Tag: united kingdom

UK Police Pilot AI System to Track “Suspicious” Driver Journeys

Police forces across Britain are experimenting with artificial intelligence that can automatically monitor and categorize drivers’ movements using the country’s extensive number plate recognition network.

Internal records obtained by Liberty Investigates and The Telegraph reveal that three of England and Wales’s nine regional organized crime units are piloting a Faculty AI-built program designed to learn from vehicle movement data and detect journeys that algorithms label “suspicious.”

For years, the automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) system has logged more than 100 million vehicle sightings each day, mostly for confirming whether a specific registration has appeared in a certain area.

The new initiative changes that logic entirely. Instead of checking isolated plates, it teaches software to trace entire routes, looking for patterns of behavior that resemble the travel of criminal networks known for “county lines” drug trafficking.

The project, called Operation Ignition, represents a change in scale and ambition.

Unlike traditional alerts that depend on officers manually flagging “vehicles of interest,” the machine learning model learns from past data to generate its own list of potential targets.

Official papers admit that the process could involve “millions of [vehicle registrations],” and that the information gathered may guide future decisions about the ethical and operational use of such technologies.

What began as a Home Office-funded trial in the North West covering Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Cheshire, Cumbria, Lancashire, and North Wales has now expanded into three regional crime units.

Keep reading

DNA Evidence Proves “First Black Briton” Was Actually A White Girl

In 2021 the establishment media was electrified by a discovery involving the ancient remains of a woman found over a century ago near a village in East Sussex in Britain.  The reason leftist journalists were so hyped?  A supposedly comprehensive study by “experts” in facial reconstruction had determined that the nearly 2000 year old skeleton belonged to a Sub-Saharan African person.

The remains became known as the “Beachy Head Woman” and images of her reconstructed black face began circulating internationally.  This was proof, somehow, that progressives had always been right to support third world immigration.

The new data arrived conveniently in time to support a far-left campaign to defend the ideas of multiculturalism.  Part of this narrative asserts that Caucasian regions of the world have never actually been Caucasian and that western culture doesn’t really exist.  In fact, white Europeans have no claim to any lands anywhere, they have no home, and African/Asian migrants have “always” freely traveled throughout Europe.

The political left was enthralled, taking to social media and reposting the discovery millions of times over to “own the fascists”.  The BBC even paid to have a plaque constructed on the site where the bones were discovered proudly proclaiming that this is where the first Briton of “African origin” had been found.

School lessons were immediately developed in the UK, teaching students about the multicultural history of Britain.  This was scientific confirmation to back up the avalanche of European entertainment content depicting Sub-Saharan Africans as integral to the history of the continent, roaming the lands as tribesman or enjoying the finery of royal court.   

Leftists argue that their version of history justifies the expansion of open mass immigration, because “things have always been this way” and white people today who want to protect their histories and cultures from erasure are merely ignorant of the past.  

The problem is, Beachy Head Woman is not African or black.  Recently confirmed DNA evidence shows she was white with blonde hair and blue eyes.  She was not a migrant, but born in ancient Britain.

Keep reading

Freed from prison, one of UK’s worst paedophiles who ran gay teens charity

One of Britain’s worst paedophiles has been freed from jail in the latest indictment of the SNP’s ‘soft touch’ justice system, the Mail can reveal.

James Rennie, ex-chief executive of a publicly funded gay and trans rights group for teens, was one of eight men exposed as members of a major paedophile ring.

The 54-year-old former Scottish Government adviser was jailed in 2009 after molesting the toddler son of unsuspecting friends.

He had been trusted to babysit the little boy – then recorded the abuse and shared it with other perverts.

During the police investigation, the boy’s parents were forced to watch a video of their baby son being violated by Rennie, who was boss of controversial LGBT Youth Scotland (LGBTYS).

Last night Scottish Tory justice spokesman Liam Kerr said: ‘Scots will be sickened that this predatory offender is back on our streets.

‘He should have spent the rest of his life behind bars.

‘His release is an insult to the victims and their families, especially with Christmas round the corner. This disgraceful case is yet another damning example of the SNP’s soft-touch justice system, which constantly puts the needs of criminals first.’

Keep reading

US Suspends $41 Billion Tech Deal with UK over Online Censorship Laws

The great transatlantic tech romance has hit the skids. What was sold as a landmark agreement binding Silicon Valley brains to British ambition has been shoved into neutral, all because Britain decided it quite fancies telling American machines what they are allowed to say.

Washington has now suspended the much-trumpeted US-UK technology agreement, a decision driven by mounting alarm over Britain’s new censorship law, the Online Safety Act.

The idea that a British regulator might fine or muzzle American firms has landed in Washington like a dropped wrench.

One participant in the talks put it bluntly, telling The Telegraph, “Americans went into this deal thinking Britain were going to back off regulating American tech firms but realized it was going to restrict the speech of American chatbots.”

The Online Safety Act gives Britain the power to fine companies it believes are enabling “harmful” or “hateful” speech, concepts elastic enough to stretch around just about anything if you pull hard enough.

