Tag: united kingdom

Jeffrey Epstein committed his first crime in the U.K. and it involved a bizarre deadly weapon

Jeffrey Epstein once admitted being convicted of a bizarre crime involving possession of an offensive weapon in the U.K.

The late disgraced billionaire revealed under oath that he was convicted of having a sword disguised as a walking cane, a device known as a ‘swordstick.’

It is unclear what Epstein’s punishment was for the crime, which happened decades ago, but records show a man later convicted of the same offense received a suspended jail sentence.

The incident, according to Epstein himself, resulted in his first criminal conviction, long before he admitted soliciting a minor in 2008, and was then charged with sex trafficking of minors in 2019.

Epstein spoke about the peculiar episode during a sworn deposition in a separate financial investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in New York in 1981.

According to a transcript of that deposition he was asked if he had ever been convicted of a crime, and replied: ‘I’ve been convicted of a crime in Great Britain at one point…I don’t believe it’s…no (U.S.) federal jurisdiction.’

He was then asked by an SEC lawyer: ‘Do you know offhand if it’s a felony or a misdemeanor?’

Epstein responded: ‘No I don’t.’

The lawyer went on: ‘What did it concern? What was the allegation and what was the conviction?’

Epstein said: ‘The allegation was I bought an antique swordstick and they said that could not be carried in the country, it had to be shipped out.’

Keep reading

Man ARRESTED In UK For Saying “We Love Bacon”

A British man has been arrested for saying “we love bacon” while protesting the building of a proposed giant mosque.

The Telegraph reports that the protest occurred at the site of planned super mosque in the Lake District, which is populated by an almost 100% white population.

The report further notes that the 23-year-old man, was not otherwise being disruptive, causing any damage or being in any way violent.

The arresting police officer claims that the grounds for the detainment were “racial abuse.”

Telegraph writer  Isabel Oakeshott notes:

Of course Muslims don’t eat pork. As a result, they cannot share this particular delight with the rest of us. However, despite a steady rise in our own Muslim population, the UK remains a Christian country. Supposedly, we also enjoy free speech. Why then did the unfortunate father find himself frogmarched away from the protest by two police officers?

Saying ‘We love bacon’ is simply a truism. We British do love it, and there is nothing wrong with saying so.

As for remarks about bacon near a religious site or in the company of Muslims, they hardly constitute public disorder, still less ‘racial abuse,’ as the officer who arrested him can be heard suggesting.

The South Lakes Islamic Centre, often referred to as the Kendal mosque due to its proximity to the town of Kendal in Cumbria, is a £2.5 million facility under construction in Dalton-in-Furness on the edge of the Lake District.

Keep reading

JD Vance Stops UK Apple Backdoor Order Threatening Americans’ Privacy

Vice President J.D. Vance played a decisive role in persuading the United Kingdom to drop its demand that Apple provide the government with a “backdoor” into personal user data, according to U.S. officials.

The negotiations followed months of quiet but direct engagement between American and British leaders on the matter, as reported by Fox News.

A U.S. official told Fox News Digital that Vance was “in charge and was personally involved in negotiating a deal, including having direct conversations with the British government.”

The official said Vance worked with U.K. partners to negotiate “a mutually beneficial understanding” that led the British government to withdraw the order.

The agreement, the official added, ensures “each country’s sovereignty while maintaining close cooperation on data sharing.”

The vice president’s background in technology, along with his stated commitment to privacy rights and the U.S.-U.K. alliance, shaped his involvement.

Keep reading

UK Government Moves to Investigate 4chan Under Draconian ‘Online Safety Act’ — Platform’s SAVAGE Response Leaves Them Humiliated

The British government is at it again, weaponizing its so-called “Online Safety Act” to crack down on speech it doesn’t like.

This time, the target is none other than the online forum 4chan, the notorious online discussion board where anonymous users post unfiltered commentary that sends elites into fits.

On June 10, 2025, Ofcom, the UK’s Orwellian Office of Communications, opened an official investigation into 4chan.

According to Ofcom, the platform failed to hand over information on demand, did not file the “appropriate illegal content risk assessments,” and didn’t bow to London’s censorship mandates. In other words, 4chan refused to bend the knee.

