Keir Starmer's appalling chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, has quit. According to 'mainstream' media, Starmer hopes this will ease the pressure that he has been under from the ongoing Mandelson scandal. If he really thinks this, he's more hopeless than we thought - and that's a tough bar to cross.

McSweeney: a horror

McSweeney is a horror. Undeclared donations from the Israel lobby, spying on journalists, covert campaigns to destroy media that highlight his boss's crimes, deep connections with genocidal Israel and a coordinated sabotage campaign to prevent Labour winning the 2019 general election. His fingerprints are on all of it.

McSweeney's success in the 2019 general election saw hundreds of thousands die under Boris Johnson's 'pile the bodies high' decision to let covid run rampant. His success in the 2020 Labour leadership election led to UK collaboration in Israel's Gaza genocide. Not only that, but a war on Britain's children, its poor and the rights of its people.

But in none of that was Starmer innocent. If he's weak enough to be led by the nose by such a horror - and who would be surprised? - he's unfit for office. If he were proactively involved in those decisions, he's unfit for office. Either way, he's unfit for office. Either way, he belongs in the dock and then in prison.

Either way, he's hated by the public and in the end the buck stops with him. Advisers advise, (prime) ministers decide.

The most hated PM ever?

McSweeney's departure only moves Starmer a big step closer to the exit door and a place in history as the most hated PM ever. Even more than Thatcher, and that's saying something - because he's hated on the left and right alike. Starmer is a dead man walking - but who is there in his party to replace him who's any better? None, at least none with any intention of standing - the party is too stuffed with brylcreem-a-likes and mini-hims for a change at the top to help it.

Starmer will be lucky to last until the Gorton and Denton by-election later this month. If he clings on, the almost certain third place - at best - his NHS-privatiser candidate will manage will see him gone.

As the saying goes, "For God's sake man, just go!" And take your rotted corpse of a party with you.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

PLUS: OpenClaw teams with VirusTotal; Crypto kidnappings in France; Critical vulns at SmarterMail; And more

Infosec In Brief So-hot-right-now AI assistant OpenClaw, which is very much not secure right now, has teamed up with security scanning service VirusTotal.…

Amazon MGM just released the final trailer for its upcoming film starring Ryan Gosling, Project Hail Mary, and it provides our first good look at his five-legged alien co-star, Rocky. The movie adapts a 2021 Andy Weir (The Martian) novel of the same name, and follows Dr. Ryland Grace, a scientist who wakes up on a spacecraft far from Earth with no recollection of how he got there or why, only to discover he's on a seemingly impossible mission to stop an extinction event. 

If you've read the book, you already know we're in for an emotional rollercoaster with this one, and the latest trailer aptly tugs at our heartstrings with a glimpse of the friendship that grows between Grace and an alien he meets after waking up — and the incredibly high stakes they're facing. The movie will be released nationwide on March 20, but Amazon announced alongside this trailer that it'll be offering tickets for early screenings in premium formats including IMAX, Dolby Cinema, 4DX and 70MM to Prime members. Those screenings will begin on March 16, and tickets go on sale February 20 through Fandango. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/tv-movies/the-final-trailer-for-project-hail-mary-is-here-and-its-an-emotional-ride-213444765.html?src=rss

Official documents released by the US Department of Justice show that prosecutors prepared their announcement of Jeffrey Epstein's death a day before it happened.

As Skwawkbox has already covered, the same file release proves that an anonymous message board post, sent before the 'death' was made public by someone who claimed to be a prison officer guarding Epstein, was indeed posted by one of the prison guards on duty that night. The guard said that Epstein had been secretly removed from his cell — alive — and taken away in an ambulance whose arrival had not been pre-booked or recorded afterward.

Epstein — another plot twist

Now, another official file in the release (archived here) shows the draft announcement on Epstein's death prepared by US Attorney's Office in southern New York. Except that the draft is dated 9 August 2019 — a day before Epstein's 'death':

This is not a mere typo, and not just because a bad typist would have had to hit two digits for '10' instead of one for '9'. The draft's day of the week is also wrong — Friday instead of Saturday. Epstein's body was not discovered until 6.30am on 10 August. It seems vanishingly unlikely that someone drafting the announcement would have forgotten what day of the week it was.

The draft was dated Saturday 10 August when it was eventually released. Epstein's 'death' was officially ruled a suicide by hanging despite the prison's failure to produce a noose or ligature. The body examined by independent doctors also had a fracture to the hyoid bone of the body, a sign of manual strangulation rather than hanging. However, many have observed apparent differences in the facial features of the body compared to Epstein, particularly in the nose and, where it would be very hard to hide, in the ears. The government was also found to have heavily edited prison CCTV footage of the area around Epstein's cell.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

It might be near impossible to be a kid these days without a smartphone, but AT&T wants to offer parents a decent compromise. The wireless carrier launched its AmiGO Jr. Phone, which combines Samsung hardware and AT&T's app, to offer kids a smartphone that has parental controls baked right in.

The AmiGO Jr. Phone is just a Samsung Galaxy A16, which still remains a solid budget smartphone pick with a 50-megapixel main camera, a 6.7-inch display and reliable battery life. However, AT&T tweaked the Samsung hardware into its kid-friendly smartphone by including features like live location tracking, safe zones and screentime restrictions that can be controlled via the AmiGO app. It's not the first time we've seen a smartphone with parental controls, since competitors like Bark and Pinwheel have been on the market for a couple of years now, but it's the first time a major mobile carrier is offering its own standalone product.

As for the AmiGO Jr. Phone, it's now available on AT&T's website for $3 a month, but you'll have to commit to a 36-month contract that provides bill credits. You still have to pay for your monthly service charges as an AT&T customer, but it'll be cheaper than buying a Galaxy A16 outright for $200. For even more security, AT&T also launched its AmiGO Jr. Watch 2 to expand its ecosystem that already includes a tablet designed for kids.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/mobile/smartphones/atts-budget-friendly-phone-for-kids-was-designed-with-parental-controls-in-mind-202200139.html?src=rss

It's about that time. Apple is gearing up for a slew of hardware announcements that will include upgrades for the entry-level iPad, iPad Air, MacBook Pro and MacBook Air, according to Mark Gurman's Power On newsletter. In line with what we've seen in recent years, Gurman reports, "A product launch is currently slated for as early as the week of March 2."

Apple unveiled the M5 MacBook Pro in October, bringing the chip first to the 14-inch model. With the coming announcements, we should see the M5 Pro and M5 Max chips finally arrive. Gurman notes that new 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros are on the way, along with a new MacBook Air. We're also likely to see new iPads soon. A new entry-level iPad will be able to support Apple Intelligence thanks to the inclusion of the A18 chip, and the iPad Air will be getting the M4, according to Gurman. 

Updates to the Mac Studio and Studio Display are expected to follow, as well as a Mac mini refresh down the line this year. As Gurman previously reported, Apple is also said to be releasing its first "low-cost MacBook" sometime in the very near future.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/computing/we-may-see-apples-new-ipads-and-macbooks-in-only-a-matter-of-weeks-192953977.html?src=rss

Steam is adding a little more transparency when it comes to Early Access games. Announced in a blog post, Steam introduced a new feature for game developers to add the exact date of when their game would leave Early Access and see a version 1.0 launch. According to Steam, this feature stems from developers who requested a way to display an official launch date.

While games still in Early Access give eager players a way to experience the early stages of a title and contribute towards the development, some games have been stalled in this phase for years. With this new feature, players can see a precise launch date displayed on the game's store page just underneath the Early Access Game note. However, game devs can choose a specific date or a more vague timeframe, including displaying only the year of the expected release.

Steam

In the blog post, Steam noted that this feature was optional for developers, adding, "just because this feature exists, does not mean you should or must use it." Steam also said that game devs should only offer their player base a concrete date if there's a "very high degree of confidence."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/pc/steam-now-lets-developers-display-the-exact-date-of-when-their-game-leaves-early-access-190413701.html?src=rss

Gaza is dying every day. Its hospitals are collapsing, its doctors are overwhelmed, and the world remains largely silent.

Children are dying for lack of medicine. Patients are left untreated. Doctors are forced to decide who might live and who must be left to die. All of this is happening in full view of the United Nations and powerful states that respond with words instead of action.

This silence is not neutral. It is a profound moral failure.

Healthcare in Gaza has been reduced to survival triage. Hospitals have become places of delayed death. Essential medicines are running out. Electricity is repeatedly cut. Medical staff work under siege, exhaustion, and constant threat. Civilians are trapped between occupation on one side and international neglect on the other.

World is silent on Gaza

Why does the world remain silent? Because political alliances and economic interests are prioritised over civilian lives. Because Gaza is treated as a distant crisis rather than a humanitarian emergency unfolding in real time.

