Allah's Willing Executioners

A transgender sex offender is now being held at a women’s prison in Maine while serving a 40-year sentence for the repeated sexual assault of a young girl. Nathan “Natasha” Venable was referred to as a “woman” by news outlets who covered his conviction, with none giving any indication he was male.

Venable has a lengthy sexual offense record dating back to 2007, when he was convicted of possessing 32,000 still images and 763 videos of child sexual abuse while serving in the US Army. Venable was sentenced to 5 months in prison, ordered to a lifetime registration on the state’s sex offender registry, and was designated a sexual predator. But following his release, he left Illinois and began living in different states.

In Washington, he was charged with failing to register as a sex offender, but appears to have left the state prior to being arrested. Venable eventually settled in Maine.

Local news reports from the time of his arrest indicate there were two young victims, but one case was never prosecuted. The second victim appears to have moved to Maine with Venable and her mother, though their exact relationship is unknown.

Venable began sexually abusing the victim when she was 10 years old while the two lived in close proximity in another state. After moving to Maine, the abuse continued on an “almost daily basis,” according to Central Maine, which referred to Venable as a “woman” throughout their coverage.

The child eventually confided in her mother about her abuse in 2022, prompting law enforcement to get involved. The mother then confronted Venable in a phone call she recorded and gave to police as evidence. In the call, Venable claimed he did not remember sexually assaulting the child.

While investigating Venable, police also found a trove of child sexual abuse material on his devices, almost all of which depicted the victim.

Venable was ultimately charged with 22 counts related to the sexual abuse of the young girl, and an additional 14 counts of possession of sexually explicit materials.

During his trial, Venable’s lawyer attempted to mitigate his crimes by citing his mental health and claiming that he genuinely did not remember repeatedly sexually abusing his victim over the course of three years.

His lawyer also referenced his military service, noting he had an “outstanding record” and had won numerous commendations prior to being arrested for possessing child sexual abuse material.

Venable ultimately pleaded guilty, and Superior Court Justice Michaela Murphy sentenced him to 30 years in prison on charges of gross sexual assault of a child, and another 10 years on charges of sexual exploitation of a minor. Venable is currently expected to be released in 2060.

At the time of his conviction, Venable was already identifying as a “woman” and was referred to by feminine pronouns by media outlets covering his trial.

Local news outlet Central Maine referred to Venable as a “Monmouth woman,” and did not mention his transgender identity a single time in their coverage, leading readers to believe he was female.

On March 6, women’s rights advocate and journalist Jennifer Gingrich reported that a female inmate had informed her that Venable was being held at the Maine Correctional Center for women.

One of the inmates in the women's prison that we didn't even know about is Natasha Venable, who is doing 40 years for gross sexual assault on multiple children.

We never even heard about him because Maine media only reported that a "woman" had been arrested. @SteveRob… pic.twitter.com/81MHatXAuV

— ♀️Jennifer Gingrich ✡️ (@fem_mb) March 6, 2026

According to his profile on the Maine Department of Corrections website, Venable is classified as a “female” inmate.

Venable is not the only dangerous male inmate being housed at the women’s prison in Maine.

Andrew “Andrea” Balcer is also at the facility, where he is serving a 40-year sentence for murdering his parents and their dog.

Balcer was just one month shy of his eighteenth birthday when he murdered his mother, father, and family dog on Halloween night in 2016. According to reports at the time, Balcer had woken his mother and told her that he was having trouble sleeping. Alice Balcer asked her son if he was having a rough night and embraced him and, while she was attempting to soothe him, he stabbed her in the back nine times, killing her.

Balcer went on to murder his father, Antonio, and their pet chihuahua, Lily. The only member of the family Balcer spared was his older brother, whom he allowed to flee after telling him “it’s not your day.”

Balcer reportedly laughed while describing his crimes to a police officer, with the young man calling 911 himself to confess his crimes. 

A violent male inmate convicted of slaughtering his family, claiming they did not support his gender identity, has been quietly marked as "female" in the Maine prison system.

Andrew Balcer has also been moved to a facility that houses women.https://t.co/yDuXDnZ7of

— REDUXX (@reduxx) December 26, 2022

“I snapped. I took my little Ka-Bar [military combat knife] there and I drove it straight into my mother’s back,” Balcer said. “My father came up because he heard her screams and I stabbed the fuck out of him. Oh, I killed the dog, too. It was barking.”

