The National have linked a Reform councillor who spoke at a ‘Nazi rally’ to a far-right vigilante group. And she’s not even the only one linked to these awful groups:

NEW: Reform councillor Audrey Dempsey, who shared a stage with neo-Nazis this weekend in Glasgow, has actually been "advising" a far-right vigilante street patrol group in the city

The National can reveal that she has been guiding the group on going to the "next level" pic.twitter.com/lmRB6xtrp8

— Laura Webster (@LauraEWebsterr) July 29, 2026

Advertisement

Nazis

We should note that Reform politicians have disputed that the ‘Nazi rally’ was in fact a Nazi rally. As Grace wrote for the Canary:

On Saturday 25 July, a far-right ‘Unite the Clans’ rally saw masked, violent fascists attacking people of colour on the streets of Glasgow. However, Reform MSP Thomas Kerr has since taken to social media to complain about the racist thugs being called Nazis — because obviously that’s the most important issue at hand.

The reason we’re confident calling it such is because many attendees were happily throwing off Nazi salutes:

Multiple Nazi salutes at the ‘Unite the Clans’ racist & fascist rally in Glasgow yesterday. They deny they are racist as majority of society abhors it. They masquerade as ‘protectors of women’, but only use concerns over women’s safety to scapegoat& build their fascist movement. pic.twitter.com/mUhNHLWP30

— Stand Up to Racism – Scotland (@SUTRScotland) July 26, 2026

Given the above, it’s no wonder an MSP has called for the group to be proscribed:

BREAKING: Anti-migrant groups causing terror in Scotland should be proscribed, an MSP has told the Home Office

Maggie Chapman has called on the UK to ban groups like Unite the Clans pic.twitter.com/p3PHBAYiJL

— The National (@ScotNational) July 28, 2026

Nazism is a well-understood and documented ideology with clear goals and methods. Clearly, any individual or group who promotes Nazi ideology is a threat to society. And as the philosopher Karl Popper wrote on the ‘paradox of tolerance‘:

If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

Back to the rally, Grace reported:

Reform councillor Audrey Dempsey is the elected representative of Springburn and Robroyston ward. She was also a speaker at the rally, pictured above in front of a sign for neo-Nazi group Patriotic Alternative.

Reform has not taken any action against her. And now we know that things are even worse than we thought.

Reform: The new Blackshirts

We now know that Demsey has also advised a vigilante street movement called Scots Active. The group is known for targeting migrants, as reported by the National:

Founded by Darren Docherty, Scots Active undertakes masked street patrols under the guise of protecting the local community, and frequently attends anti-immigration protests in Glasgow.

In a Facebook post thanking Dempsey for joining them on a street patrol, the group said:

We are so thankful she could take the time to come and complete a full walk. As well as all the advice and much more we need to take ourselves to the next level this year.

With counsellor Dempseys (sic) advice we are confident that we will make the right moves to becoming a non profit charity, have an official number for anyone needing our help to contact us on and we will hopefully have enough funding to get us set up in a small office space so the team have a base.

The National reached out to Scots Active for comment, with the group posting the following to their Facebook page shortly after:

You fucking stupid mate your gonny spread the lies you clearly listen to anyways fs take yer rag paper n shove it up yer hole.

Tiring

While Reform councillors are attending Nazi rallies and supporting violent street movements, senior Reform politicians are complaining that people are calling them ‘far right’ online. Frankly, it’s a ridiculous state of affairs, and it’s one that the public seem to be wising up to.

Labour has obliterated Reform’s poll lead

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

On June 28th, unelected Prime Minister Andy Burnham appointed Bridget Phillipson as the new Labour Party chair. What many in the mainstream media did not report, however, is Phillipson’s connection to Stuart Roden, a lobbyist with links to Israeli intelligence.

Stuart Roden

In 2023, Phillipson registered two £40,000 donations from Roden, the co-founder of Hetz Ventures, a Tel Aviv-based venture capital firm he set up with London-born former Israeli intelligence officer Judah Taub. According to a Declassified UK report, Roden’s Hetz firm employs:

an array of former Israeli soldiers, many of whom have served in elite intelligence units.

Last year, leaked diaries revealed that Roden had been conducting private meetings with then Israeli ambassador Tzipi Hotolevy, and Phillipson is not the only recent Burnham appointment he has bankrolled.

