NewsExpress

NEW: leaked report shows McSweeney's Labour Together monitored the Canary too [ 19-Feb-26 6:40pm ]

A newly-leaked Labour Together report shows that the Starmeroid sabotage group continued to monitor the Canary for years after trying to destroy it. And, Skwawkbox was monitored too - although the geniuses at the shady group failed to spell it correctly. One thing is very clear: Labour Together have been running scared of journalists reporting on their connections and movements.

Evidently, any attention on what they got up to in pursuit of their aims - and how they funded it - clearly made Morgan McSweeney and company fearful of discovery. This is flagged in the preamble of the leaked report, which says that:

recent articles and blog posts…have contained more information than ever before, raising questions and concerns about the sources of the information.

Labour Together's dossier

The Morgan McSweeney faction's frank terror of left media, especially the Canary, was well and truly exposed in Paul Holden's excellent book The Fraud. That fear triggered McSweeney and his partner in crime Imran Ahmed to try to "destroy" the Canary.

The faction's fear of left media clearly didn't stop when the propaganda groups they set up managed to topple Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader by sabotaging the 2019 general election - and came close to forcing the Canary to close.

McSweeney resigned in early February 2026 as Keir Starmer's chief of staff after years - as Holden exposed - of running covert campaigns against the left and its media. The immediate cause of his resignation was McSweeney's closeness to disgraced string-puller Peter Mandelson. It was a doomed attempt to protect McSweeney's boss Keir Starmer - but the scandals have just kept on oozing out ever since.

This week, Rupert Murdoch's Times 'broke' the news that McSweeney's outfit Labour Together paid tens of thousands to private investigators to spy on two Times hacks. It wasn't breaking; it wasn't even news. The Canary and others had already reported on it - and had reported six months earlier on Labour Together's spying on a number of left-wing journalists, as well as on author Paul Holden and former Mandela minister Andrew Feinstein.

Something bothering you, lads?

The newly-leaked report shows just how much Labour Together was discomfited by what the Canary and others were digging up. The memo begins with some anxiety over who is watching their every move:

For both left- and right-wing influencers, Labour Together and CCDH sit at the centre of a nexus of conspiracy theories that involve government attempts to suppress free speech, increasing state censorship, the sabotaging of left- and right-wing leaders, and pro-Israel advocacy, among many other accusations.

Conspiracy theories? What is it about the Canary and other independent journalists that so bothers Labour Together? Perhaps that we're not in the pockets of billionaires or politicians, and actually report the truth as we find it?

The memo also confirms that the McSweeney group continued to monitor the Canary - with particular attention to how it exposed Imran Ahmed's sock-puppet groups. This was going on long before Holden's book was published, though Holden features too:

The report was prepared for Labour Together in December 2023, marked "Strictly Private and Confidential". Oh well. After introducing the Canary as one of the main outlets paying attention to Labour Together's actions from the start of Starmer's diseased tenure as Labour leader, and to Labour Together's links with the Israel lobby, it then turns to the exposure of McSweeney and Ahmed's shamelessly named fake-news campaigns [emphases added]:

December 2020: The far-left website The Canary published an article which focused on the Stop Funding Fake News campaign following its successful campaign urging corporations to stop advertising on The Canary website.

The article focused on the connection between SFFN and Morgan McSweeny [sic]. McSweeney was identified as one of the directors, alongside Imran Ahmed, and as Keir Starmer MP's Chief of Staff at the time. The article noted celebrity Rachel Riley's support for both SFFN and the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).

The article accused CCDH of being linked to a "number of figures on the Labour right" and suggested that McSweeney and Ahmed had been operating both campaigns for longer than the organisations were "willing to admit".

Labour Together is briefly mentioned as an organisation that shares its address with CCDH and is accused of being a grouping of Blue Labour and Labour Right figures - including Lisa Nandy at the time.

Who is Imran Ahmed?

Like McSweeney, Imran Ahmed is one of the most shadowy figures on the Labour right. Initially a staffer for right-wing Labour horror Angela Eagle and desperate to protect Eagle from deselection by angry party members, Ahmed was at the centre of fake claims that left-wingers threw a brick through Eagle's office window. The whole thing was made up. The window was not Eagle's. There was never any evidence the left had anything to do with it. There was never even a brick. But following a pattern that was soon to become characteristic of Labour Together's operations, the corporate and state press were more than happy to amplify the false claims fed to them.

Ahmed then went on to co-found the Orwellian smear factory 'Stop Funding Fake News' (SFFN) to target the Canary. When that was no longer needed, SFFN morphed into the equally misnamed 'Centre for Countering Digital Hate' (CCDH). Ahmed moved to the US and touted CCDH's services to the anonymous wealthy and powerful to attack their opponents using similar tactics to those used against the Canary. He also specifically courted Israel and its donors, eager to target Palestine and the anti-genocide movement. Author Paul Thacker has accused Ahmed of working with or for UK intelligence services.

Given Ahmed's links to nefarious groups and his closeness to McSweeney, it's clear - and no surprise - that any scrutiny was unwelcome.

Shit out of luck

The Canary features numerous times in the memo, each time as a thorn in the McSweeney-Ahmed axis's side. In each case, the information exposed by our journalists about Labour Together's activities and personnel has subsequently been proven to be true, particularly by Holden's book, which was serialised by the Canary in the autumn of 2025.

When Jeremy Corbyn was still leader of the Labour party and the left media were central to his prospects of success, Morgan McSweeney told his fellow saboteurs, "kill the Canary before the Canary kills us". They came close, but they are now disgraced relics while the Canary is thriving more than ever. And, for good measure, so is Sk(w)awkbox.

Featured image via the Canary

Christian protest at St Paul's demands an end to Rosebank oil field [ 19-Feb-26 6:36pm ]

Banners outside St Paul's saying Don't Crucify Creation and Stop Rosebank with people under white shrouds in front

The Church of England should speak out and call on the prime minister to stop Rosebank. That's the demand from Christian Climate Action (CCA). The group held a 'die-in' outside St Paul's Cathedral on 18 February, which was Ash Wednesday, the start of Lent.

Ministers also used symbolic 'oil' instead of traditional ash to anoint activists with the sign of the cross as part of the peaceful vigil.

Archbishops urged to campaign against Rosebank

CCA has also written to the archbishops of Canterbury and York calling for their support in urging the government to refuse permission for the Rosebank oil field in the North Sea, stating:

As part of our Stop Crucifying Creation campaign, CCA is urging the Church of England to be a prophetic voice in this existential crisis and speak out against the fossil fuel companies that are driving the Climate Emergency.

Rev James Grote explained:

Climate change is crucifying creation through flood and drought, heat and storms. We must speak up with those who are suffering the loss of everything in our one and only planet.

If we are to continue to live in hope we have to act now, move away from fossil fuels, call out the oil and gas giants and stop Rosebank. The UK government must give us hope.

On Ash Wednesday, they held a 'die-in' where protesters shrouded themselves under white sheets, with banner messages that included "Don't Crucify Creation" and "Stop Rosebank," at the foot of the steps to the main entrance of St Paul's Cathedral.

Rev Helen Burnett said:

Ash Wednesday marks the beginning of Lent, which is the season of repentance and reflection. A time when Christians consider their commitment to living within the limits of the gospel which frees us to live in ways that bring justice and peace.

That's why we have chosen today to urge the Church to speak out against fossil fuel extraction and here in the UK that means stopping the Rosebank oil field from being developed.

The Church of England can 'Speak Truth to Power' and be a prophetic voice on climate, calling out oil and gas companies and government inaction on the climate and nature crisis.

Rosebank, the UK's largest undeveloped oil field, is back on the government's desk. It received approval in 2023, before Scottish courts ruled it unlawful. Norwegian state oil company Equinor reapplied for drilling permission in September 2025.

Following the completion of the Adura joint venture deal between Equinor and Shell in December, Adura has now assumed majority ownership of the field.

An application to develop Rosebank has been resubmitted, which will now be subject to the government's new climate test. This requires oil firms to account for the climate impact of burning the oil and gas they plan to extract.

Stop Rosebank campaigner Lauren MacDonald said:

We cannot open new North Sea oil and gas projects if we are to stay within the 1.5ºc threshold set out in the Paris Agreement, to which the UK is a signatory. In fact, Rosebank's vast CO2 emissions from burning oil and gas, would equate to what more than 700 million people living in the world's poorest countries produce in a year.

It's simply not possible to drill at Rosebank and uphold our climate commitments.

Not only this, Rosebank is a very bad deal for the UK. It won't lower bills and will do almost nothing to boost energy security, given that most of it is oil destined for export. It could also lead to a net loss to the Treasury of hundreds of millions of pounds, thanks to the enormous tax breaks for new drilling in the UK.

It is fantastic to see activists such as Christian Climate Action taking this issue to the highest level. It demonstrates how the Stop Rosebank campaign brings people from all walks of life together in unity and hope to save our planet.

Featured image via Angela Christofilou / Christian Climate Action

Gordon Brown says he dobbed Andrew in to police [ 19-Feb-26 5:54pm ]

Former PM Gordon Brown has said that he dobbed former prince Andrew into "several UK police forces".

Brown wrote a five-page letter to various forces, including the Met, Sussex and Thames Valley, which he says contained "new and additional" information from the Epstein files. The ex-royal was arrested this morning on suspicion of 'misconduct in public office' — which carries a potential life sentence but does nothing for Andrew's and Epstein's victims.

Brown doesn't seem to have been asked quite why he had information from the Epstein files not previously available to police. Keir Starmer has helpfully added 'What the king said', insisting like Chuck that the "law must take its course".

The whole establishment now seems to be getting in on the Andrew act as some kind of ritual hand-washing of its own metastatic part in Epstein's decades of child-rape, trafficking and spying for Israel. Which isn't how they're describing it, of course — especially the Israel bit.

For more on the Epstein Files, please read the Canary's article on the way that the media circus around Epstein is erasing the experiences of victims and survivors.

Featured image via the ScottishGreens

Starmer brought in ANOTHER sex pest — and he knew [ 19-Feb-26 5:33pm ]

Keir Starmer's endless — and knowing — cosiness with sex pests and paedophiles has become a byword in politics. So much so that women Labour MPs demanded a special meeting with Starmer to inform him that the public considers Labour the "party of paedos". They forgot to mention the victims, of course.

Starmer is still reeling from his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as his senior adviser — and ambassador — knowing Mandelson had remained close to the convicted serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein. Mandelson protégé Morgan McSweeney resigned in February 2026 as Starmer's chief of staff but failed to take the heat off his boss.

That heat is white-hot. Under Starmer, Labour has a deep and ongoing paedophile and sex offender problem. And now Starmer has been rocked by yet another 'appointed him and knew' scandal.

Starmer and Brendan Cox

Charity leaders and others are "dismayed" at his close relationship with Brendan Cox, the widower of murdered centrist MP Jo Cox and a keen 'both-sideser' of Israel's genocide in Gaza. Allegations against Cox of sexual assault and other sexually improper behaviour have long been public and have forced his resignation from no fewer than three charities. Despite this, according to inside sources, Starmer chose to use Cox as an 'informal consultant', though both he and Cox now deny it. Of course they do — yet Cox's latest charity, the 'Together Initiative', received almost £1.3m from Starmer's culture department over a two-year period.

Number 10 claims its consultations with Cox's outfit are no different from its talks with other charities, but presumably not all of the 'others' received more than £600,000 a year from the government.

Cox was first — at least publicly — accused of sexual harassment at 'Save the Children' more than a decade ago. He denied the allegations at the time, but resigned. He later apologised for his conduct. In 2018, he also resigned from both charities he had set up in memory of his late wife. Now, according to the New Statesman, there is "serious and high-level concern" about the closeness between Cox and Starmer's regime.

Another unnamed figure in the charity sector was more blunt:

What the fuck are they doing?

And Starmer knew, a former colleague of Cox insists:

No 10 cannot pretend that they did not know about it or that it did not come up in their due diligence checks. They know it and they have decided that it doesn't matter because he is useful to them.

Yet Cox has been allowed to give "the impression that he was briefing [the charity sector] on the government's behalf", apparently endorsed by Starmer's new chief of staff Vidhya Alakeson and with the participation of a Number 10 special adviser. Alakeson — a former Tory think-tanker — took over after the disgraced McSweeney's resignation.

Starmer's 'Party of paedos'

The Cox scandal is just the latest in a long, long list of related outrages, many involving Starmer personally and all involving the pro-Israel Labour right. Starmer followed his Mandelson fiasco with another 'Labour nonceberg' scandal over his decision to award a peerage to his former adviser Matthew Doyle. He knew, when he recommended Doyle, that Doyle had campaigned for the election of notorious Scottish Labour paedophile Sean Morton.

Starmer also:

Welcomed the London MP Neil Coyle back under the Labour whip despite Coyle being found by Parliament to have sexually harassed a staffer, as well as racially abusing a Chinese-British man.
Turned a blind eye to then-Chester MP Chris Matheson's sexual harassment: neither Starmer nor the party machine suspended him pending the outcome of the investigation, as would be usual practice to protect the women around him.
Protected at least two further alleged sex pests on his front bench.

As head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Starmer oversaw repeated refusals to prosecute offenders, including the notorious serial rapist Jimmy Savile. And perhaps most seriously, in terms of Starmer's provable direct involvement, he and his then-sidekick David Evans covered up Jewish whistleblower Elaina Cohen's allegations of serial abuse of women by a party staffer.

They did nothing

Cohen repeatedly warned Starmer and Evans that a staffer working for then-Perry Barr MP Khalid Mahmood — and allegedly Mahmood's lover — was engaged in 'sadistic' and 'criminal' abuse of vulnerable Muslim women. The victims were fleeing domestic violence, allegedly inflicted through the now-defunct domestic violence 'charity' that she ran. Starmer and Evans did nothing. Mahmood remained on Starmer's front bench and Cohen was sacked from her role as parliamentary aide.

One of the victims gave evidence at Cohen's successful wrongful dismissal tribunal. She spoke of the horrific abuse she and others suffered. This included blackmail and sexual exploitation. Her evidence was not challenged by Mahmood or his lawyers. At the tribunal, Mahmood admitted under oath that he'd personally made sure that Starmer was aware of Cohen's allegations.

Defining characteristic

Labour's 'paedophile friends of Israel' is also so widespread as to be a defining characteristic of the Zionist Labour right to which Starmer belongs:

Starmer's cadre knew, when they approved Zionist organiser Tom Dewey to stand for election as a Hackney councillor, that Dewey had been charged with possessing the most disgusting and severe child-rape images. Dewey was subsequently convicted, but when local women members wanted to discuss it, it locked them out of its systems to prevent them doing so. In February 2026 the party deselected three Hackney councillors for demanding an investigation.
'Friend of Israel' Liron Velleman has just been convicted of repeated sex crimes against a 13-year-old girl.
In January 2025, former Blair minister Ivor Caplin was arrested in a sting operation as he allegedly attempted to meet a 15-year-old boy for sex. Local police went after local left-winger Greg Hadfield for exposing the explicit content Caplin posted on his X feed — Hadfield defeated the 'vexatious' charge in November 2025. However, no charges have yet been brought against Caplin and a court did not impose bail conditions after his initial bail expired.
In March 2025 Sam Gould, another Jewish Labour Movement activist who worked for Starmer's health secretary Wes Streeting, quit as a Redbridge councillor after being convicted on two separate counts of indecent exposure to a 13-year-old girl.
The following month Dan Norris MP, an ally of Keir Starmer, was arrested over allegations of rape, child sex offences and child abduction. Avon and Somerset Police says its investigation is still ongoing.
The same Dan Norris was arrested again in February 2026 for alleged rape and sexual assault.

Another one bites the dust

It seems like every week a new Starmer sex offender scandal oozes out into the public domain. And that's not even counting the way that 'mainstream' media still stubbornly refuse to probe why several Ukrainian rent boys set fire to Starmer's property last year.

No wonder the survivors of serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein, ignored by Starmer, refuse to accept his recent non-apology and describe him as a barrier to justice for the victims of paedophiles.

Featured image via the Canary

Court orders destruction of hunting horn as dickhead huntsman is charged [ 19-Feb-26 5:07pm ]

Hunt Saboteurs Association (HSA) is celebrating the legal victory, with another huntsman brought to justice. Northampton magistrate's court has found Philip Saunders guilty of illegal hunting on Wednesday 18 February. Saunders is one of the arsehole huntsman for criminal gang, the Pipewell Foot Beagles.

Huntsman Saunders with his pack of beagles and hunting horn, looking upset.

Leg it lads, we've been seen Another one?

The conviction is the second time these bloodthirsty arseholes have been caught out illegally hare-hunting.

And it beautifully landed just before the 21st anniversary of the Hunting Act.

The court heard how Saunders led his pack to kill a hare at the Boughton Estates on Kettering. Richard Scott is the current Duke of Buccleuch and one of the largest land owners in Scotland. It's no shock that he would allow an illegal hunt to take place on 'home turf.'

Courageous wildlife photographer Emma Reed was on the scene and captured the entire incident.

A lone hunter looking annoyed on a mobile phone

Rumbled again

Reed's video clearly shows Saunders encouraging the hounds to kill. The huntsman was heard growling "Get onto it!" at the dogs. This is a specific hunting term which incites animal cruelty and it proves the hunt intended to pursue the hare.

A dead hare which has fallen victim to the hunt laid on a table

A previous victim of the hunt

As per usual, the HSA provided names to the police at the time, but they failed to act on the evidence. Again.

Losing the horn

The magistrate fined Saunders £1,000 for his role in the illegal hunt. He also has to pay £3,600 in costs and a £400 victim surcharge.

In the landmark move, the court also ordered the destruction of Saunders' hunting horn. Saunders must surrender it to the police by 5pm Thursday 19 Feb.

Destroying the horn is beautifully symbolic as this is the primary tool a huntsman uses to control the hounds. The HSA believe this should be common practice in all cases as it effectively strips the bloodthirsty wankers of the ability to lead.

