Tag: united kingdom

As War Rages In Iran, UK MoD Surveys Troops On Wearing Makeup And Nail Polish

While flames engulf Iranian oil depots following U.S. and Israeli strikes, and Iran retaliates with missiles targeting the UAE and Israel, the UK Ministry of Defence has sparked backlash by circulating a survey to troops about relaxing appearance standards. The questionnaire asks if male soldiers should be allowed to wear makeup, nail polish, and longer hair, ridiculously framing it as a push toward “gender-free” policies.

The timing of this clownish behaviour couldn’t be worse. The survey, originating from Army HQ in Andover, proposes uniform rules on hair, jewelry, and even facial aesthetics like fillers and microblading for all genders.

The review builds on recent shifts in UK military policies. In 2024, the Army reversed a long-standing ban on beards. Back in 2019, then-Defence Secretary Ben Wallace floated allowing men to use camouflage-colored makeup. And in 2017, instructions emphasized avoiding gender-specific language like “best man for the job.”

Shadow Defence Minister Mark Francois slammed the initiative, stating, “Upgrading to mascara from camouflage cream is hardly likely to deter Putin.”

An Army spokesman pushed back, clarifying, “As the Chief of the General Staff has said, the Army is focused on enhancing our lethality and fighting readiness. There are no plans to change policy – and this was not an official Army survey.”

This comes against a backdrop of escalating conflict in Iran. U.S. and Israeli forces have conducted devastating strikes on regime oil depots, with reports of “fire rain” over Tehran after the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a daytime assault. Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz, raising fears of UK gas shortages with only days’ reserves left. Iranian drones and missiles have struck Dubai skyscrapers and airports, killing civilians.

In addition, U.S. President Donald Trump has publicly dressed down UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer for what he calls a tardy response to the crisis.

In a social media post, Trump dismissed Britain’s offer to send aircraft carriers, writing, “The United Kingdom, our once Great Ally, maybe the Greatest of them all, is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East. That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember. We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!”

Keep reading

UK Government Brands Union Flag A ‘TOOL OF HATE’ In Leaked ‘Social Cohesion’ Strategy

A leaked draft of the UK Government’s new ‘social cohesion’ strategy has sparked outrage by labeling the flying of English, Scottish, and Union Jack flags as potential “tools of hate.”

The document claims these national symbols were sometimes used last summer to “exclude or intimidate,” adding that the “extreme right has tried to turn symbols of pride into tools of hate.”

The 47-page draft, leaked to the Spectator magazine, also highlights how antisemitism has become “normalised in many corners of society” from schools and universities to workplaces and the NHS.

Under the proposals, titled Protecting What Matters, some £800 million over 10 years would be allocated to 40 areas where social cohesion is “under pressure.”

The strategy is set for a cross-Government rollout next week, but critics are already slamming it as divisive.

Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice blasted the draft, telling the Sun: “Absurdly, this says our national flag is a tool of hate used to intimidate. The whole paper is a divisive nonsense that should be consigned to the bin.”

The leak ties directly into ongoing controversies over national flags, as detailed in our previous coverage where English councils admitted spending tens of thousands to remove “unauthorised” English and Union Jack flags from lampposts.

Keep reading

Leftist-Globalist BBC Caught AGAIN Doctoring a Speech, This Time by US War Secretary Hegseth, Igniting Another ‘Impartiality’ Row in Britain

The ‘Beeb’ screwed up again – possibly on purpose.

For the leftist-Globalist bosses and crew at the British Broadcasting Company (BBC), it isn’t enough anymore to have highly biased reports filled with editorial content.

Now, they feel the need to go ahead and actually doctor speeches by people they loathe, trying to modify what they are saying, in maneuvers worthy of a George Orwell novel.

The ‘Beeb’ is already on the hook for billions, after deceptively editing a historic J6 speech by Donald J. Trump, as you can read in BBC IS MELTING: British State Broadcaster To Apologize for Doctored Editing of Trump J6 Speech, Under Fire for Its Pro-Hamas, Pro-Trans and Climate Change Biases.

