Politics
US government will investigate itself over ‘narco-boat’ war crime allegations
The inspector general of the US Department of War will investigate whether America’s ‘narco-terrorist’ boat strikes are war crimes. US attacks on alleged cartel smugglers have been carried out in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific since September 2025.
The bombings were seen as precursor attacks to the 3 January raid which saw Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro kidnapped by US special forces. Yet the strikes have continued well into 2026.
The NGO Airwars says there have been 193 deaths across 56 incidents. The US maintains killings have been legal. Many legal experts say this is patently untrue.
The inquiry aims to:
determine whether DoW Components followed the established framework of the six-phase Joint Targeting Cycle when conducting targeting operations in the U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) area of responsibility.
We may revise the objective as the evaluation proceeds, and we will also consider suggestions from
management for additional or revised objectives.
Sean Parnell, then-chief spokesperson at the Pentagon, said in November 2025:
Our current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both US and international law, with all actions in complete compliance with the law of armed conflict.
The most recent strike was on 8 May. The US shared footage on social media:
On May 8, at the direction of #SOUTHCOM commander Gen. Francis L. Donovan, Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations. Intelligence confirmed the vessel was transiting along known narco-trafficking… pic.twitter.com/YFLQNZufRx
— U.S. Southern Command (@Southcom) May 9, 2026
US hemispheric plans
US belligerence across the Americas has increased under Trump. This has included brinkmanship over Greenland, rumours of an invasion of Canada and threats against Cuba.
The CIA recently killed a mid-level cartel boss with a car bomb in Mexico City, reports say. The Mexican authorities claim they gave no permission for US covert operations inside their borders. Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are part of this project too.
Historian Nikhil Pal Singh wrote in Equator magazine on 14 January 2026:
From Venezuela to Minnesota, Trump is creating a borderless American power, collapsing the foreign and the domestic into a single domain of impunity
Singh accused Trump of conflating:
immigrants, drugs and free trade as sources of weakness coming from outside, “poisoning the blood of our country”.
All in a bid to combine:
the archaic geopolitics of a settler empire to the modern legal frameworks devised by his liberal predecessors.
The Latin American Center for Investigative Journalism investigated the backgrounds of 13 of those killed in ‘narco’ strikes:
finding they came from extremely poor communities across the region, with little or no apparent connection to organized drug networks. The reporting described the victims as day laborers who took work on the boats out of desperation, not as figures with any meaningful role in the drug trade.
The US war machine will investigate itself. And the Canary will await the findings with bated breath. But substantial evidence already suggests the new ‘war on drugs’ is very much like the old ‘war on drugs’. It is a war on the impoverished, the displaced and the racialised, waged by a increasingly erratic and violent empire. Trump wants to remake the Americas in his own bloodthirsty image — and that is precisely what he is doing.
Featured image via wong yu liang
By Joe Glenton
Politics
‘Grotesque and dystopian’ sentencing of Palestine Action activists expected on 12 June
A judge is expected to sentence four Palestine Action activists as ‘terrorists’ on 12 June, despite the activists not being convicted as such.
Judge Jeremy Johnson has indicated he may add a ‘terrorist connection’ to the charges of Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona (Ellie) Kamio and Fatema Rajwani under section 69 of the Sentencing Act 2020. This is despite the jury convicting the Palestine Action four of criminal damage in their retrial.
The conviction follows the four activists’ direct action to damage computers and drones, and spray red paint across the walls and floor of an Elbit Systems factory in Filton, near Bristol on 6 August 2024. Elbit Systems is Israel’s largest arms firm.
On 5 May, the jury convicted them without the knowledge that presiding judge Johnson could later impose a terror link during sentencing. This is due to a long list of reporting restrictions on the UK press, which the judge used to block coverage that he’d barred defendants from speaking about their motivations for joining Palestine Action.
Judge gags Palestine Action
The gagging orders that judge Johnson issued also prevented the defendants from providing information to the jury on the Israeli genocide in Gaza, and Elbit Systems’ role in it.
Johnson also banned media from reporting that the defendants could face terrorism sentences. The restrictions only lifted on 12 May, a week after the conviction.
Should the judge sentence the ‘Filton Four’, as they’re now known, as terrorists, they could serve far longer prison sentences. They could also face severe limitations on their lives upon release.
On 5 June, Defend Our Juries (DOJ) filed a complaint against Johnson with the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office. Over 3,000 people, including lawyers, law professors, retired police officers and magistrates, have signed the complaint. It alleges that decisions taken by the judge “amount to a pattern of exceptional, biased and discriminatory conduct”. Judge Johnson has since refused to recuse himself from the case.
The DOJ complaint also cites Johnson’s decision to treat the defendants’ desire to prevent Israel’s mass killings of Palestinian civilians as an aggravating, rather than mitigating, feature.
According to the judge, the intention to prevent the deaths of Palestinian civilians is what brings their actions within the scope of the Terrorism Act. He regards it as an attempt to “influence the Israeli government”.
Additionally, the DOJ complaint accuses Johnson of acting “vindictively” in remanding Head, Kamio and Rajwani to custody after their retrial. Three of the four have served eighteen months on remand, with Corner having been inside for 21 months.
