The post The forbidden history of radical Islam appeared first on spiked.

Source link

North Belfast Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF) participant Fra Hughes returned to Ireland on Saturday 24 May 2026, after two days being held captive by ‘Israeli’ Occupation Forces (IOF). The long-time Palestine advocate was one of 14 Irish activists from the flotilla who were subjected to brutal treatment by the terrorist regime. The flotilla mission was an attempt to bring essential supplies to Palestinians suffering horrifically under Zionist starvation policies.

Still in his prison tracksuit and speaking at a reception in Belfast on Saturday evening, Fra gave a detailed account of a harrowing experience. Still, as he acknowledged, it was far less than that endured by Palestinians in Zionist dungeons.

He was on board a boat of six, which was intercepted by IOF criminals on 20 May. It began with the thugs training their firearms directly on the activists, red laser dots lighting up their foreheads.

The IOF goons ordered activists to strip down to just their t-shirts and trousers, then lie flat on the boat’s deck. Fra told the crowd of around 30 at the reception that he expected to be flung from the flimsy boat, as all he had to cling onto was a nearby rope.

“That was her blood” – IOF brutalise activists

The IOF then abducted the six men onto a nearby warship. The North Belfast man said the vessel was coated in razor wire, filled with rifle-wielding guards and armed with water cannons. He recounted:

They’d used the water cannons on people before I arrived. Someone shouted “Free Palestine” and the IOF shot them with a BB gun. They ended up – a woman – with her leg ripped open. We actually saw bandages with blood on them, and I thought, “I wonder if they’d been doing a simulation or something because it’s a warship”. That was her blood.

Soldiers then forced the flotilla members to lie on the metal floor for hours. Fra, who is 63, said:

We were out on the deck and they kept flushing it with water every few hours. I had no shoes on. All I had was jeans and a t-shirt, so I was f***ing freezing. I’m shivering there. My jeans didn’t dry out til lunchtime the next day.

Activists were moved to another area, and after some time, they demanded water, toilet roll and sanitary products for women. Fra, who has raised huge sums for Palestinians via his Palestine Aid Ireland charity, recalled that:

An hour later guards threw them down through a hatch, like we were animals.

He continued:

By the second day, the portaloos are filling up, the smell would choke you. We’re walking about in the water. Any sign of resistance was immediately followed by violence. Anyone who said “Free Palestine” – BANG – you got hit with the BB gun.

The IOF brought the flotilla members to the port of Ashdod, in occupied Palestine, sadly now more commonly referred to as ‘Israel’. From there, the Zionist authorities transported them to Ktzi’ot prison. Guards offered Hughes the chance to sign a form, which would mean admitting to the ‘crime’ of breaking the siege on Gaza. He would then get the chance to go home within 24 hours. He answered with:

I’m answering no questions, I’m signing no forms.

“I’m going to make your life a f***ing living hell”

Throughout the ordeal, soldiers repeatedly searched him, including strip searches. He was always transferred by guards forcing one hand behind his back, and pushing his head down to waist level.

He recounted one frightening moment in which two guards took him away to a separate room for a search, and noticed he had a couple of matches still in a jeans pocket. They yelled at him, saying “Oh, so you want to start a fire here?!” They then asked him to turn his head to one side, and open his mouth. Fra said he expected to be struck in the face, but ultimately it was just more intimidation.

Others who guards took to the same area weren’t so ‘fortunate’. Fra said people of colour were in particular danger. He said of the ‘Israelis’:

They’re racist f***s – when they saw Hāhona [Ngāti Maniapoto New Zealand citizen Hāhona Jason Ormsby], with [his] tattoos, and he does a bit of body-building, they zeroed in on him.

He continued:

They banged his head against a wall and nearly knocked him out. They took a taser and put it to his testicles, but somebody came in and said, “no no, not here”. So instead they kicked him in the testicles.

A guard then pulled down his mask and said to Hāhona:

Look at me. I am going to make your life a f***ing living hell from now on.

