Police Launch Live Facial Recognition Trial at London Subway Stations

It was a busy week for the cameras. Nobody, we were assured, would have their face read without the option of going somewhere else instead.

That was the promise at Victoria Underground on Tuesday, where British Transport Police switched on live facial recognition and, with the manners of a good host, laid on “alternative routes” and clear signage so that everyone could make “informed choices about passing through.”

The choice on offer being to let a police computer check your face against a watchlist, or to find some other way into the station, on a Tuesday, at the start of a trial booked to run four months.

The scale is where courtesy starts to sing. TfL’s own draft annual report logs over 1.2 billion passenger journeys in the year, around 3.3 million a day, and since most of those are the same tired people going to work and trudging home again, the honest figure for faces passing a lens on any given day is merely hundreds of thousands, possibly the far side of a million. Each of them, presumably, informed.

The weekend before, Greater Manchester Police had taken the same idea to the Manchester Caribbean Carnival, a party going strong since 1971, where the Manchester Evening News reckoned 60,000 people would turn out across two days of parade, soca and steelpan. The force said the cameras produced 34 alerts and 11 arrests, and that a missing child was found, which is the part no one with a heart wants to be sour about.

Then, emboldened, GMP put out a press release on Tuesday to tell us all how splendidly it is going. 641,000 faces were scanned across 56 deployments. 208 alerts. That’s to say that 99.97 percent of everyone the force has ever photographed at one of these things set off precisely nothing, roughly one ping for every 3,082 law-abiding citizens run through the machine.

Was anyone asked? No, but signage was provided.

Keep reading

The Two Terrorists: Britain Jails Tweets While the West Crowns al-Qaeda’s Man in Damascus

Two men, one word. Next Monday, at Kingston Crown Court in London, a 72-year-old grandfather goes on trial for terrorism; the evidence is a tweet of seven words, and the maximum sentence is 14 years. Nine months ago, a man who founded al-Qaeda’s Syrian branch and carried a $10 million American bounty on his head became the first Syrian head of state ever received at the White House. Tony Greenstein and Ahmed al-Sharaa have never met. Between them they define what the word “terrorist” now means – and for American readers there is a further twist: the seven words that may cost the pensioner his freedom are fully protected speech in the United States, which is why Washington has developed other methods for its own dissidents.

Take the pensioner first, and take his record in full, because the prosecution will. Greenstein was expelled from the Labour Party in 2018; he lost a libel action against the Campaign Against Antisemitism, which had called him a “notorious antisemite,” the court finding the phrase protected as honest opinion; he accepted a suspended sentence over a Palestine Action attack on an Elbit arms factory. He is abrasive, litigious and unrepentant – a Jewish socialist from Brighton, a carer, the son of an Orthodox rabbi who marched against Mosley’s Blackshirts. None of that is the charge. The charge is that in November 2023, goaded by an anonymous account demanding he declare himself, he posted: “I support Hamas against the Israeli army.” Five weeks later, at 6:30 in the morning, counter-terrorism officers took his computers and phones, held him for nine hours, and released him under conditions that banned him from posting about the war at all. “This is Orwellian,” he told the arresting officers. He undersold it.

Now the other man, whose record requires no libel lawyer to establish, because the United States government wrote it down. Ahmed al-Sharaa – then Abu Mohammad al-Jolani – joined al-Qaeda in Iraq in 2003, was captured by American forces and imprisoned for five years, then crossed into Syria to found al-Nusra Front, al-Qaeda’s Syrian branch, pledging allegiance on video to Ayman al-Zawahiri. The State Department’s own wanted notice recorded that under his leadership the group “carried out multiple terrorist attacks throughout Syria, often targeting civilians” – and itemized them: roughly 300 Kurdish civilians abducted from a checkpoint; 20 residents of the Druze village of Qalb Lawzeh massacred in Idlib; suicide bombings claimed in Damascus, Homs and Quneitra. In 2014 he called for retaliatory attacks on the American-led coalition itself. For this the UN froze his assets and banned his travel, and the $10 million bounty placed him among the five most wanted jihadist leaders on earth, on the same short list as Baghdadi and Zawahiri. That is the conduct the word “terrorist” was coined for: emptied villages, detonated city centers, a decade of American soldiers and Syrian civilians in the ground.