The communications regulator Ofcom has not been shy about using these powers.

Enforcement notices have already landed on the desks of major American firms, even when their servers, staff, and coffee machines are nowhere near Britain.

From Washington’s perspective, this looks less like safety and more like Britain peering over the Atlantic with a ruler, ready to rap American knuckles.

The White House had been keen on the £31 ($41) billion Tech Prosperity Deal, seeing it as a front door to closer ties on AI research and digital trade.

Instead, officials began to see the Online Safety Act as a mechanism for deciding what American platforms, and their algorithms, are allowed to say. Chatbots like ChatGPT or Elon Musk’s Grok suddenly looked like potential defendants in a British courtroom, accused of wrongthink.

Keep reading

Boys aged just 11 to be sent on ‘anti-misogyny training courses’

Schoolboys aged just 11 will be sent on “anti-misogyny training courses” as part of a new Labour scheme to “protect women and girls”.

Secondary school pupils in England displaying “worrying behaviour” could be enrolled in the programmes in a pilot scheme which may even be expanded to include primary schools down the line.

The courses would be led by teachers or external contractors alongside normal lessons.

Girls would also be eligible if they display “harmful” behaviour – but Labour’s focus is on boys.

Ministers are to unveil the initiative on Thursday as part of a broader strategy aimed at cutting violence against women and girls by half within ten years.

All secondary schools will be required to deliver lessons on healthy relationships.

Teachers will receive specialist training to discuss topics including consent with their students.

A new helpline will offer support to teenagers worried about their own behaviour in relationships.

Keep reading

UK Parliament Rejects Petition to Repeal Online Censorship Law, Calls for Expanded Censorship

This week in the UK, Parliament held a debate in response to a public petition that gathered hundreds of thousands of signatures calling for the repeal of the Online Safety Act (OSA).

It was a rare opportunity for elected officials to prove they still listen to their constituents.

Instead, the overwhelming message from MPs was clear: thanks for your concern, but we’d actually like even more control over what you can do online.

One by one, MPs stood up not to defend free expression, or question whether one of the most radical internet control laws in modern British history might have gone too far, but to argue that it hadn’t gone far enough.

“It’s Not Censorship, It’s Responsibility” (Apparently)

Lizzi Collinge, Labour MP for Morecambe and Lunesdale, insisted the OSA “is not about controlling speech.” She claimed it was about giving the online world the same “safety features” as the offline one.

This was a recurring theme throughout the debate: reassure the public that speech isn’t being restricted while calling for more mechanisms to restrict it.

Ian Murray, Minister for Digital Government and Data, also insisted the OSA protects freedom of expression. According to him, there’s no contradiction in saying people can speak freely, as long as they’re age-verified, avoid VPNs, and don’t say anything that might be flagged by a government regulator.

It’s a neat trick. Say you support free speech, then build an entire law designed to monitor, filter, and police it.

VPNs in the Firing Line

There is a growing fixation inside government with VPNs. These are basic privacy tools used by millions of people every day, often to protect their data. But several MPs, including Jim McMahon, Julia Lopez, and Ian Murray, suggested VPNs should be subject to age verification or regulatory restrictions.

It’s unclear whether these MPs understand how VPNs work or if they simply dislike the idea of anyone browsing the internet without supervision.

Either way, the intent is clear. The government wants fewer ways for people to browse anonymously.

Keep reading

Twitter user is jailed for 18 months for two anti-immigration tweets made after Christmas market car attack that were viewed just 33 times

A Twitter user who posted two anti-immigration tweets that were viewed just 33 times has been jailed for stirring up racial hatred.

Luke Yarwood, 36, received an 18-month sentence after tweeting in the wake of the Christmas market car attack in Magdeburg, Germany, in December 2024.

His posts were reported to the police by Yarwood’s own brother-in-law who he did not get on with.

The case has drawn comparisons with Lucy Connolly, the 42-year-old wife of a Tory councillor from Northampton, who was jailed after she called for people to ‘set fire’ to asylum hotels in the wake of the Southport attack in July 2024.

Siobhan Linsley, prosecuting, said Yarwood’s ‘extremely unpleasant posts’ had the potential to trigger disorder at one of three high-profile migrant hotels in Bournemouth, Dorset, near to where he lives.

His barrister argued the posts had 33 views between them and were the ‘impotent rantings of a socially isolated man’ that had no ‘real-world’ consequences.

But Judge Jonathan Fuller said Yarwood’s ‘odious’ tweets were designed to stir up racial hatred and incite violence, and jailed him.

Bournemouth Crown Court heard Yarwood from Burton, near Christchurch, Dorset, made a series of anti-Muslim and anti-immigration posts from December 21, 2024 to January 29, 2025.

It started the day after the car attack in Germany in which six people were killed. At the time misinformation on social media suggested the person responsible was an Islamic extremist.

Yarwood responded to a post that stated thousands of Germans were taking to the streets and they wanted their country back.

