We hope you love the products we recommend! All of them were independently selected by our editors. Just so you know, HuffPost UK may collect a share of sales or other compensation from the links on this page if you decide to shop from them. Oh, and FYI – prices are accurate and items in stock as of time of publication.

Trying to find something heartfelt that your partner likes is hard enough, without all the emotional heft that goes along with this divisive holiday.

And that’s to say nothing of all the mushy and cringy tat you’re liable to be confronted with whenever you Google anything remotely related to ‘gifts for men’, which takes an annoying amount of time to sift through.

Yes, we all love a bit of crockery, but how many novelty mugs can one household take?

So, without any further ado, here’s a tat-free list of tried and tested gifts that would be perfect for him for Valentine’s Day.

Cllr Aled Richards-Jones is the Leader of the Conservative Group on Wandsworth Council.

Local government has its various traditions and procedures, which exist for a reason: to ensure transparency, accountability and proper scrutiny of decisions that affect residents’ lives.

Traditionally, the February ‘Special’ Meeting of Wandsworth Council has two agenda items: rent setting for council housing, and the general budget. But this month, Wandsworth Labour made the extraordinary decision to include only the first agenda item and block any discussion on the budget.

You might ask why.

Shortly before Christmas, when attention was more focused on mince pies than municipal finances, the Government published its Provisional Local Government Finance Settlement for the next three years.

It immediately confirmed the worst fears of those of us who warned that a Labour Government would punitively rewrite the local government grant formula to transfer more money to their ideological heartlands.

In short, the settlement is a catastrophe for Wandsworth.

The Government is slashing Wandsworth’s funding by 39 per cent

Wandsworth Council faces an annual loss in funding of £85m a year by 2029/30 – roughly 39 per cent of its core spending power.

Worse still, that merely compounds Labour’s local financial mismanagement: the Council’s finances already have a budget gap of £51m a year by that same period – a cumulative £136m a year deficit. On top of that, the Administration is borrowing on its way into a financial crisis: planning to borrow £1.1 billion (at a cost over 50 years of nearly £2.5 billion) is reckless, particularly in these circumstances.

To compensate for the loss of funding, the Government expects the Council to increase council tax by at least 86 per cent.

Cynically, the Government’s model assumes that the punitive increases will start only after May’s local elections. The Government assumes only a five per cent increase this year, rising to 40 per cent in 2027/27, 77 per cent 2028/29, and 86 per cent in 2029/30.

The Council’s total useable reserves (all inherited from the previous Conservative Administration) stand at £166m – not enough to get through more than a year of this. The piggy bank will be smashed, the money will be gone and a decision on catastrophic tax hikes, public service cuts, or both, will need to be taken within the two-year window the Government has conveniently provided.

Labour knows that tax hikes will prove hugely unpopular. That’s why Labour ministers have granted Wandsworth a two-year exemption from the long-standing requirement councils have to hold referenda on council tax increases over five per cent.

It’s only right that councillors of all political persuasions should want to discuss such a dire state of affairs. But Labour shut us down.

When Conservative members raised points of order at the meeting, asking why the budget was missing from the agenda for the first time in living memory, the response was a nonsensical dismissal: procedures had “evolved.”

These procedures haven’t evolved; as I have written about before, procedures have been manipulated or just plain ripped-up, and councillors have been gagged. And once you look at the figures the Administration is hiding, you understand why Labour didn’t want any discussion on the budget.

Wandsworth Labour’s election strategy: deny, distract, and delay

This is not just a funding cut; it is a fundamental rewriting of the contract between resident and Council, orchestrated by Downing Street and silently accepted by Labour’s meek local leadership.

Yet the Administration has still not published these figures. So far, they’ve been provided in a written briefing to councillors by the Executive Director of Finance. If our February meeting had debated budget matters as usual, these figures would have been published in the agenda.

Almost as jaw-dropping as the figures themselves was the revelation in the briefing that the settlement for Wandsworth is actually worse than Council officials had expected. In the days after the 2024 general election, Wandsworth Labour proudly boasted about the “benefits” a Labour government, Labour Mayor of London and local council would bring the area. It’s only right Labour councillors now explain why their lobbying of their own party colleagues in Government resulted in such a bad deal for Wandsworth.

As Conservatives, it’s not only the stifling of debate we have a problem with – it’s the mobilisation of the Council’s press machine to spread untruths. Funded by taxpayer money, residents have been besieged with Facebook ads celebrating Britain’s “lowest council tax”, with not a mention of what the Labour Government expects the Council to do in the coming years.

