement

The Greens have a real plan to lower bills, protect the NHS & cap extortionate rents.

The article went on to speculate that whilst the Greens and Reform are ideologically opposed, many voters tend towards being non-ideological. Along these lines, political research director Chris Hopkins mused on the potential Reform-Green bleed:

Both parties represent an ‘anti-Establishment, none of the above’ vote, right? They are two sides of the ‘not the Labour and the Tories’ coin. Neither Zack Polanski nor Nigel Farage would probably agree with this, but they represent the same thing on a really macro level, which is ‘the current system isn’t working – we have the alternative’.

So at that point for a voter, it’s just like, what flavour do you want your alternative to be? Voters are not as left or right driven as we think they are.

As always, any political analysis needs to be taken with a large pinch of salt — but this certainly chimes with a lot of what we’ve seen of late. People crave an alternative to the current system, and Farage — in spite of all evidence to the contrary — has styled himself as the anti-establishment choice.

However, the reverse can also be true — if Polanski can continue to show that he has viable answers and actual convictions, who knows how far he might go?

Featured image via the Canary

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Source link

Three of the ‘Teledyne 4‘ group of anti-genocide activists have each been sentenced to 20 months in prison for causing around £570,000 of damage to US arms-maker Teledyne‘s factory in Shipley, which supplies the Israeli military with components for missiles.

Second trial for Teledyne 4

Laura Gao, Ruby Hamill, Daniel Jones and Najam Shah were originally tried in September 2024.

The judge at that trial falsely told the jury it could not acquit them for trying to prevent a greater crime – the Gaza genocide. This is untrue – jurors have an absolute right to acquit according to conscience under English law.

The jurors then failed to agree on a verdict at all, but the Starmer regime decided to put them on trial again. They were tried again in February 2026 and convicted.

‘Resistance cannot be locked away’

Gao, Jones and Shah were sentenced today, 24 April 2026. Skwawkbox understands that Hamill will now be sentenced at a later date.

The Defend and Mobilise Support group said of the convictions that:

The attempt by the state to repress our movement and imprison solidarity will only backfire. The resistance for a liberated Palestine cannot be locked away. We will share updates on how to provide support to them.

Several ‘Filton 24’ anti-genocide activists have also faced retrial this week after the jury in their first trial refused to convict them. The Starmer regime is determined to criminalise resistance to Israel’s crimes – even the families of those who resist – legal precedent and the rights and verdicts of juries’ verdicts be damned.

By Skwawkbox

Source link