Politics
Watch: Bosnia fans chant for Palestine before match vs Canada
Bosnia fans have gathered to chant their support for Palestine before their team’s match against Canada today, 12 June 2026.
Bosnia — Genocide collusion
To Canada’s shame, its government has colluded in Israel’s genocide just like that of the UK and most other western states. The Bosnian fans are on the right side of history:
The match finished 1-1, but only one nation won where it matters.
Featured image via Michael Steele/Getty Images
By Skwawkbox
Politics
Belfast pogroms show loyalism is ideal vanguard of a future brownshirt Britain
By now, there has been extensive coverage of the fact that the Belfast pogroms took place almost entirely in loyalist areas. This should surprise no one. Loyalism has always been an exclusivist ideology, predicated on the notion that one population deserves to dominate another that is dismissed as less deserving. Historically of course, this viewpoint dictated that Protestants must be allowed to lord it over Catholics.
However, violent sectarianism has largely faded in the north of Ireland, following 1998’s Good Friday Agreement. Instead, loyalism has now applied to immigrants, people of colour and Muslims the bigoted mindset it incubated over centuries.
It’s hard to dominate another group of people without justifying it in some way. Humans, like many other mammals, have an in-built notion of fairness. Seeing others get less without good cause cannot be easily sustained psychologically. Hence many Protestants developed prejudices giving grounds for their superior position. Catholics were said to be lazy, feckless and practicing a heretical religious doctrine.
Belfast loyalists pivot from sectarianism to racism
Years of indulging in this act of self-deceit have easily enabled the switch to applying new fictions to new target populations. Muslims are heathens, satanic even. Immigrants have sparked an unprecedented crime wave, never mind evidence to the contrary. Even children aren’t safe in playgrounds from sinister foreign men.
Combined with this capacity for a supremacist mentality has been the means for exercising the violence necessary to make dominance concrete. In prior decades, it has meant loyalists carrying out ethnic cleansing of Catholics. This was most notable in the 1920s, during the birth pangs of what became known as ‘Northern Ireland’. Loyalist mobs burned Catholics out of their homes, murdered others, and caused an estimated 23,000 to flee. So-called ‘Rotten Prods’ — Protestant trade unionists who stood alongside Catholics in workplaces — were also killed.
Another outbreak of barbarism occurred in 1969, when again loyalist thugs chased large numbers of Catholic families out of their homes, deploying widespread arson again. Belfast politicians have described how the loyalist pogroms of this week mirror those previous horrors. During the ‘Troubles’, loyalist paramilitaries carried out 713 sectarian murders of Catholics.
In its capacity to inspire reactionaries, loyalism is similar to its bedfellow, Zionism. The latter is a racist doctrine of Jewish supremacy that has always permitted extreme violence against the indigenous Palestinian population that stands in the way of their ethnostate.
As it has now reached the inevitable exterminationist phase of its trajectory, it has been celebrated by chauvinists the world over looking to subjugate their own troublesome populations. ‘Israeli’ and Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) flags can be found in loyalist areas across the north of Ireland. Loyalist politicians wined and dined by the terror regime of Tel Aviv came back singing its praises.
The longstanding links between loyalism and the British far-right
The twin primary sicknesses of these ideologies — a deeply inculcated supremacist mentality, and the willingness to use violence to suppress those deemed inferior — have obvious appeal to far-right actors everywhere. There have long been links between loyalist thugs and like-minded British neo-Nazis.
The Ulster Defence Association was known to have links to the vile racists of Combat 18. One of the latter’s founders, Eddie Whicker, helped arm the murderous loyalist terror gang. Combat 18 members were present at the notorious loyalist disorder at Drumcree.
Daniel Grundle (also known as Daniel Douglas) is the leader of current racist group Our Northern Ireland Voice. He described his founding of the group as a “calling”. Grundle reminisced about how in the 1980s his uncle Jimmy Grundle helped set up a version of Britain’s National Front in the north of Ireland.
The links extend to this day. Before Ben Habib’s recent decision to dissolve it, far-right agitator Richard Inman operated as a link between the racist Advance UK and the north of Ireland. Inman obviously thought so highly of the embedded bigotry within loyalism, that he made the Six Counties his permanent base. From there, he has lauded the Islamophobic hate displays of Concerned Parents Newtownabbey and spoken at far-right rallies.
Others, such as former Ulster Volunteer Force member Mark Sinclair and ex-Democratic Unionist Party councillor William Walker have linked up with their ideological peers at far-right rallies. Areas of Scotland still have strong loyalist elements, and they have clearly been inspired by the ethnic cleansing in Belfast. Racists there engaged in copycat crimes against people of colour.
Racist politicians embrace street violence
It isn’t just street thugs who seem enthused by loyalist violence. Those looking to take over the British state have been content to carry on stirring up emotions, even as houses burn. Reform’s Zia Yusuf screeched that:
Some cultures are MUCH better than others.
Restore Britain’s official account vomited out:
Restore Britain will reverse the third-worldification of our country.
Farage obviously delights in the prospect of reactionary rioting. In the wake of the Henry Novak murder, Farage exacerbated an already febrile atmosphere by calling for “pure cold rage“. Neither Nigel Farage nor Yusuf of Reform have used their X accounts to offer any condemnation of the Belfast violence. Likewise the even more vile Rupert Lowe of Restore Britain.
Reform have made no secret of their intent to hurtle towards authoritarianism if they occupy 10 Downing Street. Owen Jones recently enumerated their plans in this regard. As he points out, Farage has spoken of his intent to bring in a:
…British version of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the US deportation force that seizes migrants from homes, workplaces and the streets.
Under Reform:
The government would be granted direct powers over the police and would attack the independence of the judiciary, dressed up as a war on “activist judges”.
The parallels with the fascists of the 1930s are clear. The likes of Mussolini and Hitler used street thugs to help them seize power, then implemented an authoritarian state.