Lisa Nandy

Labour MP Lisa Nandy, who also held “secret” meetings with Israeli ambassador Hotolevy, received a £40,000 in-kind donation from Roden in 2024, as well as a policy adviser paid for by serial pro-Israeli financier Trevor Chinn the year before. Now, she is Burnham’s Culture Secretary.

After a Freedom of Information request into Nandy’s meeting with Hotolevy, the Labour government refused to provide further details. Instead, Nandy’s department said that they would prioritise:

protecting relations between the United Kingdom and Israel.

Luke Akehurst

For at least two years, Phillipson was benefitting from quarterly payments from Chinn, again for “staffing costs”. During her deputy leadership bid in 2025, she also received support from Labour First, a group run by ex-Israel lobbyist and now Labour MP Luke Akehurst.

Akehurst, who has also been funded by Roden, was quick to celebrate Burnham’s appointment of his “friend” Phillipson as party chair. Former Israeli embassy officer Shai Masot once described Akehurst as:

one of the best on the inside … of the [Labour] party.

ELNET UK

In 2023, lobby group ELNET UK paid for a member of Phillipson’s staff to visit occupied Palestine. Described in financial disclosures as a “study tour”, they were accompanied by Akehurst. A staffer for Burnham’s new Defence Secretary, Wes Streeting, also travelled with the group.

ELNET lists the Israeli Foreign Ministry as one of their “partners”. A 2024 trip organised by the lobby group was led by Jeffrey Epstein “pal” and disgraced ex-Labour peer Peter Mandelson. Mandelson described Burnham’s new chief of staff, James Purnell, as “one of my boys”.

Other donations

In October, Phillipson received £40,000 from megadonor David Sainsbury and £15,000 from his daughter, Francesca Perrin. Phillipson has also admitted to accepting £14,000 in donations from Waheed Alli, Keir Starmer’s largest personal donor, for “lobby journalist” events.

In 2022, Phillipson accepted £15,000 from ex-Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy. Earlier this year, Murphy’s Arden Strategies lobby firm was caught offering companies access to a VIP dinner with “top advisers” to Starmer and Rachel Reeves in exchange for £30,000.

In the run-up to the 2024 general election, Arden helped raise funds for more than 30 Labour Party candidates. Their clients include arms manufacturer Northrop Grumman, which supplies weapons components to the Israeli military.

In November, Phillipson stood for deputy leader of the Labour Party. She received another £10,000 for her campaign from Murphy, a former director of Labour Friends of Israel. In 2015, Murphy promised to:

support Israel long after my political career is over.

Coup complete

In October 2024, Phillipson posted a short update on her personal website titled:

Good to meet with Andy Burnham.

At the time, Starmer had only been Prime Minister for three months.

Now, just two years later, Burnham has ousted Starmer and Phillipson is Labour Party chair. The Burnham coup is complete.

Featured image via Manchester Evening News.

By Jody McIntyre

Source link

Quick recap on the scandal

More than 700 people running small local post offices received criminal convictions between 1999 and 2006. Faulty accounting software made it appear that money had gone missing from their branches.

The Horizon IT system developed by the Japanese technology giant Fujitsu caused this. The Post Office installed the software in the late 90s, but flaws in its programming showed up deficits in branch accounts.

Postal service executives, refusing to acknowledge problems with the software, forced their workers to repay the shortfalls. Some were imprisoned or left out of pocket, while others failed to find other jobs and even lost their homes. However, in December 2019 a High Court judge concluded that the system contained a number of “bugs, errors, and defects”.

The UK government announced in September 2023 that every postmaster convicted would receive a payout of hundreds of thousands of pounds. This was the bare minimum for the damage caused.

As of 2026, more than 600 postmasters have seen their convictions overturned, and over £320m has been paid out in compensation. However, the DWP has still to review its departmental role in some 100 convictions.

A viral petition and the CWU sum up the corrupt cronyism that ‘Mr Bates vs the Post Office’ reignited public awareness of

British police accused of fabricating evidence with AI

Burnham hands cruel ex-DWP Minister the keys to No. 10

DWP boss McFadden making vague pronouncements about ‘helping people into work’ again

Featured image via the Canary

By Cameron Baillie

Source link

The University of Swansea has U-turned on a 2023 commitment to cut careers and recruitment ties with fossil fuel companies, against the wishes of student and staff campaigners.