During the years-long court proceedings, Balcer’s attorneys cited his family’s lack of support for his gender transition as a motive for the crime. But just days before he was scheduled to plead guilty, Balcer abruptly began accusing his mother and father of physical and sexual abuse. Disturbingly, Balcer claimed his mother had molested him when he was between the ages of 14 and 16. 

The shocking allegations were vehemently denied by Balcer’s older brother, who rejected the entire attempted narrative.

Balcer was recently highlighted in a sympathetic article on trans inmates by Uncloseted Media, which framed him as being a victim of Trump-era changes to federal inmate housing guidelines which restricts the transfer of males to women’s federal prisons.

Speaking to Uncloseted Media, Balcer complained about how he was “bullied” by US Attorney General Pam Bondi, who described him as a “giant, 6-foot-1, 245-pound guy.” Balcer also says some women at his facility began to target him with transphobic rhetoric he claims was inspired by Bondi. 

“The cultural backlash has been astounding,” Balcer told Uncloseted Media. “And it’s not that I don’t understand these women — I 100% understand their position … But they can’t take out their anger on the people who quite frankly deserve it, [so] they take out their anger on the people that are the indirect cause of this.”

Though the federal government can’t influence housing policies in state prisons, in April of 2025, the Trump administration pulled $1.4 million in federal funds from Maine’s Department of Corrections for continuing to allow male inmates to be housed in women’s prisons.

reduxx

Another week, another ‘Randy Andy’ scandal.

By now, having lost all his British royal perks, titles, and honors, having been arrested, currently under investigation, one could imagine that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, exiled in a Sandringham farm, couldn’t care less if yet another compromising picture of him has been released by the US DOJ.

But, in fact, it’s the compounding effect this has on his investigation, and also the consequences being faced by his daughters.

The undated images, small and low resolution, are among the 180,000 photographs released by the DOJ under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

They’re more of a blur, these new photos, but they keep the spotlight on Andrew after a slew of compromising photos and documents destroyed whatever was left of his life.

In the meantime, people around Andrew are also suffering grave reputational damage.

His daughter, Princess Eugenie, had to resign from her role in an anti-slavery charity, as the relentless fallout from the Epstein documents continues.

Page Six reported:

“[She] served for seven years as a patron of Anti-Slavery International.

On Sunday, the princess, 35, stepped away from her role at the world’s oldest human rights organization, the Observer reported.

The charity said in a statement to the outlet, ‘After seven years, our patronage from HRH Princess Eugenie of York has come to an end. We thank the Princess very much for her support for Anti-Slavery International. We hope that she continues to work to end slavery for good and deliver freedom for everyone’.”

thegatewaypundit

In a recent interview with Hollywood actor and stuntman Steve-O, podcaster Joe Rogan delivered a masterclass in de-radicalization. Steve-O asserted, clearly thinking that Rogan would agree with him, that trans-identifying people are persecuted in the United States. In only five minutes, Rogan destroyed every one of his arguments with counter-evidence – and a stunned Steve-O appeared to change his mind.

The conversation is worth summarizing because it highlights how gender ideology took hold among the creative elites: not because they were persuaded by facts but because they were told to believe it, and they accepted it. But when facing minimal pushback, Steve-O’s adherence to gender ideology promptly collapsed.

“I spoke with (a trans-identifying person who) described to me a level of oppression that genuinely broke my heart,” Steve-O told Rogan. “They said, ‘Hey, let me tell you like I am not allowed to use the bathroom at my own place of work.’”

“That’s not true,” Rogan interrupted. “They’re just not allowed to use the bathroom if it doesn’t align with their biological sex.”

Steve-O appeared genuinely taken aback – gender ideology is sacrosanct in Hollywood, but Rogan clearly wasn’t buying it. Steve-O wasn’t expecting pushback; he was expecting an affirming conversation with solemn tsk-tsks and nods from the host.

“Listen, I genuinely think there’s people that feel like they are the in the wrong biological sex,” Rogan said. “Sure. Right. But there’s also people that are perverts and they have a thing called auto gynephilia … they get a turn-on by pretending to be a woman.”

They get excited by it and they want to be around women and they’re creeps. And so you give them a Willy Wonka golden ticket to go into the women’s locker, women’s bathroom and stare at women and pretend you’re a woman when you’re just a crazy man and you’re actually into women.