Commenting, Campaign Against Arms Trade spokesperson Kirsten Bayes said:
For generations, at Greenham Common, Aldermaston, Fairford and others, the peace movement has taken action against military logistics and supply chains, involving breaching security and causing damage.
Keir Starmer himself was part of the legal team defending the ‘Fairford Five’, who carried out direct action at RAF Fairford during the Iraq war.
The ‘Filton Four’ case bears close parallels to the ‘Raytheon Nine’, where the defendants were acquitted of criminal damage at the Raytheon factory in Derry in 2006. In this case, the activists attempted to stop weaponry being sold to Israel for use against Lebanon. Their motivations for allegedly damaging office equipment were treated as a mitigating rather than an aggravating factor, as they should be.
In the Filton raids, it was abundantly clear that neither the Israeli nor UK government were the target, as they were and remain far beyond reasonable influence. Instead, Palestine Action activists sought to disrupt the means of production.
Just as one would deny a carving knife to a murderer, these four activists sought to prevent their nation from supplying murder weapons to the genocidal Israeli government. In doing so, the Filton Four upheld an ethical duty to prevent harm, and only did so when it was clear that all ordinary options had been exhausted.
Sentencing the Filton Four as ‘terrorists’ when they were not convicted as such, and when the evidence that might have supported that conclusion was not even allowed to be heard in court, would not only be unprecedented but grotesque and dystopian.
It will always be the case that those taking non-violent direct action to prevent complicity in genocide are acting in service of humanity.
It must be said that it is a dire reflection of the UK’s police and judiciary that the Filton Four will likely be sentenced as ‘terrorists’, weeks after the Met police refused to even investigate a single one of the 2,000+ UK nationals now known to have served in Israel’s genocidal army.
Featured image via Leon Neal / Getty Images
By The Canary
Politics
Critics slam Tory plan to scrap Equality Duty
Legal experts and social justice campaigners have hit back against Kemi Badenoch’s plan to scrap the public sector equality duty, PSED, aka ‘the duty’.
Besides the obvious dire impact that the move would have on minoritised individuals across the UK, Badenoch’s argument displayed fundamental misunderstandings of the duty itself — which requires public bodies to assess the impact of their services on people with legally protected characteristics.
Dancing to Reform’s tune
In a 9 June speech, the Tory leader announced her intention to “repeal the public sector equality duty in its entirety.” Badenoch claimed the PSED had led to a pursuit of “equality of outcome” rather than “equal treatment and equality under the law”. She added that:
There are many laws which were brought in with good intentions but are delivering perverse outcomes and unintended consequences.
The PSED requires public sector leaders to abide by equality considerations set out in the 2010 Equality Act. Principally, this means working to prevent discrimination against people with protected characteristics — race, sex, disability etc — and monitoring the outcomes of that work.
Badenoch’s speech came just a week after Nigel Farage exploited the murder of Henry Nowak to attack diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives — better known as ‘EDI’ in the UK. Reform UK had also announced, several months earlier, that it plans to rip up the Equality Act completely.
Equality duty is ‘there to help’
In response to Badenoch’s announcement, a spokesperson for the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) — the body responsible for overseeing the application of the Equality Act — explained that the PSED doesn’t function as the Tory leader was trying to make out. Rather, they stated:
The PSED is not a barrier to these organisations doing the job the public expects them to do.
Most take it seriously and use the requirements of the PSED to design the best possible services for everyone. It’s there to help them make good decisions, based on an understanding of the impact those decisions have on everyone that they affect.
Professor of human rights law Colm O’Cinneide, of University College London, took a similar tack:
What the duty does is to impose a positive obligation upon public bodies to engage with these issues and to do more than just to maintain basic legal compliance, but to actually take proactive steps to eliminate problems that may exist, even if they’re not triggering a specific litigation risk.
He also underlined the shoddy nature of overall argument against the PSED:
A lot of the criticism is effectively cherrypicking individual issues and saying that because these controversies are in some way tangentially related to the duty, the entire mechanism is flawed.
Wrong… or opportunistic?
However, as the Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND) highlighted, Badenoch knows perfectly well how the PSED actually functions. MEND commented on the leader of the opposition’s glaring hypocrisy:
Kemi Badenoch says the Equality Act should be “a shield to protect you from discrimination, not a sword for social engineering.” But the duty she wants to scrap is precisely what makes that shield work. It requires public bodies to consider who their decisions might harm before they act. Remove the duty and you take the shield away.
This is also a remarkable reversal from Badenoch, who in December 2023 when Minister for Women and Equalities, wrote to every public authority instructing them to comply with this very duty, and stated that there is no hierarchy of rights because every person holds a protected characteristic. Either she was wrong then, or she is being opportunistic now.
You can read that letter here, complete with the call for public sector leaders to “ensure that equality issues are actively considered”. No prizes for guessing the Canary’s pick out of “wrong then” and “opportunistic now”.
‘Free hand to harm your life chances’
Meanwhile, other commentators focused on the dire impacts that scrapping the PSED would have on all minoritised communities. Paul Nowak, general secretary of the Trade Union Congress, didn’t hold back:
This proposal would give a future Tory government a free hand to harm your life chances if you’re a woman, gay, black, disabled or working class.
