Tag: united kingdom

UK Police Being Forced To Undergo Training To Accept Their ‘White Privilege’

One of Britain’s largest police forces is mandating “equity training” for officers, focusing on “white privilege”, “micro-aggressions” and the distinction between “non-racist versus anti-racist.”

The Telegraph reports that Thames Valley Police is putting officers through the training despite a tribunal last year finding that the force positively discriminated against white officers.

As we highlighted, the force appointed an Asian detective inspector without considering white officers for promotions.

Keep reading

U.K. Supreme Court Rules Males Don’t Qualify as Women Under Anti-Discrimination Law, in Landmark Ruling

The United Kingdom’s supreme court ruled Wednesday that males who identify as women do not fall qualify as women under anti-discrimination law, a monumental decision that will have major consequences for British law.

The high court defined “woman” based on sex rather than gender identity, keeping it within the bounds of scientific reality rather than giving into the demands of left-wing activists. The ruling specifically addressed the question of whether transgender-identifying males who obtain a gender recognition certificate — a legal document acknowledging them as women — enjoy the same protections extended to females under Britain’s 2010 Equality Act, an anti-discrimination law that covers nine protected characteristics and applies to various sectors of British life.

“The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological women and biological sex,” said Lord Patrick Hodge, deputy president of the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court, in announcing the ruling.

“We counsel against reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another, it is not.”

Keep reading

Asking Someone to “Speak English” in England Could Be a Hate Crime, Police Warn

An elderly man in the UK has been warned by police that telling someone to “speak English” in England could be considered a hate crime. A video of the incident, currently going viral across social media, begins with the officer asking a man for video evidence after he allegedly told someone to “speak English,” explaining that such a remark might be classified as a hate crime.

The officer said, “Apparently, during some conversations between yourself, apparently, you’ve alleged—we weren’t here, so I don’t know you’ve said it—but you’ve alleged to say, ‘Speak English,’ or words to that effect?”

The elderly man responded, “I said ‘Speak clearly.’”

A woman off-camera then explained that the man was deaf and had simply asked the person to “speak clearly” so he could understand them. Despite the clarification, the officer presses the issue, explaining that such a remark could be perceived as a hate crime.

“That’s fine,” the officer replied. “That’s why we’ve just come to speak because potentially someone could perceive that as a hate crime. If someone said to me, ‘Officer, I believe this,’ then we need to look at it because someone is potentially reporting it as a hate crime.”

The video surfaces amid escalating tensions in the UK, where many native Britons feel that the establishment is enforcing a two-tier system of policing and justice—one that, in their view, unfairly marginalizes them under the pretext of uplifting “global majority” groups.

Keep reading

Somali Criminal Allowed To Stay In UK Because Deportation Would “Stress” Him Out

In yet another incredulous case, the British justice system has decided in its infinite wisdom that a Somali criminal will be allowed to stay in the UK because returning him to his home country would cause him too much “stress”.

Yes, really.

The Telegraph reports that a judge in the upper immigration tribunal ruled that the asylum seeker would suffer “stress” if deported to his homeland, which would worsen his mental health, thereby breaching article three of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects against persecution and inhumane treatment.

The unnamed man, jailed for unspecified crimes, is a schizophrenic who hears voices, and has also been dependent on alcohol for almost twenty years, according to the report, another factor which led to him being allowed to stay in the country since arriving way back in 1999.

The Home Office has argued that the man, who has been granted anonymity, would be able to get medications he needs in his home country, but the judge still ruled against them.

The man is described as having a “high level of vulnerability” and “complex needs” with “the severity of his mental health problems closely linked to his stress levels and use of alcohol,” according to the tribunal.

Lawyers assigned to the guy argued that he has “no real prospect” of returning to Mogadishu and making a living and that any financial support he would receive would be “limited”, and that he has a “history of being financially exploited”.

The Home Office has a program to offer financial support to foreign criminals being deported through the Facilitated Return Scheme. In other words, the government even offered to pay for the guy’s rehabilitation in Somalia.

Keep reading

Mother Arrested, Held In Police Cell In UK, For Confiscating Her Own Daughters’ iPads

A mother was arrested and jailed for seven hours after she confiscated iPads from her own children because she wanted them to concentrate on their homework.

It’s the latest insane story of police overreach from the backwards UK, where stabbings are just an everyday occurrence and robberies are not even investigated, but people saying mean words about the ‘wrong’ things are thrown in prison.

Now responsible parenting is the target.