Steve-O attempted to push back. “I, I don’t doubt that’s real. And I know that it’s a super complex, nuanced thing and — ”

Rogan interrupted again: “Yeah, but here’s what’s not complex. What (are) your chromosomes, right? OK, this is the same thing for competing. All these mental gymnastics that seemingly intelligent people do to justify biological males competing with females. It’s the same thing. It’s the same thing, right?”

“And especially speaking as a man who has daughters, like, there are creeps,” he continued. “And if you give a creep, and I’m not saying all trans people are creeps, but a lot of these people that are in trouble for going into women’s bathrooms dressed as a woman with a beard … are just that. They’re creeps. They’re crazy men.”

“This is the problem. When you allow perverts to have this hall pass to go into women’s locker rooms and bathrooms, so you can’t say you’re not allowed to use the bathroom where you work,” Rogan added. “That’s not true. You’re just not allowed to use the women’s room where other women are in there because you’re not a woman. And I know you wish you were a woman or whatever’s going on. But you’re not.”

Steve-O didn’t know what hit him. “You make a very, very good point,” he admitted.

“Talk to most women about this,” Rogan urged him. “Unless they’re insanely captured by this woke ideology where they can’t see reality and the fact that perverts are still a real thing.” He noted that there are 47 biological males in California women’s prisons, and that in Canada, a trans-identifying male had the government fund his “boob job while he was in jail for being a sex offender.” All these men have to do, Rogan pointed out, is to identify as women.

“No operation, no nothing,” the podcast host said. “Identify. That is bonkers. And do you think they’re giving them estrogen when they get in prison? Do they give hormone replacement therapy to people in prison? I don’t know. But even then, it’s still a man with estrogen … you can’t escape your chromosomes.”

“Understood,” Steve-O said. “Understood. My experience was that I didn’t get any of this, like, you know, sense that this was a creepy pervert.”

“Right. Right. But it’s still a man,” Rogan interjected.

“I heard what they had to say about, you know, politicians trying to put him in internment camps,” Steve-O continued.

“Who’s doing that?” Rogan demanded. “There’s no movement to try to put transgender people in internment camps.” And just like that, Steve-O’s narrative fell apart. Rogan then pointed out that there is a surge in trans-identifying shooters over the past several years.

“You know why? Because they’re giving them psych medications,” Rogan said. “They’re giving them a bunch of crazy hormones. And a lot of them probably have mental struggles already and they’re ostracized from society and fill in the blank. And then they’re empowered by thinking that, you know, that the world has done something bad to them and that there’s a genocide against trans people and they attack JK Rowling and they attack all these people.”

“It’s nuts, man,” he concluded. “And it’s like either you go by biology or you do not. Either you go by XY chromosome or then you’re in this weird gray area where someone could just tell you they’re a woman and that’s how you get men in women’s prisons.”

Steve-O, desperate to end this portion of the conversation, caved. “Yeah, alright,” he said. “You’ve convinced me.”

And that was all it took. One guy, pushing back against false narratives – and it all fell apart. Most major media figures do not genuinely believe that a man can become a woman by saying so. Most of them will not say so because they are afraid. When this is over, they will announce that they always had doubts. But if more were willing to do what Rogan is doing right now, the transgender movement’s hold on the elite class could be broken overnight.

lifesitenews

The mask has not just slipped; the high-voltage exposure of leaked diplomatic cables and thousands of internal emails has vaporized it. The Iran Experts Initiative (IEI) stands exposed as a Tehran-directed influence network, a psychological strike force embedded within the very heart of Western decision-making. This is no academic debate. This is a documented, top-down subversion operation launched by the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS) – a known front for the regime’s intelligence and propaganda apparatus.

This cell was never about “cultural exchange”; it was a cold-blooded tactical maneuver designed to inject the Islamic Republic’s talking points directly into the veins of the U.S. State Department and European foreign ministries. The Iranian Foreign Ministry physically bankrolled high-level strategy sessions at Vienna’s Palais Coburg, ensuring that the “independent analysts” appearing on Western television screens were reading from a script vetted by the Mullahs.