Reed expressed her satisfaction with the guilty verdict stating:

"I am pleased with the guilty verdict as justice has been served. The judge was strong in his summing up of sending a message to the hunting community that these illegal actions will not be tolerated and are totally unacceptable."

Justice for wildlife

The Judge was strong in his summing up of the case, making it clear that illegal hunting of hares is totally unacceptable and it sends a clear warning to the hunting community.

Simon Russell, chair of the HSA spoke to the Canary about this landmark victory:

Hare Hunts always pack up and go home when sabs find them, this is what they are really doing when they're not under observation, killing our public wild Hares. A good hunting horn is hard to come by, the really decent ones rack in at £300 plus and we would suggest that future convictions have the horns donated to the Hunt Saboteurs Association. We would put them to good use saving wildlife.

Images via Emma Reed

By Antifabot

US attack on Iran seems imminent — but here's what we actually know [ 19-Feb-26 4:55pm ]

An American attack on Iran appears imminent. US president Donald Trump has deployed massive military force to the Persian Gulf while negotiations between the two counties seem to have stalled. Media reports the attack could start as soon as Saturday 21 February.

Iran's leadership has said that the principles of the negotiations — centring on Iran's nuclear plans (or lack thereof) — were understood but that no agreement had been reached. The US has said military options are very much 'on the table' while Iran now says it's open to international nuclear inspections.

Iran closed large areas of its airspace on 19 February. It's aviation authority said it was:

to allow a planned missile launch exercise tomorrow. It specified danger zones where flying will be completely banned due to military activity.

Anonymous Iranian security officials said it was a show of force, and the US aviation authority has followed suit:

warning that uncoordinated missile launches could pose catastrophic risks, including endangering civilian flight paths.

The closure was enough to active alarm bells for some countries. Poland urged its citizens to leave Iran. Prime minister Donald Tusk said:

In a few, a dozen, or several dozen hours, evacuation may no longer be possible.

Behind the scenes, US military aircraft have been moving into the region for days.

Tankers inbound

Sky News reported that American refuelling planes have passed through the UK as part of the build-up. Starmer's Britain, it appears, is happy to serve as checkpoints for Trump's march to war.

Military expert professor Michael Clarke was on Sky on 18 February. Using open source air traffic mapping, he showed how on 16 February six US tankers passed through the UK on their way to Greece. On 18 February, a further ten tankers passed through the UK on their way towards the Mediterranean:

You can hear his analysis from around 1.55 in this report:

And Drop Site News journalists Jeremy Scahill and Murtaza Huzzain reported:

the largest buildup of firepower in the Middle East since President Donald Trump authorized a 12-day bombing campaign against Iran last June that killed more than 1,000 people.

One anonymous former Trump insider told the investigative outlet that:

based on his discussions with current officials, he assesses an 80-90% likelihood of U.S. strikes within weeks.

And retired Lt. Col. Daniel Davis said the level of build-up:

harkens back to what I saw ahead of the 2003 Iraq war.

Davis warned:

You don't assemble this kind of power to send a message. In my view, this is what you do when you're preparing to use it. What I see on the diplomatic front is just to try to keep things rolling until it's time to actually launch the military operation. I think that everybody on both sides knows where this is heading.

And a key US command and control aircraft is now in the region…

Critical command and control aircraft

Former US Marine and State Department whistleblower Matthew Hoh said the presence of the E-3 command and control aircraft was an indicator Trump intended to pull the trigger:

The E3 is an incredibly important aircraft. For those unfamiliar, it is the large airplane that looks like an airliner, but with a revolving radar disc on top.

The airplane is loaded with an air crew whose job is to observe, manage and control the airspace in its area. It is especially important for directing fighters and ground/sea based missile interceptors against Iranian missiles and drones.

This is the strongest indication to me of the seriousness of the US threat to Iran. The US has deployed more than 2/3 of its available E3 command/control aircraft to Europe and the Middle East.

The E3 is an incredibly important aircraft. For those unfamiliar, it is the large…

— Matthew Hoh (@MatthewPHoh) February 19, 2026

Renowned international relations scholar John Mearsheimer reminded us that barring UAE - which has close ties with the settler-colonial pariah state - the only country absolutely determined to have a war with Iran was Israel:

Drop Site broke down the scale of the build-up:

Two carrier strike groups—each built around one aircraft carrier, several guided‑missile destroyers armed with Tomahawk missiles, and at least one submarine—are also being stationed nearby, along with several additional U.S. destroyers and submarines in regional waters near Iran to defend against ballistic missile attacks, as well as more than 30,000 U.S. military personnel and numerous Patriot and THAAD anti-missile batteries spread across regional military bases.

The USS Gerald R. Ford is on its way to the Gulf from the Caribbean. The ship took part in Trump's last 'spectacular' - the Caracas raid which snatched Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro on 3 January. The Ford is the biggest and most advanced carrier in the world.

Former Pentagon official Jasmine El-Gamal told Drop Site.

This is not a dress rehearsal. This is it. This is not the negotiations of last year or the year before or the year before that. They're backed into a corner. There's no off ramp.

El-Gamal said:

The fact that that carrier is there tells me that this isn't just a routine kind of, 'Hey, let's flex some muscle.' He didn't need that. He didn't need to send that second carrier to flex muscle.

But what would a US-Iran war actually look like?

Short intense war?

With negotiations deadlocked, one expert said that Iran and US might favour a short intense war followed by a return to talks.

Swedish-Iranian scholar Trita Parsi told Democracy Now:

We have a very dangerous situation, because both sides actually believe that a short, intense war may improve their negotiating position.

The US believes its overwhelming military capability will:

be able to take out Iran militarily rather quickly and then force it to capitulate.

Parsi said the Iranians have other plans:

They believe that they have the ability to inflict significant damage on the United States in the short term, including on civilian oil installations in the region, closing down the Strait of Hormuz, that would shoot up oil prices…

The Iranians were calculating that:

the initial cost of this to the United States would be so immense, and the United States would recognize that it would have to go for a longer war, which it cannot afford, and as a result, it would get the United States to back off.

Yes another Middle east war is looming. It would be a war which is not at all separate to the current genocide in Gaza and the legacies of the Iraq war. In fact, it would compound both. The best case scenario is that it doesn't happen at all. Next best? The sort of 'limited' bombing we've seen in the past.

The third, most terrifying and not at all unlikely outcome is that the war escalates into something altogether more existential with profound impacts for the region and the world, and which sends violent shocks through the global economy. A number of experts and insiders are saying we'll find out sooner rather than later.

Featured image via the Canary

Family of Andrew accuser Virginia Giuffre react to former royal's arrest [ 19-Feb-26 4:47pm ]

Disgraced Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former prince, has finally been arrested in connection with revelations from the Epstein files.

Among those who have responded are the family of Virginia Giuffre. Giuffre accused Windsor of sexual abuse:

Statement from the family of Virginia Giuffre:

"At last.

Today, our broken hearts have been lifted at the news that no one is above the law, not even royalty.

On behalf of our sister, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, we extend our gratitude to the UK's Thames Valley Police for their… pic.twitter.com/bgtHZtb2qO

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) February 19, 2026

Nevertheless, it hasn't escaped attention that the arrest is regarding misconduct in public office and apparently not in connection with Giuffre's allegations.

Andrew arrest: 'at last'

On 19 February 2026, Thames Valley Police arrested Andrew on suspicion of misconduct in public office. This came after they reviewed documents from the Epstein files which suggest he shared information from his time as a UK trade envoy with the late convicted paedophile.

Mountbatten-Windsor is currently in police custody amid searches of multiple properties as part of the criminal inquiry. The Epstein files have raised serious concerns about the scale of this sinister web of elitist men. This has prompted widespread demands for full transparency and accountability for sexual abuse against women and girls.

However, this pattern underscores how far more precedence is given to economic interests and institutional power over justice for victims and accountability for abusive men.

The statement from Giuffre's family reads in full:

At last.

Today, our broken hearts have been lifted at the news that no one is above the law, not even royalty.

On behalf of our sister, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, we extend our gratitude to the UK's Thames Valley Police for their investigation and arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

He was never a prince.

For survivors everywhere, Virginia did this for you.

Virginia Giuffre

Virginia Giuffre accused Andrew of sexually abusing her when she was just 17 years old. She became a prominent advocate fighting against sex trafficking, in light of her own experience being sexually exploited by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. She died by suicide in April 2025 leaving her loved ones and survivors across the world devastated and heartbroken. Giuffre's push for accountability has been continued by advocacy groups across the West. Many have joined the call in demanding powerful men face consequences for the abuse they have evidently inflicted.

We wrote about Andrew's arrest shortly after it happened:

If former royal, and mate of serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was hoping for any public sympathy after his arrest this morning - on his birthday - he's going to be sorely disappointed.

The family of Virginia Giuffre, Andrew's most well-known victim, welcomed the arrest as a sign that no one is above the law:

"At last, today, our broken hearts have been lifted at the news that no one is above the law, not even royalty," Giuffre's family said in the statement given to CBS News."

However, Windsor was arrested on suspicion of 'misconduct in a public office'. Knowing the British state, this was more likely linked to his leaking of secrets to Epstein than his abuse of trafficked and potentially under-age girls. But the offence carries a potential life sentence, so there's that.

Giuffre had long pursued seeing the suspected paedo-prince face accountability for his abuse against her. Obviously, Andrew has always denied these claims, which is no surprise as it's damn rare to find a man actually hold his hands up in disgust at the abuse he has inflicted.

Because of this, she was denied the justice she deserved over the allegations against Windsor, after Epstein and Maxwell allegedly trafficked her to him. Giuffre also shared in her memoir even more sinister allegations against former Israeli PM Ehud Barak.

We wrote in October:

Virginia Giuffre, one of the most prominent survivors (but now a victim) of serial child rapist and trafficker - and almost certain Israel intelligence asset - Jeffrey Epstein, was repeatedly left battered and bloodied after being beaten and raped by a man she describes, in a new memoir published after her death earlier this year, as a "well-known prime minister".

Adding:

Giuffre said that she called the man 'the Prime Minister' and did not name him, because she was afraid he would come after her and cause her harm if she did. Before Epstein's death, however, she named former Israeli PM Ehud Barak - also a close friend of Epstein's ardent fan Peter Mandelson - as one of the many men to rape her, an accusation he has denied.

Virginia Giuffre wrote in horrific detail about the violence inflicted on her by the 'PM', whom she met when she was just eighteen:

"He repeatedly choked me until I lost consciousness and took pleasure in seeing me in fear for my life. Horrifically, the Prime Minister laughed when he hurt me and got more aroused when I begged him to stop. I emerged from the cabana bleeding from my mouth, vagina, and anus. For days, it hurt to breathe and to swallow… [He] raped me more savagely than anyone had before."

King's 'concern'

The King chose his words carefully - and choice matters here, because men can choose to amplify victims' voices and examine allegations critically. Rather than doing so, he voiced his "deepest concern" about his brother's arrest and stated that "the law must take its course," adding:

What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities.

This statement is reported to have the full support of Will and Kate, the Prince and Princess of Wales. Queenie Camilla had nothing to offer but a wave when asked for her feelings on the arrest. We can't help but feel the Royal family's concern here lies solely with Andrew, the man-child sex-pest, rather than the countless victims across the world who fell victim to powerful, privileged men and their sick fancies.

How the mighty have fallen, thus proving that powerful men can be brought to task if the political will is there:

'Do you know who I was?' #Andrew #AndrewWindsor pic.twitter.com/Gp6Eu5NuD9

— The Rev. Anton Mittens

Andrew will have a sweat on now - and we bet Mandelson is too [ 19-Feb-26 4:35pm ]

In his 2019 BBC Newsnight interview, former prince Andrew notoriously claimed that Virginia Giuffre's allegations against him couldn't be true because he's unable to sweat.

He's likely to have discovered a few sweat glands since his arrest this morning.

All too typically for the British establishment, the arrest was not for sexually abusing trafficked and potentially under-age girls. Instead it was for 'misconduct in public office', after an Epstein files release revealed Mountbatten-Windsor was allegedly bunging sensitive secret information to the serial child-rapist while a UK trade envoy.

That fact is a disgusting betrayal of Epstein's and Andrew's victims. It's also a detail that is likely to have 'prince of darkness' and former Starmer adviser Peter Mandelson joining Windsor in a sweat bath. The same release of Epstein files also revealed 'Mandy' repeatedly doing the same thing: sending sensitive, confidential and highly lucrative government information to Epstein. This information would have enabled Epstein and his mates to make a fortune in 'insider trading'.

The British establishment deciding to throw 'Randy Andy' under the bus for that instead of his alleged crimes against trafficked girls should have 'Mandy' in a lather too.

For more on the the Epstein Files and the betrayal of victims, please read the Canary's article on way that the media circus around Epstein is erasing the experiences of victims and survivors.

Featured image via the Canary

Robert Jenrick's terrible plan for the DWP is already happening under Labour [ 19-Feb-26 4:27pm ]

Robert Jenrick has announced Reform UK's policies on how it would run the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP):

The benefits bill is a time bomb that will bankrupt the country.

And a moral disaster wasting the potential of millions of people.

Reform will fix it. We're for workers, not welfare. pic.twitter.com/2YJBgOtXeu

— Robert Jenrick (@RobertJenrick) February 18, 2026

But all of his terrible policies are already happening, or in the process of happening, under Labour.

Most of this already happens:
- You need a diagnosis and evidence to claim PIP
- DWP are returning to in-person assessments (it's part of their savings forecast bc they know more fail them)
- Luxury cars are already cut from motability

Dog whistle politics at its finest https://t.co/aUxPG1Xcu3

— Rachel Charlton-Dailey (@RachelCDailey_) February 19, 2026

Our politicians seem to be pretty good at coming up with new ways to screw over disabled people, but Jenrick wasn't even smart enough to think of his own.

Jenrick recycling policies for the DWP

Jenrick is missing the Tories that badly that they've given him a bullshit Shadow Chancellor label. Of course, he is not the Shadow Chancellor, as he is not a Tory.

hes not the fucking shadow Chancellor https://t.co/O44fSmPbnq pic.twitter.com/Xy6ccyNbIe

— Iain

PETA again calls out uni over 'cruel and pointless' mice experiments [ 19-Feb-26 4:14pm ]

PETA protest against QMUL sepsis experiments on mice

Attendees at the Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) Postgraduate Open Day Event had a more memorable experience than expected on 18 February. A group of PETA supporters stormed the famous Octagon inside the Queens' Building bearing signs that read, "QMUL: End Cruel Sepsis Experiments," and chanting, "Sepsis experiments should be cruelty free."

Cruel experiments

The action is part of PETA's ongoing campaign calling on the university to stop tormenting mice in cruel and useless sepsis experiments, which consistently fail to lead to effective treatments for humans. Activists previously crashed a meeting of the QMUL Senate to draw the attention of university leadership.

PETA senior campaigns manager Kate Werner said:

Prospective QMUL students should know that the university is using their tuition fees to torture and kill terrified mice in cruel and pointless experiments that have done nothing to advance human health.

PETA urges QMUL to stop wasting animals' lives on these cruel experiments and switch to cutting-edge, animal-free research that actually helps humans.

More than 150 drugs have successfully treated sepsis in mice, yet none have been effective in treating humans. Despite the well-documented failure in using mice to model human sepsis, QMUL experiments are cutting open terrified mice and puncturing their intestines to leak faecal matter into their bodies.

Experimenters noted that some mice experienced severe sepsis, which can include major organ failure and abject suffering. Data from some of these experiments has been published in papers that were later retracted by the publisher because data and conclusions were deemed 'unreliable'.

Mice are intelligent, complex, and social individuals who experience a wide range of emotions. They become attached to each other, love their families, and easily bond with their human guardians - returning as much affection as they receive.

PETA encourages everyone to urge Queen Mary to heed the scientific evidence and join other institutions, including the University of Kent, that have committed to non-animal methods in sepsis research.

PETA - whose motto reads, in part, that "animals are not ours to experiment on" - points out that Every Animal Is Someone and offers free Empathy Kits. For more information, visit PETA.org.uk or follow PETA on X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Featured image via PETA

https://www.thecanary.co/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Hathia-Berlin-Subbed-hb.mp4

Starmer doesn't understand inflation… or we're all just jaded cynics [ 19-Feb-26 4:13pm ]

Keir Starmer just got community-noted on Twitter again. This time, our vaunted PM managed to display his ignorance of entry-level economics - he seems to think that lower inflation means lower prices.

Now, when writing this kind of piece, I'd normally include a dozen quote tweets dunking on Starmer for such an obvious blunder. Unfortunately, that looks like it'd be rather boring today, given that they're all some variation on 'That's not how inflation works, you utter fucking clown'.

So, instead, let's take a different tack. Sometimes this job can ingrain a deep cynicism in your soul that challenges your ability to find the common humanity in the politicians we write about. With that in mind, I'm going to try for the most charitable interpretation of Starmer's tweet I can muster.

Okay Starmer, we're being nice today

On 18 February, Starmer tweeted:

The choices this Labour government has made means inflation has fallen today to its lowest rate in a year.

Lower food and petrol prices are helping ease the pressure on household budgets.

I know there's more to do, cutting the cost of living is my number one priority.

Readers almost immediately added context through the site's community notes function:

Inflation is higher now than when Labour took office and is 1% above target inflation.

Lower inflation does not equal lower prices, as inflation is a measure of rising prices.

Oo, burn.

But, what if the elected leader of the United Kingdom does actually understand what an economy is and how money works? What if the tweet was just phrased a little poorly? What if Starmer is just a tired guy who's been kept up all week defending his affiliations with his party's Epstein ties and local election U-turns?

I bet you feel dead mean now, don't you? The poor bloke could lose his job if people keep being this uncharitable.

Key points

I'll start with the central assumption that the PM isn't trying willfully to deceive the voting public. As such, I'm absolutely sure that he meant to say that lower inflation means that the money will have greater worth in real terms.

