NewsExpress

03-Feb-26

Scrapping the two-child cap is a step forward, but no panacea for child poverty [ 03-Feb-26 10:16pm ]

Ending the two-child cap won't end poverty

Today, 3 February, the Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill received its second reading in the Commons. This moves it one step closer to realisation, and promises better standards of living for over a million children.

Campaigning organisation the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) urged MPs to vote in favour of the bill. The group explained that:

Removing the two-child limit will increase the living standards of 1.6 million children overnight, while also ensuring hundreds of thousands of children are no longer affected in the future. Investing in social security is also highly beneficial for children's health, development, educational and economic outcomes.3 An improved financial situation at home means better developmental outcomes, higher educational attainment and lower health costs in childhood. This leads to greater employment prospects and better health outcomes in adulthood. Public expenditure is therefore lower and tax revenue higher. Tackling child poverty is the right thing to do - for children and their families now and in the future, as well as for our public services and wider economy.

In anticipation of the reading, the government put out an announcement for a new £1bn Crisis and Resilience Fund (CRF). The intention behind the fund is to create a "safety net" to support families with the rising cost of living.

However, the news isn't all good. A Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) impact assessment has recently revealed that over 70,000 households won't receive the full benefit of scrapping the two-child cap.

Crisis and Resilience Fund

The government press release called the £1bn Crisis Resilience Fund:

the most significant investment in local crisis support in a generation.

The CRF will launch in April 2026. Local Authorities across England will receive portions of the funding, which will replace both Household Support Fund (HSF) and Discretionary Housing Payments.

The HSF was previously renewed on an ad hoc basis, at the discretion of the government. The press statement called this an "annual cliff-edge funding cycle". In its stead, the CRF forms the first multi-year pot intended for crisis support, confirmed until 31 March 2029:

This will allow the fund to act as a genuine safety net to prevent families from falling into poverty by giving Local Authorities the certainty they need to run long-lasting initiatives targeted at the needs of their local area.

Sabine Goodwin, director of the Independent Food Aid Network, stated that:

The eagerly awaited Crisis and Resilience Fund is set to be groundbreaking for households living on low incomes in English local authorities. Its newly published guidance outlines the delivery of effective crisis support via prioritised cash payments enabling choice and dignity as well as the need to help residents build financial resilience through bolstered community support.

Taking a cash-first approach to poverty, this multi-year funding pot has the capacity to reduce the number of people having to turn to charitable food providers and to help fulfil the Government's commitment to end mass dependence on emergency food parcels.

Thousands of families missing out

A Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) impact assessment has revealed that roughly 50,000 families who are currently affected by the two-child limit won't actually be any better off once the cap is removed in April. This is due to the separate, overall benefit cap, which limits the total amount a single household can receive.

Likewise, another 20,000 families won't receive the full benefit of the two-child cap's removal, as it would take them above the overall limit.

The overall cap is currently frozen, and hasn't increase with inflation since 2023. As things stand, the upper limit on benefits is currently £22,020 for a couple with children.

Worse still, it will remain in place for the coming fiscal year 2026/2027. MPs are only under a statutory obligation to review this limit every 5 years.

'It's not enough'

The DWP's assessment underscores a warning issued last week by independent social change organisation the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. It stated that, even in spite of the removal of the two-child benefit cap, 4.2 million kids will still grow up in poverty by 2029.

Iain Porter, a senior policy adviser at the JRF, said:

It's good news that the government has begun the process of reducing child poverty and the removal of the 2-child-limit for Universal Credit is a undoubtedly a step in the right direction.

But on its own it's not enough.

Our analysis shows child poverty will fall sharply in April, but then stall. By the end of the parliament there will still be around 4m children in poverty - unless the government takes additional steps. An immediate and obvious step is to address the damage done by the benefit cap, which leaves families in hardship."

The foundation urged the government to adopt a 'protected minimum floor' for Universal Credit. This would set a limit on payment reductions such as the overall benefit cap or debt deductions. Likewise, the JRF also called for an 'essentials guarantee', ensuring that benefit payments meet a minimum standard of living costs.

The second reading of the Universal Credit Bill brings us that bit closer to seeing the ruinous two-child cap scrapped, as it should have been all along.

However, as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation warned, Labour has much more work to do if they're serious about their plans to tackle child poverty across the UK.

Featured image via Unsplash/the Canary

DWP launches Access to Work call for evidence [ 03-Feb-26 8:37pm ]

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has launched a call for evidence in relation to the Access to Work scheme — meaning the time for Disabled people to have their say has is now.

Soaring rejection rates

Access to work has come under fire in recent months. Most recently, an MP forced the DWP to admit that the number of rejections for the scheme had increased dramatically since Labour took office. The figures show that denials of the vital support had increased by over 20 percent this year. In total, the scheme rejected one in three claims.

As the Canary previously reported:

Access to Work is, in theory, supposed to provide financial support to disabled people to help them get into and stay in work. The fund can be used towards specialist equipment, transport, and support workers. However, as the Canary has reported, the programme has, for a long time, been failing disabled people, and the department is quietly cutting it without any consultation and little transparency.

Of course, this means disabled people are struggling to get into work because of their accommodations can't be met.

Additionally, in November, we reported that:

The founder of an organisation that supports thousands of disabled people in navigating Access to Work has come forward about the underhanded process by which the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is making "drastic cuts" to the crumbling scheme.

Importantly, the National Audit Office (NAO) was already investigating the DWP over its Access to Work failures.

This was after the DWP attempted to quietly push through severe cuts to the Access to Work scheme. These would limit funds for specialist equipment. It would also create stricter rules on support worker rates of pay and on awarding job aid support workers.

The changes make it harder for disabled people to find work. Additionally, though, many employed disabled people will find it much harder to keep their jobs.

A failing service

As of September, Access to Work had a backlog of 62,000 disabled people in need of support. This didn't include those already in the system who have to reapply yearly or every two years.

Another 33,000 people are waiting to be paid for support which Access to Work has already approved. This backlog is leading to people losing jobs at a time when the government is laying into disabled people — who they claim would rather be on benefits than work.

The government claims this backlog is due to increased demand for Access to Work. It has risen 83% since 2021/22. However, this makes sense because the government has attempted to get more disabled people into work.

Given the scheme's continued failures, it's more important than ever for disabled people to tell the DWP what they think. Labour continues to target disabled communities with unproven work programmes and benefit cuts in its frenzy to force disabled people into unsuitable work.

A fully-funded and functioning Access to Work programme would go a hell of a lot further to help disabled people find and stay in safe, suitable, and rewarding work. Now it's time for disabled people to make it clear that this scheme is the main way the government can support them, which it would do if it were serious about helping disabled people.

The Canary highly recommends that you get involved.

Follow this link to submit your own evidence.

Featured image via UK Parliament

By HG

Union founder slams private equity milking foster care for profit [ 03-Feb-26 7:40pm ]

Foster care ravaged by profit-hungry private equity firms

Founder of the National Union of Professional Foster Carers, Robin Findlay, has called out private equity ownership of foster care services in the UK.

Shameless profiteering

According to the Observer, Findlay said:

Private equity is looking at this as a goldmine that should be tapped into and it's bleeding the sector of money… on the back of vulnerable children.

Stirling Square Capital Partners, Cap10 Partners, and CapVest own the largest share of the provision of foster care for children in England. They are all private equity companies and the bosses, who extract profit from children needing care, generate £13m in annual profits.

A privatised foster placements can cost around double the amount than a local authority place — with prices hitting approximately £50,000. As the state is not providing for vulnerable children, councils are left with no choice but to pay higher fees for private providers.

Privatisation is branded as 'efficiency', yet it's costing councils double. In the process, children are treated like commodities by large asset management firms concerned with wealth accumulation. In fact, the Competition and Markets Authority said in 2022 that private equity firms profits, averaging 19 percent, are too high.

Foster care should ultimately be brought in-house. At the moment, it's publicly funded while the private sector continues to profit. The lack of planning also means that lots of children are sent 100 miles or more away from their hometown.

With such issues in mind, Wales has moved to ban profiteering companies from providing foster care.

The top-line

The top three firms generated a combined profit of £40m from foster care in 2023.

Stirling Square Capital, which owns National Fostering Group, made a profit of £23.4 million for the year to August 2023. CapVest, which owns Polaris Community, which turned a profit of £14.1m. Then there's Cap10 partners, owner of Compass Community, which profiteered at £3m.

Taking resources from children certainly chimes with the community spirit. Private agencies profit from homes for around one in three children in foster care. And the public purse is footing the bill.

This has to stop.

Featured image via the Canary

By James Wright

Zarah Sultana nominates Bristol community activist as Your Party leadership candidate [ 03-Feb-26 6:57pm ]

Candi Williams Your Party CEC candidate for South West

Zarah Sultana has announced her endorsement for the new Grassroots Left slate, naming Bristol-based community activist Candi Williams as her female South West candidate for the up-and-coming Your Party Central Executive Committee (CEC) elections this February.

Your Party collective leadership

Following the member decision at the inaugural conference in Liverpool last November for Your Party to be led by the collective leadership of 18 members from across each national region, Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn have both announced a slate of endorsed candidates: a man and a woman from each region.

Williams, who has played an active role in building the Bristol Your Party branch from 40 to 400, impressed Sultana with her commitment to anti-fascism, anti-imperialism, and liberation politics at a local event. And she will stand alongside Mark Gage as the Grassroots Left slate's South West candidates.

Williams commented:

For more than a decade, I've worked alongside people struggling. I have supported refugees, worked with vulnerable young people, and mobilised against fascists locally. The core problem is often the same: it comes from the top. I'm standing with people of colour, women, trans and queer people, disabled people, refugees, and all those facing oppression.

I'm looking to represent youth groups, community organisations, and charities that feel unheard and unsupported. If you represent a community group that fits this description and you feel disillusioned by the current political climate, please do get in touch.

When announcing her slate, Sultana shared on X:

I'm backing the Grassroots Left slate in the Your Party CEC elections: A member-led slate fighting for real democracy, empowering branches and members, ensuring transparency and accountability, and standing for socialist, anti-imperialist politics from the grassroots up.

All verified members of Your Party will have the opportunity to vote for their preferred regional candidates for the CEC from 9-23 February. Local hustings are expected to take place on Wednesday 4 February. The party is currently offering membership for £1.50 via its website, and anyone who joins and verifies before 5 February will be eligible to vote.

Unrepresented community groups and charities can get in touch with Williams directly regarding their policy asks via the Grassroots Left email address: contact@grassrootsleft.org

Grassroots Left says it is campaigning for maximum member democracy at every level:

A Central Executive Committee fully accountable to members.
Immediate recognition of local branches with full access to data and resources.
Transparent decision-making that treats members as the driving force of the party.

The group has committed to ensuring that elected representatives remain accountable to the membership. It promises that all elected members of the slate will meet regularly with organised sections, caucuses, and affiliated groups to report on their work, receive feedback, and collectively discuss the way forward. Find out more on the website.

Featured image supplied

Asbestos exposure is often treated as a problem of the past, or something tied to outdated construction practices or old industrial jobs. In reality, asbestos-related illnesses continue to surface today, long after the material stopped being widely used. The delayed nature of these diseases makes them a quiet but persistent public health concern, one that still affects thousands of people every year.

Long Latency Periods Hide the Risk

One of the most challenging aspects of asbestos-related illness is its long latency period. Diseases such as mesothelioma can take 20 to 50 years to develop after initial exposure. This means someone exposed in early adulthood may not experience symptoms until later in life, often long after the exposure event has been forgotten or dismissed.

Because symptoms tend to appear gradually, early signs are frequently mistaken for more common respiratory conditions. Shortness of breath, chest pain, and persistent coughing are often attributed to aging, infections, or other lung diseases. This delay complicates diagnosis and reduces the window for early treatment.

Why Cases Are Still Emerging Today

According to global health estimates, tens of thousands of deaths each year are still linked to asbestos exposure. These numbers reflect past contact rather than current use, underscoring how long-lasting the health impact can be. Despite stricter regulations and reduced use of asbestos in many parts of the world, cases continue to emerge for several reasons:

Legacy exposure from older buildings, insulation, and materials still in use
Renovation and demolition work that disturbs asbestos-containing materials
Secondary exposure, where family members inhaled fibers brought home on clothing

The Burden on Health Systems and Families

Asbestos-related illnesses place a significant burden on both healthcare systems and families. Late diagnoses often mean more aggressive disease progression and fewer treatment options. Patients may require specialized care, multiple consultations, and long-term symptom management, all while coping with uncertainty and emotional strain.

In many cases, victims' families also feel the brunt of these conditions. Many people diagnosed later in life struggle to trace where exposure occurred, making it harder to understand the condition or plan next steps. This lack of clarity can add to stress and delay access to appropriate support.

Why Early Recognition Still Makes a Difference

Although asbestos-related illnesses progress slowly, early recognition can still influence outcome. People who worked in construction, manufacturing, shipyards, or older public buildings may not realize that brief or indirect exposure can still be medically relevant.

Identifying symptoms sooner allows patients to access specialist care earlier, explore treatment options, and have a better quality of life. Even when a cure is not possible, early intervention can help control symptoms and reduce complications.

The Role of Credible Education and Support

Healthcare professionals continue to emphasize the importance of exposure history when evaluating unexplained respiratory symptoms. Access to reliable, medically grounded information plays an important role in addressing asbestos-related health risks.

Many people turn to established health-focused platforms, such as mesotheliomahope, to better understand asbestos-related conditions and navigate available support options. Clear, accessible information can make a meaningful difference, especially for those facing a rare or unfamiliar diagnosis.

Endnote

Asbestos-related illnesses remain a present-day health issue because of their long latency and often subtle early symptoms. Awareness, accurate information, and early medical attention continue to matter, even decades after exposure occurred. Recognizing these risks helps individuals, families, and healthcare systems respond more effectively to conditions that are still emerging today.

By Nathan Spears

Peter Mandelson interview shows the disgraced-Lord hasn't learned a thing [ 03-Feb-26 6:12pm ]

Mandelson in front of images of Jeffrey Epstein

In a new interview with the Times, Peter Mandelson has spoken about his decision to resign from the Labour Party. It's apparent from his latest comments, that the disgraced lord gives no shits about anything besides his own feelings:

EXCLUSIVE

Lord Mandelson interview with @katyballs, who spoke to him both before and after the release of thousands of new Epstein emails

* On resigning from Labour. 'The decision wasn't easy but I feel better for it as I need to reset. I am a New Labour person and always…

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) February 2, 2026

Blood brothers

Mandelson is currently floundering after the latest instalment of the Epstein Files exposes more details about his relationship to the deceased paedophile.

Bank statements, released in the files, show three unexplained payments totalling $75,000 from Epstein's JP Morgan accounts to Mandelson in 2003 and 2004.

During his tenure as business secretary in 2009, Mandelson allegedly forwarded confidential UK government documents to Epstein. The documents detailed £20bn in potential asset sales. Owing to these revelations, Mandelson is currently under investigation by the London Metropolitan Police for misconduct while in office.

Now, Mandelson has spoken about the latest Epstein Files, as summarised by the Times' political editor, Steven Swinford.

Lord Mandelson interview with [Katy Balls], who spoke to him both before and after the release of thousands of new Epstein emails

* On resigning from Labour. 'The decision wasn't easy but I feel better for it as I need to reset. I am a New Labour person and always will be wherever the current party situates itself. But I think I want a sea change. I want to be more an outsider looking in than the other way round. I want to contribute ideas that enable Britain to strengthen and to work for all, in every part of the country'

* On being sacked: 'It felt like being killed without actually dying. It's a unique experience. I mean, I'm navigating the experience because I have really good friends who are helping me do so, starting with Reinaldo more than anyone else'

* Says Epstein is 'muck that you can't get off your shoe… Like dog muck, the smell never goes away'

* On the $10,000 his partner accepted for an osteopathy course while he was business secretary. 'In retrospect, it was clearly a lapse in our collective judgment for Reinaldo to accept this offer. At the time it was not a consequential decision
'The idea that giving Reinaldo an osteopath bursary is going to sway mine or anyone else's views about banking policy is risible.

* What drew him to Epstein? 'He was a classic sociopath. Outwardly, completely charming and engaging. He was very clever'

* Mandelson also says Epstein threw good dinner parties. 'I remember one of the two dinner parties of his I went to. I sat next to someone in charge of brain research at Harvard. I was sitting opposite the founders of Google. At the other end of the table was Bill Gates. I think I also brushed past Noam Chomsky on a later date'

* On giving evidence to Congress: 'There is nothing I can tell Congress about Epstein they don't already know. I had no exposure to the criminal aspects of his life'

Mandelson refuses to take accountability

The public reaction to the article has not been positive, to put it mildly:

The sheer fact Mandelson is still being treated softly enough to do chummy at home interviews is a sign of how untouchable he apparently remains. Guy's under investigation by the Met but gets a magazine profile like he's a game show host https://t.co/pXlU0YbxhP pic.twitter.com/aGnxJgR9yl

— Ross McCafferty (@RossMcCaff) February 2, 2026

Let us no forget that this morning Labour sent out its people to argue there was no need for any kind of investigation into Mandelson and to bat away suggestions he lose his peerage.
Neither line last through lunch!!

— Andrew Neil (@afneil) February 2, 2026

And, worryingly, Mandelson appears keen to continue working in the public sphere:

NEW: Mandelson still wanted to come back to civic life as recently as LAST NIGHT.
Iv with @katyballs - this is from their call after he resigned his membership https://t.co/WSViSzJoF1 pic.twitter.com/uZBuXsCKlR

— Sam Coates Sky (@SamCoatesSky) February 2, 2026

Well, he's not sorry

Given his repeated refusals to apologise, it's clear the disgraced Lord doesn't give a shit about his past with Epstein — beyond the damage it's done to his reputation. Leaving the Labour party appears to be little more than a symbolic gesture — a temporary retreat from the public spotlight, in other words.

Mandelson must now be stripped of his lordship and face criminal scrutiny for what his actions.

Featured image via Epstein Files

By Antifabot

Undercover police spied on anti arms trade campaigners and exaggerated their threat to protect the arms industry [ 03-Feb-26 5:26pm ]

Evidence quoted in an opening position statement released on 2 February by the Undercover Policing Inquiry shows that multiple undercover police officers spied on anti-arms trade campaigners, including Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT), because of the financial importance of the industry to the British state.

There are also allegations that risks from protests against Defence and Security Equipment International (DSEI), one of the world's largest arms fairs, were deliberately exaggerated to ensure a repressive police response designed to stifle protest. In fact the biggest risk facing undercover police officers came from uniformed officers. Or, as they euphemistically say, "over-enthusiastic policing".

One report, a 2003 review of HN3 'Jason Bishop' who targeted DSEI protests states that:

Source has been targeted at environmentalist groups who engage in direct action
and/or protest action and a wide range of environmental and political issues. Some of these issues concern or could influence the financial well being of the State, i.e. DSEI.

Another, an interview with HN18 Robert Hastings in 2007, states that police targeted DSEI organising:

because of the high profile nature of the event and the amount of money involved and the embarrassment that would be caused to the government etc.

Additional reporting from HN18 describes the "worst disorder" at DSEI protests as:

free flowing [marches with] street party gatherings accompanied by a samba band and a sound system.

