Britain’s political establishment woke up this morning in a state of shock. Across England in the local council elections — the rough equivalent of a “midterm” on that side of the Atlantic — voters abandoned both Labour and the Conservatives in droves, handing huge gains to Reform U.K. in what commentators are already calling a political earthquake.
The Westminster class will spend days analyzing swing percentages, demographic shifts, and campaign strategies. But the reason ordinary Britons revolted is much simpler than the experts would like to admit.
Whether in rural towns or urban centers, people are sick of a political elite obsessed with policing speech, policing thought, and policing “offense” while failing to police actual crime. The message was clear: “Enough.”
Enough of watching violent crime spiral in major cities while police forces spend their time monitoring tweets and recording “non-crime hate incidents.”
Enough of hearing endless lectures about “harmful language” while grooming gang scandals continue to haunt communities across the North of England, with victims still waiting for justice and accountability.
Enough of watching peaceful Christians being dragged through the courts for expressing their faith, while ordinary citizens increasingly feel unsafe in their own streets.
And nowhere is that national frustration more vividly embodied than in the conviction this week of retired Northern Irish pastor Clive Johnston — on the very same day that Brits took to the polls. A 78-year-old grandfather now has a criminal record because he preached from the Bible outdoors.
Not for harassment. Not for violence. Not for obstruction. Not even for mentioning abortion.
His crime? Preaching a message from John 3:16 at a small outdoor Sunday service held near a hospital, where a large “buffer zone” is in place covering several streets, banning anything the police interpret to be “influence.”
That is modern Britain in a nutshell.
The authorities insist these buffer zone laws are designed to prevent intimidation outside abortion facilities. Of course, nobody should be harassed anywhere on British streets, and legislation already exists to prevent that. But Johnston’s case revealed something much bigger — and much darker. Police bodycam footage shown in court captured officers telling the pastor he should share the Gospel only inside a “safe area” like a chaplaincy, not on the public street where passers-by might hear him, and potentially take offense.
Think carefully about what that means. Britain now has areas of public space where peaceful Christian expression can effectively become criminal if somebody decides it might “influence” another person.
Christianity, apparently, is acceptable only when carefully confined to approved spaces.
Meanwhile, in city after city, police forces that somehow lack the resources to tackle shoplifting epidemics, anti-social behavior, knife crime, or organized exploitation networks can apparently still find the time and manpower to prosecute elderly pastors quoting Scripture, or individual women stopping to pray in their own heads.
It is difficult to imagine a clearer example of institutional priorities gone mad.
This is precisely why voters are abandoning both establishment parties. The Conservatives spent years talking tough on culture war issues while presiding over the steady erosion of free speech and public order alike. Labour, meanwhile, has abysmally failed to restore confidence in basic law enforcement. Ordinary people look around their communities and see disorder tolerated, borders abused by criminal traffickers, anti-social behavior normalized, and public institutions increasingly hostile to traditional values — especially Christian ones.
Then they watch a pensioner being prosecuted for preaching the Gospel.
They conclude, quite rationally, that the people running the country no longer share their instincts about right and wrong.
The revolt we witnessed in the elections was not simply economic, but moral and cultural. Across Britain, there is a growing sense that the authorities have become harsher toward the decent than toward the dangerous. They certainly seem more comfortable targeting peaceful Christians than confronting genuinely difficult social problems.
A nation cannot function when millions of ordinary citizens begin to believe there are effectively two systems of policing: one lenient toward chaos, and another aggressively punitive toward citizens who hold unfashionable beliefs.
Britain birthed America with all her understandings of liberty and democracy. This parental nation was not built on the idea that faith belongs hidden away in private rooms while the public square is handed over entirely to secular bureaucracies and activist-approved ideology. Britain was shaped by Christianity — culturally, morally, legally, and politically. From the abolition of slavery to the creation of charitable institutions, Christian belief has always shaped public life openly and unapologetically.
What voters increasingly reject is not merely “wokeness” as a slogan. They reject a governing philosophy that treats traditional values and Christian beliefs as suspect while excusing failure everywhere else. The election results show that the old political consensus is breaking apart. People want order restored. They want police focused on violent criminals, traffickers, gangs, and repeat offenders — not elderly pastors preaching John 3:16.
***
Lois McLatchie Miller (@loismclatch) is a writer and social commentator from Great Britain, focusing on the state of free speech, faith, and family across the globe.

