Most football matches are decided by small margins, but others are not. In fact, matches in the World Cup often feature remarkable scorelines not seen elsewhere. In such games, defensive structure can collapse, and goals accumulate quickly. Sometimes this happens through clear mismatches. At other times, it results from unusually open play. With the 2026 edition approaching in the United States, Canada and Mexico, a record 48 teams are taking part. This raises the bar. Uneven scorelines are all the more likely to appear, particularly when debut nations come up against established football powers.

Below are the highest-scoring matches in World Cup history, based on official FIFA records.

Nine-goal matches

Argentina 6–3 Mexico (1930) — This inaugural match showcased the drama that only the World Cup can deliver. Argentina defeated Mexico in a nine-goal contest.

Hungary 9–0 South Korea (1954) — Hungary produced one of the most one-sided wins in tournament history. They scored nine without reply.

West Germany 7–2 Türkiye (1954) — West Germany advanced comfortably with a seven-goal performance, during the play-off round.

France 6–3 West Germany (1958) — France finished third after a high-scoring match against West Germany.

Yugoslavia 9–0 Zaire (1974) — Yugoslavia recorded a nine-goal victory in the group stage. This stands as the most decisive result in any World Cup to date.

Ten-goal match

France 7–3 Paraguay (1958) — A ten-goal match played out during a tournament defined by Just Fontaine’s scoring record. Consequently, this World Cup fixture remains legendary.

Eleven-goal matches

Brazil 6–5 Poland (1938) — An open match ended narrowly in Brazil’s favour after a high-scoring contest typical of classic World Cup encounters.

Hungary 8–3 West Germany (1954) — Hungary’s attack overwhelmed West Germany in a group-stage meeting.

Hungary 10–1 El Salvador (1982) — Hungary recorded the largest winning margin in World Cup history. 

Twelve-goal record

Austria 7–5 Switzerland (1954) — The highest-scoring match in World Cup history remains the 1954 quarter-final known as the “Battle of Lausanne,” which produced 12 goals. World cup historians often cite this match for its non-stop action and drama. Austria came from behind in a match defined by constant swings in momentum.

Despite the expanded 2026 format, no match has yet rivalled Lausanne’s 12-goal record — 2026 will tell.

Featured image via Richard Heathcote / Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

3 min read43 min

Andy Burnham has said he would take a “much more devolved” approach to getting people into work and bringing down welfare spending.

Advertisement

Speaking to PoliticsHome in Makerfield on Friday, where he is standing as Labour’s by-election candidate later this month, the Greater Manchester mayor said: “We’ve all got to be concerned with getting the welfare bill down.

“I don’t think there’s any debate about that, to be honest, it’s how you do it.”

He argued that the best way to do so was through a more localised approach, rather than cuts made in Westminster.

“It’s an overhaul that the Whitehall system can’t really make,” he said. “It’s an argument actually for dealing with this in a much more devolved way than it is currently done.”

Advertisement

Burnham – who confirmed in a BBC debate on Thursday that he wants to replace Prime Minister Keir Starmer in No 10 if his bid to return to the House of Commons is successful – told PoliticsHome that local and regional authorities should be empowered to give out-of-work people the support they need for mental health problems.

“We don’t have a system that is set up to look and really get to the heart of why somebody isn’t able to sustain themselves in the labour market, and that’s been the journey that I’ve been on as mayor of Greater Manchester.

“But if you do give people what they’re looking for, I think you can support more people into work,” he said.

Advertisement

Welfare has emerged as a thorny issue for the Labour government since being elected in July 2024.

Starmer tried to introduce benefits reforms last year but was forced to abandon the plans by a major Labour backbench rebellion.

Private messages published by the government earlier this week showed Work and Pensions Secretary complaining to former US ambassador Peter Mandelson that “every meeting” he had with Labour MPs was a discussion about “who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others”.

A new report authored by former health secretary Alan Milburn found that the total annual cost to the taxpayer of just under one million young people not being in employment, education or training (NEET) is £125bn per year.