Every day without intervention becomes another day of systematic death. Doctors in Gaza face impossible conditions. They work through destruction, shortages, and trauma, while international support is delayed or blocked. Pressure on the occupying power remains minimal or symbolic.

This silence is not just political weakness. It is an insult to the idea of a global conscience.

The collapse of Gaza's healthcare system is not a natural disaster. It is a political and humanitarian crime carried out in plain sight. Every hour without medical supplies costs lives. Every day without action deepens impunity.

Gaza is not just a besieged enclave. It is a mirror held up to the world.

It asks a simple question of those who claim to defend human rights: why is the mass suffering of civilians tolerated while the world looks away?

The blood of Gaza is already answering. History will not measure morality by statements or sympathy, but by action. Every delay is another failure. Every silence is another verdict on humanity itself.

Featured image via AFP

By Alaa Shamali

Since 7 October 2023, reports indicate a dangerous shift in Israel's tactics in Gaza. Rather than relying solely on direct military force, Israel has increasingly used local collaborating militias.

These groups operate covertly within Palestinian society. Their roles include intelligence gathering, luring resistance members, and carrying out targeted assassinations under direct Israeli intelligence supervision.

The starting point: filmed confessions

An Al Jazeera investigation, broadcast on What Lies Beneath, marked a turning point. It featured filmed confessions from an agent arrested after an assassination operation in Gaza. The agent said he received direct orders from an Israeli intelligence officer. He was instructed to wear a hidden camera to document the killing.

The operation took place on 14 December 2025. The victim was an internal security officer reportedly responsible for monitoring collaborators.

Footage showed real-time communication between the agent and his handler. Instructions continued until the moment of execution, involving silenced weapons and electric bicycles.

Gaza — why militias instead of soldiers

Experts say Israel's reliance on militias reflects operational difficulty inside Gaza. Dense population and social cohesion make undercover Israeli units costly and risky.

Using local agents allows Israel to minimise losses. These agents are expendable if exposed, unlike regular soldiers.

Security data suggest many militia members were recruited from individuals with criminal backgrounds. During the war, they engaged in looting before being absorbed into intelligence operations.

In exchange, they were granted freedom of movement, protection, and tolerance for aid theft. Their personal interests were deliberately tied to organised violence.

"Yellow zones" and calculated chaos

Militia activity increasingly centres on so-called "yellow zones." There, they intimidate civilians and disrupt internal security.

Sources describe this as a strategy to exhaust Gaza's social fabric without direct military presence. Some groups now function as a de facto "shadow authority" for the occupation. These developments indicate a broader strategy of proxy warfare. Israel is shifting toward covert control, infiltration, and internal destabilisation.

This approach aims to fracture society itself, transforming daily life into a battleground of suspicion and fear.

Evidence shows these militias are now central to Israel's strategy in Gaza. Their continued use increases risks to civilian safety and social cohesion. Exposing and dismantling this system is urgent. It represents one of the most destructive aspects of the hidden war unfolding inside the Strip.

Featured image via WSJ

By Alaa Shamali

Since the start of the war on Gaza in October 2023, Israel has enforced an unprecedented media blockade. Foreign journalists and international media outlets have been barred from entering the Strip.

This policy has become one of the longest media blackouts in a modern conflict. It raises urgent questions about Israel's motives and objectives.

Gaza — controlling the narrative and obscuring the truth

The ban on foreign journalists does not appear to be a temporary security measure. Instead, it functions as a systematic policy aimed at controlling the narrative of events in Gaza. Without independent international reporting, official Israeli accounts circulate with little scrutiny. This limits accountability and obscures the scale of destruction and civilian suffering.

In a war that has killed and wounded tens of thousands, the absence of international media has distorted global understanding and weakened factual reporting.

An intentional media vacuum

The ban on foreign journalists coincides with the direct targeting of Palestinian reporters inside Gaza. Together, these actions create a deliberate media vacuum. This severely limits source diversity and restricts reporting to a narrow range of perspectives. It prevents independent investigations based on eyewitness testimony and on-the-ground verification.

Observers argue this vacuum is deliberate, designed to reduce coverage and limit international accountability.

Obstructing documentation and legal accountability

Human rights and press freedom organisations warn that blocking media access hinders documentation of violations against civilians.

Without international journalists present, collecting the visual and forensic evidence needed for legal cases becomes far more difficult. This weakens prospects for accountability in international courts.

The media blackout is therefore seen as a tool to delay justice and entrench impunity. Israel cites security concerns to justify the ban. However, international press organisations—including the Foreign Press Association—say no credible security rationale exists.

The controversy has deepened due to the Israeli Supreme Court repeatedly postponing rulings on petitions demanding media access. These delays rely on classified evidence that cannot be challenged.

Journalists view this as a continuation of the ban under a legal veneer.

Gaza — a clear violation of press freedom

Press unions and human rights groups say the ban violates Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Both guarantee freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information without restriction.

Media experts warn that normalising such bans sets a dangerous precedent for future conflicts. With Gaza still closed to foreign journalists, the conflict extends beyond military force into media, legal, and ethical realms. The blackout is not incidental. It is a central mechanism to conceal the war's consequences and keep cameras away from one of the worst humanitarian disasters of modern times.

As more than 2.4 million Palestinians remain trapped in Gaza, calls are growing to break the blockade. Allowing journalists in is now seen as a moral and professional imperative—to ensure the world sees Gaza without filters or omission.

featured image via EBU

By Alaa Shamali

At a moment when the ceasefire was meant to open a path back to normal life in the Gaza Strip, Israeli occupation forces continue to impose military control over more than half of the territory. This policy has emptied the declared truce of substance, kept civilians under constant threat, and prevented hundreds of thousands of people from returning to their homes.

Field data indicate that large areas of Gaza have effectively been turned into no-go zones. These lie between the so-called yellow line and zones of direct fire control.

In these areas, repeated shooting and constant intimidation persist, making them unfit for safe living despite the announcement of a ceasefire.

Areas of life under military control

The areas under Israeli control include some of the most vulnerable parts of Gaza. They contain the Strip's primary agricultural lands, which many families rely on for food. They also include most of the main water wells and the central water network supplying the territory. Control over these areas has become a tool of collective pressure, affecting access to both food and water.

As a result, agricultural activity has almost completely ground to a halt. Livelihoods have been destroyed at a time when hunger and thirst are rapidly increasing and the humanitarian crisis is deepening.

Gaza — a ceasefire with no humanitarian impact

Despite the announcement of a ceasefire, conditions on the ground show that humanitarian obligations are not being met.

Shooting continues, and access to residential and agricultural areas remains blocked. Around one million Palestinians are unable to return to their homes. Tens of thousands of families remain forcibly displaced within the Strip, stranded without safety or stability.

The truce has become a formality, as a new reality is imposed through military control, forced displacement, and the prevention of return. This approach is reshaping Gaza's demographic and geographic landscape.

Systematic policy of displacement and starvation

The so-called yellow zone is used as a launch point for continuous fire into residential areas.

This forms part of a broader policy aimed at forcing displacement, preventing reconstruction or resettlement, and using starvation by denying access to food and water as a means of pressure. Humanitarian indicators warn that continuing this policy risks a large-scale disaster. Its effects may extend beyond Gaza, given the near-total collapse of basic living conditions and the worsening situation of displaced civilians.

Gaza — Calls for urgent international action

Against this backdrop, calls are growing for effective international intervention. Advocates are demanding genuine enforcement of the ceasefire, an end to military control by fire, and guarantees for civilian protection.

They are also calling for the right of displaced people to return safely to their homes and for the restoration of the minimum conditions required for life and human dignity.

Featured image via Xinhua News Agency

By Alaa Shamali

Apple is keeping the entry level for iPhones at $599, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In the latest Power On report, Gurman said that the iPhone 17e is "due imminently" and will keep the same price as its predecessor.

Considering we're about a year away from the iPhone 16e's announcement, we're due for a successor to Apple's more affordable smartphone. According to Gurman, Apple upgraded the new budget-friendly iPhone with MagSafe charging and the A19 chip that's seen in the iPhone 17 base model. The iPhone 17e will also get Apple's latest in-house cellular and wireless chips, Gurman reported. 

In our review of the iPhone 16e, we weren't particularly sold because of its limited camera capabilities, particularly when compared to the iPhone 17's release a few months later. However, for the same $599 price, Apple's iPhone 17e is getting a few notable upgrades and will compete with Google's Pixel 10a. More specifically, Gurman expects Apple to target the emerging economies and enterprise demographics with the iPhone 17e. While Apple faces a lot more competition in overseas markets, iPhone sales have been experiencing a resurgence in China. Apple is even forecasting strong sales for iPhones across Asia, especially in China and India.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/mobile/smartphones/the-iphone-17e-will-reportedly-bring-some-key-upgrades-without-raising-the-price-174154577.html?src=rss

Lord Maurice Glasman is the party bigwig behind the Blue Labour movement. To be honest, we're not much of a fan of his. Credit where it's due, though; he's delivered what may be the greatest MSM takedown of New Labour yet:

Lord Maurice Glasman just gave the wildest political interview I've seen in a long time on Sky News.