With that more-kindly interpretation in mind, Starmer is making three key statements here:

Inflation has fallen to its lowest rate in a year.
Food and petrol prices are also lower.
This fall is because of Labour actually doing something right for a change (please clap/ love me - this part is implicit, but important nonetheless).

Let's examine them in order, and really try to take them at face value. I'll let go, for the moment, of the biases induced by Starmer's active support for genocide and the second rise of fascism.

Inflation is down!(?)

So, first up - how's the inflation level actually doing?

Well, according to the Office of National Statistics, the rate of inflation did drop from 3.4% in the year to December to 3% in January.

Grant Fitzner, chief economist of the ONS, stated that:

Inflation fell markedly in January to its lowest annual rate since March last year, driven partly by a decrease in petrol prices.

Airfares were another downward driver this month with prices dropping back following the increase in December.

But wait - lowest rate since March last year? Given that it's still currently February, and we're looking at January's figures, that means we're definitely not seeing the "lowest rate in a year".

Oof, that's a bad start for the 'maybe Starmer isn't a clown' hypothesis.

Money goes further (??)

Next on the agenda - food prices. The ONS reported that:

Food and non-alcoholic beverages prices rose by 3.6% in the 12 months to January 2026, down from 4.5% in the 12 months to December 2025. On a monthly basis, food and non-alcoholic beverages prices fell by 0.1% in January 2026, compared with a rise of 0.9% a year ago.

Oh dear, it's not looking good for our 'Starmer isn't a dickhead theory', is it? A monthly fall of 0.1% after a year's rise of 3.6% makes the 'lower food prices' claim technically true, but deeply misleading at best.

Meanwhile, on the subject of petrol, the ONS said:

The largest downward effect came from motor fuels, where the average price of petrol fell by 3.1 pence per litre between December 2025 and January 2026, compared with a rise of 0.8 pence per litre between December 2024 and January 2025. The average price stood at 133.2 pence per litre in January 2026, down from 137.1 pence per litre a year earlier.

A genuine fall in prices! Wonders shall never cease. I'll give a partial credit to the PM on this point.

'Thanks to the choices we made'

Like Starmer, chancellor Rachel Reeves was also quick to claim falling inflation as a win for Labour. She stated that:

Thanks to the choices we made at the budget we are bringing inflation down, with £150 off energy bills, a freeze in rail fares for the first time in 30 years and prescription fees frozen again.

Now, whether or not this economic change is down to Labour's budget wizardry would require a much longer examination. However, if Labour wants to claim this win for its budget, it probably also needs to own its loss. You see, as the BBC reported:

For 16-24s, the unemployment rate now sits at 16.1% - the highest figure in just over a decade. While for 25-34s it's 4.7%, the highest since 2017.

Average pay also grew by 4.2%, down from a revised 4.4% in the three months to November.

Economists say the latest figures would reinforce expectations that inflation will fall back, making it likely the Bank of England would choose to cut interest rates soon[.]

Inflation is slowing - but also, unemployment is soaring, particularly for young people. Given that a job is usually necessary in order to make the money to buy things like food and petrol, I'm afraid I'm going to have to declare this one another point against Starmer's claims.

So, there we have it. Even if we take the most charitable tack my jaded soul can manage, our glorious leader still comes out looking like he doesn't know his ass from his elbow.

Oh, and a corollary point - we definitely don't need to clap.

Featured image via the Canary

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Israeli military threatened a Lebanese man on the phone — die alone or with your family [ 19-Feb-26 4:06pm ]

The Israeli military allegedly threatened a man in his home in South Lebanon, as their drones circled overhead. They gave him an ultimatum: die alone or with your family. He left his home. Then they killed him.

Israel drone-bombed Ahmed Turmus in his stationary car. His death was reported on X and by Lebanese citizen news agencies:

JUST IN:

Covid inquiry: Housing conditions were a 'structural driver' of poor mental health [ 19-Feb-26 3:40pm ]

Covid inquiry finds poor housing to blame for mental health decline

The Covid inquiry has highlighted how poor housing conditions led to a structural decline in mental health during the pandemic.

On Monday, 16 February 2026, the first hearing of the final module of the Covid inquiry took place. In total, there have been 10 modules, each focused on a different area of the pandemic response. Module 10 looked at 'Impact on society'. This included the impact on vulnerable people, such as those experiencing homelessness and housing insecurity.

According to Kate Blackwell, counsel for the inquiry:

People's housing situations had a profound impact on how they experienced the pandemic.

Of course, this was far worse in more deprived areas. Furthermore, it was:

disproportionately experienced by socio-economically disadvantaged and ethnic minority households.

Both groups were more likely to live in overcrowded or poor-quality housing.

Additionally, the inquiry linked overcrowding, poor housing, and housing insecurity to higher levels of psychological distress. All three are "known risk factors" for poor mental health.

But wasn't that entirely predictable? From the start of the pandemic, the instructions were to stay at home. Obviously, anyone living in small, overcrowded or shitty conditions would suffer far more than those living in countryside mansions.

Poor management

The inquiry also highlighted how 'Everyone In' — a government scheme to get everyone who was sleeping rough off the streets in March 2020 — ended whilst the pandemic was still ongoing. Both the management of the scheme and its ending may have had an "adverse impact" on people experiencing homelessness.

Additionally, people who moved from street homelessness to Covid-secure accommodation had "divergent experiences". Individuals found the transition from face-to-face to remote contact with support workers especially challenging.

Some groups had overlapping vulnerabilities, such as care leavers, victims of domestic abuse, those with mental health conditions or migrants. For these groups, the inequalities were "particularly pronounced".

Underinvestment

A report published just before the inquiry also showed that the pandemic exposed the UK's long-term underinvestment in social housing.

It highlighted how repairs in social housing slowed down or completely stopped during lockdowns, meaning the quality of housing declined significantly.

Issues such as damp and mould became more apparent when people were forced to stay at home. Of course, this further intensified both mental and physical health conditions.

The financial pressure from rising energy bills also made matters worse, especially for people living in poorly insulated homes.

The report also accuses some landlords of using the pandemic as an excuse to delay essential maintenance.

The final hearing of the inquiry is continuing this week, where the panel will hear about the impact of the pandemic response on other vulnerable groups.

Feature image via UK Covid-19 Inquiry

By HG

Why did Starmer's disabled brother die poor? [ 19-Feb-26 2:38pm ]

Just when you thought Keir Starmer couldn't get any lower, he's now using the death of his brother as a justification for cutting benefits.

Starmer puff piece in the Mirror

Writing exclusively for the Daily Mirror, Starmer shares that the "system failed" his brother. Starmer says that Nick, who died on Boxing Day 2024:

had difficulties learning when he was growing up. He spent much of his life drifting from job to job in real hardship.

The system didn't work for him. There are millions in the same boat. Held back by a system that doesn't work for them.

So you'd think, with this in mind, that Starmer would be pledging to do more for disabled people who struggle to keep a job or can't work at all.

Instead, he pushes out a fluff piece totalling just 364 words that. Like most things that come out of Starmer's mouth, it has absolutely no substance.

There's also the fact that the Mirror gave the Prime Minister the space to publish this absolutely nothing article, just bigging himself up, when for the past week he's been clinging onto Number 10 by his nails. It's a highly suspect move for a supposedly working-class paper.

Using his dead disabled brother for sympathy

Despite his brother being a disabled man who, apparently, lived in poverty, Starmer's little PR piece doesn't mention disabled poor people at all.

Obviously, he has time to swipe at Reform, even though the Labour-run DWP is already implementing nearly all the things Reform proposed for benefits in their economic plan.

He also found space to brag about lifting the two-child cap, which he and ministers could've lifted a year and a half ago but instead chose party politics.

However, as the Canary has previously reported, lifting the two-child cap can't be all the government does. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that if the government only relies on the child cap lifting and does little else, poverty will only fall by 1% by 2029.

It's a bit rich that the prime minister is using his dead, poor disabled brother to gain support at a time when Labour threatens to leave millions more in the same position. Under Starmer's Labour, the DWP plan to half Universal Credit "health" element for new claimants.

There are also longterm plans to move it over to PIP, despite the fact that PIP has nothing to do with being unemployed.

The government is also hell-bent on getting disabled people back into work, whether or not they actually can. And whilst they're doing that, they're gutting support for disabled people in work.

Why did his brother die poor when Starmer's rich?

So it's absolutely vile that Starmer is using his brother's death to rehabilitate himself, whilst if he weren't related to him, he'd sooner spit on him than help him.

But that's what I can't get my head around, because it makes no sense that his brother did die in "virtual poverty". Starmer's a millionaire for fucks sakes. Nick died at the end of 2024, but in the tax year leading up to April 2024 alone, Starmer made £152,225.

I know family can be stubborn and proud, but something isn't adding up here. I'm not doubting that Starmer is grieving for his loved one, but if this is true, Starmer's basically admitting he let his brother die poor.

But that says it all about the way Labour and Starmer see disabled people. Why should disabled people expect real, life-changing support, when they obviously just aren't trying hard enough with the bare minimum. In Starmer's world even his own family don't deserve to live if they can't jump through every hoop the DWP throws at them.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rachel Charlton-Dailey

Gorton and Denton, and the fallout of Labour's collapse [ 19-Feb-26 1:58pm ]

Gorton and Denton — the political show down

Amid the furore over the soon-upcoming Gorton and Denton by-election, you'll probably have noticed mentions of the fact that the constituency was only created in 2023.

With this electoral boundary redraw came the fourth highest index of change — i.e. upheaval in voting makeup — in the entire northwest.

This article provides a brief overview of the ways in which that electoral makeup has (been) changed in Gorton and Denton. Beyond that, it's also a reminder that our democracy is never as simple as 'one individual, one vote'. Where that vote comes from carries enormous weight — and that 'where' is always a fluid quantity.

The newly minted constituency

The Parliamentary Constituency for England redrew the electoral boundaries in 2023, including those of Gorton and Denton.

The new constituency was first contested in the 2024 general elections, with Labour's Andrew Gwynne taking the seat. Gwynne took a comfortable 18,000 votes, that's 13,000 ahead of both Reform and the Greens.

Before that point, the area included portions of the former Manchester Gorton and Denton & Reddish seats. Oh, and Burnage Ward — previously of Manchester Withington — thrown in to boot.

The constituency is now made up of two distinct lobes, connected in the middle by Reddish Bridge. The westward half, nearest Manchester itself, includes Gorton, Belle Vue, Levenshulme, and Burnage. Meanwhile, the eastward Tameside portion comprises Denton and Haughton Green.

Demographic makeup

There's also an unequal split between the number of voters in Gorton and Denton respectively. In 2024, the Manchester wards boasted 55,000 registered electors to the Tameside's 26,000.

As such, roughly two in every three voters in the constituency fall on the more urban-liberal Manchester side. Of these, 42% of voters have a university background, 42% are white, and 40% are Muslim.

Meanwhile, the Tameside section has a far higher white and UK-born population, at 83% and 86% respectively. A further 30% of the Tameside voters hold typically working-class semi/routine jobs, far higher than the national 23.5% average.

As such, we might expect the Denton populace to be more open to Reform's populist anti-migrant messaging. By contrast, Gorton may see more of a shift to the Greens. This is especially true given that the Workers Party of Britain and Your Party - otherwise potential pulls for the Muslim vote - have stood down.

Electoral history

For what it's worth, the electoral history of Gorton and Denton's tributary constituencies is about as red as they come. However, given the collapse in support for Labour under Starmer, that doesn't necessarily mean a great deal.

Manchester Gorton, for its part, has remained stoically Labour-led from 1935 to its abolition in 2024. The Lib Dems managed to grab a third of the vote in 2005 and 2010, campaigning against the Iraq war, but fell off again in 2015.

Meanwhile, Denton and Reddish was itself created in 1983. Whilst it has also remained a Labour safe-seat since its inception, the Parliamentary Labour Party has typically enjoyed a much smaller margin of the vote. It has consistently averaged just above 50% of the share, rising above 60% in just three elections.

By contrast, UKIP took took third place in 2015, with 18.7%, and the Greens never made it over 4%.

Finally, Bunrage ward voters previously belonging to Manchester Withington make up around 16% of what is now Gorton and Denton. In stark contrast to much of the Northwest, Withington once tended weakly Conservative.

After swinging more strongly to Labour in the 1980s, Withington then flipped Lib Dem. Again, at the time, a large number of Muslim voters turned their backs on Labour due to Blair's warmongering in Iraq.

The shadows of war

The fact that it's anti-war sentiment among the Muslim electorate that has previously threatened Labour's hold on the Gorton and Denton area is significant. Labour has once again haemorrhaged support among Muslims in recent years due to its enthusiastic support of Israel's genocide of Palestinians.

As such, and quite unsurprisingly, campaign group The Muslim Vote has now thrown its weight behind the Greens in Gorton and Denton, stating:

Muslim voters, alongside many others in the constituency, will play a decisive role in this by-election. This moment must result in the defeat of both Labour and Reform through unity behind a single, credible candidate.

On this occasion, we believe the Green Party offers the strongest opportunity to win, and we urge them to work swiftly with local communities, while calling on all other progressive and independent alternatives to stand aside to give the best chance of delivering a clear break from politics as usual and putting the community first.

With the two halves of Gorton and Denton breaking down into more uni-educated urbanites and strong Muslim representation in one half, and a higher proportion of the white working class in the other, the by-election could prove a study in the shifting allegiances of the groups Labour previously took for granted.

As such, what would once have been a Labour by-election shoe-in is proving a testing ground for the UK's polarised politics — and a more multi-party system as a whole.

Featured image via the Canary

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Hind Rajab filmmaker refuses German 'peace' award over prize to Israeli general [ 19-Feb-26 1:39pm ]

Tunisian filmmaker of The Voice Of Hind Rajab, Kaouther Ben Hania, has refused to accept an award from Berlin's so-called 'Peace Gala' over its 'perfuming' of Israel's genocide. Ben Hania's film won the award for "Most Valuable Film" at the 'Cinema for Peace' festival on 16 February.

The ceremony's organisers invited warmongering former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton and gave an award to former Israeli general Noam Tibon. Tibon is an advocate of military expansion in his "beloved state of Israel" and oversaw murders of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

Ben Hania gave a speech after her award was announced, but said she was not taking the trophy because the event was providing "political cover" for genocide and acting as a "perfume sprayed over violence so power can feel refined", "denigrating protesters" and "reframing mass civilian killing as self-defence":

She continued:

The Israeli army killed Hind Rajab; killed her family; killed the two paramedics who came to save her, with the complicity of the world's most powerful governments and institutions…I refuse to let their deaths become a backdrop for a polite speech about peace.

Hania said she would accept the award for The Voice of Hind Rajab "with joy" only when peace is "rooted in accountability for genocide."

Featured image via the Canary

The Green Party stands strong with PARC Against DARC campaigners [ 19-Feb-26 1:38pm ]

The Green Party in south-west Wales has been in touch to voice its continuing opposition to the DARC radar project. The installation would use the same site that campaigners originally defended successfully in the 1990s. Back then the group of locals took the name Pembrokeshire Against the Radar Campaign. Now a lively and interactive website declares:

Well now for the great news. PARC is back, baby. We're here with a new generation, a new purpose, and a fight we are ready to win.

Under the name PARC Against DARC, the group has the backing of Plaid Cymru as well as the Greens and some members of the Liberal Democrats and Labour and an array of pressure groups. However, it remains strictly non-partisan.

Ceredigion Penfro Green Party statement on DARC

To a lot of people it appears that the world has reached a point where lots of things need fixing. The Green Party has always advocated co-operation and diplomacy over fighting.

It is therefore angry at plans by the US to build 27 giant radar dishes on Pembrokeshire's St David's Peninsula. The sole aim of this development is for the US to have total control over space.

Amy Nicholass, Ceredigion Penfro number one candidate for the Senedd Elections, is in outright opposition to this development. She says:

The DARC proposals are a disgrace. It benefits no one except the government of the US. When the US tells us to jump, the Westminster government simply asks how high.

We need to put all our efforts into creating lasting peace, not allowing anyone to recreate Cold War tactics where none of us feel safe.

Peace is at the heart of Welsh culture. The US and Westminster should come and learn from us.

There are other, more immediate dangers associated with DARC, the purpose of which is to track and destroy enemy satellites. Should any of these satellites be destroyed, it will leave behind a lot of space debris. That can make it more dangerous for other satellites, such as for weather forecasting or telecommunications, to continue their orbits.

It is vitally important that local people have a say on matters such as this large development. A local campaign group called PARC Against DARC is very concerned about the effect it would have on the tourism industry in Pembrokeshire.

These campaigners describe St David's Peninsula as a:

true jewel-in-the-crown natural wonder and headline Welsh tourism industry attraction.

Nicholass agrees. She argues for more local power to determine large planning considerations. Nicholass also says:

We in the Green Party understand how precarious the world feels to a lot of people. We can feel grateful to live in a part of the world that is peaceful but this plan brings world disorder very close to us.

We all share this one planet and we need to be part of the conversation on how to stand up for each other in a peaceful way.

Featured image (artist's impression) via PARC Against DARC

"Happy birthday Andrew" - no sympathy for ex-royal after arrest over Epstein links [ 19-Feb-26 1:25pm ]

If former royal, and mate of serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was hoping for any public sympathy after his arrest this morning - on his birthday - he's going to be sorely disappointed.

The family of Virginia Giuffre, Andrew's most well-known victim, welcomed the arrest as a sign that no one is above the law:

At last, today, our broken hearts have been lifted at the news that no one is above the law, not even royalty," Giuffre's family said in the statement given to CBS News.

However, Windsor was arrested on suspicion of 'misconduct in a public office'. Knowing the British state, this was more likely linked to his leaking of secrets to Epstein than his abuse of trafficked and potentially under-age girls. But the offence carries a potential life sentence, so there's that.

Andrew gets birthday wishes

If sympathy is in short supply, mockery isn't - and many were wishing Andy a delighted "happy birthday" - while also pointing out the vileness of him being arrested for passing info to the rapist instead of for his crimes against the victims:

Happy 66th birthday, Andrew.