Fra estimated 70–100 activists were victims of serious assaults. 15 people have reported sexual violence from IOF criminals. The Irish activist said many who sustained broken ribs got them from IOF soldiers kicking them while they were on the floor.

Belfast activist kicked to the floor then hauled up by handcuffs

The worst violence Fra suffered was when a guard ordered him to assume a stress position on his knees. Hands cuffed behind his back, he struggled to get down, and the guard then kicked him to the floor. The same man then hauled Fra up by the cuffs, causing severe pain to his wrists. When Fra yelled out, the guard threw him to the ground, only to order him back to his feet 30 seconds later. Fra told listeners:

I didn’t really suffer. There were people sexually assaulted, people with broken ribs, people with dislocated shoulders, people shot in the ankles with BB guns.

After Fra and other activists continued their refusal to sign anything, guards eventually relented and gave them food and mattresses. Fra and the other Irish activists refused food throughout their illegal detention, however. The ‘Israeli’ land thieves ultimately realised quick release for the abductees was in the settler-colony’s interests, rather than have worldwide publicity centre on the flotilla crews for a longer period.

On Friday 23 May, IOF thugs bundled Fra and comrades onto a bus to the nearest airport. A fellow activist proposed a singsong, and Fra led the bus in delivering The Fields of Athenry, a ballad about Britain’s mid-1800s genocide in Ireland. That then proceeded to Bob Vylan’s more recent classic “Death, Death to the IDF“.

Eventually, an irate guard banged on the window to the activists’ bus compartment, yelling “shut the fuck up!” The criminal threatened to throw a tear gas canister into the enclosed space, at which point the choir decided silence may be the wiser option when dealing with a genocidal land thief.

Politicians must show they care about their own citizens more than appeasing ‘Israel’

The Belfast man managed to get in a few more gestures of defiance, shouting “Free Palestine” while walking through the ‘Israeli’ airport as he departed, and flashing V signs to passengers from the pseudo-state. From there, he travelled to Istanbul, then on to Dublin, where he and other flotilla crew were met by hundreds of supporters.

Fra arrived back in Belfast shortly after local activists had staged an occupation of its city hall. They kneeled on its marble floor in the stress position that IOF guards demanded flotilla activists adopt while out in the baking sun.

Their call was to politicians: Flotilla activists have risked their lives to highlight Palestinians suffering. What will you now do to match their efforts? No more siding with the Zionist entity while your own citizens are tortured, as the Irish government did last week. Full sanctions now – zero trade or cooperation of any kind with so-called ‘Israel’.

Featured image via Fra Hughes

By Robert Freeman

Source link

For the first time since Spain began competing in the World Cup, ‘La Roja’ are entering the tournament without a single Real Madrid player. Such an unprecedented development highlights the scale of the transformation currently taking place in Spanish football and the dominance of Barcelona’s up-and-coming generation within the national team.

Spain’s squad for the 2026 World Cup features no Real Madrid players whatsoever, whereas eight Barcelona players have been selected, led by Lamine Yamal, Pedri, Gavi, Alejandro Balde and Fermin López.

Spain: Madrid on the outs

This is not just about statistics; it is about breaking a tradition that has persisted for decades within the Spanish national team. Spain has taken part in 16 previous World Cups, and Real Madrid players have featured in every World Cup squad throughout history.

According to reports, the last time Real Madrid’s presence at the World Cup was least represented, aside from the current squad, was in 1950 when the Spanish national team fielded just one Real Madrid player; Real Madrid then maintained an unbroken presence in all subsequent tournaments, until the 2026 squad brought this historic run to an end.

Manager Luis de la Fuente appeared to favour the younger generation who have made a real difference for the national team in recent years, particularly the Barcelona players who have become the backbone of ‘La Roja’, at a time when injuries and a lack of match fitness have sidelined some of Real Madrid’s key players, most notably Dani Carvajal.

