Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Politics

WWE Raw Topples Bridgerton As Netflix’s Number 1 Show Right Now

Published

on

Yerin Ha and Luke Thompson will return in new episodes of Bridgerton later this month

Bridgerton has finally been toppled from the top spot on Netflix’s list of most popular shows in the UK right now.

The forbidden romance between Benedict Bridgerton and Sophie Baek (played by Luke Thompson and Yerin Ha) had captured the hearts of the country, resulting in Bridgerton occupying the number one position on Netflix’s chart for almost two weeks.

However, that love affair is apparently now over – at least temporarily, given that the second half of the season will premiere later this month.

According to the streamer, part one of Bridgerton’s fourth outing has amassed 23.4 million viewers globally since it premiered at the end of January.

Advertisement

In its place, the WWE Raw has now once again risen to the top of the chart, solidifying to Netflix that it made the right decision to stream wrestling content on its platform.

WWE Raw is followed on the streaming chart by Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich. Despite the Netflix original documentary first being released in 2020, the recent publication of his emails has evidently piqued users’ interest in the prolific sex offender.

Yerin Ha and Luke Thompson will return in new episodes of Bridgerton later this month
Yerin Ha and Luke Thompson will return in new episodes of Bridgerton later this month

Other shows currently on Netflix’s most-watched list in the UK at the time of writing include the new series of original drama The Lincoln Lawyer and German spy thriller Unfamiliar.

Meanwhile, the Tessa Thompson crime series His & Hers is still holding strong in the top 10, more than a month on from its early January release.

This week, also added all 15 seasons of ER to their platform – and considering that everyone seems to be watching the George Clooney medical drama at the moment, we can expect it to appear in the top 10 in the coming days.

Advertisement

Part one of Bridgerton season four is now streaming on Netflix, with four new episodes of the hit period drama being released on 26 February.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Trump Claims Fizzy Drinks Kill Cancer Cells Like Grass

Published

on

President Donald Trump drinks a soda as he hosts the Holyfield vs Belford boxing match live in 2021, next to his son Donald Trump Jr.

The man who suggested people drink bleach during the COVID pandemic is back with another hit.

President Donald Trump reportedly thinks fizzy drinks are good for him, because it kills grass — and therefore it must also kill cancer cells.

The wild revelation comes via Dr. Mehmet Oz, Trump’s administrator for Medicare and Medicaid, who shared the anecdote on Donald Trump Jr.’s podcast on Tuesday.

“Your dad argues that diet soda is good for him because it kills grass if you pour it on grass, so therefore it must kill cancer cells inside the body,” Oz told Trump Jr. in disbelief, to which Trump Jr. just laughed and shrugged knowingly.

Advertisement
President Donald Trump drinks a soda as he hosts the Holyfield vs Belford boxing match live in 2021, next to his son Donald Trump Jr.
President Donald Trump drinks a soda as he hosts the Holyfield vs Belford boxing match live in 2021, next to his son Donald Trump Jr.

CHANDAN KHANNA via Getty Images

“I’m not even going to argue this right now,” Oz continued.

Oz then shared an anecdote of walking in on Trump drinking an orange Fanta on Air Force One, where he again repeated the theory.

“He’s got a Fanta on the desk and I say, ‘Are you kidding me?’ So he starts to sheepishly grin, he goes, ‘You know, this stuff’s good for me, it kills cancer cells.’”

The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center declined to comment.

Advertisement

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

How To Respond When Kids Say They Hate You

Published

on

How To Respond When Kids Say They Hate You

Hearing your child shout “I hate you” can be excruciating. I know, I’ve been there. Usually they’re in complete emotional turmoil – logic has officially left the building, as rage, frustration or disappointment takes control.

It’s hard not to take it personally, but usually when they are using this kind of language, it doesn’t actually mean they hate you. They are simply struggling to express their feelings or needs.

What it means when kids say ‘I hate you’

Psychotherapist Alison Roy suggests the phrase can mean “many things” – but mainly that there are “strong feelings around” which is actually a “healthy” sign. In this moment, they are “throwing something difficult to their parent/s to catch” (and you are their safe space, so they trust you can handle it).

Advertisement

The therapist urges parents to try not to take these statements literally or personally.

She suggests hate could mean “I feel out of control” or “you get to make all the decisions and I hate feeling powerless” or “I wish I didn’t have to feel so uncomfortable”.

Some young people might also be finding it hard to love themselves and their own self-loathing or frustrations are then projected onto their parents. “It’s important to take time to understand what’s behind an outburst,” she adds.

“As psychotherapists we use the term projections to describe feelings which can’t be managed or contained and therefore get given to someone else – usually someone the young person feels can take it.”

Advertisement

Brieanne Doyle, a BACP therapist and founder of Dwell Therapy, notes that this strong language is a way for children to “get our attention and to express their feelings/needs”.

“Behind the ‘I hate you,’ is a child who is scared, frustrated, angry,” she explains, “and they need help navigating these feelings and learning how to express them appropriately.”

The best ways to respond when kids say they hate you

It can be tempting to argue back (“how dare you!”) or immediately punish them (“no more iPad!”), but experts suggest parents should take the opportunity to quickly connect with themselves instead.

Advertisement

“What are you feeling right now? Annoyed, angry, sad? All very normal emotions, but right now, you cannot attend to yourself – so, notice the feeling and tell yourself you’ll come back to that later,” says Doyle.