Yarwood replied: ‘Head for the hotels housing them and burn them to the ground.’

While further posts by him displayed a ‘rabid dislike’ for foreigners, particularly Islam, these did not stir up racial hatred or incite violence.

For example, Yarwood wrote about the amount of foreign people in Bournemouth, stating: ‘Walking for ages and not hearing a word of English.’

He also wrote of his disgust at seeing ‘asylum seekers outside the hotel staring at young college girls’.

The second illegal tweet was made in response to a post by GB News.

Keep reading

The UK’s Plan to Put an Age Verification Chaperone in Every Pocket

UK officials are preparing to urge Apple and Google to redesign their operating systems so that every phone and computer sold in the country can automatically block nude imagery unless the user has proved they are an adult.

The proposal, part of the Home Office’s upcoming plan under the premise of combating violence against women and girls, would rely on technology built directly into devices, with software capable of scanning images locally to detect material.

Under the plan, as reported by FT, such scanning would be turned on by default. Anyone wanting to take, send, or open an explicit photo would first have to verify their age using a government-issued ID or a biometric check.

The goal, officials say, is to prevent children from being exposed to sexual material or drawn into exploitative exchanges online.

People briefed on the discussions said the Home Office had explored the possibility of making these tools a legal requirement but decided, for now, to rely on encouragement rather than legislation.

Even so, the expectation is that large manufacturers will come under intense pressure to comply.

The government’s approach reflects growing anxiety about how easily minors can access sexual content and how grooming can occur through everyday apps.

Instead of copying Australia’s decision to ban social media use for under-16s, British ministers have chosen to focus on controlling imagery itself.

Safeguarding minister Jess Phillips has praised technology firms that already filter content at the device level. She cited HMD Global, maker of Nokia phones, for embedding child-protection software called HarmBlock, created by UK-based SafeToNet, which automatically blocks explicit images from being viewed or shared.

Apple and Google have built smaller-scale systems of their own. Apple’s “Communication Safety” function scans photos in apps like Messages, AirDrop, and FaceTime and warns children when nudity is detected, but teens can ignore the alert.

Google’s Family Link and “sensitive content warnings” work similarly on Android, though they stop short of scanning across all apps. Both companies allow parents to apply restrictions, but neither has a universal filter that covers the entire operating system.

The Home Office wants to go further, calling for a system that would block any nude image unless an adult identity check has been passed.

Keep reading

A Story of a 1930s Uprising Against British Colonialism Is Key To Understanding Gaza Today

Anyone wondering why the British state and media, despite the latter’s pretension to serve as a watchdog on power, continue to cheerlead Israel’s genocidal slaughter of civilians in Gaza will find the answers in a new film.

It recounts not the current period of history, but a story from nearly 90 years ago.

Palestine 36, directed by the remarkable Palestinian film-maker Annemarie Jacir, illuminates more about the events unfolding for the past two years in Gaza than anything you will read in a British newspaper or watch on the BBC – if, that is, you can find anything at all about Gaza in the news since Donald Trump rebranded the killing and dispossession of Palestinians as a “ceasefire”.

And Palestine 36 does so, unusually for a Palestinian film, with a budget worthy of a Hollywood blockbuster and with a cast that includes names recognizable to western audiences, from Jeremy Irons to Liam Cunningham.

This is a major episode of British colonial history told not through British eyes but, for once, through the eyes of its victims.

The “36” of the title refers to 1936, when Palestinians rose up against British colonial tyranny – more usually, and deceitfully, referred to as a “British Mandate” issued by the League of Nations.

The problem for Palestinians was not just the systematic violence of those three decades of tyranny. It was that Britain’s role as a supposed caretaker of Palestine – an “arbiter of peace” between native Palestinians and mostly Jewish immigrants – served as cover for a much more sinister project.

It was British officials who ushered Jews out of Europe – where they were unwanted by racist governments, including Britain’s – to implant them in Palestine. There, they were actively nurtured as the foot soldiers of a coming “Jewish state” that was supposed to be dependent on Britain and assist in strengthening its imperial, regional agenda.

In effect, an overstretched British empire hoped over time to outsource its colonial role to a “Jewish” fortress state.

Keep reading

UK To Introduce ‘Anti-Muslim Hate’ Definition

Ministers in the UK are steeling themselves for a storm of criticism as Communities Secretary Steve Reed prepares to unveil a new official definition of “anti-Muslim hate” this week. 

Critics, led by the Free Speech Union, warn that the expansive terminology risks creating a de facto blasphemy law, stifling legitimate debate on issues like grooming gangs and Islamist terrorism.

The shift away from the term “Islamophobia” aims to provide guidance for public bodies, councils, and businesses in combating prejudice against Muslims. Yet, according to leaked drafts, it could label prejudicial stereotyping or “racialisation designed to incite hate” as hateful acts, potentially encompassing discussions that highlight patterns in crimes predominantly involving Muslim perpetrators.

Keep reading