The current situation reflects a footballing turnaround within Spain; the club that has dominated the national team for decades now finds itself sidelined from the world’s biggest football stage, whilst Barcelona continues to supply its stars to lead Spain’s new project towards the 2026 World Cup.

Featured image via Juan Manuel Serrano Arce/Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

In a move that reflects the political complexities surrounding the 2026 World Cup, FIFA has approved Iran to move its football team base from the US to Mexico.

The decision came after months of escalating political tension between Tehran and Washington, which had raised concerns within Iranian sporting circles regarding the national team’s participation in the World Cup, co-hosted by the US, Mexico and Canada.

The crisis reached a boiling point, with reports that Iran might withdraw from the finals.

FIFA president Gianni Infantino confirmed that the international federation was committed to the Iranian team participating as normal. He also denied any intention to exclude or replace the football team.

Iran moves the national team’s training camp

Iran’s national team had originally planned to hold its main training camp in Tucson, Arizona, as its three group stage matches were to be played in the US.

However, the Iranian Football Federation requested that the base be moved to Tijuana, Mexico, near the US border, a change to which FIFA has agreed.

In comments reported by the Guardian, Mehdi Taj, president of the Iranian Football Federation, noted that the move would help overcome any potential complications regarding visas or entry into the US.

Taj explained that the national team will enter the US via Mexico to play their matches, adding that there is a possibility of arranging return flights with Iran Air in an effort to facilitate the delegation’s travel during the tournament.

Participation under political pressure

These developments come at a time when Iran-US relations have seen a sharp escalation in recent months, amid growing concerns about the safety of the Iranian delegation during its US stay.

Despite this atmosphere, Iran’s national team is continuing its preparations for the historic first edition of the World Cup, which features 48 teams instead of 32.

The draw places them in Group G alongside Belgium, Egypt and New Zealand.

Iran’s national team begins its campaign against New Zealand on 16 June, before facing Belgium and then Egypt on 21 and 27 June respectively.

‘Team Melli’ hopes to progress beyond the group stage and reach the knockout rounds for the first time in its history.

Featured image via Amin M. Jamali/ Getty Images 

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

Every time a country hosts the World Cup, it is completely transformed.

The streets are filled with flags, the airports are packed with fans, and the cities become one big open-air celebration.

But what if Palestine were the host? What would it have been like if the world had come to Gaza, Jerusalem and Ramallah for football, rather than to watch the war?

Joy over terror

Perhaps we would have seen people entering Palestine with cameras and mobile phones to capture moments of joy, rather than helmets and protective vests to shield themselves from the bombardment. Perhaps Gaza would have been overwhelmed by the noise of the crowds, rather than by grief and widespread destruction.

In a World Cup like this, children would have learnt the names of the players and teams rather than the names of the martyrs. They would have carried footballs and flags through the streets, instead of bags of belongings.

If Palestine were to host the World Cup, the night would be very different. It might be filled with the cheers and songs coming from the stands, rather than the sounds of explosions and aircraft.

Even the vocabulary would have been different. The phrase ‘occupying the stands’ would, for the first time, have become a joyful expression, signifying stadiums filled with fans, rather than the meaning with which Palestine had long associated the word: the theft of land.

On the streets, taxi drivers would talk enthusiastically about the national teams’ chances, the star players and the upcoming matches, rather than discussing the war, the details of the bombings and the names of the destroyed areas.

The kind of life Palestinians deserve

The Palestinian would have shown the visitor the way to the stadium or the supporters’ area, not the way to the nearest evacuation centre or safe place.

If Palestine were to host the World Cup, the world’s cameras would be looking for the most beautiful shots of goals or fan celebrations, not the most harrowing and painful images.

As for the planes flying over Gaza, they were supposed to be carrying national teams, fans and journalists, not missiles and bombs.

In a city historically known for the generosity of its people, whatever the circumstances, the people of Gaza would have welcomed visitors with coffee, food and souvenir photos, rather than searching for a piece of bread to save their children from starvation.