Dr Becky Kennedy, clinical psychologist and founder of Good Inside, said sometimes the best response is to say or do nothing after your child says they hate you. “When we do nothing … it just sits between us. My kid has a much higher chance of re-owning what they said because I’m just sturdy in that moment,” she explained on The Huberman Lab podcast.

If your child is younger, you can get down to their level and calmly acknowledge their feelings. Doyle suggests you could say something like: “I can see you’re really frustrated right now. How can we help you calm down?”

She explains: “We are first trying to connect with the child – they are upset and it is the adult’s job to create a space of containment for their very big emotions.”

Advertisement

Sometimes the offer of a cuddle helps these big moments blow over. Other times they might just need a bit of space, or for you to silently sit nearby until they’ve calmed a bit. If they keep saying they hate you, you can tell them you’re leaving the room and will come back to speak to them shortly.

Sometimes taking time and acknowledging the big feelings but not absorbing everything or taking them personally can shift things.

– Alison Roy

Once they’re calm, you can explore where the feelings came from. “Where possible, try to find out what is behind the words – what feelings are being expressed and has something happened which has left your young person with big feelings they can’t deal with,” says Roy.

Advertisement

“Sometimes taking time and acknowledging the big feelings but not absorbing everything or taking them personally can shift things.”

Now you can offer the correction. Doyle suggests you could say something like: “You were really upset and you said something very hurtful. In this house we don’t use words to hurt each other. When you are ready I’d appreciate an apology for what you said, which really hurt my feelings.”

You can also set some “ground rules” together, says Roy, for sharing feelings and managing expectations in the future. For example, you could say: “I get that you were disappointed but I know there’s another way you can say that to me.” This way you’re validating their feelings but also setting a boundary.

“It’s important for them to know that you can manage these big feelings and they will be watching you to see how you manage them and what you are modelling for them,” she adds.

Advertisement

Lastly, as being told “I hate you” can be painful, don’t forget to check in with yourself later on, says Doyle, revisiting how you felt when your child said it and considering what you need to offer yourself: “A kind word, a reminder that you are a good enough parent, a quiet moment to yourself, sharing this with your parenting partner or a trusted friend, perhaps even with your own parent?”

She ends: “This ensures that you do not store up all the feelings associated with the phrase and then explode at your child some day when you cannot take any more.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Lammy calls Palantir-sponsored JD Vance a ‘friend’ on latest Washington trip

Published

on

Lammy

Lammy

The Green Party need not spend any money campaigning for the local elections in May next month as David Lammy is seemingly doing its press for them.

Lammy in DC

Justice secretary Lammy posted a picture of himself in Washington — presumably to attend the Bilderberg conference with Palantir-sponsored US vice-president JD Vance — and called him a “friend”.

Shadow home secretary, Zoe Gardner, reposted Lammy’s gushing friendship declaration and asked: “Genuinely, who is going to vote for this in May?” We are thinking the same.

Lammy’s friends also include Peter Mandelson, a pal of the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s friend

Other reactions were similarly expressing disgust. Green Party leader, Zack Polanski, called the photo opportunity a “debasement.”

Advertisement

One user called them a pair of trashers: Vance for trashing the peace talks and Lammy for trashing jury trials.

Advertisement

Bilderberg meeting

Declassified recently shared the list of participants of the 2026 annual Bilderberg meeting, which included Lammy.

According to Bilderberg’s press release, the 72nd Bilderberg Meeting took place from 9-12 April 2026 in Washington among a “diverse group of political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia, and media”.

Advertisement

This year’s invitee list included Palantir’s Peter Thiel and Alex Karp. NATO’s secretary general also confirmed his attendance.

Lammy has been a regular invitee to the secretive meeting.

In 2023, Matt Kennard reported that in 2022, Lammy was paid to attend the Bilderberg meeting through a consultancy headed by former MI6 head Sawers.

Advertisement

Declassified’s Mark Curtis quipped: “Never say social mobility in Britain is dead. David Lammy has gone from Tottenham boy to shameless elite apologist for genocide and imperialism in half a lifetime.”

Advertisement

Tottenham set to go Green

Lammy has brushed off polling showing he would lose his seat to the Greens in the next general election, which will take no later than 15 August 2029.

Labour holds all MP seats across Haringey, which is represented by four MPs — Bambos Charalambous (Southgate), David Lammy (Tottenham), Tulip Siddiq (Highgate) and Catherine West (Hornsey).

He rubbished the prospect of the Greens taking his seat in a recent interview with Oli Dugmore.

Advertisement

However, will local elections give Labour a jolt?

It is to be seen how Haringey will vote in the local elections in May. Labour holds 50 out of the 57 seats in Haringey.

Advertisement

Will Haringey go Green in May? Will that make Lammy realise the knee deep shit he is in with friends like Vance and Mandelson?

We think Lammy’s photo ops with Vance, Netanyahu, Gideon Sa’ar (the list is endless) will come back to haunt him.

Featured image via 

By The Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Albany’s influence wars

Published

on

Gov. Kathy Hochul has taken almost $200,000 in campaign contributions from insurance companies amid her proposal to save them thousands.

Gov. Kathy Hochul has taken almost $200,000 in campaign contributions from insurance companies amid her proposal to save them thousands.

DAYS THE BUDGET IS LATE: 14

STONES AND GLASS STATEHOUSES: Gov. Kathy Hochul has raked in almost $200,000 in campaign contributions from insurance companies as she pushes for a proposal she argues would help save both their policyholders — as well as those same companies — lots of money.

But while reaping that campaign cash, Hochul has also attacked members of the Legislature for taking their own political contributions — and she is now arguing their political positions are tainted by those dollars in a way hers are not.