Likewise, the Traveller Movement — a charity supporting Irish Travellers, Romani and Roma people — stated that:
Removing the Public Sector Equality Duty risks creating a cycle in which inequalities are identified only after harm has occurred, rather than being addressed at the earliest stage. Over time, this could result in the experiences and needs of marginalised communities carrying less weight in public decision-making, making it harder to challenge disadvantage and rebuild trust in public institutions.
For Romani (Gypsy), Roma and Irish Traveller communities, which continue to face significant barriers in areas such as education, health, housing and access to public services, the potential consequences of weakening these safeguards are particularly concerning. Any proposal to remove the Public Sector Equality Duty would lead to the most marginalised communities being put most at risk.
‘Common sense’ is a call for more racism
Lastly, independent MP and career-long human rights advocate Diane Abbott commented that:
Ending current equality rules is dangerous and divisive; a green light for all the bigots and racists. This happens when your ambition is no greater than to be the Nick Clegg in a Farage-led government
In particular, the mother of the house highlighted the Tory leader’s ridiculous appeal to ‘common sense’ to prevent discrimination. Regarding the issue of public accommodations for disabled people, Badenoch claimed that:
You don’t need a duty to tell you to take account of differences. Quite often differences are obvious.
Abbott, in return, stated that:
We live in a society where racism is commonplace. Macpherson’s call to tackle it were only ever partially taken up. ‘Common sense’ is a call for more racism not less.
The reference to Macpherson in there refers to Badenoch’s attacks on the Macpherson report. After the shamefully police handling of the racially-motivated murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993, the landmark report branded UK policing as institutionally racist.
It’s natural that Badenoch would try to critique the Macpherson report. Likewise, it’s natural that she’d fail so spectacularly. The report and its findings are the quintessential example of just how wrong the Tory leader and her ilk are.
If avoiding discrimination is simply a matter of common sense, then the police ignored it in favour of vicious racism. Conversely, if avoiding discrimination isn’t common sense, then the duty to consider it is a helpful, legally enforceable reminder.
Unfortunately for Badenoch, she’s wrong either way you slice it.
Featured image via YouTube / the Canary
Politics
John Healey resigns as defence secretary – letter in full
John Healey has sensationally resigned as defence secretary over military spending plans.
In a letter to the prime minister, Healey said the proposed defence investment plan “falls well short of what is required for defence and the country at this dangerous time”.
Read Healey’s letter in full below.
This is a letter I never expected to write, and I do so now with great regret and reluctance.
MDU warns Chancellor clinical negligence system ‘not fit for purpose’
Northern Ireland RE curriculum is ‘indoctrination’ – Supreme Court
I am proud of what we have done in less than two years as a Labour Government. We’ve stepped up to lead internationally for Ukraine with the Coalition of the Willing and Ukraine Defence Contact Group, established Britain as a leading voice for Europe in NATO, raised defence investment to 2.5% of GDP three years earlier than anyone expected, launched the deepest defence reforms in 50 years, won the biggest UK defence export deals for decades, published a first-of-its-kind Strategic Defence Review, gave our Armed Forces the biggest pay rise in nearly 20 years, boosted military morale, fixed over 1,200 of the worst forces family homes, reset relations with European allies and signed major defence agreements with Germany, Norway and France.
You have led this as PM, earning wide respect at home and abroad. Like me, I know you are exceptionally proud of our Forces and all of those who work in UK Defence.
We came into government, recognising Britain faced a new era of threat which demanded a new era for defence. The SDR we jointly commissioned set the 10-year vision to transform our Armed Forces, strengthen alliances, invest in the technology that is changing warfare and back British industry to make defence an engine for growth.
This new era for defence required further investment through the Defence Investment Plan. The excellent and extensive cross-government work that completed in January – overseen by you, me and the Chancellor – confirmed the scale of the challenge and the rising demands on defence.
Since then, you have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.
Since then, the demands on defence have increased still further, as have the UK commitments you have rightly made to allies. Conflict in the Middle East, with the UK now leading the multinational Strait of Hormuz military mission; High North security, with the UK now leading NATO’s Arctic Sentry mission; increased Russian activity towards the UK and NATO nations and increased attacks in Ukraine, with the Paris Agreement confirming a British deployment to Ukraine after a ceasefire.
We have worked to secure a Defence Investment Plan that does two things. First, deal with the increasing operational demands on defence now and step up the SDR actions to meet the increasing threat. Second, set a clear path to meet the new NATO commitment you agreed to spend 3.5% of GDP in 2035 through the next Spending Review.
As we have regularly discussed, I am certain that a headmark date for 3% of GDP on defence in 2030 is what Britain must set. This commitment would have strong cross-party support. Other European allies are stepping up in this way.
I know how hard you have worked to get to this point. And in funding the DIP, I fully recognise the strain this places on colleagues in other Departments, both now as you have required spending switched into defence and in the future. I am very grateful to those colleagues who have supported this, and I appreciate how difficult their choices will have been.
As I’ve outlined to you, there are credible ways of meeting the mid-term funding challenges, working multi-nationally and as other European nations are doing, to allow us to protect our ability to deliver the missions of our Labour Government.