Following one of the hottest Junes on record, the university has removed pledges from its Ethical Careers Policy to:

not knowingly devise marketing campaigns advertising […] roles which contribute to the detrimental effects of the fossil fuels, mining, arms and tobacco industries [and to exclude oil, gas and tar sands companies from access to] careers fairs and employer events.

In removing these statements, the university is effectively now permitting fossil fuel companies to promote their work and advertise to students. This comes after Met Office estimations that over 2,700 excess heat-related deaths occurred in May and June. The ban on tobacco companies remains in place.

In 2023, Swansea became the seventh UK university to exclude the fossil fuel industry from its careers and recruitment activities, after an 18 month campaign by students and staff. They were campaigning as part of the nationwide Fossil Free Careers campaign, coordinated by student-led charity People & Planet.

Since then, more than 10 additional universities have committed to banning the fossil fuel industry from promoting jobs to students. The campaign has had endorsement from the National Union of Students (NUS) and the Universities and Colleges Union (UCU).

Josie Mizen, co-director of Climate Justice at People & Planet, said:

After months of deadly heatwaves, it is absolutely shameful that Swansea University has backslid on its commitment not to work with the industry most responsible for the climate crisis.

This decision tells students and staff loud and clear: that their futures, their communities and the planet they live on matter less than their university’s cosy relationship with an industry that puts profit ahead of people’s lives.

We urge Swansea University to reverse its decision, and we stand in full solidarity with students and staff who resist university complicity in climate breakdown.

Advertisement

Swansea is one of 35 universities who this month have joined the Defence Universities Alliance (DUA). This is a scheme to promote greater collaboration between academia, the Ministry of Defence, and the arms industry.

A key criterion listed in the DUA Charter is to “promote careers in Defence” and to:

allow and support the attendance of defence sector firms […] at careers events.

The dropping of arms and fossil fuel exclusions from Swansea’s Ethical Careers Policy came just days after the university was announced as a founding member of the DUA.

A staff member at Swansea University said:

As a staff member I am extremely disappointed that Swansea University has chosen to remove the clause from their ethical careers policy which excludes fossil fuels, mining, and arms careers from any marketing campaigns.

Considering Swansea prides itself on positively impacting the ‘health, wealth, culture, and well-being of a global society’ this feels like a step in the opposite direction.

I hope that the university will reconsider this decision as I believe it has an ability and responsibility to show moral leadership for its staff, students, and community.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

The Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) has opened sanctioning proceedings against la Directa. This follows it publishing investigations into undercover police officers within social and pro-independence movements.

This was announced on Wednesday at a press conference at the Barcelona Press Association by the outlet, together with Irídia – Centre for the Defence of Human Rights and the Ramon Barnils Group of Journalists.

The action stems from a complaint filed by four of the police officers who, between 2020 and 2023, infiltrated social and political movements in Catalonia and the Valencian Country without judicial authorisation.

The complaints were initially dismissed, but the AEPD’s presidency subsequently reopened the case and has now launched the sanctioning proceedings.

La Directa claims public interest

La Directa maintains that its investigations exposing undercover police officers within social movements constitute a legitimate exercise of the right to communicate and receive truthful information (freedom of information), and reflect the essential democratic role of the media as watchdog of public authorities, particularly when investigating covert police operations that affect fundamental rights.

Through these investigations, la Directa exposed an operation run by the Spanish Police’s General Information Commissioner’s Office, which introduced at least four agents under false identities into social and pro-independence movements.

These cases have had major political, social and legal repercussions. Indeed, for the first time, the Spanish government acknowledged that these infiltrations into social movements were carried out under the police formula of the “intelligence agent”. This is a role that operates without judicial authorisation and has no recognition within the Spanish legal framework. This is a thesis it has reiterated in responses to parliamentary questions and before the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Despite this, the AEPD’s ruling disregards it and refers to the officers as if they were undercover agents, a category that does have legal grounding and judicial oversight. It even treats the fictitious first and last names the officers used during the infiltration as personal data requiring protection.

The AEPD’s ruling accuses la Directa of disseminating “personal and professional information” about the infiltrated officers “that allows for their identification,” despite the fact that the outlet carried out a rigorous balancing exercise between the right to information and the protection of personal data: it partially concealed their faces and published only the initials of their real first and last names.

