As Skwawkbox reported on Tuesday 17 March 2026, Israeli government minister’s daughter Shoshana Strook has been found dead in suspicious circumstances. She had just appointed lawyers to pursue justice for the crimes against her. Strook had spent months speaking publicly about allegations of physical and sexual abuse. In several social media posts she outlined how her mother, father, and brother had abused her since childhood. Authorities in Israel have claimed to be investigating the circumstances of her death.

However, Strook’s own words before she died are extremely worrying, to say the least. But the evidence may have already started to be erased.

“If they tell you I committed suicide – don’t believe it”

Strook had accused her mother, far-right settlements minister Orit Strook, along with her father and one of her brothers, of raping her for years during her childhood and filming it. In December 2025, Shoshana Strook warned her Facebook followers that she was in danger of murder to silence her. And she told them not to believe a word of it if she was found dead and it was called suicide, or an ‘accident’. A screenshot of the post, translated from Hebrew, is below in case the original is scrubbed:

Strook/Strock

That Facebook post still – at the time of writing – exists. However, Shoshana’s name on that page is “Strock”, rather than “Strook”. However, the two are interchangeable in Hebrew, which does not use vowels in the same way as European languages – and “Strock” is even Orit’s name on her official Knesset profile.

Or it was, early on Tuesday evening. By the time of writing, that profile has been deleted or otherwise made inaccessible:

As such, so have any records of the same page on the Wayback Machine archive and archive.li.

But too late – Skwawkbox had already saved a screenshot of the Knesset page proof:

Strock has not, at the time of writing, announced her resignation from her ministerial post or her position as a member of the Knesset, so that potential excuse for deleting her page doesn’t apply. And the scrubbing of the Strook-Strock interchangeability hasn’t – at least yet – been thorough enough. Orit Strock is still demonstrably named in coverage of Shoshana’s ‘suicide’ (archive) by the Times of Israel:

She is also named as “Strock” by the Jewish News Syndicate, Haaretz, the Jerusalem Post and others. Shoshana Strock’s Facebook page is that of Shoshana Strook and vice versa, as also shown by the numerous videos she uploaded straight to it.

Israel has a paedophile problem

As Skwawkbox said in its first report of Shoshana Strock’s death, the issue of child rape among Zionists is not limited to Israelis or the Israeli extreme right. The Netanyahu regime is currently ignoring well over 2,000 extradition requests for alleged and convicted paedophiles who fled there from other countries. Others have been convicted in the US, while the Zionist UK Labour party right also has a long record of paedophiles and other sex offenders.

Israeli psychotherapist and trauma expert Dr Anat Gur, head of the Bar-Ilan University trauma therapy program, has said that she believes organised child rape in Israel is widespread:

Organized child rape is one of the most horrific things I’ve encountered. It’s likely much more widespread than we think. It’s happening in places we least expect.

Strook’s death mirrors the long list of suspicious deaths among victims and associates of serial child-rapist and Israeli spy Jeffrey Epstein. These deaths include that of Virginia Giuffre, Epstein’s most well-known victim – who was also found dead after saying she would not. Jean-Luc Brunel, the French ‘modelling agent’ accused of procuring underage girls for Epstein, was found dead of supposed suicide in a French prison in 2022.

If Shoshana Strock’s death is suspicious because of her recent comment that claims of her suicide would be false, then the disappearance of her mother’s official “Strock” page does nothing to dispel those suspicions.

Featured image via the Canary

The founders of the Boycott Water Bills movement are holding a protest in Margate on Thursday 19 March. It comes ahead of long-time boycotter Julie Wassmer’s showdown with Southern Water.

Kent-based author and environmental campaigner Wassmer faces imminent court action for her four year payment boycott of Southern Water bills. She has maintained this in protest at the company’s unacceptable sewage pollution record.

Wassmer, a co-founder of award-winning campaign group Boycott Water Bills, said:

Southern Water is a criminal company – a serious serial offender regarding sewage pollution and I aim to highlight how UK water companies are evading responsibility for poor service via a selective use of the Water Industry Act 1991.

Fellow Boycott Water Bills co-founder Katy Colley says the website has seen a flood of new sign-ups following the screening of the Channel 4 drama Dirty Business.

The three-part series exposes the collusion between water companies and regulators at the heart of the current sewage crisis.

Colley, from Hastings, said:

Every day people from all over the country are getting in touch to say they will join the boycott.

We should be pursing the criminal polluters who poison our waters with impunity instead of weaponising the law against a few brave individuals in the interests of big business.

Wassmer will be joined by Kent and Sussex boycotters and Green councillors, as well as local clean water campaign groups.

Mark Hood, Green group leader on Kent county council, said:

We fully support Julie Wassmer who has bravely stood up to the water companies whose monopoly has been a disaster for Kent and our environment and who have consistently put profit before tackling pollution.