Advertisement

Speaking to PoliticsHome, Burnham described the report as a “very significant intervention”.

“I’ve contributed to it, and I think Alan is interested in what we’ve done because we’ve taken a different approach to supporting people into work.

“And this is the thing: The DWP (Department for Work and Pensions) system, I don’t think does do that, because it’s a very narrow approach in this day and age.”

He continued: “The reasons why people, particularly young people, may not be in work would be related to mental health or the housing situation or the debt they may be facing, a whole range of other things that are going on.”

Advertisement

Burnham criticised previous governments for encouraging more than 50 per cent of people to go to university.

“The obsession with the university route began with the Blair government, but then was very much continued by Gove in his reforms, [and] left 50 per cent or more of young people, particularly in an area like this [thinking], well, what about me?

In an interview with The House magazine in Makerfield, Burnham said he is “not going to hold back” on early reform to the House of Lords if he becomes prime minister.

“I can’t justify, personally, 800-plus members of the House of Lords. I don’t think – with great respect to many people in it, because I have true great respect, because there’s some incredible people in there – what the country spends on the House of Lords is actually justified by what the output is,” he said.

Advertisement

 

Advertisement

Source link

Obituaries for Franco-Iranian artist and author of Persepolis Marjane Satrapi are pouring in from Western politicians and media following news of her death in Paris at age 56 on Thursday.

Western establishments’ obituaries revealed a pattern of appreciating Satrapi for opposing Iran’s government, reflecting their ever-present instinct of Islamophobia.

“Persepolis” was a bestselling graphic novel series by Satrapi.

Most of them admire her as CNN puts it as:

an outspoken critic of Iran’s ruling establishment and a prominent supporter of the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ movement.

Satrapi was married to Mattias Ripa, who helped translate ‘Persepolis’ into English. He died last year.

Persepolis author mourned

Associated Press reported that President Emmanuel Macron and his wife paid “tribute to a remarkable artist who transformed an Iranian childhood into a universal fable.”

Yael Braun-Pivet, President of the French National Assembly, posted a picture with Satrapi, captioning it that France had lost “an immense artist.”

Marjane Satrapi avait fait de son œuvre un acte de liberté.

Avec Persepolis, elle avait donné un visage et une voix à la révolution iranienne, portant haut le combat pour la liberté et la dignité des femmes. La France perd une artiste immense.

À sa famille, à ses proches,… pic.twitter.com/TCnaIOnxfs

— Yaël Braun-Pivet (@YaelBRAUNPIVET) June 4, 2026

Advertisement

French  politician Olivier Faure said the artist had given a “global echo” to the “victims of the mullahs.”

Marjane Satrapi, autrice de « Persepolis » est morte de tristesse. Elle laisse tous ceux qui l’ont aimée et admiré son œuvre, orphelins. Spiegelmann avec « Maus » avait su donner à son histoire traumatique familiale liée à la Shoah un écho mondial, Marjane Satrapi avait réussi la… pic.twitter.com/zEzK6ZA6LE

— Olivier Faure (@faureolivier) June 4, 2026

The Mayor of Cannes, David Lisnard, said  Satrapi lived through “repression and deprivation of freedom under the mullahs’ regime,” applauding her for defending women’s rights where they are “most endangered in the world.”

Elle était une grande artiste. Sa bande-dessinée puis son film autobiographique, Persepolis, distingué du Prix du jury au Festival de Cannes en 2007, étaient aussi beaux et raffinés, à l’instar de la grande culture perse, que ludiques et bouleversants sur les conséquences de la… pic.twitter.com/z7tUj9MCgM

— David Lisnard (@davidlisnard) June 4, 2026

Advertisement

Western media

France’s Le Monde ran a few articles. They said:

Satrapi, an outspoken critic of Iran’s theocratic government, arrived in France in 1994 and gained French nationality in 2006. Persepolis recounts the story of Satrapi’s early life in Tehran, struggling under the restrictions imposed by Iran’s Islamic leadership after the 1979 revolution, before she is sent to Europe by her parents and begins a life in exile.

