- “Jewish chaplains’ houses targeted in ‘frightening’ campaign on two university campuses” – Jewish chaplains’ houses are being targeted in a “frightening” campaign, reports the Telegraph.
- “Labour MP Andy McDonald suspended over ‘between the river and the sea’ speech” – Sir Keir Starmer has suspended the whip of an MP who made reference to the controversial “from the river to the sea” chant at a pro-Palestine rally, according to the Telegraph.
- “Starmer must confront Labour’s Islamist problem” – Those making common cause with Hamas are the terrorists’ useful idiots, or worse, says Charles Moore in the Telegraph.
- “Inside the gleaming developments that made Hamas a one billion dollar terror group” – The Telegraph reports that high-value assets in Turkey are said to be a part of a secret global investment portfolio for Hamas.
- “German-Israeli Shani Louk, seen paraded by terrorists in Gaza, confirmed dead” – The remains of a German woman snatched from a music festival by Hamas have been discovered, with Israel’s President suggesting she was beheaded, reports the Times of Israel.
- “Fury as Met Police officers pull down posters of kidnapped children” – The Campaign Against Antisemitism has accused the Met of a “double standard” by “turning a blind eye to extremists”, yet pulling down the posters of kidnapped Israeli children in Edgware to avoid inflaming “community tensions”, says the Mail.
- “British society will pay a terrible price for indulging extremism” – We have imported hatreds and lost our common identity. Policy will have to be more muscular as a result, writes Nick Timothy in the Telegraph.
- “Jews feel abandoned by the British Left” – In the aftermath of the massacre, it is finally dawning on Jewish progressives that the Left doesn’t care for them at all, says Jake Wallis Simons in the Spectator.
- “The great betrayal” – The Left’s reaction to the massacre in Israel has many progressive Jews in the West rethinking their past activism, political affiliations and friendships, write Suzy Weiss and Francesca Block in the Free Press.
- “We must defend the right to hate” – Hamas apologists are entitled to free speech, too, says Wendy Kaminer in Spiked.
- “Chelsea Israeli fan club told Star of David banner cannot be displayed inside Stamford Bridge” – Chelsea fans have been prevented from displaying a banner that features the Star of David, with the club and the Premier League at odds over who is to blame for the decision that has been branded “antisemitic”, reports the Telegraph.
- “An adult on campus, finally” – In the U.S., Tulane University President Michael Fitts has schooled his mealymouthed peers in responding to a ‘Free Palestine’ protest-turned-riot, writes Nicole Gelinas in City Journal.
- “Why the Kremlin will fear Dagestan’s antisemitic mob” – Not only is the Russian Federation home to the largest Muslim population in Europe, accounting for perhaps 10% of its total population, but it’s growing, says Mark Galeotti in the Spectator.
- “What happens when there aren’t enough Jews to lynch?” – There’s a dearth of Jews in Dagestan, so the antisemites who live there have faced a supply-demand issue in recent days, writes Avital Chizhik-Goldschmidt in the Free Press.
- “Humza Yousaf admits SNP ministers encouraged to delete WhatsApps” – The Scottish First Minister has revealed there was a “social media messaging policy” that required Scottish Government figures to “routinely delete” WhatsApp messages, reports the Mail.
- “U.K.’s top civil servant said Boris Johnson ‘cannot lead’ as Covid pandemic raged, WhatsApps show” – Boris Johnson was described as “creating chaos and undermining everyone” by key aides in WhatsApp messages shown to the Covid Inquiry, says Politico.
- “Chris Whitty called Sunak’s flagship restaurant scheme ‘Eat Out to Help Out the virus’” – Rishi Sunak’s scheme to save restaurants from ruin during Covid was thought by the Chief Medical Officer to be contributing to the spread of Covid, reports the Telegraph.
- “The damning Covid Inquiry testimony of Martin Reynolds” – The appearance at the Covid Inquiry of Martin Reynolds has been a real eye-opener in some rather unexpected ways, writes Jawad Iqbal in the Spectator.
- “Dominic Cummings’s Barnard Castle trip ‘clearly against the rules’, said Patrick Vallance” – The Covid Inquiry revealed that No10 pressured Boris Johnson’s top scientific advisers to join a press conference following Dominic Cummings’s lockdown-breaking trip to Barnard Castle, says the Telegraph.
