Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

International

Keir Starmer’s left-wing UK government is at war abroad and against its own people

Published

5 months ago

12 minute read

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

With Britain’s economy facing disaster and its citizens under threat of imprisonment for tweet crimes, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government is stoking war abroad and charged with starting one at home – against its own people.

On the Fourth of July 2024 Keir Starmer won the U.K. general election with around one-fifth of the vote. This delivered him a huge majority in Parliament, and he vowed on the day that “politics can be a force for good. And that is how we will govern.”

Four months later, over two-and-a half million Britons have signed a petition to call another election. Though few believe this will result in an election, it is a strong sign of mounting dissatisfaction with the Labour government – and the numbers signing are rising by the thousands every minute.

Almost immediately on taking office the Starmer government plunged in popularity. Despite ending his first week in power with a reasonable approval rating in the polls, his support has suffered an “historic drop” in ratings, according to Politico’s report three weeks ago.

“Keir Starmer has suffered the biggest post-election fall in approval ratings of any British prime minister in the modern era,” the report said. He is “languishing on an approval rating of -38,” which is “a precipitous 49-point drop” from early July.

A disastrous budget and a declaration of “class war” on British farmers has followed this survey, with the latest indication of Starmer’s deep unpopularity seeing millions call for him to go.

One major reason for the call for an election is the Starmer government’s response to the knife murder of three girls aged six, seven and, nine by suspect Axel Rudakubana, initially described as a “boy … from Cardiff” on July 29, 2024.

Court sketch of “Cardiff teen” Axel Rudakubana. Source: X

READ: UK’s new Prime Minister Keir Starmer moves toward digital tyranny in response to civil unrest

“Is this Britain or the Soviet Union?” – asked Musk as news of the arrests for speech crimes broke.

British judges have handed down harsh sentences – up to 38 months – for “hate speech,” including posts on sites such as X (formerly Twitter).

One man, Yorkshire grandfather Peter Lynch, subsequently died in prison. He was described as “the victim of a vengeful, out-of-touch Prime Minister” in the Daily Telegraph. Starmer had vowed to “crack down on far-right thugs” such as Lynch, who was jailed for shouting that police were “protecting people who are killing our kids and raping them.”

A 2015 report said up to “one million British children” may have been sexually exploited by immigrant gangs. The judge who jailed Lynch had also set a convicted child sex offender free.

The convictions were pursued under an official narrative of countering hate speech, as many of those prosecuted alleged a terrorist motive to the killings, linking this to the fact that the suspect was the child of Rwandan immigrants. These claims were routinely dismissed as dangerous conspiracy theories – and hate speech.

Starmer was formerly a lawyer who has worked in the past to secure rights and benefits for illegal immigrants, and once promoted a 2015 petition to “accept more asylum seekers and increase support” for them.

Evidence emerged at the initial hearing before his trial that the suspected killer had been found in possession of an “Al Qaeda training manual” and was attempting to manufacture the nerve agent ricin. He was charged under the Terrorism Act.

In addition to terrorism charges, and three counts of murder, the BBC reported “he is also charged with ten counts of attempted murder and possession of a knife.” Eight children were wounded, along with two adults, during the attacks.

READ: UK’s draconian ‘online safety’ laws are turning traditional values into criminal ‘hate speech’

As this news broke, reports emerged showing Starmer had known that the suspect would face terror charges “for weeks,” whilst he and his government condemned “misinformation” whenever terrorism was mentioned in connection with the attacks.

As The Sun reported, both former Prime Minister Liz Truss and a former adviser to Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings, said Starmer would have known this “immediately” after the attacks.

Many judges who have imprisoned British social media users for “tweet crimes” have been found to have released child sex offenders without jail time, fueling further outrage. A report from the Telegraph confirmed the trend of releasing “pedophiles” without custodial sentences.

Musk again commented on one shocking case.

 

With the investigation of a British journalist, Allison Pearson, over a “non-crime hate incident,” the charge of “Keir Stasi” was reprised, with Elon Musk once again chiming in.

Pearson was visited at home by police over an old tweet, in a case which has since been dropped. Yet Elon Musk’s friction with the Starmer government does not end here – nor with him.

READ: Keir Stasi? UK government wants to prosecute ‘non-crime hate speech’

Breaking the ‘special relationship’?