“I’m proud of what we’re doing,” Hochul told reporters today at an unrelated event in the Capital Region. “Money has no influence in what we’re doing.”

Advertisement

One of the sticking points holding up the now two-weeks-late-and-counting state budget is Hochul’s push to limit who can sue for damages when they’re in an auto accident. Right now, even if the accident is your fault, you can still reap a reward. Limiting who can receive damages would save insurers money, and, in theory, cut monthly insurance rates for New York’s millions of drivers, Hochul argues.

But members of the Legislature — who often receive political donations from the state’s trial lawyers, which represent plaintiffs in personal injury suits — say they’re skeptical the push would equate to any real savings for New Yorkers, and they worry it would prevent injured people from receiving the money they deserve in court.

On Monday, Deputy Senate Majority Leader Michael Gianaris made waves in the Capitol when he blamed Hochul for acting like an obstructionist in state budget negotiations.

“It takes three parties to agree, and the person who proposed the budget seems less than willing to appreciate that,” Gianaris said on the Senate floor. He later told reporters Hochul’s negotiating strategy is “a one-way street” when it comes to auto insurance reforms.

Advertisement

A few hours later, Hochul’s spokesperson Kara Cumoletti fired back: “If Sen. Gianaris is interested in making progress, he should urge his colleagues to support the governor’s efforts to lower auto insurance rates, rather than defending a broken system that benefits trial lawyers — one of the top donors to the Senate Campaign Committee he controls.”

Ouch.

Despite her spokesperson insinuating that those looking for Gianaris’ motivations need only follow the money, Hochul insisted her political contributions have nothing to do with her stances, which are driven by a tireless fight for affordability.

“I was responding to criticism that is trying to infer that we are the roadblocks; that we’re not trying to cooperate,” Hochul said today, explaining Cumoletti’s statement.

Advertisement

Since 2021, Hochul has received $194,250 from auto insurance companies and insurance industry associations, per public records. The state Democratic Party, which Hochul controls, also raked in $70,250 from those same groups between 2024 and 2025.

“If interests are aligned, then those interests are also aligned with the interests of every single New Yorker who wants to see their rates go down,” Hochul said when asked about those donations. “I don’t think the trial lawyers’ interests are aligned with New Yorkers.”

The New York State Trial Lawyers Association President Andrew Finkelstein responded in a statement accusing Hochul of getting “into bed with the insurance industry.”

“NYSTLA will fight both in the courthouse and out to keep the doors of justice open to everyone, not just the wealthy few,” Finkelstein said. “Albany is right to pull back the covers and expose who this plan really serves.” Jason Beeferman

Advertisement

From the Capitol

Legislators, including Democratic Assembly Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes, are announcing their retirements after filing for reelection.

NO CONCERNS OVER RETIREMENTS: Hochul brushed off any concerns caused by a rash of legislators who have announced their retirements after filing paperwork to get on the ballot, effectively letting them choose their own successors in some cases.

“The process is what it is,” Hochul said. “The vast, vast majority of the time, the system is such that candidates plan to run, they plan to stay, they petition to get on the ballot, and, again, if something unforeseen happens, there is a mechanism that’s in place, the committee on vacancies, that allows that person to be filled. I’m not concluding there’s something sinister about a process that has been in place for a long time.”

Republican state Sen. Jack Martins bowed out of a battleground Nassau County district over the weekend. He previously denied rumors he might retire — but announced his plans to do so after submitting petitions that let area party leaders select Assemblymember Jake Blumencranz to run in his stead.

In the Cortland area, Assemblymember Jeff Gallahan pointed to health concerns when announcing his retirement. He’s giving his spot on the Republican line to Mark Benjamin, the community relations director for a landfill.

Advertisement

And Democratic Assembly Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes announced her retirement last week. Her spot on the ballot will go to Buffalo Common Council Member Leah Halton-Pope, and the party will avoid the primary that likely would’ve occurred had Peoples-Stokes announced her plans earlier.

“I think Crystal Peoples-Stokes was planning to stay longer,” Hochul said. “I don’t know if this is some sort of conspiracy to do something untoward. She’s following the laws, and this is how it is. It’s actually pretty rare. It doesn’t happen with great regularity.” — Bill Mahoney

HOCHUL DEFENDS POPE: Hochul said President Donald Trump’s attacks on Pope Leo XIV are “abhorrent” in emotional comments to reporters today.

“The pope is a man of peace,” said Hochul, a Catholic. “He has a right to speak out and wise leaders would be right to listen to him.”

Advertisement

On Sunday, Trump, following a veiled critique from Leo that Jesus “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war,” wrote on Truth Social that “Pope Leo is WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy.” Later that day, the president posted a picture that depicted himself as Jesus, an image he deleted the following morning.

Hochul told reporters that “Jesus would be rather shocked at what’s happening these days.”

“The Pope deserves more respect and for someone to release an image that equates the president of the United States with Jesus — or anyone with Jesus — is just reprehensible to, hopefully, everybody,” she said. — Jason Beeferman

FROM CITY HALL

City-run grocery stories were a key campaign promise for Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

BREAD AND ROSES: The mayor unveiled new details about five city-run grocery stores he plans open by the end of his term — a key campaign promise that has kindled strong feelings from opponents.

Advertisement

The stores will sit on city-owned land, absolving them of paying market-rate rent and property taxes. In exchange, the yet-to-be selected private operators will be contractually required to offer several staples like bread and eggs at a fixed price below the New York City average.

How far below, though, the administration still has not determined.