‘Gagging effect’ of ruling

Despite these precautions, the ruling also orders the removal of part of the published information and seriously undermines the investigation as a whole, as well as the right to the free exercise of journalism.

Sònia Olivella Saludes, strategic litigation coordinator at Irídia – Centre for the Defence of Human Rights, believes the proceedings:

generate a serious intimidating and gagging effect on investigative journalism.

The organisation, which filed the first criminal complaint against a state police infiltration operation targeting social movements, will submit objections against the proposed sanction and demand that the proceedings be dropped, on the grounds that la Directa struck an appropriate balance between the officers’ right to data protection and the right to information.

Olivella states that the outlet took the necessary precautions to prevent the officers’ direct identification. At the same time, she considers the published information essential to understanding the scope and significance of the infiltration operation. She says:

Spain infiltrated police officers into social movements, resulting in serious human rights violations. Not only has it denied the facts and obstructed victims’ access to justice, but now the outlet that exposed it is being criminalised.

Jesús Rodríguez, a journalist at la Directa, stresses that the public relevance of the information “is indisputable” and notes that uncovering the infiltrations led to the creation of a commission of inquiry in the Catalan Parliament and prompted numerous opposition initiatives and parliamentary questions in the Spanish Congress of Deputies.

In addition, the cases have been covered by Catalan, Spanish and international media outlets, including the Guardian and la Repubblica.

Comparison to the UK

The AEPD’s action stands in stark contrast to the response of public institutions in similar cases in the UK. After it was revealed that undercover officers had maintained intimate relationships with activists under false identities, and only thanks to sustained popular, political and media pressure from social movements, social organisations and news outlets, both the police forces and the UK government took responsibility, apologised to the victims and paid them compensation.

Moreover, in that case, the identities and photographs of the undercover officers were published freely by the media and remain publicly accessible, without this leading to any kind of sanction against the outlets that reported on the facts.

In the Spanish state, by contrast, cases of undercover policing continue to go without effective investigation or any clarification of accountability.

The threat of a financial penalty and the removal of content may discourage the media from publishing relevant information about the actions of public authorities. It therefore has an effect comparable to what are known as SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation), lawsuits designed to silence and censor.

La Directa case could set precedent

These proceedings could set a highly dangerous precedent for all media outlets and professionals who investigate police abuses or other matters uncomfortable for institutions. Elisabet Borreda, co-chair of the Ramon Barnils Group of Journalists says:

It is not la Directa that has violated personal data here, it is Spain, and we will not allow data protection to be used as a weapon against those who investigate it. When the same journalist or outlet accumulates multiple unfounded lawsuits and complaints, we are no longer talking about isolated cases: we are talking about a pattern of attrition, a clear case of SLAPP.

To face the proceedings, which threaten the viability of the journalistic cooperative, la Directa is launching a support campaign. A statement already backed by dozens of journalists and professional, social and human rights organisations, both domestic and international, states:

Defending la Directa means defending society’s right to know how public authorities act. We cannot allow those who investigate to be sanctioned while those who infiltrate are protected.

Among the first signatories are the various movements affected by police infiltration and organisations such as Òmnium Cultural, Alerta Solidària, the Journalists’ Union of Catalonia / Union of Communication Professionals (SPC) and Red Jurídica, along with dozens of media outlets and journalists.

Organisations from the UK, such as State Watch and the Police Spies Out of Lives movement, among others, are also calling for the sanctioning proceedings against la Directa to be dropped and for the Spanish government to introduce the legislative changes needed to ensure data protection rules cannot be used to gag and censor the media.

Rodríguez notes:

The AEPD’s sanction leads us to question the democratic quality of Spanish institutions. The names, surnames and photographs of officers who infiltrated social movements in the UK can be freely published by any media outlet, including la Directa, yet we are being ordered to censor all data relating to the undercover officers in the Spanish state, despite the undeniable news value of these cases.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

On Wednesday 27 July, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage posted the following to Twitter/X:

This is what Zack Polanski has just posted on his instagram.

If I was to post anything as inciteful then I would expect to be arrested, and so should Polanski. pic.twitter.com/u1s25FQ38U

— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) July 27, 2026

Advertisement

The image in question shows a guillotine next to the message “We’re only making plans for Nigel”. And Farage is certainly correct to think he would have attracted criticism if he’d published something similar.