We’re not backing down – and we refuse to accept Labour’s game playing.

By using the Council meeting to move a technical motion of our own, we managed to force a brief window of debate.

We pointed out that there is not even a sniff of a plan to deal with this £130m black hole. Labour refused to engage with the debate, and would not put up any speakers. The Leader of the Council sat silently, despite being called on to speak.

A clear choice at the election

This meeting laid bare Wandsworth Labour’s electoral strategy for the coming year: simply pretend the Government funding cuts aren’t happening, and hope residents won’t notice until it’s too late.

A financial asteroid is about to hit Wandsworth Council. The combination of a hostile Labour Government slashing our funding by nearly 40 per cent and an incompetent local Labour administration burning through our savings is catastrophic.

The next Wandsworth Council administration will receive the worst financial inheritance of any incoming administration since the Council’s creation.

Before May 2022, Wandsworth Conservatives ran the Council for 44-years, setting the country’s lowest council tax and providing award-winning services. Only Wandsworth Conservatives have the competence to navigate this crisis.

Labour refused to talk about it last night because they have no answers.

But we will not let them pull the wool over residents’ eyes.

Dr Sarah Ingham is the author of The Military Covenant: its impact on civil-military relations in Britain.

“You’re in no position to dictate… You don’t have the cards.”

With a startling lack of diplomacy, almost a year ago in the Oval Office  President Trump spelt out some brutal realities to Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky. But the US Commander-in-Chief could just as well have been talking to Europe’s leaders.

The Ukrainian President was seeking American guarantees in connection with his country’s future. He wanted a bespoke version of Washington’s sword and shield which have been integral to the defence of NATO members and the rest of Europe since the late 1940s.

Trump’s America, however, has called time on Europe’s freeloading off its taxpayers and its mighty military.

The first year of the President’s second term was punctuated by uncomfortable reminders that the US has lost patience. They include Vice-President J.D. Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference.  He was clear: “It is important in the coming years for Europe to step up in a big way to provide for its own defence.”

Across Europe’s capitals, it took a while for the penny, euro and krona to drop that the Trump administration wasn’t joking.

Keeping this country safe, as the Prime Minister reminded us at Wednesday’s PMQs, is the first duty of government. If so, there has been a dereliction of that duty, reflected by the eagerness to splurge the post-Cold War peace dividend on voter-pleasing welfare.  The defence of Europe, including this country, was outsourced to the United States.

Even with war on its doorstep following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine almost four years ago, dozy Europe was slow to awaken to the threat. It has needed the Trump administration to drive home the message about the importance of defence investment.

Finally, the continent is starting to step up.

This can be seen in Germany’s Zeitenwende  which will see defence spending rise this year to €108bn (compared to €34.2bn in 2016), Sweden and Finland’s accession to NATO and the warning by France’s military chief General Fabien Mandon that the country must be prepared to “lose its children”.

Most significant is the commitment chiselled out of NATO-member leaders by President Trump last June, which pledged an increase in defence-related spending to an annual 5% GDP by 2035. Europe wants some cards.

Suffering defence-related FOMO (fear of missing out),  the EU has conjured up SAFE, the Security Action for Europe.  It is essentially a €150bn EU-guaranteed piggy bank “to speed up defence readiness by allowing urgent and major investments in support of the European defence industry.” SAFE also attempts to streamline defence procurement within the bloc by reducing duplication.

Aimed at member states, EU defence and security partners can also apply for low-interest SAFE funds. This includes Japan, South Korea, Canada and the UK.

Last week in China PM Starmer stated that he wanted to renew defence cooperation with Europe – not least by joining SAFE. But in November Britain abandoned talks because of the entry fee Brussels was demanding – reportedly €6.75 billion.

This extortion contrasts with Canada. The EU put out the “welcome to SAFE” bunting for Ottawa in exchange for  €10 million.

UK-EU talks over SAFE are now set to resume. Aptly, for a defence-related pact involving the EU rather than NATO, questions are being raised about whether SAFE is a Trojan horse.

In theory, SAFE will give British defence firms greater access to the EU market. In practice, however, no more than 35% of components in any procurement project can come from outside the EU.  That such strings are attached is inevitable, not least because each member state wants to safeguard its own defence industry and hamper competitors, including Britain’s stellar prime firms.