BRITAIN-POLITICS-VOTE

Great Britain Is A Case Of Institutional Priorities Gone Mad, So Voters Revolted 

DW Opinion

Great Britain

During the two-decade run of &#8220;The Ellen DeGeneres Show,&#8221; its host would end each episode with the line, &#8220;Be kind to one another.&#8221; That was until the show got cancelled following allegations that DeGeneres created a toxic environment for her employees. Now, she spends her time in English exile complaining that President Donald Trump isn&#8217;t nice enough.
We all wish we had a nickel for every celebrity who vowed to leave the country if Donald Trump won the election. And then it happened twice. Ka-ching. 
Yet the vast majority of stars, <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/cher-leave-the-country-trump-reelected-guardian-interview-1234856398/">like Cher</a>, never leave. They collectively memory-holed their vow while keeping up a “resistance” posture. Not Ellen DeGeneres. She followed through on the promise to leave. The disgraced talk show host literally left the country at the end of 2024 before Trump took office for greener pastures. Bucolic England, to be more accurate. And <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8d638rrndzo">she loved</a> her new home:
<blockquote>&#8220;We&#8217;re just not used to seeing this kind of beauty. The villages and the towns and the architecture — everything you see is charming and it&#8217;s just a simpler way of life … It&#8217;s clean. Everything here is just better — the way animals are treated, people are polite. I just love it here.”</blockquote>
Yes. The comedienne who was bounced from her own show for chronic cruelty is now a big fan of polite behavior, apparently.
<div id="attachment_949729" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-949729" class="wp-image-949729 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Ellen-DeGeneres-864x576.jpg" alt="Ellen DeGeneres" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Ellen-DeGeneres-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Ellen-DeGeneres-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Ellen-DeGeneres-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Ellen-DeGeneres.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Live Nation</div>
President Trump’s reelection weighed heavily in her decision to flee the country. She also worried Trump — who has appointed openly gay men to be key parts of his administration, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and adviser Ric Grenell — would end same-sex marriage in the United States.
That was then. A year and a half of Trump-induced exile was apparently enough. The &#8220;Finding Nemo&#8221; star is now using some of her American-earned royalties to buy a new home … back in America.
The comic and her longtime squeeze Portia de Rossi just gobbled up a $27 million mansion in Montecito, California. The plan, at the moment, is for the couple to split time between England and the United States. But it appears their return may <a href="https://pagesix.com/2026/02/04/celebrity-news/inside-ellen-degeneres-decision-to-buy-california-home-one-year-after-uk-move/">be temporary</a>.
Imagine having enough money to buy a California mansion with the plan to ditch it in the near future. 
<div id="attachment_1044981" style="width: 779px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1044981" class="size-large wp-image-1044981" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Montecito-ca-769x576.jpg" alt="Backgrid. NY Post." width="769" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Montecito-ca-769x576.jpg 769w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Montecito-ca-300x225.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Montecito-ca-768x575.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Montecito-ca.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 769px) 100vw, 769px" />Backgrid. NY Post.</div>
One would think a celebrity of her stature might have a debt of gratitude to a country that allows that kind of financial freedom. Perhaps she’ll realize life in the United States, even under a so-called “dictator,” still has its perks. 
Maybe not.
It’s also unclear what DeGeneres thinks about the recent crackdowns on free speech on British citizens, including <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/irish-comedian-recounts-shocking-arrest-over-anti-trans-social-media-posts">the arrest</a> of comedic colleague Graham Linehan at Heathrow Airport over a social media post about men entering women&#8217;s spaces. She’s yet to weigh in on the matter via social media, even though she’s been a stand-up comic for decades, a gig that demands all the free speech room Western culture can offer.
For now, a <a href="https://people.com/ellen-degeneres-missing-california-after-moving-to-england-buys-new-house-montecito-11898028">People magazine source</a> says the duo missed California’s weather and “horse scene.” They&#8217;ll hole up back in California while they build a massive horse stable and riding area at the United Kingdom estate. 
De Rossi is an animal enthusiast and appears to have put her extensive Hollywood career behind her. The “Arrested Development” co-star’s resume dried up in recent years with no new projects on the horizon.
The same may not be true for DeGeneres.
The comedian delivered a rare stand-up special late in 2024 on Netflix. It was her first attempt at explaining away all the terrible headlines tied to her ugly TV talk show exit on her terms, not any tabloid headlines.
<div id="attachment_1044967" style="width: 421px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1044967" class="size-large wp-image-1044967" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Ellen-netflix-411x576.jpg" alt="Netflix" width="411" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Ellen-netflix-411x576.jpg 411w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Ellen-netflix-214x300.jpg 214w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/Ellen-netflix.jpg 450w" sizes=" (max-width: 411px) 100vw, 411px" />Netflix</div>
No filters. Just DeGeneres and her considerable wit. Except the special didn’t capture the upbeat humor that entertained so many Americans over the years. And, when it came to addressing the elephant on the stage, her toxic behavior, DeGeneres fumbled.
Even Variety, a far-left outlet that might be gracious to any DeGeneres comeback given her legitimate status as an LGBT pioneer, <a href="https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/ellen-degeneres-netflix-special-review-for-your-approval-1236153600/">cried foul.</a>
It’s a spectacle of ego that seems at odds with the humble demeanor DeGeneres shows on stage — but then, that divide has lately been part of the whole Ellen experience.
And, it appeared, the special was her way of speaking her mind and bowing out of Hollywood, officially.
Then again, how many artists have promised to hang up their professional hats only to return a short time later? If DeGeneres truly embraced the kindness and beauty of her new British home, why not move to any of the other states in America, where she’ll find plenty of both? Why pick a city that’s less than two hours from Los Angeles, still a major Hollywood hub?
Her recent social media musings prove she’s still plugged in to American news headlines and, more importantly, remains on the same page as her former Hollywood denizens. She recently offered “<a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DTquV4Ekoa1/">prayers</a>” to Minneapolis for the self-inflicted chaos engulfing the city over ICE arrests.
Perhaps DeGeneres is taking a page from the playbook of another former talk show host: Rosie O’Donnell. They’re both former comedians who fled the country thanks to President Trump, but neither can leave their old home’s politics behind.
<div id="attachment_1044987" style="width: 857px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1044987" class="size-large wp-image-1044987" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2209608348-847x576.jpg" alt="LONDON, ENGLAND - APRIL 10: Rosie O'Donnell and Carolyn Strauss attend Sky's UK Premiere of &quot;The Last of Us&quot; Season II at Vue West End on April 10, 2025 in London, England. (Photo by Mike Marsland/Getty Images for Sky &amp; NOW)" width="847" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2209608348-847x576.jpg 847w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2209608348-300x204.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2209608348-768x522.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2209608348.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 847px) 100vw, 847px" />Mike Marsland/Getty Images for Sky &amp; NOW</div>
O’Donnell’s unhinged rants over all things Trump have flowed steadily from her social media accounts despite living full-time in Ireland for the past year. She even questioned whether President Trump’s 2024 assassination attempt <a href="https://www.aol.com/rosie-o-donnell-angrily-rants-170206586.html?guccounter=1&amp;guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&amp;guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALPU--JZlGu-3QIZUjsflhvuYeZX7XoyxpfJhyLNRnDIDk9HQL9hAPxOsPCgPQy9SswtbIx4ZnRpJGMKNouhyDFBJGmhF7-yioQ8-MHodua6LPGwGCthczcNsJ2FQQCqA6-bMXCmKzKUBcL4iEh6QiwcUag87dgV7xzqhfeN2Fsy">actually happened</a>.
And both DeGeneres and O’Donnell played up a sweet, friendly brand that proved to be anything but accurate. O’Donnell’s “Queen of Nice” shtick, along with her crush on Tom Cruise, proved to be pure Hollywood fiction.
And we all know how afraid “Ellen” staffers were to be near their boss behind the scenes.
Perhaps DeGeneres’ self-imposed American exile, along with her speedy return, will end up as stand-up fodder for her next comeback attempt. Turns out even self-exiled Hollywood royalty will eventually return to the kingdom that made her rich.
* * *
Christian Toto is an award-winning journalist, movie critic, and editor of <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>. He previously served as associate editor with Breitbart News’ Big Hollywood. Follow him at <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>.