"The govt and the party has to repent and reject New Labour as an alien body that took over the Labour Party. And this is where it leads: perversion of peadophilia" pic.twitter.com/7RwXXnr67n

— Nels Abbey (@nelsabbey) February 8, 2026

Please be aware that the above should read "perversion and paedophilia", although it's bad however you hear it.

It's over

At this point, it seems that New Labour is finished as a viable political entity within the larger party. We say that because:

• The police are investigating Peter Mandelson.
• Starmer's chief of staff Morgan McSweeney just resigned in disgrace.
• Starmer himself will surely be next.
• Britons view Tony Blair like the residents of Elm Street view Freddy Krueger.
• The loathed Digital ID scheme is dead in the water.

As if this wasn't bad enough, party rivals have now branded Blairism as the political wing of international paedophilia.

There is no coming back from this.

Blue Labour

In 2020, Steve Topple described Blue Labour as follows:

a concept founded by Maurice Glasman based on socially conservative values of 'family, faith and flag' but more socialist economic policies. It is rooted in the values that Glasman perceived existed in the party pre-WWII.

On 6 February, Blue Labour put out the following statement:

This week exposed the moral and intellectual rot at the heart of our party. Glib arrogance, vicious court gossip and a culture of conformity. A willingness to look the other way for factional reasons, blind to how it looks to the outside world.

And for what? In the careerist scramble for a brief moment in the limelight all imagination and curiosity are crushed, and so we are left empty of ideas and empty of soul.

How far we have fallen as a party. This must be the end of New Labour.

At the same time, let's be real; Blue Labour aren't a viable alternative.

As activist Alan Gibbons highlighted, Glasman described Morgan McSweeney as "one of ours". McSweeney is the worst of the worst, so if he's one of theirs, that doesn't say much about them.

Featured image via Sky

By Willem Moore

Anti-corruption is widely treated as an unambiguous public good. Investigations, prosecutions, commissions, and transparency initiatives are assumed to weaken entrenched power by exposing wrongdoing. Yet in practice, anti-corruption often functions in the opposite direction. Rather than dismantling corrupt systems, it fragments and neutralises public scrutiny. Corruption is continuously exposed in pieces but never confronted as a structure.

The defining feature of modern anti-corruption is not silence but saturation. The public is presented with a constant flow of scandals, inquiries, indictments, and document releases. This produces an atmosphere of apparent vigilance. But it also overwhelms any attempt to form a coherent picture of how power actually operates. Corruption becomes ubiquitous in discourse while remaining largely intact.

Anti-corruption: fragmentation instead of accountability

Anti-corruption operates through fragmentation. Individual cases are isolated from one another. Responsibility is narrowed to specific actors. Timelines are truncated. Structural continuity is excluded from the frame. Each scandal is treated as a self-contained deviation rather than part of a durable system of power.

This approach has predictable effects. It prevents cumulative understanding. It makes it difficult to identify persistent networks, institutional protection mechanisms, or long-term patterns of accumulation. The public is invited to react repeatedly, but never to connect.

The legal form of anti-corruption reinforces this logic. Prosecutorial standards require narrow evidentiary thresholds. Journalistic coverage mirrors these constraints. What cannot be proven in court or documented in a single file is treated as speculative, even when the broader pattern is clear. As a result, systemic corruption in practice is rendered episodic in representation.

The Epstein case and managed disclosure

The ongoing fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal illustrates how anti-corruption can generate exposure without consequence. Since Epstein's death, a steady stream of court documents has been released, heavily redacted and carefully staged. Names appear without context. Associations are hinted at but rarely examined. The public receives information, but not an explanation.

Epstein's wealth, protection, and extraordinary access were not accidental.

For decades, he operated at the intersection of elite financial, political, and intelligence-adjacent environments. These conditions could not have existed without some degree of institutional tolerance. Yet anti-corruption mechanisms have focused almost entirely on individual criminality rather than systemic facilitation. They have also undoubtedly ignored the very-real human cost of Epstein's depravity - the countless victims and survivors of his horrors.

Yet, the role of financial institutions, intelligence agencies, and our own political class remains marginal to the official narrative. Instead, the case is repeatedly reopened through partial disclosures that generate periodic outrage without a comprehensive resolution for either the victims and survivors or the public.

This is not a failure of transparency. It is a controlled version of it. Redaction, selective release, and procedural delay ensure that attention is constantly renewed while structural accountability is indefinitely postponed, never to actually fruition. The scandal remains alive, but its implications remain contained in perpetuity.

Post-communist transitions and elite continuity

The same logic is visible in post-communist Eastern Europe, where anti-corruption discourse was embedded into the language of democratic transition. Romania provides a particularly clear example.

After 1989, Romania formally abandoned one-party rule but did not dismantle the elite structures that sustained it. Political authority, bureaucratic expertise, and security networks were preserved and reconfigured. Under the leadership of Ion Iliescu, the state adopted democratic forms while maintaining deep continuity in personnel and power.

Privatisation in the 1990s did not disperse economic power. It concentrated it, with state assets transferred through opaque processes to politically connected actors, many of whom had direct ties to the former regime. This was not corruption occurring within a democratic transition. It was corruption in the constitution of the transition itself.

Anti-corruption initiatives emerged after these processes had already been consolidated. Investigations focused on marginal figures or later abuses, not on the foundational redistribution of property. The most consequential decisions were rendered historical, legalised, and therefore untouchable.

By the time anti-corruption became institutionalised, the core structure of elite power had already been stabilised, and the same equally corrupt figures were making theatre, publicly denouncing practices they themselves relied upon and profited from, and staging prosecutions that carefully avoided the architects of the system. Anti-corruption became a self-purification ritual performed by elites who had already secured their positions and insulated themselves from scrutiny. Corruption was acknowledged in abstraction, while its material foundations were rendered permanent and untouchable.

Moralisation and depoliticisation

A central feature of anti-corruption discourse is moralisation. Corruption is framed as a personal failure: greed, immorality, and a lack of ethics. This framing is politically useful. It allows condemnation without a broader critique of the system, which cultivates corruption, under which it operates and thrives.

Once corruption is moralised, it is depoliticised. Questions of class power, ownership, foreign influence, and intelligence involvement are displaced by narratives of individual wrongdoing. The solution becomes better oversight, stronger laws, or cleaner politicians, rather than heralding a social and political transformation capable of dismantling the networks and interests that corruption serves.

Anti-corruption enforcement is inherently selective. Not all corruption is prosecuted. Not all actors are equally vulnerable. Decisions about whom to investigate, when, and how are political decisions, even when framed as technical or legal ones.

Selective enforcement serves an important function. It demonstrates activity while preserving stability. By prosecuting certain figures, the system signals seriousness. By protecting others, it preserves continuity. The appearance of accountability is maintained without threatening core interests.

This is particularly evident in cases involving intelligence services, large financial institutions, or strategic political actors. These domains are consistently under-investigated, despite repeated indications of involvement in corruption scandals. Anti-corruption stops where power becomes too concentrated.

Corruption as a structural condition

The assumption underlying most anti-corruption discourse is that corruption is a deviation from an otherwise functional system. In reality, corruption is often a structural condition of state formation, economic transition, and imperial power.

Where states are built through rapid privatisation, geopolitical pressure, or security-driven governance, corruption is not incidental. It is the mechanism through which authority is converted into ownership and influence into wealth.

Anti-corruption initiatives that ignore this reality cannot succeed. At best, they manage public perception. At worst, they legitimise the very systems they claim to oppose.

The function of noise within anti-corruption

Anti-corruption campaigns generate a constant churn of investigations, indictments, headlines, commissions, and moralistic discourse. This creates the appearance of transparency while overwhelming the public with fragmented scandals.

The result is paradoxical: corruption is everywhere talked about, but nowhere fully mapped; reframed as periodical episodes of outrage targeting "bad apples", obscuring the structural depth of corruption rather than confronting it.

As a result, anti-corruption is merely a tool for the stabilisation of the system, absorbing dissent, managing outrage and converting structural problems into a sequence of oversimplified scandals that liberal democracies can contain via formal and legalistic measures.

These gestural anti-corruption measures actually reinforce the system of corruption by allowing people to experience the moral outrage and catharsis of seeing the system supposedly hold people accountable, channelling public anger into formal, bureaucratic or judicial channels and thus rendering it impotent.