Farage is less correct to suggest Polanski ‘posted’ the image, but we do agree the Greens leader was correct to apologise. We also agree with those who pointed out that some of the objections from Reform are a bit rich given the behaviour they tolerate from their own politicians.

We don’t condone this either

As the BBC reported, Reform UK has now reported Polanski to the police. The Met Police have issued the following statement:

We received a third-party report relating to an image shared on social media. We take reports of this nature extremely seriously, and officers are conducting enquiries into the matter.

To make something abundantly clear, we don’t condone the guillotine image, nor indeed any call for violence. While ordinary crime may be down compared to the end of the last century, acts of terror and political violence are becoming unfortunately common (not to mention acts of state violence which are perpetrated by the police and other agents of the government). Online culture no doubt feeds into this; as does the increased disparity people now experience. These issues need solving holistically if we’re going to get off the dark path we’re walking down.

Polanski and the Green Party have made their feelings clear too, with a spokesperson stating:

Zack condemns the image on the T-shirt. He was tagged in a post with 20 images and clicked accept without realising there was more to it than he had seen.

The T-shirt is clearly in poor taste, especially at a time of heightened fears for the security of public figures, having experienced multiple threats himself.

He and the Green Party call on everyone involved in public discourse to show kindness and not encourage more division.

Advertisement

Some people have described the t-shirt as ‘satirical’. The image pictured is obviously a reference to the French Revolution – the period when the downtrodden people of France rose up to execute the decadent aristocrats – and modern references to the ‘guillotine’ are a nod to the growing wealth disparity we’ve seen in recent decades (and to what many predict will be the inevitable outcome of this unchecked greed). There is a difference between vaguely memeing about guillotines online, though, and directly linking an execution device to a politician. And this is true even when the politician in question has said things like the following:

Welcome to freedom, Lucy Connolly.

You are now a symbol of Keir Starmer’s authoritarian, broken, two-tier Britain. https://t.co/pjsg9DLI7W

— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) August 21, 2025

Advertisement

For reference, Connolly tweeted this, which led to her eventual imprisonment:

Potentially, Farage and his allies will take this moment to reconsider the support they’ve given Connolly. That or they’ll drop their calls for the t-shirt man to face arrest. You’d assume it has to be one or the other, but we’ll see.

So Polanski accepts a collab on a picture and the world goes wild

Meanwhile, Farage literally inciting riots only a few months ago and posts shit like this

See the issue here? pic.twitter.com/DZgMacL98j

— Mr AntifaBot – AKA The Intolerant Left (@_Wrevolution_) July 28, 2026

“To be clear”

The offending image was posted by former Canary photographer and contributor Barold. Barold said the following in response to the controversy:

To be clear, [Zack Polanski] did not in any way post this photo. I took this photo of someone in a satirical tshirt and I posted it as part of a run of photos which were offered for collaboration. This wasn’t intended to offend anyone and it’s clearly not intended as a serious…

Threat to anyone’s safety whatsoever. The idea that people would be making serious threats or incitement to violence by using a picture of guillotine is absurd, and whilst I acknowledge the very real threat to MPs safety let’s be real here, the call for political violence…

Is not something that is being normalised by left wing political figures or individuals. Individuals from the far right of British politics have normalised the idea of political violence over the years – the last thing Jo Cox heard before her murder was “Britain First”….

There were numerous studies after her murder that showed how many people on the right were making jokes and memes about what happened. This performative outrage is just that, and if people want to come and take it out on someone then take it out on the person who took the…

Advertisement

Picture, and who then posted it. Don’t use the short sighted actions of a freelance Photojournalist called fucking Barold as an excuse to go after [Zack Polanski] because you don’t like his politics. Pretending that this is any sort of threat is insulting to the memory of people…

Like Jo Cox, and like Anne Widdicombe and the many many people every year who are victims of real crime, and real political violence every year. I personally have been run out of protest areas while doing my job by a mob of right wing fascists in the last few months…

During the protest at Edgeware recently I was physically threatened by individuals wearing transparent earpieces while doing my job. There is the real and genuine threat of political violence all around us, being heightened by the divisive and dangerous politics that are being…

Peddled by reactionary individuals who sit in TV studios and write in columns in the press every day – taking advantage of this issue is disingenuous and far more dangerous than that t-shirt will ever be.