While the state prepared its case against the tweeter, it laid siege to the man. Eleven months to charge him; a trial date pushed back the better part of a year; thirty-two months, in the end, between the dawn raid and the jury. And one by one, his banks left him. In a statement published two weeks before trial, Greenstein described being cut off by five institutions since his arrest: Nationwide after a quarter-century, HSBC and First Direct – closing, among others, the account kept for the care of his autistic son – then Santander, which froze his personal accounts and those of a registered charity he serves as treasurer, then a savings bank that shut out his family entirely. None gave a reason; none has to, since banks warned about a customer are forbidden by law to tip him off. Nor is his suspicion of state involvement far-fetched: the government’s own Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation warned in 2023 that proscription enforcement would push banks toward jettisoning clients – “de-risking,” the trade calls it. When Coutts closed one account belonging to Nigel Farage, the affair drew condemnation from the prime minister and toppled a chief executive. A pensioner debanked six times en route to a terror trial has drawn silence. A defendant is presumed innocent; his accounts are not.

Keep reading

English Village Will Have Six MIGRANT MEN To Every Woman

A quiet North Yorkshire village of roughly 600 people is set to be flooded with around 1,200 single adult male asylum seekers at the nearby disused RAF Linton-on-Ouse base. Local women would be outnumbered six to one.

Labour MP Rachael Maskell has raised the alarm over the plan, which forms part of the government’s wider push to move roughly 3,750 people into three former military sites near villages as it tries to empty asylum hotels.

The base sits beside a primary school and nursery, has only four buses a day into York, and already faces severe shortages of water, sewage capacity and electricity. Maskell has written to border security and asylum minister Anna Turley and is due to meet Home Office officials this month.

It’s just the wrong site,” Maskell said. “The last government realised that, once they got into the detail. All we’re saying to this Government is that it’s really important that they recognise that too, because the site is in a worse state now than it was when the Government last looked at this.”

Similar plans for Linton-on-Ouse were abandoned in 2022 after fierce local opposition. Now they are back under active consideration. Local Tory councillor Malcolm Taylor captured the mood of residents who moved there for a quiet life: “They’ve moved there for the peace, tranquillity and quality of life. This hand grenade has been thrown in.”

Professor Olga Matthias of the Linton Action Group called the village “categorically the wrong place for so many reasons.”

Keep reading

British Royal Navy’s Spy Drones Have Cameras Suspected of Sending Back Data to China

Who are these drones spying for, in the end?

The Royal Navy is fighting a war with Britain, to have resources to modernize and expand the much-diminished forced, said to be the smallest-ever.

But even when modernization efforts do come, they are not without issues, as we’ve learned this week.

It’s been widely reported that the Royal Navy spy drones used by Britain’s elite special forces had cameras suspected to be secretly sending sent data to China, The Telegraph can reveal.

The Telegraph reported:

“The cameras on the K3 Scout surveillance drones had components made in China which were transmitting information to a device in the country.

The Royal Marines have been using the £12m fleet since March and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) was forced to remove all internet connectivity from the cameras after discovering the breach.

The revelation raises fears that Beijing has been attempting to spy on Britain’s military after years of security warnings about the threat from the country.”

Keep reading

Graphic: UK Cop Tries to Arrest Man Who Bought Baseball Bat and Carried It Out of Store, Crowd Comes to Man’s Defense Instead of Cop’s

The United Kingdom’s police force is beyond satire. They resemble something out of a comedy skit, but no one is laughing at their enforcement of one-sided draconian laws.

Instead, the world is horrified and outraged at the absurd lengths officers will go to arrest people.

We can now add purchasing a baseball bat to that list along with mean words and posting memes online.

On Sunday, British activist Tommy Robinson posted footage of an arrest being made by an officer for that exact reason. The man being detained had just purchased a bat from a nearby store.

It was still in the packaging, as the fed-up crowd repeatedly yelled. Multiple officers were on the scene to assist.

Again, this was all for a man holding a baseball bat he’d just bought.

Keep reading

UK Social Media Police Task Force Has Referred over 100 Online Posts for Arrest

A shadowy specialist police task force in Britain tasked with monitoring anti-immigration sentiment online has reportedly referred over a hundred social media posts to local police for potential arrests.

According to data released following Freedom of Information requests, the National Internet Intelligence Investigations unit has notified local police forces about 106 social media posts, The Daily Telegraph reported.