At the center of this web of deceit stand Trita Parsi and the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). For two decades, NIAC has masqueraded as a civil rights organization, yet its track record is one of relentless advocacy for the survival of the clerical regime. The evidence is judicial and absolute. In a landmark defamation case, a U.S. federal judge noted that Parsi’s work was “not inconsistent with the idea that he was first and foremost an advocate for the regime”. The court further sanctioned NIAC for a “disturbing pattern” of withholding evidence, including calendar entries that would have proven Parsi’s clandestine meetings with Iranian officials. This is the hallmark of an operative, not an advocate. Parsi didn’t just build a lobby; he built a bridge for the Mullahs to walk across and influence the highest levels of American power.

The network’s reach extended into the most sensitive corridors of the Pentagon and the State Department. Operatives such as Ariane Tabatabai and Ali Vaez used their positions at elite think tanks and government departments to advance narratives that prioritized Tehran’s stability over global security. Leaked emails reveal Tabatabai – while holding a high-level U.S. security clearance – actually checked in with Iranian officials before attending international conferences, asking for “advice” on her travel and talking points. These are the “friends” of the regime, as Saeed Khatibzadeh, a senior Iranian diplomat, explicitly called them in internal correspondence. They weren’t analyzing the regime; they were working for it.

The IEI playbook was a masterclass in manufactured perception. During past critical nuclear negotiations, these assets worked in lockstep to ensure the West negotiated a surrender, not a deal. They systematically omitted the regime’s initiation of violence, instead painting desperate, blood-soaked protesters as “unorganized” or “violent” to delegitimize the movement for freedom. They served as a media megaphone, poisoning the well of Western public opinion with the lie that the only alternative to appeasement was total war.

Even now, as the current administration moves to freeze funding for misguided “democracy promotion” programs that were often co-opted by this very network, the lobby fights back, weaponizing the media to protect their funding streams.

The human cost of this collusion is measured in blood. While these “experts” lobbied for sanctions relief from their comfortable offices at the Quincy Institute, the regime they protected has slaughtered at least 16,500 protesters (some reports claim many more). Every dollar of “relief” they secured funded the bullets that struck down Iranian youth. They remained silent as the regime upheld 10-year sentences for journalists like Reza Valizadeh for refusing to cooperate with IRGC intelligence. They ignored the cries of those being tortured in Evin Prison, focusing instead on the “nuance” of the Supreme Leader’s latest speech. This was not diplomacy; it is an endorsement of tyranny.

Inside Iran, the domestic ruin that meets the US and Israeli efforts to destroy nuclear and missile capabilities is absolute. The network protects a regime that fueled a cancer crisis with toxic gasoline and starved its own people through 60% inflation on basic staples. While Parsi and his cohorts dine in D.C., ordinary Iranians are searching for food in dumpsters because the regime prioritizes funding for its proxies over the survival of its citizens. The shadow lobby’s greatest crime is its role in prolonging this misery by providing the regime with the political cover it needs to avoid accountability.

The reckoning must be surgical and absolute. The era of “waste, fraud, and abuse” in Iran policy is over. U.S. Senators have already demanded immediate DOJ and FBI investigations into NIAC and its affiliates under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). There is no middle ground. The West must choose: support the millions of Iranians fighting for their freedom or continue to host the regime’s mouthpieces. Anyone found to have coordinated with the IEI should be stripped of their security clearances and removed from government advisory roles immediately.

This is a national security emergency. The shadow lobby’s attempt to hijack Western foreign policy to serve the interests of a genocidal theocracy is a betrayal of the highest order. We must launch an immediate, top-to-bottom audit of every dollar flowing to these organizations. The “politicized and misguided spending” that has sustained these shadow programs must be permanently ended.

The Trojan Horse has been unmasked, and it is time to burn it to the ground. Destroying the missiles, launchers and nuclear sites is not enough. The Iranian people are shouting for freedom; the West must not listen to the whispers of their oppressors in Washington.

israelnationalnews

For years, Brussels has repeated the same promise: Europe needs a deep reform of its migration policy. The 2015 crisis exposed a system incapable of managing large inflows, and since then, pressure on the EU’s external borders has continued to grow.

The new Pact on Migration and Asylum was born precisely with that declared ambition: to reorganize the system, strengthen control, and distribute responsibilities more effectively among Member States.

However, when one looks at the actual content of the reform and, above all, its practical implications, the impression is quite different. The pact introduces administrative changes, redefines certain procedures, and reorganizes some responsibilities, but the foundations of the model remain largely untouched.

In many respects, rather than a genuine transformation, the result resembles an old political formula: changing the narrative so that the system continues functioning exactly as before. Gatopardism.