Advertisement

My deepest apologies to [Zack Polanski] – this is not his fault.

Canary contributor Cameron Baillie posted a video showing a similar encounter to that which was described by Barold:

Here is a hired bruiser for Reform UK in Makerfield, who threatened me, a journalist and colleague of Barold.

He said to me off camera that things would “end very badly” for me if I continued to ask their MPs questions.

Advertisement

Thicko all but admitted he said it when I challenged him… https://t.co/C4vcmCby9U pic.twitter.com/YW0wlD7Hlw

— C.J.Mc. Baillie (@cjmbaillie) July 28, 2026

Wider response to Reform

Among those who responded to the controversy was Aaron Bastani of Novara, who said the following in response to Barold’s tweet:

Violence against politicians, and political figures, is an incredibly real prospect. From councillors and MPs to just activists. Amping that up in no way helps left wing politics.

I appreciate this is a joke, but the context means it’s not a laughing matter. A Reform figure was literally killed a few weeks ago.

Politically, though, Reform run risk of looking irrelevant. It’s week 2 of Burnham admin, and he’s really going for it.

Reform, meanwhile, are contesting a by election against a guy dressed as a bin, and calling for Zack Polanski to be arrested.

Reform politicians are directly calling for Polanski’s arrest too, including Zia Yusuf:

Zack Polanski has posted to his 713k Instagram followers a photo of a man in a T-shirt calling for the beheading of Nigel Farage.

To do this just 2 weeks after our friend Ann was murdered is staggering.

Polanski is inciting murder.

It must be treated as such by the police. pic.twitter.com/mkLvxESf21

Advertisement

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) July 27, 2026

If Zack Polanski is not in police custody by this time tomorrow, the Police will have declared open season on Members of Parliament.

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) July 27, 2026

Advertisement

As noted at the top, this is all very shaky ground for Reform. In the past few months alone, we’ve reported on the following in relation to Reform politicians:

• Farage threatens that white riots in Southampton are ‘just the beginning’.
• Reform councillor reposts that Labour MP ‘should be shot’.
• Reform candidate suggests ‘melting Nigerians’ to fill potholes.
• Calls for Reform candidate who praised rape of Sikh women to face suspension.
• Reform welcomes ‘shoot the p*kis’ scandal ex-Tory.

Of these, only one has been removed from the party:

• Nigel Farage remains the leader of Reform UK.
• Simon Evans – the Reform councillor who posted a meme calling for Labour MP Natalie Fleet to be shot – remains the deputy leader of Lancashire County Council.
• Glenn Gibbins – the man who joked about ‘melting Nigerians’ – remains a Reform councillor.
• Stuart Prior – the man who praised rapists – was expelled from the party.
• Derek Bullock – the man who called for Pakistani people to be shot – remains a Reform councillor.

We’re not highlighting this to justify the guillotine t-shirt; we’re highlighting it to note that Reform needs to get its own house in order. And as Canary writer Maddison Wheeldon said in response to a post about Simon Evans:

I get the point, but if we're going to attempt to legitimise this from the left by holding up the violent rhetoric of the far right, then only violence can ensue and the higher ground is lost entirely.

Violence is never funny – saying something is satirical doesnt make it okay https://t.co/kpSrEqMej5

Advertisement

— Maddison Wheeldon (@MaddisonW92) July 28, 2026

Reform need to get their own house in order

Incidents like this are best seen as opportunities for those involved to reflect and grow. For Zack Polanski and his team, it’s an opportunity to reflect on what they share on social media. For the t-shirt man, it’s an opportunity to ask if the message he’s broadcasting is being received as he expects. And for Reform UK, it’s an opportunity get their own house in order when it comes to violent and murderous rhetoric.

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

Floundering Nigel Farage has set the police on Green leader Zack Polanski for accepting an Instagram collaboration invite on an Instagram post. One of some twenty images in the post showed a protester wearing a t-shirt showing a guillotine with the wording “We’re only making plans for Nigel”. Obvious political satire, but Farage and the right-wing media are clutching their pearls over the supposed death threat.

