Something Big Is Coming…

The British state is openly preparing the public for multi-day blackouts while lining up the BBC to broadcast pre-scripted government messages once the lights, water, and internet fail.

A so called “Black Sky” contingency now sits on the books: roughly 100 BBC staff would man a hardened radio studio stocked with its own fuel, food, and water for at least three days, pumping out official instructions over FM if the grid collapses.

This arrives weeks after the government launched an official “Be Ready” campaign ordering every household to stockpile three days of bottled water (three liters per person per day for drinking alone), non-perishable food, cash, a torch, and a wind-up or battery FM radio.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham told the public that unexpected events “seem to becoming more common” and that people should keep “those supplies in the house to get you through those moments.”

Defence Secretary Wes Streeting has gone further, stating that “we do live in a more dangerous and turbulent world” and warning that adversaries could be ready to attack by 2030, giving Britain “a little over 1,000 days to complete our mission: to be ready with our allies to fight and win.”

Keep reading

The British State Now Behaves Like An Imperial Regime Ruling Over Competing Peoples

Despite spending much of the past half-century apologizing for the Empire, the British establishment is rediscovering its favorite method of rule. The old colonial district officer, accustomed to keeping the peace between rival communities, cultivating local notables and reporting troublesome political sentiments to his superiors, would find much to recognize in contemporary Britain. He might struggle with the current terminology, but once someone explained what a Cohesion Support and Interventions Function actually did, he would probably feel quite at home.

In an essay we wrote six years ago called ‘Empires of Progress‘, we argued that Western governing elites were increasingly abandoning the assumptions of the nation-state in favor of an imperial conception of political authority. A nation-state presumes a people sufficiently conscious of belonging together to accept common institutions and obligations. An empire governs different peoples, often possessing competing interests and loyalties, through a combination of accommodation, patronage, arbitration and coercion. Nations require citizens; empires administer subjects.

What we then identified as an emerging tendency has since acquired a more distinct institutional and political character in Britain. Successive governments, having encouraged mass immigration and multiculturalism, increasingly employ methods familiar from imperial administration to manage the communal divisions arising from those policies.

More significantly, these arrangements threaten to transform the relationship between the governing establishment and the historic British population, whose national attachments and political preferences increasingly conflict with the assumptions of those exercising power. Here, we examine how communal brokerage, differentiated accommodation and preventive security contribute to this estrangement, weakening the common national allegiance upon which the legitimacy of the state depends.

The imperial reflex, imported into the British domestic realm, we suggest, will prove considerably more destabilizing than its practitioners anticipate.

Keep reading

Kellie-Jay Keen charged under Communications Act over ‘grossly offensive’ X post about Islam

Kellie-Jay Keen, the British women’s rights campaigner also known as Posie Parker, says she has been charged by the Metropolitan Police under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 over a post she made on X between June 23 and June 25. She is due to enter a plea at Westminster Magistrates’ Court at 10 a.m. on December 4.

Keen announced the charge in a video on October 30. Reading the charge sheet, she said she was accused of having, “between the 23rd and the 25th of June, sent by means of public electronic communications network, a message that was grossly offensive.”

Section 127(1) covers a message “that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character.” The maximum penalty is six months in prison, a fine, or both.

Keen has not said which post is charged. In August she recorded a call, reported by the free speech and privacy site Reclaim The Net, in which a Met officer read three of her June posts back to her.

One, posted over a video purporting to show Muslims in Manchester, read “There’s nothing about this scene that doesn’t scream backward regressive sub normal culture.” Another, over a clip of Baroness Warsi, read “No one needs foreign money to understand the threat Islam poses to every last one of us.”

Asked who the offence was against, the officer said “somebody who’s read those tweets has taken offense to them and made the report.” He said the case had gone to the Crown Prosecution Service “for early advice.”

Before a voluntary police interview in September, she wrote on her Substack, “We do not have a blasphemy law in this country, and we should be extremely wary of recreating one through public order or communications offences.”

The Free Speech Union, a British group that defends people punished for their speech, is defending her. “In a free society, no religion or cultural practice should be immune from criticism,” it said, as quoted by Reclaim The Net.

The writer Paul Embery, in a post dated November 3, said Keen is asking supporters to gather outside the court.

The charge is an accusation, not a finding.

Keep reading

Britain’s Online Censorship Law Now Comes With a Crisis Plan for Your Posts

The Online Safety Act – the UK’s censorship law – is getting its “crisis” machinery in place, and in full. As of Monday, November 2, big platforms in the country are expected to have in place a censorship plan that will be waiting in the wings, ready to be launched at a moment’s notice, or even before that – if a crisis is merely “likely to occur.”

