PETA calls for 'sex strike' against 'meaty' men: 'Don't Give a F---'

PETA previously promoted a sex strike against men back in 2022 for contributing more greenhouse gases

By Lindsay Kornick Fox News
Published June 20, 2024 

PETA president discusses her grizzly post-mortem plans for her that she announced Monday.

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is calling for another sex strike until men agree to become vegans to save animals and stop climate change.

PETA announced on its official blog that it will be launching a new campaign to promote a sex strike to target men for their eating habits.

"PETA is erecting—ahem—launching new ads warning that eating animal flesh can cause impotence and is calling on people to join the sex strike, and stop having sex with their meat-eating husbands and boyfriends until they go vegan. Why? A study found that men contribute significantly more to the climate catastrophe than women through their consumption of animal flesh," the post read.


It included an ad that read "Don’t Give a F---. Meat is linked to IMPOTENCE and clogs other arteries, too. Join PETA’s sex strike until men stop eating meat. Please, go vegan."

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) launched a new ad campaign calling for men to become vegans. (YANN SCHREIBER/AFP via Getty Images)

PETA cited a study from 2021 that claimed men contributed 41% more greenhouse gases than women, likely due to their diets.

"Leave the Meat in the Sheets—Go Vegan in the Streets," one slogan read.

PETA told Fox News Digital: "Women went wild for PETA’s call for a sex strike on meat-eating men in 2022, and with a new study showing that men’s meaty eating habits cause 41% more greenhouse gasses, we know it’s time to ramp it back up. Women have always had power in the kitchen and the bedroom—so we’re combining them to save animals, the planet, and our men’s health. After all, vegans don’t need Viagra and all its attendant risks!"

As the animal rights organization noted, it put out a similar call for a sex strike back in 2022, citing the same study and attacking men for "hurting animals" and "harming the planet."

PETA cited a study that claimed men eating meat contributed 41% more greenhouse gases than women. (Leigh Vogel/WireImage | istock)

"Men need to take accountability for their actions. Now that research shows that their impact on the climate is so disproportionately large, they should take steps to rectify that. And the easiest, healthiest, simplest way to do this is by going vegan," the post read.

It continued, "For all fathers who still are grilling meat but want their children to have a healthy future on a habitable planet, it’s time for a lifestyle change. Pledge to go vegan today."

PETA has faced increased mockery in the past few years over its public statements and ads. In November, the organization was attacked online and fact-checked by X’s Community Notes after posting a picture of turkeys sitting around a human meal for Thanksgiving and claiming "turkeys would never do this to us."

PETA previously called for a sex strike back in 2022 for men to "take accountability." (Photo by Wodicka/ullstein bild via Getty Images)

"Turkeys are not vegetarians," according to the Community Note. "Turkeys eat mice, lizards, frogs, and just about anything they can fit in their mouth. If turkeys were larger or had the technological means to farm and eat humans, their current diet reveals they likely would."

‘Don’t Give a F**k’: With Meat-Eating Men Killing the Planet, PETA Calls For Sex Strike

For Immediate Release:
June 20, 2024

Norfolk, Va. – Because men apparently don’t give a f**k about the planet, as a new study shows that males contribute significantly more to the climate catastrophe than females through their higher consumption of meat, PETA is asking people to stop giving a f**k—literally—by withholding sex from their meat-eating husbands and boyfriends until they go vegan. New ads from the group asking people to join its sex strike against male meat-eaters will soon be popping up across the country. 

“Animal agriculture is a killer, spewing methane that’s destroying the planet, hardening humans’ arteries with cholesterol, and sending billions of animals to their deaths,” says PETA President Ingrid Newkirk. “PETA urges lovers everywhere to ditch deadly meat and reach for vibrant vegan foods instead and has free downloadable vegan starter kits for everyone ready to make the switch.”

According to the United Nations, about a third of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions are linked to food production and the largest percentage of these emissions come from the meat and dairy industries. PETA notes that growing water-intensive crops just to feed animals raised for food consumes more than half the water used in the U.S. and that up to 80% of deforestation in the Amazon is linked to meat production, either for grazing or for growing food for cows. Vegan foods—such as fruits and vegetables, whole grains, beans, peas, nuts, and lentils—require less energy, land, and water.

Additionally, each person who goes vegan spares nearly 200 animals every year and reduces their own risk of suffering from cancer, heart disease, strokes, diabetes, and obesity. 

IT'S AN OLD IDEA

Gutenberg.orgwww.gutenberg.org/files/7700/7700-h/7700-h

Lysistrata, by Aristophanes - Project Gutenberg

We must refrain from every depth of love.... Why do you turn your backs? Where are you going? Why do you bite your lips and shake your heads? Why are your faces ...