Perhaps the question has never been solely about football, but rather about the kind of life Palestinians deserve in the first place. The world, which travels everywhere in pursuit of football, has often known Palestine only through breaking news and images of destruction.

And if Palestine were ever to host the World Cup, perhaps the world would finally realise that Palestinians want nothing more than a normal life, just like everyone else on earth – a life in which people’s greatest concern is the outcome of a match, not surviving a war.

Featured image via David Ramos/Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

Martin Ødegaard hoisted the Premier League trophy aloft for Arsenal and the noise that followed was predictable: pundits dissected style, social feeds mocked set-piece reliance, and rivals sniffed at the manner of victory.

None of that changes the simple fact on the pitch. Arsenal finished top of the table and did what champions do and that is to win more games than everyone else.

Arsenal face criticism

All season Arsenal have been a target for critics who labelled their football “unwatchable” or reduced their success to lucky refereeing and dead-ball routines.

That chatter reached a peak when opponents and commentators pointed to Arsenal’s heavy reliance on set-pieces and a perceived lack of a single, standout goalscorer. Yet trophies are not awarded for aesthetics; they are awarded for points. Arsenal collected 85 of them.

Arteta’s response to the critics has been pragmatic rather than defensive. He has repeatedly framed the team’s approach as a set of priorities shaped by resources, injuries, and the realities of the Premier League. When you can’t outscore opponents in open play every week, you make other areas of the game unassailable and Arsenal did exactly that.

Set-Piece FC

One of the stickier narratives was that Arsenal are “Set-Piece FC” a tag meant to diminish. The truth is crisper; Arsenal turned a weakness in other seasons into a weapon this year. Opponents crowded the box, committed bodies, and tried to snuff out Arsenal’s creative channels. Arsenal adapted by mastering dead-ball situations and marginal gains around the penalty area. The result: a high conversion rate from crowded scenarios and a steady stream of match-winning moments.

Yes, rivals pointed to the numbers, even suggesting that a large share of Arsenal’s goals came from set-pieces, but that’s not cheating; it’s coaching. When the margins are fine, the team that finds repeatable, reliable ways to score will win more often. Arsenal did exactly that.

Defence first

‘Attack wins you games, defence wins you titles’ is a cliché for a reason. Arsenal’s defensive record this season was the backbone of their title charge. After April, no team scored from open play against them in a run that included Champions League semi-finals and the decisive league fixtures. That kind of consistency is not accidental; it’s the product of structure, discipline and coaching.

Arteta’s side managed to be ruthlessly efficient: they didn’t need to blow teams away with possession or fireworks. They suffocated chances, controlled the tempo when necessary, and closed out games with a clinical stubbornness that frustrated opponents and neutral observers alike. The result was a string of 1–0 victories that, while not always pretty, were brutally effective.

A big reason Arsenal didn’t always look like the textbook attacking machine was availability. Key players missed chunks of the season; Ødegaard himself played 45 minutes or more in the league only a dozen times, and the most successful front three only started together 14 times.

That instability in the final third forced Arteta to find other routes to victory. When your frontline is constantly changing, you lean on structure, set-pieces and defensive resilience. That’s not a lack of ambition, it’s adaptation.

This context matters. If you judge Arsenal against a hypothetical, fully fit version of themselves, the verdict might be different. But football is played with the squad you have, not the squad you wish for. Arteta engineered a system that maximised the available resources and minimised the damage of absences. The trophy is the proof.

The psychology of winning

There’s a psychological edge to being hard to beat. Once Arsenal went 1–0 up, the belief that they would hold on became almost automatic. Opponents learned that opening up against them was dangerous; sitting deep invited Arsenal’s set-piece threat.

That dynamic created a self-reinforcing loop: defensive solidity bred confidence, which bred results, which bred more confidence. Champions are not always the most beautiful team, but they are always the most consistent.

Arteta’s side also showed mental resilience in moments when the title looked fragile. In two periods once before Christmas and an injury-hit international break in March, which really tested the squad. Instead of collapsing, they tightened and found ways to grind out points. That capacity to survive and then thrive is a hallmark of championship teams.