Nonpayment isn’t a course of action which people take lightly but when Julie became aware of Southern Water’s record of sewage pollution to the beaches and seas she loves, she decided that she had no other choice.

The water industry needs to be returned to public ownership so that every penny of profit can be used to improve infrastructure instead of paying shareholders.

Featured image via the Canary

1. Prince William surprises Greg James for a spot of tandem bike riding

2. Prince William also had a pretty savage ‘unpopular opinion’ for Greg James as they rode together

3. Greg James’ emotional support from his mum has been a highlight for many of those following his challenge

4. Day six of the challenge began with a poignant moment in honour of Greg James’ dad on Wednesday

5. Reaching that £1 million mark was a real moment

6. Crowds of supporters have gathered over the course of the route to encourage Greg James on his way

7. His welcome in York was particularly impressive

8. The tear-jerking surprises just keep on coming

9. Oh, and if you’re wondering how Greg has been recuperating after a long day of cycling…

What are ‘clamshell’ exercises?

What are the benefits of ‘clamshell’ exercises?

Ben Fletcher is the Conservative candidate to be mayor of Cheshire and Warrington. He was previously CEO of Boots Opticians and CFO of The Very Group.

The best Conservative governments have been those that grasped the difficult job of fundamental tax reform to ensure stable finances that allow the economy to flourish. In the 1840s the Peel government ushered in a generation of prosperity through the combination of income tax reform and free trade. Disraeli oversaw significant local taxation reform, and, of course, the Howe/Lawson reforms in the 1980s were crucial to changing the trajectory of Britain’s economic performance.

Kemi Badenoch has rightly said she wants us to create a high growth, low immigration economy. There is a big argument that we need to win before the next general election: to reduce tax rates, we must reform the system. High rates are a consequence of the design of the tax system, and just reducing rates will not cut it. Successive chancellors have, in pursuit of a budget day ‘rabbit out of the hat’, tinkered with the system, creating distortions and anomalies that stunt economic growth. This has created a distorted tax system. There has been little sense of what type of tax system we want, what behaviour do we want to reward, and how do we create the environment for faster economic growth.

Reforming the tax system is going to be controversial. Since 1997 the tax code (as measured by Tolleys) has grown nearly fourfold from 7,250 pages to c.24,000 The tax code is now so long, with so many exceptions, that there will, inevitably, be opposition to almost any major change because there are bound to be losers. The need for reform though is immense. We have a Council Tax system based on 1991 housing values, an Income tax system where the marginal rate of tax rises to 70 per cent at certain income levels, meanwhile tax lawyers debate whether product is a cake or biscuit.

As the famous New Zealand Finance Minister, Roger Douglas, showed and argued, reform succeeds when the changes are big enough to create winners who can champion reform alongside the short-term losers. To sustain a reforming agenda in a way that commands the confidence of markets, fends off the ‘losers’ from any reform, and creates a clear direction of travel, we need a set of principles that can be seen to be adhered to over a series of Budgets.

A good tax system has four elements: There are as few taxes as possible, the base for those taxes is as broad as possible, so that the rate can be as low and least distorted as possible, and there are as few exceptions as possible. Adherence to these principles across the tax system would create one that was simpler, which better rewarded hard work and risk taking, and which was much less onerous for the individual or organisation being taxed.

These can be applied to any tax, but it’s VAT that’s urgent. It has become so distorted that it is now killing critical sectors of the economy, most noticeably hospitality. In Cheshire this is particularly acute as hospitality is 10 per cent of our economy, employing 40,000 people. Reforming VAT would be the tax reform that potentially does most to stimulate economic growth.

The current VAT system breaks all four of the principles I described: it is levied on a narrow base meaning the rate is high, the number of exceptions is high, and it is distortive in key sectors. The threshold is set in such a way as businesses manage with the aim of avoiding it, causing growth to be capped.

VAT is levied on only c.40 per cent of consumption. There is no longer any rationale for why the base remains so narrow. Our consumption habits have changed hugely since the introduction of the tax in 1973. In particular, the percentage of household income spent on food has fallen by two thirds, and the exclusions for books and newspapers speaks to a pre-digital age. We’re having fewer children (another VAT exception) and real wages have risen faster than the cost of products.

This has distortive effects. In hospitality, most of their costs are zero rated for VAT meaning it cannot be reclaimed. The consequence for this is that 20 per cent of their income goes straight to HMRC, an unusually high amount. This puts sustained pressure on their cashflow such that when other costs are raised, they have very little left to manage with.