Britannica.comwww.britannica.com/topic/Lysistrata-by-Aristophanes

Lysistrata | Comedy, Ancient Greece, Women's Rights - Britannica

Apr 24, 2024 ... Lysistrata, comedy by Aristophanes, produced in 411 bce. Lysistrata depicts the seizure of the Athenian Acropolis and of the treasury of .

ALSO SEE

shs.hal.science/halshs-02864005/document

The Animal Rights Struggle: An Essay in Historical Sociology

Aug 26, 2020 ... Early concern for animal welfare was rooted in the growing aversion to violence, and to the spectacle of the effects of violence on bodies. The ...

Utoronto.catspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/67306/1/OBrien_Sarah_J_201211_PhD_thesis.pdf

cinematic representations of animal slaughter and the ethics of shock

... on the labour of meat-making make a similar assertion with the title of ... slaughterhouse] and they said, 'no, we don't give tours of this plant.' 'What ...

more open Internet? Why are the Chinese so accepting of these ...

Uwo.cair.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2089&context=etd

The History of Animal Welfare Law and the Future of Animal Rights

Aug 23, 2012 ... The conclusion is that animal rights theory could build on the precedent set by the anti-cruelty laws if legal rights for animals are used as a ...

Wordpress.comgrupojovenfl.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/peter-singer-animal-liberation-1.pdf

Peter Singer, Animal Liberation - WordPress.com

themselves make an organized protest against the treatment they receive ... PETA News (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals,. Washington, D.C.) 4 ...

US bans Russia's Kaspersky antivirus software
AFP|Update: 21.06.2024 


The US Commerce Department said it would prohibit the sale of Kaspersy's software in the United States / © AFP/File

President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday banned Russia-based cybersecurity firm Kaspersky from providing its popular antivirus products in the United States over national security concerns, the US Commerce Department said.

"Kaspersky will generally no longer be able to, among other activities, sell its software within the United States or provide updates to software already in use," the agency said in a statement.

The announcement came after a lengthy investigation found Kaspersky's "continued operations in the United States presented a national security risk due to the Russian Government's offensive cyber capabilities and capacity to influence or direct Kaspersky's operations," it said.


US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said "Russia has shown time and again they have the capability and intent to exploit Russian companies, like Kaspersky Lab, to collect and weaponize sensitive US information."

Kaspersky, in a statement to AFP, said the Commerce Department "made its decision based on the present geopolitical climate and theoretical concerns," and vowed to "pursue all legally available options to preserve its current operations and relationships."

"Kaspersky does not engage in activities which threaten US national security and, in fact, has made significant contributions with its reporting and protection from a variety of threat actors that targeted US interests and allies," the company said.

The move is the first such action taken since an executive order issued under Donald Trump's presidency gave the Commerce Department the power to investigate whether certain companies pose a national security risk.

Raimondo said the Commerce Department's actions demonstrated to America's adversaries that it would not hesitate to act when "their technology poses a risk to the United States and its citizens."

While Kaspersky is headquartered in Moscow, it has offices in 31 countries around the world, servicing more than 400 million users and 270,000 corporate clients in more than 200 countries, the Commerce Department said.

As well as banning the sale of Kaspersky's antivirus software, the Commerce Department also added three entities linked to the firm to a list of companies deemed to be a national security concern, "for their cooperation with Russian military and intelligence authorities in support of the Russian government's cyber intelligence objectives."

The Commerce Department said it "strongly encouraged" users to switch to new vendors, although its decision does not ban them from using the software should they choose to do so.

Kaspersky is allowed to continue certain operations in the United States, including providing antivirus updates, until September 29 this year, "in order to minimize disruption to US consumers and businesses and to give them time to find suitable alternatives," it added.

NOBBY

  

 

Anthony Fauci Says Trump Got Hydroxychloroquine Idea From Right-Wing TV Host

Ron Dicker
Wed, 19 June 2024 

Dr. Anthony Fauci said Tuesday that Donald Trump got the notion to push hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment from none other than Fox News host Laura Ingraham. (Watch the video below.)

Fauci, a White House coronavirus task force member during the pandemic, said the former president fixated on so-called miracle cures with “no basis in science.”

Trump yelled at Fauci for openly dismissing the supposed effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug that was promoted by conservatives as a COVID treatment without any real evidence.

“I’m telling the American public the facts,” Fauci said he told Trump. “Hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work.”

Fauci, who describes his complicated relationship with Trump in his new book “On Call,” told MSNBC’s Ari Melber what he speculated was the reason for Trump’s insistence on the drug’s ability to quell the outbreak.

“I believe he wanted so badly for this to go away the way influenza goes away, and when he saw it was not going away, then he was hoping for some magical solution, and he even used those words, ‘It’s going to go away like magic,’” Fauci said. “And then when that didn’t work, then we had to have these miracle cures like hydroxychloroquine, which he got from Laura Ingraham on Fox News.”

Claims about the drug’s purported usefulness against the coronavirus were bandied about through right-wing channels before Ingraham visited the White House in April 2020 to sell Trump on the drug.