“What I can tell you is that when New Yorkers come to city-run grocery stores, they will see a clear price differential when it comes to those essentials,” Mamdani said at La Marqueta, the site of a $30 million grocery store set to open in 2029.

Unlike the East Harlem location, other city-run stores will not be built from the ground up, meaning they will open earlier. The first is set to welcome shoppers next year, for example.

Advertisement

While the mayor is planning just five stores, the concept of government grocers has sparked heated backlash from the mayor’s more moderate detractors. John Catsimatidis, owner of the supermarket chain Gristedes, threatened to close all of his stores if Mamdani won, a pledge he walked back after the democratic socialist’s November victory. Joe Anuta

BUSINESS AS USUAL: New York City Council Member Farah Louis returned to work Tuesday after federal investigators raided her home and her sister’s amid a federal probe on bribery and fraud allegations.

Louis, who has not been charged, appeared at a scheduled Zoning and Franchises subcommittee meeting, which she chairs.

As part of the investigation that led to the indictment, prosecutors have questioned whether Louis and her sister, Debbie Esther Louis, accepted kickbacks in exchange for steering city funds to shelter provider BRAHGS Home Care, according to a search warrant.

Advertisement

Louis directed more than $450,000 in city funds over five years to the nonprofit, according to city documents reviewed by Gothamist.

Louis left the building shortly after the hearing concluded and did not take questions. — Gelila Negesse 

FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL

Former Rep. Anthony D’Esposito signaled an interest in returning to Congress earlier this year.

D’ESPOSIT-NO: Former Rep. Anthony D’Esposito will not be making a comeback bid for Congress against Democratic Rep. Laura Gillen in a battleground Long Island district.

D’Esposito, who is currently inspector general in the U.S. Labor Department, signaled his interest in returning to Congress earlier this year — though it was unclear if he would quit his job in the Trump administration to do so.

Advertisement

Last month at a House subcommittee hearing, he skirted questions about his congressional aspirations, and the politically powerful Nassau County Republican Committee backed John DeGrace, a former Valley Stream mayor, as its nominee. DeGrace declined the nomination last week, leaving the possibility of a D’Esposito return on the table.

But D’Esposito ruled it out in a statement Tuesday, the final day for local Republicans to choose a replacement candidate. He expressed his personal support for Hempstead Receiver of Taxes Jeanine Driscoll, whom he called a “dear friend.”

“I will continue serving as the 9th Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Labor, working with our team nationwide to root out fraud and put those who steal from Americans behind bars,” D’Esposito said in the statement. “It is an honor to serve in President Trump’s administration and on the Anti-Fraud Task Force led by Vice President JD Vance.”

Read more from Madison Fernandez in POLITICO Pro.

Advertisement

TRUMP BOOSTS BLAKEMAN: The president emphasized his support for Republican Nassau County Executive and gubernatorial candidate Bruce Blakeman shortly after an appearance on Fox Business that was ridiculed by Hochul’s campaign.

“Bruce Blakeman, the highly respected and very popular Nassau County Executive, who is running for Governor, is surging in the New York State Polls,” Trump wrote, after Blakeman appeared on Fox Business. “He is one of the best politicians in the U.S. Watch him work his magic!!!”

About 30 minutes before Trump’s post, Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo and her partner pressed Blakeman on the following:

“I’m not seeing a lot of you, where have you been Bruce?”

Advertisement

“I don’t see enough of you. I need to start seeing you more on social media.”

“How are you going to get New Yorkers out to actually vote for you, Bruce?”

Hochul’s campaign mocked the appearance for Blakeman as “humiliating.”

For his part, Blakeman responded to Bartiromo by saying New Yorkers are sick of the high cost of living in New York.

Advertisement

New Yorkers “want a new governor, a governor that puts them first, cares about them, will cut their utility bills in half, will lower taxes, create job prosperity and create safer neighborhoods,” Blakeman said. “I have the experience, the ability and policies that people want.” Jason Beeferman

IN OTHER NEWS

MATCH DAY: Train tickets to MetLife Stadium from New York City are projected to cost more than $100 during World Cup games — despite regular prices of $12.90. (The New York Times)

INDEPENDENT: Scotia Mayor David Bucciferro rejected Republican backing for his incumbent bid with Scotia-Glenville GOP Chairman David Lindsay announcing plans to run a candidate against Bucciferro. (Times Union)

RISK TOLERANCE: Wall Street firms continue hiring and expanding in New York City at record levels, even as Mamdani advances a tax-the-rich agenda that some predicted would drive companies out of the city. (THE CITY)

Advertisement

Missed this morning’s New York Playbook? We forgive you. Read it here.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

New Swalwell Accuser Speaks

Published

on

New Swalwell Accuser Speaks

!function(n){if(!window.cnx){window.cnx={},window.cnx.cmd=[];var t=n.createElement(‘iframe’);t.display=’none’,t.onload=function(){var n=t.contentWindow.document,c=n.createElement(‘script’);c.src=”//cd.connatix.com/connatix.player.js”,c.setAttribute(‘async’,’1′),c.setAttribute(‘type’,’text/javascript’),n.body.appendChild(c)},n.head.appendChild(t)}}(document);(new Image()).src=”https://capi.connatix.com/tr/si?token=19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″,”mediaId”:”24720d12-863d-421f-bcd5-62ec523362fd”}).render(“69dea061e4b0f26bda6270e7”);});

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

No, Sadiq, London’s decline isn’t ‘disinformation’

Published

on

No, Sadiq, London’s decline isn’t ‘disinformation’

If the electorate isn’t happy with the way the country is going, you might assume this is down to social problems and poor governance. Not so for Labour politicians. According to them, the gullible British public must have been manipulated or misled by things they have seen or read in the right-wing media – especially online.