Apparently, the BBC intelligentsia hasn’t learned a thing, so they went ahead and did it again.

Now, they are ‘plunged into a fresh impartiality row’ after altering a speech by US War Secretary Pete Hegseth regarding the military operations in Iran.

Daily Mail reported:

“In the broadcast aired to audiences within Iran, BBC Persian inaccurately translated the US Defense Secretary’s remarks, reporting that Washington intended to bring death to the Iranian ‘people’.

In reality, Mr. Hegseth had specified that the United States was targeting the Iranian ‘regime’.

The BBC, which carried Mr Hegseth’s Pentagon address live on Monday, translated the word ‘regime’ as ‘mardom’, the Persian word for ‘people’, before later issuing a correction.”

Keep reading

UK Mulls Banning 67 Dog Breeds for ‘Animal Health’ — but Is That Really the Reason?

After all these years, it turns out that your beloved pooch may be “unhealthy,” so much so that his breed has to be banned. This dire news comes from the far-left government of the United Kingdom, where beagles, dachshunds, mastiffs, great danes, boxers, and saint bernards may soon be a thing of the past. All in all, the government is considering banning no fewer than sixty-seven dog breeds, with the stated reason being animal health. This is so implausible, however, that it cries out for another explanation, and there is an obvious one that doesn’t bode well for Britain’s future as a free society.

The UK’s Daily Mail reported Thursday that this initiative comes from the top: “Sixty-seven dog breeds could be banned in Britain if new breeding guidelines set by parliament become mandatory, campaigners have warned.” This is because “the all-party parliamentary group (APPG) for animal welfare has launched a new tool to determine if a dog is healthy.”

Why was a new tool to determine if a dog is healthy needed now, to the extent that the British parliament has a group devoted to studying this question? Is Britain suffering a plague of unhealthy dogs? Are these legions of unhealthy dogs infecting their owners with diseases of some kind?

None of that seems to be the case; on the contrary, this sudden parliamentary fascination with canine health seems to be entirely a bolt from the blue, and the parliamentary group’s criteria for what constitutes sufficient dog health look just as arbitrary: “The cross-party committee has developed a 10-point checklist of extreme physical characteristics which can make for a poorly pooch. They include mottled colouration, excessive skin folds, bulging outward-turning eyes, drooping eyelids, under or overbite and a muzzle that interrupts breathing.”

The upshot of this is that numerous breeds of dog that are perfectly healthy but which have a coloration or skin folds or eyes to which parliament objects may end up being banned. And parliament means business: “The assessment – which is currently voluntary but expected to become law within five years – aims to drive out breeds with these sorts of exaggerated attributes.”

The claim is that this is all about caring for the poor dears, just as Canada’s euthanasia program is supposed to be all about alleviating pain and suffering. Britain’s anti-dog push “comes after studies have shown animals of these varieties can sometimes suffer pain, discomfort and frustration from birth.” However, “critics have cautioned the new criteria will see some 67 of the most popular types of dog in the UK automatically dubbed unhealthy.” These include “widely adored breeds like dachshunds, shih tzus and Scottish terriers – and even the late Queen’s beloved Welsh corgis.”

Given that these claims about the health of well-known and beloved dog breeds are so implausible, what else could be going on here? Well, Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.) recently landed himself in hot water when he posted this on X: “If they force us to choose, the choice between dogs and Muslims is not a difficult one.” Could it be that Muslims in Britain are forcing exactly this choice, or that Britain’s far-left Labour government is trying to ensure that the country’s growing and restive Muslim population continues to vote for Labour en masse?

Keep reading

Epstein and the coming “age of accountability” psy-op

In the wake Prince Andrew’s arrest on suspicion of misconduct in public office, UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer gave an interview in which he said “nobody is above the law.”

And the media lost no time in proving my point. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson echoed it in an interview of her own. Everyone from Al Jazeera to the South China Morning Post has taken up the cry.

In one of those curiously timed coincidences, the UN actually used the same exact phrase just a day before Sir Keir.