Ingraham, who had already been touting hydroxychloroquine on her show along with other Fox personalities, brought cardiologist Dr. Ramin Oskoui, who was included in a New York Times opinion piece about “dangerous doctors in a pandemic,” and Stephen Smith, an infectious disease specialist, to the meeting, The Wall Street Journal reported. Smith said in April 2020 that he thought the drug combined with an antibiotic was “the beginning of the end of the pandemic.”

Trump was sold. In mid-May 2020, he announced that he had been taking the drug for weeks. “I’ve heard a lot of good stories,” he said.

But a study published in June 2023 by the National Institutes of Health highlighted the futility of the medicine as a pre-exposure treatment for COVID-19. It noted no significant difference between a placebo and the actual drug in preventing infection.

A study released in January 2024 determined that the drug Trump championed as a silver bullet actually increased the mortality rate by 11% among those who took it to treat COVID-19. It was linked to nearly 17,000 deaths in six countries during the pandemic’s first wave.

BMJ study did not prove Covid-19 vaccines caused excess deaths

Gwen Roley / Rossen BOSSEV / AFP Canada / AFP Bulgaria
Thu, 20 June 2024 

Articles and social media posts claimed that research published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) proves Covid-19 vaccines caused global excess mortality. This is misleading; the researchers theorize vaccination may have been a contributing factor, but the study's publisher and medical experts point out that the paper does not establish a link between mortality and the shots.

"And right when the shots start the deaths happen and then continues on. And the countries with the highest uptake of the shots have the highest death numbers," says conspiracy theorist Alex Jones in a video posted to X on June 6, 2024.

In the clip, Jones discusses a June 3 study published in the BMJ titled: "Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the Covid-19 pandemic: 'Our World in Data' estimates of January 2020 to December 2022" (archived here).

Similar claims about the paper spread across X while jumping to Facebook and Instagram -- often referencing an article by British daily The Telegraph covering the study (archived here). The posts also circulated in other languages, including French and Bulgarian.

Screenshot of an X post taken June 19, 2024

Screenshot of an X post taken June 19, 2024


The posts come amid a wave of vaccine misinformation, including false claims about adverse effects, which has undercut confidence in public health efforts to fight Covid-19 and other diseases.

The New York Post also shared a link to an article on X on June 6, 2024 with the headline: "Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths since pandemic: study." However, an editor's note attached to the story on its website said the text had been updated to reflect that the study did not analyze the impact of vaccination (archived here)

On that same day, the BMJ stated on its X account that the paper had been misreported and added that various news outlets "have claimed that this research implies a direct causal link between Covid-19 vaccination and mortality. This study does not establish any such link."

What did the study find?

According to the paper's abstract, the Dutch researchers used figures from 47 countries as found in aggregator Our World in Data to assess excess mortality -- or the number of deaths above the anticipated amount -- between 2020 and 2022.

The study concluded that the rate of excess mortality was high in the observed countries, which included the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, during that time, despite the pandemic mitigation measures that were in place.

"This raises serious concerns. Government leaders and policymakers need to thoroughly investigate underlying causes of persistent excess mortality," the researchers wrote in their conclusion.

While the paper comments on the possibility of suspected adverse events of Covid-19 vaccines contributing to excess deaths, the text also points to infection from the virus and indirect effects of containment measures as potential underpinning factors driving the trend.

The research does not present evidence for a link between vaccination and excess mortality, with the authors pointing out that governments "may be unable to release their death data with detailed stratification by cause."
Experts criticize the paper

After the study was published, it received criticism online, including an X thread (archived here) by Jeffrey Morris, a professor of public health and preventative medicine and director of the Division of Biostatistics at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine (archived here).

"This paper provides no evidence whatsoever that Covid-19 vaccines have increased mortality," he told AFP in a June 13 email. "All they do is demonstrate excess deaths did not stop in 2020 but continued in 2021-2022 'in spite of containment measures and vaccines.'"

John Ioannidis, a professor of medicine at the Stanford Prevention Research Center, said placing the burden of excess deaths on Covid-19 vaccines was "a long stretch"(archived here).

"I think that overall vaccines saved many lives in the balance: not as many as some claim, trying to paint an all-perfect story around them, but I definitely don't think that they killed more people than they saved!" he said in a June 13 email.
Publisher and hospital pull back from research

Following criticism of the study BMJ said in a June 13 press release (archived here) that an expression of concern would be placed on the paper.

On June 11, the Utrecht-based Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, listed as the affiliation for three of the study's four authors, also published a statement distancing itself from the paper (archived here).

According to the statement, the original idea of the study "was to look at the effect of Covid measures on, among other things, the mortality rate of children with cancer in low-income countries".

However, during the course of the study, the hospital said: "The focus shifted and diverted in a direction that we felt was too far from our expertise: pediatric oncology. We are not experts in epidemiology, nor do we want to give that impression."