They also call her “a powerful and outspoken artist,” in another article, and “a brilliant, free and creative artist,” in a third article.

Germany’s Die Zeit said her comics were a means of political enlightenment.

The Washington Post, Times of Israel, and  Haaretz posted the Associated Press story on Satrapi, which called her “a prominent advocate for women’s rights.”

Satrapi had worked with Israel’s film industry in the past. She was reported “enamored” with Israeli directors like Ari Folman and “friendly” with Eran Kolirin, according to Israel’s Haaretz.

The Financial Times quoted a letter that Satarpi had written she in which she said she wanted to show Western readers that Iran was not just a “country of fanatics and terrorists.”

The New York Times said her novel “illuminated the struggles of Iranians” during the Islamic Revolution

Breaking News: Marjane Satrapi, the Iranian-French author whose graphic novel series “Persepolis” illuminated the struggles of Iranians during the Islamic Revolution, died at 56. https://t.co/WQWxavBm5l

— The New York Times (@nytimes) June 4, 2026

Advertisement

In the end, the Western establishment’s embrace of Satrapi reveals more about them than her. These establishments love to canonise dissenters who serve their geopolitical narrative. Whilst many will mourn her art, it is no accident that the Western world chose to elevate her work.

Featured image via Getty/Gareth Cattermole

By The Canary

Source link

Source link

Michelle O’Neill doesn’t mince words: the first nationalist First Minister for the North of Ireland’s six counties sat down with Scottish paper the National. She had plenty to say about culture, reunification, Scottish independence, and the arrogance of Westminster.

Politics trickles through culture

Something huge is shifting in the North of Ireland.

You can feel it in the music, with establishment-baiting Belfast hip-hop trio Kneecap packing out venues across the world. You can see it on TV as Derry Girls made the six counties a cultural export. And you can measure it in the polling: 63% of people in the North now want a united Ireland inside the European Union.

Michelle O’Neill is not surprised. “Young people have it in spades,” she says of the new cultural confidence coursing through a nationalist Ireland.

That generation have a real, confident view of who they are, confident in their Irishness, very happy to assert it. They will not accept second-class citizenship.

Their parents endured it. Their grandparents endured it. This generation doesn’t plan on more of the same.

Unionists are losing the culture war

The confidence is undoubtedly real. But so is a hard, enduring, sometimes dangerous resistance to it.

O’Neill is unsparing about the forces lining up to suppress it. Political unionism, for example, she says:

blocked the Irish language at every turn.

The North still has no Irish language strategy. They fought for years just to get an Irish Language Act.

For those in political unionism trying to block that, they’re saying to young Irish Gaeilgeoirs [Gaeilge speakers] that you don’t have a place here.

What message does that send in 2026? It’s one of disrespect and intolerance and arrogance.

Young people, she says, have no truck with it. If Kneecap have done anything — they’ve certainly rocked the boat politically — it’s make Gaeilge very cool. And the new vibrancy on the streets is the proof.

British government fails yet another Palestine prosecution as Kneecap man goes free

Give us our Referendum

The cultural moment and the political moment are inseparable. When 63% of people in the North want reunification, the Good Friday Agreement’s constitutional logic demands a response.

Under its terms, the Northern Ireland Secretary holds the power to call a border poll when they believe a majority favours it. But Hilary Benn has refused. O’Neill is direct about what that refusal means.

Give us a referendum. If they’re so strong in the strength of the Union, what have they got to fear? Live up to the commitment.

She frames it, correctly, as a democratic right — one explicitly enshrined in the Agreement that ended thirty years of bloody conflict. Westminster signed that Agreement and should honour it.

An Ireland within Europe — that is the big prize.