The LBC report notes:

History teacher Vanessa Brown, 50, spent seven-and-a-half hours in a custody cell on March 26 this year, following a claim she had stolen two iPads which were traced to her mother’s house in Cobham, Surrey.

Yet it transpired that the two devices belonged to her daughters, and Ms Brown had merely confiscated them to encourage them to focus on their schoolwork, a fact Surrey Police has now acknowledged.

“I find it quite traumatic even talking about this now,” Ms Brown recalled.

“At no point did they [the officers] think to themselves, ‘Oh, this is a little bit of an overreaction for a moment, confiscating temporarily her iPads and popping over to her mum’s to have a coffee’. It was just a complete overreaction.

It isn’t made exactly clear who reported the iPads stolen, but it seems to have been the ex-partner of the woman.

Keep reading

BitChute Discontinues Video-Sharing Service for UK Residents Over Online Censorship Laws

BitChute, a platform widely recognized for its commitment to free expression and open discourse, has officially withdrawn its services from the United Kingdom, citing untenable regulatory conditions under the UK’s recently enacted censorship law, the Online Safety Act. The move comes in direct response to regulator Ofcom’s newly enhanced authority, which enables the communications regulator to levy fines as high as 10% of a company’s global revenue if deemed non-compliant with the Act’s sweeping censorship demands.

This shift in regulatory climate marks what some view as a profound erosion of digital freedoms in the UK. BitChute’s decision could serve as the first signal of a broader exodus, with other international platforms potentially following suit to avoid the heavy-handed oversight now codified in British law.

In a detailed public statement posted to its website, BitChute explained the rationale behind the drastic step:

“After careful review and ongoing evaluation of the regulatory landscape in the United Kingdom, we regret to inform you that BitChute will be discontinuing its video-sharing service for UK residents.”

The platform highlighted the unpredictable and burdensome nature of the new legal framework, emphasizing the Act’s expansive mandates on content moderation and the discretionary powers it grants Ofcom to enforce them. BitChute warned that these provisions create an environment of legal ambiguity, placing platforms at the mercy of vague standards and severe penalties.

“The BitChute platform has always operated on principles of freedom of speech, expression and association…However, the evolving regulatory pressures—including strict enforcement mechanisms and potential liabilities—have created an operational landscape in which continuing to serve the UK market exposes our company to unacceptable legal and compliance risks.”

The company has implemented immediate restrictions: UK residents can still upload content to the platform, but none of their videos will be accessible to other UK-based users. Their content will remain viewable to users in other countries, who can interact with it as usual.

“The significant change will be that this UK user-posted content will not be viewable by any other UK user, but will be visible to other users outside of the UK.”

This effectively means that while UK-based creators are not entirely barred from participation, their voices are now digitally cordoned off from fellow citizens, a result of legal constraints rather than technical ones.

Keep reading

Points For Honesty: UK Tech Firm Says “Only Immigrants From India Will Be Considered” In DevOps Want Ad

UK tech firm Avantao Technologies has apologized after posting a job ad stating “only candidates who are immigrants from India will be considered”, according to the Daily Mail.

The listing, for a DevOps engineer role in Ilford, also asked visa-related questions like “What is your native country?” and “Are you seeking sponsorship for employment in the UK?”

The Daily Mail report says that the company claims the ad was a staff training “test” that was mistakenly published. Sure.

“Unfortunately, that has been published, and we are unable to retract it because it was a mistake made by the employee who posted it live and then departed on holiday,” a spokesperson told MailOnline.

“We are very sorry to hear that this has occurred… a mistake is a mistake, and we have taken action against the individual… we genuinely apologise.”

Keep reading

Columnist Suggests Big Business Could ‘Put a Hit Out on Trump’

A prominent British newspaper columnist suggested that big business could ‘put a hit out on Trump’ in response to his tariffs.

Writing for the Telegraph, Tim Stanley made clear that he supported Trump’s tariff regime, asserting that the U.S. president is “trying to change history, rather than just caretake it.”

“In fact, Trump is correcting a 50-year misdirection in US life, and one that the hero of many Trumpers, Richard Nixon, also attempted to fix,” he wrote.

However, Stanley made clear that the backlash to Trump’s efforts to upturn the global order could be brutal.

“Were I a foreign manufacturer, I’d wager this policy will be reversed at least by 2028 when a new president is elected – or big business puts out a hit on Trump, because they’ll tolerate anything but the devaluing of their stock price. The next gun that fires at the president will probably be made in America,” he wrote.

It’s not clear whether the columnist was actually saying Trump could be physically taken out by monied interests, although his choice of words certainly seems to suggest this is the case.