Street violence has many useful traits for budding despots. It makes the state look weak, as it struggles to handle the chaos. Far-right parties project an image of strength, and proclaim they will restore order.
It can be a tool for intimidating left-wing activists. Additionally, rioting thugs can be integrated into the state’s own security forces once power has been seized.
Belfast — A return to the fascism of the 1930s
The left’s best analysts, like Yanis Varoufakis, have long been warning that we are heading for a repeat of that uniquely dark era. Racist riots and mass mobilisations are becoming increasingly common in Britain, and authoritarian policies are already being implemented by British prime minister Keir Starmer.
Reform are happy to let other street thugs pick up the baton handed to them by loyalists. Once in power, they’ll gleefully receive another gift from Labour. By that point, it’ll be too late, and Britain will pay devastating consequences for inviting its own particular variant of loyalism into government.
Featured image via Charles McQuillan/Getty Images
Politics
Iran war may be ending but humiliated Trump could hit Cuba next
The disastrous Iran war may be ending. But a humiliated US may look to Cuba as the next victim with Trump’s crony Marco Rubio applying heavier sanctions. The Americans have been making their aggressive intentions clear for months.
US outlet The Hill reported on 11 June that the US State Department:
announced that it will sanction Cuba’s state-owned oil and gas company Unión Cuba-Petróleo (CUPET) amid escalating tensions between the U.S. and the island country.
At the centre of the move was Trump’s Cuban-American henchman and secretary of state Marco Rubio. Rubio said:
the latest sanctions are pursuant of President Trump’s May 1 executive order expanding sanctions on government officials, agents “or material supporters of the Cuban government,”.
The sanctions concern Cuba’s oil and gas company Unión Cuba-Petróleo (CUPET).
Defence secretary Pete Hegseth was at the US military colony Guantanamo Bay on 10 June. As the Canary reported, Hegseth:
told a captive audience of American soldiers that Cuba had better not try and get long-range weapons. The US has been ramping up threats against the island state.
Rubio accused the Cuban government of:
diverting its energy resources “to line their own pockets: reselling countless barrels of scarce energy on the secondary market, hoarding energy supplies for its military, intelligence and repressive forces, and rationing energy as a tool of social control.”
Which is a bit rich coming from an openly far-right government committed to denying its citizens even basic healthcare while spending billions on a failed war in Iran.
An Iran deal could mean US move on Cuba
Meanwhile, a Pakistan-brokered deal to end the US attack on Iran looks close. Al Jazeera reported on 12 June that Pakistan’s PM Shehbaz Sharif had said:
Pakistan is now working closely with both sides to finalize the next steps. Peace has never been this close as it is now.
As the Canary has reported, the US was looking to bring the Americas to heel before it blundered into the Iran war.
Trump’s 2025 national security strategy said as much. The US wants to ensure:
the Western Hemisphere remains reasonably stable and well-governed enough to prevent and discourage mass migration to the United States.
And that those pliable governments:
cooperate with us against narco-terrorists, cartels, and other transnational criminal organizations.
Trump and his cronies want:
a Hemisphere that remains free of hostile foreign incursion or ownership of key assets, and that supports critical supply chains.
Cuba is the closest dissenting nation to the US in the Americas. And for Trump’s generation it is an unresolved problem. He would return to it to the status of a mafia-run US vassal state. It will be a happy day when the war against Iran ends. But a humiliated US empire is still a dangerous beast. And the people of Cuba may be the first to feel Trump’s post-Iran wrath.
Featured image via Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
By Joe Glenton
Politics
It's hot. Maybe too hot.
High-stakes geopolitics aren’t the only external factor threatening to hijack the tournament.
Perhaps ironically for a competition hosted by a U.S. president who is highly skeptical about climate change and says assertions about rising temperatures have been made “by stupid people,” the heat is very likely to be a problem.
Heat waves have become a persistent part of Northern Hemisphere summers — each one made hotter, longer and more likely to occur as a result of man-made global warming. The locations of several stadiums across the U.S. and Mexico, as well as the peak-summer timing of the World Cup, are expected to put players and fans at risk of overheating.
The problem isn’t just heat, but also humidity. The combination of the two feels far hotter and is measured with wet-bulb temperature, which mimics how the human body cools off through sweating. A wet-bulb temperature of 95 degrees Fahrenheit can be fatal even to healthy people; the football players’ union FIFPRO says wet-bulb temperatures above 79 degrees — which can be reached through a combination of 86-degree heat and 50 percent humidity, for example — will affect performance and health, and 82-degree heat should prompt the postponement of a match.
When scientists last month ran the numbers, they found that 26 of 104 matches are expected to take place in conditions of at least 79-degree wet-bulb temperature. Five matches are estimated to breach the 82-degree wet-bulb barrier. And a peer-reviewed study found that during last year’s FIFA Club World Cup in the U.S., average wet-bulb temperature exceeded 82 degrees in 31 of 57 matches analyzed by scientists.
That study also found that high temperatures were associated with players covering less ground, forcing a change of tactics. Exhaustion sets in faster under high temperatures — at the Club World Cup, 10 players asked to be substituted in a single match. But heat doesn’t just affect gameplay. At the 2024 Copa America, an assistant referee collapsed in the heat and, last month, two people died during sports events held amid a heat wave in France.
As climate change continues to heat the planet, FIFA will have to grapple with the growing threat at every subsequent tournament. The 2030 men’s World Cup in Spain, Portugal and Morocco takes place in a global warming hotspot. The women’s World Cup next year will be in Brazil during a warming El Niño event, expected to supercharge the heating effect of climate change.
And that’s not even counting the other growing climate risks — from wildfire smoke to extreme rain — that threaten to disrupt future events.
Politics
UK election interference: new details of BlackCore Israeli influence operation emerge
An Israeli influence operation named BlackCore allegedly sought to undermine left-wing politicians and shape elections in the UK and US. The Canary previously reported on a joint French/Israeli media investigation into the shadowy outfit. BlackCore is also accused of setting up a bogus Palestine charity.