But most importantly, state-mandated anti-corruption measures fail to bring justice for any of us - not least in the case of Epstein the victims and survivors of his systemic web of abuse.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rares Cocilnau

Jawad Siam is an activist and a resident of Silwan, a Palestinian neighbourhood in occupied East Jerusalem next to the old city. As we sit drinking coffee, he points to a plot of land adjacent to his home.

No justice within the Israeli 'legal' system

He tells the Canary:

Settlers took this in June 2017. My father, grandmother and grandfather all lived here in this house. According to my family tree, my family came here at least 400 years ago. We tried to do something. We went to court, but it's an Israeli court and an Israeli judge. It's not possible to win any cases today. I had to pay approximately 800,000 Israeli Shekels (£200,000). The Israelis do this with many families in East Jerusalem, not only in Silwan. They claim this land belonged to them in biblical times, 3000 years ago. They create stories, saying that for 100 years Jews have been living in the area, and things like that.

Since 'Israel' occupied East Jerusalem, in 1967, Jewish organisations have aimed to establish a Jewish presence in the neighbourhood. In an attempt to get Palestinians to leave their homes, Siam explains that settlers offer Silwan residents large sums of money to sell up. But although people do not have much money, they still do not sell their homes. Siam says he was offered $3m, and his neighbours were offered more, but they refused.

He says:

Any person in Silwan, in a minute, can be a millionaire and leave. But the people are stubborn. An old man here was offered $8m but he wouldn't sell.

Illegal Jewish settlers call Silwan "Ir David"- the City of David

These settlers are all armed. They are supported by the occupation's government and belong to the Ir David Foundation-  known as Elad.

Elad operates in East Jerusalem, and calls Silwan "Ir David' , meaning City of David in Hebrew. As well as trying to acquire Palestinian homes, Elad also runs the City of David Archaeological Park.

This major tourist attraction has been built by the occupation in the middle of a residential area in Silwan. It aims to promote the Jewish link to the area, while intentionally erasing Palestinian history, culture, and identity, and the community fabric of Silwan. Many Palestinian homes are being demolished for this park, and international tourism is allowing this to happen.

According to Siam, most houses taken by settlers in Silwan are left empty. Their real project is not about bringing settlers into the neighbourhood, but ethnically cleansing the area of its Palestinian population. He says the occupation dreams of having Jerusalem empty of Palestinians, and are doing their best to connect East and West Jerusalem, while only showing and talking about Jewish heritage.

As well as offering to pay vast sums of money for Palestinian homes, there are also other mechanisms in place, to ensure the population's displacement from Silwan and other East Jerusalem neighbourhoods. Palestinians have their land confiscated and are also evicted from their homes.

Many mechanisms to 'legally' displace Palestinians

In 1881 Yemeni Jews came to Palestine. Siam says they were promised they could live in West Jerusalem, but when they arrived they were not welcome. Instead, the people of Silwan, in the Batn al- Hawa area of the neighbourhood, welcomed them.

When the Jews left in 1928, they left the people of Silwan a letter, thanking them for their hospitality. But thanks to an Israeli occupation law, passed in 1970, any property that belonged to Jews before 1948 can now be claimed by settlers. 34 families, around 130 people, are now expecting imminent eviction after the Supreme Court's  recent decision on a decades long legal case, to dismiss an appeal by residents against their forcible displacement.

The Absentee Property Law, enacted by the occupation in 1950,  is also used to transfer Palestinian homes to settlers. The occupation's discriminatory planning policies are also used to drive Palestinians from Silwan. They are denied building permits, and so live with the constant threat of having their homes demolished.

Sari Kronish is an architect and urban planner. She is also Director of the East Jerusalem department of Bimkom, an organisation which works at the intersection of urban planning and human rights.

Planning system used for political gains, to ensure a Palestinian minority and the Judaisation of Jerusalem

She says as a result of ongoing neglect by the Israeli regime, since 1967, there is a drastic need for improvement in East Jerusalem neighbourhoods. The planning system is being used as a tool for political ends, to ensure Jerusalem is a Jewish city, the Jewish capital.

The urban planning policy is being used in a way that discriminates to achieve the political ends- to restrict when it comes to Palestinian communities, and provide when it comes to Jewish Israeli communities.

Kronish tells the Canary:

Planning should be free of that, but here there is a demographic driver to the planning policy. That's what creates the discrimination. And the legal structures and laws in place that have been set up by Israel are allowing for this to happen. It's completely in contradiction to international law, but in terms of Israeli law there are legal cover ups to everything that's going on. Nothing is in favour of the Palestinians.

But Siam does not believe the occupation has been successful in its project so far. There are still around 60,000 Palestinians in historic Silwan, and there are a total of 1500 settlers.

He says:

We were supposed to be the minority by now, and Jews the majority. They have everything- the army, the power, and the weapons. Although we've tried our best, we haven't been able to stop them. So the way for us to do this is to stay here. They thought they can easily force Palestinians to leave their land, if not using power, by using money. But this hasn't happened.

Siam, like most Palestinians, sees the double standards of the West. Hamas is labelled a terrorist movement, But Ben Gvir, and the right-wing in Israel are not.  who kill and imprison innocent Palestinians on a daily basis. But while he does not believe in Western governments, be still trusts in the various Western movements that could bring about change.

Siam: "It's a Western project here"

It's a Western project here, and we know what kind of democracy Western countries want. We saw it when they talked about the Palestinian free election,  which they said was democratic, and was watched  by the whole world. But when the results came out, they said it wasn't the democracy they wanted to see, because Hamas had won.

Palestinians have paid a high price in order to open eyes. It's not only about the Palestinian cause. A lot of injustice is hidden by the Western governments, inside their countries. We saw it in places such as the UK, with Palestine Action. You cannot express what you want to say. And all the time they're talking about human rights. But what about the eight million Palestinian refugees all over the world?

Siam helps run Silwan's Wadi Hilweh Information Centre, which informs about the problems faced by the residents. It also documents the occupation's human rights violations in the surrounding area. But this centre now has demolition orders, which are expected to be carried out any day now.

Most Palestinians demolish their own buildings to save a demolition fee, which can total the equivalent of £25,000. But Siam has refused.

Another way the occupation makes life as difficult as possible for Palestinians in East Jerusalem is through education. Siam argues the school system for Palestinians here is the worst, not only inside Palestine but also in the Palestinian refugee camps in Syria and Lebanon.

This is because Palestinian education in Jerusalem is completely controlled by the Israeli occupation. Palestinians are not allowed to teach their own history or literature to children at school. If schools do not teach the Israeli system, they are closed down.

The Israeli occupation uses education as a tool of oppression in Silwan

Siam says:

Palestinians are the most educated society in the Arabic world. Before the education system was destroyed, Gaza's school system was much better than here. But Israel does its best to stop Palestinians going to school, and tries to make Palestinians uneducated in East Jerusalem. This is one of the tools they use to turn Palestinians into simple workers, for example, working for them in the Israeli factories.

The occupation has now shut down all UNRWA facilities in the occupied Palestinian territory, and Silwan's UNRWA school closed in June 2025. Most children in Silwan do not have a long term place in a school. Parents struggle to provide education , and around 40% of children have to leave the village to attend school.

Despite the relentless pressure, Siam and those in his community remains defiant. They continue their lives in Silwan, heavily surveillance, threatened with dispossession by settlers, and demolition orders by the occupation. Children go to overcrowded classrooms, not knowing if it will be standing the following day.

Existence is resistance in Palestine, and Silwan is no exception.

Featured image and additional images via the Canary

By Charlie Jaay

A Reform UK councillor in Worcestershire has dramatically quit the party. Councillor David Taylor made the decision as a result of the party's plan to raise council tax — something which the far-right party previously stood against:

Another Reform UK councillor down.

This is significant though. It shows that Reform UK promised to cut tax. He's quit because they have raised it.

In this case it's Worcestershire - and 10%.

Jo Monk must consider her position as leader. https://t.co/6rYz8tjKTr

— Reform Party UK Exposed

The recent Epstein Files revealed a lot of disturbing new information. This included fresh revelations about the close relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Palantir boss Peter Thiel. Combined with other factors, this has got many people questioning why our current Labour government has given Palantir so many contracts. It's especially alarming, because Plantir is deeply enmeshed with the US and Israeli spy networks.

It's not just the government who have given Palantir an easy ride, either, as journalist Carole Cadwalladr pointed out:

Pls read whole piece. Neither Mandelson or Mosley were asked about Mandelson's role in fixing Starmer's visit to Palantir & subsequent £240m deal. It finally made headlines on Weds when a q was asked in Parliament.

