Blog

Parents Accuse BBC of HARMING KIDS Through Pro-Trans Bias In Children’s Programming

In a mounting controversy, 650 families have accused the BBC of saturating children’s programming with pro-transgender ideology, claiming it has led vulnerable young people toward social and irreversible medical transitions.

The allegations, detailed in a letter from the Bayswater Support Group (BSG) to broadcasting regulator Ofcom, highlight a “constant drip-feed” of biased content that parents say has caused lasting harm. This comes amid broader scrutiny of the BBC’s impartiality.

The BSG, representing parents of primary school-aged children and teenagers who identify as trans, argues that the BBC’s coverage over nearly a decade has promoted trans lifestyles without balance, objectivity, or adequate safeguarding.

A spokesman for the group stated: “For the past decade, the constant stream of propaganda about gender and trans activism the BBC has transmitted has played a significant role in creating a dangerous culture for children.”

Keep reading

BOMBSHELL: Charlie Kirk’s Head of Security Releases Text Messages Showing UVU Police Chief Promised ‘I Got You Covered’ Regarding Rooftop Vulnerabilities

In an interview on the Shawn Ryan Show, Brian Harpole, Charlie Kirk’s head of security, publicly revealed text messages with Utah Valley University Police Chief Jeff Long in which they discussed the rooftop vulnerabilities and the chief vowed, “I got you covered.”

The exchange took place in the days leading up to Kirk’s September 10 speaking event at UVU, where the Turning Point USA founder was fatally shot by a gunman who is said to have fired from a rooftop position.

Speaking to Chief Long, Harpole informed him that he was told students had access to rooftops and walkways directly above the area where Kirk would be speaking.

When asked if he wanted access to the roof, Harpole replied that it would be ideal to either lock it down or allow one of his own men to post up there.

Chief Long responded: “I got you covered.”

Harpole thanked him, but did not follow up or ask him what that meant.

Neither of the men involved in the conversation clarified who would be covering the roof, whether private security or law enforcement.

Harpole indicates that he believed this meant law enforcement would be covering the rooftops.

Keep reading

Trump is turning Gaza into a brutal colonial protection racket

The West has spent two years partnering Israel in its campaign of wanton destruction in Gaza. Now the United States – with the permission of a cowed United Nations Security Council – has appointed Donald Trump to preside over the ruins.

Like a Roman emperor, the US president will be able to dictate the fate of Gaza’s people with a simple gesture. Whatever he decides – whether the thumb turns up or down – it will be called “peace”.

Trump’s most likely side-kick in this depraved charade will be Tony Blair, the former British prime minister. He won his war-crime spurs more than 20 years ago, when he joined one of Trump’s predecessors, George W Bush, in launching an illegal invasion of Iraq and a subsequent, catastrophic occupation that left that country in ruins too.

Satire cannot do justice to this moment.

The eradication of Gaza could be achieved only with the complete hollowing out of international law – the legal global order that was established many decades ago to prevent a third world war and the horrors of the Holocaust.

Marking the demise of that era, the Security Council voted 13-0 this week to endorse Trump’s “peace plan” for Gaza, with only Russia and China daring to abstain.

The dissenting representatives of the crumbling legal order – from the judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to Francesca Albanese, the UN’s legal expert for the occupied territories – have been isolated, vilified and sanctioned by the Trump administration. No one appears to be willing to come to their defence.

Quite the contrary. Germany, whose own genocidal rampage across Europe more than 80 years ago once left it a pariah state and drove the creation of the new legal order, now confidently leads the way in flouting those very rules.

It has resumed supplying Israel with the weapons it needs to continue the slaughter, justifying the decision on the grounds that Israel is murdering fewer Palestinians during Trump’s duplicitous “ceasefire”.

On Wednesday, Israel broke the ceasefire once again, killing more than 30 people in a series of air strikes, including 20 women and children.

Even the current “peace” allows Israel to occupy some 58 percent of Gaza in a depopulated “Green Zone”, effectively partitioning the territory for the forseeable future. Daily, Israel bombs families sheltering in the wreckage of the enclave’s interior, declared a “Red Zone”. And Israel continues to block the entry of food and medicines, including the temporary housing needed as winter rains deluge the territory.