Criticism of Arsenal’s style often confuses preference with principle. Fans and pundits who value expansive, high-possession football are entitled to their taste. But the Premier League is a competition where adaptability, pragmatism and results matter more than purity of style.

Arsenal’s season was a lesson in prioritisation: when you can’t rely on a 35-goal striker or a fully fit creative spine, you build a team that wins in other ways. That is coaching, not capitulation.

Moreover, the absence of red cards and penalties conceded all season undermines the “dirty” narrative. Arsenal’s methods were legal, disciplined and effective. They deserve credit as they did not rely on cynical fouls or reckless behaviour to get results.

A club reborn

This title is more than a trophy; it’s a statement of progress. Arteta has rebuilt a club culture, installed a tactical identity that can flex, and created a squad capable of winning under pressure. The Champions League run and the domestic title together suggest Arsenal are not a one-season wonder but a team with a platform for sustained success.

Fans will debate style until the next transfer window, and pundits will keep their hot takes ready. That’s football. But when the dust settles, the record books will show Arsenal as champions and that cannot be taken from them.

Mikel Arteta’s Arsenal did what mattered: they won the league. They did it with a blend of defensive steel, set-piece mastery, and tactical pragmatism born of necessity.

Critics can argue about aesthetics; rivals can grumble about methods. The trophy, however, is indifferent to opinion. It sits in the cabinet because the team earned it, and in football, that is the only verdict that truly counts.

The reality is that winners do not need approval; the trophies speak for themselves.

Featured image via Getty/Michael Regan

By Faz Ali

Source link

Three barristers who are part of the lobby group, UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), have been reported to the Bar Standards Board for participating in a “pattern of legal intimidation”.

The barristers include crossbench peer, David Pannick KC, and crossbench (originally Labour) peer, Anthony Grabiner KC. The third is Times columnist Stephen Hockman KC.

The complaint was brought this week by the European Legal Support Centre (ELSC) and the Public Interest Law Centre (PILC). The groups are acting on behalf of a coalition of individuals, NGOs, medics and other organisations.

UKLFI to be investigated by legal regulator

The dossier outlines the way in which UKLFI frequently uses the lawyers’ high profile and status to “amplify the authority and perceived seriousness of legal threats and allegations” against groups and people engaged in perfectly lawful and, indeed, protected expression on Palestine.

ELSC and PILC have asked the Bar Standards Board, which regulates barristers and specialised legal services businesses in England and Wales, to “determine whether this use of professional status engages the [BSB] Code of Conduct, including the duties of integrity and independence, and the requirement to maintain public confidence in the profession”.

 The complaint focuses on whether senior legal standing has been invoked in a way that materially strengthens pressure on recipients engaged in protected expression.

UKLFI uses the names and titles of senior lawyers to add weight to the threats and arguments it sends to institutions hosting plays, art exhibitions and museums that humanise Palestinians.

This is UKLFI’s ‘modus operandi’ against those who oppose Israel’s genocide or even platform Palestinians and those who support them.

The group’s chief executive recently caused outrage by suggesting that Israel’s starvation blockade of Gaza would reduce obesity.

Its main mouthpiece, Natasha Hausdorff, has given a number of cold-eyed car crash interviews denying that Israel is committing genocide or any crimes at all.

Tactics ‘erase Palestinians from public consciousness’

It is not the first complaint submitted to law industry regulators. The same groups submitted formal allegations to the Solicitors Regulation Authority in 2025, listing an array of professional breaches to shut down criticism of Israel and speech supportive of Palestinians.

An European Legal Support Centre spokesperson said:

…these mechanisms are deliberate attempts to erase Palestinians from the public consciousness. This narrows democratic space, threatens freedom of expression and must be examined by the regulator to protect public confidence in the legal profession.