- “Covid Inquiry is biased against lockdown sceptics, claim scientists” – The Telegraph reports that Oxford academics Prof. Carl Heneghan and Dr. Tom Jefferson have both accused Baroness Hallett of dismissing evidence.
- “Kids less likely to spread Covid in daycare than at home: Study” – A new study disputes the widely-held belief that childcare centres are primary sources of COVID-19 transmission, says the Epoch Times.
- “Worldwide Covid mortality patterns” – PANDA investigates the trends in Covid mortality using the data from Canada and around the world. Does it point to a deadly pandemic?
- “Genetically modified organons” – On Substack, Dr. Ah Kahn Syed discusses recent Senate Estimates hearings in Australia, raising questions about the testing and classification of mRNA vaccines.
- “Trans fat to be banned: What this means for your health” – The Epoch Times reports on the impending ban on trans fats in the U.S. food supply.
- “Public services are in doom loop of decline and worse than pre-Covid, report warns” – A report by experts has found that many parts of the state have deteriorated dramatically since the Tories came to power in 2010, according to the Telegraph.
- “U.S. plans nuclear bomb 24 times more powerful than Hiroshima” – The Pentagon has announced plans for a new nuclear bomb 24 times as powerful as the one dropped on Hiroshima in 1945, reports the Mail.
- “Watch: Met Police take 40 minutes to remove Just Stop Oil activists from Parliament Square” – Police took around 40 minutes to remove dozens of Just Stop Oil activists off the road in Central London, despite outnumbering them, according to the Telegraph.
- “Just Stop Oil clowns who sparked chaos in M25 demo are spared jail” – Just Stop Oil activists, who caused “massive disruption” on the M25 in “deliberate defiance” of an injunction, have been spared jail by a High Court judge, reports the Mail.
- “Hurrah for new North Sea oil licences!” – In CapX, Andy Mayer celebrates the Government’s approval of 27 new oil drilling licences in the North Sea.
- “EV sceptic Toyota Chairman says people are ‘finally’ waking up to reality of electric vehicles” – Toyota Chairman Akio Toyoda has stated that declining demand for electric vehicles signals a changing perspective on their role in combating carbon emissions, reports ZeroHedge.
- “Cheap electric cars are still out of reach” – The West needs to pick between a rapid Net Zero transition and its decoupling from China, says Andrew Orlowski in the Telegraph.
- “U.S. think tank says ‘true cost’ of EVs after subsides equates to $6.32 per litre” – Despite a common perception that EVs are cheaper to own and operate than their internal combustion counterparts, a Texas think tank says the true cost is the equivalent of USD$17.33 per gallon, reports the Western Standard.
- “Australia warns ferries about EVs” – Australia’s Maritime Safety Authority has issued a domestic commercial vessel safety alert on the risks of ferrying battery powered cars, says WUWT.
- “Britain, a goner with the wind” – The dash for wind energy is a generational folly that will see the nation’s economic future sacrificed on the altar of Net Zero, predicts Barry Norris in the Critic.
- “Why consent is key to a just transition to Net Zero” – We need to bring the whole of society along on the journey to Net Zero, says Jeremy Apfel in CapX.
- “Why fossil fuels are here to stay” – Geopolitical conflict has exposed Net Zero as a fantasy, writes Ralph Schoellhammer in Spiked.
- “The emotional dysregulation behind progressive authoritarianism” – J.D. Haltigan joins the Public podcast to discuss the vulnerable narcissism of the radical Left.
- “Where is the Left today?” – Identity politics has triggered an identity crisis, writes Richard Bourke in UnHerd.
- “‘The Left doesn’t mean what it says’” – On SpectatorTV, Oxford University’s Nigel Biggar says a new progressivism has emerged, which is far more cynically-motivated than the old kind.
- “Libraries are being destroyed from within” – The public does not need protection from ‘problematic’ texts, writes Frank Furedi in Spiked.
- “After academic freedom” – When fields of study surrender to ideological fads, they lose their right to govern themselves, argues Jonathan Winslow in City Journal.
- “The rise of the underground free speech groups” – In the Spectator, Melanie Notkin explores the evolving feminist perspectives on justice and free speech.