Campaign Against Arms Trade

During the course of the inquiry, CAAT applied for core participant status twice. Once, when the inquiry initially began in 2015, when the inquiry argued there was not substantive proof that CAAT had been spied on.

The second application, made in 2024, was rejected on the grounds that reports were collateral damage due to reporting on another core participant, Emily Apple, who is also currently CAAT's media coordinator, and a CAAT volunteer for some of the period covered by this tranche.

However, as Apple's position statement for Tranche 3, Phase 2 of the inquiry sets out, CAAT was the target of frequent reporting by numerous undercover police officers, some of which pre-dates any reporting on her by undercover officers. Tranche 3 of the inquiry covers police spying from 1993-2008 when the Special Demonstration Squad/Special Duties Squad (SDS) closed.

Apple, who was also a very close friend of Martin Hogbin, the corporate spy who infiltrated CAAT from 1997-2003, is additionally asking the inquiry to investigate the relationship between the policing units and arms trade spies, and whether any of the information reported by Hogbin to BAE Systems ended up with the SDS.

Apple's statement also details the extensive harassment she received from the police, often directed by the SDS, and the intrusive interference in her private life by undercover officers, including buying her then two-week old son a giant polar bear.

Apple, CAAT's media coordinator and core participant, stated:

It is very clear that CAAT and other anti-arms trade campaigns I was involved in were deliberately and intrusively targeted by undercover officers to protect the arms trade, and its value to the state. Street party gatherings were described as 'serious disorder' while little or no investigations were carried out against the arms companies marketing illegal weapons at DSEI.

While some of the events the inquiry is investigating are over 20 years old, this is not a historical issue. We saw yet again at DSEI in September 2025 the lengths the police are willing to go to protect arms dealers, deploying extreme violence - the very picture of 'over-enthusiastic' policing described in the documents - to police our protests. This resulted in the police breaking the wrist of a legal observer, breaking the ankle of another protester, and knocking a third unconscious.

Anti-arms trade campaigners are currently facing unprecedented levels of repression, in particular with the proscription of Palestine Action. There are striking similarities between the exaggerated threats outlined in these documents with the justifications relied upon by this government to target protesters today.

There are serious questions that need answering about the complicity between successive governments, the police and the arms companies to repress our right to protest to protect a trade that is complicit in multiple genocides and human rights abuses.

The inquiry will hear further detailed evidence relating to these allegations on the following dates:

23 February - HN3 'Jason Bishop' giving evidence
23 March - Emily Apple giving evidence
24-26 March - HN18 Robert Hastings giving evidence

You can follow events on the inquiry's YouTube page.

Featured image via the Canary

Tories put forward transphobe to stand in Gorton and Denton [ 03-Feb-26 4:57pm ]

The Conservative Party has announced its pick for the upcoming Gorton and Denton by-election, choosing to stand former police officer and member of the LGB Alliance Charlotte Cadden.

The controversial charity Sex Matters, part of the LGB Alliance, has long drawn criticism for the hate group which works to normalise political attacks against trans people.

As a member of that group, this pick likely signals that the Tories are intending on using trans people as a scapegoat in a culture war.

- Charlotte served for 30 years as a Police Officer, both for Greater Manchester Police and the Metropolitan Police

- Charlotte is a trustee of the charity Sex Matters, a member of the LGB Alliance Business Forum. She coordinates the Women's Rights Network in Greater Manchester…

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) February 1, 2026

Glossy slogans with no real solutions for Gorton and Denton

Cadden arguably represents more of the same out-of-touch politics that Gorton and Denton residents have likely had more than enough of. Backed by a party long disconnected from the everyday struggles of working families, Cadden's right-wing campaign likely relies on glossy slogans rather than real solutions. Constituents should watch closely how Cadden plans to tackle rising living costs, crumbling public services, and declining community wellbeing.

In a northern "worker bee" constituency, austerity and underinvestment have hit residents hardest. Manchester voters need leaders who put people above party politics. However, Cadden's connections to Sex Matters and LGB Alliance raise serious questions about whether she delivers for the communities she seeks to represent.

In 2022, Consortium, a coalition of LGBT organisations, told a court that LGB Alliance was set up to:

promote transphobic activity rather than pro-LGB activities.

As usual, the Tories have no ideas beyond peddling hatred against minorities. What they do have is the commitment to making life even more unsafe for trans people.

Culture wars whilst ignoring actual abuse

And, the Epstein scandal only underscores how safety is threatened. Yet again, recent reports show how men are all too capable of orchestrating the rape and abuse of women and girls for their own gain. Even, at times, with the aid of women themselves. Therefore, it's clear that the real threat comes from those who abuse power, men or women, not from trans people, like mainstream media headlines would have us believe.

Rape/sexual assault is about CONTROL & POWER. Arguments about how it is "biological" make no sense. It has zero to do with sex— it is about having control and power over someone in the most heinous and humiliating way someone could think of, which is by violating their body.

— Lexï

Egypt's secret drone intervention in Sudan revealed [ 03-Feb-26 4:43pm ]

Egypt is running a secretive military intervention in Sudan. Drones are being flown out of an airbase in the Sahara. Egypt is striking Rapid Support Forces (RSF) targets in support of the Sudanese government. The New York Times (NYT) acquired satellite images of the base, which sits close to the Sudanese border, hidden amid a vast agricultural project:

The airstrip sits next to giant crop circles at the edge of the Sahara. Military drones take off over enormous fields of wheat, leaving their covert base for one of the world's biggest drone wars.

The war in Sudan is theoretically between the Arab supremacist RSF and the Sudanese government. But foreign states pursuing their own interests are backing the combatants. The United Arab Emirates (UAE), for example, backs the RSF with arms and equipment. Egypt backs the government, alongside Russia, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Israel has backed both sides at different times.

RSF has killed Sudanese civilians in vast numbers. And some estimates say 150,000 people have died and over 10mn have been displaced by fighting.

Egypt upscales its intervention in Sudan

The NYT reported on 3 January that:

for at least six months, advanced military drones based at the Egyptian airstrip have been carrying out strikes in Sudan.

The paper said:

Egypt, until recently, was mostly a diplomatic player in Sudan. But the drone activity suggests it has entered the fight alongside Sudan's military, adding yet another layer to a war bursting with foreign powers on either side.

Egypt's weapon of choice reflects a trend in warfare globally. Drones are the order of the day. The NYT said:

The clandestine drone operation offers new evidence of how the civil war in Sudan — racked by famine, atrocities and tens of thousands of deaths — is morphing into a sprawling theater for high-tech drone warfare driven by the interests of rival foreign powers.

Egyptian operations have been impactful enough that RSF has even threatened retribution. But RSF is also using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Theirs are Chinese-made, but supplied by the UAE. The UAE denies involvement.

Turkish arms, African wars

The Sudanese military uses drones too. Their UAVs are of Turkish manufacture. US officials said Sudanese drones made by Turkish firm Baykar were being flown from Egypt.

The fall of the southern Sudanese city of El Fasher in October 2025 reportedly sparked Egypt into action. The Egyptian government fears an RSF-controlled Sudan.

Egypt is in a precarious position. The country is a recipient of massive investment by UAE, RSF's most important backer:

Egypt's economy is highly dependent on the Emirates, which in 2024 invested $35 billion in a development project on Egypt's Mediterranean coast — the country's largest ever foreign investment.

Since 2018 Egypt has been expanding its airfield 40 miles from the Sudanese border. Turkish drones have been operating from the strip for several years:

But the arrival of Akinci drones last year provided vastly greater capabilities. With a range of more than 4,500 miles, the Akinci can carry at least three times more bombs than the TB2, according to experts. It also costs at least four times more.

The NYT added:

By December [2025], at least two Akinci drones were operating from the base and striking targets inside Sudan.

Sudan is where regional and global ambitions meet. The three-year-old conflict reflects the present and future of warfare. Advanced drone technology, brutal old-fashioned imperial violence, and proxy war meet in the country's killing fields, backed by self-serving foreign actors vying for influence in Africa and beyond. The war is one of the most grotesque spectacles of our era.

Featured image via the Canary

Starmer gives Mandelson evidence to police - but this could end be the end of Keirc [ 03-Feb-26 4:32pm ]

Keir Starmer has given evidence to the Met Police of Peter Mandelson leaking confidential government information to serial child rapist - and Mandelson's bestie - Jeffrey Epstein. The evidence includes original emails containing sensitive economic information. The emails released by the US justice department also show Mandelson engaging in insider trading that would enrich Epstein and his allies.

Now Starmer has. But his Downing Street officials - and therefore Starmer - were aware of Mandelson's emails to Epstein months before now, probably even longer.

Last September, Starmer's office said it had emails sent by Mandelson that exposed "the depth and extent" of Mandelson's relationship with Epstein. That sounds a lot more extensive than merely the pining adoration that the September Epstein file release exposed - and Mandelson had already been vetted for his appointment by Starmer as UK ambassador to the US.

SNP MP Stephen Flynn made the same point on social media - and others agreed:

Stephen:
10/09/2025 Gordon Brown reports Mandelson to Cab Sec re leaks.
11/09/2025 Mandelson is sacked.
I think the Cab Sec found the files then so Mandelson sacked.
They have covered this up until now when files released for public viewing.
No choice but to hand material to the…

— Ilkley John (@IlkleyJohn) February 3, 2026

Starmer said last September that he had full confidence in Mandelson. He knew, when he said it, about Mandelson's gushing emails to Epstein, sent after Epstein's first child rape conviction. If Starmer also knew that Mandelson was leaking sensitive information to the paedophile and Israeli spy and kept it secret, then he's toast.

Criminal toast.

Featured image via the Canary

https://www.thecanary.co/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/SnapInsta-Ai_3822409017638115091.mp4

Trump law chief admits withholding the worst of the Epstein files [ 03-Feb-26 4:25pm ]

The US Department of Justice has released three million 'Epstein files', exposing horrific crimes against children by US, Israeli, and other elites. However the Department of Justice's deputy head has confirmed in a speech that his department is withholding much of the worst:

What has already been released from the Epstein files includes admissions of torture and witness statements about rape, murder and violence toward children, mostly girls.

And Blanche admits that it includes photographic evidence of maiming, torture, rape - and murder.

All perpetrators must be exposed. There isn't a punishment strong enough both for those who've carried out these heinous crimes, and those who've enabled them or looked the other way. The whole system that has enabled and protected them must be dismantled.

Featured image via the Canary

'Infantile': Ukraine sports minister slams FIFA president's consideration of Russia rejoining [ 03-Feb-26 4:15pm ]

FIFA President Gianni Infantino's statements regarding the possibility of reviewing the suspension of Russia's participation in international competitions have reignited a broad debate about the consistency of FIFA's standards in dealing with armed conflicts.

Both FIFA and UEFA suspended the participation of Russian national teams and clubs in February 2022, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. At the time, FIFA said the move was aimed at protecting the integrity of competitions and ensuring the safety of participants. However, Infantino has spent the intervening years courting Donald Trump's hateful regime ahead of the next world cup in the US. Now, Infantino has claimed that banning Russia "achieved nothing" and instead contributed to increased "frustration and hatred." He went on to claim that allowing Russian children to play football outside their country could be "a positive thing."

'Irresponsible and Childish Statements'

Infantino's remarks were met with sharp criticism from Ukrainian Sports Minister Matvey Bidny, who argued that Infantino's remarks disconnected football from the reality of a war that continues to claim civilian lives, including children.

The Ukrainian minister pointed out that Russia is politicizing sports and using them to justify its aggression, emphasizing that his position aligns with that of the Ukrainian Football Federation, which also warns against Russia's return to international competitions.

He described Infantino's recent statements regarding the possibility of lifting the ban on Russia as "irresponsible" and "childish," given the ongoing Russian war on Ukraine, adding:

As long as the Russians continue to kill Ukrainians and politicize sports, there is no place for their flag or their national symbols among those who respect the values of justice, integrity, and fair play.

Inevitable questions

These stances have brought to the forefront comparisons with FIFA's handling of Israel's genocide in Palestine. Just as with the above invasion, Israel have continued their settler colonial domination of Palestinian territory, and murdered footballers and other sports people. Passionate pleas from human rights organisations, players unions, and football fans calling for FIFA to ban Israel have gone ignored.

Critics argue that FIFA, which emphasizes its commitment to the principle of "not politicizing sport" in the case of Gaza, has adopted a different and more decisive stance in the case of Russia, raising questions about the application of the same standards in different conflicts.

Human rights reports indicate widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure in Gaza, including sports facilities, in addition to a large number of casualties among athletes and children. Nevertheless, FIFA continues to assert that it is closely monitoring the situation and addressing it through internal mechanisms without resorting to suspensions or sanctions.

As calls for accountability for violations of international humanitarian law persist, FIFA's handling of the situations in Ukraine and Gaza is seen as a true test of its credibility as a global body that claims to uphold the values of justice, integrity, and impartiality.

Based on its current showing, FIFA is a craven and corrupt organisation who values the lives of white people over and above the lives of Palestinians.

Featured image via the Canary

By Alaa Shamali

Finkelstein appears in latest Epstein release with brutal rejection of overtures [ 03-Feb-26 3:55pm ]

Anti-Zionist academic Professor Norman Finkelstein appears in the latest release of Epstein files - and comes out rejecting the paedophiles overtures.

Robert Trivers is an academic who defended Epstein as a "person of integrity" even after Epstein's conviction for child rape. He also took cash from Epstein. The Epstein files show Trivers was in the habit of 'cc-ing' Finkelstein into emails with Epstein on topics he thought might be interesting to both. Given his later provision to Epstein of personal information on Finkelstein, this may have been a way of trying to establish contact between the pair of them.

For example, Trivers wrote to Epstein describing Epstein's lawyer, Alan Dershowitz as a "Jewish Nazi" when Dershowitz was having dinner with "Narcissistic Psychopath" Donald Trump. Finkelstein was among the other addressees:

There is no indication in the files that Finkelstein ever asked for or welcomed the contacts. The opposite, in fact.

Finkelstein mentioned in Epstein files

In 2015, Trivers received an email from academic and author Prof Joseph Chaney. Chaney castigated Trivers for not just endorsing Epstein, but blaming Epstein's victims for what they suffered. Chaney also shines for his humanity and readiness to speak out and call Epstein what he was - a rapist and paedophile:

I was shocked to read your statement yesterday in The Guardian. The paper reports:

At least two grant recipients in academia are standing by Epstein, saying he remains a friend: Krauss and Robert Trivers, a Rutgers University biologist.

Trivers said Epstein is a person of integrity who should be given credit for serving time in prison and for settling civil lawsuits brought by women who said they were abused.

"Did he get an easy deal? Did he buy himself a light sentence? Well, yes, probably, compared to what you or I would get, but he did get locked up," Trivers said. He said he got about $40,000 from Epstein to study the relationship between knee symmetry and sprinting ability.

Trivers also said he believes girls mature earlier than in the past. "By the time they're 14 or 15, they're like grown women were 60 years ago, so I don't see these acts as so heinous," he said.

The article in question can be read here.

Chaney takes Trivers obscene comments to task:

Is this claim regarding teenage girls your scientific opinion? If so, I'd like to see the research supporting your idea that a girl of 14 is as mature emotionally and psychologically as an adult woman in the 1950s. The real problem with the statement, though, is the way in which it places blame for child abuse on the child and excuses the criminal actions of an adult sexual predator, a man who was a serial rapist of children.

Your claim about 14- and 15-year-olds is clearly wrong in the legal sense; but it is also wrong, and dangerous, as a claim about maturity. Any parent of a teenager can tell you that teens are not like adults. They have not yet internalized a sense of authority. They still depend largely on the judgment and guidance of adults who praised them for their obedience more than for their independence of mind.

This means that they are too easily impressed by and manipulated by adults, especially those whom they view as important and powerful. Teenage girls, no matter how capable of sexual activity they may be, are not yet morally responsible persons. They are a vulnerable class of people that the law rightly protects from potential predators and abusers.

I believe that your affection for Jeffrey Epstein has led you to make light of his heinous crimes. Have you read the report of the original police investigation on him? If not, I urge you to read it before you make further public statements in defense of his reputation. The powerful consistency of the evidence in the Probable Cause Affidavit should give you pause.

The police record will reveal to you that Mr. Epstein is not a "person of integrity." Appearances can be deceiving!

I believe that your statement to the press was harmful. In a news report, once you are identified as a scientist from a prestigious university, people assume that you are speaking with the authority of a scientist and the backing of your institution and not simply as a private citizen. You represent Rutgers University, and also, by extension, academia. People (for instance, the parents of our students) are very sensitive to these issues.

As a professor, I also am sensitive to this issue. Your statement, with its suggestion that the girl victims are partly to blame for the abuse they received at the hands of your friend, reflects badly on all of us. I hope you will issue a public apology and retraction.

Trivers was not impressed. He forwarded Chaney's message to Epstein - and included Finkelstein - quipping:

damn, i thought a "heinous crime" was the US invasion of Iraq 2003 or at least murder, rape and pillage?

Finkelstein fired back with a damning quote from one of Epstein's child victims. He added that, rather than defend Epstein and Dershowitz, they deserve to be 'throttled':

Sworn testimony of Jane Doe #3
24. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz was around Epstein frequently. Dershowitz was so comfortable with the sex that was going on that he would even come and chat with Epstein while I was giving oral sex to Epstein.

My guess is, if Epstein put your daughter at age 15 in such a position, you wouldn't publicly describe him as a "friend" and person of "integrity." In fact, I would hope that you'd promptly throttle both Epstein and Dershowitz.

Ever uncompromising, Finkelstein copied the child-rapist Epstein in on his reply:

Finkelstein is famous for his refusal to back down in his analysis of Israel's genocide, apartheid, colonialism, arrogance and the sickness of its society. Because of it, he is hated and targeted by the Israel lobby.

He should now also be rightly famous for his refusal to compromise with perverts and paedophiles and their enablers. There is little doubt, given the prevalence of paedophilia in Israel and among its supporters, and Epstein's now-confirmed status as an Israeli 'kompromat' operative, that Finkelstein will be hated and targeted even more by the Israel lobby.

Featured image via YouTube screenshot/Media Education Foundation

DWP insults disabled people with steering group for Timms Review [ 03-Feb-26 3:14pm ]

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has appointed a 12-person steering group to the Timms Review and claims it has a range of lived experiences. However, the members are overwhelmingly southern, and the government has also included Jean-André Prager. Previously, and controversially, Prager called for the DWP to make PIP conditional for young people.

DWP: what is the Timms review?

The Timms Review is the review and consultation of Personal Independence Payment (PIP). It came about after the government failed to rush through cuts to PIP. This was because of pressure from disabled people, which caused MPs to rebel. It forced them to remove PIP entirely from the Universal Credit Bill.

This is despite overwhelming support for PIP staying exactly where it is, or even becoming more compassionate. Many responses pointed to the financial and mental health impacts of losing their PIP.

Lack of diversity

Now, the government has received only 340 applications to sit on the Timms Review Steering Group. Given that there are over 16 million disabled people in the UK, that number is embarrassing. It shows how little faith disabled people have in the process.

Additionally, the government has not disclosed which regions are represented in the steering group.

Previously, the DWP announced the members of the Independent Disability Advisory Panel (IDAP), including their locations. This included a severe lack of northern representation - leaving just one person to represent the whole of the North of England.