Its statement said: "The study in no way demonstrates a link between vaccinations and excess mortality; that is explicitly not the researchers' finding. We therefore regret that this impression has been created."
Benefits outweigh risks

Some studies have estimated that Covid-19 vaccines saved millions of lives (archived here and here). Physicians have continually told AFP the shots are effective at preventing severe illness and death, outweighing the risks of possible side effects (archived here).

Researchers estimate the Covid-19 virus itself directly led to more than 7 million deaths worldwide, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation (archived here).

In Canada, the most recent government data reports that out of more than 100 million doses of the shot, 488 deaths were reported after vaccination with four of these being consistent with causal association to immunization (archived here).

"The BMJ paper gives an overall balanced discussion of many possibilities of contributing factors that are very difficult or even impossible to disentangle as to their relative contribution with these types of data," Ioannidis said. "Many of the contributing factors tend to co-exist, making their disentanglement even more difficult."

Read more of AFP's reporting on vaccine and health misinformation here.


Fact check: Excess deaths are far below pandemic levels

Joseph Hook, PA
Thu, 20 June 2024 

Reform UK’s “contract“, published on June 17, includes the claims: “Excess deaths are nearly as high as they were during the Covid pandemic. Young people are over-represented.”
Evaluation

Excess deaths are far lower than during the Covid-19 pandemic: from an average of more than 2,000 excess deaths per week during the first 52 weeks of the pandemic, they have fallen to around a quarter of that in 2023 (the most recent comparable period).

More young people aged 0-24 have died than expected in the first four months of 2024, the only age group for which this is the case. However, across 2023, excess deaths were much more likely among older people.
The facts

In the Reform UK manifesto – which the party calls its “contract” – published on June 17, under the heading “Excess Deaths and Vaccine Harms Public Inquiry”, the party says: “Excess deaths are nearly as high as they were during the Covid pandemic. Young people are over-represented.”

Excess deaths data is monitored by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) for England. It is calculated by comparing the number of deaths reported each week to an average for the preceding five years.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, excess deaths peaked in the week ending April 17 2020, when 11,683 more people died than expected. Over the 52 weeks of data recorded for the pandemic, between March 21 2020 and March 19 2021, an average of 2,072 excess deaths were recorded each week.

This is almost four times the 519 weekly excess deaths recorded between December 31 2022 and December 29 2023.

Since the end of 2023, the OHID has changed the methodology it uses to calculate excess deaths, and it is not comparable with the previous system.

The OHID has published revised figures for 2023 under the new methodology, showing an average of 209 excess deaths each week. In the first four months of 2024, the most recent data published, 729 fewer people have died than expected on average each week.

In the first four months in 2024, people aged 24 and younger were the only age group with more deaths than expected, with around six excess deaths per week.

But across 2023, by far the highest number of excess deaths was in the 85-plus age group, with 203 excess deaths per week on average, compared with six (again) for those aged 0-24.

An assessment of Nigel Farage and Reform UK

Since his announcement that he was going to stand in this General Election, his rhetoric and statements have been like when he lied and scaremongered about immigration in the run up to Brexit.

byChris Wade
20-06-2024 
in Opinion, Politics



David Cameron described UKIP, a previous incarnation of Reform, as a party of loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists.

A pretty good assessment, in my opinion.
Reform

I think Reform is exactly the same, but with one difference.

I believe that Farage and others by continuing to demonise immigrants has emboldened a significant number of British to come out of that particular ‘closet’. It now seems OK to voice in public what previously was only talked about in like-minded company.

For instance, approximately 10% of Reform candidates are Facebook friends with the Fascist leader of the New British Union.

That’s what Farage has been able to achieve.

Let us not beat about the bush, Farage is one of the most divisive, sexist, xenophobic, Islamophobes in British politics today.

Is he racist though?

His politics and statements are there for all to see and assess.

Just a quick internet search will provide plenty of evidence.

A recent dog whistle was accusing Muslims of not having ‘British Values’

He followed up by accusing the PM of being unpatriotic and not understanding our culture. He quickly stated that he meant Sunak’s wealth, not his skin colour or immigrant heritage, that prompted his statement.

So, apparently if you are wealthy, that prevents a person from being cognisant of British Culture.

Strangely, wealth hasn’t prevented Farage himself or Richard Tice from being patriotic.
Farage greatest hits

Hope not Hate has compiled several instances which demonstrate this, and it makes for interesting, if not pleasant, reading.

It isn’t a definitive list, just a snapshot.

So, is he racist?

Since his announcement that he was going to stand in this General Election, his rhetoric and statements have been like when he lied and scaremongered about immigration in the run up to Brexit.

You could almost ‘cut and paste’ his interviews from 2016 and not waste everyone’s time by interviewing him today.
Crisis in the NHS, education, housing?

All caused by immigrants, the eternal Farage scapegoat.