But honestly, BBC also has qs to answer https://t.co/SgtsuwNDMd pic.twitter.com/GDX9apoYkk

— Carole Cadwalladr (@carolecadwalla) February 8, 2026

Palantir and Mandelson

Louis Mosley is the head of Palantir in the UK & Europe. He's also the grandson of the notorious British fascist, Oswald Mosely.

Louis Mosley spoke favourably of "the return of Donald Trump" in February 2025. In the same speech, he spoke of the need for "free speech". Mosley also said:

In the US, we are seeing innovation and reform that will change lives in that country for the better.

There's no reason we cannot have the same in Britain - and elsewhere across Europe.

Since Mosley said this, the Trump administration has launched a crackdown on free speech and civil liberties which are unprecedented in American history. ICE are instrumental to Trump's plan, with Palantir serving as a key partner to the enforcement agency.

As Cadwalladr rightly points out, the BBC had no business treating Mosely as if he's just some pundit. He and his company have skin in the game. And if British politics goes the way they want it to, these people stand to make billions.

On 4 February, Ed Sykes wrote for the Canary:

Palantir has latched onto the US imperial project and is now a prominent part of it. By extension, this means entering junior partners in the UK and Israel too. And apparent intelligence assets like Epstein helped to ensure companies like Palantir become part of this system of racist brutality and dominance.

The other factor to consider is the link between Peter Mandelson (another Epstein associate) and Palantir:

Mandelson's links with US tech firm Palantir must be fully exposed, campaigners warn.

Palantir is owned by Peter Thiel who wants democracy abolished, and whose money and influence propelled Vance into the White House. Thiel was in close contact with Epstein after the latter's… pic.twitter.com/ESMsZPZe5i

— Nick Reeves #RejoinEU #NAFO #FBPE (@nickreeves9876) February 4, 2026

With Palantir and Mandelson both back in the news, it's worth revisiting this — the Epstein/Mandelson/Thiel connection, and how Mandelson's lobbying company introduced Starmer to the Palantir team https://t.co/Zxcgmb7dKr pic.twitter.com/YDpuLiQZxP

— Peter Jukes (@peterjukes) January 30, 2026

The seedy connections between Labour and Palantir go much deeper too:

In 2022, Woodcock was hired by Palantir.

Epstein met Palantir head Peter Thiel through former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Then, last April, Peter Mandelson arranged for Starmer to visit their HQ in Washington.

Now, the firm are sponsoring Labour Party conference events. pic.twitter.com/Wn5A2c3lzq

— Jody McIntyre (@jodymcintyre_) February 3, 2026

Thiel and Epstein

As noted, the latest Epstein Files have exposed how close Palantir founder Peter Thiel was with the dead paedophile:

BREAKING: Jeffrey Epstein & Palantir's Peter Thiel were discussing a Plan that would destabilize Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, and Egypt.

"The more of a mess, with just lots of bad guys on different sides, the less we will do." pic.twitter.com/ZCoMjV2CGP

— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) February 1, 2026

Do we really want someone who wishes to destabilise the world to be in charge of our NHS data? We don't know if Thiel knows this, but we did the whole 'destabilise the Middle East' thing already, and it led to death, mayhem, and blowback.

Epstein and Thiel also discussed destabilising Europe, which is a little closer to home:

Peter Thiel claimed he had a distant, impersonal business relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.

But documents show Epstein was a limited partner in his fund - and was treated as more than that.

The well over $100 million he made from Thiel's business was his single largest asset. pic.twitter.com/gnFxVSmAua

— ClearingTheFog (@clearing_fog) February 7, 2026

There's also this:

And Peter Thiel is the one who made @JDVance a senator and installed him as Trump's Vice President, just FYI. https://t.co/Aj2GS7wPEa

— Andrew—#IAmTheResistance (@AmoneyResists) February 2, 2026

And Thiel isn't the only billionaire who was in bed with the degenerate Epstein:

BREAKING: New Image that Epstein sent himself confirms that in 2015, Epstein went to dinner with Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.

Why the hell was he invited to dinner with these three men, being that he basically plead guilty to being a p-do in 2008?

Why wasn't he… pic.twitter.com/Iq19aD23PN

— Brian Krassenstein (@krassenstein) February 7, 2026

Get them out

Zack Polanski is among those calling for the government to cut ties with Palantir:

Mandelson's malign influence runs right through the heart of this Govt.

Not least in the govt's NHS data deal with Palantir - a spy-tech firm co-founded by a man who thinks the NHS should be 'ripped up.'

I've written to @wesstreeting urging him to ditch this dangerous deal. https://t.co/O3ODX7D5W4 pic.twitter.com/r8DppettCC

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) February 5, 2026

As is Labour's Ian Byrne:

The entire issuing of Government contracts to Palentir in light of their links to Mandelson & Epstein should be reviewed.
I raised the suitability of Palantir as an NHS provider to the Tory Govt in 2023 after constituents in West Derby contacted me with serious concerns. pic.twitter.com/vXCjb46v1c

— lan Byrne MP (@IanByrneMP) February 6, 2026

At this point, it's unclear what the argument is for maintaining a relationship with Palantir.

Featured image via Gage Skidmore (Flickr) / Alexander Svensson (Wikimedia)

By Willem Moore

This isn't about gotcha politics, and it's not about partisan sniping.

This is about how Keir Starmer's decisions reveal a deeper rot and a willingness to protect establishment insiders at the expense of core progressive values like justice and solidarity for the survivors of sexual abuse.

This isn't just a scandal

The Mandelson-Epstein scandal isn't just a personal failing. It is a damning indictment of Keir Starmer's leadership and the hollowed-out soul of the Labour Party under his watch. I write about it most weeks. The Canary writes about it every day. Labour is finished.

Complicit Starmer, who campaigned on tackling violence against women and girls, chose to elevate Peter Mandelson to a prestigious diplomatic role. This was a political choice, much like wholeheartedly supporting Israel's genocide of Gaza, or the continuation of perpetual austerity.

Why? Because the umpteen-time-disgraced Mandelson is part of the Labour old guard, a crooked fixer with elite connections that Starmer deemed more valuable than ethical red lines that simply cannot be crossed.

Labour under Starmer loves to tout its commitment to protecting women and combating sexual exploitation. Yet here he is, defending — until he couldn't — a figure entangled with one of the most notorious elitist exploiters of our time.

Keir Starmer was fully aware of Mandelson's ties with the vile, convicted predator when he appointed him as UK Ambassador to the US in late 2024. This really wasn't some obscure detail. It was flagged in official security vetting, including reports of Mandelson staying at Epstein's properties while the financier was in prison and maintaining contact after his 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.

Keir Starmer: ignoring the screams of victims and survivors

If Starmer truly believed in accountability, he wouldn't have needed emails leaking Mandelson's "litany of deceit" to act, would he?

Starmer's appointment of Mandelson was a middle finger to every single survivor of child sexual abuse. He knows it. We know it. We went here with Jimmy Savile. Cover-ups, stonewalling, and the immunity of the elite until the rot bursts open.

You see, Keir Starmer values those grubby, child-raping, establishment ties more than the screams of Epstein's victims and survivors — mostly poor, working-class girls trafficked like commodities.

Politicians of Starmer's type frequently talk about "learning the lessons", yet here is Starmer, making a deliberate choice to shield the powerful capitalist abusers from accountability.

Starmer plowed ahead, gambling that Mandelson's establishment clout outweighed the moral abyss. He took a gamble on cronyism, and lost in the most dramatic fashion imaginable.

Starmer chose Mandelson's "vital" US schmoozing over basic human decency. This scandal strips away the Prime Minister's fraudulent progressive mask, revealing nothing more than a loyal fucking Blairite puppet who prioritises billionaire child rapist networks over the exploited masses.

Surely, this has to be curtains for the permacrisis Labour leader? If not now, when?

If not now, when?

Scandals of this nature have toppled governments before (think Profumo), and survival depends on party unity and public apathy. In all truths, Labour MPs are furious and public trust has completely eroded.

Keir Starmer might just cling on if Labour miraculously closes ranks, but Starmer's internal challengers can smell blood. Of course, Starmer shouldn't cling on because his judgment is fatally flawed, and clinging on to power would only deepen the party's moral bankruptcy.

If you listen very carefully you can hear the echoes of a party fracturing along class lines. If these Labour MPs that claim to feel "physically sickened" and "widespread revulsion" had any spine left, they would lead a no-confidence push, not just a file release. Utter cowards.

I forced myself to watch Keir Starmer's humiliating, grovelling apology speech on Thursday. Like many of you, I try not to listen to much of what he has to say because it always feels like he is doing the bidding for someone else.

The speech itself was an absolute disaster — a transparent, spineless exercise in damage control. Who do you think Starmer was grovelling to? The victims, or the media and the moderates?