Quick LinkedIn searches for the newly appointed steering group members reveal that at least 7 of the 12 are based in London. Unsurprisingly, once again, there is only one in the north - in Newcastle.

This is despite the North East having the highest level of disability - 21.2% - and the second highest level of poverty - 25%.

Is there any wonder the government didn't publish this information?

Here we go again

To make matters worse, the government has appointed Jean Andre-Prager to the steering group.

He was previously the Prime Minister's Special Adviser covering the DWP and is currently a Senior Fellow at the right-wing think tank, Policy Exchange.

Previously, he called for PIP to be made conditional for 16-30-year-olds. Of course, this bullshit and deeply flawed idea fundamentally misunderstands the purpose of the benefit - to aid with the extra costs of living with a disability. These do not magically appear when you hit 30. They are lifelong, and can drastically change the lives of young people.

A Policy Exchange report, which Andre-Prager led, stated:

Reform should also be based on the principles which underpinned the New Deal for Young People, first introduced in 1998, which compelled engagement via fulltime education, voluntary work or formal employment. The Government should refresh these concepts for the modern day.

This is a clear departure from the current purpose of PIP whose purpose is to meet some of the extra costs incurred by disabled people. However, given the rising claimant numbers - especially among young people with mental health challenges - we think this is a necessary step to encourage improved engagement with society. We suggest that DWP is still be able to opt individuals out of conditionality based on the severity of their condition. Coupled with this change, we would change the age where you can claim PIP to 18 (increasing it from 16) to better align with support provided.

It is ableist nonsense to even entertain the idea that young people with chronic illnesses and disabilities can just be cut out of vitally necessary support.

Disgraceful decision

Once again, we are seeing this government's latest trend of punching down at neurodivergent and mentally ill young people.

Given Andre-Prager's history of authoring this report, it makes sense that the DWP would appoint him. It's very likely that he'll bring these dangerous ideas to the steering group. But obviously, that suits Labour's already clear intent on hammering young people.

His presence is perhaps the biggest indicator of what the review is actually there to do. As the Canary has repeatedly warned, the Timms review is a foregone conclusion. It exists only to support the DWP's preconceived desire to cut PIP. The review clearly isn't for listening to disabled people or groups. It's to further stigmatise people who need support to survive.

Alarm bells should be ringing because this review does not have disabled people's best interests at heart, and it never did.

Featured image via the Canary

By HG

'Terrorist' leader of American 'Antifa' lets protestors use his loo. SEIZE HIM! [ 03-Feb-26 2:58pm ]

Ridiculous US federal officers say they have identified a key leader of 'antifa'. But the guy they are accusing seems to be a local protestor who lets other protestors use his bathroom. Hardly the second coming of Oklahoma bomber Timothy McVeigh is it, you absolute buffoons?

If it needs saying at all, Antifa does not exist in the sense meant by US officials. It's a vaguely defined political tendency. It cuts across socialist, anarchist, communist and even liberal groups who, erm, don't like fascism. It sort of says so in the name: antifa = antifascist.

Antifa war is bullshit

To be clear, US president Donald Trump's war on 'antifa' is a war on the left. It is one strand of his nativist plans for an America in which he cannot be challenged. It had nothing to do with terrorism or extremism - except his own.

Independent US reporter Ken Klippenstein's work on Trump-era authoritarianism has been groundbreaking. On 3 February he published a new story. He'd seen internal documents which referred to the individual:

Twenty-nine year old Chandler Patey has been regularly protesting outside his local ICE facility in South Portland for months, offering up his apartment to fellow protesters to use the bathroom or wash off pepper spray, according to local news.

On the face if it Patey sounds like a normal guy. One of millions of Americans opposed to Trump's so-called war on immigration.

However:

To the Department of Homeland Security, "he is the leader of Antifa in Portland, OR."

Klippenstein explains:

That phrase appears in an internal report produced by DHS, the largest law enforcement agency in the country. As they see it, Patey—a young man accused of no crime and who looks like a random protester plucked off the streets of Minneapolis—is a domestic terrorist.

He noted that Fox News anchors had even discussed Patey's home as being a antifa 'safe house':

This kind of idiocy is hardly unprecedented by the standards of cable news, of course; but the federal government is buying into the hysteria, too. Documents leaked to me show Patey and countless other American protesters have been branded as domestic terrorists. As a result, their private information is now being collected and stored in a DHS intelligence system.

American fascism

American fascism, embodied partly in the endless raids and beatings - and street executions - by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officers, is thriving.

Klippenstein previously challenged the department's claim that no database of 'domestic terrorists' existed. He asked them again in relation to Patey and got no answer.

Incredible work, guys. It would be funny, but as Klippenstein points out this kind of half-cocked intelligence gathering has consequences:

This bureaucratic imperative to find terrorists among protesters is what got Renee Good and Alex Pretti killed.

DHS shot dead Good and Pretti in January. Neither was engaged in any kind of behavior which would merit being shot. Video evidence from multiple angles shows that they presented no threat to federal officers.

The evidence suggests that like them Patey presents no danger whatsoever. Except maybe in one narrow sense and it is that basic human solidarity is a severe threat to the far-right and their vision of a cowed and obedient population which cowers while armed thugs cart away their neighbours.

Featured image via Unsplash/Julian Schneiderath

UK defence policy is nukes and sucking up to the US, minister reminds us [ 03-Feb-26 2:42pm ]

Defence minister Luke Pollard just reiterated in the House of Commons what UK defence policy is all about these days. It's about massively expensive drones, nukes that aren't ours, and a sniveling attitude to the US. Rule Britannia etc.

Pollard was answering questions from MPs on a range of military matters on 2 February. Tory Mark Francois (remember him!?) wondered if the UK would gift its Watchkeeper drones to Ukraine. Pollard said no:

The UK and partners will continue to ensure we equip Ukraine as best we can to defend its sovereign territory and ensure it is in a position of strength for any peace negotiations.

He went on:

Since Watchkeeper Mk1 entered service in 2010, drone technology has evolved at remarkable pace, driven by the extensive use of unmanned systems in the war in Ukraine. The Department has therefore prioritised this effort on more cost-effective drones that deliver comparable capability and can operate in the most demanding environments.

Supposedly, the search for Watchkeeper's replacement - AKA, the Corvus program - will cost £130mn. This seems very optimistic. Based on the Israeli Hermes drone, Watchkeeper was ten years late late and cost £1bn. That's according to Drone Wars UK. The NGO also said Watchkeeper flew only 14 hours in Afghanistan in 2014 because combat operations had effectively ended by the time it was usable.

Drone War said:

Since then, apart from one short deployment in the UK, the 50 plus Watchkeeper drones have either flown on training flight, mostly in the UK or Cyprus (despite being marketed as an all-weather system, it performs poorly in 'adverse' weather) or simply kept in storage.

The drone, which is unarmed, was then used to monitor refugees coming over the channel:

The UK deployment was to support Border Force operations to curb refugees crossings the channel. According to responses to our FoI requests at the time, a total of 21 flights were conducted in September and October 2022.

Very cost effective indeed.

Special relationship with who?

Also on 2 February Pollard was questioned about US-UK defence relations. Independent MP Ayoub Khan asked:

Whether he is taking steps to increase the UK's level of military independence from the US.

Pollard said:

The US remains the UK's principal defence and security partner, and our co-operation on defence, nuclear capability and intelligence remains as close and effective as any anywhere in the world, keeping Britain safe in an increasingly dangerous environment.

No change there then, despite Donald Trump's increasingly erratic warmongering. Pollard added:

As close friends, we are not afraid to have difficult conversations when we need to. Friends turn up for each other, as we did for the US in Afghanistan, and friends are also honest with each other, as the Prime Minister has set out.

Trump recently disparaged the NATO contribution to the disastrous Afghan war, causing immense public butthurt to British MPs. Trump eventually walked back his comments, lauding British soldiers for their efforts in that pointless, failed occupation.

Cheers, Don.

Independent nukes?

Khan had another question, however. He asked if the government would consider dropping military programs which did nothing to protect the country:

Our nuclear deterrent now consumes nearly a third of the defence budget through Trident, a system that cannot be launched without US approval. In pursuing nuclear deterrence and mutually assured destruction, we have drained funding from conventional forces and neglected the diplomacy and development that actually prevents conflicts.

He asked:

Does the Minister believe that prioritising nuclear defence over reducing tensions, ending conflicts and promoting peace genuinely delivers security for our people, and if so, can he explain why?

Pollard reiterated that the House of Commons is populated largely by sycophants divorced from public outlooks:

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question; it comes from a point of view that is different from that of many people in this House and in the wider public.

Then he leant into the usual inaccurate stock answer

Our nuclear deterrent is operationally independent; the only person who can authorise its firing is the Prime Minister. It is a part of our security apparatus, which keeps us safe every single day, and has done for decades.

Adding:

As a Government, we are continuing to invest in our nuclear deterrent, just as we are investing in jobs and skills right across the country that keep us safe every single day. Our relationship with the United States is a key part of that, but we will also continue to invest in our relationships with our other allies, especially around Europe.

In reality, as the US publication National Interest explained on 5 March 2025:

the Trident missiles are not even owned by Britain, but are instead leased by the British military from the Americans.

They expanded:

British nuclear deterrent relies exclusively on American ballistic missile technology, the submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) known as the Trident II D5, built by the U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin.

So, not independent then. The UK has lashed its future security to the whims of US leaders - whoever is in charge at a given time. Donald Trump's first year back in power has rocked alliances like NATO. It seems like exactly the time to start thinking about what a serious, independent defence and foreign policy would look like. Pollard and Starmer, however, remain committed to a dying consensus which serves nobody but the US.

Featured image via the Canary

Celebs help launch Health Workers 4 Palestine fundraiser [ 03-Feb-26 1:38pm ]

Actor Mark Rylance and model Amanda Parker at Health Workers 4 Palestine fundraising gala

Louis Theroux, Mark Rylance, Zawe Ashton, Jonathan Pryce, and Glen Matlock were among cultural figures attending the Health Workers 4 Palestine Gala to raise vital funds for the charity's Gaza Medics Solidarity Fund.

Health Workers 4 Palestine fundraiser

In the first 24 hours of the fundraiser, it has raised over £300,000. And it's now appealing to the public with hopes to raise £1m. Every donation will help rebuild maternity wards, fund mobile clinics, and pay stipends to doctors in Gaza.

You can donate here.

Brian Eno and Antony Gormley donated art to the event. Motaz Malhees appeared fresh from global acclaim for his performance in The Voice of Hind Rajab.

Also in attendance were BBC Springwatch presenter Megan McCubbin, actors Juliet Stevenson, Khalid Abdalla and Denise Gough, comedian Jen Brister and Holocaust survivor Stephen Kapos.

Health Workers 4 Palestine is an organisation of medical professionals from over 70 cities around the world. It advocates for Gaza medics and the protection of Palestinian healthcare.

Dr Omar Abdel-Mannan founded the group in 2023. In July 2025 he flew with the first Gaza child evacuated to the UK for medical aid from Cairo to London.

As over 1,700 health workers lose their lives in Gaza, and this month 37 international aid groups including Save the Children are blocked from entering, this fundraiser couldn't be more urgent. A recent study has found that the population of Gaza has declined by over 250,000 people since 7 October 2003.

The Health Workers 4 Palestine Solidarity Fund is administered by local NGOs, getting emergency support to the medics and patients who need it most.

Actor Zawe Ashton said:

I'm here tonight to encourage people to donate to Health Workers 4 Palestine because I believe as an artist it's the moment to advocate and use your voice for people whose voice is being distorted and silenced. The dismantling of healthcare in Gaza is one of the most dangerous and sickening parts of the genocide we're seeing unfold.

Dr Abdel-Mannan said:

Tonight shows what is possible when culture refuses to stay silent. We are standing in solidarity with the over 1,700 health workers who have been killed in Gaza, and those who continue to save lives against the odds working under unimaginable conditions. Together, we are fundraising to support Gaza medics and the rebuilding of Palestinian healthcare.

The gala took place at The Savoy, London on 1 February 2026. To donate to the Solidarity Fund, go here.

Featured image via Ali Khadr / Health Workers 4 Palestine

Polanski: Labour attacking me to distract from its corruption and sex offender problems [ 03-Feb-26 1:21pm ]

Continuing his laudable approach of taking smear campaigns head-on and taking no prisoners, Green party leader Zack Polanski has shredded Labour's feeble attempts to smear him. Other politicians might hide, deflect, or deny. Polanski posted to his social media that Labour is attacking him to try to distract from their own chronic problems with paedophiles and corruption.

His post points out:

• Starmer's decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as a senior adviser and UK ambassador to the US knowing Mandelson was a fan-boy and close friend of serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein. Mandelson has now also been exposed insider-trading and leaking government information to Epstein.
• Starmerite MP Dan Norris's second arrest for rape and sexual assault. Norris was also arrested for alleged paedophilia - just the latest in a long line of Labour Zionists.
• Starmer's former front-bencher Tulip Siddiq's prison sentence in Bangladesh for corruption.

He also includes a composite image of Labour's smears to leave no doubt just how feeble Starmer's party has become:

Questions about Mandelson, his heinous crimes and how much Starmer knew.Dan Norris, elected as Lab MP, arrested - 2 counts of rape.Tulip Siddiq sentenced to 4 years.I wonder why Labour have made 3 attack videos about me in the last 24 hours?They're done. Finished. Toast.

— Zack Polanski (@zackpolanski.bsky.social) 2026-02-02T21:12:30.478Z

Unlike Polanski, Starmer has an appalling record

And Starmer's personal record is appalling, from his time as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) through to what passes for his leadership of the Labour party.

Starmer was an awful DPP, according to staff who worked under him. But his awfulness went beyond merely being a bad boss. He relentlessly pursued Wikileaks founder Julian Assange over what turned out to be spurious allegations ultimately dropped by Swedish prosecutors. The CPS then destroyed the records of Starmer's involvement, but he flew to the US to discuss Assange's extradition with US officials.

Starmer also notoriously failed to prosecute serial rapist Jimmy Savile. Those around him have issued 'non-denial denials' that Starmer was personally involved in the decision not to prosecute. However, it stretches belief to think that a serial rape case against Britain's then-most famous entertainer would not have crossed the boss's desk. Regardless, as boss the buck ultimately stopped with him anyway.

Starmer was also DPP when, according to departing Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby in 2024, Welby informed Starmer's CPS about the child abuse committed by paedophile church barrister John Smyth. Welby said that he:

believed wrongly that an appropriate resolution would follow.

It never did. Smyth was never prosecuted and, just as with Savile, the scandal only broke after his death. Now to Starmer's blighted tenure as Labour 'leader'.

Not much better as Labour leader

Starmer welcomed 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 - and when-Chester MP Chris Matheson was under investigation by Parliament for 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.

Matheson resigned only after he was found guilty by the parliamentary panel of 'threatening' sexual misconduct. Starmer also protected at least two further alleged sex pests on his front bench, despite ongoing investigations.

And while Starmer's cronies were deselecting or blocking potential left-wing parliamentary candidates on any pretext it could find, they were ignoring legal advice to let their mates stand. Labour's National Executive ignored the advice of its barrister that it needed to thoroughly investigate allegations of 'serious' sexual assault brought against then-Redbridge council leader and slum landlord Jas Athwal. Athwal is a right-wing Labour figure close to Starmer's Health Secretary Wes Streeting. Instead, the NEC dropped the case and reinstated Athwal, who is now a Labour MP after a questionable vote to select him as the party's candidate in Ilford South.

Rotten

Perhaps most seriously, Starmer and his then-sidekick David Evans covered up Jewish whistleblower Elaina Cohen's allegations of serial abuse of women by a party staffer.

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, through the now-defunct domestic violence 'charity' that she ran.

Warned time and again, Starmer and Evans did nothing. Mahmood remained on Starmer's front bench as long as he chose to be there. Cohen was sacked from her role as a parliamentary aide.

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

Despite the abundance of evidence, this mountain of vileness has been almost entirely ignored by 'mainstream' media. It's time for that to end.

Go on, Zack Polanski. Go to town.

Featured image via the Canary

Reform want to make beer cheaper by nicking money from kids [ 03-Feb-26 1:01pm ]

Never a party to miss a vapid appeal to populism, Reform UK have announced plans to cut beer duty by 10%. Except, how do they plan to fund such a feat? Well, by reintroducing the two-child benefit cap, of course.

Under Reform's new commitment, the party would gradually phase out business rates altogether for UK pubs. Incidentally, they'd also plunge around 350,000 children back into poverty, and 700,000 into deep poverty.

The fact that a mainstream political party can suggest something like this without being spat on immediately by everyone in range indicates that something is deeply wrong with our country. I just don't have a better way to say that.

Facts about taxes, as if that's the problem here and not Reform

In Rachel Reeves' autumn budget, the chancellor unveiled plans to hike business rates for pubs by 76%. This would boil down to additional costs of around £4,300 a year, after the current freeze ends.

However, on 27 January Labour announced that it would reverse course. Starting in April, pubs will now receive a 15% cut to new business rates bills, along with a two-year real-terms freeze.

Reform MP, and general shithouse, Lee Anderson stated that:

The loss of one pub is not just the loss of livelihood for a landlord, or the loss of a local employment hub. The loss of one pub is a loss to all of us as inheritors of a tradition dating back to Roman rule.

He went on:

Yet the Conservatives, and now Labour, have facilitated the closure of thousands of pubs over the last decade. Any contrition they show is false.

As things stand, beer duty - i.e., tax - averages out at around 49p a pint, although that varies according to the drink's strength. Reform's plan would knock 10% from that figure by taking the money directly from struggling children and families.

Likewise, the far-right party would also cut VAT from 20% to 10% for the hospitality sector. Reform said that the fact supermarkets don't pay VAT on food sales gives them an unfair advantage over pubs, as if the party has any concept of what fairness is.

The entire plan would carry a cost of £2.29bn in the first year, rising to £2.9bn by the fourth year. For contrast, estimates suggest that scrapping the two-child benefit cap will cost £3.6bn a year once it's fully implemented.

There's something wrong with all of us

There are too many things to say about this, I don't really know where to start.

As recently as May 2025, Reform was all for scrapping the two-child cap. Then, they flipped to saying it should only be lifted for two-parent full-time-working households, and finally to opposing the removal of the cap altogether. This pointless contrarianism was motivated purely by Labour getting behind scrapping the cap.

This plan is yet another monstering of people who receive benefits - this time pitting them against local pubs, of all things. These two causes are completely unrelated to one another, but Reform has very deliberately chosen to pair them off.

Given Reform's projected image as champion's of 'British culture', pubs make sense as their chosen cause to champion - but that's not a compliment. The UK has massive problems with alcoholism and binge drinking, and has even topped world alcohol consumption charts in recent years.

And finally, this is children we're talking about. Reform are proposing to take money directly from the very poorest children in the UK, and to then give it to pub landlords. If the landlords chose to pass that saving on to customers, a pint might be 5p cheaper, at the cost of making life harder for 100,000 kids.

When did we get to this point, as a society? How can a mainstream political party can suggest something like this without it immediately sinking them? Why are the right-wing papers reporting this like it's a normal idea?

This job sometimes involves reading, seeing, and reporting on heinous things. Many of them are objectively more awful than this. But this is just such a banal, calculated, cynical evil, it's turned something in my stomach. There is something deeply wrong with us all. None of this is OK.