Ellen DeGeneres

Why Ellen DeGeneres’s Public Image Is Still In Free Fall

Exile Interrupted — Ellen’s Sudden Return Comes With A Catch

California

Comedy

Donald Trump

Ellen Degeneres

England

Entertainment

Santa Barbara

Trump Derangement Syndrome

Woke Culture

People in Britain often say that the United States is much like the United Kingdom. Recent polling by Freshwater Strategy showed that the British public thinks that the U.K., as a country, would be the 7th richest U.S. state. The actual 7th richest state, North Dakota, boasts a GDP per capita of $102,000 compared to the U.K.’s $52,000.
Many Brits assume that in both economies most people are poor, while a small number of individuals accumulate vast wealth at the top. In this myth, the U.S. suffers from the same perceived problem as Britain of inequality without wider prosperity.
The uncomfortable reality, however, is that the average Brit is significantly poorer than most Americans.
By GDP per capita, parts of America that are routinely described as economically lagging outperform the British economy. Even Mississippi, often cited as the poorest state, has a GDP per capita of $54,000. That should be a sobering benchmark. This is not a story about inequality in Britain but about weak national wealth creation.
Britain retains the self-image of a rich country but its underlying performance tells a different story — one of high taxes, vast regulation, weak productivity growth, and poor incentives for entrepreneurs.
This reality has shaped the political climate. Between 2008 and the E.U. referendum in 2016, living standards stalled. The Brexit vote was, in part, a collective response to that stagnation and a demand for a different economic trajectory. Leaving the E.U. was never a growth strategy in itself but rather an opportunity to pursue one.
In this respect, Brexit was — and still is — a fork in the road. Britain has greater autonomy over its regulatory, tax, and trade policy. The question is whether that autonomy is used to drive growth or not. My forthcoming story of the Brexit referendum, <a href="https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/ten-years-on">Ten Years On</a>, chronicles the campaign and what has happened since.
<div id="attachment_1087613" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1087613" class="size-large wp-image-1087613" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-864x576.jpg" alt="Pedestrians walk across the Millennium Bridge above the River Thames in central London on April 16, 2026. Britain's economy grew much stronger than expected in February, prior to the start of the Middle East war, official data showed on April 16 ahead of a likely hit from the US-Iran conflict. (Photo by Henry NICHOLLS / AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Henry NICHOLLS / AFP via Getty Images</div>
In some areas, Britain has benefited from its post-Brexit freedoms. Examples of this range from tech, where being outside the E.U.’s regulatory regime has allowed the U.K. to be more nimble, to healthcare, where we can now approve new drugs far faster. Overall, however, we have not made as much of these freedoms as we should have. 
Critics blame Brexit for Britain’s economic stagnation, but much of it stems from longer-term policies that have held back prosperity.
The preconditions for entrepreneurship are not new, nor are they particularly complicated. I recently co-authored a book with Dr. Arthur B. Laffer and others called <a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Prosperity-Through-Growth-Standards-Disinformation-ebook/dp/B0FP3WPW6Z/ref=sr_1_1?crid=RCU8GVEQ5895&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Qi7pfmaBWI3SOK7ThVB1F6kdMIM62-7Uwj6luPyjVkDKKI54VPK7IVlT1dVJfFQu.OQ-kNm7gXECxObiXcJrN6HqpotDFqUx2dulfB9kD06w&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=prosperity+through+growth">Prosperity Through Growth: Boosting Living Standards in an Age of Autocracy and AI.</a> We argue that growth requires low tax rates, low government spending, sound money, smart regulation, and free trade.
Ultimately, prosperity is generated not redistributed. The focus of economic policy should be incentivizing entrepreneurship rather than redistribution. Without economic growth, debates about inequality become zero-sum.
Britain’s problem isn’t that wealth is unevenly distributed. It is that the overall economic pie has grown too slowly for too long. And that pie is being cut into ever more pieces with the explosion of migration to the U.K.
This explains a paradox that defines modern Britain. All the fundamentals are there, but the incentives often discourage entrepreneurship. Inequality becomes more visible not because of a few too rich people but because the middle is comparatively squeezed.
Americans, on the other hand, enjoy higher median incomes. Take plumbers, for example, who earn $62,000 on average in America, compared to $43,000 in Britain. As President Kennedy once said, &#8220;A rising tide lifts all boats.&#8221;
The danger is that the debate remains focused on distribution rather than growth. Framing Britain as a country with a few very rich people and many struggling households risks misdiagnosing the problem.
A more accurate diagnosis is that Britain is an underperforming advanced economy. It has the capabilities to be significantly more prosperous than it currently is, but has failed to convert those capabilities into sustained growth.
The implication is straightforward. If Britain wants to meaningfully raise living standards, it must prioritize policies that incentivize growth.
The European Union referendum result reflected a demand for change. Whether that demand ultimately leads to greater prosperity depends not on the act of leaving the E.U., but on what we do with the freedoms that followed. Ironically, when critics of Brexit cite studies suggesting that the U.K. economy would be 8% bigger had it stayed in the E.U., those studies assume Britain would have grown at the same rate as the United States in the period since 2016. 
I look forward to seeing the British people enjoy the same pro-growth policies and prosperity that Americans enjoy.
* * *
Matthew Elliott is President of the Jobs Foundation and is a member of the House of Lords. He was also the Chief Executive of Vote Leave.

TOPSHOT-RACING-ENG-ASCOT

Britain Could Be Richer. It Keeps Choosing Not To Be.

Brexit

Economy

European Union

United Kingdom

TOPSHOT-US-BRITAIN-ROYALS-POLITICS-DIPLOMACY

Ilhan Omar Hits Rock Bottom With Her Dumbest Remarks Yet As Trump Delivers His Best Speech Ever

Congress

Founding Fathers

Ilhan Omar

King Charles III

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Revolutionary War

Initially, it was all very dapper: the tea, the crumpets, and the fanfare. They were all good and fine.
But then the King of England, King Charles III, decided to use his royal prerogative and lecture us on how to run our country, on how America ought to lead the world.
Shut the hell up.
It’s true that there are many lessons to be learned from Great Britain over the past century.
But the biggest one is this: Don’t do what they did.
King Charles is currently representing a civilization that no longer exists. He&#8217;s an empty crown, sitting atop a civilization that gave up the ghost a long time ago. There&#8217;s only one takeaway Americans should have from the King&#8217;s visit: If Great Britain has zigged, we ought to zag.
Britain is a cautionary tale. If we follow their path, we collapse the same way they have.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ben-shapiro-ep-2416?elementPosition=5&amp;row=5&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-974957 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-300x50.webp 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-768x128.webp 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1536x256.webp 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-2048x341.webp 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
Charles’ visit to the United States began with Revolutionary-Era soldiers welcoming the king in the Rose Garden.
Somewhat ironic; the last king who experienced Revolutionary-era soldiers would not have been welcomed in quite this way.
As a student of American history and as a devotee of British philosophers ranging from John Locke to Edmund Burke, I love the fact that the United States is rooted in Anglican and English history. I love it. It&#8217;s great.
Charles called the bond between the United States and the UK priceless and eternal. He joked about the idea that if it were not for Great Britain, we would be speaking French, a response to President Trump saying that if it were not for us, the British would be speaking German (I assume Charles was referring to the French and Indian War, which doesn&#8217;t make a whole hell of a lot of sense, because if the French had won the French and Indian War, it is very likely that many of the settlers would have returned to England).
But then the king decided it was time to lecture the United States. And this is the part to which I object.
It began with him talking about Christianity. He said, “For many here and for myself, the Christian faith is a firm anchor and daily inspiration that guides us not only personally.”
So far, so good, although I&#8217;m not sure why Democrats were clapping.
“Together as members of our community, having devoted a large part of my life to interfaith relationships and greater understanding,” he continued. “It is that faith in the triumph of light over darkness, which I have found confirmed countless times through it. I am inspired by the profound respect that develops as people of different faiths grow in their understanding of each other.”
There we go. This was all going to lead up to a bit of a lecture about America&#8217;s foreign policy.
As a person who is not Christian, I have tremendous admiration for Christianity and what it has done in the world. I encourage people to go to church all the time, but it turns out that if you want a robust Christianity, that Christianity cannot be based on vague principles. It has to be based on faith.
So when you hear the Brits lecturing the United States, a much more religious country, about Christianity and interfaith relations, let&#8217;s be real: Great Britain has taken religion and trodden it through the mud.
The statistics don&#8217;t lie. According to the UK&#8217;s 2022 census, 51% of people in the UK identify as having no religion, according to a 2024 British Social Attitudes Survey. A paltry 9% of the population attends a religious service once a week or more.
And as far as Anglican identity, it doesn&#8217;t exist anymore. 2.6% of people aged 16 to 34 identify with the Church of England.
Meanwhile, the tremendous increase in radical Islam in the kingdom has been overwhelming. 15% of London, at a minimum, is Muslim. A huge percentage of those people are radicalized. According to one survey conducted in 2016 by the polling exchange, 4% of British Muslims say that 9/11 was executed by al Qaeda, 7% say the Jews, and 31% say the American government.
Great Britain imported millions of people who believe this. Millions of people. This is where their interfaith nonsense has gotten them.
So, as far as being lectured on Christianity and interfaith attitudes by the Brits, the answer is no.
You know where interfaith is going in Britain. Interfaith is about tolerance for radical Islam, which is why today, the day after King Charles visited the United States, there was an attack in Golders Green, which is a very heavily Jewish part of London, in which a radical Muslim took out a kitchen knife and started stabbing people who were wearing Jewish garb.
According to UK government data, there were 15,859 total reported incidents of knife crime in London in 2025 alone. We know that Great Britain&#8217;s interfaith tolerance allowed for gigantic grooming gangs to basically run the place for years on end, out of fear that there might be a backlash to open immigration.
King Charles also took the opportunity to lecture us on climate change. We should mention that the UK has destroyed its own economy on the basis of this nonsense.
Listening to the Brits lecture us on energy production is ridiculous. Roughly 78% of the UK&#8217;s energy still comes from hydrocarbons. That would be things like oil and natural gas. The UK is constantly on the economic edge because of its extraordinary regulations and low domestic gas storage capacity. According to an article in The American Spectator, there&#8217;s a 78% tax rate on North Sea gas production and a nuclear program that&#8217;s not going to deliver energy for a decade.
The energy programs in the UK have driven them into the dirt, economically speaking.
All of this culminated in King Charles lecturing the United States on how to beat swords into plowshares rather than plowshares into swords.
I understand: King Charles represents the monarchy. Keir Starmer&#8217;s government is an appeasement-oriented, left-wing pacifist government.
In order to understand my ire here, I think you have to understand that having the British Crown come to the United States and tell us all about the old-style civilization that Britain basically surrendered in favor of welfare statism is highly irritating. 
In 1933, there was a resolution at Oxford University at their debate club, the so-called King and Country Resolution, in which the students voted, “that this House will under no circumstances fight for its king and country.” This was reflective of British sentiments; an attempt in the aftermath of the course of World War I to recede from global leadership.
You know what ended up happening? It was a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I was recently reading Winston Churchill&#8217;s “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Gathering-Storm-Second-World-War/dp/039541055X/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0">The Gathering Storm</a>,” which is, of course, a classic. It is the first volume of his Second World War series. In the beginning pages of the book, Churchill explains his purpose in writing the book, saying he was writing to demonstrate “how the malice of the wicked was reinforced by the weakness of the virtuous, how the structure and habits of democratic states, unless they are welded into larger organisms, lacked those elements of persistence and conviction which can alone give security to a humble masses. How, even in matters of self-preservation, no policy is pursued for even 10 or 15 years at a time. We shall see how the counsels of prudence and restraint may become the prime agents of mortal danger. How the middle course, adopted from desires for safety and quiet life, may be found to lead direct to the bullseye of disaster.” 