However, your DIP financial settlement – which I was first given in full on Monday afternoon this week – falls well short of what is required for defence and the country at this dangerous time. The extra support is backloaded when the pressure of operations and imperative to speed up readiness to fight is in the first two years and it rises to just 2.68% of GDP in 2030, when we will reach 2.6% next year with the investment we are already making.
You spelled out the threats last week: “it is our intelligence assessment, and the assessment of other countries in NATO, that there could be an attack by Russia on NATO as soon as 2030.”
You know what defence needs. You made the argument for this powerfully in your speech at the Munich Security Conference back in February.
Without a DIP that meets the moment in this way, I am being forced to make decisions that would reduce the readiness of our Forces and increase the risk to personnel on operations, and could make the country less safe.
After explaining to you that I would not be able to accept a DIP settlement that does not give our Forces the resources they need, I am now left with no other option than to submit my resignation as your Defence Secretary.
I wish you all continuing strength in the exceptional challenges you face as Prime Minister. As always, our Labour Government will continue to have my fullest support.
Politics
‘So what?’ Farage says about Kenyon’s lewd comments
Reform UK’s candidate in the Makerfield by-election is one Robert Kenyon. As we’ve reported, Kenyon has been criticised for a series of lewd, sexist, and weird comments. But rather than apologising, Robert and party figures have repeatedly doubled down.
The latest example is this:
Farage brushes off his Pervy Plumbers Social media posts with the usual lies and deflection. — The Rev. Anton Mittens
These comments were posted a decade ago – no they were not. The Carol Vorderman post was just 5 years ago.
They have been taken out of context – no they include self‑contained assertions,… pic.twitter.com/dU7kZ53Wd7


(@MittensOff) June 10, 2026
Kenyon is not sorry
Here’s what Farage said on Kenyon’s past comments:
These comments were posted a decade ago. They’ve been taken wildly out of context, but they’re the sort of comments that you won’t necessarily get if you’re an Oxford-educated career politician living in a nice postcode in London,” he adds.
But I tell you what, they are the kind of comments you’ll hear in every pub in the country every evening, and we should be unapologetic that Rob is an ordinary bloke who’s carved quite a career for himself, had the guts to set up a business, served as an army reservist, is a patriot, likes his rugby, likes the odd pint, and said a few laddish things on social media 10 years ago.
Do you know what I’d say to that? I’d say, so what?
If Farage or Kenyon had simply apologised, we’d have moved past this by now. Because they keep angrily refusing to do so, we have to keep reminding people precisely what Kenyon isn’t sorry for.
First up, there was this absolute war crime of a tweet, in which the Reformer said:
“It was a crude attempt at a joke to probably about 50 followers… if you go into any building site, I think you’d hear a hundred times worse said” pic.twitter.com/vHA33K0ez5
— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) May 28, 2026
NEW: Reform UK Makerfield candidate Robert Kenyon has refused to apologise for his comment about Carol Vorderman
You will hear this kind of talk in every pub in the country, according to Farage, and you will hear it every evening. Personally, we think that will only be true if you’re the one making the comments.
Kenyon also said this when Russia invaded the Crimea region of Ukraine:
I agree totally, Russia are well within their rights to do what they have done, as we did with the Falklands.
Notoriously, the boozers of Britain are all big Russophiles. Every night they sing songs celebrating Putin’s latest conquests. Many of them are calling for the UK to adopt the ruble.
Hilariously, Kenyon was also a Remainer, according to himself:
"Anyone who thinks I love Trump, voted Brexit… is wrong… I woke up the day after Brexit shitting myself to what was voted for"
— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) May 26, 2026
NEW: Reform UK's Makerfield candidate Robert Kenyon said in 2019 that he did not vote for Brexit
We dunno, Nigel, this seems like the sort of comment you would hear if you’re an “Oxford-educated career politician living in a nice postcode in London”.
Reform felt a need to deny that Kenyon actually voted Brexit. At the same time, it’s felt no need to deny or apologise for the many sexist comments Kenyon has made.
Make of that what you will.
Take it from us
We don’t normally give Reform advice, but we are now urging them to apologise for these comments and move on.
It’s time.
And while we’re more than happy to keep reminding everyone of what a little freak Kenyon is, the good people of Makerfield have suffered enough:
Voters who had noticed Kenyon’s online comments (almost everyone was aware) were slightly baffled he hadn’t apologised. Feel a difference here between “never back down” attitude of online debate versus what people expect in real life.
— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) June 9, 2026
Featured image via Ryan Jenkinson / Getty Images
By Willem Moore
Politics
‘Dead Mouse’ slams cruel sepsis experiments at QMUL open day
Ahead of undergraduate open days at Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) on 12 and 13 June, PETA has placed a new ad just a stone’s throw from the campus.
It warns prospective students that researchers at the university are tormenting mice in cruel and useless sepsis experiments that consistently fail to lead to effective treatments for humans.
The appeal depicts a dead mouse alongside the message:
Septic Fail. Mice Suffer and Die in Sepsis Tests at QMUL – With No Human Benefits.