Featured image via the Canary

French judges order arrest of extremist women who blocked aid to Gaza [ 03-Feb-26 11:54am ]

French judges have issued 'arrest summonses' for two French-Israeli women who travelled to Israel to block aid to Gaza.

Nili Kupfer-Naouri founded and runs the 'charity' 'Israel Is Forever'. The group says it exists to foster the "mobilisation of French-speaking Zionist forces". Another women, known so far only as 'Rachel T', acts as spokesperson for the far-right extremist 'Tsav9' group, which regularly attacks aid trucks at the Gaza border. Even the US has sanctioned it. The 'charity' called for volunteers to support Tsav9's blockade. Both women were born in France but now live in Israel.

Israel is manufacturing famine in Gaza

Israel has repeatedly used settler groups and other civilians as a human shield to distance itself from accusations of directly blocking aid. However, the mobs enjoy access to military-only roads and occupation forces supposedly 'escorting' aid trucks do nothing to prevent the attacks.

Kupfer-Naouri confirmed that a summons had been issued for her in an interview with a pro-Israel 'news' site. She complained that it meant she wouldn't be able to visit France any more because she doesn't want to go to prison:

The risk is that I won't be able to set foot in France anymore because I have no intention of going to French jail, whether in police custody or otherwise.

She described the arrest orders as "antisemitic madness" and said that three other members of her 'charity' had been interrogated by French police. And, she also complained that the summonses would mean French occupation war criminals would be unable to visit family in France:

What's serious is that it would set an unfortunate precedent for all our Franco-Israeli soldiers who participated in the 'war of redemption' [extremist language for the Gaza genocide] and who want to visit their families in France.

Yes, that's what's 'serious'.

More whining

'Rachel T' whined that the judges had acted for "radical pro-Palestinian" complainants than for the demand of Zionist groups for an apology from left-wing MPs from the La France Insoumise (France Unbowed) party, which has vocally opposed Israel's genocide in Gaza:

I note that French justice is quicker to deal with a complaint filed by a radical pro-Palestinian organization than with those filed by Avocats Sans Frontières and the OJE [European Jewish Organization] against apologies for terrorism made by LFI [La France Insoumise, radical left] MPs.

'Avocats Sans Frontières' translates as 'lawyers without borders', but the French group is unconnected to the international human rights group Lawyers without Borders. The French group sent a delegation to Israel in December and told French media that Israel is not an apartheid country.

The summonses were issued after formal complaints were filed by a number of pro-Palestine and anti-genocide groups. While arrest warrants have to be approved by the French 'National Anti-terrorism Prosecutor', 'investigating judges' can issue arrest summonses directly. Unlike warrants, they do not automatically mean provisional detention of the suspect. In principle, these summonses apply throughout the EU.

Featured image via the Canary

Alex Pretti ICE killers could face homicide charge [ 03-Feb-26 11:47am ]

The killing of Alex Pretti by ICE agents

On 26 January, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents wrestled nurse Alex Pretti to the ground and shot him multiple times in the back. The killing was caught on camera by several bystanders, providing various angles. The Trump regime initially defended the use of lethal force, with key advisor Stephen Miller describing Pretti as an "assassin". Trump and others around him would later backtrack following massive public backlash.

Now, it looks like the ICE agents involved could potentially face consequences:

The doc, obtained by TMZ, lists "multiple gunshot wounds" as the cause of death … and under the section "how injury occurred" medical examiner Dr. Andrew Baker wrote, "Shot by law enforcement officer(s)." pic.twitter.com/E4pPflJ2Zf

— TMZ (@TMZ) February 2, 2026

ICE: prosecution for the shooters?

The shooting is now officially classed as a homicide. The medical examiner has listed the cause of death as "multiple gunshot wounds". Under the section "how injury occurred", Dr. Andrew Baker stated "shot by law enforcement officer(s)".

Pretti was shot by ICE on 26 January 2026, only 11 days after another altercation with ICE in which he suffered a broken rib, with the Canary previously reporting:

about a week before his death, he suffered a broken rib when a group of federal officers tackled him while he was protesting their attempt to detain other individuals.

The conclusion by medical examiners now leaves the door open for prosecution of the agents involved in the killing. This could set a new precedent for further scrutiny of ICE's activities:

Sounds like the federal agents that killed him should go to jail for 25+ years https://t.co/8qnYKeKBci

— Polling USA (@USA_Polling) February 2, 2026

Featured image via France24

By Antifabot

Greens doorstep polling shows Reform in the lead & Labour third [ 03-Feb-26 11:24am ]

Nigel Farage, Zack Polanski, and Keir Starmer Reform

According to doorstep polling from the Green Party, Reform are currently in the lead in Gorton & Denton. While this obviously wouldn't be the desirable outcome, they're also saying Labour are a distant third. And this could mean the Greens will benefit from any tactical voting which takes place:

The Green Party have shared doorstep data with me from across Gorton and Denton.

They say it shows:

Reform - 39%

Greens - 34%

Labour - 21%

Their data shows Reform 5 points ahead and Labour in a poor third place.

— Owen Jones (@owenjonesjourno) February 2, 2026

Polling

As Owen Jones highlighted, Reform also have Labour in third place:

The Reform Party's own data has the Greens in second place right now:https://t.co/A2Jqo9jSC3

— Owen Jones (@owenjonesjourno) February 2, 2026

It's important to remember these things can shift massively in response to a good campaign, with the key example being the 2017 election (the biggest vote share swing in Labour's history).

While the polling we have currently suggests Reform will win, the bookies think the Greens have it:

The bookies currently have the Greens as the strong favourite to win the by-election.

But that'll only pan out if the Greens can convince voters that it's voting Labour which risks a Reform victory. pic.twitter.com/44R7uWR45x

— Owen Jones (@owenjonesjourno) February 2, 2026

Polling is a snapshot of the moment; bookies have to to predict the future lest they lose money (not that they always get it right).

Given the polling, the Greens are saying they're the only realistic option for people who want to keep Reform out:

It's all to play for but it's clear Labour have blown it.

Only the Greens can stop Reform. https://t.co/IZ2E8zIqnM

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) February 2, 2026

This is especially true as both Your Party and the Workers Party have pulled out of the race:

Labour MPs are talking mutiny over Starmer's ties to Mandelson [ 03-Feb-26 11:00am ]

Images of Keir Starmer and Peter Mandelson

Keir Starmer notoriously made Peter Mandelson the ambassador to the US. We say 'notoriously' because at the point when Starmer hired Mandelson, he knew he'd maintained a friendship with Jeffrey Epstein after the late paedophile was convicted for sex crimes. As many predicted, this scandal eventually exploded, and in recent days has gone nuclear.

Now, Starmer's MPs are starting to talk about mutiny. As one unnamed MP said to Sky News's Alexandra Rogers:

Consistent failures by Morgan McSweeney have damaged our media operation and left the public unaware of much of what we've achieved in government.

The Mandelson saga has only made things worse, and if Keir doesn't make changes soon, the PLP will.

We've had enough.

Mandelson's creature

Morgan McSweeney is Keir Starmer's chief of staff. As Paul Holden wrote in his book about Starmer's rise to power (The Fraud):

McSweeney is a long-time protégé of Peter Mandelson, the architect of New Labour who, in February 2017, publicly bragged that he was "working every day" to bring down Corbyn's elected leadership.

Holden also reported:

McSweeney joined Labour in the mid-1990s as a receptionist and then a member of the party's media operations. During the 2001 election he was given the task of feeding data into Peter Mandelson's famed Excalibur computer that stored information to be used by the party's rebuttal unit.

This is what Mandelson - the "best pal" of paedophile Jeffrey Epstein - said about McSweeney:

I don't know who and how and when he was invented, but whoever it was . . . they will find their place in heaven.

As Holden detailed, McSweeney used all manner of underhanded tactics to ensure Jeremy Corbyn lost in 2019, and that a malleable alternative took his place. That man was Keir Starmer, and this is what the public think of McSweeney's vision:

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

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

— Stats for Lefties

Don Lemon's arrest shows just how politically lost America is [ 03-Feb-26 10:53am ]

Journalist Don Lemon was arrested as he reported on a gathering protesting the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unit in Minnesota. The Associated Press reported that:

The charges stem from Lemon's actions while covering a protest, raising concerns among press freedom advocates about the criminalisation of journalistic activity.

Let's be clear. Don Lemon did not call for unrest. He did not incite violence, organise mass resistance, or step outside the bounds of liberal democratic debate. Instead, his arrest while reporting on a protest exposes a far more uncomfortable reality: power has grown brittle and it now reaches for punishment when scrutiny feels too close.

This moment reveals the authoritarian drift of the Trump administration and, more pointedly, who bears the cost when the states legitimacy comes under pressure.

Don Lemon: when liberal positions become liabilities

As a former CNN anchor, Lemon is smack bang in the centre of the political spectrum. Historically, his positions would have registered as unremarkable. Opposition to unaccountable force, scepticism towards militarised policing, and concern over immigration enforcement once formed the backbone of liberal democratic critique. These views alighted with constitutional restrain, not rebellion.

However, something has shifted.

Today, the state increasingly treats scrutiny itself - however mild - as a provocation. As executive power expands and surveillance becomes normalised, even mild dissent now attracts suspicion. Consequently, journalism that merely documents authority - not necessarily agitates against it - is shut down with considerable force.

Crucially, when a Black journalist raises that challenge, institutions rarely interpret it as professional distance. Instead they read it as intent to agitate.

Surveillance disguised as neutrality

Editorial scrutiny often presents itself as neutral concern: questions about tone, warnings about objectivity and accusations of advocacy. In practice, however, this scrutiny operates as institutional suspicion.

Neutrality, it seems, remains intact only when journalism aligns with power. When reporting destabilises official narratives, neutrality becomes negotiable. As a result, white journalists benefit from an assumption of detachment, while Black journalists must reportedly demonstrate it.

Because of this imbalance, identical actions generate unequal consequences. The determining factor is not behaviour, but who performs it and what their presence exposes.

Lemon's reporting remained measured, legible, and recognisably liberal. Ironically, that restraint made it more threatening, not less. The state does not fear incoherent outrage. It fears critique that cannot be dismissed as extremism.

The free speech contradiction

At the same time, those in power insist they value free speech. They repeatedly frame dissent as welcome, provided it remains responsible and measured.

Lemon's met those criteria. Nevertheless, coercion followed.

This contradiction matters. A system that claims to prize reason while punishing those who test it does not defend free speech. Instead, it manages it. Calls for civil discourse function less as invitation and more as constraints, allowing speech only when it reassures power rather than interrogates it.

Ultimately, the response exposes fragility, not confidence. A secure system answers criticism. A brittle one suppresses it.

Another consideration of Lemon's arrest is the spatial context. The fact that his arrest took place around a church, a site the state traditionally treats as morally insulated and symbolically untouchable. Religious spaces have long been leveraged by authority to legitimise control, casting state action as protection rather than coercion. When power cloaks itself in religious sanction, scrutiny becomes easier to criminalise.

This is not about faith. It is about how religious symbolism is mobilised to discipline dissent. By framing the site as sacred and the journalist as disruptive, the state redraws space itself as a boundary of obedience. In doing so, it turns moral authority into territorial control, narrowing where journalism is allowed to exist at all.

From scrutiny to criminalisation

In response to Don Lemon's arrest, the Freedom of the Press Foundation said:

Arresting journalists for doing their jobs sets a dangerous precedent and threatens the public's right to know.

Authoritarianism rarely announces itself. Instead it advances through procedure. Laws stretch beyond their original purpose. Reporting blurs into obstruction. Monitoring quietly replaces protection.

When authorities detain or arrest journalists under the language of public order or interference, the message becomes unmistakable: scrutiny itself now constitutes a risk.

This shift intensifies during moments of political anxiety. As legitimacy thins, power prioritises containment over accountability. Accordingly, journalism survives only when it remains predictable, deferential, and safely non-disruptive.

The most serious danger, then, is not radicalisation. Rather, it is anticipatory obedience, the slow internalisation of limits imposed not for accuracy, but for the safety of power.

Lemon has rejected the suggestion that his reporting crossed a line, framing the case as a threat to press freedom:

I have spent my entire career covering the news. I will not stop now. In fact there is no more important time than right now, this very moment, for a free and independent media that shines a light on the truth and holds those in power accountable.

Race as structure, not sentiment

Importantly, this is not an argument about identity politics.

Black journalists operate within a historical framework that has long cast Black presence as disruption in public space, political discourse, and intellectual authority. That history does not disappear inside courtrooms or newsrooms. Instead, it reasserts itself through surveillance, suspicion and unequal enforcement.

As a result, the same behaviour produces different interpretations. Surveillance follows the bodies power has always keened to regulate.

A warning, not an exception

It would be tempting to treat this case as an aberration, a mistake that institutions can quietly correct. That interpretation would miss the point.

This moment signals a narrowing of legitimate journalism itself. When liberal dissent becomes suspect and calm scrutiny triggers coercion, democratic accountability has already begun to erode.

A free press does not exist to reassure authority. It exists to unsettle it. If that function no longer enjoys protection, particularly for those already over surveilled, then free speech becomes a slogan rather than a practice.

The real question, therefore, is not whether Don Lemon crossed a line.

Instead, it is how narrow the space for journalism has become, if measured critique now invites punishment.

When mild opposition registers as a threat, authoritarianism is no longer approaching. It is already operational.

Featured image via the Canary

By Vannessa Viljoen

PSNI may roll out rights-violating face scanner tech [ 03-Feb-26 10:27am ]

The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) is investigating the potential deployment of Live Facial Recognition Technology (LFRT or LFR) in the Northern Ireland. According to a report in The Irish Times:

The force has set up a Facial Recognition Governance Board which is monitoring programmes elsewhere in the UK and engaging directly with industry providers, though it insists no decision has been taken over whether to deploy the controversial technology.

The PSNI haven't exactly been transparent about such plans up to this point, with no public references to the Facial Recognition Governance Board available online prior to today's revelation. LFRT involves the use of cameras combined with automated facial recognition software to scan and identify faces. The system then matches the results against a police watchlist of wanted persons.

The PSNI say they don't currently use the technology, meaning officers manually operate cameras and examine footage collected. However, they say they are:

…monitoring national LFR programmes, including those implemented by the Metropolitan Police, South Wales Police and, most recently, British Transport Police.

At this stage, we are engaging with these programmes and their industry providers solely in order to assess operational feasibility.

PSNI turn to 'Israeli' surveillance tech already in use by British police

A crucial question is whether any of those "industry providers" include Corsight AI, an 'Israeli' firm whose LFRT program has been adopted by British police. This is already a breach of the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement's guidelines. They stipulate no economic dealings with the Zionist entity, or even non-'Israeli' companies which support the terrorist land theft project.

Purchasing Zionist tech is one of the worst imaginable cases of this, as it gives a direct boost to the military-surveillance sector of 'Israel's' economy. Further use of Corsight's product provides funding to, and refinement of, a system used to violate Palestinian rights.

The British government is planning to roll out LFRT systems further, moving from 10 vans to 50 that have the technology installed. Al Jazeera outline how even "Israeli intelligence operatives" have "concerns about its accuracy". This appears to be another case of much heralded AI ending up like the fictional Robocop prototypes shooting themselves in the head.

Big Brother Watch have flagged the unreliability of the dodgy tech, saying it:

…discriminates against women and people of colour. 80% of people misidentified by facial recognition in London in 2025 were Black.

This sort of bias is a commonly recognised flaw of AI platforms.

Misidentification is a crucial flaw which would result in potentially illegal surveillance. If a system incorrectly identifies someone as a suspect on a watchlist, it could result in their data being stored in the system. This would be a breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which outlawed the storage of data like DNA and fingerprints from people not convicted of a crime.

A chilling effect on basic rights

Beyond that, use of LFRT in a public space is inherently indiscriminate and likely breaches other laws, such as those relating to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Its use at protests will discourage attendance, especially from minoritised communities. Lancashire police are known to have shared footage of disabled people with the Department of Work and Pensions in an attempt to have their benefits stripped.

The above issues have been cited in a challenge to the Met Police's use of facial scanning which has just been heard in the High Court. Big Brother Watch argued that its use amounted to "stop and search on steroids". They cited the case of a man detained for 20 minutes by the cops, despite providing ID to show he'd been falsely identified.

The Met's justification is that London's scale makes tracking suspects too hard:

Locating these individuals within a vast, bustling metropolis is akin to looking for stray needles in an enormous, exceptionally dense haystack.

Though it may currently make mistakes, AI is steadily improving. Its increasing capacity to sift through enormous amounts of data and make sense of it is amounts to a power too excessive to grant to increasingly authoritarian states. When Edward Snowden revealed the extent of the US surveillance apparatus in 2013, he didn't just criticise its immorality. He also lambasted it as ineffective, due to excessive data collection simply adding more hay to the haystack.

In the age of AI, a giant haystack becomes less of an issue. What would previously have required hours of human intervention to interpret can now be churned through and summarised by AI in seconds. Such a power seems too much in the hands of even an accountable state, nevermind an undemocratic and abusive one arresting thousands of innocent people for opposing genocide.

PSNI can't be trusted with mass surveillance power

The PSNI has played a role in that. In the last week alone it has been shown to have behaved in a discriminatory manner. Internment and collusion are grim historic examples of what happens when police are granted excessive powers.

We could achieve zero crime, but it would require total surveillance and ensure zero freedom. Mass face scanning is a step too far towards the latter, and the PSNI's secretive Facial Recognition Governance Board should rule out its use.

Featured image via the Canary

By Robert Freeman

New Epstein files show Mandelson repeatedly 'insider trading' and helping banks beat taxes [ 03-Feb-26 9:48am ]

Documents in the latest Epstein file release show Keir Starmer's disgraced senior adviser Peter Mandelson engaging repeatedly in likely 'insider trading' with Epstein, who was closely and corruptly linked to big banking and big business. At least, that's according to finance expert and investigative journalist Dan Neidle.

A number of commentators have pointed out that the files show Mandelson boasting of persuading Gordon Brown to resign as prime minister, including the Times's Gabriel Pogrund. But, as Neidle pointed out in response, they show far more than that.

Instead, they show Mandelson providing financially sensitive - and potentially highly profitable - insider information to a Wall Street trader:

Gabriel understates what happened here. We can tell from this version of the same email chain that Mandelson's last email was sent 16:02:52 BST

Brown's resignation was public 19:19 BST.

Implies Mandelson leaked price-sensitive information to a Wall Street insider. https://t.co/bWCjLpaAku pic.twitter.com/nYNLWnENMR

— Dan Neidle (@DanNeidle) February 2, 2026

Mandelson's sickening power

Knowing that Brown was about to resign - with its likely 'blip' in UK stock market prices - would have given Epstein and anyone else he informed the opportunity to 'sell short'. Short selling involves selling shares a trader doesn't own yet, in the expectation of buying them for a lower price later because of news that shocks the market.

This is not theoretical. In another grossly anti-semitic email thread, Epstein boasts to another Jewish contact that "the Jew make money" by "selling short" while the gentiles - "goyim" - "deal in the real world":

Grim links

The Times's political editor Steven Swinford and Novara's Aaron Bastani picked up on another email showing Mandelson tipping off Epstein about a coming $500bn bail-out "to save the euro" - and "threatening" then-chancellor Alistair Darling on behalf of a huge bank to reduce a planned tax on bankers' bonuses:

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

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

— Aaron Bastani (@AaronBastani) February 2, 2026

The bail-out tip-off would have given Epstein and his coterie the opportunity to buy shares - the opposite of selling short - at the existing price, knowing that news of such a huge bailout would push prices up and create an immediate profit.

