Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Justin Gaethje defeated Ilia Topuria in their White House UFC cage match.
Further

White Trash Losers 'R Us

Oof, so many fails. An abject purge from the Kennedy Center, a tatty Iran deal, a brackish Reflecting Pool. And at the People's House, pay-per-view bloodsport rife with jingoism, fireworks, flyovers, honor guards for Nazi thugs, grift vast and brazen, the crass smear of an iconic woman in the name of "a permission structure made visible" emboldening "the worst people in the world." The result: "The cringiest collapse of a nation in real time."

For many appalled observers, the grotesque state of the Republic (if you can keep it) summoned the tawdry antics of President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho in Mike Judge's infamous Idiocracy - "Welcome to AOL Time Warner Taco Bell US Government Long Distance," "Welcome to Costco. I love you" - the portrait of a dystopian American future after "mankind became stupider at a frightening rate." His deranged, AR-15-wielding State of the Union: "I know shit's bad right now, with all the starvin', and the dust storms, and we're running outta french fries and burrito coverings. But I got a solution. We got this guy Not Sure, and he's so smart, he's gonna fix everything in a week."

And so to a pricey Iran "deal” maybe (or not) ending an inept illegal war that fails on all fronts - military, political, economic, moral - and strengthens Iran’s hand as a regional power. Where are we, asks retired Major General Paul Eaton after "a war with no plan, no strategy, no achievable objective, no definition of what victory even looked like, and no plan for day 2." His response: "Thirteen dead. Years of lost readiness. Higher prices in every American home. All to arrive back at the starting line, weaker than when we left it." Meanwhile, the cost of his fucking ballroom that nobody asked for has soared 50% to $600 million, more than half to be paid by us, not imaginary "generous American patriots."

In another weekend fail, symbolic but gratifying, hundreds of real patriots gathered - and thousands watched a livestream - to see the vile name stripped from the Kennedy Center after US District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled it illegal. Alas, the crowd waited all day and night in humid heat - bearing flags, "You're No JFK" signs, hope to see "a horrible scar" vanquished - only for Friday's midnight deadline to come and go as workers built endless scaffolding and Center lackeys filed last-ditch appeals. Rumors flew, chants grew - "TAKE IT DOWN," "Rest in Shame," "Tear down that wall," "More Cow Bell" - as drag queen Tara Hoot blew bubbles and Rep. Joyce Beatty declared, to cheers, "We cannot be silenced."

The approach of midnight brought breathless countdowns - "30 minutes!“ "Five minutes!" "No pressure - you’re doing great!” - then angry charges of "a cover-up in real time" when it passed. People sang This Land is Your Land, thunderstorms halted work (and extended the deadline), and when a miraculous double rainbow emerged, people huddled under awnings to sing God Bless America and give thanks: "And the angels sang...Mother Nature Understands The Assignment...Just think what She'll do when he leaves the White House...Well-played, universe." One worker in a lift could have quickly done the job; instead, 13 hours later, the final scaffolding went up - to hang a tarp, met with boos, to hide a snowflake's shame.

Around 4 a.m, the Center later told the judge, the 18 odious letters of “The Donald J. Trump and" had been removed. For the public, it's hard to tell: The tarp's still up. To Andrew Flanagan, it confirms "how deeply insecure & pathetic" is the guy who's usually a "big redaction fan" - for the Epstein files, Mueller report, Jan. 6 transcripts, any form of accountability. "Nothing says 'stable genius' like illegally slapping your name on a cultural landmark, then hiding your name getting ripped off behind a bedsheet like a toddler who broke a vase," he wrote, adding, "Sheet was probably stolen from a hotel." Still, the action offered a modest "preview of Independence Day," what one resident called "this little splash of hope in the rain."

Not so his vaunted, likely illegal, American-flag-blue do-over of the Lincoln Reflecting Pool: Because everything he touches dies or stinks, it has joined the Resistance by swiftly reverting to its previous brackish green. After the "expert builder" removed a state-of-the-art filtration system installed by Barack Hussein Obama, used a darker paint that draws heat and algae, boasted its"CLEAN, BEAUTIFUL WATER” would "SPARKLE magnificently...for 100 years," and insisted the rogue algae was just a “residual part of the normal startup process," the $1.5 million job that became a no-bid $14.2 million has in mere days proved an algae-beset bust. Now National Park workers are frantically dumping gallons of hydrogen peroxide into it. Is it great yet?