Is this what, 19 years ago, Condoleezza Rice, Bush’s secretary of state, meant when she spoke of the coming, painful “birth pangs of a new Middle East”?

Now, it seems, they have arrived in full force – and the region has never looked more terrifying.

Keep reading

Trump buys millions in Boeing bonds while awarding it contracts

Trump bought up to $6 million worth of corporate bonds in Boeing, even as the Defense Department has awarded the company multi-billion dollar contracts, new financial disclosures reveal.

According to the documents, Trump bought between $1 million and $5 million worth of Boeing bonds on August 28. On September 19, he bought more Boeing bonds worth between $500,000 and $1 million. In total, Trump appears to have bought at least $185 million worth of corporate and municipal bonds since the start of his presidency.

Kedric Payne, Vice President of the Campaign Legal Center, told RS in a phone interview there is “absolutely” a conflict of interest in Trump’s purchase of Boeing, especially since it is “a government contractor that is connected to military actions that the president controls almost unilaterally.”

Trump also bought between $1 and $5 million worth of Intel bonds in August, a week after the Trump administration took a 10% stake in the company. “I love seeing their stock price go up, making the USA RICHER, AND RICHER,” Trump posted on Truth Social on August 25. Trump purchased Intel bonds on August 29.

The partial purchase of the chip manufacturer, done under the auspices of driving technology research vital to national security, drew praise from some advocates of corporate accountability, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Others raised concerns about how the U.S. government could maintain fairness. “Will the government favor firms in which it owns stakes over other competitors that might have better technology or processes?” asked Peter Harrell, a Non Resident Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment. Since the U.S. government’s partial ownership could give the Trump administration far more influence over the company, Trump’s personal investment in Intel could blur the lines between personal, corporate, and national interests. Intel has said the government’s partial ownership would be passive, with the government agreeing to “vote with the company’s Board of Directors on matters requiring shareholder approval, with limited exceptions.”

Upon entering office, Trump did not move his assets into a blind trust run by an independent trustee that could not be directed by the Trump family. Instead, he opted to hand over his business empire to his sons. The White House did, however, insist that the bond purchases were made by independent financial managers “using programs that replicate recognized indexes when making investments.”

Keep reading

Nicolás Maduro’s Socialist Regime Sentences 65-Year-Old Physician Marggie Orozco to 30 Years in Prison for a WhatsApp Voice Message Criticizing the Regime and Urging Neighbors to Vote in the July 2024 Elections

The socialist dictator Nicolás Maduro has orchestrated a 30-year prison sentence — the maximum penalty in Venezuela — against Dr. Marggie Orozco, a 65-year-old general practitioner suffering from serious health problems.

This verdict, handed down on November 17, 2025, by Judge Luz Dary Moreno of the 4th Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit in the state of Táchira, is based on fabricated charges such as “treason against the homeland,” “incitement to hatred,” and “conspiracy.”

All of this for a simple WhatsApp voice message in which Orozco criticized the irregular distribution of domestic gas cylinders by the Local Supply and Production Committees (CLAP) — clientelist structures loyal to Chavismo — and encouraged her neighbors to participate in the presidential elections of July 28, 2024, a process blatantly rigged by Maduro to cling to power despite the overwhelming victory of the opposition.

Orozco was detained on August 5, 2024, in San Juan de Colón, near the border with Colombia, amid the post-election crisis that unleashed massive protests against the evident fraud.

A CLAP leader loyal to the regime reported her to the authorities — part of a neighborhood surveillance system that Maduro has actively promoted through mobile apps that allow citizens to denounce “fascists” (his euphemism for any dissident) in exchange for subsidized food bonuses.

After her arrest by the Bolivarian National Police, Orozco suffered a heart attack on September 15, 2024, while in custody, yet she was returned to prison the very next day despite her critical condition. She has suffered from chronic depression since 2013, worsened by the tragic loss of two of her children: one murdered during an attempted robbery and the other killed in an accident.