Trafficking and sexual abuse allegations against Andrew — no arrest.

Alleged misconduct in public office? Arrest.

No wonder women don't trust the police. pic.twitter.com/rUFSRLAmie

— Dr Charlotte Proudman (@DrProudman) February 19, 2026

Happy Birthday Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor pic.twitter.com/9R1Ixm0kIb

— Manxy (@Manxy) February 19, 2026

Happy Birthday Andrew you crock of shit!

Labour Together has snuck its way into the DWP [ 19-Feb-26 1:11pm ]

The sabotage outfit that put Keir Starmer into power, spied on journalists, and whose architect Morgan McSweeney recently resigned in disgrace from his role as the prime minister's chief of staff, has spun the revolving door at Westminster once again. This time, a former director and senior staff member from the shady pressure group Labour Together have quietly wormed their way into the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

So now, its acolytes are in the prime position to shape this Labour Party government's next callous plans for welfare claimants.

Labour Together grifters: now at the DWP

In December, Labour Together executive director Matthew Upton made like a reverse Ashworth running from constituent scrutiny and landed himself a new role at the DWP. There, he's now 'Principal Advisor' to Alan Milburn's stitch-up Young People and Work review.

The Canary previously highlighted Upton's connection to investment (and former insurance) giant Aberdeen Group Plc. Upton was a trustee for its philanthropic research funding arm: arbdn Financial Fairness Trust. The now-defunct organisation financed a 2023 Fabian Society report that proposed a time-limited 'unemployment insurance' benefit. In reality though, it's a trojan horse to do-away with new-style Employment Support Allowance (ESA). So naturally, the new Labour government has been all over the idea.

Upton also appeared next to the overpromoted Blair-era relic in a foreword for a September 2025 Labour Together briefing. Curiously, it was discussing the very same thing.

Hope the (revolving) door hits you on your way out…

Incidentally, that segues quite nicely to the next Labour Together grifter-come-dutiful-benefit-slashing-DWP-disciple. As of January, author of said report and Labour Together chief policy advisor Morgan Wild slid on over to his new position at Westminster. He's now policy advisor to none other than current DWP benefit-reaper-in-chief himself: Pat McFadden.

Here's what a New Statesman senior editor had to say about Wild's appointment:

Spad news: Morgan Wild, Labour Together's chief policy adviser, has become a policy adviser to Pat McFadden.

He's a champion of the contributory principle, which will be a key feature of welfare reform. pic.twitter.com/NHk0WRN0QZ

— George Eaton (@georgeeaton) January 13, 2026

The 'contributory principle' holds that:

Our society only succeeds when people pay their taxes, care for their families and communities and are recognised for these contributions. Our economy only succeeds when people work, develop skills, take risks, and start businesses.

In other words, anyone who cannot work because of health issues, caring commitments, or any other reason is a workshy layabout who shouldn't be supported to survive, but punished for existing.

In (not) unrelated news: the government's recent so-called Fairer Pathway to Settlement consultation rattled off the words 'contribution' or 'contribute' no fewer than 72 times. Needless to say, the anti-immigration hostile environment is disgustingly alive and thriving at the racist DWP.

Guess who's back?

And speaking of ex-Labour Together directors, Jonathan Ashworth was at the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) in Westminster - where it appears the washed-up former DWP sec now works as a senior fellow on "welfare, health, and addiction".

Ashworth appeared in the Express recently, clamouring to be relevant and spouting trash about welfare 'reform.'

He's also claimed that disabled people are "being abandoned to health-related benefits". He made the stigmatising remarks as part of the announcement for the CSJ's Welfare 2030 enquiry launch.

Genius interpreter of the public mood and uncontestable political clairvoyant Ashworth is, he told the Express in early January:

I think Labour can turn this around, and I suspect, in a year's time, if you come back to record me for a follow-up interview, I'll bet you that Keir Starmer is still the Labour prime minister.

The previously tipped to-be Cabinet member will now be just a short hop and a skip away from Whitehall. Bang, smack in the heart of Westminster, the CSJ's office is just a five minute walk from parliament.

So not only has Labour Together installed itself in the DWP, but it also has a former director positioned at a Tory-founded think tank that's influencing the Labour government's plans to decimate the welfare state.

Labour Together and the party of 'work'

The intentions behind their appointments are obvious in the buzzword of the moment: 'contribution'.

For his Welfare 2030 cameo, Ashworth was also crowing on about developing:

a system that values contribution, protects the most vulnerable, and helps thousands more people gain all of the advantages that come with work.

Chuck it alongside vitriol around 'economic inactivity' and you have a winning recipe for ripping into the welfare state.

The clear insinuation is that a person's worth is tied to their productivity inside the capitalist system. What this really means in practice, is that disabled lives are expendable. The fact that 'cuts kill' is of little consequence to Labour Together and its devotees.

But as the Canary has previously pointed out, this eugenicist thinking is the corporate fascist wing of the Party's MO.

Labour Together still shaping the agenda

Suffice to say that despite McSweeney's departure from Number 10, Labour Together still has its claws in shaping this government's brutal policy programme.

And Upton and Wild's appointments wouldn't be the first instance of the Labour right think tank driving the DWP's austerity agenda.

As the Canary previously exposed, Labour Together and its donors funded nearly every single one of the 'Get Britain Working' group of Labour MPs. In March 2025, it sprung up to back Rachel Reeves and Liz Kendall's vicious disability benefit cuts.

The clincher that Labour Together has had its grimy mitts all over the DWP benefit cuts all along? As the Canary's Steve Topple highlighted before, it was Morgan McSweeney who led 'briefings' in a bid to:

"win over" MPs for its package of atrocious austerity-driven cuts.

But ultimately, what it all underscores is how the Labour Together right-wing circus is still scattered right throughout this government. For all its smokescreen committees boasting disabled representation, these are the capitalist cronies this government is really listening to.

Because at the end of the day, this rotten ableist 'party of work' rhetoric has always been at the Labour right's very core. Upton and Wild's new high-profile advisory roles at the DWP show that's not about to change.

Featured image via author

By Hannah Sharland

'Hallmarks of genocide' — UN strengthens language on Sudan [ 19-Feb-26 12:57pm ]

The United Nations (UN) has strengthened its language on Sudan. The international body said the foreign-backed war has a genocidal character. The move is welcome, but too late for the tens of thousands who've been murdered.

Genocidal intent

The three-year conflict between the Sudanese government, backed by Egypt and Turkey among other states, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), heavily reliant on arms from the UAE, has displaced and killed millions.

The RSF and allied militias are known for acting out their "racist Arab supremacist" ideology against non-Arab populations, murdered and ethnically cleansed from certain areas to maintain an Arab majority.

UN fact-finder Mona Rishmawi said on 18 February:

The body of evidence we collected — including the prolonged siege, starvation and denial of humanitarian assistance, followed by mass killings, rape, torture and enforced disappearance, systematic humiliation and perpetrators' own declarations — leaves only one reasonable inference.

Rishmawi said:

The RSF acted with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the Zaghawa and Fur communities in El-Fasher. These are the hallmarks of genocide.

The UN also launched a major humanitarian appeal to support the millions of Sudanese left starving and displaced by the ongoing war. It said that the:

Sudan Regional Refugee Response Plan (2026) aims to deliver lifesaving assistance this year to 5.9 million people across seven neighbouring countries: the Central African Republic, Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, South Sudan and Uganda.

The plan will continue to prioritize aid for roughly 470,000 new refugees who are expected to cross into these countries, as well as thousands more who remain in border areas and have received only the most basic assistance.

El Fasher massacre

A report released by the UN on 19 February detailed the El Fasher massacre carried out by RSF in October 2025. The southern city was besieged by RSF for months. When it fell RSF massacred civilians wholesale.

The evidence gathered since:

Establishes that at least three underlying acts of genocide were committed: "killing members of a protected ethnic group; causing serious bodily and mental harm; and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group's physical destruction in whole or in part."

Mohamed Chande Othman, chair of the mission, said:

The scale, coordination, and public endorsement of the operation by senior RSF leadership demonstrate that the crimes committed in and around El Fasher were not random excesses of war.

They formed part of a planned and organized operation that bears the defining characteristics of genocide.

As the Canary has previously reported, British military equipment has turned up in RSF hands.

The UK is a major supplier to the UAE. In turn, the UAE is supplying the RSF. The UAE is pursuing resources (not least, gold) and control in Sudan as part of its increasingly colonial regional aims. And you can read about Israel's dangerously under-reported role in the war here.

International bodies have been slow to respond to the crisis in Sudan. They are finally admitting there is an active genocide in Sudan. And, just like in Gaza, the British are playing a role in the slaughter.

Featured image via the Canary

https://www.thecanary.co/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/goY7OJBKwFeMnEyt1-1.mp4

Rachel Reeves called out as a 'genocide supporter' in supermarket [ 19-Feb-26 12:30pm ]

Genocide supporter Rachel Reeves has been called out as - well, a genocide supporter - as she toured a Sainsbury's supermarket:

All too true. In December 2025, after more than two years of Israel's genocide in Gaza, she told the racist 'Labour Friends of Israel' that she is a "proud" and "unapologetic" Zionist. She added that the idea there's anything "inherently wrong" in the ethno-supremacist ideology must be "wholeheartedly" rejected.

Getting called out while posing in a supermarket is nowhere near enough - Reeves and her boss belong in jail for collaborating in genocide. But it's still nice to see.

Featured image via the Canary

Kate Scott says racists 'don't belong' in football after Vinícius Júnior abuse [ 19-Feb-26 12:20pm ]

A Champions League match between Benfica and Real Madrid had to be called to an end shortly after the second half following yet another incident of racist abuse against Real Madrid's Vinícius Júnior. The abuse is alleged to have come from Benfica's Gianluca Prestianni who was seen covering his mouth to deliver the offending racist remarks.

Denials after the game from Benfica's coach Jose Mourinho compounded the harm caused by the racism on clear display, with many coming out to show solidarity with the Real Madrid forward. UEFA have since announced that an investigation will be launched into 'allegations of discriminatory behaviour'.

The latest to add their voice to this long-overdue discussion is sports broadcaster Kate Scott who declared racists 'don't belong' in football.

Kate Scott has absolutely nailed it. Every word is spot on.pic.twitter.com/UDhxl9Eazz

— Mukhtar (@I_amMukhtar) February 18, 2026

Vinícius Júnior constantly racially abused

Vinícius Júnior has received an onslaught abuse in football, regularly finding himself on the receiving end of racial abuse. The Canary reported yesterday:

The match had just gone into the second half, with Real Madrid dominating the game. Vinícius Júnior scored in the 50th minute. Like many footballers do, he celebrated his goal at the corner flag which took his team into the lead. This resulted in a yellow card for the player.

Apparently, his dance of celebration was even enough to rile up Prestianni who proceeded to throw a racial slur at the Real Madrid forward. This isn't the first time racism has shown up in football. Particularly targeted at Vinícius Júnior who the Independent say has 'evidently' become a:

"lightning rod for the kind of people who would racially abuse an individual, who want to goad him in the worst way possible."

Kate Scott is a sports broadcaster from Manchester best known for her football coverage on CBS. She has been outspoken in her support of Vinícius Júnior amid ongoing issues of racism in football.

During her recent segment, Scott strongly condemned racist abuse directed at players, making it clear that racism should have "zero involvement whatsoever" in the sport. Her comments make clear that broadcasters, players, and governing bodies are calling out racism directly rather than brushing it aside.

Bigots have repeatedly subjected Vinícius Júnior to racist abuse while he played in Spain. As a result, he has become a central figure in the fight against racism in football.

'Same old racist problems'

In the clip above, Scott reminded us that this is not a new issue as she stated:

Well, I guess today is a new day in football, but with the same old racist problems. And whilst we do want to focus on the games ahead today, because the game is what we love, yesterday does still linger.

And whether or not you like Vinnie Junior, that shouldn't shape your opinion on this incident. And which team you support, it shouldn't affect which side of the story that you fall on.

This isn't Real Madrid versus Benfica, it is right versus wrong. Vinnie Jr. and Kylian Mbappe said that there was repeated racial abuse. Gianluca Prestianni said they misheard.

Plenty have tried to deny the abuse occurred, with Benfica doubling down sharing videos trying to suggest it was impossible for Prestianni to even be heard:

But he covered his mouth to hide what he said from the cameras. And hopefully we can all agree that if what you're saying on a football pitch is shameful enough to have to hide it from the public, then you're wrong. In any case, racial abuse is not new in this game, that's for sure. In decades gone by, Cyril Regis, Howard Gale, Viv Anderson and John Barnes, to name just a few who played in this country, dealt with continued and horrific racial abuse to pave a path for players of Vinnie's generation to play and celebrate without shackles.

Scott then astutely pointed out the lack of progress for the wellbeing and safety of Black and Brown players:

Except in 2026, that still doesn't always apply. They are still expected, as Vinny Jr. was last night, to rise above it, to answer by performance, to shut up and play. Jose Mourinho is an iconic figure in world football. Yesterday, he switched the focus from what had actually been said to whether there was provocation for it. He essentially told us that Vinny Jr. was asking for it. That is a damaging narrative from a man who is considered a leading figure in the global game.

Football governance struggles globally with racial diversity at its top executive levels, as do UEFA. But we do hope that the lack of black voices in the room will not mean that black players continue to go unprotected. Investigation and due process will have to occur. But whatever the results of that in this case, we hope that football becomes a better platform where hatred is met with more than nominal fines and partial stadium closures, where diversity is truly celebrated, not just tolerated or abused with shirts over mouths.

The racial diversity on a football pitch in the Champions League is the representation of the global love for this game and the global belonging in this game. This is the very spirit of football.

Scott finished with a polite 'fuck you' to racists:

And if you don't agree, then respectfully, you are the one who doesn't belong.

Thierry Henry: 'Let's see how big of a man Prestianni is'

Thierry Henry, who sat alongside Scott on the segment, offered his experience as a Black footballer:

I can relate to what Vinicius is going through.

That happened to me so many times on the pitch. I talked about it so many times after games. I've also been accused of looking for excuses after games when that happened to me. At times, you feel lonely, because it's going to be your word against his word.

Touching on the cowardice inherent in racism, Henry added:

We don't know what Prestianni has said, because he was very courageous by putting his shirt over his mouth to make sure that we weren't going to see what he said, so clearly, already, you look suspicious.

Henry also issued a moral challenge to Prestianni:

Let's see how big of a man Prestianni is, tell us what you said. You must have said something, because you can't go to Mbappe and say, 'I didn't say anything'. What do you mean, you covered your nose for what, you have a cold?

Henry joined Scott in referring to those who came before them and who fought so courageously for equality in football:

People did fight, way before my time, for us to be able to perform and to entertain people

And to still be in 2026 dealing with the same thing, it's tiring. Obviously, I can relate, not only I can relate by the colour of my skin, I can relate because I've been there. I've been lonely.

Courageous leaders in football

This incident against Vinícius Júnior is deplorable, there can be no doubt on that. The very fact it has become so fatiguing for Black and Brown players speaks to how often racial abuse occurs.

The courage shown since this incident by those in the sport with a platform is invaluable in promoting equality. Nevertheless, Black and Brown players and pundits should not stand alone in this, left continually to fight this uphill battle alone.

Featured image via the Canary

By Maddison Wheeldon

Wholesale Palestine Action acquittals again expose Labour's lies [ 19-Feb-26 11:57am ]

The decision of a criminal court judge to enter not guilty verdicts for all of the remaining 'Filton 24' anti-genocide protesters has again exposed the lies told by successive Labour home secretaries to justify banning the 'Palestine Action' group.

Contrary to some reports, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) did not merely drop the charge of aggravated burglary lodged against all the 24. The judge ordered verdicts of not guilty, an acquittal just as concrete as any delivered by a jury. Six of the group were already acquitted on 4 February 2026.

'Aggravated burglary' involves burglary with prior intent to cause physical harm. The offence carries a potential life sentence and was brought by the CPS to justify the Starmer regime's decision to ban Palestine Action as a terrorist group. The attempt was underpinned by claims from media and politicians that a policewoman's spine was broken by the activists. In fact, the injury was only suspected, could not be identified on x-rays and will heal fully in a matter of months.

Not only that, but the prosecution presented no evidence to show the injury was caused by the activists. Instead, the only evidence of violence was entirely on the part of security guards working for Israeli weapons-maker Elbit. This caused considerable embarrassment when video evidence completely contradicted the claims of the prosecution and its witnesses. Or it would have, if the corporate media had bothered to report it.

Palestine Action questions

But then-home secretary Yvette Cooper had tried to justify the terrorist designation - which happened after the 24 were imprisoned - by lying that Palestine Action intended violence toward human beings. That lie has long been exposed and the disgraced Cooper was reshuffled to foreign secretary.

Her replacement Shabana Mahmood, however, continued the lie - and the regime needed convictions on serious charges involving violence to shore up its claims. That attempt has now collapsed entirely - except for the charge of grievous bodily harm still hanging over Sam Corner.

The High Court ruled on 13 February 2026 that the terrorist ban on Palestine Action was disproportionate and unlawful. The jury in the 4 February criminal trial refused to convict Corner of GBH and refused to convict any of the six of criminal damage.

Mahmood has appealed both decisions, claiming falsely that the jury's refusal to convict was the result of 'tampering'. The 'tampering' was protesters reminding jurors of their legal right to acquit - which a court has already ruled cannot be a crime. Mahmood and the Israel lobby are desperate to continue their long 'lawfare' war against solidarity with Palestine.

The government's attempt to criminalise the group is not over, but the regime's lies are teetering on the brink of collapse. The appeals court will rule on Friday 20 Feb whether Mahmood will be allowed to appeal the lifting of the proscription, keeping the ban in place for now, or it will be lifted immediately. For the time being, supporting Palestine Action remains a chargeable offence.