A case in point is the pint-sized culture warrior in City Hall, London mayor Sadiq Khan, whose city is not particularly happy these days. Concerns about crime and demographic change are long-standing in the capital. Recently, we’ve seen mobs of anti-social teenagers using the Easter holidays to loot supermarkets and menace shoppers in Clapham. Last week, a 21-year-old man was stabbed to death in Primrose Hill, the latest victim of gang violence that remains endemic. The borough of Tower Hamlets has essentially become Lutfur Rahman’s personal sectarian fiefdom, with UKIP marches banned, women prevented from partaking in fun-runs organised by mosques, and now a ministerial corruption probe over cash being ‘funnelled’ to Bangladeshi groups.

In the face of these alarming social problems, Khan instead warns that London is facing a ‘dark blizzard of disinformation’. Speaking at the Cambridge Disinformation Summit last week, he presented the findings of a City Hall report into the supposed scourge of disinformation today. The often-negative way London is talked about online poses ‘risks’ to ‘marginalised groups, democratic functioning, the economy’ and even ‘national security’, it claims, with London particularly ‘exposed’ to such narratives due to its ‘global visibility, diversity and political prominence’.

Advertisement

Funnily enough, all the disinformation ‘narratives’ it warns of are precisely the kinds of political arguments most damaging to a right-on Labour mayor who bluntly insists that Britain’s ‘diversity’ is its biggest strength. These include claims that London is ‘unsafe or in decline’, or that women and girls are at risk from sexual assaults by immigrants – ‘narratives’, which it admits, ‘often draw on real offences’. Apparently, it’s also ‘misleading’ to point out how vastly London has changed, as in claims of ‘“Islamisation”, demographic replacement or preferential treatment for particular groups’. Any suggestion that there might be two-tier policing of protests is also presented as malign and spurious.

Historically, the censorship Blob has tried to mask its authoritarian instincts by pretending that it is only worried about falsehoods, not political dissent as such. It has typically talked of ‘disinformation’ as being deliberate false propaganda, usually disseminated by a foreign power. Meanwhile, ‘misinformation’ usually refers to untruths shared by hapless dupes. Of course, it was always obvious that both were mere euphemisms for opinions people like Sir Sadiq didn’t want to hear. And now, they’re not even bothering to pretend.

Advertisement

Enjoying spiked?

Why not make an instant, one-off donation?

We are funded by you. Thank you!

Advertisement




Please wait…

Advertisement
Advertisement

Indeed, Khan’s City Hall report warns of ‘malinformation’ – information that, despite being ‘based on fact’, is used ‘out of context to support misleading conclusions’. So even information that the mayor admits is true is considered a threat if it leads people to the wrong conclusions. A footnote then gives the game away: ‘“Mis- / disinformation” is used as a shorthand for misleading or harmful information.’ So Khan and his cronies want political narratives censored – even if they are based on fact.

Worse, Khan suggests that it is online discourse that’s causing London’s problems, not his own soft-on-crime policies as mayor. Negative social-media commentary has put London in a ‘toxic feedback loop’, he claims, meaning that ‘as extremists erode trust in our city and its institutions, it gets easier and easier for them to twist online anger into offline violence’. So if there are muggings, stabbings or grooming gangs in London, these are actually the fault of outrage about them online?

Advertisement

We’ve seen this kind of bizarre, topsy-turvy reasoning before. In the run up to the Gorton and Denton by-election, Green Party candidate Hannah Spencer blamed the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing on the rhetoric of the right, accusing her Reform UK rival, Matthew Goodwin, of ‘dividing people’. These are extraordinary, ghoulish claims. In this warped world, the original problem the public is rightly aggrieved about is somehow caused by the subsequent outrage it generates online.

What follows inevitably from this mindset is the belief that the best way to solve social problems is through restricting what can be said. Tellingly, other speakers at the invitation-only disinformation conference included Imran Ahmed, chief executive of the notorious pro-censorship campaign group, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate. This three-day summit was in truth a chummy, secretive gathering of leading lights of the global censorship industrial complex.

‘I see disinformation as preparing the landscape for corruption’, declared its chair, Alan Jagolinzer, while calling for lots more money to be funnelled to anti-disinformation crusaders like him and his chums. This was a gathering of snooty globalists who disdain free expression and believe that the only reason for the rise of populism is that they haven’t censored dissent enough. No wonder Khan felt right at home.

Advertisement

Sadiq Khan has been a disaster for London. The capital is dirtier, less safe and more expensive than at any time in recent memory. This creeping decrepitude isn’t misinformation, disinformation or malinformation. There is a simpler word for it: the truth.

Laurie Wastell is an associate editor at the Daily Sceptic and host of the podcast, The Sceptic. Follow him on X: @l_wastell.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Southport inquiry, Prevent and a risky fixation on ‘terrorist ideology’

Published

on

Axel Rudakubana as an adult on the left and in stark contrast on the right, where he's pictured as a young child in school uniform looking happy

It makes for particularly interesting reading alongside comments made earlier this month by the Prevent assistant commissioner, Laurence Taylor. He claimed the counter-terrorism scheme was being overwhelmed by a massive influx of referrals.

Trends indicate that Prevent will receive more than 10,000 referrals in 2026, representing a 33% increase compared to 2024. However, Taylor argued that this doesn’t necessarily represent an uptick in the radical ideologies that Prevent was (nominally) set up to combat.