He continued, “We shall see how absolute is the need of a broad path of international action, pursued by many states in common across the years, irrespective of the ebb and flow of national politics.”
Great Britain is currently telling the United States that we ought not do what we are doing in Iran. They are doing absolutely nothing to help us in the Strait of Hormuz. They are perfectly willing to allow China to maximize its global influence. Only in the case of Ukraine has Britain taken a leading role in any sort of way, and even there, it&#8217;s basically to beg us for money and armaments.
After World War II, Great Britain decided it would give up global leadership in favor of irrelevance and socialism.
No country has done as much damage to itself as Great Britain through pacifism, socialism, redistributionism, and open borders.
The Brits can&#8217;t even leave their kids money, because when you give up global leadership, free markets, private property, and skew in favor of socialist idiocy and global weakness, you become irrelevant.
You don&#8217;t get to come here and lecture us about any of this.

The Empty Crown: Why America Should Ignore King Charles

Christianity

Radical Islam

On Thursday, St. George’s Day—which celebrates St. George, the patron saint of England—Great Britain’s leftist prime minister Keri Starmer took aim at the nationalists who want to take their country back from the wave of immigrants who have inundated their country, calling them “plastic patriots.”
“St George’s flag stands for unity over hatred and decency over division,” Starmer wrote on X. &#8220;Those are the values I will always fight for. Some try to hijack our flag to spread hate, I reject their plastic patriotism.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
St George’s flag stands for unity over hatred and decency over division. 
Those are the values I will always fight for.
Some try to hijack our flag to spread hate, I reject their plastic patriotism. <a href="https://t.co/b0V8dhKGjL">https://t.co/b0V8dhKGjL</a>
&mdash; Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) <a href="https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/2047209134085271553?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Conversely, Hiroshi Suzuki, the Japanese Ambassador to the United Kingdom, wrote simply, “Happy St George&#8217;s Day!!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Happy St George&#39;s Day!! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🌹 <a href="https://t.co/Is7J3KCKWX">pic.twitter.com/Is7J3KCKWX</a>
&mdash; Hiroshi Suzuki (@AmbJapanUK) <a href="https://twitter.com/AmbJapanUK/status/2047231020345249886?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
In his St. George’s Day speech, Starmer <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efmotazhp10">reiterated</a>, “There’s no getting around the fact that there are voices both here and abroad who would seek to divide us, who would set us apart from each other, who want to pretend that in this country, what we really do, is to distinguish between people, to find the points of difference, to have a sort of toxic culture of hatred between different individuals, different groups, different communities. &#8230; We will not let them do this.”
Starmer was hammered for his language on social media:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It literally stands for none of this
It’s a crusader cross designed to help you identify the people on your side when you’re killing others on the battlefield 
You’re a fucking idiot from every angle possible
Push your social engineering but do it honestly
Don’t lie about…
&mdash; leekern (@leekern13) <a href="https://twitter.com/leekern13/status/2047334685445861448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The English flag has never represented a set of shallow, universal values that belong to no one and nowhere in particular.
The St George&#39;s Cross represents the English people, and the country named after them. It is theirs, and theirs alone.
Patriotism comes from the Latin…
&mdash; Connor Tomlinson (@Con_Tomlinson) <a href="https://twitter.com/Con_Tomlinson/status/2047224995072385455?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Why are you once again using the flag to cause division?
You’re obsessed with dividing people!
No one spreads more hate than you!
You recently branded half the country racist and far right because they were angry that 3 little girls were slaughtered at a dance class!
You…
&mdash; J Stewart (@triffic_stuff_) <a href="https://twitter.com/triffic_stuff_/status/2047210537545572663?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
“It’s deeply insulting, of course, his attitude today, but we’ve got used to that. I think all we can do now is sit tight and look forward to his demise, which will be inglorious, which will be catastrophic, and which will send him off into ignominity, hopefully,” former Met Police detective Peter Bleksley <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egvTq8AlURI">said</a>.
After a young man of Rwandan descent knifed to death three young girls, ages 6,8, and 9, in Southport, England, on July 29, 2024, and anti-immigration demonstrations were mounted from Liverpool, England, to Belfast, Ireland, Starmer condemned the protesters, calling the actions “far-right thuggery we have seen this weekend.”
Yet in 2020, Starmer had a quite different reaction to the Black Lives Matter riots in the United States, saying, “Like you, I was shocked and angered at the killing of George Floyd. And the response of President Trump and the U.S. authorities to the peaceful protests, to people rightly demanding justice, has been an affront to humanity. The last week has shone a spotlight on the racism, discrimination and the injustice experienced by those from black and minority ethnic communities in the U.S., in the UK, and around the world. Martin Luther King said, ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Watch Two Tier Starmer response to BLM Riots vs Southport Riots
If you can’t see it by now there’s no helping you. <a href="https://t.co/GqOrTX53PS">pic.twitter.com/GqOrTX53PS</a>
&mdash; Concerned Citizen (@BGatesIsaPyscho) <a href="https://twitter.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1820315183857668124?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 5, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
St. George&#8217;s Day commemorates various things; according to some, the real St. George was likely a Greek-born soldier in the Roman Guard. He was executed on April 23, 303 AD, because he refused to renounce his Christian faith during the persecutions of the Emperor Diocletian. The day is primarily a religious feast day marking the anniversary of his death.
The most famous reason for the celebration is the legend of St. George and the Dragon. According to legend, a dragon was terrorizing a town, demanding human sacrifices. When the lot fell to the king’s daughter, George arrived, fought the dragon, and saved the princess. In the Middle Ages, this became a metaphor for the triumph of good over evil and Christian chivalry.
In England, St. George&#8217;s Day is a celebration of national heritage. The white flag with a red cross is flown outside pubs and homes.