Featured image via the Canary

Who Protects Global Shipping Routes From Modern Piracy Threats [ 19-Feb-26 11:41am ]

Modern piracy and missile threats rarely meet a single line of defence. They meet layers of state power. To protect global shipping routes, national naval forces patrol high-risk corridors such as the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea, and the Strait of Hormuz, where traffic density and regional conflict raise the stakes for global trade.

In the Red Sea, Operation Prosperity Guardian illustrates how a multinational coalition can surge ships, aircraft, and intelligence sharing when the Houthis target commercial vessels. These deployments often combine escort missions with maritime domain awareness, while diplomats coordinate rules of engagement that minimise disruption to shipping. This posture aims to deter attacks before ships become easy targets.

Closer to shore, coast guards enforce law in territorial waters, investigate boarding incidents, and coordinate handoffs to naval forces when threats cross jurisdictions. Together, they support freedom of navigation through routine presence patrols and, when required, freedom of navigation operations that challenge unlawful restrictions and keep sea lanes open.

Private expertise also informs assessments. A maritime security consultant may provide risk snapshots alongside official reporting, helping operators understand threat patterns before vessels enter contested waters.

International Frameworks That Govern Maritime Security

Protection on the water depends on legal authority established through international agreements. Without these frameworks, coordinated anti-piracy efforts would lack the jurisdictional foundation needed to operate across borders.

The IMO and ISPS Code

The International Maritime Organisation sets baseline maritime security standards through conventions that flag and port states implement, creating shared expectations for vessel protection across busy shipping lanes.

Under the ISPS Code, ships and port facilities must translate those standards into practical controls. These include security assessments that identify likely boarding and sabotage risks, documented plans with designated officers and training to maintain readiness, and procedures for setting security levels and exchanging alerts with ports.

The official ISPS Code maritime security framework links security duties to broader safety rules, providing a reference point for compliance across the industry.

UNCLOS and Legal Authority at Sea

UNCLOS provides the legal authority that allows states to act beyond their territorial seas when piracy occurs on the high seas. It supports interdiction, seizure of pirate vessels, and prosecution decisions, while still requiring evidence handling and respect for jurisdictional limits.

This legal baseline enables international naval operations to coordinate boardings and handovers effectively. Regional agreements can then add local reporting channels and shared procedures tailored to specific corridors.

These add-ons often clarify who can pursue suspects into adjacent waters. They also guide how ports share incident reports without delaying cargo flows.

Private Security Companies and Armed Guards

Where naval patrols cannot cover every lane, private security companies fill practical gaps. This is especially true on merchant transits that must keep schedules. Their value often starts before a ship leaves port, with a structured risk assessment that shapes the entire voyage.

Intelligence Gathering and Risk Assessment

Consultants track piracy patterns, local conflict dynamics, and known threat actors using open-source reporting, port briefings, and shipboard surveillance practices. They translate this intelligence into routing advice, watch schedules, and communications plans tied to specific choke points.

The process involves drafting incident checklists that bridge teams can follow under stress, at night, or whenever conditions deteriorate. To connect security planning with wider context, crews often review current maritime security challenges alongside flag state guidance and insurer requirements.

This alignment helps decisions reflect both operational reality and compliance obligations.

Armed Teams on High-Risk Transits

When a voyage still requires additional protection, armed guards may embark for the highest-risk legs. Teams typically coordinate with the master to avoid escalation and to keep crew safety central throughout the passage.

On transit, vessel protection focuses on layered deterrence. This includes visible watchkeeping and clear rules for reporting contacts, hardened access points and rehearsed mustering procedures, and graduated response protocols if evasive manoeuvring fails.

Armed presence serves as a last line of defence, intended to buy time, break an attack, and allow the ship to exit the danger area without injury.

How Protection Differs by Regional Hotspot

No single protection model works everywhere. Threat profiles vary dramatically between regions, and defensive measures must adapt accordingly.

Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Operations

In the Red Sea, protection planning now reflects missile and drone risks linked to the Houthis. Naval forces concentrate on coordinated escorts and shared surveillance across air and surface assets, responding to threats that look more like state-adjacent warfare than traditional piracy.

Operators also rely on rapid threat reporting to adjust routes and watch levels. Managed corridors help responders cover traffic without diverting the main shipping lanes.

In the Gulf of Aden, however, procedures still draw on lessons from the Somali piracy peak. Patrol patterns and reporting points aim to increase visible presence against criminal networks rather than armed groups with military capabilities.

Crews log contacts early to trigger support before skiffs close. This consistency matters because ships still funnel through fixed shipping lanes where predictability creates vulnerability.

West Africa and Southeast Asia Protocols

West African waters often involve kidnapping and cargo theft closer to shore than open-ocean piracy. Protection leans on port state procedures, secure anchorages, and restricted access during cargo operations.

Regional navies focus on interdiction and evidence handling within coastal jurisdictions. Operators plan communications to limit time at low speed near approaches.

In Southeast Asia, by contrast, incidents concentrate in narrow straits where traffic density complicates detection. Watch teams use short-range surveillance to track craft that blend into routine movements.

Coast guard cooperation becomes central because vessels cross jurisdictions quickly. Local reporting networks help authorities coordinate intercepts before attackers reach sheltered waters.

Coordination Between Naval and Private Security Forces

Real-time coordination works best when naval forces and private security companies operate from a shared picture of risk. Standard reporting formats let shipboard teams pass contact reports, surveillance cues, and posture changes to military watch floors without delay.

Communication hubs such as UKMTO and regional maritime security centres relay threat alerts, route advisories, and incident updates to vessels and nearby patrols. If a ship with guards aboard transmits a distress call, responders may include coalition units or the U.S. Coast Guard, depending on location and tasking.

To avoid gaps at jurisdiction lines, operators use defined handoffs when ships enter territorial seas or leave escorted corridors. The master and security team confirm tactical control at each boundary.

Common mechanisms include agreed radio channels and call signs, time-stamped position reports, escalation criteria for warnings versus assistance, and post-incident summaries focused on crew safety and evidence preservation.

Evolving Piracy Tactics and Defensive Responses

Modern piracy groups increasingly borrow tools from state and criminal networks. Reports from recent incidents describe attackers using drones for scouting, GPS spoofing to confuse navigation, and encrypted communications to coordinate multiple craft.

The Houthis shifted the risk picture by pairing maritime harassment with missile and one-way drone strikes. This threat profile looks closer to terrorism than classic boarding-for-ransom operations. As a result, vessel protection plans now evolve around detection, disruption, and rapid reporting rather than just physical barriers.

Defensive responses often include enhanced surveillance that fuses radar, electro-optical cameras, and AIS analytics. Electronic countermeasures help mitigate jamming and spoofing effects, while tighter access control, drills, and escalation protocols align with terrorism scenarios.

These measures support earlier alerting when small boats loiter or when air contacts appear. They also help crews share clearer track history with naval responders quickly.

Protecting Global Trade Through Layered Security

No single navy, coast guard, insurer, or private team protects shipping lanes on its own. Modern piracy, drone harassment, and regional conflict shift quickly, so coverage depends on layers that overlap and backstop one another. When one layer misses a warning, another can still detect, deter, or respond.

That layered approach blends patrols and escorts, legal authority through international frameworks, and shipboard measures informed by private risk assessment. It also relies on shared reporting hubs, evidence handling, and clear handoffs at jurisdiction lines.

As threats evolve, sustained coordination keeps vessels moving and helps safeguard global trade across contested chokepoints and oceans.

By Nathan Spears

Paramilitary gangsters in North of Ireland continue to extort businesses [ 19-Feb-26 11:20am ]

"If we go to the police, we would be killed." Those are the words of a woman featured in a BBC report about paramilitary extortion rackets in the North of Ireland. The investigation spoke to:

…business owners anonymously about being threatened to pay money to proscribed organisations. It includes those running restaurants or shops and those in the construction industry.

The paramilitaries involved would previously have been participants in the sectarian warfare that characterised The Troubles in Ireland.

Since the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, that kind of violence has hugely declined. Paramilitarism remains a feature of the Six Counties, however, particularly in organised crime. The payments which gangsters demand from businesses are typically described as 'protection money'. The name implies you will receive protection from some unspecified threat, but in reality you are paying to avoid beating or death from those demanding it.

Sometimes the thugs characterise it in other ways. One respondent to the BBC said:

I have never been asked to pay for protection, but they asked me to contribute to the community activities which I did do.

Reverse-Robin Hood paramilitaries rob from those least able to pay

The report refers to "shops, salons and restaurants" as among the businesses targeted. Construction sites are another common source of revenue for paramilitaries. What this essentially amounts to is a regressive tax on people of average income.

The thugs aren't going to Tesco management, Intel or JP Morgan to demand a cut of their profits. They're robbing small local businesses often struggling to survive in a climate where large corporations relentlessly lobby government, and where the high street already struggles to survive.

Of course, such gangsters rob everyone on a daily basis, a fact highlighted by the Independent Reporting Commission (IRC) which monitors paramilitary activity. They pointed out that:

If paramilitarism is not brought to an end, it will continue to create
unmanageable strain on public finances through its direct and indirect harms.

This cost to us all comes from the increased policing expenses required to deal with the issue, especially when paramilitaries drive instances of mass rioting and racial pogroms, such as those they stoked in Ballymena in June 2025. The IRC reported with "no doubt" that there was paramilitary involvement in the riots, which took place among loyalist communities in the town. The Belfast Telegraph reported how:

Almost 50 children have been referred to social services by the PSNI after race riots in Northern Ireland over the last two years.

'Protection' scam extends to exploiting kids

These are kids who are coerced into participating in criminal racist behaviour. Those with links to far-right loyalist paramilitaries often like to parade as the protectors of women and children. However, as in the case of 'protection money', it's the men in balaclavas who people need protecting from.

The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission has warned that the Justice Bill before the Northern Ireland Assembly may not provide sufficient protection against criminalising children dragged into crime by paramilitaries. The bill seeks to bring the Six Counties somewhere close to parity with Britain, as the former has previously lacked legislation to deal with organised crime.

Some indicators show a decline in paramilitary activity. The Police Service of Northern Ireland's (PSNI) Security Situation Statistics give an indication of this. In their latest report, which covers the period from 1 October 2024 to 30 September 2025, there were:

…no security related deaths, compared to one during the previous 12 months.

Shooting incidents also declined from 16 to 11. The chief constable of the PSNI Jon Boutcher has expressed optimism about a downgrading of the security threat rating in coming years. He says it may go from its current 'substantial' level to 'moderate', meaning "an attack is possible, but not likely."

Of course, this assessment is based on threats to the state, rather than the general threat posed to the population at large by paramilitary violence, nevermind the other costs.

PSNI must take a share of the blame

The PSNI itself has some role to play in the continued role in daily life of paramilitaries. It has turned a blind eye to displays by violent groups such as the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), while arresting peaceful Palestine Action protesters. Like police forces in Britain, it continues to maintain relatively low ratings from the public. According to the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA):

60.6% thought police were not visible or not very visible in their local area.

67.5% were satisfied with the job the PSNI do in Northern Ireland.

61.4% were confident in PSNI's ability to protect and serve.

63.8% thought the PSNI were engaged or very engaged with local communities

While this remains the case, some people will still see paramilitaries as a local replacement for cops, perceived as cracking down on drug dealers and petty crime. This is the legacy of The Troubles — a police force still beholden to appalling British law, and the long tail of paramilitary thuggery given life by an inadequate political settlement.

Featured image via Nazli Tarzi

By Robert Freeman

BREAKING: ex-prince Andrew arrested [ 19-Feb-26 10:25am ]

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the Epstein buddy formerly known as 'prince', has been arrested this morning at the Sandringham estate in Norfolk.

Police arrived early this morning in unmarked cars. The exact reason for the arrest is still unannounced, though it is under the umbrella term of misconduct in public office. BBC correspondent Laura Manning speculated that:

My understanding is that there's been a very significant development in the investigation into the Epstein files. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has been arrested this morning on suspicion of misconduct in public office.

That goes back to documents from when he was a trade envoy, that are alleged to have been passed to Epstein.

Knowing the priorities of the British state, it is more likely to be linked to his leaking of secrets to serial chiild-rapist Jeffrey Epstein than his alleged trafficking of women.

For more on the the Epstein Files, please read the Canary's article on way that the media circus around Epstein is erasing the experiences of victims and survivors.

Featured image via the Canary

Trade Union Congress calls out Reform plan to bin minimum wage [ 19-Feb-26 10:01am ]

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) is exposing on X the dangerous impact Reform MP Richard Tice would have if he makes it to office.

Live on LBC, Tice stated that Reform would:

Will consider cutting the minimum wage for younger workers.

This demonstrates how disastrously out of touch Tice is with the very voters he's trying to win over.

The post below from the TUC underscores the contrast between billionaire-funded Reform UK, and the real challenges facing ordinary people — just trying to make ends meet.

Young people: We can't afford our rent.

Multi-millionaire Reform MP Richard Tice: We're going to cut your pay. https://t.co/i9SoVTcAPb

— Trades Union Congress (@The_TUC) February 17, 2026

Richard Tice: "100% of nothing is nothing"

The original LBC interview went as follows:

Ben Kentish: If you were in government, would reform cut the minimum wage for young people to get more of them into work? Is that on the table?

Richard Tice: Well, we'll be talking about that over the coming weeks. We've got to re-look at it because the evidence is immediately there within a matter of six to nine months. But this has had a catastrophic impact as well, of course, of the impact of national insurance contribution rises, employment rights, fears from the dreadful employment rights bill. All of these things have a cumulative impact, which means that employers are saying, why should I take the risk?

Kentish: A potential pay cut for millions of young workers on the minimum wage is something you are considering?

Tice: If you're unemployed, I mean, 100% of nothing is nothing.

Kentish: But we're talking specifically about the minimum wage here and whether it needs to be cut for young people.

Tice: But the wage is irrelevant if you're not employed. If businesses are not employing you, so it's much better to say, actually, we look at…

Kentish: But the young people who are employed on the minimum wage obviously would also be affected by a cut in the minimum wage.

Tice: And that's why I'm not going to make policy on the hoof. That's why you've got to look at the implications of this.

Kentish: But you're looking at it.

Tice: We've got to look at all of this because they've got themselves in a terrible pickle and sometimes it's then quite hard to unwind these things.

Kentish: And to young people who say, well, I'm in work, I'm earning the minimum wage, why on earth would I vote Reform if they think I should potentially earn even less than I'm getting?

Tice: That's…

Kentish: What would you say?

Tice: Well, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is other young people are not being employed who could be and should be because of this extra cost. And it's a significant disadvantage. But it's now… it's a complicated issue.

Unfortunately, Kentish misses another reality: giving bosses 'recruitment discounts' through low pay requirements doesn't lift people out of poverty.

Many will still need benefits to survive, with taxpayers footing the bill for what rich employers refuse to pay. After all, workers can't get their PAYE sent to offshore tax havens — they're captured by the tax system from the get-go.

Once again, the majority are forced to bear the burden the super-rich continue to shrug-off.

As if it wasn't completely clear already, if you vote #Reform, what you are voting for is taking money out of the pockets of the working class and giving it to millionaires and billionaires. It really is that simple. They are a bunch of absolute grifters who prey on stupidity https://t.co/dAHbz1C1TV pic.twitter.com/QzNQQBlGvm

— Jim Kavanagh (@Jimbokav1971) February 17, 2026

Says the immigrant from Dubai. Has he learned Arabic yet?

Reform couldn't give a damn about the working class. They're a private members' club for billionaire tax-dodging wankers and offshore-trust boys who lecture 16 year old shelf-stackers to "tighten their belts for… https://t.co/kuCOsOtU1Z

— Atlanta Rey

British Legion to hold grotesque commemoration of Iraq war [ 19-Feb-26 9:56am ]

British military legion celebrates Iraq war

The Royal British Legion (RBL) have announced an Iraq War '15 years on' memorial event. The veterans charity, which is backed by major global arms firms, said the event would be held in Staffordshire in May 2025 at the National Arboretum.

The Arboretum is a national site for military remembrance, and is known for partnering with military-linked firms.

The Legion's press release says:

We will remember the lives lost and those affected and pay tribute to the professionalism and dedication of the men and women who served, from the initial invasion to the crucial rebuilding of Iraqi institutions and infrastructure.

That last little bit is particularly deceptive. It makes Iraq sound like a humanitarian mission, rather than a war crime-riddled heist.

Iraq denials don't hold water

In fact, one Iraq veteran told the Canary that the RBL's claim was flat wrong:

When I was on Telic one [the Iraq invasion] there was a planned campaign of arresting anyone that had membership of the Ba'ath party (this was after the government had fell). In effect teachers, dentists, doctors, or anyone with a skilled job, had to be members of the party under the old regime, or they wouldn't have been allowed to work.

He continued:

In effect, anyone that knew how to do something in society was removed, and when we questioned this on the ground, we were told that this policy had come from the very top (Downing Street)

So it wasn't just the military campaign it was also the removal of all people that ran Iraqi society. At the same time the army was pretty much made redundant.

The institutions and infrastructure wouldn't have needed building up or repairing without this.

When we asked the RBL about their links to corporate sponsors, they told us:

The RBL Iraq 15 event will not have any corporate sponsors.

Which certainly doesn't clear up the issue of their corporate sponsors as an organisation. And, when we asked the Iraq veteran about the Legion's links to arms firms, he told us:

Yes the RBL are basically partnering with the arms business, which surely must be against the principles of when the organisation started.

The truth is that the Iraq War was illegal and killed and maimed hundreds of thousands of people. The war destabilised the entire Middle East region, leaving a lasting impact on those who carried it out. By all measures, it was an unmitigated disaster. Yet, bizarrely, figures like Trump's secretary of state Marco Rubio are clamouring to revive colonialism. Regime change in Iraq clearly taught them that war is profitable for the West.

In the pockets of Big Death

Since the ousting of the pre-2003 government, Iraq has become a lucrative cash cow for certain players, including global arms firms — what I prefer to call Big Death. Welcome to the military charity-industrial complex.

What makes the Iraq event and comments from the Royal British Legion striking is that both the legion and the National Arboretum proudly state their connections to the global killing business.