If it wasn’t for these people, the ones who look and sound different to him then everything would be fine.

So, is he racist?




Chris Wade
Semi-retired, ex Railway MFC season ticket holder Husband, father, friend Cyclist (slow) Socialist Hate discrimination. Fave description of self... odd but nice

Sound the alarm: racism and Reform UK on the rise

Racist politics and the far right are on the rise. We need mass resistance to fight back

By Charlie Kimber
Thursday 20 June 2024 
SOCIALIST WORKER

Reform UK, lead by Nigel Farage, has seen a rapid rise in the polls (Photo: flickr/Gage Skidmore)

It’s time to sound the alarm louder—the growth of the far right and Nigel Farage’s Reform UK threatens to become a seismic shift.

And in response, sections of the trade union and “left” movement are making compromises with the devil. Anti-racists need to react urgently.

Several opinion polls have now shown Farage’s party level with or ahead of the Tories nationally. And they confidently predict Farage will win in Clacton, Essex, where he’s running to be MP. We can’t know if the polls are reflecting reality or whether at least some of them are simply expressing the wishes of those who want to boost Reform UK.

Because of Britain’s electoral system, that doesn’t mean Reform UK will necessarily surpass the Tories’ number of MPs. But it does mean the poison that Farage pumps out will be injected even deeper into political debate.

The far right, and the fascists who cluster around them, could be on the verge of a breakthrough.

Years of state racism and Islamophobia from the Tories, unchallenged by Labour, is the crucial background to Farage’s growth. And the Tories, in an ever more desperate situation, have reached even deeper into the racist cesspit.

On Thursday they unveiled an advert purporting to believe that Labour would roll out the red carpet to “illegal immigrants” and write “welcome” in the sand on British beaches to attract them. And Labour began its election campaign with Keir Starmer’s declaration, “Read my lips—I will bring immigration numbers down. I will control our borders and make sure British businesses are helped to hire Brits first.”

Farage is taking that further with calls for “freezing non-essential immigration”, and parts of what passes for the left are following his politics eagerly.

After his manifesto launch this week, George Galloway of the Workers Party of Britain was asked about migrants and refugees coming across the Channel. Instead of kicking back against racism and pointing out that many were fleeing the devastation caused by Western imperialism, Galloway demanded more vicious measures that the Tories have dared to propose.

“Where were the ships?” he said. “The ships were in the Red Sea, in the Black Sea, in the South China Sea. The Royal Navy’s principal purpose and duty is to defend the shores of His Majesty’s realm, but they’re not doing so.

“They’re in every sea except our own sea. They are not involved in turning back illegal departures from France,” he said.

“Illegal arrivals in England, which then cost £80 a night per person, and potentially forever to the British taxpayer. We’ve got all these Royal Navy assets—the problem is they’re deployed everywhere except defending our own shores.”

Galloway claimed the French authorities are “watching migrants leave their shores”. He added, “We certainly wouldn’t allow them to leave unmolested from the beaches of France.”

He is disgustingly echoing Farage’s filth—and the language of the fascists in France.

RMT union leader Mick Lynch told an election event, “There’s a problem on the left. If working class people say there’s a problem in my town, we haven’t got enough resources to deal with an influx of people, you’ve got to deal with that. You can’t say that’s not true.”

He argued that there must be “a left response” to “the migration issue”. “If that upsets some people or is anti-woke, I don’t care.”

Organised workers and trade unions have been and must again be central to the anti-racist response we need. We need clear class politics.

How about an answer that doesn’t pander to the idea that migrants are the problem and instead targets the class enemy—the rich and the corporations. Let’s rage against the chief executives who live in obscene luxury and the billionaire class that is looting society.

A working class divided by racism will never fight effectively against the bosses and the ruling class. That means we must confront racism.

Our sisters and brothers are workers from anywhere in the world, however they come to Britain. And our enemies are those who sit at the top of society, living off the work of the rest of us.

There’s plenty of money for housing, the NHS and everything else we need if we tear down the system of profit.

These are urgent times. We need mass resistance to racism and revolutionary socialist politics at the heart of that fightback.

Join Stand Up To Racism’s campaigns, and make sure there is a mass turnout on Saturday 27 July when the fascist Tommy Robinson seeks to profit from the growth of racism during the election. And build a principled socialist opposition for now and after the election. As racism rises, no section of Labour—left or right—will be enough to deal with it.
Blame the rich, not migrants

The richest 52 families in Britain have more wealth than the poorest half of the British population—33 million people. The 52’s combined wealth is £795 billion—roughly the equivalent of giving every family in Britain £41,000.

It’s more than all the goods and services produced each year in Poland, a country with a population of almost 37 million people. Over the last 35 years, the wealth of the 200 richest families has grown from £42 billion to £711 billion, a 15 percent annual increase in real terms.