(This is a sentiment certainly shared with the majority of SNP politicians and voters. Some 62% of Scots voted to remain in the EU, and that figure has likely only risen since. Brexit is still felt sorely in Scotland.)

But O’Neill knows the prosaic questions matter too. Taxes. pensions, healthcare, etc. She doesn’t want to simply dodge them. She flips them and, yes, perhaps weaponises them. But why shouldn’t she?

She’s right to point out, for example, that the six counties don’t have devolved fiscal powers of anything like the scope that Scotland has, which is still far below the scope of Westminster. (Although this scope is also limited by Rachel Reeves’ rigid OBR fiscal rules.)

Reunification, O’Neill argues, is an opportunity: a stronger economy, free education across the island, a roof over everyone’s head. The research backs her up too, where people in the Republic already earn more, have higher living standards, and face shorter healthcare waiting lists. (Not that the south is without problems, however — particularly Dublin’s notorious housing crisis.)

Untied Kingdom: anti-unionist parties take power across the Celtic nations

The new Celtic Alliance

O’Neill watched last week’s Scottish Parliament vote for an independence referendum with keen interest. She watched Westminster’s response with something closer to fury.

The very quick response from Whitehall was that they would completely disrespect and disregard that mandate. That’s a mandate from the people.

She sees Scotland, Wales, and the North of Ireland as part of the same story.

The recent elections in Scotland and Wales really add to that message. The people want self-determination, they want to take their future into their own hands.

The SNP and Plaid Cymru taking power in Edinburgh and Cardiff, in her words:

Demonstrates a real, seismic change in terms of our politics, collectively, here. …

The nations on the periphery of this broken union are moving. Westminster is not listening. That is no longer sustainable and it looks like major change is coming, sooner than later.

People are tired of the mess of Westminster. They’re tired of the disregard shown towards them. The austerity agenda, the revolving door of British prime ministers, Brexit — we have never been top of the agenda. We never will be. Our interests will never be served by Westminster.

That is not, despite SW1’s imagination, mere Celtic bitterness — it is serious political analysis. And it is shared, increasingly, from Belfast to Edinburgh to Cardiff.

O’Neill wants power-sharing in Stormont to work — she has even put her own party’s veto on the table to make institutions function. She can, she believes, make devolution work today while arguing unapologetically for constitutional change tomorrow.

But the direction of travel is clear. The nations are watching each other and drawing the same conclusions. Westminster’s continued disregard built this moment — it has no one else to blame.

Featured image via Getty/Charles McQuillan

By Cameron Baillie

Source link

Andy Burnham at the launch of his campaign as Labour’s candidate for the Makerfield by-election, 22 May 2026 (PA Images / Alamy)

4 min read16 min

Exclusive: Andy Burnham has told The House magazine that he would support “early change” to the House of Lords, with reform – including downsizing it – coming by way of the next general election.

Advertisement

The Greater Manchester mayor was speaking at a campaign stop on Friday in the Makerfield constituency, where he is Labour’s parliamentary candidate in a by-election. If he wins on 18 June, he has confirmed that he hopes to replace Keir Starmer in No 10.

Asked by The House whether he still backed turning the Lords into a ‘Senate of Regions and Nations’, with seats for metro mayors included in it, he stood by his support for overhauling the Upper Chamber and said it should be “the first place to look” for cutting “the cost of politics”.

“I wouldn’t rule out quite an early change, and possibly the 2029 general election or beyond, because I’ve long believed that there’s a first stage of Lords reform, which is indirect election that could be linked to a general election, and I just think we can’t delay this any longer,” Burnham said.

Advertisement

“I don’t think we can justify half of our national legislature being unelected. I think this is something that is, in many ways, quite scandalous.

“If you think about this constituency and the feeling here that Westminster looks past it – when you look at the flooding issues it’s got, the illegal tip, poor infrastructure, a whole host of other issues. Is it a surprise to people here that that might be like that when you have a House of Lords that’s largely drawn from within the M25?”