PETA senior campaigns manager Kate Werner says:
What QMUL’s tours fail to divulge to students is that on campus, terrified mice are being cut open while they’re still alive and subjected to the agonising experience of sepsis, all for worthless experiments that benefit no one.
PETA is urging the university to stop wasting time, resources, and animals’ lives on these cruel and ineffective experiments and adopt human-relevant research methods.
More than 150 drugs have successfully treated sepsis in mice, yet none have been effective in treating humans. Despite the well-documented failure in using mice to model human sepsis, QMUL experimenters are cutting open terrified mice and puncturing their intestines to leak faecal matter into their bodies.
During experiments, some mice experience severe sepsis, which can include major organ failure and difficulty breathing. All animals are killed at the end of these experiments.
Some data from these experiments have been published in papers that were later retracted by the publisher because the animal data and conclusions were deemed ‘unreliable’.
Mice are intelligent, complex, and social individuals who experience a wide range of emotions. They become attached to each other, love their families, and easily bond with their human guardians, returning as much affection as they receive.
PETA encourages everyone to urge QMUL to heed the scientific evidence and join other institutions, including the University of Kent, that have committed to non-animal methods in sepsis research.
Featured image via PETA / Lucy Watson
By The Canary
Politics
Politics Home Article | John Healey Resigns As Defence Secretary Over Military Spending Plans

(Alamy)
2 min read
John Healey has resigned as defence secretary warning that Keir Starmer’s military spending plans fall way short.
Healey announced his resignation on Thursday, saying he had been “left with no other option” but to quit having been presented with details of how much additional money the government was planning to spend on defence.
He singled out the Treasury for criticism, saying it was “unwilling” to “commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats”.
Healey is considered a Starmer loyalist and his resignation represents a major blow to the Prime Minister.
The government is expected to publish its long-awaited Defence Investment Plan (DIP) in the coming days after months of delay.
The PM and Chancellor Rachel Reeves are under pressure to significantly increase defence spending in response to global threats to the UK. Last year, the Prime Minister pledged to raise military spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027, with the ambition of increasing that figure to 3 per cent in the next parliament.
However, Nato allies have also pledged a new baseline for military spending to reach 3.5 per cent of GDP. Starmer has promised to achieve this goal by 2035.
At the Munich Security Conference in February, which Healey references in his resignation letter, Starmer said: “To meet the wider threat, it’s clear that we are going to have to spend more, faster.”
In his letter of resignation to Starmer, Healey said the DIP financial settlement, which he was first given in full on Monday afternoon, “falls well short of what is required for defence and the country at this dangerous time”.
“The extra support is backloaded when the pressure of operations and imperative to speed up readiness to fight is in the first two years and it rises to just 2.58 per cent of GDP in 2030, when we will reach 2.6 per cent next year with the investment we are already making.”
He added: “Without a DIP that meets the moment in this way, I am being forced to make decisions that would reduce the readiness of our Forces and increase the risk to personnel on operations, and could make the country less safe.
“After explaining to you that I would not be able to accept a DIP settlement that does not give our Forces the resources they need, I am now left with no other option than to submit my resignation as your Defence Secretary.”
Politics
Musk should pay for Belfast pogrom clean-up, says local politician
West Belfast MLA Gerry Carroll has suggested that the world’s wealthiest man, Elon Musk, should pay for the massive damage caused in Belfast by racist mobs. This is after the billionaire used his X social media to encourage the carnage.
Musk is a white supremacist vomited up by apartheid-era South Africa 54 years ago. He is currently using his wealth and X reach to ensure the continuation of that vile regime’s politics, only now on a global scale.
Carroll shared the following message:
How about he reaches into his very deep pockets to pay for the damages? For the lost pay, damaged public transport, burnt homes and displaced families. To say nothing of the widespread trauma.He can afford it. But he won’t. Last night’s pogrom was carried out on the streets of Belfast, but it was encouraged and greenlit by the rich and powerful and stoked by well-known figures on the far right.As they have many times in the past, capitalists are energetically trying to divide people here for their own ends. We live in one of the most unequal societies in Europe—with a failing NHS, a low wage economy, crumbling public services and a manufactured housing crisis. Trump, Farage and Musk laugh all the way to the bank, while the despair eating away at working class areas is directed against vulnerable migrants.
A second night of racist rioting
As previously reported by the Canary, Musk promoted the protests to his 240 million followers on the social media hell-site. People Before Profit man Carroll was speaking before a second night of rioting by hooligans in the north of Ireland.
The disorder was less severe than on Tuesday June 9, with the main flashpoint being in Glengormley, a suburban area to the north of Belfast. There, masked thugs attempted to conduct a further pogrom at the Chimney Corner Hotel. However, racists have frequently protested at the site in the past. This is due to it housing asylum seekers.
On this occasion, a heavy police presence prevented rioters from accessing the hotel. The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) deployed a water cannon to push back would-be ethnic cleansers. This granted them their first shower of the year.
In Portadown, incompetent hoods might have wished for said hosing down. This is because they set themselves on fire while attempting to petrol bomb police. Pogrom enthusiasts Official Protestant Coalition provided footage of the mess their incitement helped produce. It showed a town centre strewn with broken glass and burning barricades.