BAE Systems is a major partner of the RBL — to the tune of £400,000. The Arboretum's website names Amey, Key Systems, Briggs Equipment and Jaguar Land Rover among its partners and supporters. All of these firms make profit from war and global instability.

The press and RBL did not even attempt to reflect these galling truths in their coverage of the event.

Flattening Iraq: literally and ideologically

Instead, the Mirror led with stories about veterans horribly wounded in the war — yep veterans, not the countless Iraqis killed as a result of the war.

Certainly, these are awful and harrowing tales involving terrible injuries. But the point, my friends, is that the choice to focus on individual stories is deeply political.

In 2018 Professor Paul Dixon wrote a report called Warrior Nation: War, militarisation and British democracy. Dixon recently published a much-expanded book on the same issue.

In his original report, Dixon identified many different tactics used by pro-war groups and individuals to de-politicise and flatten discussions about war. One of these is 'personalisation".

As Dixon has it:

The personalisation of war refers to the focus on human stories and the plight of the troops. This may serve militarists well in 'depoliticising' the war (which is, ironically, to conceal the highly political motivations of those behind the war) diverting attention from wider questions as to why it was necessary to fight these wars.

He adds:

Personalisation can be combined with deflection in which opposition to the war is presented as opposition to military personnel, militaristic ideals and the nation. War becomes 'a fight to save our own soldiers… rather than as a struggle for policy goals external to the military.'

Whether the press and the RBL know it or not, they're using a well-established tactic to remove the war and its outcomes from their political context. Which is exactly the thing we should be discussing.

We've drawn on Paul Dixon's more recent work in January 2026. He wrote about how he'd argued the UK's military elite had used the wars to cement more power over UK democracy.

These military elites, Dixon argues:

[often] claim to be non-political, [but] their history suggests a close relationship with the political right, sympathy for monarchy and imperialism, and hostility to liberalism, socialism, feminism and democracy.

The British military produces far-right ideologues? Quelle surprise.

Britain's war machine

It might seem odd that major arms firms and the powerful UK military charities are so closely linked. But, this is what it has always been.

You could read about the historical links between the Legion and the military establishment in my second book Veteranhood. Except you can't. Why? Because an Israeli AI bro bought the publishing house and now myself and load of my fellow authors are boycotting our own work and giving any future royalties to Palestinian causes.

And if you want to understand militarism in the UK and globally — and how it's enmeshed with global capitalism — one of the best places to start is by scrutinising military charities (which are themselves big firms) in bed with the war trade.

Because underneath the rhetoric about remembrance, sacrifice, and courage you'll find that what arms firms and these big charities really do is re-write, obscure, and mythologise as noble what is, in fact, the UK's violent, counter-productive, imperialist foreign policy. Lipstick on the pig, if you like? They limit the space to critique those policies, to make them harder to challenge and to conflate criticism with disrespect for 'the troops'.

The real face of that war is much less marketable, as another Iraq veteran told us:

I'm 38 now. I had only just turned 20 when i deployed, I redeploy most nights. Waking my partner up - kicking & screaming. You come home, but bits of it stay with you — and your family carries it too.

He pointed out the lack of accountability too:

Chilcot told us what went wrong, but nothing really changed at the top. Blair is still a free man. If remembrance means anything, it should mean telling the truth, rather than white washing the nations war crimes.

But the truth is, when you see and hear about the dead and wounded in wars like Iraq, the real disrespect lies in failing to criticise, probe, and challenge the ugly consequences of war.

Featured image via Peter Kennard and Cat Picton-Phillipps

Europe's Industrial Accelerator Act marks the rupture within the EU [ 18-Feb-26 11:53pm ]

On 25 February 2026, the European Commission is expected to formally present the Industrial Accelerator Act, a comprehensive proposal designed to accelerate the decarbonisation of energy-intensive industries, secure strategic supply chains, and rebuild manufacturing competitiveness amid mounting external challenges.

Behind the familiar language of climate transition and industrial resilience, however, lies something far more unsettling.

The Industrial Accelerator Act is not simply another technocratic adjustment within the routine choreography of Brussels policymaking, nor merely a regulatory attempt to smooth the frictions of a volatile global market.

Rather, it embodies the emerging ideological and geopolitical rupture within the European project itself, signalling that the continent has, albeit belatedly, that the post-Cold War settlement, which subordinated production to finance, economic planning to the whims of the free market, and sovereignty to supranational institutions dictated by the whims of Washington, is no longer sustainable under conditions of intensifying fissures.

The Industrial Accelerator Act: the end of financialisation?

For three decades, the European Union has determined its economic constellation on a fragile architecture of external guarantees provided by the rules-based order, with the US at its helm. Cheap energy flowed from Russia's abundant gas reserves, manufacturing networks extended into China, and the wider Eurasian periphery and security concerns were largely outsourced to the US.

This model, often celebrated as the triumph of liberal internationalism and popularised by figures such as Francis Fukuyama as the "End of History," was framed as the final stabilisation of the global order following the collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe.

The European Union presented itself as the laboratory of a post-political future: a space in which conflicts would be neutralised through procedure, and the market would quietly perform the task once reserved for political struggle. The violence of history, we were told, had been domesticated.

This apparent stability concealed profound contradictions. Europe's eventual transition toward a post-industrial economy was less a transcendence of its industrial preponderance than its externalisation. Manufacturing did not disappear; it was offshored.

The era of financialisation masked a structural fragility, substituting speculative expansion and asset inflation for productive renewal. Economic integration concealed asymmetries of power, while global value chains obscured the geopolitical dependencies within them. Europe increasingly occupied the position of the consumer within a system whose productive core and strategic leverage were located elsewhere.

Permacrises

The crises of the 21st century have progressively exposed this settlement as contingent and unstable.

The financial crash of 2008 revealed the systemic risks of an economy oriented solely toward financial accumulation rather than industrial resilience.

The pandemic exposed the brittleness of global supply chains, as shortages of essential goods demonstrated the strategic costs of outsourcing critical production.

The war in Ukraine shattered longstanding assumptions about energy security and forced Europe into a rapid and costly restructuring of its economic model at the behest of US imperatives.

Simultaneously, the US returned to large-scale industrial policy, crystallised in the Inflation Reduction Act, made clear that even proponents of neoliberalism had abandoned their own orthodoxy. China's ascent in renewable energy, battery production, advanced manufacturing, and critical mineral processing further underscores that control and guidance over production remain the decisive axis of power in the current world-system.

In this context, the Industrial Accelerator Act can be understood as the first attempt to reconstruct the material basis of European autonomy in global affairs.

Reconstructing autonomy via the Industrial Accelerator Act

Pushed forward by French Commissioner Stéphane Séjourné and supported by a broad coalition of industry leaders, the proposal deploys a suite of mechanisms: European preference in public procurement, low-carbon labelling for steel and cement, fast-track permitting for decarbonisation projects, and caps on foreign direct investment in emerging strategic sectors (notably a 49% limit on non-EU ownership in key greenfield investments) to foster a durable industrial ecosystem capable of sustaining a necessary ecological transition and geopolitical power.

While recent drafts have introduced flexibility, allowing "trusted partners" (such as the UK or Japan) to qualify under delegated acts and softening rigid origin thresholds to avoid immediate supply-chain ruptures, the core intent remains unmistakable: to create lead markets for cleaner, more resilient EU-made products and to prevent the hollowing-out of strategic industries by external actors.

If implemented with sufficient ambition, the Industrial Accelerator Act could underpin a genuine reindustrialisation: millions of skilled jobs in retrofitted steel mills, battery gigafactories, and hydrogen infrastructure; reduced exposure to geopolitical coercion; and a decarbonisation pathway that strengthens rather than undermines social models.

Yet the path is fraught. Internal divisions persist, between free-trade-oriented member states wary of Single Market fragmentation, industries concerned about cost increases, and those demanding bolder action. Compatibility with WTO rules remains contested, and the success of delegated acts that define thresholds and "trusted partners" will determine whether the policy is inclusive or exclusionary.

What is Europe to become?

Above all, the Industrial Accelerator Act signals a deeper ideological shift.

Europe is moving, however unevenly, from a post-historical illusion of triumphant liberalism, marked by an era of uncontested American hegemony, to an increasingly multipolar arrangement, though not in the way we expected. it.

The Industrial Accelerator Act reflects Europe's attempt to navigate this contradiction. It seeks to preserve openness while constructing resilience, to maintain integration while rebuilding production. But this effort is haunted by internal tensions. The European Union is not a unified state but a heterogeneous formation. Some member states fear protectionism; others demand more radical intervention. The result is a policy that oscillates between ambition and hesitation.

This hesitation is itself revealing. Europe does not yet know what it wants to become. It oscillates between the desire to remain within the Atlanticist world-system and the necessity of sovereignty. It fears both dependency and conflict. The Act therefore embodies a form of strategic ambiguity, an attempt to act without fully acknowledging the implications of one's actions.

The presentation on 25 February will mark not the conclusion of a legislative process, but the opening of a larger contest: whether Europe can summon the political will to reclaim the material basis of its independence, or whether it will once again defer to external forces the question of who controls its destiny. The Industrial Accelerator Act is the first gesture in that uncertain process.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rares Cocilnau

Removing Starmer won't change the Labour Party enough to stop Farage [ 18-Feb-26 11:39pm ]

If you lose every football match because your goalkeeper keeps booting the ball into their own net, shouting at the other team is pointless. Inventing new tactics to get past the other keeper is pointless, because the ball will always go past yours. That was true about Jeremy Corbyn. It is true about Keir Starmer. And it's time for progressive voters to accept that it's true about the Labour Party in general. Removing Keir Starmer as leader won't change Labour enough to prevent Nigel Farage from becoming Reform prime minister.

A confession

Don't get me wrong. I was still holding out hope that Labour might save us - until last month.

I even got major egg on my face, suggesting that the Greens should stand aside in the Gorton and Denton by-election. I wanted a clear path for Andy Burnham to become an MP and then replace Keir Starmer as prime minister.

Burnham has always campaigned to ensure that all votes count equally. So, if he became prime minister and gave us a proportional voting system, the UK would genuinely be saved from fascism. Reform, who are polling around 30%, therefore wouldn't be able to gain a majority in parliament. Furthermore, parties to the left of the Tories (Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, Greens) have received more than 50% of the vote in almost every election since WW2.

So, if all votes counted equally, the future of the UK would be almost permanently progressive. But Labour blocking Andy Burnham didn't just make me look foolish; it killed the Labour Party.

Labour is dead and buried

Why? Because Keir Starmer was already on borrowed time, even before he knowingly hired a child rape-trafficker's fan as our US ambassador. He already had the lowest popularity rating of any prime minister in UK history. So the Labour machine knew that Starmer was on his way out. So the decision to rule out Andy Burnham as a potential challenger was about the politics he would bring to the table.

This is a long-standing problem.

In 2020, Labour kicked me out of the party for saying that I joined the Labour Party to get them to support proportional representation. Labour members have supported proportional voting for several years and made it the party's official conference policy, yet the leadership has rejected it. Labour just published its Representation of the People Bill.

This is their flagship law to reform our democracy, yet it makes no mention of proportional representation. So Labour is committed to ensuring that most British votes don't count, because a minority-voted party always get a majority of seats in Parliament.

Wes Streeting, Starmer's most likely successor, even explicitly confirmed this when I interviewed him at the party conference. When I accused Labour of supporting a system where most votes don't count, he said, "In the grand scheme of things, I'm more worried about the NHS".

To which I replied: "So democracy doesn't matter?".

Streeting: "Democracy does matter"

Me: "So you want the majority of votes to count, then?"

Streeting "No. We're focusing on our manifesto."

No allegiance

So, we are dealing with a Labour Party that is institutionally committed to a voting system that has consistently given us governments that are more right-wing than what the majority of people voted for. Logically, our voting system is the most right-wing policy the UK has ever invented, and yet it is being supported by the party some people still call "the Left".

If you can't tell, I have no allegiance to any politician or any party. I backed Corbyn when he campaigned for Remain, opposed him for the three years where he backed Brexit, then campaigned for his Labour Party when he backed a 2nd referendum in late 2019.

I backed Starmer when he called for a referendum on the Brexit deal in early 2019, then opposed him once he became a genocidal Thatcher tribute act, so I voted Green in 2024.

So, having entered politics in 2016, I've only ever really seen Labour copy the biggest right-wing policies of the day. Whether that's Brexit under Corbyn, or austerity, bigotry and genocide under Starmer. As I said, if your keeper keeps booting the ball into your own net, complaining about the opposing team is pointless. And if you care about protecting people from what happens next (see America), then your allegiance shouldn't be to any player, whether that player is in green, red or yellow. Besides, this isn't a game.

Labour is finished

I joined the Green Party in October because they actually want to stop this car from driving to the far right, not simply say slightly nicer things from the passenger seat. Labour has become part of the problem and can't beat Nigel Farage.

What's tragic is… on balance, even Reform voters believe Brexit has made us poorer, and they don't like the Tories. But the Brexit Party changed their name to Reform UK and has populated itself almost exclusively with former Tories.

Yet somehow that's enough to convince them that they're not voting for the same Tories who already made them poorer… If simply changing Labour's leader is enough to convince you that it's become a whole new party, then stop pretending you're smarter than a Reform voter.

Featured image via the Canary

By Femi Oluwole

London former Labour council leader defects to Greens [ 18-Feb-26 10:00pm ]

Southwark councillor James McAsh has defected to the Green Party from Labour with a blast at Starmer's factionalism and red-Tory austerity politics. McAsh was elected as council leader in July 2025, but the central party moved to quash the result and installed a tame Starmeroid.

In his resignation from Labour, McAsh said that he can no longer ask Southwark residents to vote for Starmer's party because the Labour-run council is:

planning for funding gaps larger than those faced in almost every year of Conservative and Liberal Democrat austerity, this time imposed by a Labour government.

Unless something changes, Labour cuts will devastate the local services that as residents of this fantastic borough, we all rely on.

McAsh added:

I grew up in a Labour household and I've devoted much of my adult life to the party. I'm proud of the work I've done in Southwark - but Labour is no longer the vehicle for social justice I once thought it was.

He is the fourth Southwark Labour councillor to join the Greens since last year's scandal and the seventh to resign from Labour. Southwark is part of a London-wide phenomenon of Labour councillors flooding to the Greens since Zack Polanski won that party's leadership — including at least one deputy mayor.

Featured image via SouthworkNews

Shady think tanks start the year as they mean to go on — demonising benefit claimants [ 18-Feb-26 9:37pm ]

Murky think tanks lurking at Tufton Street and Westminster have begun the New Year with a shameful bang. That is to say, the usual way: by scapegoating benefit claimants.

Here are all the (largely) opaquely-funded organisations helping the corporate media manufacture consent for cruel welfare cuts. This is what they've been up to so far in their bid to ram forward further callous benefit 'reforms' and pit the public against people seeking state support.

Mealy-mouth-pieces in the media vilifying benefits

Shady benefit-slashing machinations abound across the mainstream media. Throughout January, the hate-mongers traded in a reprehensible assortment of stories maligning claimants. By our count, think tanks spawned these pieces in at least 56 instances:

The award for the most despicable attempts to vilify go to…The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) for puerile attempts to pit the public against migrants.

Notably, it tag-teamed with shadow Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) sec Helen Whately in an article for shitrag the Daily Mail. It made up more lies about the numbers claiming welfare to scapegoat refugees and asylum seekers.

So, the usual racist, xenophobic bullshit? We're not linking to it here.

Other dishonourable mentions included:

A Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) report triggered no fewer than 21 stories. The analysis attempted to drive a wedge between pensioners and welfare recipients on one end, and workers on the other. Multiple outlets framed it that Labour's taxes are "hammering" working people, while pensioners and welfare claimants would be "better off". This would be thanks to inflation-linked increases due to the triple-lock and the increase in Universal Credit's standard allowance. Of course, every piece failed to mention that new disabled UC claimants will be thousands of pounds worse off after Labour cut the health element almost in half.
The corporate media churned out no less than 13 articles for the Centre for Social Justice's (CSJ) Rewiring Education report. Headlines blurted every variation under the sun on '700,000 graduates claiming benefits'. Put simply, the report essentially set about discouraging poor kids from going to go to uni — go figure.

And it wasn't just the print press. Think tank spokespeople and research appeared in a number of TV and radio shows throughout January as well:

CSJ gears up for a vile propaganda drive against benefits claimants

An announcement from Iain Duncan-Smith's diabolical brainchild drew multiple puff pieces for its latest project to smear claimants. These made the decidedly dubious (more like: utter bullshit) claim that six million Britons would be better off on benefits.

Notably, at the end of January, the think tank decided now's a good time to amp up the antagonism on disabled welfare claimants. You know, right after a round of vicious benefit cuts that's set to make some disabled people destitute. Not enough, says blatant misnomer the CSJ.

Now, the think tank has launched its so-called Welfare 2030 enquiry to:

diagnose the causes of escalating worklessness, its harms to struggling families and the cost to the taxpayer.

It says this will involve a "Big Listen" series with its 900+ strong "CSJ Alliance of small charities" throughout spring. Then it plans to take these ideas to the major party conferences. At them, it says it will host 'debate' about the so-called "welfare crisis".

For the project, the CSJ has of course put together a dedicated webpage. There, an animated reel of right-wing foghorns screech out frontpage headlines bleating that "5 million paid not to work" and "Get a grip on welfare… or tax bomb will go off this Autumn". Foregone conclusion much?

Introducing the enquiry, the ever-ghoulish former grim reaper of the DWP, IDS, was bandying about the establishment's favourite trope. In particular, he was wanging on that:

The system must stop writing off thousands of people every day, and incentives to work must be restored to end this ruinous waste of human potential.

Hall of infamy (lobbyists not even being shy about it)

Think tanks rarely miss the opportunity to boast their role seeding regressive policy. Case in point:

The Canary's formidable chief DWP botherer Rachel Charlton-Dailey recently did a scathing and on-point take-down of the government's wilfully misleading PR about the farcical scheme. Contrary to its name, there's actually no real evidence it's actually 'working well'.