At the recent International Armoured Vehicle Conference, Army chief General Sir Roly Walker said that Britain’s military has been trying to imagine a large-scale combat operation in 2027. “What would we be doing differently now, and why aren’t we doing that?” There is similar focus in Germany where Defence Minister Boris Pistorius has warned the country must be prepared for conflict by 2029.

A fortnight ago at Davos, President Zelensky voiced his frustration at Europe’s inability to act, citing the limbo around Russian sanctions funds and the lack of will to halt Russian oil being transported around the continent’s shores.

The EU seeks to avoid duplication, but there is already a cross-European defence forum that could address efficiency issues, such as armed forces’ inter-operability: NATO.

SAFE offers Labour another bite of the EU re-set cherry. Promoted as a job-creation scheme, it is also an example Brussels’ tendencies towards protectionism and bureaucratic meddling.

The need for rearmament is urgent: the €6.75bn question is whether Britain should lock itself into SAFE.

Tolga Inanc is Co-Chair, of the Conservative Friends of Turkey.

Starmer’s Chagos deal has been delayed in Parliament following backlash from President Trump. While the UK government’s position remains unchanged, the deal’s fate hangs in the balance.

Chagos is rarely an issue for most of the public.

An archipelago in the Indian Ocean 5,800 miles away, it has been controlled by Britain since 1814. Despite being one of the most remote places on Earth, it houses Diego Garcia – a top-secret US military base vital to UK defence, intelligence, and security.

The agreement to transfer sovereignty to Mauritius while leasing Diego Garcia back for 99 years offers a fascinating insight into Starmer’s worldview. However laudable his intentions, the deal and its justification reveal an extreme naivety at the heart of our government.

Starmer’s first justification is international law. Labour ministers claim the Diego Garcia base was threatened by court decisions challenging UK sovereignty. Yet the legal ruling they cite is non-binding and advisory. On 25 February 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an Advisory Opinion disputing Chagos’s separation from Mauritius in 1965. This opinion was requested by the UN General Assembly in 2017. Starmer must know the ICJ’s advisory function was never intended to settle disputes between states.

Furthermore, he has forgotten his history. Mauritius agreed to the separation of the Chagos Islands in 1965 and reaffirmed this during its 1968 independence. Britain made a binding commitment to cede sovereignty only when the islands were no longer needed for “defence purposes.” Mauritius respected this until the 1980s, when it began demanding a sovereignty transfer. Britain, meanwhile, has stood by the 1965 agreement.

Starmer also cites national security, claiming the deal protects Diego Garcia from ‘malign influence’. It is unclear how surrendering sovereignty 5,800 miles away and leasing back a site housing top-secret assets increases security. The best guarantor of security is the status quo, where Britain maintains sovereignty for defence. Sovereignty should only pass when that defensive need ends – as it did with the Seychelles in the 1960s.

That moment has not yet come, especially as great powers jostle for leverage, best gained through assets in key locations. With 40 per cent of global trade passing through the Indian Ocean, British sovereignty is vital to its strategic advantage and prosperity. Ceding control is an unforced error in an age of geo-economic competition.

As hostile states target democracies, this deal sets a dangerous precedent for British Overseas Territories and Sovereign Bases such as the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar or Akrotiri. Having worked in the Civil Service on hostile states and seen how they undermine the West, I anticipate Russia, China, and Iran using this deal to weaponize other bilateral disputes from history.

Starmer claims this deal addresses “past wrongs,” yet this is deeply misleading.

If he truly cared about past wrongs, he would listen to the majority of Chagossians in the UK who oppose the transfer. Mauritius has made only passing references to the Chagossian cause. Starmer could have shown leadership and diplomatic dexterity by offering practical support: reviewing resettlement options, improving livelihoods in the UK and abroad, and reconciling with families expelled in the 1960s. We could have deepened security ties to give Mauritius a greater stake in its relationship with Britain, counter-balancing Chinese influence.

Special Envoy Jonathan Powell – who negotiated the deal – claims China could not develop a base in Chagos. He forgets China’s disregard for bilateral treaties over Hong Kong and the fact that Mauritius is now free to resettle the Chagos Archipelago. What recourse does the UK have if such resettlement allowed under the deal is used for military purposes?