- “Why are feminists like me being labelled ‘far Right’?” – In the Spectator, Joanna Williams shares her ordeal with censorship and free speech suppression regarding gender and sex-based rights in Canada.
- “BBC hails Roman emperor as ‘black Briton’ – even though he wasn’t black” – A Roman emperor who appears on numerous lists of “black Britons” was not black, reports the Telegraph.
- “Jacob Rees-Mogg blasts woke MI5 over ‘institutional racism against white people’” – On GB News, Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg has said that “MI5 is institutionally, publicly racist against white people”, following the news that only ethnic minorities can apply for its summer internships.
- “BBC presenter warns against science being ‘just done by European white guys’” – The presenter of The Sky At Night has warned that science being “all just done by European white guys” may lead to a “blinkered view of the world”, reports the Telegraph.
- “The myth of LGBT conversion therapy” – There’s no credible evidence that Britons face torture for being gay or trans, writes Malcolm Clark in Spiked.
- “‘Gender-affirming care is dangerous. I know because I helped pioneer it’” – In the Free Press, Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala describes her increasing worries about the gender-affirming treatment she approved for vulnerable patients, and her decision to speak out.
- “Luis Rubiales gets three-year football ban for kissing Jenni Hermoso” – Luis Rubiales has been banned from football for three years for kissing Spain forward Jenni Hermoso after the Women’s World Cup final, reports the Telegraph.
- “The AI fraudsters are coming – we need to act now” – The FBI is warning that AI could be used to create ‘deepfakes’ to exploit people’s trust, writes Richard Hyde in CapX.
- “Chief Covid lockdown architect Neil Ferguson denies ever calling for a lockdown” – On X, Michael P. Senger has posted a video of Neil Ferguson being grilled in the Covid Inquiry.
If you have any tips for inclusion in the round-up, email us here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
But there’s certainly no need to worry that programmable digital currencies will be used for social control. Just a conspiracy theory, folks.
https://www.gbnews.com/cash if you haven’t signed it already.
If that carries on, £50 notes might be in demand. Organised social groups with cash in hand, no invoices etc won’t be popular with the Treasury.
Of course cash is the solution and the last lifeline to some semblance of freedom.
Which is why we can be sure all sorts of legislation is in the works to limit and ultimately eradicate its use.
It will come disguised as something that no-one can argue against, like the anti-corruption billl or the financial integrity bill or some other Orwellian term.
We are going to have to fight extremely hard to keep out right to use cash.
An enlightened government (ha! ha!) would boost our sagging economy by making all cash transactions non-declarable for tax purposes. A thriving black economy would provide the roots for the overall economy to grow (on the basis that cash eventually finds its way back into the bank, at which point it becomes taxable – but meantime the quantity of released, entrepreneurial energy would be tidal).
Financial institutions destroying more of their business and nobody thinks this is odd? Just woke overzealousness?
Not very likely.
Nudge, nudge, nudge.
Here comes the Central Bank Digital Currency in all it’s gory Chinese-style social credit scoring glory.
Slowly but inexorably we will all become prisoners of a digital panopticon.
Our every thought, word and deed monitored for ‘wrong-think’ by an unelected bureaucracy of Common Purpose graduates.
Orwell would have rejected this plan as being too dystopian, too depressing, too hopeless.
I actively deplore hunting purely from the animal cruelty perspective.
That said, I often wonder why hardly anyone seems to get upset about the huge increase in the number of animals that suffer horrific injury and death in the name of progressing medical research especially now with mRNA/vaccines. Lots of bigpharma even grow their own literally/genetically.speaking.
How many miracle cures have actually arisen from this “essential research” – especially set against the actual harm the animal tested product actually cause (see the criminal fines paid by bigpharma in that regard.
Anyway, back to the article. It’s deplorable that any bank should have this sort of power – because surely only the Government should have this sort of abilty (sarc).
Cash rules and if we lose it, it’s welcome to a dystopian future.
”You took the words right out of my mouth..” 100% concur, well said and bravo, Sforzesca!
I’m not accusing any individual hunt of anything, however some hunts are using trail hunting as a cover for continuing to hunt foxes illegally. In this case they should be treated the same as any other criminal organisation and have their assets frozen or cut off, and I’m just talking about financial assets.
In my experience all hunts use the trail hunt loophole as cover. It’s amazing how many hounds just happen to lose the trail and well, unfortunately, end up hunting a fox instead.