I didn't see any genuine contrition. It was a scripted plea from a failed, shit PR consultant, desperately bidding to cling on to power amid a scandal that highlights how Keir Starmer's collapsing government is infested with the same network of elites that protected dangerous predators like Jeffrey Epstein.

Starmer blamed Mandelson for "lies" and "deceit", claiming ignorance of the full extent of the Epstein connection, despite it being publicly known for some time.

Who is this fucking disgusting charlatan trying to kid?

Keir Starmer has to go

This is the same Keir Rodney Starmer who rose through the establishment ranks as Director of Public Prosecutions. If he couldn't vet a high-profile creepy-crony like Mandelson properly, what does that say about his already-questionable competence?

What have we been saying about his competence and his judgement for the last seven years? It's not even just Keir Starmer's incompetence and bad judgment, it's a damning symptom of how far Labour has drifted from its anti-establishment origins.

The victims of Jeffrey Epstein deserve so much better than a Labour Prime Minister who looked the other way.

This disgraceful scandal shouldn't just end Starmer's career, it should bury him politically, shatter his joke of a legacy, and force a socialist reckoning in Labour to oppose the forces of hate before it further becomes another tool of the billionaire class.

Nothing less than a full purge of the centrist tumour that is terminally infecting Labour will suffice, once they have finished deleting their pro-Mandelson tweets.

It's time to go, Mr Starmer, you're not just a dead man walking, you're a corpse in a suit, and we have had enough.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rachael Swindon

Morgan McSweeney - the long-term enemy of the Canary - has resigned from government in disgrace. And to quote Canary head of content Maryam Jameela who just messaged me in Signal:

bye bye dickhead

The man behind The Fraud Morgan McSweeney - off

As journalist Paul Holden covered in The Fraud, the Labour Together schemer Morgan McSweeney was the man who spent the last decade manoeuvring to:

• Bring down Jeremy Corbyn.
• Position the Labour right as the leaders of the Labour Party.
• Return to government.

McSweeney managed all three, but he hit step 3 more quickly than anticipated. This is why Labour ended up in power with the political vacuum that is Keir Starmer. It's also why they achieved a majority government with fuck all plan as to what to do next.

Regardless of the finer details, this Labour government is McSweeney's vision brought to life. This means he's lived to see how much the public despise his worldview, with voters leaving the party in droves:

Contrary to popular belief, Labour is not struggling in the polls because they're losing votes to Reform. Even if they recovered all the votes lost to Reform they'd still be on just 21%, down double digits since GE2024.

Instead, the bulk of votes lost have been to the LEFT.

— Stats for Lefties

This week, Labour politicians found themselves tasked with defending the Peter Mandelson Affair. As we've been pointing out for some time, Keir Starmer knew Mandelson was a wrong 'un when he made him the ambassador to the US, but journalists turned a blind eye. Now, the famously slow British media have woken up, and questions are being asked.

One particular question provoked a less-than-reassuring response from DWP boss Pat McFadden:

If your husband/wife asks if you've had an affair and you hadn't, you'd say no, right? You wouldn't say "I don't believe so" pic.twitter.com/RDUutdKwr9

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) February 8, 2026

The Pat McFadden connection

Before we get to McFadden's worrying response, we should explain the context.

As noted, everyone knew that Mandelson maintained a relationship with Epstein after the paedophile was convicted. What we didn't know until the latest Epstein Files was that Mandelson was forwarding his paedo mate British secrets. He also worked with JP Morgan to bully the UK government into giving the bank a more favourable deal:

Mandelson was seemingly involved in insider trading, while helping Epstein, and by extension Jamie Dimon, intimidate his colleague, Alistair Darling, over a tax on bankers bonuses.

We've genuinely never seen anything like this in British politics before (on this scale).… https://t.co/nyDCgycEtj

— Aaron Bastani (@AaronBastani) February 2, 2026

Absolutely treasonous behaviour.

And there's a McFadden connection too. As Jody McIntyre wrote for the Canary on 6 February:

We now know that as Business Secretary, Peter Mandelson passed classified government information to likely Israeli intelligence asset Jeffrey Epstein, even messaging the notorious paedophile on the day former Prime Minister Gordon Brown "finally got him to go." But Mandelson had two deputies at the time, assisting him in his work: David Lammy and Pat McFadden.

Additionally:

In 2008, he was made Mandelson's right-hand man. Indeed, in a fawning article printed by the Guardian in September 2023, Mandelson waxes lyrical on his former assistant, saying: "Pat has seen it all. He is a walking encyclopedia of political and policy knowledge, and experience in government." But had McFadden "seen" Mandelson's communications with Epstein?

During the 2024 general election campaign, McSweeney and McFadden's desks were "right in the middle of the room" at Labour HQ. His wife, Marianna McFadden, was already McSweeney's no. 2. Mandelson said that McFadden and McSweeney would complement each other, opining that "Pat is cautious…[whereas] Morgan is a hard-driven street fighter." High praise all round from the Epstein-informant.

For more on Starmer's chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and how he used dodgy tactics to maneuver Starmer into power, read The Fraud by Paul Holden.

If you're not a Mandelson, just say no

In the clip at the top, the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg asks DWP boss Pat McFadden the following:

Did you ever forward emails about government business outside of government - to a private email or to someone else?

McFadden responds:

I don't believe so.

Sorry, come again?

You don't "believe" so?

As in you can't just say 'no'?

Fucking hell.

If you didn't watch the video, his face is ashen when he says this — his voice barely more than a whisper.

McFadden also said he could see why Starmer made the decision to appoint Mandelson — basically because he thought he'd get along with Trump. What goes unsaid, as always, is that Trump and Mandelson were both close friends with Epstein at one time or another:

Pat McFadden defending the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as ambassador.

He has to, of course, because if he doesn't he's hanging the PM out to dry, and its clear the Labour right aren't ready to discard Starmer just yet. pic.twitter.com/L7ER9qeEpV

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) February 8, 2026

They know it's over

A tetchy McFadden also began to lose his temper when Kuenssberg pressed him:

McFadden is right, the media is just as culpable when it comes to Mandelson & that includes Kuenssberg (e.g. he was on #bbclaurak twice in 2024 & LK didn't ask him about Epstein either time)

This is a warning by McFadden, of course. Press me too much & I'll cover you in sh*t too pic.twitter.com/Nxk33SXWN2

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) February 8, 2026

It's almost as if he knows the jig is up, and he can't contain his resentment.

Oh, and shout out to Saul Staniforth who clipped the above. You can (and should) follow him on X.

Featured image via BBC

By Willem Moore

As we reported yesterday, the police are investigating Reform UK. Their alleged crime is sending out a letter to the residents of Gorton & Denton which wasn't marked with the party's logo. A spokesperson for the party blamed a printing error, but people aren't buying it.

Now, a Tory councillor has pointed out there's a very simple way for Reform to quickly salvage their reputation:

Publish the print-ready proofs. https://t.co/603ATAWoqg

— Cllr. Matt Cowley (@matcow7) February 7, 2026

Reform — Lettergate

Reform UK blamed the absent logo on a printing error, with the printers themselves taking responsibility.

As people have highlighted, this exact same thing has happened to Reform before:

Reform have not made a "mistake" in Gorton and Denton as they did EXACTLY the same thing in Caerphilly last year. pic.twitter.com/IHISoAM9x0

— Socialist Opera Singer (@OperaSocialist) February 7, 2026

People also had a hard time believing the 'printing error' line:

The Reform UK @GoodwinMJ campaign and printer is blaming a "trimming error" for the imprint not being on the letter.

Bearing in mind the letter is A4, what exactly was trimmed.

And why would you print on A4 and trim it? The images show it clearly wasn't trimmed.

The lie is… pic.twitter.com/EJ7q8O118h

— Reform Party UK Exposed

Meet llama3pure, a set of dependency-free inference engines for C, Node.js, and JavaScript

Developers looking to gain a better understanding of machine learning inference on local hardware can fire up a new llama engine.…

The absolute last conspiracy theory you want to be entertaining is 'X person is actually still alive'; if nothing else, because it's such a cliche. We're at a point, however, where we need to acknowledge what's coming out of the Epstein Files, because god damn:

Why would the Trump administration draft a press release saying that Epstein died a day before he actually died?

Oh. Oh my. https://t.co/Cx2SHzqUCP

— PatriotTakes

Things are looking worse and worse for Keir Starmer. This is especially bad, because things were already about as terrible as it's possible to get for a sitting PM.

Lammy told Starmer

In the latest instance of the badness intensifying, the deputy PM David Lammy has apparently said he told Starmer not to appoint Mandelson. And of course, what we actually mean is "friends of the Deputy Prime Minister" told the Telegraph.

There's just one problem with all this:

That's odd because here is David Lammy describing Peter Mandelson as a "man of considerable expertise" and the "right man" to be the US ambassador.