Neidle added that the threatening of Darling directly benefited Epstein as well as his banking sponsor:

New Epstein emails show Peter Mandelson secretly advising JPMorgan's CEO on how to fight Labour's 2009 bankers' bonus tax - even suggesting he "mildly threaten" the Chancellor.

Mandelson was Business Secretary at the time.

A year later, he was seeking work with JPM. pic.twitter.com/Nz8o5pN7b4

— Dan Neidle (@DanNeidle) February 1, 2026

Both the short-selling and the bail-out tip-off fall under the category of 'insider trading'. Insider trading is a serious criminal offence. At the time Mandelson was providing this information to Epstein, the criminal penalty was an unlimited fine and up to seven years in prison. The potential prison time has since increased to ten years, but only for offences committed from 2021. The Mandelson emails were in 2009 and 2010.

Police are 'investigating' whether Mandelson's actions are prosecutable. There can be no excuses for failing to charge him.

Featured image via the Canary

Epstein, Mossad, and the question we are not allowed to ask but must do [ 03-Feb-26 12:07am ]

The latest release of documents connected to Jeffrey Epstein has reignited a familiar media ritual. Names circulate, while royals and celebrities dominate headlines. Moral outrage flows freely, and safely in directions that neatly avoid the structures of power.

Epstein - the unasked question

But beneath the spectacle lies a question that mainstream commentary continues to avoid, despite its growing inevitability:

Was Epstein operating as part of an intelligence-linked blackmail operation? And if so, for whom?

This is not a conspiracy theory, but a legitimate question that the files themselves provoke.

Epstein's death in 2019, officially ruled a suicide but shrouded in conspiracy, left a trail of unanswered questions. The financier's rise from humble Brooklyn teacher to billionaire was always suspicious.

How did a man with no clear business acumen amass such wealth? Epstein's partner, Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of media tycoon Robert Maxwell, a confirmed Mossad asset who died under mysterious circumstances in 1991, provides the smoking gun. Multiple Israeli prime ministers attended Robert Maxwell's funeral, with Shimon Peres delivering the eulogy.

'Honeytrap'

Former Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben-Menashe has alleged Epstein and Maxwell ran a "honeytrap" operation for Mossad, luring elites into compromising situations to extract favours or silence. This is no conspiracy theory; it is echoed by Steven Hoffberg, Epstein's former business partner, who alleged Epstein frequently flaunted his Mossad connections.

Survivor Maria Farmer described the network as a "Jewish supremacist" blackmail ring linked to the Mega group, a cabal of pro-Israel billionaires including Les Wexner, who gifted Epstein his Manhattan mansion.

Epstein held multiple passports (a spy's toolkit) and reportedly fled to Israel after his first charges in 2008 before securing an extraordinary non-prosecution agreement that allowed him to continue operating freely.

It is also worth noting that Israel has long been a legal and jurisdictional refuge for sexual predators, particularly where extradition would expose intelligence, financial or diplomatic sensitivities.

Israel's intelligence services, including Mossad, operate globally and extrajudicially by design. Like all major intelligence services, they cultivate leverage, assets and influence networks beyond formal diplomatic channels. Sexual blackmail has been widely documented as one such method across intelligence history, from the Cold War to present.

What distinguishes the Epstein case is not the abstract possibility of intelligence involvement, but the patterned convergence of factors: unexplained wealth, elite access, transnational mobility, institutional protection and repeated investigative shutdowns. These are not the characteristics of a 'lone wolf', but of a pernicious foreign influence over celebrities, politicians, bankers and media moguls.

Recent revelations

The most recently released files only amplify these suspicions. An FBI report from a confidential source claims "Trump has been compromised by Israel," citing leverage through Jared Kushner and Alan Dershowitz. Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre accused Dershowitz, a staunch defender of Israel, of involvement, though she later retracted her statement amid legal pressure.

The scale of Epstein's reach is difficult to dismiss as coincidence. Across politics, finance, media and celebrity culture, the same names, or at least the same circles, recur with unsettling regularity.

In politics, the record is already public. Former US president Bill Clinton flew on Epstein's private jet numerous times, a fact acknowledged but persistently minimised. Donald Trump, for his part, publicly described Epstein as a "terrific guy" who enjoyed the company of "beautiful women… on the younger side". While these statements are not crimes on their own, they are indicators of proximity.

Media power was no less entangled. Senior figures from major broadcasting and publishing empires, from former CBS chief Les Moonves to media baron Rupert Murdoch, surface repeatedly in the documents and testimonies, either through social proximity, shared intermediaries, or financial overlap.

Epstein did not merely socialise with media elites; he embedded himself within institutions capable of shaping coverage, suppressing stories, and disciplining dissent. When journalists attempted to pursue the story aggressively, they encountered legal pressure, editorial resistance, or sudden loss of access.

Hiding in plain sight

Celebrity culture played a complementary role. High-profile figures moved through Epstein's orbit not necessarily as conspirators, but as legitimising assets. Fame provided cover, glamour, and normalisation.

The presence of globally recognisable names diluted suspicion, transforming what should have been alarming access into social banality. Ironically, it was over-exposure that provided the perfect cover for Epstein's crimes, rather than secrecy.

Flight logs and visitor records name Hollywood stars like Leonardo DiCaprio, Naomi Campbell, and Kevin Spacey, alongside tech titans such as Bill Gates. While some deny involvement in illicit activities, their proximity to Epstein's web implies potential leverage over public influencers who mould cultural discourse.

Similarly, major institutions including JPMorgan Chase and Deutsche Bank continued to service Epstein long after everyone knew his criminal record. Internal compliance failures have since been acknowledged, but the broader question remains unanswered: how did a convicted sex offender retain access to the global banking system at the highest level? Who judged the risk acceptable - and why?

Geopolitical leverage

Further evidence of Mossad's fingerprints emerges in Epstein's dealings with international crises. Emails from July 2011, just a month before Muammar Gaddafi's fall, show Epstein and associate Greg Brown plotting to recover up to $80bn in frozen Libyan funds, assets deemed sovereign, stolen, or misappropriated by Western powers.

Brown believed the true amount could be four times higher, reaching $320bn. Their scheme involved leveraging MI6 and Mossad agents to extort concessions from postwar Libya, still assumed under Gaddafi's control, in exchange for returning the funds for "reconstruction".

This wasn't mere opportunism; it points to Epstein's role in geopolitical manoeuvring, using intelligence networks for financial and strategic gains aligned with Israeli interests.

The real Epstein scandal

The conclusion, then, is not a lurid morality tale about "bad people doing bad things," nor the tired revelation that royals, celebrities, or billionaires behave with impunity. That much is already obvious. Child abusers exist across every class and every society. What does not exist everywhere is a system that records, archives, weaponises, and protects that abuse for strategic ends.

The Epstein case points not to isolated depravity, but to structured leverage: an architecture of blackmail in which sexual crimes become instruments of power rather than grounds for prosecution. That is why the fixation on individual scandal - princes, parties, and gossip - functions as misdirection.

The real scandal is the evidence of an intelligence-linked operation in which Mossad repeatedly appears as a point of reference, protection, and utility; an operation that embedded itself across politics, finance, media, and celebrity culture.

Not all abusers are documented and not all are shielded. And not all become untouchable.

Epstein did because he was useful. Until this is discussed in those terms, as a question of foreign influence, the story will remain trapped in spectacle, and the system it exposes will remain intact.

Featured image via the Canary

By Rares Cocilnau

02-Feb-26

Epstein's "Nazi like" eugenicist horrors revealed in document release [ 02-Feb-26 11:03pm ]

Content warning - this article contains extremely upsetting content that details child rape and paedophilia

A journal — written by a girl who was 16 years old at the time of some entries — reveals the sheer depravity of Jeffrey Epstein and the ruling class he lurked within.

The girl was subjected to horrifying sexual abuse and despairs at being Epstein's "property", and "incubator" for the now-deceased financier's children. One deeply disturbing account reveals the loss of a child, likely due to incessant abuse by Epstein and his associates:

So sorry Jeffrey these things happen when your body had never been given time to properly heal!
So it came out in the toilet and I didn't know what to do so I just flushed the tiny little foetus.
You have made me numb and I hate you for this!
I hope I never have to see you again!
I am not your personal incubator!

Another equally troubling passage seemingly describes a traumatic childbirth performed by an 'Israeli' doctor:

Close your eyes close your eyes close your eyes. Don't speak she doesn't talk.

I cant stop shaking and its been a week.

A decision was made but I cant tell Jeffrey.

These things happen. Why didn't I close my eyes fast enough.

The doctor was different again.

I think from Israel. He had kind eyes but didn't speak directly to me.

This was different.

A shot and those rod like things had a hook and so much pain.

Ghislaine [Maxwell] said to push all the pain away. I don't understand.

Blood and water all over the bed and she was right.

Like a feeling when your tummy hurts and you have to push.

She said to close my eyes and put her hands over my eyes but I didn't close them because of these tiny cries.

I am so lost.

I saw between her fingers this tiny head and body in the doctors hands.

It reached its tiny arm up and had a tiny foot.

I closed my eyes and no more…

In a later entry, she fears something terrible has happened to the child:

In the hall Ghislaine said she was beautiful.

SHE WAS.

Not is.

She was a beautiful girl!

I heard her.

Where is she?

Why did she stop whimpering?

She was born!

I heard the tiny cries!

I cant do this anymore!

'Master race' insanity of vile paedophile

The pregnancy appears to be part of a deranged eugenicist plan by Epstein to create as many "perfect offspring" as possible. She writes:

Superior gene pool? Why me? It makes no sense.

Why my hair colour and eye colour?

That feels very Nazi like but in thinking about these stupid insane theories he has I guess in mind it makes sense.

This revolting fantasy is consistent with previous reporting on Epstein. The child abuser — who liked to wear an 'Israeli' Occupation Forces sweatshirt — was determined to develop a "super-race" by "impregnating 20 women at a time". The New York Times reported in 2019 that:

Epstein told scientists and businessmen about his ambitions to use his New Mexico ranch as a base where women would be inseminated with his sperm and would give birth to his babies … Mr Epstein's goal was to have 20 women at a time impregnated at his 33,000-sq-ft Zorro Ranch in a tiny town outside Santa Fe.

This is the most sinister form of a growing interest in pronatalism among the US ruling class. Fellow "Nazi like" sieg-heiler Elon Musk has fathered 12 children, and advocates for measures to increase the birth rate. The founder of messaging app Telegram Pavel Durov has made:

…a sperm donation…to a fertility clinic [which has] resulted in children conceived in 12 countries by more than 100 couples.

Overseas, authoritarians Nigel Farage and Viktor Orban have talked up policies for ensuring greater levels of childbearing. Given their racist ideologies, one suspects they imagine these children all having a similar skin colour to their own.

Rogues' gallery of ruling class sickos

This all amounts to the strange delusions brought on by excessive power — a belief that you're a superior form of life, when you in fact represent the absolute dregs of humanity. A notion that the world needs more of you, when we can all see the defective specimen before us is already one too many.

Other entries from the journal of the child abused by Epstein reveal the alleged participation in her suffering of countless other ruling class ghouls. Among those named are:

Mr. Leonsis, Mr. Case, Mr. Snyder, the Gregorys, Mr. Colgan…Mr. Kimsey [and] George Mitchell

There are suggestions that the above refer to Jim Kimsey, Ted Leonsis, and Steve Case, AOL executives at the likely time of the journal's creation. George Mitchell is the former Democratic senator, perhaps best known for his role as chair of the North of Ireland peace negotiations. He is described as someone:

…who you think would be good like a grandpa [but is] bad.

The writer also names lead Epstein funder Leon Black. She accuses the financier of throwing her to the floor and says "the fat fuck bit me", leaving blood on Epstein's carpet.

Capitalism ensures the Epsteins of the world rise to the top

All this is ultimately the product of an economic and political system that practically guarantees the most poisonous humans imaginable rise to the top. Capitalism rewards the most ruthless and domineering among us, not the kindest and most compassionate.

Those attracted to being a CEO — with the ability to control potentially thousands of lives — are unlikely to be good people. Once there, wealth grants them the ability to evade the law and control the political realm. With greater power comes greater impunity, and an already degraded soul rots still further. It's a system that selects for, then refines, the worst traits of our species.

The Epstein documents have produced an outpouring of fury, and an increasing clarity to the realisation that an entire system needs to be dismantled and reconstructed into something less misanthropic. We've had enough warnings by now of "Nazi like" reprobates controlling our lives. An imminent return to something akin to Nazism looms unless an alternative course is pursued urgently.

Featured image via ABC

By Robert Freeman

Toxins beneath the rubble of Gaza: electronic waste is a silent bomb threatening people's lives [ 02-Feb-26 10:17pm ]

The rubble of war in the Gaza Strip is no longer a silent witness to destruction. It has become a layer of contamination storing slow-acting toxins.

Among the debris, the remains of homes, hospitals, and schools are mixed with thousands of tonnes of broken electronic devices. This has created what can be described as electronic rubble — a long-term environmental and health hazard. These toxins seep silently into soil, water, and human bodies in one of the most densely populated and besieged places on Earth.

In Gaza, the war has not only caused physical destruction. It has also left behind a new type of waste that the Strip was never equipped to handle. Mobile phones, computers, household appliances, medical equipment, and network cables have been turned into dense electronic waste by bombing. This waste cannot be easily separated from building rubble or safely disposed of.

The suffocating siege and the near-total collapse of Gaza's waste-management system make the problem even worse.

Gaza figures spell environmental disaster

The United Nations Development Programme estimates that between October 2023 and the end of November 2025, around 900,000 tonnes of solid waste were generated in Gaza. Most of this waste was dumped in temporary sites after the collapse of collection and treatment systems.

Daily waste generation has risen to between 3,300 and 3,850 cubic metres, compared with about 1,300 cubic metres per day before the war. Electronic waste is estimated to make up 10-15% of the total. That equals 90,000 to 135,000 tonnes of toxic devices, metals, and chemicals.

This is equivalent to thousands of buses filled with highly hazardous waste.

An invisible danger — and an indelible impact

According to World Health Organization reports, electronic waste is the fastest-growing form of solid waste worldwide. Less than a quarter of it is recycled. While e-waste contains valuable materials, improper handling poses a serious threat to public health and the environment. This risk is amplified in fragile settings that lack infrastructure and oversight.

The danger lies not only in volume, but in composition.

Burning, landfilling, or unsafe dismantling releases toxic substances such as lead, mercury, and dioxins. These seep into air, soil, and groundwater, enter the food chain, and ultimately reach humans. The WHO warns that children and pregnant women are most vulnerable. Exposure can cause premature birth, neurological damage, and chronic respiratory and immune diseases that may last a lifetime.

Scientific warnings from inside Gaza

Environmental experts in Gaza warn that electronic waste is among the most dangerous threats facing Palestinian society today. It contains electronic chips, heavy metals, and toxic chemicals that persist in the environment for decades.

These materials gradually penetrate soil, contaminate groundwater, and reach people through food and air.

Experts stress that burning or burying electronic waste with ordinary rubbish releases toxic fumes. These gases damage skin and lungs and worsen asthma and heart disease. The risk is intensified because landfills are often close to homes and displacement camps.

Pollution does not stop at the surface. It spreads into groundwater and farmland, threatening food security and public health in the medium and long term.

Unprotected workers — and a crisis without tools

Sanitation workers and waste collectors face even greater danger.

They handle hazardous materials without adequate protective equipment, while the sector suffers severe shortages of resources and capacity. Experts agree that the long-standing blockade, combined with widespread wartime destruction, has paralysed Gaza's ability to manage complex waste safely.

A silent bomb waiting to explode

Environmental specialists say urgent action is needed. This includes separating e-waste from debris, safely treating toxic materials, providing protective gear for workers, and launching public awareness campaigns.

Without intervention, electronic waste will remain a silent bomb beneath Gaza's rubble.

It threatens present health, future ecosystems, and adds another layer of suffering to lives already exhausted by siege and war — with consequences that may last decades after the bombing ends.

Featured image via UNRWA

By Alaa Shamali

Modi liberalises Indian tariffs much to chagrin of the left [ 02-Feb-26 9:23pm ]

After nearly two decades of intermittent negotiations that began in 2007, India and the European Union have concluded a landmark Free Trade Agreement (FTA). But potential 'reform' of tariffs is angering many of the left of Indian politics. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, both announced the deal enthusiastically, with Modi saying:

Today is a day that will be remembered forever, marked indelibly in our shared history.

Von der Leyen framed the agreement as a historic achievement, stating in a pinned tweet:

Europe and India are making history today. We have concluded the mother of all deals.

The EU-India deal

The EU-India Free Trade Agreement commits both sides to sweeping tariff elimination, covering over 96% of India's tariff lines and 99% of the EU's — with the goal of expanding bilateral trade, which reached €120bn in 2024.

A key selling point to Europe, as outlined by the European Commission, is that the deal:

will help EU companies and farmers export more. Separately, the Commission underscored a specific gain for EU agriculture through a parallel pact on Geographical Indications (GIs), which aims to protect traditional EU products in the Indian market 'by removing unfair competition in the form of imitations'.

Through the timing of the conclusion of the agreement, India and the EU are unmistakably sending a message to Washington. Its allies and partners will not give in to threats of tariff wars and weaponising trade, according to the geopolitical magazine The Diplomat.

The Diplomat further states there are some roadblocks before the operationalisation of the deal:

The EU-Mercosur agreement, concluded after 25 years of negotiations, just days before the India-EU FTA, is now facing opposition from the European Parliament. Unlike the Mercosur agreement, the India-EU FTA does not require approval by each of the 27 national member states, which could potentially speed up the operationalization of the agreement, but it would still need Parliamentary approval.

India's left condemns Modi's neoliberal deal

However, the core disputes that caused the breakdown of negotiations in 2013, under the then-ruling Congress party, have not been meaningfully resolved in the current pact. They have simply been papered over.

A key failure cited by the current opposition Congress is the Modi government's inability to secure an exemption for India's aluminium and steel sectors from the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Jairam Ramesh, the Indian National Congress's general secretary in-charge of communications, emphasised the material consequence of this on social media:

India's aluminium and steel exports to the EU have already fallen from $7bn to $5bn and are only expected to fall further beginning this year due to the enforcement of the CBAM since 1 January, 2026.

The tweet from Ashok Swain, an Indian-origin academic based in Sweden, captures the tone of the Indian left's opposition to the EU-India trade deal:

Thanks to the trade deal between EU and India, German cars and French wines will be cheaper in India - exactly what 800 million Indians surviving on subsidised food have been demanding.

Pros and cons of tariffs

Swain's criticism mirrors the opposition from domestic left-leaning factions like the Communist Party of India (Marxist), which has argued that tariff cuts on luxury goods will only benefit the wealthy, while threatening the livelihoods of farmers, workers, and ordinary citizens.

The skepticism of the left stems from India's economic history.

As Tricontinental Research notes, millions in India still rely on agriculture for their livelihood. The institute notes that in the 1990s, aggressive cuts to agricultural tariffs triggered a prolonged agrarian crisis. While farming now makes up just 18 percent of India's GDP, it still employs 46 percent of the national workforce. In contrast, the service sector accounts for over half of the economy but only 30 percent of jobs.