If anyone happens to think the fox doesn’t suffer, they ought to be there at a “kill” in order to see and hear how humanely the dogs tear the fox to bits. Not that I blame the hounds though. Some human beings actually enjoy it…
And another niceity is the blocking of and interfing with badger sets by the brave terriermen lest the fox go to ground. Completely illegal also.
That may be so, but if it is a loophole or actually illegal then that should be put right through the normal channels. Its nothing to do with the banks or their card payment providers
“I actively deplore hunting purely from the animal cruelty perspective.”
Ever seen a pregnant ewe after a fox has attacked it, or a chicken run after a fox has got in?
Psst … don’t tell these guy we’re animal predators with an instinct to hunt, too. He very likely doesn’t want to know that.
We have all sorts of instincts left over from our evolutionary past, e.g. rape and racism (or at least hatred of people who aren’t part of a small social group) have a lot of evolutionary advantages. The vast majority of people have managed to overcome these instincts and society is so much better as a result. Most of us have also overcome the natural instinct to hunt, shame not everyone can.
Hunting with dogs is completely different to controlling foxes humanely e.g. by shooting. Foxes attacking livestock are simply following their instincts and have no concept of morality or right and wrong. Surely a big part of what makes us different from animals is our sense of right and wrong and our ability to overcome our base instincts.
Would sooner subscribe to the Beano than the DT so I can’t read the link to find out who the financial company in question relates to. Does anyone know?
DS and Telegraph both identify the company as being called SumUp. They’re described as a card reader provider, my response would be “Who, never heard of them”.
Looking at their website they seem to be one of the many companies that have set up in recent years using mobile phone technology to connect a simple card reader to the banks by way of an app. The only difference I can see is they might be a bit cheaper than others.
So same as a Zettle (now owned by Toby’s favorite organisation, PayPal).
For hunts, cash is best, surely?
If fortune-telling is also prohibited business, when are we going to hear about Neil Ferguson’s debanking?
Haha.. that made me chuckle..
This is significantly different from the Farage case. Sumup are withdrawing their services because they would be supporting an activity they disapprove of and there are plenty of alternatives. This is much closer to the woman who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay marriage because she disapproved of it (and I think that was reasonable even though I have no problem with gay marriage).
Coutts disapproved of Farage. Same thing.
This is significantly different from the Farage case. Sumup are withdrawing their services because they would be supporting an activity they disapprove of
You’re misrepresenting this. Sumup is not a being and cannot disapprove of anything. This is another case of people employed by a publically-traded company abusing their accidental position of power (which is based on handling lots of other people’s money) to harm some other people because these probably engage in activities which are not compatible with the political program of the US democrats. And they’re absuing it to the financial detriment of the business they’re working for.
There are also no workable alternatives to a financial services provider which choses to stop providing this service to someone without advance notice in the middle of a fund-raising event.
You are comparing apples and oranges. individuals, like bakers, have personal feelings and attitudes. A company is not an individual.
Company = The Members In Company = those who own the company stock = shareholders.
A company is not a person except for legal reasons and therefore it or ‘they’ cannot approve of/disprove of anything. Technically all of the shareholders could at a general meeting by passing a resolution to that effect.
Instead we have managers making decisions based on their personal prejudices, rather than what enhances shareholder value, in breach of their fiduciary duty. There is a strong case for shareholders to start suing these idiots.
Hang on though, SumUp isn’t a bank, it’s a financial service. Surely private companies are allowed to deny services to whoever they want? De-banking for political reasons is clearly dangerous and appalling, but is that what this is…?
Sumup is one of a number of payment providers. Just at Natwest if one of a number of banks. If you’re a trader or any kind of organisation and none of the digital payment providers will do business with you, you cannot take card payments and you are screwed.
Hang on though, SumUp isn’t a bank, it’s a financial service. Surely private companies are allowed to deny services to whoever they want?
Let’s use a contrived example to illustrate this: Assume there’s an actual private enterprise (not the case in the real example) and it’s a plumbing service. Some customer arranges for an appointing to have a leaking pipe fixed. The plumber who’s the owner of the business shows up and does half of the job, ie, takes everything apart. Then, he suddenly notices that his customers owns a book by Jane Austen, an author he absolutely deplores. Therefore, he declares “I’ll now deny service to you because I hate Jane Austen!” and leaves on the spot. The next day, a bill for the work he did before chosing to deny service arrives.