Attack dog apartheid apologists

UKLFI does what it says on the tin and is considered one of the UK’s top two “apartheid apologists” using ‘lawfare’ for Israel. The group has targeted individuals, hospitals, art exhibitions and even media giant Netflix in its attempts to keep the public from seeing pro-Palestinian content — and even plates painted by Palestinian children.

It has also repeatedly tried  — 11 times so far — to remove the medical licence of British Palestinian doctor Ghassan Abu-Sitta, after he spoke of his experiences as a volunteer medic during the Gaza genocide.

UKLFI appears almost 130 times in the ELSC’s Index of Repression, a database recording the systematic repression of Palestine solidarity in Britain.

Featured image via European Legal Support Centre

By Skwawkbox

Source link

The United States declined to host Iran’s World Cup training camp; Iran will base itself in Tijuana, Mexico and commute to U.S. venues for its group matches.

The 2026 World Cup was sold as a continental celebration across the United States, Mexico and Canada.

Instead, geopolitics has forced a national team to set up camp outside the country where all its group matches will be played. Iran’s football federation moved its base from Arizona to Tijuana after U.S. authorities signalled, they did not want the squad to remain in the United States for the tournament, a decision that Mexico stepped in to manage.

Mexico and Iran: practical fallout

The switch is blunt and immediate: Iran will train and live in Mexico, then fly into U.S. stadiums for matches, complicating travel, accreditation, and security plans that normally assume a team is hosted inside the country where it plays.

FIFA approved the relocation of Iran’s team base to Tijuana after talks with Iranian officials, but the logistical strain is real: short flights, repeated border crossings and the need for multiple-entry U.S. visas for players and staff.

Hosts are expected to guarantee access and safety for every qualified nation. When visa politics or security calculations prevent a team from being based in the host country, the tournament’s neutrality is dented.

The U.S. refusal whether framed as a security precaution or a diplomatic stance. Makes no difference, it is clear this host nation is already the worst to ever be given the opportunity. Ultimately leaders and football tournaments do not go together. FIFA have enabled this madman to be involved by giving him importance.

Mexico hosting correctly

Mexico’s decision to accept Iran’s camp was pragmatic and immediate. By offering Tijuana, Mexico preserved Iran’s participation while shielding the tournament from a last‑minute withdrawal, and it underscored the role co‑hosts can play in absorbing political shocks. But the optics are awkward: a co‑host doing the heavy lifting while the primary host is seen as the obstacle.

Labeling the United States ‘one of the worst host nations’ is provocative but not baseless in public perception. The incident stacks against the U.S. visa denials or reluctance to host a qualified team, public diplomatic friction, and the need for a cross‑border workaround all feed a narrative of racism, mismanagement.

Bottom line

Sport promises a neutral field; politics keeps proving otherwise. The Iran‑Tijuana arrangement will work on paper, but it will also be a running reminder that hosting a global tournament requires not just stadiums and ticketing, but the political will to keep sport separate from state conflict.

The reality is the FIFA and all federations will have to answer for allowing the clear racism and discrimination of a nation that has qualified for an international tournament.

It will be a stain that will not be forgotten quickly, the fans from other nations can see and are already boycotting this dodgy host nation, all because of an egotistical testicle who claims to be a leader.

Featured image via Getty/Amin Al-Jamali

By Faz Ali

Source link

Officially, Andy Burnham is running to be the MP for Makerfield. Unofficially, he’s running to replace Keir Starmer as the prime minister.

The problem is we don’t have a good idea of how Burnham will govern in office; the other problem is the signs are pointing towards him being Starmer 2.0.

As a result of this, some of Labour’s left-leaning MPs are talking up the idea of a challenge. As we’ll get into, however, Burnham probably doesn’t have much to worry about.

Vanishing Manchesterism

The Times‘ assistant political editor Geri Scott has reported:

Left-wing MPs are considering standing a candidate against Andy Burnham in a future Labour leadership contest because of concerns the Greater Manchester mayor could abandon progressive positions to broaden his appeal.