A 99-year lease won’t stop Mauritius from signing a defence treaty with China in a decade or allowing a Chinese surveillance site to monitor and disrupt UK-US operations in Diego Garcia. Beijing will not respect non-binding advisory notes when Diego Garcia undermines its vested interests. To our adversaries, this lease means as little as the 1968 treaty now means to Mauritius.

Some Labour figures note that negotiations began under the Conservatives. However, initiating discussions and formally ceding sovereignty are two very different things. Any minister using this talking point reveals how out of depth they are on diplomacy.

Whether driven by dogmatic idealism or poor advice, Starmer’s justifications show a lack of judgement. While our adversaries in Moscow and Beijing plan for leverage decades ahead, Britain’s resolve to maintain its strategic advantage and operate effectively in a realpolitik world continues to wane.

Why taking away toys or privileges as punishment might not have the desired effect

Staying calm and offering connection is key

Try to catch and reinforce positive behaviour as much as possible

There’s an ‘intimate connection’ between the workings of the US empire and the UK media. And they didn’t just batter the left in the Jeremy Corbyn years. They also set us up with a cold, rotten dish of Keir Starmer, Peter Mandelson, and their ilk of soulless corporate stooges.

Filmmaker Victor Fraga made the film The Bad Patriots, which is now available on major streaming services. And to mark the occasion, he told us about how establishment propagandists got away with smearing prominent left-wingers Ken Loach and Jeremy Corbyn.

This is a film for everyone because, as Fraga asserted:

I’m not asking people to love Ken and Jeremy… It’s not a film about their ideas. It’s a film about misrepresentations.

He added:

We like to believe Britain is free, but it really isn’t that free.

UK Media and legal collusion blocked the left

Having previously made a documentary about media enabling of countless coups in Brazil, Fraga followed up by looking at the same dynamic in the UK. Through his film about Loach and Corbyn, he said, a key focus was to show:

how the British media has consistently and promiscuously attempted to defame and degrade Ken and Jeremy, paint them as antisemitic, spineless, fruitcakes, too old, … not being patriotic enough

As an establishment mouthpiece, he stressed, the mainstream media played a “crucial role” in the propaganda war on the left that put the right back in charge of the Labour Party:

Keir Starmer would have never been elected without the support from the media. I mean, the Sun supported Keir Starmer and Tony Blair. That says a lot, doesn’t it?

Imperialism and media bias, meanwhile, are “intimately connected”. As he insisted:

You can talk about imperialism without talking about the media, but I don’t think you can talk about the media without talking about imperialism. Obviously, the media attend to the interests of the few, not the many…

The objective of the media is not to inform people. It’s to control people. And most mainstream media, virtually all of them, are owned by millionaires.

Advertisement

And the people the media smears target struggle to fight back because of how expensive it is in the UK, where the law favours obscenely wealthy actors over ordinary people. At the same time, the smears were so systemic in the case of Corbyn that it would have been almost impossible to challenge them legally. As Fraga asserted:

The legal costs are so high that even when you win, sometimes you lose…

So, yeah, the justice system is complicit.

And it’s not just the legal system playing along. Because as the Canary has detailed previously, there is a whole infrastructure of repression against the left in the UK, including the political policing project that unjustifiably spied on hundreds of left-wing groups for decades.

This infrastructure isn’t always obvious for everyone, because of the veneer of freedom and democracy that our establishment sells us. But there are times, like with the Peter Mandelson scandal (connecting into the whole anti-socialist offensive to put Keir Starmer in power), where the dark dealings of establishment politics and media come out into the light.

The interests behind the misrepresentations

The empire and its propagandists want to sell an upside-down view of the world — as we’ve seen during the US-Israeli genocide in Gaza and the repression surrounding it. As Fraga stressed:

In the same way Keir Starmer purports to be left-wing (someone who supports foreign invasions, who’s deeply xenophobic, and who shudders at the thought of anything vaguely socialist), Jeremy is painted as an extremist for wanting to nationalise rail and for policies which are widely implemented in France and Scandinavia. They paint a pacifist such as Jeremy Corbyn as an extremist, and a warmonger like Tony Blair as moderate. That’s pretty sick.

Corbyn was certainly a concern for the US empire and its junior partner in the UK. Ex-CIA director and secretary of state Mike Pompeo admitted as much when he promised to “push back” to undermine Corbyn’s chances of winning the 2019 election. Figures in the British army and secret services also briefed against him.