There are now 165 billionaires in the UK—there were 11 in 1989.For Stand Up To Racism campaign materials and details of the days of action on 22 and 29 June and the demonstration on 27 July go to standuptoracism.org.uk

Keir Starmer refuses to say whether he meant it when he said Jeremy Corbyn would make a great Prime Minister

Chris Jarvis 

Today

LEFT FOOT FORWARD


He was asked FIVE TIMES

The Labour leader Keir Starmer has refused to say whether he meant it when he said Jeremy Corbyn would make a ‘great prime minister’ in 2019. His refusal came as part of the BBC Question Time leaders special in which he was asked a series of questions about his support for the Labour’s election campaigns during Corbyn’s leadership of the party.

The first question put to him from the audience related to his comments about Rishi Sunak, who Starmer accused of putting forward a ‘Jeremy Corbyn-style’ manifesto. The audience member asked Starmer why he supported Corbyn’s manifesto in the 2019 general election.

In his response, Starmer said: “In 2019, I campaigned for the Labour Party, as I’ve always campaigned for the Labour Party. I wanted good colleagues to be returned to parliament. I knew we had a job and a half to do as the Labour Party because I didn’t think we were going to win that election.

“Afterwards, because we got the worst results since 1935, the electorate clearly gave their verdict to us, and we did a lot of work on how we needed to change the party. And that started with what went wrong. And in all the analysis we did, people said they quite liked some of what was in our manifesto, but they thought there was too much and they wanted to see something that was fully costed and fully funded.

“And that’s why my manifesto going forward for this election is fully costed and fully funded – everything we say we’re going to do, we say how much it’s going to be and where the money is coming from, because that’s the sort of stability that we need.

“The other thing that’s obviously happened since then is Liz Truss put forward a number of unfunded commitments, in her case tax cuts, and look what it did to the economy, and there’ll be people in this audience, people who are watching who are still paying the price for that. And I said it about Rishi Sunak’s manifesto, because he’s now included unfunded commitments in that, so he’s repeating the mistake.”

He went on to say that the 2019 Labour manifesto was ‘overloaded’, at which point the show’s host Fiona Bruce intervened and probed Starmer about his past support for Corbyn. Specifically, she asked about Starmer’s comments from 2019 in which he said Corbyn would make a ‘great Prime Minister’, asking whether he ‘meant it’, or whether he had his ‘fingers crossed behind his back’.

Starmer didn’t answer the question directly, instead starting by saying: “I didn’t think we would win that election”, leading to Bruce to intervene again. She asked: “Irrespective of that, you said he’d make a great prime minister – did you mean it?”

Again, Starmer didn’t respond directly, saying: “It wasn’t a question that really arose because I didn’t think we were going to win the election”.

And again, Bruce stepped in, asking: “But we all heard you saying he’d make a great prime minister – that was your way of telling the people here: vote for him. Did you not mean that?”

This time Starmer reverted to his earlier messages: “I was campaigning for the Labour Party, and I’m glad I did.”

Later, Bruce tried another time, asking: “Just answer this yes or no, when you said Jeremy Corbyn would make a good prime minister, did you mean it?”

Bruce didn’t allow Starmer to divert his answer to speak about Boris Johnson, asking him one final time whether he meant it when he said Corbyn would make a great prime minister.

And in his final response, Starmer said: “I didn’t think we were in a position to win that election,” leading to Bruce to say clearly: “that’s not an answer.”

In total, she asked him five times.

Working-class ‘red wall’ voters decided the last UK election. How do they feel now?

Stefan Rousseau/PA/AP
Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer arrives on board his election bus in Halesowen County of West Midlands, England, June 13, 2024, after unveiling Labour's manifesto in Manchester.

By Katie Marie Davies Contributor

June 20, 2024|TYLDESLEY, ENGLAND


When the United Kingdom heads to the polls July 4, all eyes will be on towns like Tyldesley.

With its tangle of narrow streets and red brick homes dating back to the area’s industrial heyday, Tyldesley is typical of towns across England’s northwest. Labour Party candidate Jo Platt has already spent weeks campaigning here, diligently pushing glossy leaflets into letterboxes and engaging in doorstep conversations with voters.

“We need to give a little bit of hope back to the country. I think that’s what we’ve lost,” she says earnestly, already walking to her next canvassing event. “We’ve lost pride in our towns. If we’re fortunate enough to get into government, then I hope that’s something that we can bring back.”

In 2019 elections, Britons living in “red wall” constituencies felt disrespected by the Labour Party, which helped lift the Conservatives to victory. Now, they may decide the election again – and they feel it’s the Tories who aren’t doing right by them this time.

Labour is campaigning hard here. Once it was all but given that the traditionally left-leaning party would win the votes of working-class, industrial towns like Tyldesley. Then came 2019. The area’s constituency switched allegiances to the opposing Conservatives, ending decades of Labour domination.

