British tourist, 60, ‘who filmed Iranian missiles’ in Dubai is facing two years in prison after being charged with cybercrime offence

A British tourist arrested after allegedly filming missiles hitting Dubai is facing two years in prison after being charged with a cybercrime. 

The 60-year-old Londoner, who was detained on Monday night, is said to have deleted the video immediately when asked. He insists he did not mean to break the law.

However, he has been charged alongside 20 others over videos and social media posts relating to recent Iranian missile strikes on the UAE, according to campaign group Detained in Dubai. 

The official allegation relates to ‘broadcasting, publishing, republishing or circulating rumours or provocative propaganda that could disturb public security’. The offence carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison. 

Dubai’s government heavily polices social media and responded to the outbreak of war by threatening jail against anyone sharing information that ‘results in inciting panic among people’.

Videos of drone and missile strikes were regularly shared on social media in the early days of the conflict, but these have largely disappeared and been replaced by a deluge of posts praising Dubai’s government. 

Once a tax-free haven attracting influencers from across the globe and thousands of Brits seeking warm weather and crime free streets, Dubai’s carefully crafted image has been shattered and some residents believe it is ‘finished’. 

The emirate, home to around 240,000 British expats including Rio and Kate FerdinandLuisa Zissman and Petra Ecclestone, has been targeted by constant Iranian missile and drone attacks as the regime strikes US allies in the Middle East. 

Dubai was hit by a fresh wave of drone attacks today, with a fire breaking out at a hotel in Creek Harbour in the early hours of the morning. Around noon, a building on the Sheikh Zayed Road was hit followed by a further incident in the Al Bada district. 

Keep reading

UK Councils Tell Schools: Children’s DRAWINGS Could Be Blasphemous Under Islamic Law

In yet another assault on free expression in British classrooms, schools are being instructed by Labour councils to treat kids’ innocent drawings as potential offenses under Islamic interpretations. 

Guidelines warn that depicting humans or prophets could spark blasphemy complaints, forcing teachers to tiptoe around religious sensitivities at the expense of creativity and open education. 

The push comes amid a broader Labour government drive to monitor and suppress any perceived slights against Muslims, turning schools into surveillance outposts rather than places of learning.

The guidance, titled “Sharing the Journey,” originates from northern Labour councils like Leeds, Calderdale, Oldham, and Wakefield, and has been adopted by others including Sefton and Tameside. It explicitly states that “for some Muslim parents, sensitivities may exist in connection with the teaching of aspects of art, dance, drama, music, physical education, religious education and RSHE”.

Teachers are advised: “It is very important that the school understands this and is also careful not to ask its students to reproduce images of Jesus, the Prophet Mohammed or other figures considered to be prophets in Islam. Some Muslim pupils may not wish to draw the human figure.” This stems from hadith interpretations prohibiting images of living beings, viewed as idolatrous by some sects.

The restrictions don’t stop at art. On music, the document notes: “in Islam, music is traditionally limited to the human voice and non-tuneable percussion instruments as in the days of the Prophet, when they were only used in marriage ceremonies and on the battlefield”. It adds that “schools should listen to any concerns, discuss the place of music in the curriculum and ensure that students are not asked to join in songs that conflict with their religious beliefs”. 

Keep reading

Critics Say New Definition of Anti-Muslim Hostility Is ‘Assault’ on Free Speech

Critics have said that a new UK government definition of anti-Muslim hostility is an “assault” on free speech.

On March 10, the Labour government adopted a new non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility as part of its “Social Cohesion” strategy, aimed at tackling hate crime and strengthening community relations.

The guidance, titled “Protecting What Matters,” sets out a definition intended to help institutions identify and respond what they call to anti-Muslim hatred and discrimination.

The Free Speech Union (FSU) said the initiative could represent an attempt to revive blasphemy-style laws in Britain. The FSU offers legal help to people disciplined or arrested for lawful expression.

“What we are seeing is an attempt to reintroduce Britain’s blasphemy laws, 18 years after they were abolished by Parliament, and the biggest assault on English liberty, particularly free speech, in over 800 years,” it said in a March 10 post on X.

According to the document, the definition, laid out over three paragraphs, says anti-Muslim hostility includes “intentionally engaging in, assisting or encouraging criminal acts—including acts of violence, vandalism, harassment, or intimidation, whether physical, verbal, written or electronically communicated, that are directed at Muslims because of their religion or at those who are perceived to be Muslim, including where that perception is based on assumptions about ethnicity, race or appearance.”

Keep reading

UK Lords Back Facial Recognition Overreach, Protest Crackdown Powers

The UK Lords spent March 9 dismantling what little legal cover existed for anonymous protest and privacy, and building new tools to suppress it entirely.

Start with what they refused to protect. Peers voted down an amendment that would have kept the DVLA database (the equivalent of the DMV in the US) out of live facial recognition searches.