And whether or not there was direct coordination, the establishment media was absolutely singing from the empire’s hymn sheet. It played a key role in smearing Corbyn and ensuring his loss in the 2019 election. And even the biggest supposedly left-wing paper, the Guardian, was in on it. As Corbyn later told Declassified:

I do not trust the Guardian… it’s a tool of the British establishment.

Prominent filmmaker Loach also represented a concern for the powers that be due to his longstanding critique of capitalism, colonialism, imperialism, racism, and state repression. And he has faced significant attempts to censor and silence his work as a result.

As Fraga summarised, the whole country should be aware that the media’s behaviour is “not an accident”:

On many occasions, they do know they’re lying blatantly. They do know what they’re doing.

And that intentional behaviour serves the interests of the rich and powerful, undermining what limited democracy exists in the UK even further.

This matters to absolutely everyone in the country, and Fraga hopes The Bad Patriots can help to ‘burst the bubble’ and get people talking about the media’s actions more. So invite friends, family members, and anyone you can to watch the film. Because only by facing this issue head on can we stand a chance of changing things.

Featured image via Journeyman Pictures

The Leicestershire Police and Crimes Commissioner and proud Reform UK supporter Rupert Matthews needs a hard drive check it seems. On January 4 he sparked fury when he changed his profile picture on Twitter to ‘Amelia‘, an AI-generated CHILD used by extremists to promote hate.

Reform UK’s PCC @Rupert_Matthews has set his profile picture to a still of the deeply racist AI video that was doing the rounds recently.

‘She’ uses the terms “paki wankers” and states that the Church and BBC are a bunch of “queers and nonces” and makes a strange remark about… pic.twitter.com/dR7UV2eulH

— Reform Party UK Exposed 🇬🇧 (@reformexposed) February 4, 2026

Even AI kids aren’t safe from the far right

The disgusting irony of a PCC using a child as their profile picture is disgusting. Amelia was originally a character for Pathways, a government-funded video game. She was designed to warn other children of the dangers of radicalisation. Yet the far-right have taken Amelia and made her some kind of figurehead:

Wake up, Britain, We Are at a tipping point. #Amelia #Ameliasong #UK #UniteTheKingdom #UnitedKingdom https://t.co/k5YJWnwLDm pic.twitter.com/porTirrNtr

— Amelia (@makeukgood) February 1, 2026

So of course the far-right took her image, adopted it and sexualised her:

They can’t conceal ya Amelia!

This is really good Ai music video from Skyebrows.@TRobinsonNewEra #UKPolitics

A Million Amelias – Skyebrowshttps://t.co/2X1SV49MHd pic.twitter.com/dbBHW2yHKh

Advertisement

— Jack Shepard (@JackShepardNow) January 31, 2026

Can Amelia be the worlds first AI PM 😁pic.twitter.com/IOiAa025JR

— Mist 🇬🇧 (@DontFearTheMist) January 31, 2026

I am shaking with anger writing this. Yes, she may be AI generated, but she is still meant to represent a child.

Reform’s Matthews needs a hard drive check. Now!

Matthews is now promoting his political brand with a picture that was meant to warn kids about everything Reform UK represents. It’s so weird, when this purple-haired goth aesthetic is one that the far right usually mocks. Yet here she is, standing as some kind of nationalist e-girl icon.

This move is particularly alarming for a man who is in charge of policing. By adopting Amelia, not only is he signifying an alignment with far right ideology, he’s also sexualising children.

Hard drive check needed.

Featured image via Twitter

Police in Las Vegas have arrested an Israeli citizen in an armed raid after an illegal ‘biolab’ made several people exposed to it ‘deathly ill’. 55-year-old Ori Salomon aka Ori Solomon was arrested on charges “disposing of and discharging hazardous waste” charges – and later also charged with illegal possession of six firearms – including an assault rifle of Israeli make.

Police recovered more than 1,000 samples of likely hazardous material after finding a freezer, multiple fridges and other laboratory material including:

biosafety hood, a biosafety sticker, a centrifuge, multiple refrigerators, red-brown unknown liquids in gallon-sized containers, and refrigerated vials with unknown liquids.

Bizarrely, it was not the first such raid. A Limited Liability Company tied to the county’s record of the property has the same name as a company named in an ongoing federal case in California involving a similar biological laboratory.