Controls that should have existed from the beginning

One of the points Brussels presents as progress is the introduction of faster border procedures. In theory, these will make it easier to determine who has the right to apply for asylum and who should be returned.

The idea sounds reasonable. The problem is that this kind of control does not represent a radical innovation. In reality, these are measures that many governments have been demanding for years and that should have been part of the system from the beginning.

For too long, Europe has operated with a model in which thousands of people entered EU territory and remained there for long periods in a kind of administrative limbo.

Slow procedures, endless appeals and an overwhelmed system meant that many expulsion decisions were simply never carried out.

The new pact tries to speed up that machinery. But accelerating a system does not necessarily mean making it work better.

The main problem: returns

One of the weakest points of European migration policy remains the real capacity to return those who have no right to remain on the continent.

In theory, the system provides for expulsions. In practice, a large proportion of them never materialize. Returns almost always depend on the cooperation of countries of origin or transit. And that cooperation does not always arrive.

Official European statistics have shown the same pattern for years: a significant share of return orders is never executed. The result is a growing number of people who remain in Europe with an unresolved legal status.

The pact promises faster procedures. But it cannot force third countries to accept the return of their nationals. That is a political decision, and very often also a diplomatic one.

And even when there is political will, there is another obstacle: judges who have been ideologized for years to block any reform, as has been the case in Belgium or Italy.

External borders under constant pressure

Spain’s case illustrates the tensions within the system particularly well. The Atlantic route towards the Canary Islands has become one of the main entry points into Europe. In recent years, the number of arrivals has increased significantly, pushing the archipelago’s reception capacity to its limits.

Images of overcrowded centres or improvised camps have become a recurring scene. Each new wave of arrivals forces emergency solutions and reopens the debate over how migrants should be distributed within the country.

This outlet recently published a must-watch documentary on this issue to understand the hidden reality of the islands.

Beyond the technical details, the pact avoids addressing the real problem: what migration model Europe actually wants.

The reforms focus on procedures, burden-sharing mechanisms and administrative improvements. But the debate about the scale of immigration, its social impact or its long-term integration remains uncomfortable for many institutions.

europeanconservative

Jacob Rees-Mogg joins the New Culture Forum to discuss the state of modern Britain, the fragmentation of the right, his Christian faith, the Monarchy and the British constitution.

Fears of racism have prevented around 30 charities and community centres from being investigated amid alleged links to the Iranian regime, a new report has detailed.

Lord Walney alleges Iran uses the network of organisations to maintain its “influence and interests” in the UK while separately plotting attacks against critical Iranian media and the Jewish community.

Former government extremism advisor and Labour MP Lord Walney noted a network of over 30 religious institutions, including 10 charities – eight of which are currently being investigated by the Charity Commission, although this has been plagued by “systemic delays”, he says.

The Islamic Centre of England (ICE) is described as a “central node” in the network. Its recent director and secretary was appointed by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei himself and killed in an Israeli airstrike, it is claimed.

Iran’s Deputy Minister of Culture between 2000 and 2003, Aliasghar Ramezanpour, was interviewed by Lord Walney in the report and described ICE as a “kind of a headquarters that supervises all the network ([of charities in the UK)”.

Kast year, the Intelligence and Security Committee said ICE could provide Iranian intelligence agents “with a useful base from which to act”.

ICE also received a warning from the Charity Commission in 2020 after hosting a vigil for Qasem Soleimani, the IRGC commander who was killed by the US in 2020. They have been subject to a statutory inquiry since November 2022.

Sir William Shawcross, who chaired the Charity Commission between 2012 and 2018, said he encountered a “real nervousness about talking about suspicions of Muslim organisations,” adding: “There’s a widespread fear amongst police, amongst schools, the headmasters and others of being accused of being racist”.

The commission has “never had the resources it needs for any investigations, and certainly not for counter-terrorism or counter-extremism investigations”, the peer stated.

“(In 2018, upon leaving the commission) it was already clear that the Iranians were very, very active in Britain, both in charitable and non-charitable organisations,” Sir William noted.

Kasra Aarabi, Director of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Research at United Against Nuclear Iran, mirrored this view, saying: “I think this goes back to political will, and also unfortunately the fear of being labelled Islamophobic. The first thing that these people (Iranian charities) will allege is Islamophobia.”