The Samyukt Kisan Morcha, a coalition of over 500 Indian farmers' unions, warns cheap, subsidised EU processed foods and wines will crash domestic prices and devastate small farmers. It condemns the "double standard" where complex EU barriers block Indian farm exports, while India lowers its own import standards.

Furthermore, left-wing critics warn the FTA's facilitation of European weapons procurement from India risks empowering crony capitalists and derailing the country's traditional nuclear policy, with the Diaspora in Action group and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) asserting it represents an "absence of guardrails" for peace and stability.

Featured image via the Canary

Apparently, Reform are trying to court the Muslim vote for the London mayoral race [ 02-Feb-26 8:45pm ]

A clip has emerged on social media of Reform leader Nigel Farage proudly explaining that his party has put forward a Muslim candidate for the London mayoral election in order to court the Muslim vote.

In the video, Farage — apparently answering an interviewer's question — states that:

We've got a Muslim woman who's gonna stand for us for the mayor of London contest against Sadiq Khan. So no, there are plenty of members of the Muslim community who will vote for Reform, support Reform. The difference here of course is that, for many many years, the Muslim vote was viewed by Labour as being a bloc vote. They turned out and voted for Labour in their droves. That has changed a lot.

The hypocrisy on display is quite breathtaking, even for Farage. 'We've got a Muslim woman, so of course Muslims will vote for us — also, Labour made the mistake of thinking Muslims all vote together'.

It sounds an awful lot like the Reform leader is fine with playing identity politics when it suits him, doesn't it?

Unfortunately for him, Farage also mistakenly seems to think that UK Muslims are completely uninformed.

Reform — London 'feels like a Muslim city'

You see, that Muslim woman that Reform have got would be Laila Cunningham, a UK-born Muslim of Egyptian descent. Cunningham formerly worked as a prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service before making the move into politics.

Like most Reformers, she's also a Tory washout. The Reform candidate was previously elected as a Westminster City Council member in 2022 for the Conservative Party. And, also like most Reformers, Cunningham also happens to have dabbled in Islamophobia.

In an interview on the Standard podcast, Cunningham argued that Muslims wearing the burqa should be stopped and searched by the police. As her reasoning, the newly-minted Reformer stated:

It has to be assumed that if you're hiding your face, you're hiding it for a criminal reason.

She also asserted that "there should be one civic culture, which "should be British", and went on to say:

If you go to parts of London, it does feel like a Muslim city. The signs are written in a different language. You've got burqas being sold in markets.

For her comments, Shaista Gohir — crossbench peer and CEO of the Muslim Women's Network UK — accused Cunningham of helping to endanger UK Muslims. Gohir said that the Reform candidate was:

sending a message to Muslims that they do not belong [and] emboldening people who already abuse Muslims and influencing those people who are reading this misinformation.

Who else did we expect from Farage?

As such, Cunningham hardly seems like a shining light to sway London Muslims to vote for the far right. But, then again, who else would we expect as a choice from noted Islamophobe Nigel Farage, who once told Sky News that:

We have a growing number of young people in this country who do not subscribe to British values, [who] in fact loathe much of what we stand for.

When questioned on whether he was referring to Muslims, the Reform leader responded:

We are. … And I'm afraid I found some of the recent surveys saying that 46% of British Muslims support Hamas - support a terrorist organisation that is proscribed in this country.

This is a blatant misrepresentation of a study from the Henry Jackson Society — a neoconservative think tank. It asked whether British Muslims feel more sympathy with Hamas or Israel [p22].

Apparently British Muslims are just expected to forget Farage dog-whistling that they, as a whole, are terrorist sympathisers. Likewise, Reform clearly reckons that London Muslims are just waiting to vote for a woman who wants them accosted by police.

Reform chose Cunningham, as a minoritised woman, to lend an acceptable face to racist policies. Far from being the breath of fresh air in UK politics they pretend to be, Reform are pulling the same old establishment stunts.

See also: Priti Patel, Shabana Mahmood, Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman, etc etc etc.

Featured image via the Australian

Belfast university dumps Mitchell after further Epstein ties emerge [ 02-Feb-26 7:54pm ]

Queen's University Belfast (QUB) will end its relationship with George Mitchell, following new revelations in the latest trove of Jeffrey Epstein files released in the last week. A building on the university's campus will no longer be known as the Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice. A bust of the former Senator will also be removed.

In a statement, the university said:

While no findings of wrongdoing by Senator Mitchell have been made, the university has concluded that, in light of this material, and mindful of the experiences of victims and survivors, it is no longer appropriate for its institutional spaces and entities to continue to bear his name.

As a civic institution with a global reputation for leadership in peace, reconciliation, and justice, Queen's University Belfast must ensure that its honours and symbols reflect the highest standards consistent with its values and responsibilities.

String of allegations facing George Mitchell

QUB's claim of no wrongdoing by Mitchell is highly questionable. He remained in contact with Epstein years after the notorious paedophile was convicted in 2008 for procuring a child for prostitution. This may not have been criminal wrongdoing, but was certainly the wrong thing to do.

A 2011 email present among the three million documents released by the US Department of Justice shows Epstein planning to meet with Mitchell and former secretary of state for Northern Ireland Peter Mandelson in New York. Mandelson has resigned in disgrace due to continuing details emerging about his links to Epstein.

Other allegations against Mitchell are more sinister. A horrifying letter written in code by a 16-year-old abused by Epstein reads:

They are always flights of horror whether it's with Jeffrey, Mr. Leonsis, Mr. Case, Mr. Snyder, the Gregorys, Mr. Colgan or one being borrowed by a seemingly good federal worker and even rented, it is all horror.

And nothing is as it seems, I am so confused by everything and people you expect to be good like even Senators like George Mitchell who you think will be like a grandpa are bad. Mr. Kimsey is deranged.

Those mentioned appear to mostly be prominent US business figures. A previous email release suggested a victim of Epstein's crimes:

…was required to have sex with friends of Ms Maxwell and Mr Epstein, including Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner, Ehud Barak, former Senator George Mitchell and Stephen Kosslyn.

Mitchell has previously described his relationship with Epstein as a "blessing". In 2019, Virginia Giuffre accused Mitchell of raping her. She died by suicide in 2025.

George Mitchell — scholarship body cuts its losses

The US-Ireland Alliance has also separated from Mitchell. It describes itself as:

…proactive, non-partisan, non-profit organisation dedicated to consolidating existing relations between the United States and the island of Ireland and building that relationship for the future.

It offers scholarships for US students to study in Ireland. The website is keen to stress the body's role in generating future "leaders". It's reasonable to ask why we'd want the people who should be our representatives pre-selected for us via Ivy League universities and unaccountable institutions. The better option is to have them rise through more organic popular movements, such as trade unions.

The question is even more timely as the Epstein revelations show us the utter depravity of the ruling class the former system has produced. In a statement today, the Alliance said:

The board of directors of the US-Ireland Alliance has unanimously agreed that its George J. Mitchell Scholarship program should no longer bear the former Senator's name.

The decision was made due to new information that has come to light as part of the release of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein by the Department of Justice on Friday, according to Trina Vargo, founder and president of the US-Ireland Alliance.

Vargo, like Mitchell, was previously involved in the North of Ireland peace process.

Time to end all boot-licking tributes to wretched US ruling class

Mitchell has been a revered figure among the establishment in the Six Counties for his role as chair in the talks which culminated in the Good Friday Agreement of 1998.

He was invited to speak in front of a group of teenagers at the university as recently as April 2025, which seems like a deeply irresponsible decision given the credible accusations against him. Mitchell's removal is long overdue.

Fawning tributes to powerful Americans were always pathetic, but the latest revelations add an additional element of disgust to the sycophancy. While they're ridding us of Mitchell, Queen's can go one better — kick warmonger and fellow Epstein associate Hillary Clinton out of her role as chancellor.

Featured image via the Canary

By Robert Freeman

Trade unionists call on Polanski to mobilise Greens against local council austerity [ 02-Feb-26 7:45pm ]

Zack Polanski in front of a People's Assembly banner saying End Austerity Now

The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) has been in touch with details of a petition to Green Party leader Zack Polanski. It calls on him to commit Green candidates in the upcoming council elections to opposing austerity cuts:

The Polanski petition

The TUSC all-Britain steering committee has welcomed a new petition from leading trade unionists. It calls on the Green Party leader, Zack Polanski, to mobilise his party in the struggle against local council austerity.

The petition, launched by 20 current and former members of trade union executives, makes an opening appeal to Polanski:

to ensure that in this year's local council elections no candidate shall appear on the ballot paper on behalf of the Greens who has not made a public commitment to vote against all cuts and closures to council services, jobs, pay and conditions should they be elected as a councillor on 7 May.

This is the first set of elections since Polanski won the Green Party leadership last summer, denouncing the 'system rigged for the rich'. And, with local public services still facing an unbearable funding squeeze, opposing all further cuts and closures should be a no-brainer.

As the petition says, while:

we cannot expect Sir Keir Starmer's Labour Party, the Lib Dems, the Tories or Reform to join the struggle to defend local public services… we should not expect anything less from those who have spoken against the establishment's austerity agenda.

The trade unionists' petition further asks that Zack Polanski:

instructs all current Green Party councillors to make the same commitment for future council budget-making meetings, including in the 40-plus local authorities where the Greens are presently part of the council administration.

The Greens do have a substantial presence in local government and if their hundreds of councillors were to take such a stand - and there was a protest movement to back them up - who could categorically say that Starmer and the chancellor Rachel Reeves wouldn't have to make yet another U-turn?

The central battle remains to get the trade union leaders to build on the heroic resistance of those like the Birmingham council bin-workers fighting wage cuts and poorer services. But a widespread councillors' rebellion would open up a new front. That's why the trade unionists' petition to Polanski deserves all our support.

But can councillors resist austerity?

The main argument made by councillors from the establishment parties for why they 'reluctantly' go along with the devastation of local public services is that it would not be 'legal' for councils to resist. Firstly, that's not a good argument from those who say they are 'fighting the system' - only not now apparently, and not in their local town hall in defence of public services! But also, it is just not true.

Since its inception, TUSC has pioneered an anti-austerity strategy of councils using their prudential borrowing powers and reserves to set needs-based budgets as part of building a mass campaign for proper government funding for local services, explaining exactly how that was possible. Not by ignoring the legal requirement for a council to set a 'balanced budget' each year before it is able to spend money or issue council tax bills, but by formally 'balancing' it by the use of borrowing powers and reserves.

Previous TUSC documents have detailed what powers councils have and how they could use them to this end. They include the 55-page briefing Preparing a No Cuts People's Budget, available from the TUSC website. What is very relevant is that the alternative budget amendments moved by TUSC-supporting councillors and explored in this briefing were not recommended by council finance officers when they were presented. But officers didn't rule them 'illegal' either. There really is no excuse for any councillor to go along with local austerity policies.

The latest developments on local council funding and the law were addressed in a TUSC discussion document arguing for a clear anti-austerity stance in the 2026 elections from any candidates selected by the newly-formed Your Party. But the same points apply to Green Party candidates too.

TUSC candidates and the petition

It is clear that local austerity will not be defeated by votes in the council chambers alone but by combining such defiance with building a mass movement. But it is also absolutely clear that councillors voting for austerity is definitely not the way to defeat it!

The TUSC national election agent, Clive Heemskerk, welcomed the petition as a means to help clarify where there should or should not be TUSC candidates contesting seats in the 7 May elections:

All candidates appearing on the ballot paper using one of the TUSC descriptions in May will have no difficulty in making the commitment asked for in the trade union petition. It is a requirement of standing to agree to TUSC's six candidate guarantees - the first one of which is to 'oppose all cuts and closures to council services, jobs, pay and conditions, and the privatisation of services or their transfer to social enterprises or arms-length management organisations which are the first steps to their privatisation'.

The six guarantees are the minimum commitments candidates make. They can bring other issues to the fore of their campaign if they wish, as the TUSC model means that it is the individual candidate who is in control. But you can't use one of the TUSC descriptions on the ballot paper unless you commit to the six guarantees as a minimum.

This May, TUSC has agreed that we will not be standing against Your Party candidates and, if there are Green councillors or candidates who sign the trade union petition to Zack Polanski, we will not stand in competition with them either.

We can't know in advance what position Zack will take on the petition's call - we would very much welcome the Green Party throwing its councillors into the battle against austerity but that will very probably not be his stance - but if a prospective Green candidate is prepared to sign the petition that's a better indication that they might resist the pressure for cuts from the council officers (and their less determined fellow councillors) than any amount of verbal 'opposition' to austerity in general.

Of course, it is true that petitioning Green and Your Party candidates to take a stand is not the same as trade unions having their own candidates running, directly subject to the democratic accountability of the union members. It puts the working class and its organisations in a similar position to where we were at the end of the 19th century, without a party of our own and seeking out individual 'friends of labour' to articulate workers' interests.

That's why TUSC will be stepping up its support for the campaign in the trade unions for them to take the necessary measures to establish their own political voice; including by encouraging as many trade unionists, socialists and working-class community candidates as possible to stand in May's elections - alongside Your Party and genuine anti-austerity Greens.

You can sign the petition online here. Or you can download a printable PDF version here.

Featured image via TUSC

Israel causes Gaza's population to drop by about 254,000 during the war [ 02-Feb-26 7:26pm ]

A large-scale study published by the Guardian and prepared by the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights has found that Gaza's population has fallen by around 254,000 people since the outbreak of war on 7 October 2023.

By the end of 2025, this decline amounted to roughly 10.6% of Gaza's pre-war population. Researchers describe it as one of the most severe demographic shifts in the Strip's modern history.

Unprecedented

The figures confirm what researchers call an "unprecedented demographic earthquake". They link the decline to mass civilian killings, forced displacement, and worsening health and living conditions. These factors have also caused a sharp drop in birth rates.

The report provides stark details on the human cost of the war:

18,592 children were killed between the start of the conflict and the end of 2025.
12,400 women died as a result of violence.
Total Palestinian casualties reached 71,000, with more than 171,000 injured.

Despite a ceasefire agreement signed in October 2025, hundreds of additional deaths and injuries were recorded afterward. This underlines both the fragility of the truce and the failure to protect civilians.

International humanitarian law under strain

The study warns that international humanitarian law, designed to safeguard civilians during war, has reached a "breaking point". Researchers cite widespread war crimes and an almost total lack of accountability.

They caution that continued impunity risks eroding international legal protections entirely, paving the way for future atrocities.

The damage has extended far beyond loss of life. Gaza's social fabric has been torn apart by falling birth rates, destroyed homes, and the devastation of hospitals and schools.

Severe shortages of water, electricity, and healthcare have compounded suffering, pushing civilian life into an unprecedented crisis.

International support and accountability

The study urges the international community to act immediately to protect civilians in Gaza. It calls for:

Stronger enforcement of international humanitarian law
Faster investigations and prosecutions of war crimes
Urgent international assistance to relieve civilian suffering and address widespread destruction

Featured image via Red Cross

By Alaa Shamali

As Spycops hearings resume victims set out their positions [ 02-Feb-26 6:47pm ]

Spycops campaign banners outside Royal Courts of Justice

The 'Spycops' Undercover Policing Inquiry has resumed hearing live evidence in Central London. Five former undercovers from the notorious Special Demonstration Squad active between 1992 and 2007 will be giving evidence over the next two months.

The inquiry has published a series of 'position statements' on behalf of numerous participants, including the Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police and victims of abusive undercover policing.

Spycops infiltrating campaigns

The Inquiry has set out some of the questions it will be asking about the justification for spying on trades unions, justice campaigns, political parties and campaign groups, including Palestinian solidarity groups, as well as the accuracy of the intelligence reporting, the officers' abuses, including black-listing and sexual deception, as well as the impact of it all.

Following on from previous hearings about the police's handling of the murder of Stephen Lawrence and spying on the Lawrence family, the Inquiry will explore how the tasking of undercovers focused on protecting the reputation of the police.

In 2005, police shot dead Jean Charles de Menezes in cold blood. They then deployed undercover officers to spy on the campaign for justice. The Metropolitan Police has proffered an apology to the family for the reporting on their campaign.

In the early 2000 this drive to protect reputations expanded, with a 'policing' focus on preventing embarrassment to the government, and protecting corporations and 'UK Plc'.

The evidence is that spycops ran deliberate campaigns of harassment. We will hear evidence of how managers and undercover officers secretly plotted to disrupt democratic processes by targeting print shops, raiding people's homes and deliberately harassing people, and we will hear from the victims about the psychological damage and disruption that caused.

The Inquiry will also hear from women targeted for deceitful sexual relationships where the evidence speaks of abuse and coercive control.

Spycops as provocateurs

As with previous hearings, the Inquiry will hear about undercover officers' roles in a number of high profile events, including the massive 2003 Stop the War demonstration against the invasion of Iraq, and the undercover officer who played a central role in planning the high profile 1999 Carnival Against Capitalism, often known as J18, which ended in widespread clashes in the City of London.

The inquiry will explore the extent of DC Jim Boyling's role in organising the J18 event, alongside the decision by the Special Demonstration Squad not to tell the City of London Police the protesters' plans, and government claims that the police had no contact with the organisers and no way of knowing what would happen on the day. Boyling will also face questions about his central role in organising the first ever anti-genetic crop decontamination in Ireland.

DC Carlo Soracchi will face questions about his attempts while undercover to encourage an arson attack on a charity shop in Maida Vale. And also how he came to meet with police barristers preparing the Met's defence in a civil case about the mass detaining of protestors, the 2001 Oxford Circus 'Kettling', contributing to the police's victory, and undermining the judicial process in a case which set a major precedent.

The human toll

This so-called 'spycops' inquiry is one of the longest and most expensive ever, and it has been plagued with delays. Nevertheless, its importance is probably best underscored by the final words of the Metropolitan Police in its position statement:

The human toll of the [Special Demonstration Squad]'s dysfunction has been severe and wide-ranging: misuse of deceased people's identities, wrongful intrusion into individuals' private and political lives, grievous sexual exploitation, damaged relationships, broken families, and widespread anger, distress and psychological harm (including to some of the officers themselves).

The MPS recognises how important it is to understand the damage that the SDS has caused, to hear directly from the people who have been affected, and for the Inquiry to hold those responsible to account.

Hearings are taking place at the International Dispute Resolution Centre, opposite St Paul's Cathedral.

For live coverage of hearings follow @tombfowler on social media & see the YouTube channel.

Featured image via the Canary

Starmer tries to pretend he's against Mandelson - but we have the receipts [ 02-Feb-26 6:21pm ]

Keir Starmer is desperately scrambling to distance himself from the (re)disgraced Peter Mandelson. The prime minister now says that Mandelson should be removed from the house of lords after Mandelson's resignation from Labour for his extreme closeness to serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein. But we have the receipts - far too many to fall for such craven arse-covering.

Last September, when a then-new tranche of Epstein files exposed Mandelson's pining for Epstein, Starmer went to Parliament to insist Mandelson - a senior Number 10 adviser - had his full confidence as his personally-appointed UK ambassador to the US.

But Starmer had been warned more than a full day earlier that the damning revelations were coming out.