In fact, the majority of these referrals are apparently unrelated to extremist ideologies. Instead, they’re issued over concerns about people becoming interested in violence. As such, Taylor claimed that Prevent’s time is being wasted, leaving it less able to deal with actual threats.

We at the Canary phrased this another way:

Advertisement

That is, the UK has invested so much in the very idea that (Muslim) terrorism is the greatest threat to our safety that we’ve actively started to damage the capacity to respond to non-terror threats.

The Southport inquiry report has only added weight to that assertion.

Axel Rudakubana as an adult on the left and in stark contrast on the right, where he's pictured as a young child in school uniform looking happy

‘Referrals ought to have been made’

The report’s foreword notes that no single agency was willing to “accept that it had the lead role in managing the risk” Rudakubana, referred to as “AR”, posed.

One of several examples of this failure, was that:

Prevent declined to refer AR’s case to a Channel panel on three occasions when, based on the information that should have been known to Counter Terrorism Policing North West (CTPNW), referrals ought to have been made.

However, it also makes clear that Prevent was the most likely candidate to take the lead.

Advertisement

While Prevent, by the nature of the cases which it routinely deals with, would have been the most likely framework to be able to address AR’s risk, none of these three frameworks [Prevent, Working Together to Safeguard Children, Early Help] was by any means a perfect fit. The risk of harm posed by AR fell between their respective remits.

Rudakubana’s school referred him to Prevent no less than three times. However, Prevent never escalated his case to Channel. Channel’s aim is to provide support to stop extremist ideology from developing into criminal behavior.

The teen, 17, ‘had not displayed any extremist views’

Of the three referrals, the report acknowledges the failure to escalate the first as the most fundamental failure.

One of the main reasons for this was that, during a visit from Prevent:

AR had not displayed any extremist views, or counter-terrorism or domestic extremism ideology during the conversation. He failed to demonstrate any interest in politics or religion, and he had not revealed grievances against particular groups.

The report earlier states that officers had searched actively for evidence of ideological motivations.

Advertisement

It is to be stressed that the police searched for and were unable to find any evidence of AR having pursued an ideological cause, whether political, religious or racial.

Although he had downloaded an image of the Twin Towers and an academic paper containing the Al-Qaeda training manual, these two items were patently insufficient to support a suggestion that he was motivated by Islamic fundamentalism when balanced against the remainder of the material in his possession.

To the contrary, Rudakubana reportedly possessed materials mocking various religions. Among these, Islam, Judaism and Christianity, were particularly prominent. However, the report stresses that the “significant quantity” of “grossly offensive” anti-Islamic material was of particular note.

Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe and Alice da Silva Aguiar

‘Mixed, unstable or unclear’

It would be easy to dismiss Prevent’s failure here as a one-off incident, but the report shows that this sidelining of non-ideological motivations is a pervasive issue.

In 2017-18, 8% [of] individuals referred to Prevent due to concerns around Islamist extremism or right-wing extremism ultimately received support via Channel.

The corresponding figure for individuals referred due to concerns about ‘mixed, unstable or unclear’ ideologies was less than 1%.

Advertisement

While there are likely to be many reasons for this, as we have seen in recent tragic attacks, the motivations of the terrorists responsible sometimes remain unclear even after the event, so we need to pay due regard to this complex issue in order to better protect the public.

After Rudakubana’s attack, Prevent referrals started to rise dramatically. However, more than 50% of the individuals concerned had no clear ideological motivation. In a Guardian interview, Prevent’s assistant commissioner reasoned that this was because there’s simply nowhere else to report these kinds of concerns.

On this subject, the Canary previously argued:

Prevent, despite ostensibly being set up to target all extremist ideology, has disproportionately targeted Muslims from its outset. In fact, hundreds of babies and toddlers have been referred to the scheme, overwhelmingly due to “Islamist concerns”.

In 2022, the Shawcross review even had the nerve to call for a renewed focus on Islamic extremism, calling the definition of neo-Nazism has “expanded too widely”.

Advertisement

And now, we’re being told that non-ideological motivations are falling through the cracks precisely because of the state’s obsession with terrorist ideology? And, in fact, we have no real mechanisms in place for concerns of non-terrorist violence?

The phase one Southport inquiry report has shown this to be true in tragic detail. Officers searched and questioned Rudakubana for evidence of ideological motives — Islamist or otherwise. Finding none, they failed to escalate his case further.

Beyond that, no agency was a “perfect fit” for Rudakubana, so none stepped forward to take the lead. Because he wasn’t an obvious terrorist or a case for social care, mental health services, or some other agency, he fell through the cracks. As a result, three young girls are now dead.

Featured image via Peter Powell/ AFP/ Getty Images

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Soaring energy costs are killing Britain’s AI ambitions

Published

on

Soaring energy costs are killing Britain’s AI ambitions

OpenAI announced last week that it is to pause Stargate UK. This was the multibillion-pound project designed to boost artificial-intelligence (AI) infrastructure in the UK. It was to include a large data centre in north-east England, in partnership with tech firms Nvidia and Nscale. Explaining its decision to put the project on hold, OpenAI pointed to a difficult regulatory environment and, above all, the UK’s high energy costs.

Unfortunately, this is not a shock. OpenAI’s struggle is an all too familiar and depressing tale of a deep, structural problem in the British economy – namely, our extortionate energy prices, which are some of the highest in the world.