Then there’s this long article in the Atlantic, I won’t sport with your intelligence by relating the bulk of the text, we concern ourselves only with the concluding paragraph:

The former Prince Andrew acted as he did because he lived in a world in which someone like him never faced consequences. That isn’t true anymore.

That’s the narrative in a nutshell. The system is fair and treats everyone the same. Old Guard bad, corruption being rooted out, accountability for the old boys club. Like #MeToo on crack.

In this vein we have the arrest of Peter Mandelson.

The investigation, and alleged attempted suicide, of Norway’s former PM Thorbjørn Jagland

The resignation of World Economic Forum chief Børge Brende over his “Epstein links”

The “retirement” of Harvard President and former Treasury Secretary of Larry Summers

Even stuff as small as the revelation of Bill Gates’ affairs with a couple of Russian women.

None of those latter four come close to actual arrests, of course. And the story is very much that while the UK (and Europe in general) are willing to act on Epstein, the US is lagging behind.

Keep reading

Britain is Trying to Censor Americans – But America is Fighting Back

Ofcom has confirmed it is referring 4chan to a final enforcement decision under the Online Safety Act. The target is a Delaware company that runs an entirely anonymous imageboard from the United States, with no offices, staff, servers or assets in Britain. The demand: install age-verification systems and content filters so that British children cannot access the site or face daily fines levied from London on an American platform. This case is not an outlier. It is the clearest real-world demonstration of what the new generation of “online safety” laws requires: private companies must build automated filters that decide, in advance, which legal speech is too harmful for minors to see. The question the regulators never quite answer is simple: what exactly does the filter catch?

In the early 2020s, a political consensus formed on both sides of the Atlantic: social media is harming children and something must be done. The result in Washington was the Kids’ Online Safety Act (KOSA); in Westminster, the Online Safety Act (OSA), which received Royal Assent in October 2023 and began enforcement in 2025. The political appeal of both measures is genuine. Adolescent mental health deteriorated in the 2010s, parents are alarmed and platforms have appeared indifferent. But good intentions do not make good law, and the form these interventions took is constitutionally and morally indefensible. Both KOSA and the OSA rest on a duty-of-care model: platforms must take “reasonable measures” or implement “proportionate systems” to prevent minors from encountering content associated with depression, anxiety, eating disorders, self-harm and suicide. This is not a regulation of conduct. It is a mandate to suppress speech based on its topic and its predicted emotional effect on a reader: the very definition of content-based regulation.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) stated the constitutional problem plainly in its July 2023 letter opposing KOSA: the bill “is a content-based regulation of constitutionally protected speech” that “will silence important conversations, limit minors’ access to potentially vital resources and violate the First Amendment”.  Under Reed v. Town of Gilbert, a law is content-based if it “applies to particular speech because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed”. Content-based regulations are “presumptively unconstitutional”.

Keep reading

UK Consults on Social Media Age Verification While Directing Parents to Report “Hate Speech” to Big Tech

The British government launched a consultation this week that could require age verification for anyone using social media, gaming sites, or AI chatbots.

The consultation, titled “Growing up in the online world,” opened on March 2nd and closes May 26, 2026. It asks the public whether the government should ban under-16s from social media entirely, impose mandatory overnight curfews on platform access, restrict AI chatbot features for minors, and require platforms to disable “addictive design features” like infinite scrolling and autoplay.

The government says it will respond in summer 2026, and Parliament has already handed ministers new legal powers to act on the findings without waiting for fresh primary legislation.

The Prime Minister announced those powers on February 16, weeks before the consultation even opened. The government can now move faster once it decides what it wants. What the public thinks determines the packaging, not the destination.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall framed it this way: “The path to a good life is a great childhood, one full of love, learning, and play. That applies just as much to the online world as it does to the real one.”

The actual policy tools being considered are a different matter.

Age verification, as a mechanism, works by proving identity. Every user proves who they are.

A social media platform that must exclude under-16s must verify the age of its over-16s. That means collecting identity documents, linking browsing activity to real identities, or building infrastructure that a government can later compel to serve other purposes.