The Starmer government is also mired in a serious scandal concerning the incoming Trump administration. As the Washington Post reported, Starmer’s Labour Party “helped organize 100 members to volunteer for the Kamala Harris campaign, with a focus on the swing states.”

The Trump campaign responded with a legal complaint with the U.S. Federal Election Commission, charging Starmer’s Labour, together with the Harris campaign, with “making and accepting illegal foreign national contributions.”

Though the scandal was hand-waved away by Starmer, his cabinet ministers have a long history of making outrageous remarks about President Trump. U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy, for example, has alleged Trump is a member of the Ku Klux Klan and called Trump a “neo-Nazi sociopath.”

That the Trump campaign has called Starmer’s party “far-left” is not the half of it. The U.K. government has long pressed for escalation in Ukraine – a war which Trump has vowed to end.

With the war’s end would come a harsh reckoning of costs – including to energy bills, in human lives, and of course in the once notorious corruption of Ukraine itself. The Pandora Papers revealed the “hidden fortunes of the world’s elite and crooks” and the report, issued in November 2021, even detailed the shady financial dealings of Zelensky himself.

With isolation looming in Europe, Starmer is looking very lonely. His chief continental ally, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, has just seen his government dissolve. Right-wing populism is growing across Europe, with France, Sweden, Austria, and the Netherlands looking to politicians far friendlier to Hungary’s Viktor Orbán than to pro-open borders and permanent war progressives like Starmer.

British intelligence operations under Starmer have also included attempts to “kill Musk’s Twitter,” with Kit Klarenberg reporting on November 3 how “British Intel Again Targets Donald Trump.”

Starmer’s troubles at home and abroad are serious and seemingly insoluble. His Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, has recently been exposed as a liar. She had claimed to have been an economist, when in fact she had been a sort of clerk – and had also been described as “useless.”

With Britain’s economy facing disaster, its citizens under threat of imprisonment for tweet crimes, and with the Labour Party seeing farmer protests in London against its tax and land grab, Starmer’s government is stoking war abroad and charged with starting one at home – against its own people.

His government is an advertisement for a world order which Americans – and Europeans – are voting against in huge numbers. So, what happened in the U.K. in July?

The real winner of the last election in the U.K. wasn’t the Labour Party. Half of all adults did not vote at all, and turnout was the lowest since universal suffrage was introduced, as the IPPR reported.

“If non-voters were a party, they would have been the largest party by some distance,” it found.

Britain does not just face a crisis of confidence in its current government when the largest vote share is won by “none of the above.” It is hard to see how a petition can fix this, but given the level of disengagement with the electoral machine, it is notable that two-and-a-half million people can be bothered to sign it at all.

If you can motivate millions of people who do not vote into taking an interest in politics, perhaps – as Keir Starmer did – you can call yourself a “force for good.”

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Crime / 1 hour ago

Canada Blocked DEA Request to Investigate Massive Toronto Carfentanil Seizure for Terror Links

Business / 9 hours ago

Overregulation is choking Canadian businesses, says the MEI

Alberta / 9 hours ago

‘Existing oil sands projects deliver some of the lowest-breakeven oil in North America’

International

Nigeria, 3 other African countries are deadliest for Christians: report

Published on May 1, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Angeline Tan

The 2025 Global Christian Relief Red List report has found that the deadliest region for Christians is Africa, with Nigeria taking the top spot with 10,000 deaths in 2 years.

The 2025 Global Christian Relief (GCR) Red List report, which highlighted “the 25 worst countries for Christian persecution across five categories of concern” including killings, building attacks, arrests, displacements, abductions and assaults, has found that Africa, in particular Nigeria, is the most dangerous region for Christians.

Released in January, the GCR report, which relied on data from the Violent Incidents Database, a project founded by the International Institute for Religious Freedom (IIRF), summarized:

Africa remains the deadliest region for Christians, with Nigeria consistently being the most dangerous country for followers of Jesus. Between November 2022 and November 2024, nearly 10,000 Christians were killed, primarily by Islamic extremist groups such as Boko Haram, Armed Fulani Herdsmen, and the Islamic State’s West Africa Province (ISWAP). Similar patterns emerge in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Mozambique, and Ethiopia, where numerous armed militant groups target Christians.