After all, training frontier AI models and running data centres requires affordable and abundant energy. When energy is expensive, the cost of doing everything increases. This means that previously viable business models fall apart, and companies will think again about scaling up their operations, or will expand where energy is cheaper.

Advertisement

The repercussions of high energy prices reach far beyond cutting-edge technology. They determine whether a steel plant can stay open, whether a salt plant will close, and whether a new factory is built in the UK or elsewhere. If it costs far more to run a factory here than it does abroad, then industries and jobs will move.

It is the British people who then lose out. Industries that once defined and knit together communities are disappearing. Jobs that once powered the local economies of villages, towns and cities across the UK are moving to other countries. Wages that previously kept pubs and high streets alive now barely cover the basics. The impacts are felt not just through those industries that we lose, but also through those that never arrive.

Advertisement

Enjoying spiked?

Why not make an instant, one-off donation?

We are funded by you. Thank you!

Advertisement




Please wait…

Advertisement
Advertisement

This is the price the UK is paying for successive governments’ prioritising of ideology over affordable and secure energy. If we continue down this path, we will disqualify ourselves from hosting new and growing industries at scale.

This is why the pause of Stargate UK matters. It’s a signal – another flashing warning light – that Britain is not a viable location for those seeking to shape the technologies and capabilities of mankind tomorrow. But this outcome is not inevitable: those breakthroughs can still happen here, those jobs can still be created across the country, and those businesses can still scale up in Britain.

Advertisement

What we are seeing is not a product of fate, geography or an immutable characteristic of our isles. It is the result of political choice – a choice that has meant the country responsible for pioneering the Industrial Revolution is now failing to produce abundant and affordable energy. Government after government has backed down to consultants, lawyers, lobbyists and activists.

The government does not have to cave. Our politicians can change course. They can choose to rebuild our domestic energy production. They can prioritise the energy bills of households and companies across the country over pats on the back by their friends at Westminster dinner parties.

The choice is stark. With cheaper energy, industries can grow, businesses can scale up, families can afford a meal out. With the most expensive energy in the world, food costs more to produce and transport, businesses face higher overheads and those industries that could come here may choose elsewhere.

Advertisement

This is not a question of capabilities: Britain has the talent, expertise and potential. Instead, it is a question of will. If we continue down our current path, we will watch from the sidelines as other nations capture the benefits of tomorrow’s world. If we change course, we can bring back industries and jobs across the country, and define the future once again.

Dr Lawrence Newport is the CEO and co-founder of Looking for Growth, the political movement to end decline and save Britain.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

ICJP writes to UNESCO over Ben-Gvir raid of Al-Aqsa

Published

on

ICJP writes to UNESCO over Ben-Gvir raid of Al-Aqsa

The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians has written to the director of world heritage at UNESCO. It’s to raise concerns over the recent raiding of Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem by Israeli settlers, alongside far-right Israeli minister and all-round nightmare Itamar Ben Gvir. This came at a time of rapidly increasing religious persecution of Palestinian Christians and Muslims in the occupied Palestinian territory by Israeli authorities.

Ben Gvir raiding Al-Aqsa again

This follows Israel’s increasing attempts to consolidate total sovereignty over Al-Aqsa, which is the third holiest site in Islam, and is emblematic of Israel’s primary aim of Judaisation of Muslim and Christian holy and heritage sites across the occupied Palestinian territory.

UNESCO’s role in safeguarding the protection of Palestinian cultural, historical, and religious heritage sites is of fundamental importance in the face of increasing Israeli attempts to erase Palestinian cultural heritage, which includes its continued weaponisation of archaeology to appropriate Palestinian land.

It is paramount that the UN strongly condemns the move by Ben-Gvir to consolidate Israeli control of Al-Aqsa, his unlawful raid of the compound, and for the UN and UNESCO to immediately take preventative measures that stop the Israeli authorities from deepening its persecution of Palestinian Muslims and Muslim holy sites across the occupied Palestinian territory.

Advertisement

In his capacity as minister for national security, Ben Gvir has also indicated his plans for Israeli authorities to oversee the admitting of up to 150 Israelis or Muslims at a time in the Al-Aqsa compound. This move would place Ben Gvir in effective control of the Mosque’s affairs, side-lining the Jerusalem Islamic Waqf, which holds recognised exclusive administrative authority, including control over access, and has done so for 839 years.

It is also profoundly concerning that Ben Gvir’s raid of Al-Aqsa Mosque was permitted at a time when the site remains unlawfully closed to Palestinian Muslims. The compound has now been inaccessible for over a month, including throughout the recent holy month of Ramadan, raising serious alarm. This development sets a dangerous precedent, further entrenching patterns of discrimination and exacerbating the risk of religious persecution against Palestinian Muslims.

Freedom of religion and belief

Ben Gvir has also pushed for the Knesset to introduce legislation to curtail the Muslim call to prayer. Meanwhile, on the recent Palm Sunday, the Archbishop of Jerusalem was denied access to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the holiest site in Christianity.

The prolonged and deliberate restriction of access to Al-Aqsa Mosque by Israeli authorities constitutes a grave breach of Israel’s obligations under international law. Such measures amount to religious persecution of Palestinian Muslims and impose unlawful restrictions on fundamental rights, including freedom of movement, freedom of religion, and the right to practice one’s faith.

Advertisement

These rights are firmly protected under international legal frameworks, rendering continued encroachment upon Palestinian religious and cultural sites across the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful under international humanitarian law.

Israel’s actions regarding Al-Aqsa follow a similar pattern to those seen following the progressive Judaisation of the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron. In January 2026, Israel barred the mosque’s Palestinian directors and seized planning rights over part of the site, in contravention to longstanding arrangements.