By August 13, Ofcom escalated matters, issuing a provisional notice of contravention under the Act and threatening fines of £20,000 ($27,100) plus daily penalties until the platform complied.

According to the notice:

Provisional Decision: Information Notice duties

In accordance with section 130 of the Online Safety Act 2023, we have today issued 4chan Community Support LLC with a provisional notice of contravention.

Ofcom is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing the provider has contravened its duties under section 102(8) of the Act to comply with two requests for information. We will consider any representations provided in response to this provisional notice before we make a final decision on this matter.

The additional duties under investigation

On 10 June 2025, we opened an investigation into whether the provider of 4chan has failed/is failing to comply with its duties under the Online Safety Act 2023 to:

  • adequately respond to a statutory information request;
  • complete and keep a record of a suitable and sufficient illegal content risk assessment; and
  • comply with the safety duties about illegal content.

Ofcom’s investigation continues to examine concurrently whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that the provider has failed, or is failing, to comply with the other duties under investigation, including duties to protect its users from illegal content. We will provide updates on these matters in due course.

But instead of cowering, 4chan and its legal team fired back with a blistering response that left Ofcom and Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s censors utterly humiliated.

In a blistering legal statement posted by Byrne & Storm, P.C. and Coleman Law, P.C., 4chan’s lawyers dismantled Ofcom’s fantasy that they had authority over an American company.

The statement went further, warning that U.S. federal authorities had already been briefed and that the Trump Administration should be prepared to step in to defend American companies against foreign censorship mandates.

The statement reads:

According to press reports, the U.K. Office of Communications (“Ofcom”) has issued a provisional notice under the Online Safety Act alleging a contravention by 4chan and indicating an intention to impose a penalty of £20,000, plus daily penalties thereafter.

4chan is a United States company, incorporated in Delaware, with no establishment, assets, or operations in the United Kingdom. Any attempt to impose or enforce a penalty against 4chan will be resisted in U.S. federal court.

American businesses do not surrender their First Amendment rights because a foreign bureaucrat sends them an e-mail. Under settled principles of U.S. law, American courts will not enforce foreign penal fines or censorship codes.

If necessary, we will seek appropriate relief in U.S. federal court to confirm these principles.

United States federal authorities have been briefed on this matter.

The Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, was reportedly warned by the White House to cease targeting Americans with U.K. censorship codes (according to reporting in the Telegraph on July 30th).

Despite these warnings, Ofcom continues its illegal campaign of harassment against American technology firms. A political solution to this matter is urgently required and that solution must come from the highest levels of American government.

We call on the Trump Administration to invoke all diplomatic and legal levers available to the United States to protect American companies from extraterritorial censorship mandates.

Our client reserves all rights.

Keep reading

‘This is the UK in 2025!’ — Police face backlash after failing to arrest asylum seeker who entered elderly woman’s home

London’s Metropolitan Police has been accused of failing to protect the public after an asylum seeker housed at the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf entered an elderly woman’s home without permission — and was returned to the hotel without arrest.

The incident took place on Aug. 13, when police were called to Marsh Wall at 6:07 p.m. Officers claimed in a statement posted on social media that the man entered the property through an open door while “being followed by a group of men” in the street.

Police claim no intent could be proven, and the man was not arrested.

However, the response was markedly different toward protesters angry about the housing of asylum seekers in the area. Three demonstrators outside the migrant hotel, questioning why the man was not arrested, were themselves detained — including a 22-year-old woman facing multiple charges such as common assault on a security guard, possession of an offensive weapon, and affray. A Section 35 dispersal order was issued in the area, leading to the arrest of a 28-year-old man and a 57-year-old woman for breaching it.

Keep reading

‘This Is The UK In 2025’: Police Face Backlash After Failing To Arrest Asylum-Seeker Who Entered Elderly Woman’s Home

London’s Metropolitan Police has been accused of failing to protect the public after an asylum seeker housed at the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf entered an elderly woman’s home without permission — and was returned to the hotel without arrest.

The incident took place on Aug. 13, when police were called to Marsh Wall at 6:07 p.m. Officers claimed in a statement posted on social media that the man entered the property through an open door while “being followed by a group of men” in the street.