Keir Starmer

‘F*cking Idiot’: Starmer Insults Citizens On St. George’s Day, Calls Them ‘Plastic Patriots’

General

U.K.

World

The following is an edited transcript excerpt from <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1947-sub?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">The Michael Knowles Show</a>.
* * *
Everyone’s hot on the fat shots. Everyone’s taking them. 
They say it’s for health reasons. Maybe in some cases it is, but for a lot of people, they just want to look better.
Well, as it turns out, there is a real downside to the practice, namely, people are now getting divorced because of them.
This is <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/04/05/fat-jabs-to-unleash-divorce-boom/">from The Telegraph in the UK</a>: 
<blockquote>Fat jabs to unleash divorce boom.
Couples undergoing rapid weight loss are twice as likely to end “unhealthy relationships,” the study finds.</blockquote>
Now, what’s an “unhealthy relationship”? Generally, that just means a relationship I no longer enjoy being in. Does that mean one of the spouses is beating you? Or does it just mean you’re sick of your husband or wife? It can mean any of those things.
The article continues:
<blockquote>The growing popularity of fat jabs is expected to increase Britain’s divorce rates as slimmed-down partners look for new love, health experts have said. According to research from academics in Sweden, people who undergo rapid weight-loss are twice as likely to divorce. The study focused on people who had been fitted with gastric bands, known as bariatric surgery, the risk of weight-loss drugs will trigger an even larger divorce trend in the future, researchers said.</blockquote>
This brings me back to a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8qj9RNA938">conversation I had</a> with that “looksmaxx” guy, Clavicular, before everything went south, before he was arrested, before all that.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1947-sub?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-1054531" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-768x128.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1536x256.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1.jpg 1800w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
I asked him: What are you after? What do you want?
He said: I just want to look as good as I possibly can. I want to “looksmaxx.”
I said: Okay, that’s interesting.
I found him very thoughtful for a 19-year-old. He was going down a bad path, but he thought about things. And I asked him a question he couldn’t really answer — but also kind of did.
I asked: What is looking good for? What’s the goal?
And he didn’t have an answer. The answer he gave was: “I just want to mog.”
And what is “mog”? Entire dictionaries could be written on that word. Basically, it means to dominate, to be better than others, to outshine them.
But I always thought, if you’re a guy, you want to look good to get a girl. Or, if you’re an actor, you want to look good in order to get a part in a movie. Or to get a job, or win votes, or something. But mostly, men want to look good to get a girl. Same for women, to attract a guy.
But he said no, it’s looksmaxxing for its own sake. Even if it has negative effects.
He was taking so many hormones that he was impotent. Couldn’t have kids.
Well, that defeats the purpose, right? If the point is to look good to get married and have a family, you just undermined that.
But he said that’s not even the point.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="&quot;I Would Hit Myself In The Face With A Hammer&quot; Michael &amp; The Looksmaxxer | Clavicular" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/e8qj9RNA938?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
And that’s how I feel about the fat jabs. Why are people getting them? What’s it for?
They’ll say it’s for health — but there are downsides too. So, I don’t know — talk to your doctor.
If you’re single, I kind of get it. It’s tough out there. But if you’re already married, isn’t there something kind of fitting about getting a little plump? You’re not on the market anymore. You want to look good for your spouse, but you’re no longer competing at the clubs every night.
And if you make an idol out of your looks, that might actually undermine your marriage.
Our Lord says, “What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul?”
What does it profit someone to lose all that weight but lose their marriage?
What does it profit a man to looksmaxx but lose his family, his legacy?
What’s it for? You’ve got to ask that question about anything in life.
Back before modern philosophy scrambled everyone’s brains — back to Aristotle — we understood that to know what something is, you have to know what it is for.
So what’s the fat jab for?
Put it down and ask that.
What does it profit a man to mog the whole world but lose his, maybe slightly chubby, wife?
Not a good trade.

Government  Aims To Make Weight Loss Jabs Available To All Through The NHS

The Weird Downside Of The Fat-Jab Craze That’s Quietly Reshaping Marriages

The Weird Downside Of The 'Fat-Jab' Craze

divorce

Michael Knowles

Ozempic

weight Loss

In a report that has sparked significant public outcry, GB News has revealed that British taxpayers are footing a massive legal bill for two convicted child sex predators.
Cousins Manzorr Hussain and Imtiaz Ali were sentenced in December 2025 to a combined total of 58 years in prison for a horrific campaign of grooming and sexual abuse against five vulnerable girls. However, exclusive findings show that the defense for these heinous crimes was funded by the very public the criminals victimized.
“Ali began abusing the girls with his relatives shortly after his arrival in the UK from Pakistan in 1996. &#8230; One victim tearfully read her impact statement from the witness box, shielded by screens from the defendants in the dock,” ITV News <a href="https://www.itv.com/news/granada/2025-12-08/jailed-groomers-branded-scum-of-the-earth-in-court-by-victim">reported</a>. “The woman said some men would come to her school to pick her up and she suffered three years of rape and sex abuse from the age of 13, leading to ‘30 years of shame.’ She added: ‘You are nothing better than pedophiles, rapists and scum of the earth. You are the lowest of the low.’”
According to Freedom of Information requests obtained by the outlet, at least £150,000 in legal aid has been spent on the duo’s defense. Specifically, Ali — who was sentenced to 28 years for hosting &#8220;sick sex parties&#8221; where girls as young as 13 were plied with drugs and alcohol — received £71,111 in taxpayer-funded assistance. His cousin, Hussain, who was sentenced to 30 years for offenses including arranging for a girl to perform sex acts for strangers on a dirty mattress, was granted nearly £80,000.
GB News highlighted the irony of these figures, noting that the abuse began shortly after Ali arrived in Britain from Pakistan. The report emphasizes that the £149,888 total currently accounted for — roughly $200,000 — may only be the beginning; the Legal Aid Agency indicated that they are still awaiting further claims from legal representatives, suggesting the final cost to the public will likely climb higher.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
🚨BREAKING: The British government are paying money to pakistani grooming gang rapists for legal fees.
This is literally INSANE. <a href="https://t.co/xfur6ao4VP">pic.twitter.com/xfur6ao4VP</a>
&mdash; God Save Great Britain (@GSGB01) <a href="https://twitter.com/GSGB01/status/2041485473235800138?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 7, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
JAILED: Cousins gang rape children. 
Two men get 30 &amp; 28 years for 1990s grooming and rape of children.
Manzorr Hussain: 7 rapes, 6 indecent assaults. Imtiaz Ali: 5 rapes, indecent assaults.
They groomed victims with alcohol, drugs, money and lifts before raping them.
-… <a href="https://t.co/8Di21Y1N5x">pic.twitter.com/8Di21Y1N5x</a>
&mdash; Imtiaz Mahmood (@ImtiazMadmood) <a href="https://twitter.com/ImtiazMadmood/status/2021958722394972573?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
While the legal aid system is designed to ensure a fair trial, the revelation that such vast sums were used to defend men who showed &#8220;no remorse&#8221; for &#8220;systematically abusing children&#8221; has drawn sharp criticism. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) <a href="https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/two-men-jailed-58-years-sexually-abusing-five-girls-bury#:~:text=Both%20defendants%20were%20adult%20men,to%20do%20what%20they%20wanted.">described</a> the case as one of the most appalling examples of organized child sexual exploitation, involving crimes committed between 1996 and 1999.
The CPS and Greater Manchester Police spent years meticulously building a case that finally brought the cousins to justice decades after their crimes. Prosecutors praised the bravery of the victims, who carried the trauma of the abuse for over twenty years.
However, for many viewers of the GB News report, the sense of justice provided by the long prison sentences is tempered by the news that the British public was forced to subsidize the legal defense of such heinous predators.