Now a French domestic security agency is investigating too. Israeli newspaper Haaretz and French outlet Libération reported on 11 June:
Israeli firm BlackCore, suspected of interfering in France’s local elections in March, is also suspected of meddling in elections in New York City and Scotland, and operating in Angola and Togo, the head of France’s disinformation detection service Viginum said on Thursday.
In a second article covering another aspect of BlackCore’s operations, also published on 11 June, claimed:
A network of fake fitness coaches, Vietnamese bots, Facebook ads aimed at Brits – and a bogus ‘humanitarian fund’ for Gaza. A Haaretz and Libération investigation exposes a digital operation whose infrastructure leads back to BlackCore, the Israeli influence firm under investigation in France.
Various Israeli influence operations have come to light in recent months. One looks at how the Israeli military shapes media reporting of the Gaza genocide. Another examines leaked documents about a military-run course for English and Hebrew speaking influencers.
The fact Israel runs complex influence operations is well-known. Press reporting on the granular details is less common.
Election interference by Israel
Russia and China are often charged with election interference in the west. There’s no doubt both countries run influence operations just like the UK and US. But the new Haaretz report sheds light on how Israel runs its own.
analyzed BlackCore’s digital footprint, uncovered a toolkit of influence-operation systems routed through servers in Britain, Germany, Finland and Lithuania.
Closest to home is the allegation that Israel tried to shape Scottish elections. French security agency Viginum claims:
France’s cybersecurity agency has accused the Israeli tech company BlackCore of interfering in the Scottish elections earlier this year by targeting the first minister, John Swinney.
The disinformation detection agency Viginum said BlackCore had this year used proxy social media accounts to target Swinney, the Scottish National Party, and the Scottish government on four occasions.
Viginum’s head of ‘digital interference’ Sébastien Lecornu said:
This modus operandi was not limited to municipal elections in France. It also appears to have been used to carry out foreign digital interference operations in other countries or regions, such as Angola, Togo, the elections in Scotland, and the 2025 municipal election in New York.
It was previously reported that BlackCore targeted left-wing candidates in Marseille and Toulouse elections.
Brillant added:
Our investigations did not make it possible to identify the sponsor or sponsors, if indeed they exist, behind this foreign digital interference.
BlackCore — Fake Palestinian charity?!
The other part of the Haaretz report verges on the bizarre. It centres on an allegedly fake charity named Sadaqah Palestine, which:
presented itself as a non-governmental, non-political nonprofit helping Palestinian families, children and refugees affected by displacement, poverty and war.
The ‘charity’ had:
a website with a credit card donation form and maintained social media accounts on X, Instagram and Facebook, and even had a paid advertising budget on Meta’s platforms.
it did not have… any verifiable existence. No organization by that name appears in the U.K. charity register, nor in similar U.S., EU and Israeli records offline. Its social media following, our analysis found, was largely manufactured, including seemingly fake accounts.
The charity’s digital footprint leads back to BlackCore, which has been described as:
[an] Israeli “elite influence, cyber and technology” firm.
Researchers described the site as:
a honeypot: a decoy built to attract people who wanted to help – in this case, by aiding Palestinians – and to take donors’ money, their personal data or both.
The cynicism involved is hard to fathom:
The page pitched the fund against the backdrop of the collapse of official humanitarian aid in Gaza, noting that as USAID and UNRWA halted most of their operations, ordinary donors had to step in.
And:
It declares its location as Palestine; X’s own metadata places it in the United Kingdom. In its 13 years of existence, the account has never once “liked” anything.
Followers were also fake: a mix of US-based ‘fitness’ accounts and Vietnamese bots. Researchers traced the page to BlackCore via:
Digital certificates – the public, immutable record created every time a website obtains an encryption authorization.
You can read the full reports on the charity and the election interference here and here. They offer a rare glimpse inside an alleged Israeli influence operation. This is notable of itself. The fact one aspect of this operation was to exploit public goodwill over Palestine is especially grotesque.
Featured image via the Canary
By Joe Glenton
Politics
Alternative World Cup rankings
Congratulations to Sweden on winning this year’s World Cup … and also to France, Qatar, Uruguay, Norway, New Zealand and Switzerland for the same thing.
No, POLITICO hasn’t been engaging in match fixing, but we have been crunching the numbers to see how all 48 of this year’s World Cup participants rank in several other categories, and the countries mentioned above all did well. There are 10 EU countries taking part.
First of all, we took each country’s FIFA ranking from the world soccer governing body. In April, France was the number one country in the world, with Spain second and Argentina third, all the way down to New Zealand, which was the 85th-ranked country in the world and therefore the lowest-ranked team in the tournament.
Then, we looked at all 48 countries to see how they ranked in terms of five other categories, staring with gross domestic product per person, according to World Bank data for 2024 (the last year for which data is available).
Stay tuned for more data visualizations today and tomorrow.
Politics
Thunberg speaks out against EU’s deportation bill before Parliament vote
Greta Thunberg took to social media to condemn the EU-wide deportation plan, calling on citizens to rally against it.
The European government and institutions are pushing through a law which the far right celebrated as the start of the era of deportations, she said.
View this post on Instagram
European Parliament is planning to vote on it next week, the activist said on Friday, slamming efforts to pass the law “quietly and quickly.” She slammed European politicians for fueling wars and climate catastrophes and then unleashing detention on people who flee from them.
The EU’s controversial deportation bill is heading for a crucial vote next week, as far-right parties and the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) have joined forces, with the bill expected to be passed on June 17.
She called on European citizens to:
Refuse outsourced prisons, refuse far-right policy, refuse a Europe governed by fear. Call your MP, write to your government, tag your ministers in the comments, and let them know that this won’t keep us safe. We keep us safe.