This is what the regulator’s own paperwork, released on October 12, reveals, with the rules coming into force three weeks later. The crisis rules are part of amendments to two Ofcom codes – the Illegal Content Codes and the Protection of Children Code.

A crisis is defined as “an extraordinary situation in which there is a serious threat to public safety in the United Kingdom” that is highly likely to cause, or have come from, a surge in certain content. Ofcom also said that “local or regional crises may still meet the definition” and “an overseas event may also meet the definition.”

What is covered is content related to terrorism, hate, harassment, stalking, threats and abuse, and what is referred to as “the foreign interference offence” – which is a reference to the National Security Act, and a “misrepresentation” that “may” include “presenting information in a way which amounts to a misrepresentation, even if some or all of the information is true.”

As for the effect of such “misrepresentation,” the Act says it can influence political processes or decisions, and a foreign power can be not only a state, but also its head or government.

The posts that are at risk of being taken down are described by Ofcom as “the most highly protected forms of expression,” including “political speech.”

When a crisis hits – or is about to – these will be the first to go. “A higher risk of false positives is likely to be proportionate,” Ofcom says.

To be able to do all this, platforms must now have in place a crisis protocol, which they “need not publish” – and watch their own warning indicators.

Then, they should send in a senior crisis team “as soon as reasonably practicable if the provider determines that a crisis is occurring or is likely to occur.” Reviewing the situation afterwards should also be done in secret.

Large services will also open “a dedicated channel for law enforcement to contact the provider on matters related to the crisis.” No court order is necessary for this police hotline to be activated.

All this applies to large services (those with over 7 million monthly UK users) that are considered to be at medium risk, and any service that is at high risk. The rules cover user-to-user content on social media, messaging apps, forums, dating apps, games, marketplaces, and some AI tools.

The government has said that these steps “are not mandatory in themselves” – but a platform that follows them “will be treated as having complied” with the law. In other words, anyone who decides to go another way will have to prove to Ofcom that their method is equally effective.

It’s optional – in the British sense of the word.

And don’t worry, Ofcom has more reassurances: “The measures do not enable Ofcom to declare a crisis, nor do they introduce emergency powers.” But the Secretary of State can direct Ofcom to send a public statement notice to platforms, and they should take this into account when deciding whether a crisis is indeed taking place.

Ofcom has been working on the crisis protocol for a while, finalizing it on June 9 – the same day riots spread through Belfast after a stabbing on the Shankill Road. We reported about it then.

Keep reading

‘Digital ID Checks For All’: Ofcom’s Plan For UK’s Under-16 Social Media Ban Puts Adults In The Age-Check Line Too

Privacy campaigners have argued for months that this is where an age ban ends up. In March, Big Brother Watch titled a post “A social media ban for under-16s = digital ID checks for all” and argued that because the alternatives are intrusive and unreliable, ID would be required in many millions of cases. “All of the online age verification options are highly invasive and the biometric and behavioural profiling options are highly inaccurate, meaning IDs will be required in many millions of cases regardless,” the group wrote.

Britain’s communications regulator now points the same way. Ofcom’s rapid assessment, published Oct. 29, says the face scans social media platforms use to estimate ages are too imprecise to police the government’s coming ban for under-16s on their own, and that a second check, often photo ID, will have to back them up. And the checks won’t stop at teenagers: many adults with existing accounts will be asked to prove their age as well.

Ofcom named four methods it considers capable of being highly effective at 16, Digit reported: photo ID matching, banking information, digital identity services and facial age estimation. Photo ID matching compares the photo on a passport or driving licence with a live image of the user. A bank check uses age data the bank holds, with the user’s consent. A digital ID service lets a person prove their age once with photo ID and reuse it.

Keep reading

The UK Is Fast-Tracking Permanent Residency For An Army Of Migrants

It’s not quite citizenship, but it’s close enough. The UK offers a number of loopholes or “fast tracks” to permanent residency for third world migrants, and one of those loopholes is “Indefinite Leave to Remain” (ILR), also known as permanent settlement.

Settlement status allows migrants to stay in the UK essentially for the rest of their lives, with unrestricted access to the labor market, access to health and welfare benefits, and the ability to leave and reenter the country any time they wish. It also gives them the ability to bring their families to live in the UK.  They enjoy many of the advantages of citizens, except they don’t get to vote and their children do not automatically become citizens.

Many critics of the system argue that once these migrants become entrenched, it is impossible to legally deport them.  They also argue that “settlement” is a progressive government agenda to provide to mass citizenship for millions of migrants in the near future.

At bottom, ILR is a way for left-wing leaders to import masses of migrants while pretending as if this is not true immigration.  