Looks like he is trying to save his own skin. https://t.co/V1vIlscNws pic.twitter.com/Ve8AoJLdMX

— Chris Rose (@ArchRose90) February 7, 2026

Whispers

Here's what the Telegraph reported:

David Lammy turned on the Prime Minister as allies revealed he had warned against appointing Lord Mandelson as the ambassador to the US.

In a blow to Sir Keir Starmer, friends of the Deputy Prime Minister confirmed on Saturday night that he had not been in favour of bringing the "Prince of Darkness? back into government over his links to Jeffrey Epstein.

Mr Lammy is the first Cabinet minister to break openly with the embattled Prime Minister, whose future hangs in the balance over the Mandelson scandal.

If it was us, we wouldn't simply have 'warned' Starmer; we would have refused to serve in the same government as the 'Prince of Darkness'. They don't call him that for nothing, and finally the media is past pretending.

This is what slippery Lammy said in the video above (emphasis added):

Peter Mandelson is a man of considerable expertise. He's the right man for this moment to be out ambassador. He's been a business secretary, a Northern Ireland secretary, of course he's worked in the European Commission, and he brings all of that to bear working as our ambassador, and of course he's looking forwards to presenting his credentials to Donald Trump.

If Lammy is telling the truth, and he did warn Starmer, then he was lying when he said Mandelson was the "right man for this moment".

Either way, he's a liar.

And you can't trust a liar.

Starmfall

The Telegraph article also reports that Starmer is "devastated" and considering an exit. It further suggests Wes Streeting may have scuppered his own chances of replacing Starmer because of his links to Mandelson (links we've reported on). The problem for Labour is that most of the big players in the current government are connected to Mandelson, because he's been the puppet master behind Starmer's operation.

In other words, there's no obvious way out of this mess for Labour.

Featured image via BERR

By Willem Moore

Reform-led Kent council — one of the far-right party's 'flagships' — has been exposed inventing a claim that it had saved tens of millions as part of its 'DOLGE' 'efficiency' drive. The programme is supposed to be based on the Trump-Musk 'Department of Government Efficiency' (DOGE), with the addition of 'local'. But it follows the DOGE model in different ways from what we're supposed to think.

Just as DOGE claimed huge savings that it then had to remove from its supposed 'achievements', Reform's claim that DOLGE had saved almost £40m from Kent council's budget has turned out to be made up. So clearly made up, in fact, that the council's DOLGE lead Matthew Fraser-Moate has resigned because the council:

had not actually made any cuts.

DOLGE-IE stuff from Reform

Moate's colleague Paul Chamberlain, another councillor involved in Reform's DOLGE team, also quit. In January 2025, he had admitted publicly that there:

just weren't big cuts to make, because services had already been hacked away for years and years.

Well duh.

The claims have now been dismissed as a "blatant lie" after the savings — supposedly made on 'net zero', of course — were found to be entirely based on "hypothetical" projects whose existence is completely undocumented.

The £39.5m figure, part of a claimed £100m saving, was made up (literally!) of £32m from scrapping a scheme reducing properties' environmental impact and £7.5m by not switching to electric vehicles. After months evading transparency, the council eventually admitted that the projects didn't exist but were "potential capital projects" the council might have done in future but had not allocated any funding to.

Despite the admissions, a council spokesperson said that the council "categorically rejects any suggestion of impropriety, fabrication of figures or attempts to mislead".

While making up savings, Reform had been 'spaffing' large sums on parking spaces for its councillors — £600k.

Green party Kent councillor Stuart Jeffrey told the Canary he had been pursuing the matter for ages but there is "no record of savings". Worse, Reform has added to its spendthrift ways by creating a new cabinet position who will "burden" the council's strained finances:

I've been asking the finance team for the detailed impact of DOLGE and there is no record of savings. Reform are simply making it up.

Worse still is that they are doubling down on their personal pocket lining approach by appointing another cabinet member who will deliver nothing while being a burden himself on the council finances.

Featured image via KentLiveNews

By Skwawkbox

A whistleblower's allegations against Trump's Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard have finally been revealed. After a Washington process hid the details for a week following an unnamed whistleblower said he would publish them if they continued to be hidden, the allegations have finally been made public — and they are dynamite.

In spring 2025, the US National Security Agency (NSA) detected a call between a party identified as a foreign intelligence figure and a person described as very close to Trump. The NSA informed Gabbard, but instead of following normal distribution process, Gabbard blocked it. She then printed a copy and took it to Trump's chief of staff Susie Wiles — all according to Andrew Bakaj, the whistleblower's lawyer.

After meeting Wiles, Gabbard told the NSA to kill the report's publication and told it to send all information only to her office.

A spokesperson for Gabbard's office denied the accusation as "baseless" and claimed it was politically motivated. However, the communications between Gabbard and the NSA — and Wiles's receipt for the intelligence report — were sent directly to the Guardian. Gabbard was once a Trump critic, but changed her tune after Trump appointed her as DNI.

Joining the dots, many are publicly linking the 'foreign intelligence' service to confirmations in the latest Epstein file release that Donald Trump is "compromised by Israel", including former political candidate Melanie D'Arrigo:

Tulsi Gabbard and the White House killed a whistleblower report that someone close to Trump was talking to foreign intelligence.

Trump and his inner circle are in the Epstein files, and likely controlled through blackmail by foreign intelligence.

The whole Trump administration…

— Melanie D'Arrigo (@DarrigoMelanie) February 7, 2026

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

After decades in the trenches, this engineer is done with hype cycles

Opinion The real opponent of digital sovereignty is "enterprise IT" marketing, according to one Red Hat engineer who ranted entertainingly about the repeated waves of bullshit the industry hype cycle emits.…

Researchers claim model can cut years from testing cycles

Scientists have developed a machine learning method that could dramatically slash the cost and energy required to develop new lithium-ion batteries that the modern world is becoming increasingly reliant.…

On Friday, New York State Senators Liz Krueger and Kristen Gonzales introduced a bill that would stop the issuance of permits for new data centers for at least three years and ninety days to give time for impact assessments and to update regulations. The bill would require the Department of Environmental Conservation and Public Service Commissions to issue impact statements and reports during the pause, along with any new orders or regulations that they deem necessary to minimize data centers' impacts on the environment and consumers in New York.

The bill would require these departments to study data centers' water, electricity and gas usage, and their impact on the rates of these resources, among other things. The bill, citing a Bloomberg analysis, notes that, "Nationally, household electricity rates increased 13 percent in 2025, largely driven by the development of data centers." New York is the sixth state this year to introduce a bill aiming to put the brakes on data centers, following in the footsteps of Georgia, Maryland, Oklahoma, Vermont and Virginia, according to Wired. It's still very much in the early stages, and is now with the Senate Environmental Conservation Committee for consideration. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/new-york-lawmakers-introduce-bill-that-aims-to-halt-data-center-development-for-three-years-224005266.html?src=rss

Netflix's acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery isn't quite a done deal yet. As first reported by The Wall Street Journal, the US Department of Justice has started its probe of Netflix's proposed purchase, but is notably interested in whether the streaming giant was involved in any anticompetitive practices. According to the civil subpoena seen by WSJ, the Justice Department is looking into any "exclusionary conduct on the part of Netflix that would reasonably appear capable of entrenching market or monopoly power."

While Netflix announced plans to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery in December at a value of $82.7 billion, the deal was expected to close in 12 to 18 months, subject to required regulatory approvals. The DOJ has the power to block the transaction and this investigation could hint at the agency's approach, which may involve proving that Netflix put its competition at an unfair advantage.

Netflix's attorney, Steven Sunshine, told WSJ that this probe was standard practice and that, "we have not been given any notice or seen any other sign that the DOJ is conducting a separate monopolization investigation." Netflix also said in a statement that it's "constructively engaging with the Department of Justice as part of the standard review of our proposed acquisition of Warner Bros." According to WSJ, the investigation is still in its early stages and could take up to a year to complete.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/streaming/doj-is-investigating-if-netflix-used-anticompetitive-tactics-as-part-of-its-merger-probe-210940856.html?src=rss

The State Department is wiping the post history of its X accounts and making it so you'll have to file a Freedom of Information Act request if you want to access any of the content it removed, according to NPR. The publication reports that the State Department is removing all posts from before President Trump's current term — a move that affects several accounts associated with the department, including those for US embassies, and posts from the Biden and Obama administrations. Posts from Trump's first term will be taken down too. 

Unlike how past administrations have handled the removal of social media content and the transition of accounts, these posts won't be kept in a public archive. A spokesperson for the State Department confirmed this to NPR, and said the move is meant "to limit confusion on U.S government policy and to speak with one voice to advance the President, Secretary, and Administration's goals and messaging. It will preserve history while promoting the present." The spokesperson also called the X accounts "one of our most powerful tools for advancing the America First goals." 