Greta Thunberg — European ICE
Greta Thunberg said Europe had been taking notes from the USA’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Private security companies, detention contractors, surveillance firms, and deportation airline owners will benefit from the new law if enacted, she warned, saying:
Public money is being directed away from housing, school, and healthcare as powerful politicians cut deals with wealthy CEOs, turning deportation into an ever expanding industry.
According to the EU Observer, the bill seeks to make it possible for EU member states to create so-called “return hubs” in foreign countries, facilities reserved for individuals whose asylum claims have been rejected, who have been ordered to leave Europe, and who cannot return to their home countries for a variety of reasons.
This isn’t happening just in the EU. Reform UK has completely embraced the ICE model.
Zia Yusuf, the party’s home affairs spokesperson, unveiled plans for a “UK Deportation Command” earlier this year.
Yusuf is currently in the USA, cosying up to the far-right Heritage Foundation, where they drink together from the same elixir of hating migrants.
Thunberg is right: only we can save ourselves. And the threat is Yusuf, the Heritage Foundation, and Europe’s far-right and all their ilk.
Featured image via Fabrizio Villa/Getty Images
By The Canary
Politics
Elon Musk is a threat to democracy, and now also a trillionaire (same thing, really)
Elon Musk has been all over the headlines today, 12 June, as he tips over the threshold to become the world’s first trillionaire. And inevitably, Musk is a walking, talking argument against the existence of such wealth — which he uses to oppose democracy and amplify the far-right around the world.
The real-life Bond villain (thanks, Financial Times) owes his latest windfall to SpaceX. The company, of which Musk is the majority shareholder, makes its initial public offering at a value of around $1.8tn.
Of course, once any individual’s personal wealth enters the billions — never mind the trillions — it becomes largely hypothetical. We, humanity that is, just aren’t made to comprehend that kind of amount. NBC tried to visualise the total:
A stack of $100 bills worth $1 million stands just over 3 feet tall. Scale that up to $1 billion, and the stack is over half a mile high. At $1 trillion, however, the stack reaches a staggering 679 miles in height, nearly 11 times the distance from Earth’s surface to the edge of outer space.
Elon Musk — Buying up democracy
Personally, we at the Canary still find it difficult to picture that kind of thing. We’re activists and journalists — we work in concepts. Fortunately, there’s a ready example in those terms, too. $1tn will buy you, more or less, one global democracy, or a sizeable chunk of it at the very least.
Back in January, Oxfam released research highlighting that billionaire wealth had reached its highest level in history, breaching $18.3t (trillion) globally. Inevitably, that wealth also brings vast political power. In fact, compared to the average citizen, billionaires are 4,000 times more likely to hold political office.
Elon Musk already tried his hand as a fascist politician — after a buy-in donation of over $250m to the Republican Party in 2024. Under Donald Trump, he became the unelected co-chair of ‘DOGE’ (the Department of Government Efficiency).
Of course, the department did absolutely nothing to alter the USA’s national debt, which actually spiked in 2025. However, Musk’s wild slashes to the USAid budget caused a conservative initial estimate of 750,000 deaths around the world. Likewise, that’s not even mentioning the 300,000 federal employees he left out of a job.
All that in the mere 10 months of DOGE’s tragic existence.
Amplifying the fash on Twitter
However, even outside of direct political office, Musk — seen here sniffing around for a party invite from convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein — has still proven himself perfectly capable of buying political influence and stifling democracy.
Actually, scratch that, ‘capable’ is the wrong word — $1tn just makes up for an awful lot of incompetence.
After seemingly accidentally backing himself into a corner and being forced to purchase Twitter for $44bn, Musk gained massive power over (what was once) one of the world’s more popular social media platforms. Over and over again, he’s used that power to amplify far-right voices and talking points.
Since the ill-fated Twitter purchase, far-right accounts have seen a boom on the site. As NBC News found in 2024:
at least 150 paid “Premium” subscriber X accounts and thousands of unpaid accounts have posted or amplified pro-Nazi content on X in recent months, often in apparent violation of X’s rules.
In several cases, the Nazi accounts gained traction because of Musk’s active help. He personally retweeted several prominent ‘race science’ adherents. Mother Jones described him as:
spreading misinformation about racial minorities’ intelligence and physiology to his audience of 176.3 million followers.
Oh, on that note, a quick aside. Musk — pictured here giving a Nazi salute at a far-right political rally — has argued it should be criminal to describe “non-violent” people as Nazis or fascists. Oh, and the same goes for telling people to hate America.
So much for Musk’s famed ‘free speech absolutism‘ (except when he’s defending his AI bot generating child sexual abuse imagery).
Attacks on UK democracy
One of Musk’s favoured pet fascists is Rupert Lowe, founder of the extreme-right Restore UK. Since launching Restore back in February, ten of Lowe’s X posts have received over 10-million views. This, in turn, has caused massive issues for Reform UK, as it faces pressure from the even-further-right.
Another key beneficiary of Musk’s algorithmic patronage is Tommy Robinson, one of the organisers behind the white-supremacist ‘Unite the Kingdom’ (UtK) rally. The white-supremacist agitator/all-round scumbag has openly admitted that Musk previously covered his legal costs.
Likewise, Musk addressed the 2025 UtK rally via video link. He called for “a change of government in Britain” along with a:
dissolution of Parliament and a new vote held.
The Financial Times counted more than 100 of Musk’s social media posts attacking British multiculturalism. More recently, he exploited the tragic murder of Henry Nowak to foment the riots in response. Likewise, he also amplified Robinson’s dogwhistle calls to riot in Belfast earlier this week.
In response, Green Party leader Zack Polanski stated that:
This man is a threat to our democracy. He backs violence and extremism.
Blaming a group of people for the awful actions of an individual leads us to a very dark place.
Musk, Lowe, Farage, Robinson – these men don’t give a shit about this country, they want to rip us apart.