Funnily enough, that's precisely the title of its predecessor scheme, which the DWP based it on, and the Canary previously showed to be a sham. Needless to say, the CSJ has long been plugging the glorified work programme to coerce chronically ill and disabled people into work.

Weaseling into Westminster

Of course then, this nebulous back-scratching ecosystem would not be complete without Westminster. MPs and peers will regularly lean on think tank talking points that the mainstream media has propagated.

In this way, think tanks and the press are collaborators in manufacturing consent for benefit cuts and other punitive welfare policies. For instance, in January, Conservative MP Harriet Baldwin paraded the CSJ's latest rotten report on graduates claiming benefits (mentioned above).

However, it's not only think tank talking points getting around the Palace's hallowed halls. It's also the former think tank brains themselves.

As the Canary's brilliant HG reported, the DWP has set the fox among the henhouse with the appointment of Policy Exchange senior fellow Jean Andre-Prager to the Timms Review steering group.

Meanwhile, former Labour Together bigwigs have also been sneaking their way into the department too.

Serving the interests of billionaires

Ultimately, the point is: from Westminster to the media, think tank ideologues are moving in all the right circles to spread vicious benefit claimant propaganda. The deluge of demonising stories across the pages of the mainstream rumour mill is no accident.

These elitist and covertly-funded capitalist front organisations are driving the attacks on the working class and disabled people from the shadows. All the while, the Labour Party has continued to flirt with ever-more alarming policy ideas these very shady groups have been cooking up.

It's more than time to shine a searing spotlight on the hidden forces colluding with the billionaire press to dismantle the welfare state.

Featured image via the author

By Hannah Sharland

18-Feb-26

Arms Trade Corruption Tracker exposes NATO's 'highest-profile corruption scandal' [ 18-Feb-26 9:17pm ]

Arms Trade Corruption Tracker (ATCT) have exposed reported Elbit contract suspensions at the behest of NATO's Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA). In a decision taken last year, the NSPA took action to suspend over a dozen contracts linked to the Israeli arms company after anti-corruption investigations involving former NSPA staff.

They add that:

not all investigations appear to link directly to Elbit but details are still emerging.

ATCT further added, in a 'spicy detail', that the US had coincidentally dropped its investigation into some of those implicated. This came two weeks after a meeting between US President Trump and Turkish President Erdogan. Funnily enough, one of the investigations dropped refers to a Turkish officer formerly employed by NSPA.

Once again, the right-wing US President appears to be choosing to cover up corruption, as opposed to trying to tackle it.

#UnravellingTuesday: Israeli arms giant Elbit Systems faced reported contract suspensions from NATO's Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) in relation to several anti corruption investigations involving former NSPA staff. New case link below. pic.twitter.com/W67cfTcTJt

— Corruption Tracker (@ArmsTradeCT) February 17, 2026

Elbit — NATO's 'highest-profile corruption scandal'

ATCT reported that the contracts were suspended by NATO in July 2025 following four investigations into possible corruption. These investigations involved eleven suspects and stated that 'not all cases appear to directly involve Elbit'. They further stated that the evidence of corruption gathered represents:

the highest-profile corruption scandal the Alliance [NATO] had faced since its founding.

The Corruption Tracker website has published a detailed timeline outlining the countries, weapons, and equipment linked to the suspended contracts. The investigations implicate arms sellers, naming Israel's Elbit Systems and its subsidiary Orion Advanced Systems, as well as Global Defence Logistics (GDL) and an unnamed Italian company. The contracts reportedly involve officials in Israel, Italy, Turkey, Romania, and Luxembourg, who appear positioned to benefit financially.

ATCT stated:

Authorities from the US, Romania, Belgium and the Netherlands had been investigating eleven suspects accused of bribery, accepting bribes, money laundering and illegal kickbacks, tied to military procurement contracts awarded between 2015 to 2024.

A wave of arrests followed across Spain, Romania, Belgium and the Netherlands. Yet despite the scale of the investigation and the seriousness of the charges, the consequences proved remarkably limited. None of the detainees served more than six months in prison. Most were released under conditional liberty, while others ultimately saw the charges against them dropped altogether.

Referring to the meeting between Trump and Erdogan, and subsequent shady actions taken, ATCT added:

The case took a dramatic turn in early July 2025. Just two weeks after the US and Turkish presidents met on 25 June 2025 at the Hague NATO Summit - and only two days before the extradition of suspects was due to take place - the US abruptly withdrew all charges. Those cleared included Manousos Bailakis and Ioannis Gelasakis, accused of bribing a NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) official, as well as Scott Everett Willason alleged to have paid bribes, and Ismaïl Terlemez, accused of accepting them in order to steer NATO procurement decisions in favour of Willason's client portfolio.

Suggesting internal whistleblowers are facing typical abuse and negative consequences as a result of raising concerns about internal corruption, they added:

The fallout did not stop with the suspects. Inside the alliance, senior officials began raising alarms of their own. The NSPA's Director of Human Resources and its Chief Audit Executive and Head of Investigations flagged internal corruption and wrongdoing within NATO's structures. Their interventions came at a cost: both saw their positions either suspended or left unrenewed.

Whilst the US step away, the rest of us must step up

The US and its "diplomatic might" sit under the control of a shameless, unrestrained leader who has made clear he will pursue financial gain at any cost. However, the ATCT point out that the US shows precious little concern for corruption. Instead, Trump seems happy for it to continue, leaving smaller countries in the alliance with the huge responsibility of exposing such a sinister web of corruption.

They added:

With Washington stepping away from the case, responsibility for its resolution now rests with Dutch, Belgian and Romanian authorities, who continue to handle the remaining proceedings. Questions remain about accountability at the highest levels of the alliance.

Since the deliverables under these contracts lead to the mutilation, trauma, and deaths of innocent civilians, conducting this investigation is essential in the interest of humanity.

Arms trade corruption investigator Andrew Feinstein spoke to the Canary about the clear corruption within the report from ATCT, stating emphatically:

Elbit is one of the deadliest company's on the planet. It is central to Israel's genocide in Gaza.

Israel is both a materially & morally corrupt country.

This is seen most explicitly in its defence sector of which Elbit is a leading part. The company is the corrupt fulcrum at the heart of this murderous country.

Powerful elite might delay justice, but they cannot prevent it indefinitely

We have to face it: the US has abandoned justice and fully descended into a dog-eat-dog mentality where the richest and strongest are always right. Even though they're so evidently and deplorably wrong.

These findings support yet another call for the UK to disentangle itself from US-led foreign policy rather than risk being dragged into its consequences. The powerful may delay justice, but they cannot prevent it indefinitely. After all, history books will not look kindly on those who permit corruption. Particularly when its consequences include civilian deaths in Gaza and throughout the Global South and Middle East.

We must demand that our government suspend all contracts with Elbit Systems now. Citizens must insist on a thorough and independent investigation into the relationship between Elbit and government officials. There are already serious concerns already raised about transparency and political conduct under the government of Keir Starmer, specifically in relation to Israel.

Therefore, there is ample reason to insist on scrutiny here at home as well.

You can read the Corruption Tracker's full investigation and findings here.

Featured image via Twitter

By Maddison Wheeldon

Tony Blair says his favourite film is Schindler's List. No, really. [ 18-Feb-26 7:28pm ]

Former PM, genocide supporter and on-the-loose war criminal Tony Blair has said another ridiculous thing — it must be a day ending in a 'Y'. The hyper-wealthy friend of a cast of dictators, maniacs and war criminals to rival the steering committee of SPECTRE reckons his favourite film is Schindler's List.

The 1993 film centres on the Nazi Holocaust and contains powerful lessons from history…

Not a single fucking one of which Big Tony has grasped in any way whatsoever given he has signed up to the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Blair was one of the first names on the list for Donald Trump's Board of Peace initiative.

Blair said the film's greatest lesson for him was

You cannot be a bystander.

To which we must say 'Jesus, Mary and Joseph, what on earth are you talking about, you rictus-grinned narcissist prat?'

He added that not being a bystander:

can lead you to right judgments and wrong judgments but it is not just your job to look after your country… you owe some responsibility to the bigger world.

Hmm…

Tony Blair — like a bad smell

To be fair Blair has never been a bystander when it comes to war, invasion and empire. He's usually been an enthusiastic participant. The interview was part of an interview series which nobody wanted or needed, but Channel 4, in their infinite middle class wisdom, decide to make anyway… head-in-hands…

The general public are less inclined to see Blair on TV:

Imagine watching Schindler's List and your takeaway is that you should participate in the next genocide you see pic.twitter.com/TR3eYFw3xN

— Council Estate Media (@cem_uk_) February 17, 2026

One Blair fan described the ex-PM as:

an absolute utter fucking piece of Shit.

Say what you feel, mate.

Tony Blair is an absolute utter fucking piece of Shit.

He was happy to see hundreds of thousands of people die for a lie in Iraq and he was happy to see people murdered in Gaza. And yet he's sitting here talking about Schindler's list never again it meant to be never again for… https://t.co/SbsOdGuJzi

— Hussain "Hoz" Shafiei (@HussainShafiei) February 17, 2026

Another discouraged us from watching the series with reference to Blair's famously terrifying Christmas card:

You don't need to watch The Tony Blair Story. You just need to google "Narcissistic Sociopath" who poses for a Christmas card like it's a fight outside a Wetherspoons at 2am and leave it at that.#LeaveItTony pic.twitter.com/kuKiTNYtBs

— Niecy O'Keeffe (@NiecyOKeeffe) February 17, 2026

Someone else said that given Blairite ghoul John Rentoul has endorsed the film it was probably about as veracious as Flat Earth Theory:

if John "Blairite truths are eternal" Rentoul has seen your Tony Blair documentary and liked it, it may be something of a whitewash pic.twitter.com/oJUMsJeFg9

— Jack FR (@FrayneJack34043) February 16, 2026

Another was buzzing for Series Two which will presumably see Blair in a war crimes court. We hope and pray:

I'm looking forward to Series 2 of The Tony Blair Story.

The one where he and Alastair Campbell are tried in The Hague for war crimes, and the Dr Kelly 'suicide' files they had put away for 70 years, to be released many years after their deaths, are released to the public. pic.twitter.com/9dHcToibmD

— MacPhisto (@BulletBlueSky2) February 18, 2026

In fact — big shocker — the war crimes thing was something of a theme:

Tonight 9pm The Tony Blair Story.
The only Tony Blair Story I want to see is when he's sharing a cell with Radovan Karadzic.

— Ragged Trousered Philanthropist (@alfienoakes63) February 18, 2026

Another X user made the connection with, ahem, current events in the Massive Nonce… sorry… Labour Party:

It's an Epstein Files who's who in The Tony Blair Story on Channel 4 tonight

25,000 back calls for NatureScot to end controversial guga hunt [ 18-Feb-26 6:30pm ]

More than 25,000 people have now signed a petition calling on NatureScot to stop licensing the controversial guga hunt. And pressure continues to mount on Scotland's nature agency.

The guga hunt - killing young gannets

Each autumn, a group of men from the Isle of Lewis travel to the remote uninhabited island of Sula Sgeir to capture and kill flightless gannet chicks ("guga") for food. The hunters use poles to dislodge the young birds from the cliffs and then batter them to death.

The activity is part of a historical tradition and takes place under authorisation from public body NatureScot. The agency decides whether to grant a licence each year there's an application, subject to conservation tests.

Protect the Wild created the petition. It argues that NatureScot is failing to meet evidential thresholds when issuing these licences and should not continue authorising the guga hunt.

Mounting public pressure recently prompted NatureScot to issue a public statement. It acknowledged the "strong feelings" about the guga hunt and confirmed that its board is considering people's concerns.

In its statement, NatureScot said:

We understand there are strong feelings about the guga hunt, and that some people will disagree with it taking place. The hunt is recognised in law under the Wildlife and Countryside Act…Our role is to make licensing decisions based on the most recent scientific evidence.

NatureScot confirmed that in 2025 it reduced the permitted take from 2,000 birds to 500 following survey data collected after avian flu outbreaks. And it said that it granted a licence on the condition that the hunters killed the birds "humanely".

Insufficient monitoring

But Protect the Wild says the Sula Sgeir gannet colony remains in decline and that allowing even a reduced guga hunt risks further damage. It also questions how NatureScot can guarantee the killing is humane when it does not directly monitor the process.

Devon Docherty, Scottish Campaigns Manager at Protect the Wild said:

Sula Sgeir is now the only Special Protection Area for gannets in Scotland that has fallen below its official citation level.

NatureScot continues to grant licences knowing the gannet colony is vulnerable, the hunt harms other breeding seabirds, and that they cannot verify whether the chicks are killed humanely - they simply take the hunters' word for it.

With tens of thousands of people now calling for it to stop, the continued licensing of the guga hunt is becoming increasingly difficult for NatureScot to justify.

NatureScot has stated that if a new licence application is received for 2026, it will be brought before its Board for decision.

Protect the Wild says it will continue urging NatureScot to reject future licence applications. And it's calling on the Scottish government to remove the legal exemption that allows the guga hunt to take place.

Featured image via John Ranson / the Canary

Ramadan in Gaza two years after the war: fasting among tents and suffering amid rubble [ 18-Feb-26 6:04pm ]

Two years after a war that left widespread destruction across the Gaza Strip, Ramadan returns amid an extremely complex humanitarian crisis. Feelings of joy at the arrival of the holy month are mixed with grief, displacement and the collapse of basic services.

The population welcomes Ramadan burdened by loss. Longstanding traditions have been replaced by tents and queues for aid.

Ramadan in Gaza — a pressing humanitarian situation

More than two million Palestinians are living in severe hardship. There are acute shortages of food and drinking water, and purchasing power has fallen to unprecedented levels amid widespread unemployment. A large segment of the population now relies on soup kitchens and relief aid to meet daily needs. Even then, supplies cover only a fraction of demand.

The health sector faces serious challenges. There are ongoing shortages of medicines, medical supplies and laboratory materials. These gaps threaten to increase health risks during the holy month, particularly for chronically ill patients, children and the elderly.

Medical authorities warn of the consequences of continued restrictions on humanitarian supplies. Ramadan is traditionally a season of solidarity and support, yet conditions remain dire.

Modest meals and absent rituals

Each evening, families gather for modest iftar meals. These are often limited to bread, vegetables and whatever relief supplies are available. Before the war, the holy month was marked by large family feasts. Extended families rarely gather now. Many have been scattered by displacement and the loss of their homes.

Street decorations and festive lanterns have largely disappeared. Children no longer roam markets buying Ramadan lights. Instead, small temporary lamps replace traditional decorations.

Some families craft handmade ornaments inside their tents. It is a small attempt to preserve the spirit of the month despite harsh conditions.

Mosques between destruction and temporary alternatives

Many mosques were damaged during the war. Some remain completely out of service, depriving residents of a central part of Ramadan.

In response, residents have set up temporary prayer spaces inside tents or damaged schools. Prayers are performed with whatever resources are available. Despite ongoing security concerns and tensions, many remain determined to perform Taraweeh prayers. For some, these rituals provide rare moments of peace amid instability.

Childhood in Gaza looks different this year. Children who have lost homes or family members play between rows of tents. They carry simple lanterns made from available materials.

They try to recreate the joy they associate with Ramadan, even while surrounded by rubble.

Parents strive to create moments of warmth within the family. They prepare simple meals together or organise small group prayers to maintain social bonds.

Between the 'yellow line' and the expanding buffer zone

Ramadan's arrival coincides with ongoing changes on the ground. These shifts have altered Gaza's demographic map.

A 9 February report by the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Observatory described what it called a "silent and slow genocide." It said this goes beyond bombardment to include structural changes. According to the report, the buffer zone is expanding along the so-called "yellow line," dividing the Strip into two areas. Israel controls land to the east, which the report says represents more than half of Gaza's territory.

The line, previously expected to remain fixed, has reportedly advanced around 1.5 kilometres into residential areas. Additional neighbourhoods have been annexed, forcing more families to flee.

Ramadan in Gaza, between loss and resilience

Ramadan in Gaza this year is not only a month of worship. It is also a test of resilience.

Homes have been destroyed, families dispersed and daily life remains under pressure. The holy month feels very different from before the war. Yet residents continue to observe Ramadan as best they can. They stress that its spirit lies in patience and solidarity rather than outward celebration.

Between forced hunger and religious fasting, Gazans are redefining Ramadan. Even amid devastation, many see it as a space for hope and quiet endurance.

Featured image via Aljazeera

By Alaa Shamali

Another shade of blue? Nine ex-Reform councillors defect to Restore [ 18-Feb-26 5:28pm ]

Seven Kent County councillors and two North Northamptonshire County Councillors have joined Restore Britain. Reform UK previously expelled six of them.

Most of these were thrown out of Reform UK when @LeaderofKCC had her meltdown in the 'suck it up' cabinet meeting and the video was leaked. https://t.co/w5NmJN5AH8

— Reform Party UK Exposed

This military expert says UK leaders should be afraid to discipline Special Forces for war crimes [ 18-Feb-26 4:43pm ]

Serious UK prime ministers should be afraid to discipline special forces troops over war crimes because they are so popular with the public. That's according to Dr. Simon Anglim, who wrote a lengthy essay on the UK's new ranger and special operations units.

The essay makes a range of (in fairness, very interesting) points about shadowy deployments overseas — including to Ukraine. But the King's College War Studies lecturer — yes, it's the KCL War Studies people again — also warned that the current Haddon-Cave inquiry into war crimes in Afghanistan could have serious implications for the use of UK Special Forces (UKSF).

UKSF is distinct from the ranger units and remains heavily protected from even basic democratic scrutiny. The government refuses to comment on what they do — even in parliament.

It's a distinctly British practice. None of our major allies refuse point blank to comment on their special forces operations. Yet we do. As the now-defunct Remote Control project pointed out in a 2016 report:

this blanket opacity policy is not standard practice, and the UK is lagging behind its allies on transparency over its use of Special Operations Forces (SOF). The US, Australia, and Canada are all more transparent about their deployment of SOF than the UK.