Justice is blind statue symbolizing law and legal system with United Kingdom of Great Britain nad Northern Ireland flag in the background.

Taxpayers Funded Defense For Muslim-Linked Child Predators — And Bill Isn’t Done Climbing

Child Sex Abuse

Crime

Muslim

The following is an edited transcript excerpt from <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1945-sub?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">The Michael Knowles Show</a>.
* * *
A huge proportion of babies born in the United States are now born to foreign nationals who are cheating the immigration system. 
Can we acknowledge this whole “anchor baby” thing is a problem? I should hope so but I’m not totally sure that we can.
The whole concept of birthright citizenship comes from the British. The idea stems from a distinction between jus soli — the right-of-the-soil — and jus sanguinis — the right-of-blood. The notion that you get your citizenship from the blood of your parents versus receiving citizenship because you were born on certain soil.
Well, we get the idea from English common law. And guess what? The English — the Brits — have not had jus soli, right-of-the-soil birthright citizenship, since 1983. So even they recognized there’s a problem.
Can we too recognize that there’s a problem here?
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1945-sub?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-1054531 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-768x128.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1536x256.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1.jpg 1800w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
Western Lensman gives some very good background on this topic on X, posting a clip about pregnant mothers from Turkey giving birth in the United States. Here&#8217;s the clip:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
2020. Turkish anchor baby ring found operating in Long Island, NY — mothers got taxpayer funded healthcare.
This is insane:
&#8220;Prosecutors say more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came here to give birth, so their children were instantly granted U.S. citizenship.&#8221;… <a href="https://t.co/mjxyihjeO2">https://t.co/mjxyihjeO2</a> <a href="https://t.co/QcWl50rEXd">pic.twitter.com/QcWl50rEXd</a>
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) <a href="https://twitter.com/WesternLensman/status/2039716413225550306?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 2, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Source: WesternLensman/X.com
There are “anchor baby” operations — what amount to birth tourism schemes — that have been operating in this country for years. Prosecutors described a case on Long Island where more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came to the U.S. to give birth so their children would automatically receive U.S. citizenship.
<blockquote>The defendants fraudulently facilitated the births in the United States of approximately 119 Turkish children. And those children now hold birthright U.S. citizenship.</blockquote>
Officials alleged the scheme was openly advertised abroad — essentially marketing the idea: if you want your child to be born in the United States and become an American citizen, this is how you do it.
This is a business. This is an industry.
You see versions of this in other countries too — there were similar cases involving Chinese birth tourism operations in the past.
So, again I ask, can we acknowledge that this is a problem?
Yes.
Where does the problem derive from? It derives from what is now an outmoded conception from English common law — so much so that the English themselves moved away from it — and from interpretations of the 14th Amendment that have been expanded far beyond what some argue was originally intended.
So what’s the solution?
The solution, very obviously, would be to place limits on how birthright citizenship is applied. You don’t necessarily have to eliminate it entirely — you could define it more narrowly. Some argue that even within the text of the 14th Amendment there are grounds for interpretation about who qualifies, since the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has historically been debated.
That’s the argument.
And the broader point is this: if a country cannot define who is and is not a citizen, then it raises serious questions about sovereignty and governance.
That’s why this debate keeps coming up.

New parents watching babies in hospital nursery

‘Anchor Baby’ Schemes Are Thriving And The System Making It Possible Is Still Untouched

14th Amendment

babies

birthright citizenship

citizenship

Pregnancy

Turkey

For years, Britain has prided itself on avoiding America’s bitter abortion wars. That pride came from a “settled” law that the public took as a “pragmatic compromise.” But a recent vote in Parliament has shattered that illusion, generating the first national debate in the United Kingdom on the issue in almost 60 years.
Since 1967, abortion has been permitted in Britain for any reason up to 24 weeks (almost 6 months) — already far later than in most of Europe — with complete allowance up to birth in cases involving serious risk to the mother’s life or health, or fetal disability.
But last week, Britain’s House of Lords backed a change that decriminalizes abortion outside the existing legal framework. In plain terms, while abortions carried out through the NHS will still operate within a regulated general 24-week limit, no laws will exist to deter women from ending their pregnancies outside that system — including at full term, for any reason whatsoever.
This isn’t hypothetical. It has already happened.
In 2010, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-19621675">Sarah Catt,</a> 35, from North Yorkshire, aborted her baby at 39 weeks — days before her due date. She didn’t carry out this abortion because of any medical crisis. She and her baby were perfectly healthy. Rather, she had the abortion because she was having an affair, and didn’t want her partner to find out.
Sarah was prosecuted under the law for killing her viable, late-term baby, but the changes pushed through by politicians means she will be fully pardoned — as if her actions were never immoral.
These cases are rare. But they matter, because they expose the very boundary the law once enforced — and what can happen when that boundary disappears.
The activism in support of the recent vote to change the law gained momentum in the past few years due to a small increase in the number of women investigated for potentially illegal abortions, following the introduction of pills-by-mail or &#8220;pills-by-post.&#8221; This Covid-era scheme enabled women under ten weeks pregnant to order abortion pills by phone, and take them with no in-person examination or medical supervision.
Following the pandemic, the government made the scheme permanent — despite evidence that it opened women’s health up to far greater risk. Around 20 women <a href="https://righttolife.org.uk/news/over-10000-women-needed-hospital-treatment-after-using-abortion-pills">per day</a> in 2020 had to be admitted to the hospital after taking the pills alone at home. Ambulance dispatches and emergency calls responding to abortion pill concerns <a href="https://www.gbnews.com/news/ambulance-dispatches-and-999-calls-responding-to-abortion-pill-concerns-have-risen-by-64-since-2019-gb-news-investigation/359311">rose by 64%</a> following the scheme’s introduction.
Without scans or examinations, ectopic pregnancies requiring urgent medical care are missed; and crucially, gestational ages are not confirmed. Relying on women to self-report how far along their pregnancy carries a minefield of risks.
The court case of Carla Foster exposed the danger of this approach. Carla, 44, obtained abortion pills after telling a provider she was less than ten weeks pregnant. In reality, she was around 34 weeks along. She took the pills at home to end the life of her fully-developed baby in utero, went into labour, and delivered a stillborn daughter, whom she later named &#8220;Lily.&#8221;
Lily was viable, healthy and pain-capable. She could have survived if simply allowed to be delivered alive. Foster later described being “haunted” by the experience. Nobody wants to see women go through this trauma; nobody wants to see developed babies, capable of survival, being killed at this late stage. The pills-by-post scheme should have been scrapped to prevent this happening again. Instead, parliamentarians removed the legal deterrents that prevent more women from following in Carla’s footsteps.
Across most of the continent, abortion on general grounds is limited to the first trimester — typically between 12 and 15 weeks. Britain’s 24-week limit is already by far one of the most permissive. Stripping away the legal enforcement of that limit is not a minor adjustment, but a radical departure.
Perhaps most striking is how out of step this is with public opinion. While most Britons support legal abortion in some circumstances, <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2183929/abortion-birth-voted-lords-legalised-infanticide">less than</a> 1% support abortion up to birth for any reason. 
In other words, this is not the result of overwhelming democratic demand. It is a top-down redefinition of moral boundaries — one that the public has barely begun to grapple with.
Even in Britain’s typically muted political landscape, alarm bells are starting to ring. Senior figures, from Reform MP Suella Braverman to Kemi Badenoch, leader of the Conservative Party, have broken the long-standing bipartisan reluctance to engage on this issue, warning that removing legal guardrails up to birth goes too far. In a country that has spent decades avoiding this debate, that shift alone is telling.
The British parliament has sent a signal that no abortion, no matter the reason, can ever be judged as immoral. The British public will now have to decide if they agree — or if it’s time to finally reopen the conversation, and look into how our laws can be better structured to support both mothers and their babies to thrive.
* * *
Lois McLatchie Miller (@LoisMcLatch) is a writer and commentator from Great Britain.