In our deeply broken system, money is power. A billion, let alone a trillion, gives an individual the power to buy things that should never have been for sale. Musk is a living demonstration of the fact that no reasonable society should permit the existence of such obscene wealth.
Featured image via Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Politics
The corporate lobbyists behind new defence secretary Dan Jarvis
New defence secretary Dan Jarvis has previously received around half a million pounds in donations from corporate lobbyists. So, as mainstream media outlets say the Labour right-winger “once looked like the future” and “is a fine choice“, let’s look into the dark money that’s been fuelling his political career.
Jarvis and his local Labour Party in Barnsley have done such an awful job at countering Tory damage to the town in recent decades that it turned to Reform in the 2026 local elections. And when you look at where Jarvis’s funds come from, you can understand why the people of Barnsley might not exactly be his top political priority.
1 — Labour Together millionaires
One major source of donations to Jarvis has been key Labour Together donor Martin Taylor. Taylor runs a hedge fund that invests in private healthcare.
Fellow Labour Together donor and proud pro-Israel lobbyist Trevor Chinn also gave thousands of pounds to Jarvis. It seems likely that such support was at least in part because Jarvis was a parliamentary supporter of Labour Friends of Israel who even received money from the lobby group.
Labour Together was a prominent vehicle for undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party and forcing vacuous corporate lackey Keir Starmer onto the country.
Other beneficiaries of money from Labour Together or its donors have included high-profile cronies such as Yvette Cooper, Wes Streeting, David Lammy, Shabana Mahmood, and Rachel Reeves.
2 — The “multimillionaire recruitment tycoon” with interests in private healthcare
EveryDoctor explains that “multimillionaire recruitment tycoon Peter Hearn“:
made his fortune through recruitment firms PSD and Odgers Berndtson
Odgers Group Limited, where he resigned as a director in 2025, has offered:
headhunting services to the NHS as well as the private healthcare sector. The firm has faced criticism for some of the senior executives it has helped recruit to the NHS. Former TalkTalk executive Dido Harding was headhunted by Odgers Berndtson to lead the NHS Test and Trace programme during the pandemic, which was later deemed to be ineffective by MPs.
A fellow director at Odgers was Tory peer Virginia Bottomley.
While Hearn clearly has a massive soft spot for Labour right-wingers Wes Streeting and Yvette Cooper, Dan Jarvis has been the other key recipient of Hearn’s money. They’ve all received money from Hearn’s OPD Group and MPM Connect Ltd. Labour campaign group Momentum once called MPM “dark money“, and Sky reported that:
The company has no staff or website and is registered at an office in Hertfordshire where the secretary says she has never heard of them.
EveryDoctor says Hearn’s OPD Group also “provides services to the NHS“.
With Dan Jarvis, the lobby’s grip on government continues
In 2016, Blairite strategist John McTernan said Jarvis:
so clearly wants to be Leader of the Labour Party.
Many on the right of the party mentioned his name “as a potential challenger to Jeremy Corbyn” early into Corbyn’s time as leader, with some of them even seeing him as “the party’s greatest hope“. Jarvis also reportedly had links to Blue Labour, whose whole argument is basically that Labour should be ‘more conservative‘.
Jarvis has largely remained quiet in the last ten years, just accumulating corporate money and doing little of note for people in his constituency. But his move into the role of defence secretary may be a sign that his star on the Labour right is rising yet again.
Considering that lobbyists’ empty vessel Keir Starmer has pushed Labour far to the right as leader, it’s unsurprising that Dan Jarvis fits neatly into the project.
The question now is, exactly how much will Jarvis’s deep links to the corporate lobby influence Ministry of Defence policy at a time of already increasing military spending?
Featured image via Carl Court/Getty Images
By Ed Sykes
Politics
Upset ‘Tommeh’ gives Canary’s print edition free advertising
The Canary upsets all the right people. Particularly, it seems, in print. The far-right hate peddler known as ‘Tommy Robinson’ has got a bit upset at being called out on a Canary front page for his part in inciting white-supremacist violence in Belfast. And in his annoyance, he gave the Canary some accidental free advertising:
He doesn’t have a leg to stand on about the ‘smear’, legally speaking. Truth is an absolute defence and libel requires damage to reputation, while his — and no doubt his income — depends on his supporters seeing him inciting. And even in the UK’s corrupt justice system, there’s no way to say evil like this isn’t inciting:
The whole of the United Kingdom is hitting the streets tonight at 7pm following yet another invader attack on our people.
It’s time
pic.twitter.com/tscckc9ceK
— Tommy Robinson
(@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026
And the Canary is not the only outlet to point out that he was not just inciting, but coordinating, the Belfast white hate riots. Like the i:
And even far-right ‘msm’ rags have taken him down before, just as brutally:
They are far right shithouses. pic.twitter.com/mmrQMALuCy
— Andrew (@AndrewEgan89975) June 13, 2026
Of course, Tommeh’s mates might not be too impressed that he was (again) sucking up to foreign billionaires while he was doing it. But then again, they might not care. Only certain kinds of foreigners are despised, perhaps.
Tommy Robinson — “Cry harder”
And his post didn’t exactly generate much sympathy. Lots of responses encouraged him to get even more upset:
Cry harder!
You only have yourself to blame!
![]()
— Duncan
Still Socialist tired of LIES & Anger (@BRUMSTOKIE) June 12, 2026
Others focused on the truth of the headline and the article:
You mean… the truth??
![]()
— Ren (@RenLaz17) June 12, 2026
And quite a few added the ‘patriot’s liking for foreign climes (and cash):
You do have ten names though don’t you, protecting British values but changes his name and moves to Spain.
The guy that has been an illegal immigrant, complains about illegal immigration. pic.twitter.com/JZIoJFp3LU
— My Two Pence (@MyTwoPenceUK) June 12, 2026
![]()
Oh fuck I HOPE they did. It’s about time your grifting coked up shit stirring little arse got a proper headline.