Israeli biolab raid

The Las Vegas raid followed a tip-off that lab equipment and hazardous materials were being stored at the residential property. The weapons charge was added later because the original warrant for the raid did not include firearms. The charge sheet says that Salomon/Solomon:

knowing that he was an alien admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa, knowingly possessed the firearms below, which were in and affecting interstate commerce, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(5)(B) and 924(a)(2):

a. a Springfield Armory SA-XD ACP 45 caliber bearing the serial numberUS734441;
b. a Savage Mark II .22 caliber rifle bearing the serial number 399291;
c. a Euroarms Brescia-Italy .36 Navy bearing the serial number 30614;
d. a Springfield Armory XD-9 9mm Handgun bearing the serial numberXD193283;
e. an IWI US Tavor-x95 5.56 bearing the serial number T0066621; and
f. a Glock 19 9mm Handgun bearing the serial number ANK965US.

Advertisement

The IWI Tavor-x95 ‘bullpup assault rifle’ is made in Israel and used by Israel’s military. The Austrian Glock 19 is also widely used by Israeli armed forces.

Court documents state that after entering the garage, several people became “deathly ill,” and “could not get out of bed”, according to local TV station KLAS. Samples have been taken by FBI aircraft to the National Bioforensic Analysis Center in Maryland.

Local media have speculated that the Israeli biolab may have been involved in the production of counterfeit medicines. However, there is another possibility. Islamophobic Israel advocates have claimed that ‘Iranian’ cells in the US were planning terror attacks.

The claims appear to be an attempt to fuel US aggression toward Iran and led to warnings that Israel itself is planning ‘false flag’ attacks in the US. The colony has a long and proven record of using such attacks to achieve political and military ends.

Featured image via author

Keir Starmer has ‘apologised’ for Peter Mandelson in a speech in Sussex. Kind of, but not really. You know the kind of thing. The “I’m sorry people felt offended” apology that puts the blame on others.

Starmer turns on Mandelson after it’s too late

Starmer said he was sorry for believing Mandelson’s lies — ‘Peter’ was never added as Starmer tried desperately to distance himself. Distance himself from the man he took on as his senior adviser when Mandelson’s closeness to child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein was already well known. From the man he then appointed as ambassador to the US, despite knowing the same.

From the man whose protégé he still has as his chief of staff.

Despicably, Starmer then cynically exploited Epstein’s victims to try to get himself off the hook. It was the first time he’d mentioned them since Mandelson blew up in his face. It was only to use them, shamelessly, to excuse not releasing what pre-ambassador vetting had told him about Mandelson and Epstein.

The Met Police, very conveniently, announced that the Mandelson vetting records can’t be released because releasing them might compromise an investigation. Everyone understands this, surely correctly, to mean the supposed investigation into Mandelson’s insider trading and leaking of state information to Epstein.

Starmer claimed he was deeply frustrated by the Met’s decision. Yeah, right. But then he claimed that he accepted it because releasing the Mandelson files might rob Epstein’s victims of justice for Epstein’s crimes. Exposing Starmer’s decision to ignore Mandelson’s ardour for the child-rapist poses zero threat to the US investigation into Epstein’s crimes against children and young women.

It was an appalling, disgusting, entirely cynical ploy

And then, out of nowhere, Starmer began attacking the hundreds of thousands of people who march against Israel’s genocide. He repeated the Israel lobby’s lie that marching against genocide makes UK Jews scared. Nonsense. UK Jews are front and centre of every march and rally — so much so, that the BBC and others have to hide them. Leaving them in would expose that lie and the lie that all Jews support Israel, you see.

To reinforce his smear, Starmer reminded his listeners that Jews suffered the UK’s most recent terror attack. He left out that the Jewish casualties at the Manchester synagogue attack were shot by armed police. Also left out that the people of Palestine continue to suffer daily terrorist attacks by Israel — including many bombed and burned this week. Also ‘forgot’ to mention the 1.5m Palestinians starving and freezing in Gaza under Israel’s blockade. He ‘forgot’ to mention that the Gaza ‘ceasefire’ is a sick joke. He ‘forgot’ to mention that Israeli extremists are attacking Palestinians in the West Bank and burning their homes.

Of course he did. Starmer is too determined to criminalise pro-Palestinian speech and protest. He is holding anti-genocide protesters in prison without trial, arresting grannies for opposing genocide. He sends his lawyers to try to ensure journalists who support Palestinian rights and freedom are locked up.

And he doesn’t give a flying you-know-what for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein beyond their usefulness to keep the Mandelson files hidden. To anyone watching closely, he made that perfectly clear.

Watch below:

Featured image via the Canary