The GCR report detailed how “most of the killings” in Nigeria happened in the country’s northern “sharia” states, where Christians “often live in remote villages in semi-arid landscapes, making them particularly vulnerable to attacks.” Notably, the same report highlighted the failure of the Nigerian government in stopping these anti-Christian attacks, stating that “despite government assurances that they will defeat the extremists, the violence continues to escalate.”

Ranking second to Nigeria as the next “deadliest country for Christians” was the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where “390 Christians were recorded as killed” during the reporting period of November 2022 to 2024. The GRC report singled out “Islamic militant groups like the Allied Democratic Forces” as the “main killers.”

Coming in third was Mozambique, with “262 recorded deaths.” The report declared that although Mozambique was “once a relatively peaceful Christian-majority country,” “a swarm of militants led by the Islamic State Mozambique (ISM)” has disrupted the peace of the country.

Strikingly, Ethiopia emerged as the fourth deadliest country for Christians, “with at least 181 Christians killed.” The GCR report detailed how “believers — particularly converts — faced high risks of violence in regions dominated by Islamic militants”.

Apart from killings, African Christians have to contend with the risk of displacements, assaults, and kidnappings.

“Despite the intense challenges in places like Nigeria, China, and India, we continue to see remarkable resilience in these communities,” Brian Orme, acting chief executive of Global Christian Relief, declared. “Even in the darkest circumstances, the Church not only survives but grows stronger — millions are choosing to follow Jesus despite knowing the risks they face.”

“Working closely with our partners on the ground in these high-risk areas, we provide emergency aid, safe houses, and trauma counseling to Christians facing violent persecution,” Orme said.

According to the report, “much of the violence occurred in Manipur, where unrest erupted in May 2024. Rioters, driven by Hindu extremists from the Meitei tribe, attacked predominantly Christian Kukis, systematically burning churches and setting fire to the homes of believers.”

Meanwhile, China led the world in arrests of Christians, with more than 1,500 believers detained under the communist government’s religious prohibitions. The report stated:

It is no surprise that China tops the 2025 GCR Red List for Arrests, given that the communist nation has the world’s most sophisticated surveillance mechanisms.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump’s bizarre 51st state comments and implied support for Carney were simply a ploy to blow up trilateral trade pact

Published on May 1, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Conservative Treehouse

Trump’s position on the Canadian election outcome had nothing to do with geopolitical friendships and everything to do with America First economics.

Note from LifeSiteNews co-founder Steve Jalsevac: This article, disturbing as it is, appears to explain Trump’s bizarre threats to Canada and irrational support for Carney. We present it as a possible explanation for why Trump’s interference in the Canadian election seems to have played a large role in the Liberals’ exploitation of the Trump threat and their ultimate, unexpected success.

To understand President Trump’s position on Canada, you have to go back to the 2016 election and President Trump’s position on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) renegotiation. If you did not follow the subsequent USMCA process, this might be the ah-ha moment you need to understand Trump’s strategy.

During the 2016 election President Trump repeatedly said he wanted to renegotiate NAFTA. Both Canada and Mexico were reluctant to open the trade agreement to revision, but ultimately President Trump had the authority and support from an election victory to do exactly that.

In order to understand the issue, you must remember President Trump, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer each agreed that NAFTA was fraught with problems and was best addressed by scrapping it and creating two separate bilateral trade agreements. One between the U.S. and Mexico, and one between the U.S. and Canada.

In the decades that preceded the 2017 push to redo the trade pact, Canada had restructured their economy to: (1) align with progressive climate change; and (2) take advantage of the NAFTA loophole. The Canadian government did not want to reengage in a new trade agreement.

Canada has deindustrialized much of their manufacturing base to support the “environmental” aspirations of their progressive politicians. Instead, Canada became an importer of component goods where companies then assembled those imports into finished products to enter the U.S. market without tariffs. Working with Chinese manufacturing companies, Canada exploited the NAFTA loophole.

Justin Trudeau was strongly against renegotiating NAFTA, and stated he and Chrystia Freeland would not support reopening the trade agreement. President Trump didn’t care about the position of Canada and was going forward. Trudeau said he would not support it. Trump focused on the first bilateral trade agreement with Mexico.