Police claim no intent could be proven, and the man was not arrested.

However, the response was markedly different toward protesters angry about the housing of asylum seekers in the area. Three demonstrators outside the migrant hotel, questioning why the man was not arrested, were themselves detained — including a 22-year-old woman facing multiple charges such as common assault on a security guard, possession of an offensive weapon, and affray. A Section 35 dispersal order was issued in the area, leading to the arrest of a 28-year-old man and a 57-year-old woman for breaching it.

Keep reading

Immigration, Censorship, and the Deep State in the Yookay

Mass immigration and the refugee crisis have transformed European politics over the last decade. The United Kingdom has experienced some of the biggest changes, as repeated popular revolts against immigration have led to both Brexit and the collapse of the Conservative Party in favor of Reform UK. The American Conservative sat down with Connor Tomlinson, a British journalist and political commentator, to talk about the impact of immigration on the UK and the country’s future.

Let’s start with something that I think a lot of Americans have found quite puzzling looking at the situation in the UK. Immigration is the question in British politics, especially right now. Every British government for years has been elected on the promise of lowering immigration. None have done so. Why?

When you say for years, that means going back to 1974. Every single election referendum since has promised lower migration and never delivered. There’s a few reasons. 

The first, I think, is the economic system. Anytime someone promises to cut immigration, a pie chart is wheeled into the room by the so-called experts, and they say, “If you do this, we won’t be able to fudge the numbers on the population, which then builds our annual GDP up, which then allows us to borrow even more debt to pay down for subsidized socialized medicine and pension system.” One thing that Keir Starmer ran into when he was elected to government was that because the Treasury predictions are done on an annual cycle, you can’t cut the size of the civil service, because if you make anyone lose their jobs—and it’s very hard to do the extra legislation anyway—but if you make anyone lose their jobs, they get a year severance pay, and it doesn’t register as cuts. If you cut immigration in the short term, there might be a dip in GDP, because you cut X amount of totally useless jobs. So instead, all they ever do is cut the very few things that they can do—the extra payments and pensions and things like that, which ends up estranging entire swathes of their voter base. 

So economics is one reason. The other one is that there is a human-rights industrial complex that has taken root. Keir Starmer, when he was a human-rights lawyer busy going around the world acting on behalf of murderers to get rid of the death penalty, actually helped write the text for Tony Blair’s 1998 Human Rights Act, which wrote the European Court of Human Rights and Convention on Human Rights into British law. So even after Brexit, we still have European laws on our books, because they’re a separate entity.

That means that you get Pakistani pedophiles or Albanian gangsters who say, “My son doesn’t like the taste of foreign chicken nuggets,” appealing to the statue and saying, “My right to a family and private life should mean that I get to stay in this country even though I’m a criminal.” No politician wants to touch that because of the deep taboos that have existed since 1945, since the atrocities of the Holocaust, since Hitler killed a lot of people in a very racist way. So all these antiquated human rights doctrines, like the UN Refugee Convention, like the European Convention of Human Rights, which were written with Dutch Jews fleeing persecution in mind, are now pertaining to North African rapists, and we’re just battery-farming them at the taxpayers expense. 

The final reason, I would say, is that the government has a hell of a lot of contracts with private security and housing firms like Serco. So local councils which mismanage their budgets and these private security firms and these hotel chains will take direct government subsidies to house not just legal migrants that come over (95 percent of whom aren’t paying any taxes at all, and are just a net drain), but also loads of illegal migrants who have come over the physical barrier of the English Channel. These illegal migrants have been picked up by the RNLI, our border force, ferried back, and are now housed in four-star accommodations at the cost of over £14 billion a year to the taxpayer.

Keep reading

British Police Told Reveal Ethnicity, Migration Status of Suspects in High-Profile Cases

British police forces have been told that they should disclose the ethnic background and nationality of suspects in at least high-profile cases to rebuild trust with the public amid accusations of politically correct cover-ups.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing have issued interim guidance to forces across England and Wales, advising them to disclose more information about suspects in high-profile cases, rather than merely disclosing their age and location of arrest, London’s Daily Telegraph reports.