Hypocrite Farage

But Farage has his own form. Farage has farcically claimed to be the most threatened UK politician – despite the actual murder of several MPs. But he also refused to condemn a senior Reform figure who shared a call for Bolsover Labour MP Natalie Fleet to “be shot”:

Accepting the collaboration was an avoidable error by Polanski, but nothing like sharing and endorsing an actual death threat. Farage wouldn’t condemn a far more explicit, serious and intentional one – but he’s desperately clinging to Polanski’s error, like a drowning man to a lifebelt, to try to revive the dead horse of his own expired political credibility.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Source link

A new CIA assessment has exposed how Israel is scrabbling to entrench permanent US military backing. The settler-colonial state is terrified that future administrations will cut support amid plummeting public support.

They’re right to worry. Israel’s brazenly genocidal assault on the Palestinians has seen traditionally solid US support for the ethno-state plunge.

“Israel-first”

Journalist Aida Chavez, formerly of the Nation and the Intercept, wrote on her Class and Empire Substack:

Israeli officials believe the political fight over Israel in the United States is becoming harder to win, and that the era of indefinitely securing billions of dollars in annual military aid is coming to an end, according to the assessment, which was described to Capital & Empire by several U.S. officials.

Chavez said:

Instead of relying on direct U.S. military aid – an increasingly visible and politically contentious form of support – Israel is racing to embed itself more deeply in America’s military, intelligence, and national security apparatus in ways designed to outlast future administrations.

Enter a new CIA assessment on Israel’s plans…

Chavez said the report:

describes discussions about expanding intelligence cooperation and the possibility of hosting a permanent U.S. military base on Israeli territory.

She described how Israeli officials have been “cultivating”:

prominent figures in the American technology sector to build long-term political and financial support for the strategy.

The individuals are not identified.

Last week, Chavez wrote, US Congress “quietly approved”:

Section 219 of the National Defense Authorization Act, establishing a permanent U.S.-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative within the Pentagon.

This:

establishes a Pentagon executive agent charged with coordinating bilateral defense research, development, industrial cooperation, and technology integration.

Partisan support for neocolonialism

Both Democrats and Republicans have been organising the plan, the true scope of which has been poorly reported in legacy media.

Chavez wrote:

Earlier this year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu floated phasing out direct U.S. military aid altogether. Most mainstream news coverage framed the proposed shift as a reflection of Israel’s growing economic and military strength, or self-sufficiency.

However, the assessment indicates that the CIA “views the strategy differently”:

The spy agency believes that Israel is seeking to insulate the U.S.-Israel alliance from America’s changing political landscape by replacing highly visible foreign aid with deeper, longer-lasting forms of military and industrial integration.

The kinship between the two violent settler-colonial states is well documented. But this new proposal risks entrenching virtually permanent military support between the imperial power and Israel — it’s brutal policeman in Middle Eastern. Unpicking those obligations may be impossible if the new deal comes to pass. For that reason and others it must be vehemently opposed.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

Source link

Palantir is an American company which makes spy and military tech. Some of this technology has been used by Israel to carry out its genocide. And as such, it’s no wonder a significant portion of the population don’t want the UK to have anything to do with the company.

How are Palantir responding to this, you ask? Currently by labelling the majority of Britons a “noisy minority”:

65% of the British public want the NHS to drop its contract with Palantir.

They try to paint us an a minority – when it is Palantir who are swimming against the tide of public opinion. https://t.co/kzBIR4Chk3

Advertisement

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) July 29, 2026

Oh, and in case you’re wondering, yes, Louis Mosley is the grandson of the notorious British fascist Sir Oswald Mosley, sixth baronet. While we don’t think you should blame individuals for the sins of their fathers, we do believe in class politics, and this is a clear example of how such politics can replicate and mutate over successive generations.

“Noisy minority” (Palantir claims)

In the interview above, Palantir CEO Mosley said:

There is a lot of noise about us. It does come from, I would say, a minority. It’s a specific end of the political spectrum… It’s a noisy minority. It’s people like Zach Polanski. They have a big issue with the way in which our software is used thousands of miles away in other countries, specifically America and Israel.

We’re not sure that the genocide being “thousands of miles away” does anything to negate the horror of the genocide, honestly. Mosley continued:

My view, and by the way, I’m very happy to debate that. I will defend it. But when it comes to the NHS, my view is what matters is” can the NHS control the data when it’s using Palantir? Is patient data safe if it’s using Palantir? And secondly, are the Palantir tools working? The answer to both those questions is a categorical yes.