The Trump administration has been purging information from government websites since he took office last year. Just this week, the CIA unexpectedly took down its World Factbook, a global reference guide that's been available on the internet since 1997.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/the-state-department-is-scrubbing-its-x-accounts-of-all-posts-from-before-trumps-second-term-205515745.html?src=rss

Five Years Ago

This week in 2021, the attacks on Section 230 were coming fast, with a Columbia law professor spewing blatantly false information in the Wall Street Journal and Joe Lieberman calling for its repeal, followed by the Democrats introducing the dumpster fire that was the SAFE TECH Act, which we dug into in depth. We also wrote about how attempts to tie 230 to a horrific story of online stalking were just plain wrong. Meanwhile, a federal court tossed out a constitutional challenge to FOSTA, 14 states were considering right to repair laws, and the RIAA launched a brand new front group pretending to represent independent artists.

Ten Years Ago

This week in 2016, a DHS official was calling for an end to anonymity online, French politicians were trying to ban linking to any website without permission, and India was getting ready to ban zero rating after the failure of Facebook's misleading lobbying. We wrote about how lobbyists turned an education reform bill into a copyright propaganda push, Take Two Software was sued over tattoo copyrights, Hasbro was sued for font piracy on My Little Pony merchandise, and a ridiculous copyright fight was still keeping the only video of the first Super Bowl locked up.

Fifteen Years Ago

This week in 2011, there was a lot of coverage of the recent uprising in Egypt and the government's response. We looked at just how the government shut down the internet in an attempt to quell the protests, then at how they turned it back on for the same reasons. Al Jazeera offered up its Egypt coverage under a Creative Commons license, while China was trying to prevent people from talking about it online. Meanwhile, Homeland Security embarked on a new round of domain seizures that raised serious questions and strongly suggested the agency was twisting the law, especially with the now-infamous seizure of Spanish streaming site Rojadirecta.

Luke Akehurst isn't very well liked here at the Canary. Conversely, seeing Akehurst make a fool of himself is super popular, hence this:

Mate, do you genuinely think you're helping here.

— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) February 6, 2026

Spy hard

Akehurst and Hodges are discussing Labour Together's spying scandal. As Ed Sykes wrote on 6 February:

Labour Together is part of the shady right-wing infrastructure that, along with Peter Mandelson, helped to undermine the left and boost Keir Starmer into power. And a new report reveals how Labour Together spent tens of thousands of pounds getting a dodgy company to investigate journalists looking into all this. This behaviour shows it's not just Mandelson that should never be near government again. It's the whole sinister machinery that put Starmer where he is today, including his right-hand man and Mandelson protege Morgan McSweeney.

Is it good for political parties to spy on journalists?

No.

Is it creepy?

Yes.

Does the terminally unaware Akehurst realise any of this?

Not according to the conversation he had with Hodges:

But do you think attempting do defend Labour Together's profiling of journalists in the current environment is really helpful to your party and Prime Minister.

— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) February 6, 2026

It's objectively extremely funny that Luke Akehurst's only objection to LT as front organisation, secret slush fund and journalist-hounder is not a moral one, but that he thinks that money would have been spent slightly better on the right-wing corporate ginger group he helms. pic.twitter.com/0CJooxsa61

— Scurial (@Scurial2940422) February 7, 2026

Akehurst didn't respond to the above, suggesting someone with more than one brain cell advised him to cut his losses. No doubt the same genius advised him to delete all his pro-Mandelson tweets:

Sometimes I almost feel sorry for @lukeakehurst. Such a loyal attack dog for the poisonous version of the Labour Party spewed up by the likes of Mandelson & Blair, he's now reduced to deleting his fawning tweets - like cleaning up the sick after a party he wasn't invited to.

As highlighted by journalist Michael Crick, Labour's chief whip apparently got where he is today with a little help from the 'prince of darkness' himself — Peter Mandelson:

Oh dear! According to the memoirs of former Stalybridge MP Tom Pendry, the selection of current Government Chief Whip Jonathan Reynolds as subsequent Labour candidate for the Stalybridge seat (and MP from 2010) was fixed by a chap called Peter Mandelson. pic.twitter.com/qmRJtSlUuc

— Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick) February 7, 2026

Funny, isn't it, how so many people in the Starmer government seem to owe their career to Peter Mandelson.

It's almost as if Mandelson is actually the architect of this loathsome abomination of a government.

Mandelson — All coming out

The page Crick highlights reads:

I was of course a part, that a normal selection process could not take place - something that James almost certainly had planned on. The National Executive of the party convened a panel consisting of Tom Watson MP, Keith Vaz MP and a trade unionist member of the National Executive Committee to interview would-be candidates. The local party were informed that their panel's decision on a shortlist of candidates was sacrosanct and appeals were not allowed.

The panel duly came forward with a shortlist that did not include James Purnell's office manager, Johnny Reynolds - his favoured candidate. Not to be thwarted, Purnell, together with some assistance from Peter Mandelson MP, went over the head of the interviewing panel.

It was revealed in The Times Guide to the General Election of 2005 that Mandelson then surprised the National Executive to include Johnny Reynolds on the shortlist, which they dutifully did.

As Johnny Reynolds had managed Purnell's office, he had a great advantage over the other candidates regarding access to the names and addresses of local party members, which greatly helped with canvassing and postal votes. Johnny became the candidate, and subsequently MP.

I was asked three times to go on BBC's World at One with Mandelson to discuss whether there was any malpractice, but I refused as it could have harmed Johnny's chances had I done so. Peter did go on and, as I understand, he said he didn't intervene in the selection process - if that is what he said then that would be a blatant distortion of the truth, as pointed out in The Times Guide that stated that Jonathan Reynolds was 'selected amid a huge row with Peter Mandelson's involvement after failing to make the initial shortlist'.

In the Corbyn years, the media would call you a 'Stalinist' even if you carefully did the precise opposite of the above. You'll notice they've turned a blind eye to how the likes of Starmer and Mandelson operate, however.

Or they did, anyway.

Obviously they taste blood in the water right now, so they're noticing all the things they allowed to fly under the radar with Starmer.

Surprise, surprise

We've never cared for Reynolds, reporting in 2023:

We're at a point now at which even the austerity-pushers in the media are looking at Britain's crumbling infrastructure and saying 'maybe we should spend the bare minimum on this stuff'. Among the public there's been a hunger for public spending for years; now we're at a point at which you can voice that feeling without being dogpiled by the nation's thickest columnists. And yet - and fucking yet - Labour are using this situation to promote - of all fucking things - more austerity - i.e. the thing which got us here in the first place - the thing which we know from history never works:

Jonathan Reynolds says the Tories were wrong to cancel a Labour program to refurbish and rebuild our schools, but he refuses to say the next Labour govt will refurbish and rebuild more schools that the Tories have committed to doing #TrevorPhillips pic.twitter.com/0ICvkJMLIZ

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) September 10, 2023

Here's what our own James Wright wrote on him in 2024:

The Labour Party has offered corporate bosses the "unique opportunity to become a commercial partner at our business policy round-table over breakfast" for up to £30,000 - in another cash-for-access scandal.

For £15,000, corporations would give a keynote speech, have photographs with business secretary Jonathan Reynolds and have a dedicated Labour Party staffer to make introductions. And for £30,000, the corporation could also decide who else would attend the breakfast.

Given Reynold's track record, it's entirely unsurprising to learn that the sulphurous stench of Mandelson has clung to his career from the jump.

Featured image via Number 10 (Flickr)

By Willem Moore

Trump Mobile is already failing to deliver on some early promises, according to the latest report from The Verge. The report revealed the near-final design of the T1 smartphone and uncovered some major changes with pricing and manufacturing.

The Verge spoke with Don Hendrickson and Eric Thomas, two of the three execs behind Trump Mobile, about the company's first smartphone, which will get a more expensive price tag and no longer boast being made in the USA. Thanks to a screenshot from the report, we can see that the latest T1 design also changed the camera array, which first resembled the iPhone's but now has three cameras in a misaligned vertical stack.

As for the price, Hendrickson told The Verge that anyone who paid the $100 deposit will still pay $499 total for the T1 as an "introductory price," but that later customers could fork up to $999. Thomas also revealed that the T1 smartphone will go through "final assembly" in Miami and no longer be "proudly designed and built in the United States," as seen in the introductory press release. Instead, the website now shows a description that says, "with American hands behind every device." We still don't have a release date — and now we don't even have a final price — but the website still claims the T1 smartphone will be released "later this year."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/mobile/smartphones/trump-mobiles-t1-phone-is-apparently-still-coming-but-itll-be-uglier-and-more-expensive-190626835.html?src=rss