This included 50 posts in June in the wake of the disclosures surrounding the murder of teen Henry Nowak, who was stabbed to death by Sikh man Vikrum Digwa and had his pleas for help ignored by police officers, who refused to believe the dying student because his killer claimed to have been a victim of racism.

Footage of Nowak’s final moments sparked protests and riots in Southampton and drew accusations of two-tier policing on social media, with critics claiming that Nowak was treated differently from Digwa because he was white.

The National Internet Intelligence Investigations task force was established in the wake of the Southport riots, which erupted after Rwandan-heritage teen Axel Rudakubana killed three young girls and injured 10 others in a mass stabbing at a Taylor Swith dance party.

Rather than addressing the anger of the public and the role that immigration played in the tragedy, the left-wing Labour government of then-Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer branded the backlash as “far-right” and began a mass jailing campaign, arresting over 1,876 people, including some who merely posted on social media.

Keep reading

UK Police Literally Have An ‘Elite Squad’ To Flag Spicy Social Media Posts…

An elite police unit set up by the Labour government has already flagged more than 100 social media posts to local forces, monitoring online “protest related activity” in a move critics brand a sinister step toward state control of speech.

The National Internet Intelligence Investigations team, created in the wake of the 2024 Southport riots, began operations in February. Freedom of Information figures obtained by the Telegraph and reported today show it has made 106 referrals of “suspicious” posts to forces across the country.

In June alone, 50 of those referrals came as public anger boiled over in Southampton after police bodycam footage exposed officers handcuffing dying teenage murder victim Henry Nowak while accepting a false complaint of ‘racism’ from his Sikh killer.

When the unit was first announced, then policing minister Dame Diana Johnson described it as “a dedicated function at a national level for exploiting internet intelligence to help local forces manage public safety threats and risks.”

The National Police Coordination Centre claims the squad “supports policing’s understanding of protest-related activity in the online environment by developing a broader picture of emerging, potential risks.”

Its remit, officials say, focuses on “providing strategic insight and improving awareness of protest-related developments that may have relevance to policing.”

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage commented “This is the beginning of the state controlling free speech. It is sinister, dangerous and must be fought.”

Police have refused to disclose which posts were flagged, citing exemptions around crime prevention. The pattern is clear enough. The unit was born from the Southport disorder that followed the murders of three girls by Axel Rudakubana.

Keep reading

Oxford Union Debate Stunt Exposes The Real Limit Of Free Speech In Britain

In the heart of the Oxford Union, a supposed bastion of open debate, a single brown paper envelope triggered pure panic.

Commentator Laurence Fox stood to argue that the West is right to be suspicious of Islam. He held up the envelope and indicated it contained a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad. The chamber erupted in frantic attempts to stop him opening it. Rules were suddenly invoked. Relevance was questioned. Respect was demanded.

The Muslim president of the Union interjected that her very presence should have been enough to persuade Fox that Muslims believe in free speech.

“My wife asked me not to show this for fear of repercussions for my family,” Fox said. “But I told her that if I did not, I would have submitted to Islam.” He continued that the West should resist Islam “in the strongest terms on free-speech grounds alone.”

Fox opened the envelope and revealed a cartoon of Rees-Mogg. Laughter and applause followed. The fear that had gripped the room evaporated the instant it became clear the image did not depict Muhammad.

In that moment the argument was settled more effectively than any speech could manage.

The debate took place under the motion “This House believes the West is right to be suspicious of Islam.” Speaking for the motion were actor and free-speech campaigner Laurence Fox, Tommy Robinson, and writer Jonathan Sacerdoti. Against them stood Oxford Union president Arwa Elrayess, a 20-year-old Muslim of Palestinian heritage from Gaza, Rees-Mogg, and others. Outside, left-wing protesters tried to block entry. Inside, the atmosphere was already charged.

Fox made free speech the centrepiece of his case. He cited polling showing that 78 percent of British Muslims believe no publication should print pictures of Muhammad, rising higher among some groups. He noted that Britain had long abandoned its own blasphemy laws. Then he produced the envelope.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, speaking against the motion, reached for procedure, recalling that as a former Union librarian he believed props were against the rules. Others in the audience scrambled for any technicality that might prevent the image from appearing. The chair eventually ruled that props were permitted.

Keep reading

Britain’s Hybrid Threats Directorate: Whitehall’s Ministry for Manufacturing Enemies

A British government operation established to counter Russian disinformation has expanded to Iran, China and Gaza, according to leaked Foreign Office files examined by David Miller, a British political sociologist and investigative researcher specialising in the study of propaganda and political influence.