Okay, so our problems are:

• Will giving Palantir contracts inevitably mean more money for a company which is happy to support a genocide?
• Could anyone possibly trust the weasel words of such a company?

The answer to the first question is a categorical yes: the answer to the second is a categorical no.

Mosley went into more detail about how NHS patient data is supposedly safe, but this does nothing to address the issues above. The more that support for Israel drops, the more people will want Palantir gone too. And the same will be true for all the politicians who inflicted Palantir upon us:

NEW | Support for Palestine in Britain has risen to its highest-ever level, with Greens most supportive.

Palestine – 37% (+7)
Israel – 15% (-2)

The % of Green voters who back Israel is… 0%

Via @YouGov, 29-30 Jul (+/- vs 23 Jun) pic.twitter.com/epOVw0u2ut

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) August 8, 2025

History repeats itself

Oswald Mosley wanted to repress a targeted minority as his friend Adolf Hitler did; Louis Mosley and his company repress a different targeted minority by selling Benjamin Netanyahu tech solutions. Same shit, different era.

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

Data centres are getting a bad reputation for how much energy and water they use (something particularly problematic for AI data centres). The reputation these data centres have will likely only get worse too, because Trump is seemingly giving them permission to create acid rain:

The Trump administration has exempted data centers from acid rain regulations, removing caps on sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. pic.twitter.com/2rPzFptVwy

— FactPost (@factpostnews) July 29, 2026

When it rains

Acid rain was a commonly discussed problem in the late 20th century. It’s spoken about less now because scientists were successful at identifying the problem and formulating a solution. As the BBC reported in 2019:

At its worst, acid rain stripped forests bare in Europe, wiped lakes clear of life in parts of Canada and the US, and harmed human health and crops in China where the problem persists. Looking back today, there is little argument that the cause was sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides emitted by fossil fuel combustion by cars and industrial facilities like smelters and coal-burning utilities. When combined with water and oxygen in the atmosphere, these air pollutants chemically transform into sulphuric and nitric acid. Acidic droplets in clouds then fall as rain, snow or hail.

The BBC concluded:

In the fight Hurley helped to lead against acid rain, this meant talking to coal workers at sportsmen’s shows, engaging them in conversations about clean water for fishing salmon, and going for walks in war cemeteries where acidity was ruining the limestone of gravestones.

Though aspects of its legacy remain, solutions to the acid rain problem moved forward, in North America at least, because it became a non-partisan issue. Hurley reflects that “a broad spectrum of people came to believe that it was important to protect natural resources – our forests, our northern lakes and the fish they contain – resources that belong to everyone”.

The problem is that it’s pretty much impossible to have a ‘non-partisan’ issue today. If rich people can profit, legions of right-wing lobbyists and political operators will find a way of making it partisan. And this is why countries are now backsliding on issues we’d previously solved.

Trump loosens restrictions

In an announcement posted on 27 July, the United States Environmental Protection Agency said:

This month, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued guidance clarifying that the Clean Air Act (CAA) Acid Rain Program (ARP) does not apply to power generation facilities that are not connected to a public electricity grid, commonly referred to as “islanded” power generation facilities. The guidance expands opportunities for companies to develop and operate islanded power generation facilities for data centers.

For clarity, some of these data centres use so much electricity that they require their own power generation facilities. Now, said facilities will be able to get away with producing the sort of pollution that leads to acid rain — no thanks to Trump.

The move from the Trump regime will be challenged, as environmental attorney Mike Levin has said:

EPA is trying to create this exemption while avoiding Congress. But agencies cannot rewrite statutes by memo. If Congress intended to exempt privately dedicated power plants from the Acid Rain Program, we would have written legislation to do so. We most certainly have not.

EPA is attempting to narrow a law Congress enacted without Congress’s approval. Courts should reject it, and Congress should make clear that clean air protections apply based on pollution, not on who buys the electricity.

Advertisement

Our kids deserve clean air more than data centers deserve a special loophole.

Getting worse

It’s important to note that there’s already a considerable backlash to data centres, with backlash in communities all over the country:

Despite the efforts of Trump and others, the reaction to data centres is actually non-partisan too — or it is right now, anyway.

Over time, lobbyists may convince people that these dirty, water-draining abominations are actually good for them. Alternatively, the AI industry could completely collapse in on itself, leaving many of these tech warehouses as empty blights on the land.

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link