He added: “I can’t justify, personally, 800-plus members of the House of Lords. I don’t think – with great respect to many people in it, because I have true great respect, because there’s some incredible people in there – what the country spends on the House of Lords is actually justified by what the output is.

Advertisement

“I’m just being honest with you. I’m not going to hold back on it, actually, because I just think we’ve allowed this to persist for too long. If you want to cut the cost of politics, that’s the first place to look.”

In an interview with The House in November 2023, Burnham said reform of the Upper Chamber was urgent.

“I heard a narrative when I was in government a lot – that all that constitutional stuff, it’s not really a priority, we’ll get round to it at a different time. I’ve come around to the thinking that you can’t actually do that, that the wiring of the country is part of the problem,” he said before the 2024 general election.

Burnham also told The House on Friday that he maintains his support for changing Labour’s position on standing candidates in Northern Ireland. The party has a longstanding policy of not contesting elections in the devolved nation.

Advertisement

The leadership hopeful said his endorsement of electoral reform, which would introduce a switch to a more proportional voting system, could facilitate the change to Labour’s refusal to field candidates in Northern Ireland.

“Yes, I’ve had a position on that going back. But it would obviously require careful conversations with our sister party, the SDLP, and with other political parties in Northern Ireland. I wouldn’t want to blunder in and create an issue.

“But I do have an in-principle commitment that democracy should allow the range of parties to be represented, and personally I am in favour of more proportional systems, and that allows that approach, because in that type of system it’s not the case of one party not contesting where a sister party is involved. I just think it allows more collaboration between parties.”

Burnham was at a pub in Orrell announcing his call to cut business rates by 20 per cent for pubs and music venues and to remove small, family, high-street businesses, including hairdressers and cafes, from business rates altogether.

Advertisement

He said Labour had “got it wrong on small businesses” and the policy would be funded by raising rates on warehouses used by online tech giants and via action on empty retail spaces on the high street.

A Survation poll published on Thursday put Burnham 10 per cent ahead of his closest rival, Reform candidate Robert Kenyon (49 per cent to 39 per cent).

 

Source link

In a new review, notorious pro-Israel agitator John Mann has pushed for measures to silence NHS humanitarianism. The government and NHS have already pledged to implement them, including a crackdown on NHS staff members openly expressing solidarity with Palestinian people during Israel’s ongoing genocide.

This is about Israel, not about ending racism

Israel is a key junior partner to US billionaire–imperialism. The UK is a junior partner too, so giving Israel political and material support is just part of the deal. And for British political elites trying to get away with this shameful behaviour, consistent and widespread public outrage over Israel’s genocide in Gaza has been a big problem.

This is why Keir Starmer’s regime has filled departments with pro-Israel lackeys, cracked down on citizens’ right to protest, and censored pro-Palestinian voices. So Mann’s review, calling for a ban on NHS staff wearing ‘political’ badges or wearing their uniforms at protests (with clear mentions of pro-Palestinian activism), is no surprise.

Meanwhile, years of UK governments backing genocide have helped to normalise far-right talking points. And in this context, racism against NHS workers has increased significantly – primarily targeting Black and Brown staff. There have even been examples of clear anti-Palestinian bias in the country’s main nursing union.

All forms of racism are vile. But Mann and other pro-Israel politicians have long prioritised and weaponised antisemitism allegations to try and smear or silence critics of Israel. The new review seems to be a continuation of that.

As we’ve reported previously, Mann is not Jewish himself. He’s just a person who has received tens of thousands of pounds from pro-Israel lobbyists and lobby groups over the years. He has also made many visits to Israel – one of which the Israeli government paid for itself.

Mann’s wife, meanwhile, is new MP Jo White. She isn’t Jewish either, but is a vice-chair of Labour Friends of Israel. Pro-Israel lobbyists and groups have happily donated to her. And one of these is Palace Yard Events Ltd, which the government has given over a million pounds to ‘tackle antisemitism’ in the education system.