Despite its administration by Palestinians and use as a mosque for more than 1,400 years, Israel has continually increased Jewish access to the site in its attempts to consolidate Israeli and Jewish sovereignty over it, increasingly so after the 1994 massacre of Palestinian Muslims at the mosque by a Jewish settler.

Órlaith Roe, ICJP public affairs and communications, said:

Advertisement

It is paramount that the UN adopts the findings of its own special rapporteurs and recognises the apartheid system that Israel perpetuates, including a system of religious apartheid that violates international law.

The safeguarding of Palestinian cultural, historical, and religious sites from Israeli appropriation and attacks is a duty the UN cannot afford to fail in upholding.

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Southport attack inquiry stresses ‘fundamental failure’ of authorities

Published

on

Axel Rudakubana's mug shot in which he looks unkempt and wild, and has his mouth tightly shut

The Southport Inquiry has highlighted the “fundamental failure” of authorities to prevent the horrific 2024 murder of Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe and Alice da Silva Aguiar.

Inquiry chairperson, Adrian Fulford, began the report, released on Monday, by describing the events of 29 July 2024 as “one of the darkest moments in recent national memory”.

The report concluded by saying that authorities could have prevented the murderer, Axel Rudakubana, referred to as “AR”, from eventually killing Bebe, six; Elsie, seven; and Alice, nine at Hart Space dance studio in Southport.

Blame was also attributed to his parents.

Advertisement

Wholly separately, therefore, from my view that the attack would not have occurred had AR’s parents reported what they knew in late July 2024, if appropriate arrangements and reasonable resources had been in place to address the risk that AR posed to others from December 2019 onwards, it is highly likely that the tragedy of 29 July 2024 would not have occurred.

Southport inquiry: Authorities knew about the risk, but failed to intervene

The report went on to detail the woefully inadequate actions of authorities, insisting that:

There was a fundamental failure by any organisation, or multi-agency arrangement, to take ownership of the risk that AR posed.

Despite authorities having sufficient information to warrant close attention, it added, there was a “pervasive failure to act on AR’s dangerousness”. This was “significantly troubling”, it asserted.

Agencies from social services to the police and Prevent, the Government’s strategy to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism, tried on numerous occasions to explain away AR’s highly concerning behaviour as a “mental health” issue.

This reflected a poor understanding of both ASD [Autism Spectrum Disorder] itself and a misunderstanding of the ability of mental health services to ‘treat’ or address it.

Axel Rudakubana's mug shot in which he looks unkempt and wild, and has his mouth tightly shut

It should have already been clear for all agencies from 2019 that Rudakubana “posed a high risk of harm to others”.  

Advertisement

In October 2019, he repeatedly carried a knife to his former school with the intention to inflict serious harm.

Then in December of that year, he took weapons with him to kill a pupil he perceived had previously bullied him, the report shared. Instead, another student was assaulted at random.

Fulford said December 2019 was a “watershed event”.

As the subsequent narrative will reveal, nothing occurred during the next five years to indicate that this level of danger had diminished. To the contrary, as time passed the authorities, with certain minor exceptions, had an
ever‑reducing understanding of AR’s preoccupations and intentions. Interaction between AR and the relevant organisations became, at best, something of a token.

The report also criticised the:

Advertisement
  • Severe lack of attention authorities have paid to “online knife and machete marketing” and “inadequate…enforcement of the existing law”.
  • “Lack of provision” at Lancashire County Council (LCC) “for violence fixated young people who have been excluded either for acting violently or for carrying knives to school”, and “the impact of combined underfunding and underperformance at LCC which saw no meaningful intervention in alternative education provision for AR for the final two years before the attack”.
  • Long waiting times for expert diagnoses.
  • The failure of Rudakubana’s parents to fully share information that could have sparked stronger action from authorities.

Fundamental change to fix broken systems

Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe and Alice da Silva Aguiar in separate school photos supplied by their parents
Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe and Alice da Silva Aguiar. Credit: BBC News

Elsie’s parents, the report noted, have called for “systemic changes in order to prevent similar tragedies” alongside the parents of other survivors of the attack.

They stress that the incident should not be viewed merely as an example of ‘knife crime’ but rather a failure by the authorities to prevent an individual who was intent on harming children from committing these crimes.

Southport councillor, Sean Halsall, added to this message. He told the Canary:

We need to make sure that everything that comes out of this inquiry is implemented properly and properly resourced, that things aren’t done half-heartedly, that it isn’t a sticking plaster but the fundamental change that makes sure we fix these broken systems.

A key reflection from the inquiry is “the amount of times that stage agencies failed the family and those little girls”, he added.

[These authorities] passed the parcel until the parcel exploded, and we’re here with the aftermath of three families who will be forever grieving the loss of their daughters.

Apart from building state agencies that properly support families and individuals in need of special attention, he also insisted on paying attention to how a young person can get hold of a dangerous weapon in the first place. He said:

For any teenager to be able to get hold of these things, it’s incredibly worrying and tells me that we are not going anywhere near far enough at regulating these companies that profiteer off of these sales, profiteer off of putting human lives at risk.

He added:

Advertisement

We can’t look past austerity and the damage to the social fabric that’s done with removing the youth centres and youth clubs and mental health support services for young people.

There are indeed many lessons to learn, as the inquiry has shown. To truly honour the memories of Bebe, Elsie, and Alice, we need to demand the government learns those lessons and acts on them quickly.

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025