We’ll be honest, it’s a bit late to be saying “could abandon” at this point. As we’ve reported:

• Burnham ‘to support’ Mahmood’s racist immigration changes;
• Burnham is silent on wealth taxes – not a promising sign from potential PM;
• Andy Burnham’s role with Iain Duncan Smith’s think tank just shows he’s more of the same;
• Burnham WON’T back proportional representation this parliament;
• Shapeshifting Burnham ditches trans rights to panic-grab Reform votes.

Scott added:

The Times has been told they do not want Burnham to be treated as the automatic standard-bearer for the left of the party.

Some MPs on the hard left have complained that Burnham has fallen in behind immigration reforms proposed by Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, and backed government guidance on single-sex spaces.

‘Hard left’ is full-on Communism, and there aren’t any Communists in the Labour Party. That aside, here’s what one of these anonymous politicians said:

A lot of us are increasingly frustrated that he’s being portrayed as the saviour of the left when he’s nothing of the sort. There have been discussions about whether we put up a candidate to try to force him into more progressive positions.

Another noted:

It will be difficult for the supposed supporters of Andy to back him for leader if he keeps offering something on a Monday then changing his mind on Tuesday. His immigration stance and the possible inclusion of Wes [Streeting] as his chancellor will be a problem.

These points are fair enough, but the Labour left does have a reputation for backing down. If they weren’t willing to compromise their beliefs, they wouldn’t be in the Labour Party.

There’s also this to consider:

Find this odd really. If the candidate is from the SCG wing of the party they simply wouldn’t have the numbers…?

No one from the soft left would stand against him so I don’t know why it’s being floated or why it’s being given air time? https://t.co/vVliPTpgW5

Advertisement

— Matthew (@MatthewTorbitt) May 25, 2026

I wrote about this a couple of weeks ago (before Burnham had got a seat) for @NewStatesman. From my conversations the SCG was always planning to run a candidate – as they did in dep leadership – in order to push the main contenders from the left. But think there’s a clear… https://t.co/x93lIO19cr

— megan kenyon (@meganekenyon) May 25, 2026

Advertisement

Mainstream

The Times reported that “mooted” candidates include:

Richard Burgon, the MP for Leeds East and a former Corbynite frontbencher. Other names include Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Olivia Blake and Clive Lewis.

As the outlet notes, however, none of these people have expressed any intention of standing. Another source said Labour MPs will actively repel any of the above, noting that the issue is:

not that someone like Burgon wins, it’s that the whole debate shifts on to his territory. If Andy is forced to spend six weeks talking about Gaza, then he comes out of it weaker and the party looks like it has learnt nothing.

Labour would only look like it’s learned nothing if it does in fact learn nothing. The solution to this is to learn from Keir Starmer’s mistakes, and to support a free and independent Palestine.

The Times also reported that:

members of Mainstream, the group seen as an incubator for Burnham’s Westminster ambitions, have become irritated with Tribune, the soft-left group whose members are part of Burnham’s campaign team. Some allies of Burnham have accused Tribune figures of “taking over” his campaign.

Clive Lewis is a member of Mainstream, and he’s previously served as one of Burnham’s biggest cheerleaders. Speaking in September 2025, Lewis said:

In this hollowing-out of govt, we face the danger of a politics so cowed by vested interests that it cannot stand up to them. And when that happens, it is the authoritarian right who reap the rewards.

People aren’t fooled. They can feel the country is being run for “them” not “us.” And unless Labour changes course – embracing pluralism, democracy and genuine debate – it will deliver power straight into Farage and Trump’s waiting hands.

Perhaps we’re in need of a bit of ‘Manchesterism’ – a different way of doing govt and one not afraid of giving control of public services to the very people that use and run them; Us!

Advertisement

On 23 May, however, he reposted the following:

This is a very small sample but it's a very scary level of support for the far right and much closer than I was expecting. I would say this, obviously, but I really don't think Burnham's 'Oh, no, I didn't mean nationalisation – why would you think THAT?' is helping anything. https://t.co/6BZZCunPOx

— Jeremy Gilbert (@jemgilbert) May 23, 2026

If Lewis is making his thoughts clear online, it seems likely that Burnham isn’t listening to him offline.