A debate has been raging over more strict rules for who qualifies for settlement, but the UK government’s obsession with multiculturalism makes any serious immigration reform difficult. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has announced final details of the government’s reforms to permanent settlement rules, and she notes that there will be special allowances for most migrants working in social care.

Keep reading

Why Are So Many British Teens Being Treated As Terrorists?

What is going on with Britain’s children? Last year, more than 6,000 under-18s were referred to Prevent, the UK government’s counter-terrorism scheme, with a record number reported for being obsessed with mass violence and extremism. Believe the headlines, and we are raising a generation of committed terrorists and murderous nihilists. But scratch beneath the surface, and a far more complex picture of adult failure begins to emerge.

Clearly, some children really are attracted to terrorism and extreme violence. Last week, Yusuf Shah was convicted of providing cybersecurity support to groups including al-Qaeda. He was just 16 when he was arrested at Heathrow Airport and was found to have downloaded instructions for making explosives and using different types of weapons. In 2024, Axel Rudakubana was 17 years old when he entered a dance class in Southport, killing three girls and injuring eight other children and two adults with a kitchen knife. And in 2018, 18-year-old Safaa Boular became Britain’s youngest convicted female Islamic State terrorist after she helped plan an attack on the British Museum in London.

Yet in all three of these cases, these terrorists were either not referred to Prevent, or Prevent failed to ensure their deradicalization. Rudakubana was referred to Prevent three times between 2019 and 2021, but was deemed unsuitable for intervention as officers could find no evidence that he had a fixed ideology or motivation driving his obsession with violence.

One problem for Prevent officers is their rapidly increasing workload. The 6,085 under-18s referred to the scheme in 2025 represent a threefold increase on the 2,129 participants recorded in 2020. In just that one year, the education sector reported 3,129 individuals.

Another problem is that Prevent focuses on the wrong issue. Data from 2025 show that ‘extreme right-wing‘ concerns accounted for 21 per cent of all referrals. This is more than double the proportion of referrals for ‘Islamist extremism’ (10 per cent). What’s more, compared with the previous year, referrals for ‘extreme right-wing’ concerns increased, while referrals for ‘Islamist extremism’ decreased (down from 13 per cent).

Yet this is completely at odds with the reality of the terrorist threats we face in the UK. Since 2001, nearly 100 people have been killed in terrorist attacks in Britain. Fifty-two people were slaughtered in London on 7 July 2005 when Islamist terrorists bombed public transport. In 2017, three separate attacks resulted in multiple deaths at Westminster Bridge, Manchester Arena and London Bridge. Just two people have been killed by right-wing extremists: Mohammed Saleem (2013) and Jo Cox (2016). Prevent officers kept busy dealing with children referred for right-wing extremism have less time to worry about the far more real threat posed by Islamists.

Panic about children, especially boys, being radicalized by right-wing extremists spills over into actual arrests. Figures from UK Counter Terrorism Policing show that one in five of those arrested for terrorism-related offenses is under 18. Earlier this month, a 15-year-old boy was arrested for calling a Conservative councillor a ‘rent boy’. Four police officers in two cars turned up outside the house of the Reform UK activist, despite Reform being a mainstream political party and it not being illegal to call someone a ‘rent boy’. The boy understandably believes he was targeted for his political views and allegiances. If so, then the definition of ‘extremism’ has been stretched so much it is now meaningless.

The completely disproportionate number of teenage boys being referred to Prevent for right-wing extremism betrays the cowardice of adults. It is far easier to panic about children, social media, hate speech and toxic masculinity than it is to name, let alone confront, the real threat of Islamist terrorism. Teachers, social workers and police officers routinely assume that boys with even mainstream right-wing views pose a serious threat to society.

The increase in referrals to Prevent points to adults’ failure to relate to children in ways once taken for granted. It suggests that rather than engaging with young people by talking to them about their opinions and questioning their views, adults hit the panic button and retreat. Rather than being arrested, the 15-year-old schoolboy critical of his local councillor should have had his interest in politics taken seriously. Perhaps the offended councillor could have suggested some good books for him to read instead of calling the police.

The latest Prevent statistics point to other problems with our failure to socialize the next generation. A growing number of children are being referred to Prevent for having a fascination with ‘mass violence unrelated to a political cause’. Following the Southport attack, the government is updating Prevent to enable it to better deal with children who are obsessed with violence, mass shootings and weapons despite having no obvious ideological motive. Clearly, some of these children are mentally ill and need psychiatric treatment rather than anti-radicalization counseling. Prevent is being expected to pick up the pieces when mental-health services fail.