The real state failure isn’t immigration
Musk has continued a relentless stream of messages fear mongering about immigration. This includes a thread from failed parliamentary candidate Matt Goodwin. In it, Goodwin got perilously close to forming a coherent thought. He seemingly didn’t need machine doping to help him this time.
The walking charisma vacuum lamented that:
We’ve entered a new phase of ‘anarcho-tyranny’ where the state is now failing to perform its basic duties like controlling the borders while oppressing its own people.
Veering close to one of his twice-daily broken clock moments, Goodwin was correct to identify that the British state — to which the north of Ireland is still sadly tied – no longer functions properly. However, this isn’t the fault of immigrants. It’s the result of now almost two decades of austerity, kicked off in 2010 by the Conservatives. These policies have seen the lives of those within Westminster’s influence grow progressively worse. They have to put up daily with the very things Carroll cited:
…a failing NHS, a low wage economy, crumbling public services and a manufactured housing crisis.
While there has been deranged fury about a single act of violence from a single Sudanese man, the reality is you’re much more likely to be killed by a billionaire than a migrant. Structural violence is a far greater threat to the people of Belfast than any refugee or asylum seeker. That’s when harm is done to you by systemic failures, those created from political decisions shaped by the ultra-wealthy who buy off our politicians.
When those politicians underfund the NHS, you get fewer ambulances. You get fewer doctors, and nurses, and less up-to-date diagnostic systems. That means, when someone suffering a medical emergency needs an ambulance that never arrives, they die. When someone needs cancer treatment but their under-resourced hospital can’t provide it, they die. In both cases, the harm can be traced to a billionaire. This is just as surely as the wounds of the victim in Belfast can be traced to his attacker’s blade.
Musk aims to distract with race panic
Hadi Alodid, alleged to have been the assailant in question, almost killed one man. Austerity is estimated to have killed at least 330,000. Elon Musk is set to become the world’s first trillionaire. With a fraction of that wealth, and a similar amount taken from all other capitalist robber barons, virtually all those deaths could have been averted.
In a fairer economy, where wealth is collectively owned rather than hoovered up by the worst people imaginable, we could heal and house the entire native population of these islands, and generously welcome those who arrive from abroad.
Musk and his ilk want to continue hoarding wealth, beyond the dreams of avarice, rather than allow that reality to emerge.
In the meantime, the working class of Belfast and beyond, of all colours, will pay in myriad ways while the ultra-rich get off scot-free.
Featured image via Kevin Lamarque / Getty Images
Politics
Iran warns of World Cup suspensions over political symbols
Iran is warning that it will suspend its team’s matches at the 2026 World Cup if “unofficial” flags or political slogans are seen or heard at stadiums. Moreover, the team is referring to the Lion and Sun flag. The flag in question is recognised as an anti-government symbol. It is popular among some — though not all — dissidents and supporters of the Pahlavi monarchy.
Reuters quoted Iranian media as saying Sports Minister Ahmad Donyamali confirmed that Iran had informed FIFA of the need to prevent such incidents. In addition, he said:
We have informed FIFA that if unofficial flags are raised or slogans against the national team are chanted in the stadiums where Iran is playing, the team manager will bear responsibility for halting the match.
Donyamali added that authorities have received assurances that such incidents would not take place on 26 June during Iran’s match against Egypt in Seattle.
Rising US-Iran tensions
These latest snags appear against a high tide of US-Iran tensions. Additionally, FIFA is the governing body responsible for maintaining a clear separation of football and politics. It has stood by Iran and protected its right to participate in the 2026 World Cup tournament. However, how FIFA will now tackle crowd control remains unclear.
Reuters reported that protesters gathered outside the FIFA Congress in Vancouver in April. They called for the exclusion of the Iranian national team. The protesters argued that it represents the proscribed Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Moreover, they claim that it doesn’t represent Iranian people.
The agency also noted that the Iranian and Egyptian football federations had asked FIFA to ban LGBTQ+ related activities during their match in Seattle, which local organisers have included as part of Pride Week events.
Iran begin their Group G campaign against New Zealand in Los Angeles on 15 June, before facing Belgium on 21 June, and Egypt on 26 June.
Featured image via Lintao Zhang / Getty Images
By Alaa Shamali
Politics
The House Article | Britain doesn’t need fewer graduates, it needs better ones

(Alamy)
4 min read
It is time to consider what a graduate is actually for.
On Monday, a new Policy Exchange report added to the ever-growing pile of literature and comment about whether too many young people are going to university. It is a question that deserves serious consideration and practical answers. If graduates are struggling to find good jobs, as the recent Milburn review concluded, universities cannot dismiss those concerns. If employers say they cannot find the skills they need, we must listen.
Before concluding that Britain needs fewer graduates, however, it is worth considering the world that today’s students are preparing to enter. We must consider seriously what a graduate is for.
The world they will inherit is likely to need more highly skilled people than the one we inhabit now. A QS report in March identified that among the 1,436 occupations essential to the delivery of the Industrial Strategy, 80 per cent require level six skills or above. In common parlance, that’s a bachelor’s degree or higher. From healthcare and education to science, engineering and professional services, we require more high-skilled workers, not fewer. Advances in artificial intelligence are also increasing the value of capabilities that remain distinctly human: judgement, creativity, communication and the ability to work effectively with others.