UK Parliament Ahead of 2025 Budget

Could Full-Term Abortion Become Reality In America? The Debate Just Shifted.

Abortion

Abortion Drug

Leftists

Parliament

Women

Radical leftist British MP Zarah Sultana is escalating her campaign against the Western alliance, demanding on Monday that United Kingdom authorities “kick U.S. troops off U.K. bases” and withdraw immediately from NATO.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Kick US troops off UK bases.
&mdash; Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) <a href="https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/2033573226647892171?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The former Labour MP, who has become a leading figure in the fringe &#8220;Your Party&#8221; movement, took to X to rail against the relationship. Her latest outburst follows at least one inflammatory post in which she accused the United States and Israel of waging an “illegal war on Iran.”
“The UK must immediately end its complicity in this illegal war: no US use of UK bases, no arms sales, no surveillance support, no military cooperation,” Sultana wrote. In a jab at the British government’s alignment with Washington, she added, “The British public don’t want to be America’s poodle anymore.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Since the US and Israel began their illegal war on Iran, over 1,300 Iranians have been killed and nearly a third are children.
At least 20 schools and 10 hospitals have been targeted. These are grave war crimes.
In Lebanon, over 600 people have been killed including 86…
&mdash; Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) <a href="https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/2031859855028375716?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Sultana’s rhetoric has become increasingly harsh as she targets the cornerstone of Western security. On March 5, she took aim at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, dismissing any hope of reforming the alliance. “Can NATO be ‘reformed from within’? No,” Sultana declared. “It’s an imperialist war machine. We must leave NATO immediately. No ifs, no buts.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Can NATO be “reformed from within”? No. 
Even Mark Rutte openly admits that it’s an imperialist war machine.
We must leave NATO immediately. No ifs, no buts. <a href="https://t.co/1YJBWSFhPX">https://t.co/1YJBWSFhPX</a>
&mdash; Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) <a href="https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/2029716324763504793?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The MP’s hostility toward the West is not limited to military alliances. She has frequently directed her ire at President Donald Trump, recently accusing his administration of targeting Cuba with “expansionist” policies.
“Cuba is next on Trump’s expansionist hit-list,” she wrote on X. “The only ‘threat’ it poses is existing as a sovereign state that refuses to bow to US imperialism. Blocking all fuel supplies is collective punishment and a war crime. It must be opposed. Hands off Cuba! Hands off Latin America!”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Cuba is next on Trump’s expansionist hit-list.
The only “threat” it poses is existing as a sovereign state that refuses to bow to US imperialism.
Blocking all fuel supplies is collective punishment and a war crime. It must be opposed.
Hands off Cuba! Hands off Latin America! <a href="https://t.co/22dkUEDiam">https://t.co/22dkUEDiam</a>
&mdash; Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) <a href="https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/2017398907135729953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 31, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In January, she characterized a U.S.-led reconstruction board for Gaza as a “colonial Board of Occupation,” concluding her remarks with the cry for Israel’s extermination, “From the river to the sea.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Trump &#39;s so-called “Board of Peace” for Gaza is a colonial Board of Occupation, run by war criminals and profiteers.
Reconstruction will cost at least $70 billion. Israel, the US and every complicit state must pay for the genocidal destruction they enabled.
We will continue to…
&mdash; Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) <a href="https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/2013373906359291907?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 19, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
While Sultana focuses on dismantling Western defense, critics say she is simultaneously working to obscure uncomfortable truths at home. In late 2025, she faced a firestorm of criticism for attacking Migration Minister Mike Tapp. After Tapp suggested that an inquiry into grooming gangs should examine the “Pakistani-Muslim nature” of the perpetrators to identify cultural links to the abuse, Sultana branded him a “Temu Enoch Powell” and accused him of using a “fascist playbook,” as GB News <a href="https://www.gbnews.com/politics/grooming-gangs-inquiry-ex-tory-mp-blasts-radical-left-row-mike-tapp?utm_source=chatgpt.com">reported</a>.
Former Conservative MP Alexander Stafford slammed Sultana’s attempts to shut down the discussion, noting that independent reports have repeatedly highlighted the overrepresentation of certain minority groups in these horrific abuse cases.
“They’re basically denying the facts,” Stafford told GB News, accusing Sultana and other far-Left figures of trying to “minimize the impact” on victims. “By diminishing and moving eyes away from the root cause &#8230; you’re actually going to make it more likely for issues like this to happen again.”
Sultana’s history of radicalism is well-documented. As a student, she posted social media comments expressing a desire to see Western leaders like Tony Blair and George W. Bush &#8220;meet their creator.&#8221; In 2015, Sultana <a href="https://www.easterneye.biz/labours-zarah-sultana-apologises-for-celebrate-deaths-post/?utm_source=chatgpt.com">wrote</a>, “Try and stop me when the likes of Blair, Netanyahu and Bush die,” adding in another post, “The sooner they meet their creator the better. The concepts of justice and accountability don’t truly exist in this life. Only in the next.”
Today, as a sitting MP, she has remained unapologetic, as she <a href="https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/zarah-sultana-declares-herself-to-be-a-loud-and-proud-anti-zionist/?utm_source=chatgpt.com">said</a> in 2025: “I say it loudly and proudly: I’m an anti-Zionist. Print that.”