As we reported yesterday, despite Trump surviving two assassination plots last year, vile leftists would be happy to see him killed.

A poll conducted by the Network Contagion Research Institute found that over 55 per cent of respondents said it would be “justified” to murder President Trump, with just under 50 per cent believing the same about Elon Musk.

As we highlight in the video below, Stephen Colbert also ‘joked’ that if the deep state existed, it should step in to do something about Trump’s tariffs, referencing the word “Fidelio” from the movie Eyes Wide Shut, which is about a secret society that kills people who expose it.

Keep reading

Mum jailed for ‘racist’ migrant hotel tweet ‘not allowed to visit ailing husband’

A woman who was jailed for over two years after tweeting about mass deportation and setting fire to migrant hotels has been refused temporary leave to visit her sick husband. Lucy Connolly, 42, was sentenced to 31 months behind bars after an inflammatory post on social media during the Southport riots last summer.

Demonstrations broke out across the country following the vicious killing of three children at a dance class on July 29, fuelled by false claims that the attacker was an illegal immigrant. Connolly’s post, which was later deleted, read: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f***ing hotels full of the b******s for all I care … If that makes me racist, so be it.” The 42-year-old has reportedly been denied temporary leave to visit her husband Ray, who is suffering from bone marrow failure, and has also had her pleas to be with her 12-year-old daughter, whose behaviour at school has been “out of character”, rejected by authorities.

Documents suggest that Connolly has been denied leave for reasons linked to concerns over public and media interest in her case, rather than issues meeting the necessary criteria, The Telegraph reported.

Prison service sources denied her application for temporary release was blocked, insisting it was being considered by the governor at HMP Drake Hall in Staffordshire, to which she has recently been transferred

A spokesperson said: “Decisions on release on temporary licence and home detention curfew are made following uncompromising risk assessments to prioritise public safety.

“These are discretionary schemes, and each case is rigorously scrutinised, considering the severity of the offence, the prisoner’s conduct and the potential impact on victims and the community.”

However, internal notes at her previous prison, HMP Peterborough, suggested that the temporary release was “not necessarily going to happen due to the public interest” and that “the media interest has been raised as an issue in terms of any future Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) applications”.

Keep reading

UK creating ‘murder prediction’ tool to identify people most likely to kill

The UK government is developing a “murder prediction” programme which it hopes can use personal data of those known to the authorities to identify the people most likely to become killers.

Researchers are alleged to be using algorithms to analyse the information of thousands of people, including victims of crime, as they try to identify those at greatest risk of committing serious violent offences.

The scheme was originally called the “homicide prediction project”, but its name has been changed to “sharing data to improve risk assessment”. The Ministry of Justice hopes the project will help boost public safety but campaigners have called it “chilling and dystopian”.

The existence of the project was discovered by the pressure group Statewatch, and some of its workings uncovered through documents obtained by Freedom of Information requests.

Statewatch says data from people not convicted of any criminal offence will be used as part of the project, including personal information about self-harm and details relating to domestic abuse. Officials strongly deny this, insisting only data about people with at least one criminal conviction has been used.

The government says the project is at this stage for research only, but campaigners claim the data used would build bias into the predictions against minority-ethnic and poor people.

The MoJ says the scheme will “review offender characteristics that increase the risk of committing homicide” and “explore alternative and innovative data science techniques to risk assessment of homicide”.

The project would “provide evidence towards improving risk assessment of serious crime, and ultimately contribute to protecting the public via better analysis”, a spokesperson added.

The project, which was commissioned by the prime minister’s office when Rishi Sunak was in power, is using data about crime from various official sources including the Probation Service and data from Greater Manchester police before 2015.

The types of information processed includes names, dates of birth, gender and ethnicity, and a number that identifies people on the police national computer.

Statewatch’s claim that data from innocent people and those who have gone to the police for help will be used is based on a part of the data-sharing agreement between the MoJ and GMP.

A section marked: “type of personal data to be shared” by police with the government includes various types of criminal convictions, but also listed is the age a person first appeared as a victim, including for domestic violence, and the age a person was when they first had contact with police.

Also to be shared – and listed under “special categories of personal data” – are “health markers which are expected to have significant predictive power”, such as data relating to mental health, addiction, suicide and vulnerability, and self-harm, as well as disability.

Sofia Lyall, a researcher for Statewatch, said: “The Ministry of Justice’s attempt to build this murder prediction system is the latest chilling and dystopian example of the government’s intent to develop so-called crime ‘prediction’ systems.

“Time and again, research shows that algorithmic systems for ‘predicting’ crime are inherently flawed.

Keep reading