That’s MARVELLOUS.
Well done @TheCanaryUK
pic.twitter.com/XdD8W887js
— Damian (@D_MQuail) June 12, 2026
Lots pointed out the cash, actually:
Where’s the lie exactly you malformed little racist runt? pic.twitter.com/deFGhG0j7s
— CaptainBird (@CaptainBird5) June 12, 2026
And the foreigners operating him in return for it:
— George (@seeyouinpub) June 12, 2026
Some pointed out the, ahem, inconsistency of Robinson’s ‘political’ positions:
The whole of the United Kingdom is hitting the streets tonight at 7pm following yet another invader attack on our people.
It’s time
pic.twitter.com/tscckc9ceK
— Tommy Robinson
(@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026
While others just contented themselves with taking the mickey out of him for not realising the obvious:
It’s literally there in front of you, you bleeding imbecile
![]()
— RandomHero (@ImMeHooYou) June 12, 2026
Of the many hundreds of responses, only a few were from people willing to reinforce the idea that he doesn’t incite, or is right to. There are far too many good replies to include them in an article, so if you have a spare few minutes, reading the others will be a rewarding way to spend them.
And of course, spare a few to pop out and buy a Canary print edition, Monday to Friday. You can find your nearest stockist here. It really is upsetting all the right (wrong) people.
Featured image via Luke Dray/Getty Images
By Skwawkbox
Politics
Belfast, broken borders and the evasions of our elites
At around half past 10 on Monday night, 8 June, on a residential street in north Belfast, a man in his thirties allegedly pinned another man to the ground and began stabbing him. He was stopped by three members of the public, one of them carrying a hurling stick, who dragged him clear. The victim, a man in his forties, lost his left eye. His right eye sustained serious damage. He has deep lacerations to his face and back. He remains in serious condition in hospital. A kitchen knife was recovered.
The man now charged on suspicion of attempted murder is Hadi Alodid, 30 years old, of Duncairn Avenue, Belfast. He is also charged with possession of a blade in a public place and with threatening to kill a female NHS radiographer while he was being treated for a hand injury following his arrest. The court heard that while receiving that treatment, he told police: ‘I killed someone, I don’t know if they’re dead.’ Judge Steven Keown refused bail on Wednesday, finding that ‘the risks were far too great and unmanageable with any bail conditions’.
Alodid’s route to Belfast is on the public record. He flew from Sudan to Paris and from there to Dublin. On 10 February 2023, he boarded a bus from Dublin to Belfast, applied for asylum, and was granted leave to remain until 2028. He had no (known) criminal record and appeared on no police database. When Jon Boutcher, Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) chief constable, contacted his counterpart in counter-terrorism, nothing came back. The attack is not, at present, being treated as terrorism. The motive is yet to be established. The investigation continues.
So too does the journey from Paris to Dublin to Belfast, for anyone minded to take it. It is worth understanding why this journey was taken, because understanding is exactly what the governing class is hoping the public will not acquire.
When the UK left the European Union, it lost participation in the Dublin III Regulation, the mechanism that had previously allowed it to return asylum seekers to whichever EU member state through which they had first passed. After Brexit, the UK introduced replacement inadmissibility rules under the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, which allow the state to refuse a claimant’s asylum request if he or she has a connection to a safe third country or passed through one before arriving in the UK. But these rules apply to Great Britain and not to Northern Ireland, where a Belfast High Court ruling in 2024 barred key provisions of the UK’s post-Brexit immigration laws. The Common Travel Area, the arrangement between the UK and the Republic of Ireland that predates both states and was preserved through Brexit as a structural requirement of the Good Friday Agreement, means that a person crossing from the Republic into Northern Ireland faces no passport check, no border control and no immigration officer.
This is not an oversight. It is the consciously constructed legal architecture, known to every government in the chain. And none has dared address the problems it poses, on the grounds that doing so might complicate the arrangements around the peace process.
Democratic Unionist Party MP Carla Lockhart asked in the Commons on Tuesday what action the UK government is taking to prevent abuse of the immigration system via the land border with the Republic. Hilary Benn, the secretary of state for Northern Ireland, confirmed what was already known: that any foreign national who abuses the hospitality of this country to commit crimes should be in no doubt of the government’s determination to deport them, and that net migration is down 82 per cent from its peak under the previous government. That, of course, is an answer to a different question.

Northern Ireland secretary Hilary Benn, and PSNI chief constable Jon Boutcher attend a press conference in Belfast, 10 June 2026.
Benn subsequently offered, in good faith and apparently without embarrassment, a comment about the prospect of using someone’s history and background to assess future risk:
‘Questioning the suspect, seeking to find out more about him and the circumstances, it doesn’t necessarily follow that someone’s previous history is going to enable you to know if they are going to do something in the future. And therefore it is very hard to operate a system in those circumstances which attempts to anticipate what someone might do.’
This prompts one to reach for an argument of Thomas Sowell. There are no migrants in the abstract, Sowell observed. There are only specific people from specific places with specific histories, specific beliefs and specific characteristics. The generalisation ‘migrants’ is not a policy instrument. It is a rhetorical convenience for avoiding the actual policies that would have to be designed if you were dealing with real people. Benn is not refusing to generalise – he is refusing to particularise. He is arguing that because you cannot know in advance what a specific individual will do, the only defensible conclusion is that prior history, background, ideology and behaviour offer no useful information whatsoever. The system, he implies, simply cannot anticipate anything of note. We are, apparently, operating national border control much like a roulette wheel.
This is not merely wrong. It is the precise negation of what every risk assessment, every parole-board hearing, every terrorism analyst, every child-protection social worker and every insurance actuary does for a living. Risk assessment is the applied science of inferring future probability from prior evidence. The counter-extremism Prevent programme, which the government funds to the tune of tens of millions of pounds annually, is predicated entirely on the premise that prior indicators – ideology, association, behaviour, radicalisation pathway – are meaningful predictors of future violence. Following Benn’s logic, Prevent should be abolished immediately, because its entire operational rationale is the thing he just said is impossible.