National March For Palestine And Counter Protest Held In Central London

Anti-West British MP Zarah Sultana Demands U.K. Expel U.S. Troops

Global Politics

Iran

Muslims

When Islamists on horseback can intimidate and chase down anti-regime protesters on British streets without consequence, it raises a question no modern Briton ever expected to ask: is this still a country confident enough to protect dissent?
That is the question behind the startling <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/67f5fe6bb82cd78e3cd235719ccff719148d83a7?u=11850803">suggestion</a> from U.S. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers to the Telegraph — Britons may soon be justified in seeking asylum in America. She was not being casually provocative for effect. She was serious — and each passing day strengthens her case.
With war now raging between the United States, Israel, and Iran, Britain is confronting a humiliating question: what does it say about our country when anti-Ayatollah Iranians can be harassed on British streets while police stand idly by? In Manchester, rival demonstrations erupted after the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and reports circulated — alongside <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/da2384697c47993ad15de8bdc876420559a23a03?u=11850803">widely shared footage</a> — that pro-regime Islamists on horseback were intimidating and chasing away Iranians near the Islamic Centre.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
UK: Pro-regime Iranian enforcers chased anti-Ayatollah Iranians near the Islamic Centre in Manchester. The police declined to intervene. <a href="https://t.co/HNkOOLH75p">pic.twitter.com/HNkOOLH75p</a>
— @amuse (@amuse) <a href="https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2030231214171255001?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 7, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Source: @amuse/X.com
To the shock of bystanders, police made no arrests. The astounded man filming the giant steeds and their bearded Islamic riders pleaded with police to know why the men weren’t being “nicked” (that’s arrested, in Northern parlance). “They’ve just chased people with their ‘orses!” he shouts; his broad Manchester accent starkly at odds with the Middle Eastern politics playing out on his streets.
“What are we supposed to do?” shrugs the short, young police officer, “Pull him off his horse?”
“Yes!” exclaimed the terrified onlooker.
This is the state of affairs in Britain: if your safety, social norms, or free speech are being compromised by Islamic agitators, the police stand by. Our accidental documentary-maker behind the cell phone summed it up nicely, “If he had a Union Jack on, he’d be off the horse.” He’s right.
Over the past thirty years, the United Kingdom has <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/c4330ffdf28b092bd3a9ded3c05868fc52d57f3f?u=11850803">quietly</a> redefined the social contract that underpinned British society. But even those of us who have watched a stream of Trojan horses sneak in cultural change didn’t foresee it morphing into actual horses on our streets.
And as Rogers correctly identifies, it is all underpinned by the demise of free speech. This has fallen off a cliff: not through dramatic constitutional rupture, but via bureaucratic growth under both Left and Right-wing governments. Millions of Brits, many of whom are my viewers on GB News, are relieved that the Trump Administration has been ringing the alarm bell on our behalf.
A growing number of ordinary citizens are being swept into the criminal justice system for social media posts, venting frustration on WhatsApp groups, and even uttering <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/c2bceac0258a441bd433e922797e28875d0bf888?u=11850803">unkind</a> words at protests. There were more than 12,000 <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/62470ed4abde1015105311facb04948e43d91009?u=11850803">arrests</a> in 2023 under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 — laws that criminalize posting messages deemed &#8220;grossly offensive,&#8221; &#8220;indecent, obscene,&#8221; or causing &#8220;annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety.&#8221;
That&#8217;s roughly 33 arrests <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/a979482f8ee61bcacaa182549ce7da9ecb858cf5?u=11850803">per day</a> in a country where shoplifting is practically decriminalized, and less than 5% of home burglaries are solved.
While the laws curtailing speech were originally intended to deal with serious threats and targeted harassment, in practice, they can be applied far more broadly. Civil liberties groups <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/1cf9edb8541540b412d62c86505cf0d8ee16552f?u=11850803">argue</a> that the vagueness of what constitutes &#8220;offensive&#8221; content allows authorities to monitor or detain people for expressing controversial political opinions, satire, or clumsy humor.
Things became more extreme with the 2023 Online Safety Act, one of the most significant legal changes of the decade, granting the communications regulator (Ofcom) wide authority to compel platforms to remove content. It also creates new criminal offenses for incidents of &#8220;false and threatening communications.&#8221; But the act&#8217;s overly broad, subjective definitions and heavy penalties will lead to the censorship of lawful and harmless speech by tech firms trying to avoid multi-million dollar fines. Hundreds of people have already been <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/8bcf7660c7ddc8842b69fe45491a3fd9daa62bc6?u=11850803">charged</a> under the new regime for &#8220;illegal fake news&#8221; and &#8220;threatening communications,&#8221; with dozens convicted just months after it came into force.
Rogers is right to observe that this environment has produced something historically novel: a liberal democracy in which citizens increasingly self-censor not out of politeness, but out of fear.
Comedy writer Graham Linehan was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/irish-comedian-recounts-shocking-arrest-over-anti-trans-social-media-posts">arrested</a> last September at London&#8217;s Heathrow Airport after traveling from America, where he had <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/ed17a91d8bdab33570b575f3018e8c7d96f65a97?u=11850803">posted</a> on X about protecting women&#8217;s spaces from trans-identified males.
2023 also saw the arrival of enforcement <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/e1d16dc331f341b4db26779377550dfa0d97d162?u=11850803">against</a> &#8220;non-crime hate incidents,&#8221; a uniquely British invention that allowed police to record speech as hateful even when no law had been broken. The message is unmistakable: speech is tolerated only so long as it causes no discomfort to those empowered to define harm.
Contrast this with the American approach Rogers implicitly praises — the First Amendment as the cultural spine of American life. It protects speech precisely because it is offensive, destabilizing, or unpopular. American courts do not ask whether speech might cause emotional unease; they ask whether the state has any business interfering at all.
Critics will argue that Britain&#8217;s model is merely more &#8220;civilized&#8221; and that Americans fetishize absolutism. But balance presumes a neutral arbiter, and Britain no longer has one. When regulators, universities, employers, and police all share the same ideological assumptions, moderation becomes enforcement by another name.
What Rogers understands — and what many in Britain still resist — is that free speech is not primarily about manners: it is about power and control. Once the power to determine acceptable opinion shifts decisively to institutions, citizens become subjects in all but name. You may still speak, but only at your own risk.
This is why talk of asylum, literal or not, resonates deeply.
Asylum is sought not only when bombs fall, but when rights erode so completely that dissent becomes untenable. We are not quite there yet — but the trajectory is headed nowhere good. How could it? The British government is currently <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/93424203e35ae34cb4276d0c03f8932f0045fee0?u=11850803">proposing</a> the abolition of jury trials for all but the most heinous crimes.
America&#8217;s free-speech culture survives not because Americans are uniquely virtuous or diplomatic but because their system assumes fallibility — of governments, of majorities, of individual morality. Britain, by contrast, increasingly assumes moral consensus and builds enforcement mechanisms around it.
Sarah Rogers has done the UK a service by saying the quiet part aloud. If Britain wishes to remain a nation of free speakers rather than shy whisperers, it must relearn a lesson America never forgot: the price of liberty is not silence, but tolerance of speech we would rather not hear.
* * *
Bev Turner is a host of &#8220;The Late Show Live&#8221; for Great Britain&#8217;s GBNews, based out of Washington, D.C. Follow her on X <a href="https://l.gourl.es/l/6a872d0bbc65de7ea63572b544b18a7c29887860?u=11850803">@BeverleyTurner</a>
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Anti-migrant Hotel Protest And Counter-Protests Take Place In Newcastle

Saying The Quiet Part Out Loud About Britain’s Free Speech Crisis

Free Speech

Manchester

Menu