Starmer has no excuses

Nor was there any excuse for Starmer appointing Mandelson in the first place. Mandelson's closeness to Epstein was not a new revelation. Labour had known about it for years, yet he still got the top job. This appointment was pushed by the appalling Morgan McSweeney, Mandelson's protégé, Starmer's chief of staff and one of the architects of Corbyn's downfall.

Yet even when last September's exposure came about, Starmer tried to protect him. With Labour out of options, Mandelson was then removed - kind of - as ambassador, but kept on the government payroll - and allowed to keep both his peerage and his Labour membership.

And Starmer was never powerless to remove Mandelson from the Lords, as he now tries to claim:

Of course the PM doesn't have the power to unilaterally remove Mandelson from the Lords. But given it can only be removed via an act of Parliament in government time, Starmer is hardly powerless, indeed he is the only person who can make it happen. pic.twitter.com/A9UyQtLK3I

— Lewis Goodall (@lewis_goodall) February 2, 2026

There's a saying about Israel's genocide in Gaza that "one day everyone will have been against this". Starmer now wants us to believe that he has always been against Mandelson and his perks and peerage.

Nope. We're not buying it - but we do have the receipts.

Featured image via the Canary

Dan Norris arrested again, this time over rape and sexual assault [ 02-Feb-26 6:01pm ]

Dan Norris, former Labour MP and current Independent MP, has been arrested again for a number of sexual offences.

Norris's first arrest, in April last year, was over alleged rape and paedophilia. His latest arrest is on suspicion of rape against a second woman, sexual assault against a third woman, as well as voyeurism and upskirting against a number of women. The police investigation into the first allegations is still ongoing.

Dan Norris arrest one of many

Norris's re-arrest is the latest in a long line of scandals involving the pro-Israel right, especially in the Labour party - mainly, but not exclusively, in connection with child sex offences. Zionist former MP Conor McGinn was charged last week with one count of sexual assault against a woman. Starmer's mentor and chief adviser Peter Mandelson resigned yesterday over his notorious links with serial child rapist and Israeli agent Jeffrey Epstein. In early January, Israel fanatic Liron Velleman admitted child sex offences.

But these barely scratch the surface.

In January last year, 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. Despite the ongoing police investigation, Caplin was recently invited to speak on LBC about Keir Starmer's move to block Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham's bid to stand in a parliamentary election.

The list continues

Hackney councillor Tom Dewey, an organiser in pro-Israel group 'Labour First', admitted possession of the most serious category of child rape images in 2023. The party knew of his arrest when it allowed him to stand for election. After his conviction, it blocked local women members from its systems to prevent them discussing the case.

In March 2025 Sam Gould, 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.

And in August 2025, the US allowed Israeli cyberwar official Tom Alexandrovich to fly back to Israel after he was caught in a police paedophile sting.

The problem is not limited to Israel's supporters outside Israel, either.

The regime is currently ignoring well over 2,000 extradition requests for alleged and convicted paedophiles. In April 2025 Shoshana Strook, the daughter of Israel's far-right settlements minister fled to police and asked them to protect her, accusing both her parents and one of her brothers of raping her as a child, over a period of years, and filming the rapes.

A jury will decide on the evidence whether Norris and McGinn join the list or are acquitted - as long as 'justice secretary' David Lammy doesn't abolish juries for such cases before then. But the arrests bring the Starmeroid faction's paedo and sex offender issues well and truly back into the spotlight.

Featured image via the Canary

Musk 'fully crashes out' after new Epstein allegations [ 02-Feb-26 5:48pm ]

A spiralling Elon Musk has been accused of "fully crashing out" and "powerscaling his pedophilia" in his bizarre attempt to brush off his over 1,000 appearances in files on serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein. So far. Many of them come in the latest Department of Justice release, including asking Epstein about parties on his island on Christmas Day.

Bizarre sort-of-denial from Musk

Musk issued a bizarre response that if he wanted to "spend my time partying with young women" he wouldn't need "creepy loser" Epstein's help. But as a non-denial denial, it didn't go down well. Accusations in response were along the lines of 'protesteth too much,' or in more modern parlance, "fully crashing out":

Fully crashing out pic.twitter.com/F0AIxyi7k9

— evan loves worf (@esjesjesj) February 1, 2026

Others were even more direct, accusing Musk of "powerscaling his pedophilia" to say he'd beat Epstein at it:

Dude is powerscaling his own pedophilia against Epstein and saying that he would win pic.twitter.com/N4NJQShVe8

— Saltydkdan (@saltydkdan) February 1, 2026

But even that wasn't direct enough for some:

Just a fair reminder that behind the screen, this is the man who begged to be on Epstein Island pic.twitter.com/UCR6l014Lf

— Dr man (@dr_1man) February 1, 2026

And Epstein may have shot himself in the foot, or at least the ego. A bias he reportedly wanted built into his 'Grok':

the "Elon is great at everything" feature he personally demanded be programmed into Grok is a source of perpetual amusement pic.twitter.com/iRs0hIYluA

— Claire, aka Midwestern Hedgie

Kuenssberg tries to trip up Polanski on legalising drugs, but he smoothly obliterates her [ 02-Feb-26 5:31pm ]

The BBC's Laura Kuenssberg interviewed Green party leader Zack Polanski. The Greens have a policy to legalise, regulate, and use a public health approach to drugs.

Polanski calls out 'unnecessary deaths'

With reference to that policy, Kuenssberg tried to trip him up with tired propaganda from proponents of the 'war' on drugs, but failed:

"What we need is a public health approach [to drugs]"

Green Party leader Zack Polanski defends his party's drug legalisation policy and also tells #BBCLauraK why he personally has never taken drugs or drank alcohol#BBCLauraK https://t.co/SSXISApUWc pic.twitter.com/rgOGDP82aQ

— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) February 1, 2026

The interviewer said:

Keir Starmer said you were high on drugs and soft on Putin.

Polanksi replied:

That was beneath the audience of the Prime Minister. There are thousands of unnecessary deaths from drug harms and dangerous drugs, what we need is a public health approach. That's not just me saying that, that's experts. So when we talk about legalising drugs, the key bit is about legalising and regulating. If someone has a problematic relationship with drugs, surely they should be seen by a medical health professional to help them.

Legalising and regulating drugs is the sober approach. Portugal decriminalised possession of drugs in 2001 and the results have been positive. Drug death rates fell following the reforms 15 years ago. And compared to the EU, they've remained much lower. In 2019, drug deaths in Portugal were six for every million people. The EU average was 23.7 per million. In Scotland it was much worse at 315 deaths per million.

'Hypocritical'

Kuenssberg continued:

Are you sending a message to young people that if you legalise all drugs its ok to use drugs?

But Polanski responded:

Well Keir Starmer made a joke about taking drugs at university. What we see is that this is very racialised. Very often it is young black people stopped and searched on the street, eight times more than their white peers. The danger is happening now where we're pushing it into street corners… I've never taken drugs in my life, or even drunk alcohol, but I don't sit here as the fun police. People should do what they want to do, it just wasn't for me. But this is about a system change, against a hypocritical approach. We've had Labour and Conservative MPs say on the record they've taken drugs, but they're both putting in prison people who have taken drugs, and again, it is disproportionately young black people

In Portugal, use of drugs by 15-24 year olds actually fell in the decade following decriminalisation. So Kuenssberg is missing the mark.

Trauma causes addiction, not drugs

Evidence analysed from a wide array of experts shows that trauma, environment, and issues like social isolation lead to drug addiction. It's not a fact of the drugs themselves. This is revealed in Johann Hari's book Chasing the Scream.

Another issue with prohibition is that people with heroin or crack addictions are stigmatised and isolated even further because of their addictions. Whereas, in Portugal they are mentored into increasing social connections and leading vibrant lives. Instead, people with addictions are integrated into society.

This policy is outdated and Polanski is right to challenge it.

Featured image via YouTube screenshot/BBC Politics

By James Wright

Declassified summit: Ahmed Alnaouq confronts the left's failure to unite against rising fascism [ 02-Feb-26 5:21pm ]

Yesterday, Palestinian journalist Ahmed Alnaouq delivered a powerful mobilising speech confronting the left's continuous squabbles whilst the far-right are exploiting divisions and soaring in popularity with British voters.

At the Declassified UK summit, Alnaouq called on left-wing fighters against fascism and Zionism to unite against the threats we all face. He challenged us not to fall for the gutter press' toxic culture wars, amplified by our broken media system. His energised speech reminded us of the power we hold in solidarity and shared resources.

Furthermore, it comes as a wake-up call for socialists across the country: build bridges, focus on what unites us, and stop obsessing over what divides us.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Palästinaforum Austria (@palaestinaforum)

Ahmed Alnaouq: 'we have everything to unite us'

Since Your Party was announced by Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn in the summer, public spats and our failure to have respectful, decent debate have left socialists across the country frustrated and angry.

Alnaouq's speech in full was as follows:

I think it is the time for unity. I'm just sick and tired of us people with morals and human rights. I'm sick and tired of us quarreling among each other. I'm sick of us trying to build new parties. I'm sick of us fighting each other, finding ways to divide us from each other.

Well, we have everything to unite us.

My friends, fascism is not at the doorsteps in the UK. It is here. And unless we join forces with each other, unless we hold hands, we will not be able to defeat it. And we don't have the luxury for trial and waiting. We do not have time. We have to act. My friends, we have the numbers. We have the resources. We have the support of the people. What we don't have is organisation. We need to learn how to work with each other in order to defeat fascism, in order to defeat far-right, in order to defeat Zionism. And we must never shy away from calling ourselves anti-Zionists because we are anti-Zionists.

Our recent reporting highlighted the deepening split between Your Party's co-founders, exposing factions more interested in division than unity. Following the launch of Corbyn's The Many slate, we wrote about the common enemies we should be uniting against:

Both leaders have been clear that they face the same enemies. Wealth inequality, rising costs, oppression, injustice, and war all sit at the centre of their political focus.

Despite those common enemies, as Alnaouq outlines, leftists are not doign enough.

Power for the people, not egos

This issue once again underscores an issue that we know full well permeates through all structures of power: ego and self-advancement. To build a movement that can sustain the fight ahead and withstand attacks from the far right and the media, we must safeguard against self-interest and the hunger for power. Those shady, unwelcome interests will continually seek to manipulate the overall movement for their own advantage, which will only weaken us all in the end and lose the battle ahead.

Capitalist, neoliberal abuse won't fall on its own. In order to beat billionaire-funded fascism we must have a socialist movement run and powered by its members. Anything else is just repeating failure and hoping for miracles.

As Alnaouq pleads, it is high time for the left to finally learn our lesson.

Featured image via Instagram

By Maddison Wheeldon

'Stay away': Israel drop mystery chemicals in Lebanon and refuse to explain why [ 02-Feb-26 4:57pm ]

Israel has sprayed chemicals into Lebanon, according to UN forces in the region. United Nations Interim Force In Lebanon (UNIFIL) said in a press release:

the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) told UNIFIL that they would be carrying out an aerial activity dropping what they said was a non-toxic chemical substance over areas near the Blue Line.

The 'blue line' is a 120km strip which marks the line of withdrawal after Israeli military withdrawal in 2000. UN troops monitor the zone.

Israel attacks Lebanon AGAIN

Despite the claims the chemical were non-toxic, UNIFIL were told:

peacekeepers should stay away and remain under cover, forcing them to cancel over a dozen activities.

UNIFIL complained their peacekeepers could not "perform normal operations" near the Blue Line for over nine hours. Later, UN troops helped the Lebanese military collect "samples to be tested for toxicity".

UNIFIL called the move "unacceptable" in their press release:

The IDF's deliberate and planned actions not only limited peacekeepers' ability to undertake their mandated activities, but also potentially put their health and that of civilians at risk.

Israel did not disclose what the chemical was or why it as being deployed. UNIFIL said it had

concerns about the effects of this unknown chemical on local agricultural lands, and how this might impact the return of civilians to their homes and livelihoods in the long-term.

Southern Lebanon has remained under Israel attack despite a ceasefire with Israel. Israel killed eight journalists in 22 January, as well as wounding nineteen civilians.

UNIFIL called on the Israeli forces:

to stop all such activities and work with peacekeepers to support the stability we are all working to achieve.

The Republic of Ireland currently has 350 troops deployed as part of the peacekeeping presence. Irish troops were not affected but the country's defence forces condemned:

any violation of airspace or conducting of activities which prevent UNIFIL personnel from carrying out their duties.

The IDF has not commented, but the unexplained use of unknown chemicals in a febrile area is a cause for major concern for UN troops and locals alike.

Featured image via the Canary

Epstein and Palantir boss discussed plans to destabilise the Middle East [ 02-Feb-26 4:49pm ]

Journalist Sulaiman Ahmed has exposed a deliberate agenda between Palantir's Peter Thiel and convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to destabilise the Middle East. The latest Epstein File releases included emails referencing Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, and Egypt, suggesting coordinated attempts to advance Western interests in the region.

This follows widespread reporting on Palantir weeding its way into our NHS, with the help of their privileged ally and Labour peer Peter Mandelson. This latest revelation strengthens wider calls to block Palantir's advances into our state infrastructure through our healthcare system.

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

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

— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) February 1, 2026

Epstein Thiel: billionaires pulling the strings of global chaos

The email correspondence released shows Epstein and Thiel state their intention to destabilise the over-policed region. Confirming a long-suspected Western agenda, Epstein is alleged to have said 'the more of a mess, with just lots of bad guys on different sides, the less we will do'. This is no secret, of course, with the West having a long history of interfering in the Middle East. Our own Steve Topple wrote in 2017 about the correlation between the unhappiness of the region's citizens with the levels of western interference:

The World Happiness Report 2017 manages to highlight the never-ending chaos and suffering that comes with failed Western intervention. And the reason is generally because such interference is driven by one thing: money. So while Western nations enjoy the fruits of past colonial plunder and modern neoliberal policies, people in far-off, forgotten lands continue to suffer the consequences of those greed-driven Western exploits.

The latest batch of files on Epstein further demonstrate what is the lived reality for Arabs - understanding so-called 'destabilisation' in the region can only happen through understanding Western interventionism carried out by powerful elites.

Palantir, Epstein and mass murder

Public calls to limit Thiel's influence in the UK are likely to gain weight from journalist Ryan Grim's X post. Grim has shared an audio clip in which Epstein links Israel's former PM Ehud Barak to Palantir. Where Palantir operates, morality does not appear to follow:

As Ehud Barak was leaving official govt service in Israel, he turned to Jeffrey Epstein for guidance. Epstein told him he needed to look at a Peter Thiel company called Palantir. Rare audio of Epstein and Barak from the latest DOJ release: pic.twitter.com/bSSeRrWkVb

— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) February 2, 2026

It's curious that just as the US grows more unstable, connections surface between Thiel's guidance and JD Vance's political rise:

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

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

This next clip simply goes to evidence how US leaders are not acting in the interests of their own country, but that of a hostile, aggressive military state. Again, this should further strengthen public calls to keep pro-Israel Thiel out of UK politics.

NY Sen. C. Schumer (not up for re-election till Jan 2029):

"We delivered more security assistance to Israel, our ally, under my leadership than ever, ever before. We will keep doing that… I have many jobs as leader & one is to fight for aid to Israel."pic.twitter.com/ciwtO7aSMQ

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) February 1, 2026

Palantir and the NHS

Palantir and Thiel's influence in politics across the world is difficult to overstate. For example, we have repeatedly written about the defence surveillance corporation moving to seize the data held by the NHS. Wes Streeting has shown no qualms in handing the UK state over to billionaires, continually taking steps to ensure the richest profit from the essential health needs of ordinary citizens.

As wrote recently about the contract between Thiel's Palantir and the UK government:

NHS England awarded the contract in 2023, under the Conservative government. Palantir is also known to have close links to the Labour Party, and it has been reported that Palantir hired Peter Mandelson to lobby the Labour Government to help it win more government contracts. The contract is up for renewal in February 2027.

Palantir is a US company that specialises in artificial intelligence powered military and surveillance technology and data analytics. Billionaire Trump donor Peter Thiel was a co-founder of the company.

Moreover, the evidence above shows Peter Thiel demonstrating an apparent eagerness to sow chaos in the Middle East for his own gain. As a result, his active contracts and partnerships with the Labour government must now be scrutinized to ensure the rights of those in the Middle East are not denigrated so billionaires can make even more money.

No more establishment politicians

Neo-liberalism has seen Western politicians repeatedly abusing power and the richest bending the rules in their favour. As a result, the most important choice for UK voters in the upcoming local elections is to elect leaders who serve ordinary people and rein in billionaire influence.

As Zack Polanski, Green Party leader recently put it in a letter to Palantir's CEO Alex Karp:

I know that companies such as yours hire corporate lobbyists such as Peter Mandelson to assess 'political risk'. I have some advice you can have for free. The political risk is very high for your continuing involvement with the NHS. The Green Party is advancing, and we will use every means at our disposal, including that of our hundreds of thousands of members, to get you out of the NHS.

Like many across the country, we are watching and we are taking receipts. We cannot allow this craven bunch of money-hungry fools lead the world into further ruin.

Featured image via the Canary

By Maddison Wheeldon

The international order is dead, and the West killed it [ 02-Feb-26 4:29pm ]

The international order meant to limit the effects of war on vulnerable groups is falling apart. 100,000 civilians died in 2024 and 2025 as a result. And the problem isn't going away anytime soon.

The Geneva Academy's new report laid out how international humanitarian law (IHL) was at breaking point around the world. The War Watch: IHL in focus study warned:

The years 2024 and 2025 proved devastating to civilians, with little evidence of willingness among warring parties to limit the barbarity inflicted upon the most vulnerable.

In many cases:

serious violations of international humanitarian law (IHL)were wrought against those whom the law was supposed to protect on a huge scale and with rampant impunity.

And the report said:

Murder, torture, and rape were widespread; civilians and their homes, schools, and hospitals were bombed regularly and sometimes systematically.

The report acknowledges genocide in Gaza and Sudan as being among the most egregious cases today. But many other countries are also affected.

International order breakdown: neither inevitable nor unavoidable

The report describes widespread attacks on hospitals, medical workers, and journalists. There is widespread sexual violence in many conflict areas. Disabled people are particularly vulnerable in warzones, and at the same time warzones create more disabled people - often in mind-boggling numbers. In Ukraine, for example:

at least 50,000 Ukrainians - soldiers and civilians had lost limbs - since the February 2022 invasion. That estimate had doubled by the end of 2025.

Impunity is widespread. The academy said dealing with it should be "treated as a policy priority". However:

Persistent under-resourcing, alongside political measures that constrain or undermine judicial independence, risks weakening the enforcement of IHL and eroding its deterrent effect.

Rhetorical commitments

The report warned that many governments did not match action with rhetoric. This includes arms sales:

International law prohibits States from assisting any actor, State or non-State, in carrying out attacks
against civilians.

The authors warned political considerations often overrode legal obligations:

While the UN Arms Trade Treaty has been ratified by a large number of States, its obligations are too often sidelined in favour of political considerations. This must change. The continued export of arms to Israel, Russia, and others has contributed directly to violations on the ground.

This seems especially relevant given US and Israeli attacks on organisations like the United Nations (UN) and International Criminal Court (ICC). And the Trump administration's recent decision to pull out of dozens of international bodies covering everything from climate change to counter-terrorism.