The practice is also deeply undemocratic:

This leaves the British public, and the parliament that represents them, among the least-informed of their foreign allies about the government's current military activities in places like Syria and Libya stymying informed debate about the UK's role in some of the most important conflicts of our age.

So what's happening then?

Special Forces afraid of the light

Anglim said the threat of accountability over the Afghan allegations was "a shadow hanging over UKSF":

The ongoing Inquiry, presided over by Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, investigating allegations that UKSF members committed unlawful killings in Afghanistan in 2010.

Ireland legacy allegations were also an issue. The SAS investigation:

runs concurrently with the Northern Ireland Coroner's ruling that soldiers of 22 SAS were 'not justified' in killing three members of the Irish Republican Army in an ambush at Clonoe in Northern Ireland in 1992, and the stream of further allegations of unlawful conduct it has set off.

As Anglim pointed out, the cases are sub judice — ongoing — currently. But he expressed a concern they:

could strengthen demands for UKSF to face greater Parliamentary scrutiny, possibly via a Select Committee similar to the one overseeing Intelligence.

Clearly, public scrutiny is a terrifying prospect.

Scrutiny and pressure

This, Anglim said, could result in political pressures which might limit the use of SF:

Given the potential for security breaches and increased hostile scrutiny, this may have a freezing effect on future UKSF deployments and could alter the relationship between the Directorate and its political masters.

Presumably by 'hostile scrutiny' he means from the press and public. Anglim suggested he might write about it more once the cases are resolved:

but it is worth noting that, given their high status with the British public, no serious Prime Minister would want to impose collective punishment on Britain's Special Forces and besides, they are too valuable as national assets to do this too severely if at all.

Anglim makes some very good points in his essay. He is also the definition of an establishment academic. He has worked with the US Department of Defence (currently ridiculously rebranded as the Department of War), the Sultanate of Oman, various establishment think-tanks and has given evidence on readiness to the defence committee.

Here he is talking about how Covid and Brexit affected the military:

But his warnings that some sort of basic accountability could reduce Britain's ability to conduct secret military operations are telling. As with all things the British establishment says you must turn them upside down to understand them.

Public and journalistic scrutiny are good, actually, because they are a threat to the British ruling class's hunger for war, war-profits — and for staying close to US imperial foreign policy whatever the cost and whoever is president. The more scrutiny, then, the better. And if 'serious' prime ministers would be afraid of the light of said scrutiny, let's hope for an 'unserious' one.

Featured image via the Canary

Palestine Action defendants have aggravated burglary charges dropped [ 18-Feb-26 4:36pm ]

Eighteen defendants from Palestine Action have now been acquitted of aggravated burglary. Earlier this month, a jury cleared six of the Filton24 of aggravated burglary, while leaving the charges of criminal damage and violent disorder undecided. These charges are in relation to direct-action taken targeting Israeli arms company, Elbit Systems in Bristol.

Middle East Eye reported that:

Following the decision to drop the charges, five of the defendants - William Plastow, Ian Sanders, Madeline Norman, Julia Brigadirova and Aleksandra Herbich - were granted conditional bail.

Plastow, Sanders and Norman have been held on remand for the longest period of the 18- spending 18 months in prison. Birgadirova and Herbich has been imprisoned since November 2024.

Bail applications for another eight defendants will be held on Friday.

Palestine Action targeting

Today's announcement comes as the prosecution have "reconsidered the sufficiency of the evidence". This move appears to suggest it would be unlikely to achieve the guilty verdicts it is clearly aiming for. However, at this late a stage in a criminal case, the prosecution could not just drop the aggravated burglary charge against the remaining defendants. This left it no option but to concede defeat on that charge if it wished to change course.

Consequently, concerns have resurfaced that the prosecution and government could reconsider their strategy and pursue different charges with a stronger likelihood of conviction.

All of the Filton24 were acquitted of aggravated burglary. SAY IT. https://t.co/ohMIDuUYVb

— Huda Ammori (@HudaAmmori) February 18, 2026

Victory: for now

The Palestine Action defendants have received popular support amongst pro-Palestinian activists and groups. In fact, many pensioners across the country have been seen risking arrest for daring to show public support for then proscribed Palestine Action (PA). The direct-action group has protested against Israel's settler colonialism for many years, and its members have long sought to call attention to those arming the Zionist entity. The case against them refers to a break-in near Bristol of an Elbit Systems site known to be providing arms and supplies to Israel.

Citizens across the UK have taken to protests in every city since October 7th, 2023, making it clear that the majority of British people do not support the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Moreover, leading Holocaust scholars across the globe and the International Court of Justice in The Hague have identified this as a genocide, while the International Criminal Court has moved forward with arrest warrants at the direction of Prosecutor Karim Khan.

We wrote a few days ago on the court ruling that the proscription of Palestine Action, brought because of their acts of protest, was deemed disproportionate. Yet little has really changed, as Skwawkbox wrote:

The decision was made by a panel of judges who all have strong links to Israel, underscoring just how far the Starmer regime overstepped human rights legislation. It is almost certain to try to appeal, despite the exposed web of lies it created to try to justify the ban.

Nevertheless, people are rightfully celebrating this reprieve across social media:

Victory after victory … what an incredible start to Ramadan, the month of victory https://t.co/zrI9NkAiNi

— Fahad Ansari

International Olympic Committee drowning in hypocrisy over Russia and Israel [ 18-Feb-26 2:50pm ]

A Ukrainian athlete was disqualified from the Winter Olympics for a helmet which depicted fellow athletes whom Russia had murdered.

The BBC labelled it:

The Games' biggest controversy so far.

The Ukrainian athlete, Vladyslav Heraskevych, was wearing a helmet that displayed images of more than 20 fellow Ukrainian athletes, all of whom Russia has murdered since the start of its invasion.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) made the decision due to Heraskevych's:

refusal to comply with the IOC's Guidelines on Athlete Expression. It was taken by the jury of the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (IBSF) because the helmet he intended to wear was not compliant with the rules.

The IOC Rule 50 states:

No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.

However, nowhere on his helmet did it mention war, Russia, or how Russia killed these people.

Astounding hypocrisy over Russia

At the very same Winter Olympics, Maxim Naumov, an American figure skater, held up a photo of his dead parents as he received his final score.

His parents were world champion figure skaters - but they competed in two Olympics for Russia.

So, athletes are allowed to celebrate dead Russians, but not dead Ukrainians?

Since then, Heraskevych has accused the IOC of fuelling Russia's propaganda. He added:

it does not look good. I believe it's a terrible mistake that was made by the IOC.

But the IOC's hypocrisy doesn't end there.

Israel is allowed to compete in the event - a literal genocidal terrorist state, with team members who served in the genocidal Israeli Defence Forces who have committed atrocities against Palestinians. Meanwhile, the IOC banned a Ukrainian athlete for wearing a helmet that might upset Putin.

One Swiss commentator called out the Israeli team during a bobsled race. As the Canary previously reported:

Stefan Renna, who works for Swiss Radio and Television (RTS), pointed out that bobsled racer Adam Edelman calls himself "Zionist to the core". Edelman has also made numerous social media posts supporting Israel's Gaza genocide. Renna even used the g-word - genocide - that terrifies UK corporate 'journalists', referring to the findings of the UN International Commission of Inquiry.

The IOC has maintained that both Israel and Palestine should have equal opportunity to compete at the Games. However, Israel has a team at the Winter Olympics, whilst Palestine does not.

Whilst Palestine has never entered the Winter Olympics, only the summer games, we can put that down to the lack of infrastructure and the continued system of apartheid, which means the country lacks the funding to support its athletes' development to an elite level. Perhaps Palestine could put a Winter Olympics team together if Israel stopped razing them to the ground every few years.

Israel has murdered over 800 athletes and sporting officials since October 2023. That figure includes more than 100 child athletes. The terrorist state has also destroyed 273 sports facilities - meaning Palestinian athletes who survived have nowhere to train.

Make your mind up

The IOC has banned both Russian and Belarusian athletes from competing under their own flags. Meanwhile, there has, of course, been no equivalent ban for Israeli athletes.

However, in September, the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) lifted its ban on athletes from both countries competing at the games, which doesn't make sense when Russia's attacks on Ukraine are still ongoing.

The IOC needs to make up its mind.

Either athletes cannot remember and dedicate their victories or performances to the dead, or they can. And the answer to that should not depend on where they come from.

Similarly, can murderous regimes compete under their state's flag, or not? Of course, they unequivocally should not. But the IOC cannot have one rule for one and one rule for another.

Obviously, we know why this is. Israel is funding politicians left, right and centre who can put pressure on sporting bodies to have countries banned as and when they see fit, as Lisa Nandy did only this week.

Moreover, the West, the mainstream media, the majority of our politicians, and apparently the IOC, seem to care more about dead white people than they do about dead brown people. The hypocrisy stinks - and Israel should not be allowed to compete whilst simultaneously murdering Palestinians. The double standards are strewn everywhere.

Featured image via ABC News (Australia) & Euro Media News / YouTube

By HG

British Epstein survivor rejects Keir Starmer's 'apology' [ 18-Feb-26 2:09pm ]

Anouska de Georgiou is a British survivor of the crimes of serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein and his sick circle of powerful men and their enablers. She has published a TikTok video rejecting Keir Starmer's weasel non-apology for knowingly appointing Epstein fanboy Peter Mandelson as ambassador and his senior adviser.

De Georgiou has spoken of receiving death threats, threats to her family, and sinister packages from Epstein's clients and enablers who want to remain hidden. And she says that Starmer is part of the structure that is protecting perpetrators and betraying victims.

Epstein: Starmer is complicit

Starmer knew Mandelson had continued his friendship with, even ardour for, Epstein long after the latter's first paedophile conviction. In fact, such a fact was freely known amongst the British media.

Starmer's 'apology' was in fact all about Starmer - an attempt to exonerate himself for his decision. He 'apologised' for "believing Mandelson's lies", yet clearly signalled he will block as much as he can get away with from becoming public. 'National security' and 'foreign relations' concerns, don't you know.

But de Georgiou didn't just reject it for herself. She said she was speaking on behalf of all those who survived Epstein's evil - and the victims of his UK-based fellow paedophiles in the al Fayed/Harrods empire. To all of them, she said, Starmer and his regime are a barrier to justice and his 'apology' does nothing to change that at all:

@anouska_de_georgiou #jeffreyepstein #keirstarmer #harrods #alfayad #trafficking ♬ original sound - Anouska de Georgiou

Starmer and his "paedo lover" party are more than a passive barrier. Starmer is accused of:

Welcoming the London MP Neil Coyle back under the Labour whip despite Coyle being found by Parliament to have sexually harassed a staffer, as well as racially abusing a Chinese-British man.
Turning a blind eye to then-Chester MP Chris Matheson's sexual harassment: neither Starmer nor the party machine suspended him pending the outcome of the investigation, as would be usual practice to protect the women around him.
Protecting at least two further alleged sex pests on his front bench.

Whistleblower

De Georgiou made her feelings on Starmer clear:

You [Starmer] said Epstein victims face barriers to justice for trafficking and abuse they suffered and you said you would do everything in your power to ensure victims get justice and there's a big lie that causes me to reject your apology. At the dismissal hearing of Jeffrey Epstein's charges my statement was I am every girl this happened to and every one of them is me.

De Georgiou is right. Starmer is a huge barrier to justice and transparency - and the 'mainstream' media are not telling the British people even a fraction of it.

What has he done to ensure justice for Epstein's British victims, like Anouska? Nothing.

Featured image via the Canary

Why is the DWP suddenly being honest about the rise in Universal Credit claims? [ 18-Feb-26 1:50pm ]

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) decided yesterday to share why the number of people claiming Universal Credit (UC) has risen. This came as a surprise to disabled campaigners, who have been fighting against the waves of disability hatred coming from the DWP for years.

The DWP being honest? Nahhh

While hatred against benefit claimants has always been bad, it seems to have ramped up overwhelmingly in the last couple of years. Not just from the media, which is of course fed the stories by the DWP, but also from ministers and MPs themselves.

But, after months of pushing that too many on Universal Credit are unemployed layabouts, Labour are apparently telling the truth. That the main reason there's a huge influx is UC claims is that the DWP are making people switch over to UC.

On Twitter, they declared:

Here's what's actually happening with the increase in the Universal Credit caseload

Nearly 80% of the increase is people being moved from old benefits onto Universal Credit

Not new claims

A transition we inherited

Data source https://t.co/mnxKOZS3fP pic.twitter.com/SgzDOjuu7s

— Department for Work and Pensions (@DWPgovuk) February 17, 2026

The chart attached showed that in the last year, 1 million new people claimed Universal Credit. However, 800,000 of those are people who'd been forced to move over.

They quickly followed this up with sharing how many claimants couldn't work and how forced migration inflated those figures too. Though it wasn't reported by the DWP in that way:

And it's the same story for those with no work requirements - at least 72% of that increase is legacy benefit claimants moving across

It's felt very odd that they just out of the blue shared this, seemingly completely off their own backs, on a random afternoon. Especially considering that just a few months ago, they were feeding the rags ffigures on how it'd "shot up".

There's always a reason

For many, it was jarring to see them be so honest, but the reason why is there for everyone to see. And as usual, it's in their sly wording.

The DWP should surely have used their own classification when reporting this second dataset- "people with limited capability for work". Instead, they chose to say "those with no work requirements". This implies that they're choosing not to work, when they've actually already gone through a gross assessment process and been judged as not fit for work.

This subtle change in language has fueled the rags in their hatred of disabled people, because instead of it being clearly understood, this lets people draw their own conclusions. And that's exactly what they want.

This display of "transparency" also says nothing of the 400,000 people who lost their benefits because they found the migration process too complex. But hey the DWP don't give a fuck about them, so why should the public?

We also can't gloss over the fact that they're still blaming the Tories, despite having been in power for almost two years. And in that time, they've only made the culture worse for disabled claimants.

Disabled unemployed people screwed again

It's no coincidence that while they're just casually throwing out figures, DWP bigwig Pat McFadden is trying any way possible to force disabled people into work. As of April, new claimants who can't work will get £200 less a month.

When announcing this change, the DWP said they were tackling "perverse incentives" that make people "choose" benefits over finding work. I'm not sure you can call supporting people too sick to work "perverse", but then I don't hate disabled people.

This is, of course, more propaganda so they can continue forcing disabled people into work. Pushing ahead with his disgusting Get Britain Working plan, McFadden is now introducing Mobile Jobcentres. Finally, an even grosser pop-up than when Embarrassing Bodies would arrive in town to tell young women their acne made them ugly!

DWP not fit for purpose

More than anything though, this just feels like another desperate attempt by the DWP to show that they are actually in any way fit for purpose. When countless committees, from Work and Pensions to Public Accounts are proving otherwise.

While this sharing of information seemed pretty inconspicuous, we must remember that the DWP always has an agenda. This wasn't them finally being honest, they were further embedding that disabled unemployed people are the problem. And scarily one they plan to fix by any means necessary.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rachel Charlton-Dailey

Trump tries to censor Texas Democrat Talarico's Colbert appearance [ 18-Feb-26 1:01pm ]

Donald Trump is accused of censorship in an escalating row over Stephen Colbert's interview of Democratic Texas Senate candidate James Talarico.

US journalist Joshua Eakle explained that Trump threatened the US broadcaster CBS over Talarico's segment. And CBS caved!

It's important that you understand what happened last night.

Last night, Stephen Colbert interviewed Democratic Texas Senate candidate James Talarico, a candidate who, by all accounts, is on track in the polls to flip Texas blue.

In response, Trump's FCC reportedly threatened… pic.twitter.com/IEyWg7KnuW

— Joshua Reed Eakle

Arms giant BAE Systems posts record profits in blood money [ 18-Feb-26 11:55am ]

Arms giant BAE Systems has posted record profits for 2025. In short, it'll be yachts and third homes for the elites while the world burns. Yay! The Independent reported:

Europe's biggest defence contractor reported better-than-expected underlying earnings before interest and taxes of £3.32 billion for 2025, up 12% on the previous year, as sales jumped 10% to a record high of £30.66 billion.

Recent global instability means the firm has a massive backlog of orders as nation states scramble to arm themselves:

The aerospace and weapons manufacturer said its order backlog also hit a record £83.6 billion as of the end of December while its order intake stood at £36.8 billion.

The This is Money website was extra jovial about the news:

Analysts at broker AJ Bell also point to conflict in the Middle East and heightened geopolitical tensions for BAE's 'stunning run'.

The shares have trebled since Russian tanks rolled across the Ukrainian border four years ago.

'Stunning run'… okay fellas.

BAE Systems have a record breaking backlog?

BAE boss Charles Woodburn said:

Our results highlight another year of strong operational and financial performance, thanks to the outstanding dedication of our employees.

In a new era of defence spending, driven by escalating security challenges, we're well positioned to provide both the advanced conventional systems and disruptive technologies needed to protect the nations we serve now and into the future.

He added:

With a record order backlog and continuing investment in our business to enhance agility, efficiency and capacity, we're confident in our ability to keep delivering growth over the coming years.

BAE Systems reported sales to many countries across Europe and beyond. This included kit sold to authoritarian governments like Qatar.

Starmer's big spend

This could even increase over the next year as the UK's Keir Starmer promised to ramp up defence spending. His pledge followed demands by US president Donald Trump that Europe do more.

Stop the War Coalition were having none of it:

This is part of a massive European arms drive aimed at appeasing Trump as he demands Europe pay more for its own defence.

The additional cost comes at a time when we are told to accept cuts to pensions, to wages and to public services, while much of what is spent will go directly into the coffers of US arms manufacturers.

Arms firms thrive in conditions of chaos and war. In fact instability is self-evidently in their interest. And nobody understands this better than they do… It's on the rest of us to defy and challenge the kind of militarist, profit seeking logic which is running rampant in these febrile times.

Featured image via the Canary