There was also Paige, the four-ton elephant bedecked with a "Unity Drives Victory" banner the Texas GOP brought into its annual convention in Houston, a promised "larger-than-life surprise" who abundantly peed at the feet of the faithful just as Greg Abbott finished his keynote speech - what Dems called a "perfect metaphor for the Texas Republican Party." While it's unclear how much Dear Leader is to blame for that fiasco, he's totally, shamelessly, smirkingly responsible for the simultaneous atrocity unfolding on the White House Lawn: An impossibly base, blood-spattered cage fight, "crass display of toxic hyper machismo," and "bar fight making millions for the Epstein class" that "flaunted the absolute worst of America."

UFC Freedom 250, the besmirching of a staid White House lawn long reserved for dignified welcomes to foreign leaders, careful displays of statesmanship and the occasional Easter egg roll, began in May with the construction of a massive, hulking, $60 million cage called "the Claw." For weeks, up to 900 workers from seven federal agencies, including DHS and FAA, labored on our dime to build a gaudy monstrosity for 14 mixed martial arts fighters to beat and pummel each other bloody - at a "House that has hosted Churchill, Mandela, the Apollo astronauts...(that) sits at the center of the constitutional republic a generation of Americans bled for in places whose names their grandchildren cannot pronounce."

Trump "sees everything and everyone in terms of dominance or submission," notes Robert Reich. Choosing to mark his fucking big boy birthday by wrapping it in the pretext of the country's 250th anniversary and planning what's been likened to a "human cockfighting" spectacle on the White House Lawn, Reich adds, is "seeking to project an America like the winner of a cage match" - cheap, crude, violent, and so brazenly tasteless that even Republicans who once freaked out at Michelle Obama's vegetable garden there joined the vast 84% of Americans who denounced the event. Implausibly, impressively, the damning consensus reached Fox News viewers. "Tacky as hell," declared one. "Trump is a white trash president."

He is also history's most corrupt president, so no surprise his "gift to Americans" proved, per a failed lawsuit, "a volcano of corruption" and a “private, commercial, corrupt use of our most sacred national monuments," with Trump at its greedy core. He invested heavily in UFC owner TKO; his World Liberty Financial crypto business, earning billions on paper, was an “official sponsor"; so was Truth Social - "Download Truth Social today!"- and TrumpCoins.com - "Limited quantities available now!" Melding corporate and political grift, fighters were "paid" crypto bonuses, ads and logos were everywhere, fights in a Bud-Light-adorned ring had to be watched with a subscription to Paramount Plus, sponsorships cost up to $1.5 million per person.

The flagrant profiteering and Hunger Games optics were so "tone-deaf to the struggles of the American people” even some UFC fighters objected. "I don’t give a fuck to fight in front of some fucking billionaires and rich people," said one; added middleweight champion Sean Strickland, "To go hang out with people on the Epstein list? I'm good, dog.” (He was reportedly banned for criticizing Israel and the Epstein cover-up; he turned up anyway that night and was later escorted out by security for causing "disorder.") All in all, in a "celebration of American strength and exceptionalism" featuring guys clearly not quite princes among men, it was less than surprising things regularly descended into cruder, meaner, more vicious territory.

Bantamweight Sean O’Malley, "a nasty little shit" in all red, white and blue, the color scheme for everything in sight - has publicly defended cheating on his wife because rapist and human trafficker Andrew Tate said it was okay: "If I get a little puss on the side - I got status, so I can." After he beat Canada’s Aiemann Zahabi to raucous chants of "U-S-A!" he thanked his fans, offered a tribute to UFC's Dana White - "Dana’s a fucking gangster," and threw up several straight-armed "Sieg Heils" to Trump. The team of four accommodating announcers - who rapturously praised the event's "unbelievable" energy, spirit, patriotism that gave them "goosebumps...How special is it to be here?" - called them "salutes to the troops."

Like all the fighters, O'Malley had earlier walked through the lofty Lincoln Memorial to a scuffling weigh-in where thugs jousted - "Don't act like a fucking animal" - and a press conference. Like the others, he later dressed in an opulent White House "locker room," aka the historic Indian Treaty Room, and made his cinematic way to the Claw flanked by an honor guard - a veteran, first responder or Medal of Honor recipient - cleverly obliging every service member to salute as he walked past. Lincoln, Eisenhower, Paul Krugman weep at the "unspeakably vulgar" debasement. The ancient philosopher Seneca, on the rise and fall of a Roman Empire that also boasted extreme inequality and gladiatorial games: "The way to ruin is rapid."