Today, imprisoned at the Western Penitentiary Center in Santa Ana, Táchira, her health continues to deteriorate without proper access to medication or family visits, effectively turning this sentence into a slow death penalty.

This case is not an isolated incident but rather one more cog in the repressive machinery that tyrant Maduro has perfected to silence every critical voice. According to Foro Penal, Venezuela currently holds 882 political prisoners, both civilians and military personnel — a figure that skyrocketed after the fraudulent elections: more than 2,400 initial arrests, of which around 2,000 were released months later under international pressure, yet leaving behind a trail of terror.

Keep reading

Zohran Mamdani Has No Idea How He’s Going to Fund ‘Free’ Buses in New York City 

Zohran Mamdani, the new Democratic Socialist (communist) mayor-elect of New York City clearly has no idea how he is going to pay for all of the supposedly ‘free’ buses he has promised to voters.

He was recently pressed on this issue by a reporter, and when he could not answer the funding question, he simply said that it’s more important that they get it done, not how they fund it.

That’s not how things work in reality.

Transcript via Real Clear Politics:

MAMDANI: Well, I think the mayor will find that he’ll have a tough time trying to stymie the momentum that we have as a campaign and as a movement, because more than a million New Yorkers came out to vote for our vision of making the city more affordable. I know that’s difficult for the mayor because he ran an administration where, for four years, he made it more difficult for those New Yorkers to afford this city.

And even one of the people he floated appointing to the Rent Guidelines Board is a star of a show that I think is called Selling New York, which in some ways is a description of what Eric Adams tried to do.

MANNARINO: But if he does it, does that put a foil — or at least a pause — on freezing the rent?

MAMDANI: I think it’s an obstacle, but it’s one that I think we can overcome.

MANNARINO: And the other one — talking about fast and free buses, and your meeting with the governor. I’ve heard you say many times that you don’t want to take money away from the MTA — you want to put money back in. And it’s something she agrees with, right? “We don’t want to take away money from the MTA.”

How are you getting that $700 million to make the buses free into the MTA if she’s not for raising taxes?

MAMDANI: You know, I think the two clearest ways to raise that money is through raising the state’s corporate tax to match New Jersey. A lot of this is still a case to be made — whether it’s the corporate tax or the personal income tax on those who make more than a million dollars a year. I think these are the clearest ways.

I’ve also said that if there are other ways to raise this funding, the most important fact is that we fund it — not the question of how we do it, but that we do it.

Keep reading

The Left Is Nowhere Near Letting Go Of Its Trans Obsession

he Transgender Day of Remembrance, if nothing else, was a reminder that the left — and the corporate media in particular — is still completely infatuated with transgender ideology. That assertion may seem completely unrevelatory, but for peace-and-homestead-life-loving conservatives, it’s an essential reminder.

Yes, the right has made tremendous gains on the issue during the Trump Administration 2.0. The International Olympic Committee’s plan to ban male athletes in female sports — under pressure from Trump — is just one example of many. And Trump’s choice to capitalize on Kamala Harris’ pro-trans-procedures-for-illegal-immigrants-in-prison views likely played a critical role in sinking her campaign.

But none of that changes the modern left’s fundamental relationship to transgender ideology. It’s the legitimate child of the sexual revolution, the incarnation of lawless individualism, the apex antagonist of Christian teaching on ethics, sin, and human nature. In other words, it’s a doctrine, a creed, an axiom. The left’s approach to defending that axiom may fluctuate, but the loyalty is unshakeable.

Take, for example, The Washington Post editorial board’s Wednesday response to Health and Human Services releasing an updated version of its report on the treatment of gender dysphoria. Rather than take the typical radical pro-transgenderism approach, WaPo asserted that the report leaves us all stumbling in the dark when it comes to mutilating children, headlining the piece “What we still don’t know about pediatric medical transition.” The paper’s editors can’t help but call into question the study’s obvious conclusion, that “it is not ethical to subject adolescents to hormonal and surgical interventions … even in a research trial, until and unless the state of the evidence suggests a favorable risk/benefit profile for the studied intervention.”

That such a statement could at all be controversial emphasizes just how firmly trans ideology grips the editors at WaPo.