The surveillance architecture required to enforce a children’s safety law is the same architecture required to surveil adults. It gets built for one reason. It gets used for others.

Then there’s the “Help your child stay safe online” campaign site, the government launched alongside the consultation. The site includes a page directing parents to report “bullying, threats, harassment, hate speech, and content promoting self-harm or suicide” directly to platforms, with links to the reporting tools of Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, WhatsApp, TikTok, Discord, YouTube, and Twitch.

Keep reading

UK COUNTER-TERROR Police Ad Warns Teens Sharing ‘Funny’ Content Could Be TERRORISM

The UK’s Counter Terrorism Police have released a disturbing advertisement depicting a white teenager facing police seizure of devices and a potential criminal record simply for sharing a link he found “funny”—content, we are told, was later deemed terrorist material.

This move, part of the broader Prevent anti-radicalization strategy, underscores the UK regime’s push to police online activity among youth, framing it as a gateway to extremism while ignoring surging real-world dangers from mass migration.

In the ad, a teen laments: “I just got all my device taken away by the police… My mom couldn’t believe it. I might get a criminal record and not be able to go to college.” He then explains: “I only shared a link. I just thought it was funny, but it was terrorist content.”

Counter Terrorism Policing describes itself as “a collaboration of UK police forces working with the UK intelligence community to help protect the public and our national security by preventing, deterring, and investigating terrorist activity.”

A recent academic analysis in the Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism highlights the escalating involvement of family courts and Prevent in childhood radicalization cases, noting “the number of children referred to Prevent and Channel due to concerns that they might be at risk of, or from, radicalisation has been steadily increasing since 2015.”

It adds that professionals like teachers are “legally obligated to refer that child to the police under the auspices of Prevent” if suspecting risk.

Government guidance on Prevent duty in schools urges communication with parents to spot signs, but also empowers referrals if family members show vulnerability. As one factsheet states, referrals can come from “a family member, friend, colleague, or a professional.”

Keep reading

Politician Rory Amon admits sex with a 13-year-old boy in a ‘dirty, hidden car park toilet’ – as he faces rape charges and jury hears his explanation

A teen lied about his age to a former Liberal MP before the pair had sex on the floor of a dirty car park bathroom, jurors have been told.

Rory Amon was a 27-year-old aspiring politician when he met the teenager at his Sydney apartment block in July 2017.

He admits having sex with the 13-year-old on one occasion at night in the underground car park bathroom.

But this was far from a case of a man lurking in a space for children, a NSW Supreme Court jury was told on Tuesday.

Amon met the teen on a gay dating website where users had to be over 18 to sign up, defence barrister Matthew Johnston SC said.

‘This is not a case … where there is an adult who’s on a chatroom that’s frequented by 13-year-olds and is tricking them into a meeting,’ he told the jury.

The alleged victim admitted lying about his age, once in signing up to the website and again when chatting to Amon, Mr Johnston said.

This was the only reason his client had met the boy, he argued.

If the teen had said he was 15 – as he claimed in the witness box – the former politician would have ceased chatting to him immediately, the barrister said. 

Instead, the 13-year-old bolstered his lies by sending photos and messages, which made him seem older with the intent of meeting Amon for sex, Mr Johnston said.

‘I’m raising that not to, in any way, say that (the alleged victim’s) to blame for anything,’ he told the jury.

‘He was 13 … adolescents make stupid decisions all the time.’

But the jury was urged by prosecutors to reject Amon’s evidence he thought the teen was above the age of consent.

‘Using your common sense and experience, you may have very little difficulty finding this accused is guilty,’ crown prosecutor Meaghan Fleeton said.

It would have been obvious to Amon when he met the boy in person he was under 16, she argued.

She said the intelligent, articulate former MP had lied about his age to manipulate the boy before pursuing and sexually assaulting him.

The alleged victim was a child with no sexual experience at the time, she said.

Now 36, Amon has pleaded not guilty to 10 child sexual abuse, child rape and indecent assault charges.