Tyldesley was not alone. The 2019 election saw a landslide of small towns across England’s north and Midlands as well as in Wales – an area often described as the “red wall” in honor of Labour’s traditional colors – vote in Conservative members of Parliament, many for the very first time.

The collapse of the red wall was a key factor in pushing then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson to 2019 election victory with an 80-seat majority. But five years later, with Conservative approval ratings rapidly tumbling and Labour looking at overwhelming gains in Parliament, it’s these seats – and accordingly, their voters – that are likely to push Labour across the finish line.

Identity and the red wall

The legend of the red wall – and its 2019 collapse – is tightly bound to an idea of British political tribalism. Throughout the 20th century, northern, working-class voters were seen as loyal Labour devotees, while rural, more affluent areas were judged to be unquestioning Conservative heartlands.

Karen Norris/Staff

The 2019 election brought new political divisions to the fore, with old class divides overshadowed by issues such as Brexit, when the U.K. left the European Union. Many red wall areas – towns that too often felt overlooked and forgotten in a new era of globalization – had voted to leave the EU, but were concerned that Labour would not honor the referendum results. In Tyldesley, the mood soured in the run-up to the 2019 vote. Local Labour councilor Jess Eastoe, who has been handing out leaflets with Ms. Platt, describes being verbally assaulted and spat at.

“The political wrangling over Brexit forced many people to choose between their EU identity [as a ‘leaver’ or a ‘remainer’] and their party identity,” says David Jeffery, a senior lecturer in British politics at the University of Liverpool. “Most studies show that, until quite recently, the EU identity was held much more strongly. Brexit really broke down this strong loyalty toward Labour.”

But that is now changing. As of June 13, just over three weeks before the election, the Conservative Party was polling at just 26% for the Leigh and Atherton constituency of which Tyldesley is part, compared with 50% for Labour. Similar figures are being seen across red wall seats, many of which are projected to fall back under Labour control.

“Of the red wall seats, I’d be surprised if more than a handful stayed with the Conservatives,” Dr. Jeffery says.

“The Conservatives have done nothing”

The Conservatives’ fall from grace across red wall towns has a regional accent. Across Wales and northern England, many voters feel cheated by shortfalls in the government’s “leveling up” plan, a targeted program supposedly designed to help balance regional inequalities between London and other U.K. regions.

Leon Neal/Reuters
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (left) walks with energy secretary Claire Coutinho (right) at the Rough 47/3B Bravo gas platform in the North Sea, June 17, 2024.

The program was a key part of the Conservatives’ promise when they won red wall seats in 2019; at that year’s party conference, then-leader Mr. Johnson vowed that “leveling up” initiatives would repay the region’s trust.

There has been little, however, in the way of results. The government’s flagship plan for a high-speed train line between London and Manchester, HS2, for example, was canceled in October 2023. (The line will instead stop at Birmingham, 100 miles farther south.) Similar policies, such as reducing regional differences in life expectancy or building 40 new hospitals by 2030, have also fallen flat.


Discontentment in towns like Tyldesley also mirrors concerns seen across the country as a whole. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is unpopular, and after a flurry of four Conservative leaders in just over six years – including Liz Truss, who spent just 44 days in office and remains best known for being compared to a lettuce – there is a dearth of likely replacements. Meanwhile, the party’s rhetoric of fiscal austerity is wearing thin after 14 years, particularly against a background of inflation and rising prices.

“The Conservatives have done nothing,” Tyldesley resident Charlotte Steel says when asked who she’ll be voting for in the election. She’s particularly worried about a health and social care system that has been hit by repeated Conservative funding cuts, and says that she’ll be supporting Labour. “This government doesn’t care about people.”

The cost of living in particular is on everyone’s lips. Doorstep issues focus on local infrastructure: People are desperate for more housing, but the new estates being hastily erected are too expensive for locals and serve commuters from nearby Manchester instead.

PA/Reuters
HS2 workers look on as the boring machine Cecelia breaks through after finishing a 10-mile-long tunnel for the HS2 project under the Chiltern Hills, March 21, 2024.

Local schoolteacher Paul Crowther remains undecided, but is already sure that he won’t be voting Conservative either. The party’s leader, Mr. Sunak, is simply out of touch with the needs of local people, he says. “We just need more funding,” he says, “For the NHS and for education.”ing?

It’s voters like Mr. Crowther that Labour hopes to bring back into the fold. In order to do so, its manifesto has introduced new themes, such as pledges to create a “new Border Security Command” and “crack down on antisocial behavior,” as well as plans to recruit more teachers and promises of economic stability.
Recommended

FREEDOM
Wait ... the Underground Railroad ran across the Rio Grande? A lost story surfaces.

Critics have accused the party and its leader, Keir Starmer, of moving away from Labour’s left-wing roots and heading for the political center. Yet the move – a deliberate break from the policies of former leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was seen by many small-town voters as too radical – seems to be resonating.