Something else is going on, too. An increasing number of children obsessed with violence, mass shootings and weapons hints at a prevalent sense of nihilism. As we see playing out across France right now, Western nations harbor a proportion of youngsters who feel only contempt for the society they inhabit. They have no sense of allegiance to their country, its history or its institutions. Teachers, journalists, politicians and cultural curators who should have taught children to love their country and respect their fellow citizens have failed in this task.

Referring ever more children to Prevent helps no one. As adults fail in the task of socializing children and raising decent adults, the anti-extremism program has become the institution of last resort, expected to deal with every disaffected or non-conforming teenager. Meanwhile, the role Prevent should be playing in stopping terrorism – which primarily comes from Islamist extremists – is lost to panic and political correctness.

Keep reading

Europe Under Attack? Far-Left Sabotage UK Military Satellite Equipment Supply Chain

Europe faces growing national security risks from violent far-left groups seeking to destroy capitalism and the continent amid weeks of riots, looting and unrest in France and elsewhere.

The chaos has not yet stopped. There was looting and violence in Germany over the weekend and ongoing unrest in France.

An evolution of the revolution may have emerged overnight, as far-left activists reportedly broke into a defense manufacturer’s facility in the UK and destroyed military satellite communications equipment.

Palestine Action knockoff “People Against Genocide” apparently broke into Ultra Intelligence & Communications’ manufacturing facility in Tring, Hertfordshire.

Video shows these revolutionaries taking sledgehammers to portable satellite terminals that were in production. The Cradle says these terminals were “destined for Israel,” but there is no confirmation of that.

Keep reading

Ofcom lists four age checks many adults may face to stay on social media

Ofcom, the United Kingdom’s communications regulator, on October 29 named four age-check methods it considers “highly effective” at proving a user is 16 or older. Ministers asked for the assessment to inform the regulations for their ban on under-16s using social media.

The four are photo ID matching, bank-based checks, digital ID services and facial age estimation, which The Register reports must be paired with a second check. Credit card, mobile operator and email checks, which Ofcom says work for confirming someone is 18 but not 16, did not make the list. A passport or driving licence is one route; the bank, digital ID and face checks are the others.

The practical effect falls on many adults, not only children, because a platform cannot know who is under 16 without checking. The Register reports that some adults may be spared where a platform can infer their age from past activity.

Dame Melanie Dawes, Ofcom’s chief executive, said the ban “can work if social media firms do highly effective age checks properly.” According to The Register’s report of the assessment, Ofcom concedes that “the risk of circumvention cannot be entirely eliminated.”

Big Brother Watch, the civil liberties group, answered the same day. Its director, Silkie Carlo, called the plan “a national ID system by the back door” and “an Orwellian assault on free speech and privacy,” and called instead for “parental controls that genuinely protect children.”

The ban rests on a new section 214A of the Online Safety Act 2023, inserted by the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026. Ministers intend to lay the regulations before the end of this year, and the ban is expected to start around spring 2027. The assessment was requested in June by the Technology Secretary, Liz Kendall.

Dawes is a career civil servant whom the Ofcom board appointed chief executive in February 2020.

Canada is on the same road. The Safe Social Media Act, Bill C-34, which would set a similar limit for children 16 and under, is at second reading in the House of Commons.

Keep reading

UK Announces Tax Hikes on Savings and Property Income as Welfare Spending Rises

The left-wing Labour Party government will raise fresh taxes on savings and property income as spending on welfare and foreign subsidies will continue to grow, recently installed Chancellor John Healey told the House of Commons on Wednesday.

Unveiling his autumn budget, Chancellor Healey said that he would be increasing tax rates on income made from savings and property by two per cent starting in April to 24 per cent, 44 per cent, and 49 per cent depending on income level.

“I am increasing the rates of tax on income from property and savings by a further two percentage points from April 2027, with no change to tax on income from dividends and tax on income from employment,” he said. The Chancellor also said that he would be increasing tax on bank profits over £100 million ($133m) from three to six per cent.

Yet, Healey did not take the opportunity to slash welfare spending, which is now predicted to reach £431.3 billion ($574bn) per year by 2031, The Telegraph reported.

This comes as estimates forecast that direct welfare payments to migrants will hit £21 billion ($28.5bn) a year by 2029, and Reform UK has predicted the cumulative lifetime cost of the so-called Boriswave migrants who arrived between 2020 and 2024 will be £622.5 billion ($828bn) for British taxpayers.

In addition to ploughing more money into Britain’s ballooning welfare state — and thus into the pockets of many recently arrived foreigners — Chancellor Healey also announced a further £10 billion ($13.3bn) in British support for Ukraine in economic and military aid

Keep reading