The narrow base causes the rate to be high. We have the highest rate in Western Europe which drives the second distortive effect: incessant lobbying for exceptions to the rate. Food in a pub? Taxed. Food at home? Not taxed. Plain biscuit? No VAT. Chocolate Biscuit? 20 per cent. Buying a pet? Taxed. A Rabbit, though? Not taxed. No wonder the lawyers are doing well.

The other aspect which narrows the base is the threshold for VAT registration, currently £90,000. Entirely unsurprisingly small businesses manage their revenue to the threshold to avoid the rate. The presence of this cliff edge (a lamentable feature of many taxes) means there are sudden movements in tax liabilities for small businesses which hamper growth as owners seek to minimise their cash outflow. We need businesses focused entirely on growing their income, not managing to an effective revenue cap.

The next Conservative government should go big. Taxing consumption is preferable to taxing income or risk taking. We need people to want to work, and found businesses risking their capital, and for that to be rewarding. What families spend their money on is their business.

Extended VAT to all consumption and radically reduce the rate. Extending the base should allow the rate to come in at c. 8 per cent and still raise the same revenue as today. In the same package of reform, we should cut the threshold from £90,000 to zero, so that every company pays VAT from day one. This removes the growth cap of the cliff-edge and because the rate has been cut makes it manageable for all companies. For new companies there should be a three-year transition where a VAT rebate is provided of 75 per cent in year one, 50 per cent in year two, and 25 per cent in year three to support cashflow in the critical early years.

Big changes always mean there are some losers, such as those businesses not currently paying VAT, and tax lawyers. Others, such as hospitality would have their growth prospects transformed. Our highly competitive retail industry would work hard to keep prices keen for the consumer.

Kemi Badenoch and Mel Stride have shown with their announcement on Stamp Duty that they are prepared to be radical about tax. This willingness to make bold choices will be essential in creating a growing economy.

Reforming VAT in a first Conservative budget would create the basis for accelerated economic growth and be consistent with the reforming approach shown by the best of our predecessors.

In a speech outside Downing Street this week, Keir Starmer spoke about his cost of living policies. The thing is, his remarks take the phrase a ‘band aid for a bullet wound’ to new heights.

Nearly all of these policies are reheated. They had already been announced.

Cost of living policies explained

The energy price cap until June — an attempt to shield Britons from volatile international energy prices — was announced in February. However, energy bills still rose on average by 68% (£713) between the winter of 2020 and 2025. This policy does next to nothing to address the overall and spiralling cost of living.

If Labour was serious about homegrown energy, the Prime Minister would deliver a Green New Deal, like he pledged to while campaigning to become Labour leader. This would mean Iran’s retaliatory blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route, would have no impact on UK energy prices. It would also bring energy into public ownership — another way to make bills significantly cheaper.

Instead, Starmer said in his speech on Monday:

we have to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to ensure stability in the market.

Labour’s cut in fuel duty is also not a new policy. It’s a Conservative one from 2022 that Labour is actually removing in September rather than “extending” as Starmer presented in the speech. Labour is in fact bringing the first increase to fuel duty since 2011.

Rather than investing in modern development, Starmer also said he will make provisions for petrol stations to publish prices. The climate crisis means we need to swiftly move away from oil powered vehicles, not encourage them.

The 1945 Clement Attlee government delivered huge change, such as nationalising 20% of the economy. This brought down inflation for decades through a price drop in the essentials that every business and person relies on. It shows the government taking an active and strategic hand in the economy is entirely possible.

Featured image via the Canary

Hours after the shock caused by the Confederation of African Football’s (CAF) decision to award Morocco the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) title and declare Senegal the loser with a 3-0 scoreline, the Senegalese Football Federation announced it would launch a new legal battle to defend the rights of its national team and fans.

The federation will officially appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to overturn the decision, considering what happened a serious deviation from legal and administrative procedures.

The federation’s general secretary, Abdoulaye Sow has called the decision a “travesty.” Sow said:

This is a travesty; this decision is based on absolutely nothing. It has no legal foundation … The president of the federation will get in touch with the lawyers; we will engage with the appropriate authorities, and then we will go to the court of arbitration for sport, which will issue the final decision.

He added:

We will not back down. Senegalese people should have no doubt. The truth is on Senegal’s side, the law is on Senegal’s side.

AFCON debacle

The Senegalese Football Federation described the procedures preceding the decision as arbitrary and without any legal basis, anticipating that the case will turn into a lengthy legal battle that could affect the fate of the tournament and reopen one of the most controversial Africa Cup of Nations finals.

In concluding his remarks, Sow reassured the fans, affirming that the fight is not over and that the federation is striving to restore justice and the title that the national team won on the field. He confirmed that communication is ongoing with all relevant parties to guarantee Senegal’s rights.

With the case now before the Court of Arbitration for Sport, the world awaits the outcome of this legal battle, in a new chapter of African football’s history, already full of controversy and drama.

Featured image via the Canary