The government funds a counter-extremism programme built on the premise that prior behaviour predicts future violence. And yet it sends its secretary of state for Northern Ireland to argue on television that prior behaviour cannot meaningfully predict future violence as a reason for declining to scrutinise how a specific individual came to be in Belfast before allegedly attempting to decapitate someone. One of these positions is true. The Prevent position is closer to the truth, which is why Benn’s broadcast remarks are not a serious argument. They’re a holding measure, a way of filling the airtime between the event and the moment when the news cycle obliges by moving on.
Now consider what happened simultaneously at Wednesday’s press conference. PSNI chief Boutcher, appealing for calm and promising law enforcement against the rioters, said that those involved in the disorder would have their images plastered everywhere. It is a legitimate deterrence instrument, and images of rioters do result in identification and prosecution. The observation that the institution declining to characterise the perpetrator of the original attack is energetically committed to naming and imaging the people who responded badly to it will not, however, have escaped the notice of the people being told to go home and be calm. The asymmetry is visible. And visible things tend to be noticed.
This is not an argument for outing defendants before trial. Sub judice rules are sensible and the presumption of innocence is not negotiable. It is an observation about where the state deploys its energy and its language. The prosecutorial machinery has historically moved with speed and purpose against such rioters, just as it did in 2024 after the Southport attack unrest. Yet it tends to be much more cautious when it comes to the events that have prompted the riots. That’s when the authorities throw out the usual lines: the motive is yet to be established, the investigation continues, please be mindful of what you share online. This pattern, swift action against one form of disorder and studied caution around the other.

Protesters in stand-off with police in Glengormley, north of Belfast, Northern Ireland, 10 June 2026.
The Prevent dimension deserves attention. Prevent is the British government’s programme for identifying and supporting individuals considered vulnerable to radicalisation. William Shawcross’s 2023 Independent Review of Prevent found multiple issues: that it had drifted from adequately confronting Islamist extremism; that it was characterised by institutional timidity on the subject; and that Islamist terrorism remained the primary domestic terrorist threat. Indeed, Islamist terrorism accounted for approximately two-thirds of attacks since 2018, three-quarters of MI5’s caseload and 64 per cent of those in custody for terrorism-connected offences. The review recommended reorientation toward the primary threat.
The government accepted several of these recommendations. The acceptance was followed, as usual, by a considerable number of further discussions about how the acceptance might be implemented without causing too much disruption to existing arrangements.
Alodid was not, the PSNI chief Boutcher confirmed, known to Prevent. He was not known to any national-security database. He was, in other words, exactly the type of individual that Prevent’s acknowledged gap in non-networked, non-referred coverage is designed to miss. This was a man who had arrived from Sudan, a nation in the grip of an active civil war in which Islamist militias – designated as terrorist organisations by the US State Department as recently as March of this year – were being absorbed into the Sudanese Armed Forces’ fighting ranks. It is entirely reasonable to ask whether he should have been given leave to remain and why he was not properly vetted. Benn’s answer, that previous history doesn’t tell you what someone will do, is rejected daily by his own government’s counter-terrorism strategy.
Then there is the question of what the word ‘refugee’ is being required to carry in this discussion, and it is carrying considerably more than it can bear.
Refugee status is a legal designation, not a moral quality. It is a determination made by a caseworker, on the basis of evidence available at the time of claim, that a person faces a well-founded fear of persecution in their country of origin. It says nothing about ideology. It says nothing about mental health. It says nothing about criminal propensity or the individual’s relationship to political violence. These are orthogonal categories. A person can be a genuine refugee, genuinely fleeing genuine persecution and also pose a serious risk to British citizens. When determining whether someone is a refugee, caseworkers assess the persecution claim. The security and public-protection assessment is a separate exercise, conducted separately, resourced separately, and in the case of an individual arriving via an unmonitored land border under the Common Travel Area, conducted with whatever information the Home Office happens to have – which, in this case, was apparently nothing.
The governing class and its media interlocutors have fused refugee status and individual safety assessment into a single category. To define someone as a refugee is to declare they pose no threat. This is not an honest synthesis. It is a category error with a political function. The function is to ensure that the concrete question – whether this individual was adequately assessed before being granted leave to remain and whether the route through which he arrived constitutes a structural gap in public protection – cannot be posed without triggering the response that you are calling for the abolition of the asylum system. Nobody serious is calling for that. The question is whether the asylum system, as it currently exists, is doing the full job that protection of the public requires. Benn’s claim, that prior history doesn’t tell you what someone will do, is not an answer to that question. It is a device for making the question sound unanswerable so that it need not be answered.
As Sowell taught us, there are no migrants in the abstract. There is no refugee in the abstract. The abstract refugee is a politically useful figure. He is stateless and suffering, the exemplar of everything the liberal conscience requires one to defend. The abstract refugee cannot be scrutinised without implicating the liberal conscience. The concrete individual here, suspect Hadi Alodid, is a specific man, from a specific country, with a specific recent history. He arrived via a specific route that specific legal decisions have left unmonitored. He was granted leave to remain in September 2023 on the basis of a specific assessment by a specific caseworker. His particular case desperately needs to be scrutinised. Scrutiny is not an attack on the abstract refugee. It is how you protect the next person. The governing class prefers the abstract refugee, because the abstract refugee requires only sentiment. The concrete individual requires accountability.
‘Progressive’ journalist Mehdi Hasan’s appearance on BBC’s Newsnight on Tuesday evening deserves credit for its internal consistency. He argued that this is a story of far-right actors exploiting a hideous crime, amplified by Elon Musk and Tommy Robinson. The danger, he continued, is to minority communities, and that anyone drawing wider conclusions from the attack is doing the demagogues’ work.