Humanity-free zones

Countless genocide scholars, legal experts, and human rights groups call Israel’s actions genocide. Among the 70,000+ people it has murdered since 2023, over 20,000 are children.

You might have thought this would have shamed pro-Israel voices into piping down a bit. But they haven’t. They’ve just denied a genocide is happening and kept going, waging firm institutional efforts to suppress any resistance in public life to our government’s complicity in genocide.

As we’ve regularly reported, the UK government has deep links to the Israel lobby, arrested both Jewish and non-Jewish people for opposing genocide, and antisemitically sought to conflate the state of Israel and its crimes with the religion of Judaism.

In service of its commitment to US billionaire-imperialism and its Israeli allies, the government is increasingly trying to silence public expressions of humanity. This normalises the type of repression that the far right (which could very possibly gain power at the next election) won’t hesitate to weaponise even more intensely.

This is all incredibly dangerous. We need to firmly oppose it, and defend our right to fight for humanity.

Featured image via Getty/Leon Neal

By Ed Sykes

Source link

Reform UK’s MP candidate for Makerfield, Robert Kenyon, once self-proclaimed himself as a sexist, but now he is running for parliament he coincidentally won’t accept the label and insists:

I’ve got nothing but respect for women… I’ve said things years ago that I wouldn’t say now.

However, his complete refusal to apologise for comments that many women rightfully found deeply offensive exposed another issue with the Makerfield ‘hopeful’. Instead of showing an ounce of humility or reflecting on why people objected, he doubled down.

That response only strengthened the perception that he places his own views and sense of certainty above the concerns and rights of the women understandably affected by his disgusting, derogatory comments.

Basically, it goes to underscore how his sexism is still alive and well, which is hardly a shock in a patriarchal, woman-hating party as Farage’s Reform.

Fiona Bruce, "The question asked most by the audience about your Robert Kenyon was about comments you've made in particular about women"

Lady in maroon, "I'd rather have a career politician than a plumber who is a sexist"

Fiona Bruce, "You may not be aware of the things Robert… pic.twitter.com/K4zGQMlgiM

— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) June 4, 2026

Advertisement

Reform classic – never apologise

Needless to say, concerns regarding sexism were amongst the most common questions raised by audience members on Question Time, according to Fiona Bruce. Kenyon obviously sought to deflect and deny any notion of being a sexist, despite declaring himself as such. However, his virtue signalling response to a female audience member speaks volumes.

The audience member stated she would:

rather have a career politician than a plumber who’s a sexist.

Fiona Bruce then provided context for those who might not be aware of Kenyon’s pretty disgusting remarks about women, particularly pointing out:

Okay, you described yourself as a sexist. You have made offensive comments about women. You’ve admitted that.

You’ve also said that abortion is the cowardly act of women murdering a defenceless baby and that women do it so they can shag anyone they want.

That’s your phrase, not mine.

As I say, I’m raising it because lots of people in the audience raise it. I want to give you a chance.

Nevertheless, a striking contradiction runs through Kenyon’s subsequent defence. He appears comfortable applying the label to himself when it suits his argument yet rejects it outright when women raise concerns about his comments. Instead, he points to the fact that he was raised by a single mother and grew up with a grandmother and sister, as though those relationships alone settle the question.

The problem is obvious: having women in your life has never served as proof that you respect women or understand their experiences. If it did, no man with a mother, sister, wife, or daughter could ever face accusations of sexism. The argument does not address the criticism – it simply attempts to sidestep it.

He’s a ‘changed man’ apparently, as he said:

So, I won’t accept that label. I mean, a lot of the things have been said 15 years ago. I hold my hands up. I’ve made mistakes.

Recent abusive comments towards Carol Vorderman were also brought up, in which he has been more than happy to perversely sexualise her – which women well know, from experience, puts us at risk of sexualised attacks and abuse.

No apology there either, of course.