Sean O'Malley walks from the White House to his fight with his Honor Guard Sean O'Malley walks from the White House to his fight with an Honor GuardPhoto by Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

Before the actual bloodshed, there were weeks of other grotesqueries: Screaming promos - "Are you ready?!" - with an AI, shirtless, oiled, ripped fantasy Trump next to other oiled guys grappling; a $1-million-a-plate fundraising "candlelight dinner," probs akin to this one, at Trump's D.C. golf club; a barbed, garbled panel of all 14 fighters, adding more insult to injury to the Lincoln Memorial. The big bellicose day started with Trump and White marching (or waddling) out to their own color guard, a flyover by the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds, and the incongruous sight of Nitro Circus motocross riders on dirt bikes flying through jumps and spins in front of the White House. Best comment: "OMG ffs we just want health care."

Despite a hilariously sinister weather forecast - lightning, downpours, wind gusts, possible swarms of mosquitoes in the heat - fights were only delayed an hour, with no rain. The waiting crowd, less than a predicted 4,000 ringside and 80,000 at the Ellipse watching on huge screens, were treated to a Department of War (sic) recruitment video touting "peace through strength," songs from American Pie to Sex on Fire, "ring girls" in sexy "patriotic motifs," UFC fights projected onto iconic buildings - including rapist Conor McGregor on the Washington Monument - and protesters chanting, “Whose house? Our house!" alongside a makeshift cage filled with puppets of regime lackeys "to show them behind bars where they belong."

Ultimately, all seven fights ended in knockouts or TKOs, many brutal. Former lightweight champion Ilia Topuria, in his first fight since he and his ex-wife reached a settlement after she accused him of domestic abuse, lost to Justin Gaethje in a TKO that left Topuria's face so bloodied a doctor nearly stopped the bout; the crowd chanted "U-S-A!" and “Let them fight!”, he did, and Topuria was later found to have suffered orbital fractures in both eyes. Lightweight Michael Chandler, 40, was "destroyed" by upstart Brazilian Mauricio Ruffy in Round 1. Fans urged Chandler to "Retire, please"; through a translator, Ruffy asked his girlfriend to marry him "since we're right here at the White House," and urged fans to, "Give your life to Jesus."

The fights, and the graphic accounts of their pummeling, were savage: "Ruffy stung Chandler with a spinning heel kick, hurt him with an uppercut and whipped a horrific body shot into his midsection, ripping a nasty liver punch...Chandler shoots for a takedown, but Ruffy sprawls. OH! Another spinning heel kick! Down goes Chandler!" Etc. Later, at a post-fight press conference with most of the fighters - except Topuria, in the hospital - Dana White celebrated an event with "no political agenda." “I believe that if you are an American, no matter where you sit politically, tonight was just a proud night,” he said. "Hopefully, we created some unity in the country and the world, and brought in some new fans."

Diego Lopes celebrates defeating Steve Garcia in their featherweight bout. Diego Lopes celebrates defeating Steve Garcia in their featherweight bout. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Still, all the disingenuous violence paled before the barbarism of heavyweight Josh Hokit, a self described “100% transphobic" who called a Black fighter "a human gorilla," tried to sic ICE on his Mexican mother, and theatrically staggered wasted into the weigh-in pretending to puke from a night of drinking because "a giant black man wants to knock me out." After taking down aforementioned black man Derrick Lewis, Hokit offered Trump ringside a gaudy pendant and a shout-out "for having the balls to put something like this on." Then he giddily proclaimed himself "the beast that's ready to feast," thanked "my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ,” and added, " Michelle Obama is a man. Am I right, America?"

The crowd gave a modest, sickening roar. The president said nothing in response, nor has he yet, because the "short-fingered vulgarian" is not celebrating a birthday or a nation's anniversary so much as he is "flipping off all of it, and all of us, by desecrating every American temple that presidential authority touches." "The bar has been on the ground for so long we have stopped noticing we are crawling," writes Tom Wellborn of "what the man in the cage chose to do with the microphone at the White House." Hokit spoke with "the full confidence of a man in a room that told him his worst instincts were welcome," and where "the culture of the room tells you cruelty is the entry fee."