That database isn’t a surveillance archive. It was built to verify driving licenses. It contains photographs linked to the confirmed real-world identities of most UK drivers, and the Lords just cleared the path for police to run it against faces captured in real time at public gatherings. A licensing bureaucracy would become an identification engine. The repurposing happened quietly, through a vote most people won’t read about.

The Lords also voted down a proposed “defence of reasonable excuse” for concealing identity at protests. The amendment would have shifted the burden of proof onto police officers to justify why a face covering made someone arrestable.

Keep reading

UK Govt Urges Schools To SNITCH On ‘Anti-Muslim Hostility’ In Orwellian Crackdown

The UK government is ramping up its assault on free expression, now urging schools, councils, and workplaces to monitor and report “anti-Muslim hostility” as part of a broader strategy that critics slam as a tool to silence legitimate debate.

Under Labour’s plans, institutions will be encouraged to track incidents of ‘prejudice’ against Muslims, with a new definition adopted to clarify unacceptable behavior. This comes amid a surge in hate crimes, but opponents warn it could muzzle criticism of Islamism or immigration policies.

Schools are at the forefront, with the government pushing for monitoring in education settings where antisemitism and anti-Muslim hate have reportedly normalized.

This escalating surveillance in schools reeks of authoritarian control, prioritizing thought policing over genuine security.

The strategy includes boosting security for mosques and Muslim schools through schemes upgrading CCTV, alarms, and fencing. A new “anti-Muslim hostility tsar” will oversee implementation, advising schools, universities, and public services on tackling hatred.

Communities Secretary Steve Reed defended the move in Parliament: “Today, we are adopting a non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility. This gives a clear explanation of unacceptable prejudice, discrimination and hatred targeting Muslims, so we can take action to stop it.”

But Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has blasted the vague wording, warning it could chill free speech and make people afraid to criticize Islam, migration, or Islamist extremism. He argued it might be used to silence debate rather than stop actual attacks.

Keep reading

UK Parliament Plans ISP Blocking and Age Verification Powers

If you wanted a case study in how modern democracies widen state oversight step by step, Britain has offered a clear example. On March 9, two major surveillance-related bills advanced through Parliament, each pointing toward broader government authority, reduced personal privacy, and tighter limits on protest activity.

These measures advanced through procedural votes and technical amendments that sounded administrative, yet carry consequences for how millions of people use the internet and exercise civic rights.

The main legislative action unfolded in the House of Commons during debate on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Members of Parliament actually rejected amendments from the House of Lords that would have required age verification for VPNs and certain user-to-user services.

But don’t get too excited. Replacement amendments approved by MPs would grant significant new authority to the state. The powers allow the government to require internet service providers to block or restrict children’s access to specific online platforms, impose time-of-day limits on when services can be used, and mandate age verification across nearly any platform that enables users to post or share content.

Keep reading

How Grok’s Football Roasts Put X in the Crosshairs of Britain’s Online Censorship Law

Few subjects in Britain carry as much emotional weight as football. Club loyalty runs deep, tragedies remain painfully close to the surface, and rivalries often cross the line between banter and cruelty. That volatile mix resurfaced this week when Grok, the AI chatbot on X, generated what officials described as “vulgar roasts” after users explicitly prompted it to produce offensive material.

UK authorities reacted quickly, discussing the Online Safety Act, Britain’s new censorship law, and raising the possibility of serious financial penalties for X. Under the law, platforms can face fines reaching up to ten percent of global revenue if they fail to address harmful content.

The material dredged up some of the most painful chapters in English football history. It mocked the Hillsborough disaster, where 97 Liverpool supporters were crushed to death at an FA Cup semi-final in Sheffield after police failures led to fatal overcrowding in a standing pen.

It also referenced the Munich air disaster, which killed 23 people, including eight Manchester United players, when the team’s aircraft crashed during takeoff in icy conditions. Grok further alluded to the recent death of Diogo Jota, who died in a car accident in Spain in June 2025 at the age of 28 while playing for Liverpool F.C.

Keep reading

Dodgy Fire Stick crackdown: Eight new targeted areas named as police plan to swoop on illegal streamers

Police have launched a fresh crackdown on dodgy Amazon Fire TV sticks, with eight new areas across the UK being targeted.

Illegal Amazon Fire Sticks and ‘dodgy boxes’ are streaming devices that have third-party software installed in them, allowing users to watch premium content from providers such as TNT Sports, Sky Sports and Disney+ for free. 

The use of these devices is deemed a ‘serious crime‘, and police forces across the UK and Ireland, alongside the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), have been targeting individuals who continue to watch unauthorised content. Sky, who pay billions to the Premier League to show matches, also have their own in-house piracy team.

The latest swoop is part of ‘Operation Eider’, a campaign led by FACT, with 14 more cases identified on November 14, 2025.

The eight areas targeted were: London, South West, North West, North East, Scotland, Wales, Yorkshire and Humber, West Midlands.

Of the 14 cases, 12 individuals received cease-and-desist (C&D) notices, while two were served with C&Ds via knock-and-talk enforcement. 

Keep reading

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