ICE denied suggestions it acted as a headquarters for a supposed network and claimed the publication of what it described as inaccurate and inflammatory claims risks promoting religious hatred and causing harm.

A second charity, Dar Alhekma Trust, is also being looked at by the commission. Trustee Saeed Shehabi praised a commander of the IRGC and also claimed, after the October 7 attacks, that Palestinians “rose up and became the master of the situation”.

Mr Shehabi was a “long-standing peaceful campaigner”, the charity said.

The report also cited an incident in May 2024, when a man working at Dar Alhekma left an individual with serious spinal cord injuries after an altercation with an Iranian dissident.

A spokesman for the Charity Commission said: “As a civil regulator, we use the powers granted to us by Parliament to respond robustly to evidence of wrongdoing and make referrals to other agencies where appropriate, including where there is evidence of criminality.

“In light of this week’s developments in Iran we have been in direct contact with a number of the charities mentioned in this report to remind the trustees of their legal duties relating to any political activity, proactively warning them of the consequences of breaching charity law.

“However, it is not presently open to the commission to remove charitable status as a sanction, and in the absence of proscription of the IRGC the commission can only act where there is clear evidence of a breach of charity law.

“As the threat from extremism grows, we know our powers must keep pace. We are currently in welcome dialogue with the government to ensure our powers and our corresponding resources are fit for the present and the future.”

gbnews

President Donald Trump roasted Britain as a “once great ally” on Saturday as he continued to express displeasure with the left-wing Labour government in London over its initial refusal to grant the U.S. use of its bases for the conflict in Iran.

After severely damaging the so-called “special relationship” between the United Kingdom and the United States — while being shown up by France in terms of swift military deployments — Prime Minister Starmer’s government is said to be preparing to demonstrate a show of force, with reports on Saturday indicating that it is preparing to send aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales for possible deployment to the Middle East.

However, this has apparently failed to impress President Donald Trump, who openly mocked Starmer for his Johnny-come-lately stance to the conflict after having initially refused to allow the United States to use UK bases for operations in Iran.

“The United Kingdom, our once Great Ally, maybe the Greatest of them all, is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East. That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!” he added.

Former British Prime Minister Liz Truss agreed with Trump’s assessment, calling his comments “justified and damning.”

pic.twitter.com/0uvtbSAnms

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 7, 2026

While Starmer later backtracked on his initial opposition to granting the U.S. access to British military bases — although still limited to “defensive” actions — it has done little to repair his relationship with the American leader.

Earlier this week, speaking to London’s Daily Telegraph, President Trump said that he was “very disappointed” with Starmer over the move, which he noted may have been the first time in the history of UK-U.S. relations that a prime minister refused a military request from Washington.

Trump noted that Starmer — a former human rights lawyer — made the decision because he was “worried about the legality.”

The President suggested that the niceties of international law should not outweigh the duty to British citizens, many of whom have been “blown up” by terrorists backed by Iran.

President Trump further mocked Starmer during an Oval Office meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, saying of the UK leader: “This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with”.

Although Starmer had initially attempted to break with his left-wing party and cosy up to the Trump administration, ties took a turn for the worse over the move by Starmer to cede control of the strategically significant Chagos Islands to the China-aligned East African nation of Mauritius, following a ruling from the International Court of Justice at the United Nations.

Trump has described the move, which throws into question the fate of the UK-U.S. military base on the island of Diego Garcia, as a “blight” on the reputation of Britain, and accused Starmer of bowing to “wokeism”.

Trump ‘Very Disappointed’ in Starmer Blocking U.S. From Launching Iran Strikes From British Bases: Reporthttps://t.co/4OHKvPydcX

— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) March 2, 2026

breitbart

The ‘Beeb’ screwed up again – possibly on purpose.

For the leftist-Globalist bosses and crew at the British Broadcasting Company (BBC), it isn’t enough anymore to have highly biased reports filled with editorial content.

Now, they feel the need to go ahead and actually doctor speeches by people they loathe, trying to modify what they are saying, in maneuvers worthy of a George Orwell novel.

The ‘Beeb’ is already on the hook for billions, after deceptively editing a historic J6 speech by Donald J. Trump, as you can read in BBC IS MELTING: British State Broadcaster To Apologize for Doctored Editing of Trump J6 Speech, Under Fire for Its Pro-Hamas, Pro-Trans and Climate Change Biases.

Apparently, the BBC intelligentsia hasn’t learned a thing, so they went ahead and did it again.