*Shocking, Reform UK's Robert Kenyon again refuses to apologise for insulting Carol Vorderman, and doubles down* #BBCQT

Sarah Wakefield, "I spoke to Carol Vorderman this morning, she's really distressed that you, Robert Kenyon, have failed to apologise for any of these… pic.twitter.com/tNUwBQfgje

— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) June 4, 2026

Kenyon’s defence as weak as it is predictable

Bruce wasted little time highlighting the problem with that defence, reminding viewers that Kenyon made those comments about abortion only a few years ago, including claims that women were “murdering” babies so they could sleep around.

Yet Kenyon seems to believe his relationships with women somehow settle the matter. By that cynical standard, every sexist in history would get a free pass simply because they had a mother, sister, wife, or daughter. The argument is as weak as it is predictable.

Needless to say, every abusive man in history also knew women. Women gave birth to them, raised them, worked with them, and often endured their behaviour. Simply having women in your life is not proof of respect for women, nor does it automatically make someone an ally of women’s rights.

Kenyon’s opposition to diversity doesn’t stop at equality for women, as this audience member below poignantly highlighted:

Gent in pink slams Reform UK's Robert Kenyon,

"As a community we want a normal person, a real person stepping in and taking charge to make sure that people of our constituency can get ahead in life the best they can"

"I would rather have a community made up of diversity, of… pic.twitter.com/ehtoTGWEWH

— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) June 4, 2026

Advertisement

One X user commented:

People are trying to whitewash this man by saying it was in the past. People don’t fundamentally change – believe them the first time.

He’s against women, abortion & freedom to choose. Believe the man, don’t vote for him & allow him to slip back to the sewer he came from.

Another said:

“I was bought up by women” seems to be his reasoning that he isn’t sexist. Similar to “I can’t be racist I have a Motown record”

Give a liar or a bull sh***** a spade: They can’t resist talking & automatically start digging a hole as we can clearly see #RobertKenyon doing here.

If we were living in normal times, Rob Kenyon's performance on #bbcqt tonight would be the biggest case of political suicide since Nick Griffin was on #QuestionTime in 2009;

Inarticulate
Only recited scripted Reform talking points throughout
Looked and sounded out of his depth pic.twitter.com/1xF8Cqwfck

— Jay Walker (@jayBwalker) June 4, 2026

Advertisement

Sexists were also birthed by women – and most often, raised by them

Kenyon’s attempt to dismiss comments he previously embraced as merely an “alleged” label simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Rather than addressing the concerns people raised, he has fallen back on the argument that he cannot possibly hold sexist views because he has women in his life.

It truly is little different from the tired old defence: ‘I can’t possibly be racist because I have a Black friend.’

Thus, Kenyon’s argument entirely misses the point. Every man has women in his life – mothers, sisters, partners, colleagues, friends, teachers, and carers. Simply knowing or ‘caring’ about women does not make someone immune from criticism when they make comments that are sexist, derogatory or dismissive.

Therefore, what stands out most is not the original comment but the ignorant response that followed.

Rather than recognising why people took issue with the Reform candidate’s remarks or offering any meaningful apology, Kenyon has chosen to dispute the criticism itself. That approach has only deepened concerns about his dangerous judgment.

When someone seeks influence and authority, their willingness to listen to criticism and reflect on their mistakes matters just as much as the views they express.

Featured image via YouTube screenshot/BBC News

By Maddison Wheeldon

Source link

Green party deputy leader Mothin Ali has condemned a firebomb attack targeting two Muslim Greens who were working to make the UK a better place for all its people.

The West Midlands couple, identified as Farrukh and Salma, saw their car reduced to smoking wreckage by the attack. Ali called for West Midlands Police to treat the matter seriously. He condemned the anti-Muslim speech of Reform and other politicians and for everyone to work together to create an “island of belonging” instead of inciting hate and division:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Green Party of England & Wales (@thegreenparty)

Routine incitement

But, it’s telling that Mothin Ali is the one condemning this despicable attack. Reform, Labour and the Tories all routinely incite Islamophobia and embolden white supremacists for their own political agendas – including against Ali personally. Anti-Muslim hate incidents have risen faster than other racial or religious hate. Yet the UK’s ‘mainstream’ media have ignored the firebomb attack:

This is a grim contrast with the blanket coverage that follows even the most questionable incident involving supporters of Israel.