Over at CNN on Thursday, Leah Asmelash was wandering in a similar cloud of pro-trans confounded befuddlement: “The White House wants to eliminate ‘gender ideology’ and ‘trans ideology,’” she wrote. “What does that mean?” What a difficult question. She is lost, bewildered, stumped. After all, “the term ‘gender ideology’ didn’t originate in the US,” and everyone knows how hard it is to comprehend foreign ideas. (Further, Jair Bolsonaro once “decried ‘gender ideology,’” and he’s headed to prison now, so there’s that.)

“‘Transgender ideology,’ a phrase largely used in the US, is, if anything, even more amorphous,” Asmelash said. It is, indeed, a mystery wrapped in an enigma — but only for someone who works for the legacy media. Aside from the fact that her entire article questioning what transgender ideology is is itself transgender ideology, if Asmelash is confused, maybe she should take a look at her own reporting. In 2023 she raved about how Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse‘s Gwen Stacy, who had a “Protect the Kids” transgender flag in her room, may have been trans.

Or she could have turned to CNN’s 19-minute read, published the same day as her piece, memorializing eight trans-identifying individuals (seven men and one woman) who died this year. It’s a study in transgender ideology and propaganda, with each of the men who said they were women presented as angelic divas in lines like these: “Tahiry Broom could show up anywhere — from a seat at a church service to a night club’s pulsing dance floor — armed with her long, painted nails, shimmery eyeshadow and colorful wigs. Then, like magic, the whole place would belong to her.” The article is titled “A ballroom legend, an ‘auntie’ and a young athlete: Here are some of the trans people lost to violence and suicide this year.”

Keep reading

Google and US government battle over the future of internet advertising

Google will confront the U.S. government’s latest attempt to topple its internet empire in federal court on Friday as a judge considers how to prevent the abusive tactics that culminated in parts of its digital ad network being branded as an illegal monopoly.

The courtroom showdown in Alexandria, Virginia, will pit lawyers from Google and the U.S. Department of Justice against each other in closing proceedings focused on the complex technology that distributes millions of digital ads across the internet each day.

After a lengthy trial last year, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled in April that pieces of Google’s ad technology had been rigged in a way that made it an illegal monopoly. That set up another 11-day trial earlier this fall to help Brinkema determine how to remedy its anti-competitive practices.

Friday’s closing arguments will give both Google and the Justice Department a final chance to sway Brinkema before she issues a ruling that probably won’t come until early next year.

The Justice Department wants Brinkema to force Google to sell some of the ad technology that it has spent nearly 20 years assembling, contending a breakup is the only way to rein in a company that the agency’s lawyers condemned as a “recidivist monopolist” in filings leading up to Friday’s hearing.

The condemnation refers not only to Google’s practices in digital advertising but also to the illegal monopoly that it unleashed through its dominant search engine. Federal prosecutors also sought a breakup in the search monopoly case, but the judge handling that issue rejected a proposal that would have required Google to sell its popular Chrome web browser.

Although Google is still being ordered to make reforms that it’s resisting, the outcome in the search monopoly case has been widely seen as a proverbial slap on the wrist. The belief that Google got off easy in the search case is the main reason the market value of its parent company Alphabet surged by about $950 billion, or 37%, to nearly $3.5 trillion since U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta’s decision came out in early September.

That setback hasn’t discouraged the Justice Department from arguing for a breakup of an ad tech system that handles 55 million requests per second, according to estimates provided by Google in court filings.

The huge volume of digital ads priced and distributed through Google’s technology is one of the main reasons that the company’s lawyers contend it would be too risky to force a dismantling of the intricate system.

“This is technology that absolutely has to keep working for consumers,” Google argues in documents leading up to Friday’s hearing. The company’s lawyers blasted the Justice Department’s proposal as a package of “legally unprecedented and unsupported divestitures.”

Besides arguing that its own proposed changes will bring more price transparency and foster more competition, Google is also citing market upheaval triggered by artificial intelligence as another reason for the judge to proceed cautiously with her decision.

In his decision in the search monopoly case, Mehta reasoned that AI was already posing more competition to Google.