Now, they are ‘plunged into a fresh impartiality row’ after altering a speech by US War Secretary Pete Hegseth regarding the military operations in Iran.

🚨BREAKING: THE BBC HAS BEEN CAUGHT DOCTORING FOOTAGE AGAIN 🇬🇧

They changed Pete Hegseth’s speech to make it look like he was talking bad about Iranian people, when in reality, he was talking about the ISLAMIC REGIME❗️

THE BBC ARE FAKE NEWS ⚠️

pic.twitter.com/kYM1z5rDz8

— BRITAIN IS BROKEN 🇬🇧 (@BROKENBRITAIN0) March 6, 2026

Daily Mail reported:

“In the broadcast aired to audiences within Iran, BBC Persian inaccurately translated the US Defense Secretary’s remarks, reporting that Washington intended to bring death to the Iranian ‘people’.

In reality, Mr. Hegseth had specified that the United States was targeting the Iranian ‘regime’.

The BBC, which carried Mr Hegseth’s Pentagon address live on Monday, translated the word ‘regime’ as ‘mardom’, the Persian word for ‘people’, before later issuing a correction.”

The Telegraph reported:

“BBC Persian, which broadcasts to audiences inside Iran, mistranslated remarks by the US secretary of defense, telling viewers Washington was bringing death to the Iranian ‘people’. In fact, Mr Hegseth had said the Iranian ‘regime’ was being targeted.

{…] The mistake was seized upon by pro-Israel media campaigners, who claimed that it cast doubt on the BBC’s impartiality. It also triggered a backlash on social media.

[…] The error [also] drew condemnation from Iranians online, who accused the BBC of conflating ordinary civilians with the brutality of the regime and altering the meaning of Mr. Hegseth’s speech. […] In his speech, Mr. Hegseth said: ‘It turns out the regime that chanted ‘death to America and death to Israel’ was gifted death from America and death from Israel. This is not a so-called regime-change war, but the regime sure did change and the world is better off for it’.”

thegatewaypundit

by Eric Utter 

The Daily Mail has reported that “Sixty-seven dog breeds could be banned in Britain if new breeding guidelines set by parliament become mandatory.”

It added that “The all-party parliamentary group (APPG) for animal welfare has launched a new tool to determine if a dog is healthy.”

This tool doesn’t concern itself with a dog’s actual health and eschews clues such as a shiny coat, general disposition and demeanor, healthy appetite, etc. No, these assessments/guidelines include “extreme” or “exaggerated attributes” such as “mottled coloration, excessive skin folds, bulging outward-turning eyes, drooping eyelids, under or overbite and a muzzle that interrupts breathing.” The assessment, currently voluntary, is reportedly expected to become law within five years, although those behind the new “tool” claim these reports are “misinformation.”

If mottled coloration, excessive skin folds and drooping eyelids are problematic, most humans in the U.K. would be banned, as well.

Beagles, dachshunds, Great Danes and St. Bernards are among breeds that would likely be targeted by the new guidance.

Well, “beagle” has “eagle” within it, and that is an American symbol most unwelcome in Keir Starmer’s Britain. Dachshund? German; equals Hitler. Great Dane? Fairly Decent Dane would be less ableist and less likely to offend those of lesser stature. St. Bernard? Carries unacceptable Christian overtones. Even on a purely DEI basis, these breeds are problematic!

In truth, the proposed new health tool is likely a response to the U.K.’s surging Muslim population, as Islamic law considers dogs dirty and unworthy. Much as it abhors alcohol. (It is no coincidence that many hundreds of British pubs, once iconic pillars of British communities, have closed in recent years.)

Maybe the APPG could send the people’s pooches to a Fauci facility … or ship them off to Canada to be disposed of via that nation’s all-encompassing Medical-Assistance-In-Dying program.

But what of other exaggerated attributes, such as British Parliamentarians’ own cravenness and spinelessness in pre-emptively surrendering to the surging population of Muslims at the cost of their fellow Englishman’s prosperity, safety and dignity?

But let’s not worry about rampant rape gangs or the prevalence of pedophilia when there is the existential problem of man’s best friend to deal with, APPG wankers! Even though many of us consider dogs to be our furry friends…or even family members.

“Who let the dogs out” in the U.K.?

The very same people who let the “undocumented immigrants” in.

And they want to get rid of Lassie.

americanthinker