That picture feels familiar to me. UCL educates future clinicians, engineers, teachers, architects, data scientists, entrepreneurs and public servants. When I speak to employers, I rarely hear them asking for graduates who know less. More often, I hear them asking for graduates who are better able to apply what they know. They want people who can work effectively in teams, communicate clearly, manage projects and adapt when circumstances change.
None of this means concerns about graduate outcomes should be waved away. Quite the opposite. An economy can need more graduate-level skills and still leave some graduates struggling to make the transition into good work.
Universities are asking themselves what more they can do to close that gap. For many years, employability was often treated as something that happened alongside a degree rather than through it. Students would study their subject, then visit the careers service towards the end of their course and think about what came next. That model became outdated some time ago.
Universities cannot become strictly vocational training providers. A university education ought to expand horizons, cultivate intellectual confidence and encourage students to think critically about the world around them. The graduates Britain needs are those who are prepared not only for the workplace as it currently stands, but also for the workplaces of the future. That is where an education from a university like UCL has a distinct value add. Students benefit from learning alongside people who are helping to shape the future of their disciplines, whether that means developing new technologies, advancing medical treatments or exploring solutions to complex social problems.
Yet there is plenty of room to be more ambitious about helping students connect those qualities and experiences to life beyond the campus. Students should encounter more opportunities to work on real-world problems before they graduate. Increasingly, at UCL, we are experimenting with ways of doing that. For example, through our ExtendEd programme, every student is now given the opportunity to take part in industry challenges, community projects and collaborative problem-solving activities alongside their academic studies.
I am proud that our graduates enjoy some of the strongest outcomes in the country. Yet spending time with students and employers leaves me convinced that this conversation cannot stop at employment statistics. The economy is changing too quickly for that. Many of today’s students will move between organisations, sectors and technologies that do not yet exist. Preparing them for that future involves more than helping them secure a first job after graduation. It means equipping them with the knowledge, judgement and adaptability to navigate a lifetime of change.
Britain faces genuine skills shortages. Employers need talent. Young people need opportunities. Universities have a responsibility to work with both of these groups to be part of the solution.
Britain’s economy will continue to need graduate-level skills in the years ahead. The task for universities is to ensure that more graduates are equipped to make use of their knowledge, contribute in meaningful ways and adapt as the world changes around them.
Dr Michael Spence is president and provost of UCL
Politics
Reform aghast as Spencer calls them ‘grubby’ in parliament
On 11 June, Hannah Spencer caused quite the commotion in parliament for vocalising a popular-held sentiment about Reform UK. Here’s what went down:
"There's plenty of dirty grubbiness behind me." Look at their faces. — Oliver (@OWS1892) June 10, 2026
Well said Hannah. #PMQs pic.twitter.com/9oD2OrP4KR
Presumably, that’s ‘dirty’ to the left of her and ‘grubby’ to the right.
But what did Spencer say exactly?
It’s a filthy job
The offending comment in full was:
Running a business as a plumber, I was well used to dealing with dirty grubbiness, and there is still plenty of that dirty grubbiness behind me.
Given that Spencer sits directly in front of the Reform mob, the assumption is she was accusing them of being ‘dirty’ and ‘grubby’. We’re not quite sure why she’d say that, but it could have something to do with stories like the following:
- Farage bought £1.4m house after undeclared £5m ‘gift’.
- Former Reform leader Gill sentenced to 10.5 years for taking bribes.
- Reform councillor fined £40,000 for hiring ‘illegal’ workers.
- Reform candidate Goodwin took fat salary from Hungarian far-right.
- Former Tory donors flock to Reform, including a massive donation from Thai-based billionaire.
- Reform candidate became councillor despite antisemitism exposé.
Spencer’s comments went down well online:
She shoots, she scores!@SarahForRuncorn’s face *chef’s kiss*
Well done, Hannah Spencer! @McrGreenParty pic.twitter.com/wV0QhJ8VIa
— James Foster (@JamesEFoster) June 10, 2026


Well, the comments mostly went down well. Brain genius Lee Anderson hit back at the insinuation with the following:
Dirty Grubbiness.
Today one of the Green MPs spoke of the dirty grubbiness sat behind her. She must've been talking about the Lib Dems sat behind us.
Vote @reformparty_uk pic.twitter.com/4aMtK4pbdM
— Lee Anderson MP (@LeeAndersonMP_) June 10, 2026
They’re calling it the comeback of the century.
‘Dirty grubbiness, is it? Yeah? Well, actually, she probably meant someone else.‘
Another retort was that Spencer appeared to be “draped in exquisite Gucci”:
At PMQs, Green MP Hannah Spencer, draped in exquisite Gucci, accused Lee Anderson and Sarah Pochin of being “dirty and grubby.” But Starmer landed the line, calling out Zack Polanski’s absence and asking if he’d swapped his houseboat for a submarine. pic.twitter.com/EliuXmu6ID
— Crewkerne Man (@CrewkerneMan) June 10, 2026
You’ll notice that the right are so riled by what Spencer said that they’re defending Starmer to get at her. Unprecedented stuff.