Keep reading

Report: U.S. Is the World’s Largest Debtor to China — Thanks to Amazon, Disney, and Tesla

A report published on Tuesday by the AidData research lab at William & Mary university in Williamsburg, Virginia, found that the United States is the largest recipient of loans from China.

The report, entitled Chasing China: Learning to Play by Beijing’s Global Lending Rules, found that 1,193 Chinese banks, investment companies, and government institutions loaned $2.2 trillion to recipients in 179 countries between 2000 and 2023.

AidData researchers drew two surprising conclusions from their research: “China’s overseas lending portfolio is vastly larger than previously understood,” and its loans to the developed world are an order of magnitude larger than widely believed.

The common image of Chinese loans is banks pumping huge loans to Third World countries through China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The ostensible purpose of BRI was to help developing countries build vital infrastructure, but the projects are often criticized as unprofitable “debt traps” approved by spendthrift local governments that saddle the borrowing nations with debts to Beijing they can never repay.

Whatever the flaws of BRI might be, AidData determined that only about 20 percent of China’s titanic lending portfolio involves infrastructure projects in developing nations. Meanwhile, the amount China loans to developed nations “skyrocketed from 12% to 76%” between 2000 and 2023. Ten of the top 20 destinations for Chinese loans are “high-income” countries.

“Another major discovery is that Chinese state-owned creditors have bankrolled approximately 10,000 projects and activities in 72 high-income countries to the tune of nearly $1 trillion,” the report said.

“Much of the lending to wealthy countries is focused on critical infrastructure, critical minerals, and the acquisition of high-tech assets like semiconductor companies,” noted AidData’s lead author, Brad Parks.

Keep reading

Ukraine & Europe Reject Trump’s Russia Peace Plan, Prepare Emergency Call

By all estimates, this is the first ever US-proposed peace plan which actually demands major concessions from Ukraine, but it also seeks to provide assurances for Kiev’s future protection modelled on NATO article five, according to Axios.

Among President Zelensky’s top objectives has long been to obtain a robust US and European security guarantee, and this new 28-point plan appears to give just that:

President Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine includes a security guarantee modeled on NATO’s Article 5, which would commit the U.S. and European allies to treat an attack on Ukraine as an attack on the entire “transatlantic community,” – writes Axios.

Such a pledge could be recipe for future war, however, and that’s precisely how Moscow might see it, especially if other pressing issues of territory or military NATOization on Russia’s doorstep aren’t resolved. The security guarantee would be for up to a decade and could be renewed, according to the draft.

There are also reports that the US is already advancing a very ambitious timeline – that it wants to see the plan signed by Thanksgiving, or as soon as next week.

There are even lines for signatures on the document, indicating places for Ukraine, Russia the US, and even NATO and the EU. It’s unclear just which representatives would sign from each country or bloc, and its as yet unclear whether Putin himself must sign.

A senior Kremlin official cited in Axios said he was “optimistic” about the plan’s prospects, arguing that it aligns more closely with Moscow’s views than previous diplomatic efforts. This is especially as a large portion of the Donbas will be recognized as under Russia’s control, and the size and capability of the Ukrainian army will be scaled back, which a commitment to no foreign troops on Ukrainian soil as well.

And yet, as predicted by many, Ukraine and its European backers stand ready to rejected the plan – though it’s still only in its draft form and hasn’t been seriously negotiated over by the warring sides. Newsweek reports:

European leaders are preparing an emergency call to discuss U.S. President Donald Trump’s controversial proposal to end the war in Ukraine.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz cancelled a scheduled appearance to join the discussion, which will also include Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, and French President Emmanuel Macron.

The 28‑point plan caught European capitals off guard. Leaders were not directly involved in the U.S. effort and learned the details only after the document was made public.

Indeed Ukraine wasn’t involved either, and the emerging complaint is that it too closely resembles earlier Russian talking points and proposals for ending the war.

EU High Representative Kaja Kallas said Thursday, “We have always supported a lasting and just peace, and we welcome any efforts to achieve it, but for any plan to work, Ukrainians and Europeans are needed.”

Keep reading