When the U.S. and Mexico had agreed to terms of the new trade deal and 80 percent of the agreement was finished, representatives from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce informed Trudeau that his position was weak and if the U.S. and Mexico inked their deal, Canada would be shut out.

When they went to talk to the Canadians the CoC was warning them about what was likely to happen. NAFTA would end, the U.S. and Mexico would have a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA), and then Trump was likely to turn to Trudeau and say NAFTA is dead, now we need to negotiate a separate deal for U.S.-Canada.

Trudeau was told a direct bilateral trade agreement between the U.S. and Canada was the worst possible scenario for the Canadian government. Canada would lose access to the NAFTA loophole and Canada’s entire economy was no longer in a position to negotiate against the size of the U.S. Trump would win every demand.

Following the warning, Trudeau went to visit Nancy Pelosi to find out if Congress was likely to ratify a new bilateral trade agreement between the U.S. and Mexico. Pelosi warned Trudeau there was enough political support for the NAFTA elimination from both parties. Yes, the bilateral trade agreement was likely to find support.

Realizing what was about to happen, Prime Minister Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland quickly changed approach and began to request discussions and meetings with USTR Robert Lighthizer. Keep in mind more than 80 to 90 percent of the agreement was already done by the U.S. and Mexico teams. Both President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and President Trump were now openly talking about when it would be finalized and signed.

Nancy Pelosi stepped in to help Canada get back into the agreement by leveraging her Democrats. Trump agreed to let Canada engage, and Lighthizer agreed to hold discussions with Chrystia Freeland on a tri-lateral trade agreement that ultimately became the USMCA.

The key points to remember are: (1) Trump, Ross, and Lighthizer would prefer two separate bilateral trade agreements because the U.S. import/export dynamic was entirely different between Mexico and Canada. And because of the loophole issue, (2) a five-year review was put into the finished USMCA trade agreement. The USMCA was signed on November 30, 2018, and came into effect on July 1, 2020.

TIMELINE: The USMCA is now up for review (2025) and renegotiation in 2026!

This timeline is the key to understanding where President Donald Trump stands today. The review and renegotiation is his goal.

President Trump said openly he was going to renegotiate the USMCA, leveraging border security (Mexico) and reciprocity (Canada) within it.

Following the 2024 presidential election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau traveled to Mar-a-Lago and said if President Trump was to make the Canadian government face reciprocal tariffs, open the USMCA trade agreements to force reciprocity, and/or balance economic relations on non-tariff issues, then Canada would collapse upon itself economically and cease to exist.

In essence, Canada cannot survive as a free and independent north American nation, without receiving all the one-way benefits from the U.S. economy.

To wit, President Trump then said that if Canada cannot survive in a balanced rules environment, including putting together their own military and defenses (which it cannot), then Canada should become the 51st U.S. state. It was following this meeting that President Trump started emphasizing this point and shocking everyone in the process.

However, what everyone missed was the strategy Trump began outlining when contrast against the USMCA review and renegotiation window.

Again, Trump doesn’t like the tri-lateral trade agreement. President Trump would rather have two separate bilateral agreements; one for Mexico and one for Canada. Multilateral trade agreements are difficult to manage and police.

How was President Trump going to get Canada to (a) willingly exit the USMCA; and (b) enter a bilateral trade agreement?

The answer was through trade and tariff provocations, while simultaneously hitting Canada with the shock and awe aspect of the 51st state.

The Canadian government and the Canadian people fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

Trump’s position on the Canadian election outcome had nothing to do with geopolitical friendships and everything to do with America First economics. When asked about the election in Canada, President Trump said, “I don’t care. I think it’s easier to deal, actually, with a liberal and maybe they’re going to win, but I don’t really care.”

By voting emotionally, the Canadian electorate have fallen into President Trump’s USMCA exit trap. Prime Minister Mark Carney will make the exit much easier. Carney now becomes the target of increased punitive coercion until such a time as the USMCA review is begun, and Canada is forced to a position of renegotiation.

Trump never wanted Canada as a 51st state.

Trump always wanted a U.S.-Canada bilateral trade agreement.

Mark Carney said the era of U.S.-Canadian economic ties “are officially declared severed.”

Canada has willingly exited the USMCA trade agreement at the perfect time for President Trump.

Continue Reading

Trending

X