He admits meeting the boy for sex once, but denies allegations of a second meet-up where a towel was brought to the bathroom.

Mr Johnston suggested the incident had ‘grown’ in the complainant’s mind over the years as he grappled with its impact.

‘Some witnesses – they believe they’re telling the truth … but they’re genuinely mistaken about some things,’ he said.

But the Crown portrayed the key witness as honest and who broke down when testifying.

‘You saw (him) get upset when shown the photos of the car park toilet – that dirty, hidden car park toilet – where he had his first sexual experience,’ Ms Fleeton said.

‘It was a significant and life-changing course of events.’

There would have been a window of opportunity in July 2017 for both of these ‘hasty hook-ups’ to have taken place, she argued.

Soon after the alleged sexual abuse, he gave some details of what occurred to his mother, friends, school counsellor and psychologist, she noted.

The complainant first became aware of Amon’s identity in 2020 through a COVID-19 announcement when the former Liberal was a councillor.

The two reconnected on Snapchat in 2019 and then on Grindr in 2022 when Amon sent him some photos, including one in his volunteer firefighter uniform.

The trial continues on Wednesday.

Keep reading

Hundreds of cases of child abuse involving beliefs in witchcraft and evil spirits go unreported every year in UK, experts reveal

Hundreds of cases of group ritual abuse against children are going unreported every year in the UK, a leading researcher has revealed. 

Victims have been contacting support services to describe abuse at the hands of paedophile rings who use claims of witchcraft and possession to cower them into submission.

In a twisted inversion of reality, acts of rape, sexual abuse or torture are then characterised as ‘cleansing’ rituals to rid the victim of a demon or evil spirit – with perpetrators sometimes wearing costumes or masks.

While so-called ‘organised ritual abuse’ is described as a ‘rare but real phenomenon’ in Britain, police are concerned that it is heavily underreported and rarely appears in official data.

Dr Elly Hanson, a clinical psychologist and researcher, said victims often do not report ritual abuse to police because they feared their claims would appear too fantastical to be believed.

Others have become ‘disassociated’, a process that sees abuse victims adopt a different identity as a way of separating themselves from the reality of what has happened to them, or simply feel too traumatised to ‘give a coherent narrative’.

‘There are so many hurdles facing victims that nearly all of them end up falling out of the system,’ Dr Hanson told a media briefing held today by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC).

An analysis of police data by the NPCC found that just seven ritual abuse cases were investigated in 2024 out of 4,450 instances of child abuse, marking just 0.2 per cent of all investigations.

However, the National Association for People Abused in Childhood (NAPAC) found that out of a sample of 36,700 calls to their helpline between July 2016 and January 2025, 1,311 (3.57 per cent) mentioned ritual abuse.

Dr Hanson said organised ritual abuse typically involves family members and starts when children are young.

Perpetrators frequently do not believe the supernatural belief systems they are espousing and simply use them as a means too gain control over their victims, the psychologist explained.

This form of abuse regularly involves torture or extreme acts of violence and may end in murder or animal sacrifice.

While beliefs about witchcraft and spirit possession are often linked to ethnic groups, such as those with links to sub-Saharan Africa, many offenders have British backgrounds.

According to Dr Hanson, ‘cultural sensitivities’ are one factor holding back police and social services, but she believes the issue works both ways.

‘You’ve potentially got a desire to be culturally sensitive with certain cultural communities, then you’ve got the other direction where someone who is British and not from a particular community they are not seen as someone who might be suffering ritual abuse,’ she said.

One recent case saw a seven-strong child sex ring in Glasgow prey on children as young as 13 in a drug den nicknamed the ‘Beastie House’.

The trial heard how the group performed ‘spells’ on the children and convinced them they had been metamorphosed into various animals.

Richard Fewkes, the director of the NPCC’s Hydrant programme targeting child sexual abuse, said the case was an example of paedophiles using claims of witchcraft as a means of control.

‘Those individuals did not necessarily believe in witchcraft, but they used the ritual of it to control the children,’ he said.

Keep reading