Do you think that’s an acceptable way to conduct business? Or that it should be an acceptable way do conduct business?
Are they allowed to deny services based on race, sexual orientation, sex? Companies are regulated in a number of ways. And… before we get into ‘Rights’, the Common Law principle as one may not enjoy his/her Rights at the expense of another’s. Under Common Law, Rights are passive. Nobody has a Right to demand a service, but nobody has a Right to deny it if it deprives them of their right to go about their legitimate activities.
There is also the law of contract. By offering a service on certain terms and conditions which are excepted by the other party, and the transaction takes place, there is a contract. Exclusion clauses in Co tracts have to be ‘reasonable’ or cannot be upheld in Court.
I think there needs to be some legal action in these matters.
Whatever services these companies supply, finance, paint or coffee, previous causes for access restriction was for proven criminal activities and disruptive behaviour, which has now been replaced with not being in the same group of thought. A Stonewall banner published recently says it all. “Acceptance without exception” total submission to their theme is the ultimate aim, you have no right to freedoms of action or thought or to object, only to capitulate. That is to where we are sleep walking.
The most sensible way to deal with this issue is for those Hunts affected to go on the attack. They should issue statements declaring that they will NOT be accepting card payments and they are CASH only.
If banking services are subsequently withdrawn they have the bank bang to rights, the card provider has lost business and as a Brucie Bonus gained much negative publicity and the Hunt can polish its halo.
Win, win chicken dinner as the kids say. Or something like that.
That’s a nice idea. But it’s not really practical until UK businesses are legally required to accept legal tender (including £50 notes, BTW), which they are not. There are even businesses who refuse to accept cash payments in Reading and in London, you’ll have serious trouble finding some which accept it.
And… people want to pay in cash. I don’t.
The last cashless payment I made voluntarily went this way: I was at the counter in Sainsburys Broad Street (Reading) and had just packed all of my stuff into my backpack. I put my card in, entered the PIN and waited for “Approved. Remove Card.” to appear. I removed the card, grabbed by backpack and wanted to leave when the counterstuff person stopped me: “The payment hasn’t gone through! You removed the card to early!” (always blame the customer, part I) I protested that I didn’t but this obviously didn’t help. Then, I retried this a couple of times and the payment was rejected every time. As I knew I had £30 on the account, I then said “Ok, I’ll go to the cash machine to get £30 to pay my stuff” but the cash machine wouldn’t give me any money, either. Headscratching … I then came to conclusion that I must have misremembered my balance. I left the full backpack at the store, ran home (in summer) and checked my bank account — £30 had been debited from it at the time of the original transaction. No wonder it was empty now! I transferred enough money from my savings account to my current account, ran back to store, asked for the manager to come and demanded an explanation of this mystery. Instead, he started ranting loudly about my card being somehow bad (always blame the customer, part II) and that I’d need to pay all my things again (But make sure to use a different card this time!! — always blame the customer, part III). I ignored the ranting moron, put be card in, entered the pin again, waited for … and removed my card and this time, it worked.
Back at home, I contacted the bank about this. The answer I got was the Sainsburies computer had caused my bank account to be debited but then, refused to accept the payment. Hence, it went into a special account where it – unless claimed by the Sainsburys computer again – would remain for two weeks and then, I’d get it back (which I did).
I can perfectly do without adventures of this kind when shopping for groceries and hence, since then, I (again) always pay with cash.
Those people who reject cash payments are taking the rest of us to a digital hell.
I look forward to reading the list of “worst offenders” Nigel Farage is compiling with regard to financial institutions who are playing politics with their customers instead of serving them. I see also a huge commercial opportunity opening up for those financial service providers who actually want to run a business and make profit by providing customers with good services instead of acting as would-be tin-pot dictators trying to shape society through discrimination and persecution. This could be the banking sectors bud-light moment.
Stop Central Bank Digital Currencies
Just a thought about the Farage/Coutts dossier. He exercised his right to access it, and then published its content, also his right. But in so doing, under current and intended legislation, does the content of that dossier, now in the public domain, constitute a hate crime against him?