Little opposition

According to Scott, another anonymous Labour insider said:

A candidate like that wouldn’t reach the threshold for nominations. Quite a lot of their colleagues have been out on the campaign trail over the weekend and seem very excited about the prospect of Andy.

If there is going to be serious opposition to Burnham’s flip-flopping, it’s not going to come from the Labour Party. We’re also not seeing much from the Greens. Let’s hope that changes with the announcement of their new candidate:

NEW: Sarah Wakefield is the Green Party candidate in the Makerfield by-election

She is a charity director and a Manchester City Councillor pic.twitter.com/PAEJGniwoM

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) May 26, 2026

Featured image via Ian Forsyth (Getty Images) / Leon Neal (Getty Images) / Peter Summers (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

Teaching assistants, residential workers, and other support staff at Ash Field Academy, a Leicester SEND school, completed their third day of strike action on Thursday 14 May. They’re demanding that Discovery Schools Academy Trust (DSAT), which runs the school, reinstates their trade union rep, Tom Barker.

DSAT suspended Barker from Ash Field on 30 October 2025. This was just four working days after the closure of a ballot in which UNISON members voted for strike action over staffing cuts. DSAT linked the suspension to unspecified conduct concerns.

Almost seven months on, DSAT has still produced no evidence to support any allegations against Barker. He remains suspended. Barker had led a successful campaign against DSAT’s attempt to cut around 10% of support staff.

Having completed three strike days, UNISON members have now decided to escalate their industrial action campaign. The union has given notice of further strike dates on (all dates inclusive):

• 3-5 June.
• 15-19 June.
• 6-9 July.

The reinstatement campaign, led by UNISON Leicester City, has received widespread support, including from Zarah Sultana MP and Andrea Egan, UNISON’s general secretary. Campaigners have initiated a TUC petition to demand Tom’s reinstatement.

On 30 April, the first day of strike action, Leicester South MP Shockat Adam attended the picket line. Adam said:

Workers’ rights don’t exist without action to defend them. I stand with those on strike against union busting and was proud to join the picket line in solidarity.

Louise Lewis, a teacher and a member of the national executive of the National Education Union, visited the picket line on Thursday 14 May. Speaking in a personal capacity, Lewis said:

Underfunding and privatisation – including the academy model for schools – have been extremely destructive for school staff, as well as our students, families, and our communities.

Strong trade unions are the most effective defence against attacks on public services. The picket lines I visited at Ash Field were extremely strong. I was proud to have attended.

UNISON members are rightly going to escalate the fight to stand against attacks on their right to organise. Some workers might be afraid of standing up to union-busting employers. This is understandable, but I want to send a message to these workers: you have nothing to lose and everything to gain by joining the pickets.

Advertisement

Like Tom, while serving as a rep in my previous school, I was suspended after standing up for members and challenging management.

What I remember most is the solidarity. NEU members stood together, took strike action in my defence, and closed the school in support. That collective action forced governors to reinstate me, and although I was later dismissed, members continued to stand with me throughout a successful tribunal case.

Only by standing together against injustice can we challenge union-busting employers.

Liz Robinson, UNISON East Midlands regional organiser, said:

Based on the information we have available to us, and the discussions regional officers have had with the trust, we are increasingly certain that this investigation, and Tom’s suspension is related to his Trade Union role.

We understand that the school denies this. If they were to admit that this was motivated by Tom’s Trade Union activities they would be admitting to breaching employment law.

Andrea Egan, UNISON’s general secretary, said:

I stand in full support of Tom Barker who was wrongly suspended by Ash Field Academy in October 2025 following a successful industrial action ballot in opposition to cuts, which Tom played an instrumental role in securing.

If Tom is not reinstated we will have no hesitation in escalating this dispute.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link