Miller’s investigation for MintPress News draws on internal government pages and an organizational chart naming officials, specialist teams and private contractors. The documents expose part of a state apparatus that operates with little public scrutiny while monitoring and countering narratives deemed threatening to British interests.

At the centre of the files is the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s Information Threats and Influence Directorate. Its teams covered Russia, China and Iran, while another structure worked on Israel and Gaza. Miller reports that the directorate was later absorbed into the Cyber, Information and Tech Threats Directorate. Its functions now appear to fall within the broader Hybrid Threats Directorate.

Iran was not merely added to a list of foreign concerns. Miller reports that leaked charts place the China and Iran desk under the same official who led a semi-detached team focused on Israel and Gaza, with personnel developing proactive campaigns alongside regional and communications departments. The documents therefore place work concerning Iran, Israel and Gaza within an overlapping institutional structure, showing how the same Foreign Office information-threat structure could be directed across related geopolitical issues.

The Gaza operation emerges amid an unprecedented crackdown on Palestine solidarity in Britain. The government proscribed Palestine Action under terrorism legislation in July 2025. Since then, more than 3,300 people have been arrested and over 1,200 charged with terrorism-related offences, many for peacefully opposing the ban. The UN human rights chief warned that the proscription misused counterterrorism law and threatened freedom of expression, assembly and association.

The leaked files expose another layer of state power behind that visible police response. Government analysts monitor political narratives and trace how they circulate, while intelligence agencies, communications teams and contractors develop measures against activity classified as foreign manipulation. Ministers have already portrayed pro-Palestinian demonstrations as having been “hijacked” by people seeking to sow division. Within the information-threat apparatus described by Miller, such rhetoric can recast opposition to British support for Israel as something imported, manipulated or dangerous rather than a genuine political response to the destruction of Gaza.

Once dissent enters that system, official assessments can shape government messaging, engagement with online platformsfunding decisions and how people are treated across public institutions. The machinery exposed by Miller allows officials to define the threat, identify its alleged carriers and intervene without disclosing the evidence behind those judgments.

Parliamentary oversight has not kept pace. The Intelligence and Security Committee has warned that security functions transferred into policy departments have escaped its scrutiny. The government blocked attempts to extend the committee’s remit to bodies including the Counter Disinformation Unit and the Foreign Office’s intelligence policy department, preventing what the committee called “effective scrutiny by Parliament.”

Keep reading

UK government launches legal action to stop the release of data showing crimes committed by migrants

The Labour government is heading to court to block the publication of migrant crime statistics.

Following a year-long battle at the Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”), it was ruled that the Ministry of Justice must provide the Centre for Migration Control with the most comprehensive dataset on migrant crime in British history.

The Labour government is now trying to stop the public from learning the truth.

The Daily Telegraph has run this story: ‘David Lammy fighting to ‘cover up’ foreigners’ crimes’.

The Centre for Migration Control today announces a campaign to fight back against this cover-up. The public deserves to know the truth; the country requires that this information be published.

Help the Centre for Migration Control fight back against the Labour government by supporting our Crowdfunder: End the Migrant Crime Cover-Up.

Background

For the last year, the Centre for Migration Control (“CMC”) has been locked in a battle at the Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) – a non-department government body tasked with upholding public access to government data – with the Ministry of Justice.

In June 2025 the CMC requested via the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FoI”) that the Ministry of Justice produce statistics on the total number of convictions between 2018 and 2024 ( broken down by nationality) for detailed offences within the following headline offence categories: “violence against the person,” “sexual offences,” “drug offences,” “criminal damage and arson,” “possession of weapons,” “theft offences” and “robbery.”

This information would have been the single biggest release of migrant crime statistics in British history and, for the first time, told us how many migrants are convicted every year of murder, rape, arson, the importation and supply of class A drugs, the sale of weapons, along with hundreds of other offences.

Unlike other European nations – including Denmark, Germany, and Sweden – the British government does not publish this information. This is despite the information being readily available on the Police National Computer.

The Ministry of Justice refused this FoI request and, on 10 July 2025, the CMC requested that the ICO make a ruling on whether it was appropriate for the data to be withheld.

On 22 June 2026, over 12 months after the initial FoI request, the ICO ruled unambiguously that the Ministry of Justicemust “disclose the requested information” to the CMC.

Keep reading