We’ve contacted Spencer to get to the bottom of the Gucci accusation, and will let you know if she updates us. Regardless of whether it’s Gucci or not, it’s probably not smart to respond to the ‘dirty and grubby’ accusations by saying ‘yeah, well you’re stylish and well dressed!‘
Yellow-bellied submarine
What’s been under-reported is that Spencer was actually asking a question of Keir Starmer. That question in full was:
Running a business is tough, so will the Prime Minister join me in backing the “VAT’s the Problem” campaign to cut VAT rates in hospitality? He did not answer the question last week, so will he tell us today: yes or no?
Would you believe Starmer answered by not answering?
Specifically, he said:
I am very glad that we are cutting VAT over the summer with our summer savings programme, which I hope the hon. Lady will support. I note that we have not heard much from the Green party leader after he admitted he had not paid his council tax. Perhaps he has traded his houseboat for a submarine.
In our opinion, the joke didn’t land as well as Crewkerne Man suggested. We say this because Starmer’s anxiety and awkwardness have reached record highs. We can’t confirm this, but that could be because his party has unofficially given him the sack. And honestly, we’d feel awkward too if we had to stand before several hundred people and pretend to be the prime minister.
As Spencer noted, our temporary PM faced a similar question last week, which came from Rosie Duffield:
This week, Tom Kerridge and UKHospitality launched their “VAT’s the Problem” campaign, and yesterday my neighbour the right hon. Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale) and I hosted industry bodies, chefs Matt Tebbutt and Thomasina Myers and hospitality leaders from Manchester, Liverpool, London and Kent, including Andy Burnham’s night-time economy adviser Sacha Lord. They all agree with campaigners such as Andy Lennox that the UK’s rate of 20% VAT on hospitality is killing businesses daily. Does the Prime Minister agree that VAT’s the problem? Will he match the pledge of his candidate in Makerfield to slash VAT in line with the rest of Europe?
Ah, okay, so now we see why Starmer was nervous. The proposal is being promoted by his replacement, Andy Burnham, so obviously it must be a sore point.
Tinkering
For clarity, this was how Starmer responded to Duffield:
I thank the hon. Member for the question. I recognise the challenges that she identifies. That is why we are permanently lowering business rates for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses. Every pub will get 15% off its new business rates bill, and bills will be frozen in real terms for a further two years. In relation to VAT, she will see that we are offering support by cutting VAT on children’s meals in restaurants—particularly over the summer period—with those savings set out two weeks ago by the Chancellor.
What he’s saying is ‘no‘, he doesn’t have any plans to permanently reduce VAT. As a British politician, however, he can’t just give a straight answer. And as such, he’s going to keep facing the same question.
Featured image via X/Twitter
By Willem Moore
-
Fashion6 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Evereve – Corporette.com
-
Crypto World6 days ago
Jensen Huang Approves Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron for NVIDIA (NVDA) HBM4 Memory Supply
-
Entertainment4 days agoThe Best Mystery Series of All Time Is Surging on Streaming 30 Years After It Ended
-
Crypto World3 days agoAnatomy of the June crypto crash: Fed, Iran, Saylor
-
NewsBeat4 days agoAlexander Zverev wins the French Open to finally earn a 1st Grand Slam title
-
Tech5 days agoSuspicious Polyfill login prompts pop up on Toshiba, Muji websites
-
Crypto World5 days agoSenator Cynthia Lummis Calls CLARITY Act the Most Consequential Financial Legislation of This Generation
-
Tech4 days agoMicrosoft unveils seven homegrown AI models in new bid for ‘long term self-sufficiency’
-
Tech6 days agoMicrosoft launches MXC, an OS-level sandbox for AI agents, with OpenAI and Nvidia already on board
-
Business6 days ago(VIDEO) Justin Bieber Delivers Surprise Happy Birthday Serenade to Diners at Los Angeles Mexican Restaurant
-
Business4 days agoThe Pain Points Taking a Fragile Tech Rally Down a Notch
-
Business3 days agoHigh Stakes for Wembanyama as New York Pushes for 3-0 Lead
-
Crypto World3 days ago
Eli Lilly (LLY) Stock Surges 4% Following Breakthrough Sleep Apnea Trial Results
-
Tech5 days agoVon der Leyen’s AI envoy pick draws conflict-of-interest fire
-
Crypto World6 days ago
LBank Surpasses 25 Million Users Worldwide as AFA Partnership Continues to Drive Global Growth
-
Tech6 days agoMeta steals a tactic from Tesla and builds data centers in tents
-
Tech5 days agoHackers now exploit SolarWinds Serv-U flaw to crash servers
-
Crypto World4 days agoTrump’s AI Ownership Plan Could Benefit Anthropic at OpenAI’s Expense
-
Sports2 days agoBangladesh beat Australia after 20 years in ODIs, register only their second win over six-time world champions | Cricket News
-
NewsBeat4 days ago
Alexander Zverev conquers demons and outlasts Flavio Cobolli to win French Open for first major title

You must be logged in to post a comment Login