The authors said:

What is described and summarized in this report is neither inevitable nor unavoidable. It is a choice we make as a species to murder, torture, rape, and abuse our own.

Either the situation is arrested and enforcement and accountability are guaranteed or further damage will be done to IHL:

This report is a record of both what has, and has not, been done in armed conflicts around
the world. It is a grim, grisly snapshot of our inhumanity. No one in a position of authority, though, can say they did not know.

In recent weeks we saw an admission from Canada's PM Mark Carney that the so-called global order was dying. He wasn't wrong, even if he didn't go far enough. Now legal experts are saying the legal system meant to limit war is coming apart too. And, it's happening entirely by the choice of many powerful Western states.

Featured image via the Canary

Pope Leo makes even more of a mess of Trump strangling Cuba [ 02-Feb-26 4:20pm ]

Donald Trump's regime has been tightening the US stranglehold on Cuba. And Pope Leo XIV's take on the events has attracted criticism. Because it shows the kind of establishment propaganda the world is up against.

On X, the first US pope of the Catholic church lamented:

an increase in tensions between Cuba and the United States of America

The "economic terrorism" of the US embargo has now strangled the Caribbean island for over six decades, reportedly costing it $170bn. But the pope seemed to think both-sidesing the issue was appropriate. And reacting to Trump's unprovoked decision to squeeze Cuba even harder, Leo simply called on "all responsible parties" to negotiate.

Fortunately, people were quick to challenge the pope's ridiculous framing of the issue:

Collective punishment by the USA against Cuba isn't "tension" it's a war crime.

— John Smith (son of Harry Leslie Smith) (@Harryslaststand) February 1, 2026

The only thing 'increasing', Puerto Rican professor Rafael Bernabe clarified, is the:

systematic aggression of the US government against Cuba

There are no "increasing tensions" between Cuba and the United States. That implies that Cuba is taking action to increase tensions with the United States. There is nothing of the sort. There's only increased and systematic aggression of the US government against Cuba, which must…

— Rafael Bernabe (@BernabeMVC) February 1, 2026

To be fair, Leo did call for dialogue to "avoid violence" and further suffering of the Cuban people (indirectly clarifying that it's the US posing the threat and that Cuba poses no threat at all to US civilians). But his both-sidesing seems to be an echo of Catholic leaders' longstanding hostility to communism.

Amid the US terror assault in Latin America during the Cold War, for example, many Catholics in the region wanted to stand clearly with ordinary people against ongoing inequality and injustice. But the church hierarchy in Europe attacked and silenced progressive voices while appointing conservative figures in their place.

You can't defeat the empire without defeating its propaganda

The issue here isn't communism, though. It's that the US has long been terrorising civilians whose governments don't submit to its rule. Trump's regime may treat international law with more overt contempt. But it's nonetheless a pattern of behaviour that Western propaganda enables.

To help break this cycle, we need to centre the key context. That means highlighting how the US:

Is a military superpower with hundreds of international bases.
Has consistently terrorised countries around the world.
Is a co-perpetrator of Israel's genocide in Gaza. And it has attacked the international legal system to defend these actions.
Has undermined international law by imposing an illegal embargo on Cuba since the early 1960s, costing both countries billions. The majority of countries in the world have consistently called for an end to the embargo. The US and Israel have often been the only ones to oppose that call.
Tightening of sanctions since the first Trump administration has "hurt civilians the most", increasing infant mortality and reducing life expectancy.
Currently holds Venezuela's president as a prisoner of war. It abducted him in an illegal military invasion that used new high-tech weaponry. And it probably committed war crimes in the process. But the US president boasted about how "incredible" this all was.

It also means emphasising that Cuba:

Is willing to engage peacefully and lawfully with the US. And it has never attacked the US or its people.
Has supported countless liberation movements in the past, including in the battle that helped to defeat settler-colonial apartheid in South Africa. But since the end of the Cold War, it has no longer done this.
Has its issues, but has also made significant advances in healthcare and education since its 1959 revolution. And it has sent hundreds of thousands of doctors on solidarity missions around the world.

Name the real 'malign actor' - US imperialism!

Despite all of the above, the US insists that it's going after Cuba because of its links to "malign actors". These include China and Russia, with which the US itself has sought to improve relations. But some truth always slips through, and the White House has clarified that Cuba's continuing independence is:

threatening the foreign policy of the United States.

The foreign policy of the US, as has long been the case, is to ensure the dominance of US elite interests in the Americas. Trump's stance on Cuba follows this policy, while also appeasing and exciting his anti-communist voters, agitators (like secretary of state Marco Rubio), and racist warmongers in general.

There will be resistance from within Cuba itself. And countries in the region like Mexico may refuse to play along with Trump's power games completely. Resistance to Trump's shamelessly brash version of US imperialism needs to be much stronger, though.

Trump has shown that he will back down when he feels too much pressure from other countries. He's just pushing the world to see how far it will let him go. And the more lazy framing we get from high-profile figures like the pope, the easier Trump's rampage will be.

Featured image via the Canary

By Ed Sykes

Disgraced General David Petraeus is back and trying to cash in on Gaza [ 02-Feb-26 4:02pm ]

Ex-US general David Petraeus is trying to make money out of Israel's genocide. The one-time special forces chief and counter-insurgency 'expert' now works for a private equity firm linked to military and fossil fuel contracts. Wow. What a surprise for us all.

Petraeus is know for many things. Like being a former top US special forces commander. And also head of the CIA. Oh, and leaking state secrets to his biographer. Who he was having an affair with. And getting away with it, barring a fine.

All of this is relentlessly cringe obviously, but somehow the biography in question ultimately ended up being called 'All In: The Education of General David Petraeus'. Which is a bit much for a Monday. Anyway…

David Petraeus and biometric warfare

Drop Site News now reports Petraeus has been out to Israel giving speeches and schmoozing. He

visited the U.S.-military run coordination center established in southern Israel to oversee the so-called ceasefire in Gaza.

Why? Well it is likely connected to his reputation as:

a major proponent of biometric gated communities in counterinsurgency, now works for KKR whose portfolio includes companies that have technology and defense interests in Gaza.

So who are KKR?

Drop Site reported:

Soon after his resignation from the CIA in 2012, Petraeus began work for Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (KKR), a powerful U.S. private-equity and investment company. Petraeus is currently a partner at KKR, chairman of the KKR Global Institute, and chairman of KKR Middle East, which has offices in the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

Sounds like he knows all the worst people…

A dubious track record

The general is seen by some as the pioneer of modern counter-insurgency, despite being forced to resign from the CIA. He escalated the war in Iraq, deploying more troops and arming militias. He also expanded the dirty war of night raids and drone strikes in Afghanistan and Yemen.

Former US president Barack Obama then installed him as head of the CIA - until his mortifying downfall. Petraeus has worked around the private equity sector ever since.

But why is he interested in Gaza? Well one of his hobby horses is the role of gated communities in counter-insurgency. In effect, how to control populations. And the US-led transitional authority, named the Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC), has come up with a deranged plan to keep Gazans in special UAE-funded blocks.

One week prior to Petraeus's visit, the U.S. Army presented the CMCC with plans for a "Gaza First Planned Community" in Rafah, as first reported by Drop Site.

Drop Site said:

The residential compound would house up to 25,000 Palestinians in an area under full Israeli military control and would include biometric entry, identity checks, reeducation programs, and controls over aid and housing.

Sounds deeply fucked up, but understandably appealing to someone like Petraeus.

Wall it off

Petraeus' January 21 speech to the CMCC was reportedly full of praise over the current non-ceasefire in Gaza. But the former general also visited Israel in 2024 for a major military conference. He told the Israeli press then:

The foundational concepts of counterinsurgency are that you clear an area, you hold it, and you hold it in a very significant manner…You wall it off. You create gated communities, as we call it, 12 or 13 of them in Fallujah alone. You use biometric ID cards because you're trying to separate the enemy, the extremists, from the people. That's the fundamental idea.

It's not clear what is in it for Petraeus. But Drop Site said:

The exploration of Gaza's gas would fit into the economic and energy cooperation between Israel and the UAE under the Abraham Accords. In 2025, a formal UAE-Israel energy cooperation memorandum of understanding was signed, outlining gas sector cooperation.

They added:

UAE involvement in Gaza gas would further position it as a regional energy hub linking the Gulf's capital and infrastructure with Eastern Mediterranean resources and European markets.

And here is the thing, UAE's national oil firm has links to KKR:

KKR, together with Blackrock, held a $4 billion investment in the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) and has a minority stake in ADNOC Gas Pipeline Assets, which has the technical expertise required for offshore gas exploration and extraction…

Retired military officers often end up making money in lucrative roles in the arms and energy industry. Petraeus is no different. The fact he also gets to riff about population control and counter-insurgency is an added bonus. Like so many of the War on Terror's ghoulish figures, where most of us see genocide, Petraeus sees opportunity.

Featured image via the Canary

Residential care charity trustee paid his own company £1m from charity funds [ 02-Feb-26 3:47pm ]

The families of residents at William Blake House in Northamptonshire have called for an urgent inquiry into the residential care charity. They've made accusations of mismanagement after it came to light that one of the trustees paid its own company £1m from the charity's funds.

The care facility houses 22 residents with learning disabilities and complex care needs. For this role, William Blake House received £3,464,805 last financial year from 20 government contracts. However, it now faces the threat of closure under a staggering £1.6m debt in unpaid taxes.

Residential care charity told 'trust has been shattered'

A group of 17 residents' families have accused the charity of wasting public funds and putting their relatives' care at risk. In a public statement on the situation, the families explained that:

Our relatives are some of the most vulnerable adults in society and entirely dependent on stable, continuous care. As parents we placed our trust in the charity to protect the welfare of our loved ones.

This trust has been shattered and serious mismanagement and lack of governance revealed. Our children's wellbeing has been placed in jeopardy.

The group also asserted that they weren't made adequately aware of the care facility's mountain of debt.

As such, the Charity Commission confirmed that it has opened an investigation into William Blake House. A spokesperson for the third-sector watchdog said:

We are aware of potential governance concerns at William Blake House Northants and have opened a regulatory compliance case to engage with the charity's trustees about these matters.

Mounting debts

William Blake House failed to pay its 77 staff members' pay-as-you-earn (PAYE) and national insurance to HMRC. Meanwhile, the charity's assets slumped in value between 2022 and 2024, plummeting from £920,000 to just £200,000.

The care facility's own records show that auditors have repeatedly questioned the facility's financial viability. Earlier in January, a judge told trustees that it had until 30 March to square off its taxes with HMRC. Failing this, the charity would be slapped with a winding-up order.

The charity's webpage states that:

We offer accommodation where the residents can live, learn and work with others in healthy social relationships based on mutual care and respect. We are inspired by the ideals of Rudolf Steiner, based on the acceptance of the spiritual uniqueness of each human being, regardless of disability or religious or racial background.

Steiner was a 19th Century Austrian philosopher, scientist and noted occultist. A Guardian article on the unfolding William Blake House scandal noted that:

Over the same period, the charity has paid Van Kruger Consulting, a company solely owned by William Blake House's chair, Bushra Hamid, £800,000 in strategy fees over three years to develop a "Steiner strategy" business selling online Steiner training courses, and a further £240,000 in unspecified consulting fees. It has yet to launch.

The payments were authorised by the William Blake House board. Its current three trustees include a business associate of Hamid, Paula Allen. Hamid is also chair of the Northampton-based arts gallery charity the Shoosmith Centre, where Allen is both a fellow trustee and its £30,000-a-year interim chief executive.

'Tangible progress'

For its part, William Blake House claimed that the need to repay HMRC delayed the launch of the Steiner training courses. It also stated that Steiner Friends - another charity - would repay the £800,000 consultancy fee. Hamid happens to chair Steiner Friends, and it also features Allen as a trustee.

Likewise, William Blake House asserted that it returned to a regular PAYE payment schedule with HMRC in October 2024. In defense of its financial mismanagement, the charity pointed the finger at local authorities failing to raise contract payments in line with inflation, along with the high cost of agency staff.

The trustees stated that they've made "tangible progress" toward selling off the facility's land to a developer in order to pay off the remaining tax debt. The developer, in turn, plans to construct a new residential home and rent it back to William Blake House.

Featured image via the Canary

https://www.thecanary.co/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/ETjXZ2KBuhNpf-9e1.mp4

Remember when Epstein-fanboy Mandelson said he 'worked every day' against Corbyn? [ 02-Feb-26 3:13pm ]

Peter Mandelson has just quit the Labour party over his extreme closeness to and admiration for serial child rapist Jeffrey Epstein. He said he wanted to avoid embarrassing Keir Starmer any further. By resigning he embarrassed Starmer even further by exposing Starmer's refusal to kick him out.

This is Mandelson in 2017, telling an interviewer that he worked every day to bring down Jeremy Corbyn, reposted today by writer Saul Staniforth:

Tax lawyer and investigative journalist Dan Neidle discovered evidence in the latest Epstein file release that he claims is evidence that Mandelson leaked sensitive UK government info to Epstein:

the link: https://t.co/aIfM9QyJBq

— Dan Neidle (@DanNeidle) February 2, 2026

Mandelson machinations

Mandelson failed - or only partially succeeded in his efforts to undermine Corbyn in 2017. Corbyn went on to almost defeat the Tories in that year's general election. But that wasn't the end of the sabotage - and in 2019 Mandelson got his wish, along with catastrophe for our country.

The UK has been massively damaged by a ring of paedophiles and their hangers-on in the Labour right, including the Israel-funded 'Labour Together' faction that finally brought down Corbyn and still runs Starmer's government through Mandelson protégé Morgan McSweeney, Starmer's chief of staff. McSweeney then pushed Starmer to appoint Mandelson as a his senior adviser.

Their success in undermining Corbyn up to the 2019 general election led to another Tory government, led by Boris Johnson. Johnson's mismanagement of the pandemic led to the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands, many of whom would have survived under a Corbyn response that would have mirrored the successful strategy of New Zealand instead of Johnson's 'pile up the bodies' approach.

Their success in installing Starmer in Downing Street in 2024 has led to incalculable continued misery for Britain's poor and vulnerable, especially our kids. It led directly to Starmer's collaboration in Israel's genocide of hundreds of thousands of innocents in Gaza - and Israel's murder of British aid workers.

There is certainly satisfaction in Mandelson's exposure and disgrace now. But there will not be justice until he, Starmer, and all their faction are behind bars for genocide and treason.

Featured image via the Canary

DWP study shows their health assessors feel 'despised' - and are quitting in droves [ 02-Feb-26 2:58pm ]

A newly-released report commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has revealed that over half of its health assessors quit the job within their first year.

The health professionals reported feeling 'despised' for their role, which involves evaluating people for both Personal Independence Payments (PIP) and the health-related element of Universal Credit (UC).

DWP health assessors: 'a cog in the machine'

The DWP carried out its research back in 2022, and included findings from 2021. It found that a full 40% of new recruits don't make it through the training period of three months. By the end of a year, 52% of the health professionals quit working for the department.

Both PIP and Universal Credit disability assessments have to be conducted by a qualified health professional. However, the DWP is held in such low regard that most don't even consider working for it until they have "no other option but to leave the NHS". In fact, one assessor stated that:

We all got in healthcare for altruistic reasons and that maybe isn't the case in this job… you're a cog in the machine doing bureaucratic work.

During a work capability assessment for the health-related element of universal credit, the assessor is meant to determine an applicant's level of capability and how that would affect their working life.

Likewise, for a PIP assessment, the health professional scores an applicant according to their level of impairment with daily tasks. This score determines the level of support the claimant receives.

'Punitive, exhausting and inflexible'

However, the disabled people at the receiving end of these assessments have often described them as inconsistent, hostile and degrading. Financial insecurity charity Turn2us' head of policy, Lucy Bannister, explained:

People recovering from illness or navigating the additional cost of disability should rightly expect to be treated with dignity and respect. But this report shows that's not happening.

The staff carrying out assessments for disability benefits describe the system in the same terms as disabled people: punitive, exhausting and inflexible, focused on tick-boxing rather than care. It's not working properly for anyone.

One DWP contract manager commented on newly recruited health professionals for the study:

The idea that they would want to be on a treadmill of collecting details but not intervening is alien to a significant proportion of the health sector.

A lot of people that apply for roles don't understand this point. They arrive. Have rigorous training and [the] penny drops that this is what role is.

'They suck you into it'

A former nurse, who left the DWP after two years, put it more bluntly for the Independent:

They suck you into it, because when you first go they tell you 'give it six months, because it's a totally new way to how you've been working as a nurse'. […]

Most assessors leave at around six months because they realise they've been had.

She also described remaining in the office from 5am to 10pm "working [herself] to death". This was because the DWP's backlog of cases has become completely unmanageable. And, as the Canary's Rachel Charlton-Dailey explained, the situation has only gotten worse in 2026:

the department has diverted staff from dealing with new claims to tackle the backlog of reviews. This meant the DWP got to brag that they processed the highest number of reviews since the benefit began. 96% more reviews were carried out than in Q3 in 2024. But it was only because they had so many left over to clear.

This has, of course, meant that new claimants suffered, as clearance for new claims fell by 25%. This meant that 40,000 new claimants were left waiting. This is despite the fact that the number of new claims is down by 6% from the same period in 2024. This also means the decision time has risen, from 14 weeks in October 2024 to 16 weeks in October 2025.

Reform and rebellion

Given the massive backlog, Labour came up with the bright idea of 'reforming' PIP assessments back in the summer of 2025. That is to say, they attempted to rush through massive cuts that could have ruined PIP claimants' lives.

The proposed changes would have made it far more difficult to qualify for PIP. This would have resulted in thousands of disabled people losing the support they relied on. The cuts were only narrowly averted when a group of Labour MPs rebelled against the plans.

Instead, DWP minister Stephen Timms took PIP off the table during the debate, beginning a review in its place. However, this meant MPs were able to vote through Universal Credit cuts. And, of course, the review itself is already looking like a complete farce:

Timms has spent a good chunk of the last few months umming and awwing over how he can make it look like the review is co-produced with disabled people. It took until 30 October 2025 for them to appoint disabled co-chairs.

At the same time, they quietly released the terms of reference which, while seemingly aimed at placating disabled people, confirmed that all PIP recipients will be at risk by DWP decisions.

'Struggling to do the job'

The DWP conducted their staff-retention study back in 2022, and only chose to publish it now. However, the writing has been on the wall of a long time, as Charlton-Dailey wrote earlier this month:

It's becoming increasingly clear that the main reason the government is pushing ahead with PIP reform is that they don't have the staff to process the claims they already have. As a recent report found, delays to PIP are endangering people's lives. The same report revealed that the DWP planned to make the application process more online-focused and to give every claimant a case worker. But this only works if the DWP can actually find the staff.

With the DWP struggling to do the job it's already supposed to do, it's difficult to see how it could possibly manage reforms. But they'll almost certainly find a way to blame that on disabled people, too.

PIP and UC assessments are designed to minimise a claimants' disability, such that the government has to award as little support as possible. We see this at every level of the DWP machine, from the shocking treatment of disabled people during assessments, to governments desperately trying to move goalposts and slash payouts.

It's unsurprising, really, that healthcare professionals leaving NHS jobs are finding the DWP intolerable. They've left respected roles providing treatment for illness, only to enter a role where they're tasked with removing that self-same support. Any individual with a shred of empathy would feel the same.

Featured image via the Canary