Mr. Starmer may not be wildly popular, but he is a safe option – and after years of political upheaval and an increasingly disliked government, that might just be a winning formula.

“People are worried about issues that affect this town, like drugs and petty crime,” says Ms. Eastoe, the Labour councilor. “We need to put the boring back in politics. We’re running a country, not a circus.”

UK

Whisky distillery staff to strike in pay dispute

BBC
Getty Images


Distillery workers at whisky maker Whyte & Mackay are due to walk out next week after rejecting the company's latest pay offer.

The GMB union said staff would strike at three Highland distilleries on Monday, with 11 more days of action in July then a two week walkout in August.

It comes after 84% of union members at the company's Dalmore and Invergordon distilleries in Ross and Cromarty, and Tamnavulin in Moray, voted to reject a pay offer in a ballot, which saw a 90% turnout.

The GMB claimed that Whyte & Mackay had "angered members" by saying that a strike by a small number of staff would have little impact on operations.


GMB Highlands organiser, Lesley-Ann MacAskill said: “The company’s rush to suggest distilleries are somehow less important than bottling and distribution operations was insulting and inflammatory.

“It should instead have been rushing to offer fair pay to our member because without their skill and experience there would be nothing to bottle and nothing to distribute."

GMB members were balloted following what the union said was a pay offer of between 6% and 7%.

The offer was accepted by Whyte & Mackay staff at the company's bottling and distribution sites at Grangemouth, but not the Highland sites.

Whyte & Mackay said its priority was to resolve this dispute.

A spokesperson added: "We do not recognise the substance of the statement regarding the negotiations.

"Whyte and Mackay has acted in accordance with legal advice, and approached the negotiation in an open and transparent manner throughout.

"We continue to engage both our trade union partners to reach a sustainable resolution."

The walkout comes as GMB members at whisky maker Edrington, which makes The Macallan and Famous Grouse, are also being balloted on industrial action in an ongoing pay dispute.

The Iberian lynx is back from the brink of extinction. Here’s how it happened

By Teresa Medrano And James Brooks The Associated Press
Posted June 20, 2024 11:32 am

Things are looking up for the Iberian lynx.

Just over two decades ago, the pointy-eared wild cat was on the brink of extinction, but as of Thursday the International Union for Conservation of Nature says it’s no longer an endangered species.

Successful conservation efforts mean that the animal, native to Spain and Portugal, is now barely a vulnerable species, according to the latest version of the IUCN Red List.

In 2001, there were only 62 mature Iberian lynx — medium-sized, mottled brown cats with characteristic pointed ears and a pair of beard-like tufts of facial hair — on the Iberian Peninsula. The species’ disappearance was closely linked to that of its main prey, the European rabbit, as well as habitat degradation and human activity.

Alarms went off and breeding, reintroduction and protection projects were started, as well as efforts to restore habitats like dense woodland, Mediterranean scrublands and pastures. More than two decades later, in 2022, nature reserves in southern Spain and Portugal contained 648 adult specimens. The latest census, from last year, shows that there are more than 2,000 adults and juveniles, the IUCN said.

“It’s really a huge success, an exponential increase in the population size,” Craig Hilton-Taylor, head of the IUCN Red list unit, told The Associated Press.
Edmonton's breaking news sent to your email as it happens.

One of the keys to their recovery has been the attention given to the rabbit population, which had been affected by changes in agricultural production. Their recovery has led to a steady increase in the lynx population, Hilton-Taylor said.

“The greatest recovery of a cat species ever achieved through conservation (…) is the result of committed collaboration between public bodies, scientific institutions, NGOs, private companies, and community members including local landowners, farmers, gamekeepers and hunters,” Francisco Javier Salcedo Ortiz, who coordinates the EU-funded LIFE Lynx-Connect project, said in a statement.

IUCN has also worked with local communities to raise awareness of the importance of the Iberian lynx in the ecosystem, which helped reduce animal deaths due poaching and roadkill. In addition, farmers receive compensation if the cats kill any of their livestock, Hilton-Taylor said.

Since 2010, more than 400 Iberian lynx have been reintroduced to parts of Portugal and Spain, and now they occupy at least 3,320 square kilometers, an increase from 449 square kilometers in 2005.

“We have to consider every single thing before releasing a lynx, and every four years or so we revise the protocols,” said Ramón Pérez de Ayala, the World Wildlife Fund’s Spain species project manager. WWF is one of the NGOs involved in the project.

While the latest Red List update offers hope for other species in the same situation, the lynx isn’t out of danger just yet, says Hilton-Taylor.

The biggest uncertainty is what will happens to rabbits, an animal vulnerable to virus outbreaks, as well as other diseases that could be transmitted by domestic animals.

“We also worried about issues with climate change, how the habitat will respond to climate change, especially the increasing impact of fires, as we’ve seen in the Mediterranean in the last year or two,” said Hilton-Taylor.