This is a partial argument presented as a total one. The partial truth is real. On Tuesday evening, homes burned, families were forced to flee and a Turkish barber’s shop in Ballyclare was attacked. These are genuine harms visited on innocent people. All of that is true. But none of it is an argument about whether the system that produced the conditions for the original attack is functioning adequately.
The existence of disreputable or thuggish people who exploit a failure does not determine whether the failure is real. If it did, institutional failure could never be examined, because there is always, in any charged situation, someone willing to exploit the examination for bad purposes. The governing class has understood this and used it consistently in response to incidents similar to the one in Belfast this week. Produce a Musk. Point at the mob. Claim that anyone not pointing at the mob is in league with it. The examination of the actual problem at hand is indefinitely deferred, which is the point.
The history that makes Hasan’s position untenable is not a history he disputes. It is a history he declines to address. The grooming-gangs scandal in Rotherham illustrates the point. The 2015 Jay Report documented over 1,400 victims of organised sexual exploitation in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013. The Casey Review of 2015 found Rotherham council ‘in denial’. Casey’s Rapid Audit of June 2025 found that institutions had, across two decades, avoided discussing perpetrator ethnicity ‘for fear of appearing racist, raising community tensions or causing community cohesion problems’. It found that one local authority had replaced a plan targeting specific perpetrators with a ‘broad commitment’ to tackling exploitation ‘in its varied manifestations across the district’s communities’, and that police were told by councils to avoid publicising convictions ‘due to fear of raising tensions’.
This was a deliberate institutional choice, made in the face of known evidence, to prioritise what officials called ‘community cohesion’ over the protection of children. ‘Community cohesion’ here means the management of political embarrassment at the expense of the people being harmed. It is a bureaucratic alibi, not a social good.
The language around Belfast – that the motive is yet to be established, that prior history doesn’t necessarily tell you what someone will do, that the investigation must be allowed to proceed – is not identical to the Rotherham mechanism. But it runs on the same fuel and it serves the same interest. Hasan is running the same machine under a different brand, and the machine is running fine.
The same PSNI chief constable who will plaster rioters’ images everywhere is the head of a service whose intelligence operations, as disclosed in recent Investigatory Powers Tribunal proceedings, included routine six-monthly trawls of journalists’ phone data. The same secretary of state who told the Commons that those abusing the hospitality of this country will be deported is the minister responsible for an immigration architecture with a functioning open door in it. The same prime minister who found the attack sickening took the knee in 2020 and is now managing a premiership whose departure timetable is a matter of active parliamentary negotiation. The people moving quickly are moving quickly against the people who reacted badly to the failure. The people responsible for the failure are explaining, at measured length, why the failure was in the nature of things. Why previous history cannot tell you what someone will do, and why it is very hard to operate a system in these circumstances.
Many of us, for different reasons, find this less than fully satisfying. The religion of calm has its sacraments and its clergy. Its central liturgy is the substitution of the emotional register for the analytical one. Their emotivist lexicon consists of sickening, harrowing, deeply shocking, deeply concerning. Its founding doctrine is that concern about the immigration system is contamination, that the person asking the structural question stands in proximity to the mob and must prove they are not by not asking it. Its clerisy are the Benns and the Hasans and the Boutchers and the Starmers. All mostly reasonable people, managing unreasonable circumstances they helped to construct. All gesturing toward the next calm that will precede the next event on the next street.
Three brave people with a hurling stick ran toward such an event this week. Yet the governing class continues to look the other way.
Owen Shapell is a PhD researcher in social sciences.
-
NewsBeat6 days agoAlexander Zverev wins the French Open to finally earn a 1st Grand Slam title
-
Entertainment7 days agoThe Best Mystery Series of All Time Is Surging on Streaming 30 Years After It Ended
-
Crypto World5 days agoAnatomy of the June crypto crash: Fed, Iran, Saylor
-
Crypto World2 days agoOppenheimer backs SpaceX as $70 billion retail frenzy builds
-
Crypto World2 days agoMarkets Rally as SpaceX IPO Looms Amid Iran Tensions and Inflation Surge
-
Crypto World7 days agoSenator Cynthia Lummis Calls CLARITY Act the Most Consequential Financial Legislation of This Generation
-
NewsBeat6 days ago
Alexander Zverev conquers demons and outlasts Flavio Cobolli to win French Open for first major title
-
Tech6 days agoMicrosoft unveils seven homegrown AI models in new bid for ‘long term self-sufficiency’
-
Business5 days agoHigh Stakes for Wembanyama as New York Pushes for 3-0 Lead
-
Tech6 days agoNotion restores access to Anthropic after service disruption
-
Business7 days agoThe Pain Points Taking a Fragile Tech Rally Down a Notch
-
Crypto World5 days ago
Eli Lilly (LLY) Stock Surges 4% Following Breakthrough Sleep Apnea Trial Results
-
Business6 days agoThe investment to transform historic St Helen’s ground in Swansea
-
Crypto World6 days agoTrump’s AI Ownership Plan Could Benefit Anthropic at OpenAI’s Expense
-
Sports4 days agoBangladesh beat Australia after 20 years in ODIs, register only their second win over six-time world champions | Cricket News
-
Tech12 hours agoNanoClaw integrates JFrog registries to secure AI agent downloads
-
Crypto World8 hours agoBitget enters Argentina’s regulated crypto market through PSAV registration
-
Tech23 hours agoThis Week In Security: Microsoft On Microsoft, Register Your Domains, Linux On ARM, And FreeBSD Joins The File Cache Club
-
Politics2 days agoPolitics Home | Healey Resignation Is “Colossal Failure Of Government”, Says Former Labour Defence Secretary
-
Sports2 days agoFirst Time Since 1971: Australia Register Historic Low In ODI Cricket

You only have yourself to blame!
Still Socialist tired of LIES & Anger (@BRUMSTOKIE) 

You must be logged in to post a comment Login