Featured image via Instagram

By Skwawkbox

Source link

John Swinney knows the rules. He can’t pretend he doesn’t.

?

So let there be no mistake: if Police Scotland and the Crown Office refuse to investigate the First Minister’s open public confirmation this week that a serious crime was committed by the SNP over the “ring-fenced” fundraiser money from 2017 and 2019, it will be beyond any fair dispute that Scotland is a corrupt banana republic where the powerful and the elite can simply do whatever they want, as brazenly as they like, and the law will turn a blind, uncaring eye.

That the prosecutorial service of a nation is run by a government minister answerable to a political party leader has always been a source of embarrassment. It makes Scotland look like a tinpot dictatorship, a North Korea-style state where a huge artifice of pantomime is constructed to disguise the fact that the country is a naked plutocracy.

Advertisement

That’s an opinion increasingly widely shared in Scotland.

That editorial leader from today’s Scottish Sun is speaking for every single person of integrity and decency left in the country. We have prima facie evidence that a crime has been committed – the misappropriation (at a minimum) of well over half a million pounds. We know exactly who did it, and they’ve confessed unambiguously and openly in public, in front of news cameras. Multiple properly-constituted complaints have been filed. And yet despite a five-year investigation, nobody has been prosecuted for it and we haven’t even been given the most cursory explanation of why.

And there are growing suspicions too, that the one person who WAS convicted over an entirely separate crime which indirectly led from the investigation might be about to be let off incredibly leniently for it.

Natalie McGarry was sentenced to almost two years in prison for embezzling £25,000. If Peter Murrell is handed a shorter prison term (or even no prison term at all) later this month – with the nation helpfully distracted by Scotland’s World Cup campaign – for stealing more than EIGHTEEN TIMES as much as McGarry did, on the grounds that he’s paid back the money to the people who also committed a crime with it, it will be a scandal of unprecented proportions in the history of Scottish justice, save perhaps the case of the Lockerbie bomber.

Advertisement

It was revealed this week that Murrell’s assets include a £613,000 pension fund. It is entirely conceivable that Murrell’s embezzlement contributed significantly to the size of that fund, which will have earned a very significant sum in interest over the years that he was stealing large amounts.

So by the time you also factor in the selling of all his illegally-obtained trinkets, it’s within the bounds of possibility that even after paying back the money, Murrell will come out of the deal financially ahead. The SNP, meanwhile, will have been fully reimbursed for its losses and will be the happy recipients of a welcome and substantial unexpected boost to their threadbare coffers.

The only people who will have lost out will be the people – supporters of all parties and none – who donated to a fund that was specifically, explicitly and stridently advertised as being for Scottish independence and NOT for general SNP purposes, and instead saw it spent on the latter.

And ever-useless, the Scottish media is allowing Swinney to dodge that issue and focus solely on donations from SNP members – the only donors to the “ring-fenced” funds who might reasonably be imagined to accept the money being spent on broader SNP interests.

Advertisement

(Coincidentally, a study today revealed that less than half of 2014 Yes voters voted SNP at last month’s election, with a whopping 31% of them voting for Unionist parties. “The SNP” and “independence” are not synonyms.)

Operation Branchform made front-page headlines across the globe, so it’s probably not an exaggeration to say that the world is watching to see the outcome of the new complaint lodged with Police Scotland and the Crown Office yesterday.

If there is to be no rule of law for the powerful in Scotland, if we are to be revealed as the only bent dictatorship in the world where the idiot population keeps voting for the crooked dictators of their own genuine free will, then that is something that the rest of the planet will notice, and then turn their faces away from our shame.

Source link