The guidance comes in the wake of controversy surrounding the alleged gang rape of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton last month. Police faced accusations that they tried to prevent the public from being informed that the two suspects in the case, Ahmad Mulakhil and Mohammad Kabir, were asylum seekers from Afghanistan out of concern that it would inflame “community tensions”.

Warwickshire Police Chief Constable Alex Franklin-Smith denied that there was a “cover-up” but said that the decision to not publicly reveal the immigration status of the suspects was a result of “national guidance”.

A similar excuse was reportedly used to keep the Liberal Democrat-run Portsmouth Council in June from disclosing that a rape suspect in the area was being housed in a government-funded migrant hotel, leading to accusations of an intentional cover-up amid growing public anger and safety concerns over often young male illegal migrants being housed in communities across the country at the taxpayer’s expense.

Keep reading

Man ‘given no choice’ over trowel arrest caution

A man who was cautioned for carrying a bladed trowel in public has said he was given no choice but to accept the reprimand because police were unable to contact a solicitor for him.

Armed police were sent to challenge Samuel Rowe as he walked home from his allotment in Chorlton, Manchester, carrying the tool, a peeling knife and a sickle.

The 35-year-old theatre manager said he was held for 12 hours, before being told he had to accept the caution without representation or face longer in custody.

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said Mr Rowe had admitted possessing a “dagger” and was given a conditional caution, which entailed advice about the law on the carrying of bladed weapons in public.

The keen gardener said he was terrified when the armed officers, who did not draw their weapons, arrived outside his home on 3 July.

He said the officers were shouting at him to “drop the knife”.

“I said I didn’t have a knife and they told me to drop the knife again,” he said.

“So I dropped my Japanese hand gardening sickle and a handful of privet that I just cut off the hedge.

“They turned me around, pushed me up against my house, handcuffed me, then put me in the back of a van.”

Keep reading

US Plan To Copy UK’s Disastrous Online Digital ID Verification Is Winning Friends in the Senate

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is moving forward in the US Senate with 16 new co-sponsors as of July 31, 2025, reviving a proposal that copies the same type of provision found in the UK’s controversial Online Safety Act, which has caused much backlash across the Atlantic.

In Britain, that measure forces online platforms to implement digital ID age checks before granting access to content deemed “harmful,” a policy that has caused intense resentment over privacy violations, the erosion of anonymity, and government overreach in the realm of free speech.

Now, US lawmakers are considering a similar framework, with more senators from both parties throwing their support behind the bill in recent weeks.

Marketed as a way to shield children from harmful online material, KOSA has gained prominent backing from Apple, which has publicly praised it as a step toward improving online safety. Yet beyond the reassuring branding, the legislation contains provisions that raise serious concerns for free expression and user privacy.

If enacted, the bill would give the Federal Trade Commission authority to investigate and sue platforms over content labeled as “harmful” to minors. This would push websites toward aggressive content moderation to avoid liability, creating an environment where speech is heavily filtered without the government ever issuing direct censorship orders.

The legislation also instructs the Secretary of Commerce, FTC, and FCC to explore “systems to verify age at the device or operating system level.” Such a mandate paves the way for nationwide digital identification, where every user’s online activity could be tied to a verifiable real-world identity.

Once anonymity is removed, the scope for surveillance and profiling expands dramatically, with personal data stored and potentially exploited by both corporations and government agencies.

Advocates of a free and open internet warn that laws like KOSA exploit the emotional appeal of child safety to introduce infrastructure that enables ongoing monitoring and identity tracking. Even with recent changes, such as removing state attorneys general from enforcement, these core concerns remain.

Senator Marsha Blackburn defended the bill, stating, “Big Tech platforms have shown time and time again they will always prioritize their bottom line over the safety of our children.” Yet KOSA’s structure could end up reinforcing the dominance of large tech firms, which are best positioned to implement costly verification systems and handle the resulting data.

The bill’s earlier version stalled in the House after leadership, including Speaker Mike Johnson, questioned its impact on free speech. Johnson remarked that he “love[s] the principle, but the details of that are very problematic,” a sentiment still shared by many who view KOSA as a gateway to lasting restrictions on online freedoms.

If this legislation moves forward, it will not simply affect what minors can view; it will alter the fundamental architecture of the internet, embedding identity verification and top-down content control into its design.

Keep reading