Hokit "read the room," he goes on, "with attention to what the environment rewards and what it punishes, and what the environment rewarded was the ugliest thing a person could say. He knew the environment would punish nothing, because the man whose birthday it was has built his entire career on the same calculation...The president got another night of the only thing he has ever wanted - the performance of dominance in a room full of people who will never tell him no." But that night, people also gathered in another room on another planet, where Robert De Niro welcomed "all of you who couldn't get tickets to the White House cage fights," urged them to say not just no but "Shut the fuck up," the sane response to an insane historic moment, and they did.

SEE ALL
people invovled in legal challenge to canada's climate policy
News

Canadian Youth, Groups Sue Over Carney 'Failure' on Climate Crisis

"You cannot abandon the map and still expect to reach your destination. Yet that's exactly what the federal government has done with its 2030 climate plan."

That's according to Charlie Hatt, climate director at Ecojustice, Canada's largest environmental law charity and one of the groups that partnered with a trio of young citizens this week to challenge Prime Minister Mark Carney's "failure" to bring the country's 2030 emissions reduction plan into compliance with a key federal law.

"Right now, its only climate plan is a plan to fail—and that's not just irresponsible, it's unlawful under the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act," said Hatt. "Neither the climate nor the law can tolerate rollbacks today in exchange for promises of action many years from now."

The act requires the federal government to set science-based climate goals, create a plan to achieve them, and report on its progress. However, Carney has recently pursued various rollbacks and boosted fossil fuel development, putting his nation's 2030 emissions reduction target out of reach—which the groups and young people argued violates the law.

"Everyone in Canada deserves to be safe and healthy," said Dr. Samantha Green, president of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment. "Instead, our government is putting people at risk by dismantling key climate policies without a credible plan to reduce emissions. Climate change is not an abstract future threat: It is a public health emergency that is already harming patients and communities across Canada. That's why CAPE is joining this lawsuit."

The fossil fuel-driven climate emergency isn't just a danger to public health. As Environmental Defence's Julia Levin noted, Canadians "are paying the price through wildfires, heat domes, rising food insecurity, and high costs of living."

"PM Carney is betraying Canadians by taking a wrecking ball to our hard-fought climate progress," Levin declared, accusing the Liberal Party leader of following in the footsteps of Big Oil-backed Republican US President Donald Trump.

"The rest of the world is rapidly adopting clean energy systems that are already more reliable, affordable, and secure than fossil fuels," she said. "Meanwhile, our prime minister is copying President Trump's playbook, ensuring that Canada will be left behind."

Carney's climate policies as prime minister—especially compared with how he talked about the crisis before rising to his current position last year—have frustrated many citizens and left "climate-anxious voters... feeling a major case of buyer's remorse, disoriented by the dissonance between who they thought they were supporting and a climate plan that is now a complete shambles," as Canadian climate writer and activist Seth Klein wrote for The Guardian last month.

Youth applicants in the new legal fight made that frustration clear on Tuesday. Montréal, Quebec-based climate organizer Shirley Barnea said that "the Carney government's gutting of climate policy is a massive insult. After presenting himself as a climate leader, our prime minister is now abdicating responsibility—to Canadians, to future generations, to the law. As long as governments continue ignoring climate science and rolling back protections for our futures, young people will continue taking them to court."

Marie Maltais, who is from Sainte-Catherine-de-la-Jacques-Cartier, Québec, and has advocated for the climate since her early teens, said that "my generation has grown up surrounded by climate disasters and broken political promises to address them. We're told to trust the government's climate commitments—but commitments mean nothing without a real plan behind them."

Sudbury, Ontario-based Sophia Mathur, an early participant in Greta Thunberg's Fridays for Future movement who recently met with Carney and urged him to keep his climate promises, added that "young people are being handed the consequences of decisions we didn't make. We are going to live with the impacts of unchecked climate change for the rest of our lives—so we're standing up for our futures, now."

The young citizens and advocacy groups are seeking a court order that would compel Carney to comply with the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, stressing that "climate change is an existential threat to all Canadians."

SEE ALL
"America is Not for Sale" Rally Against Trump's Crypto Dealings
News

'This Has to Be Stopped': Alarm As Trump's Crypto Firm Set to Get Federal Banking Privileges

Critics expressed alarm on Tuesday amid a new report suggesting that President Donald Trump's cryptocurrency firm is about to get federal banking privileges.

As reported by NOTUS, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) in the coming weeks is expected to approve a national trust bank charter for World Liberty Financial, the crypto startup founded by members of the Trump family and the family of Trump Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.

Were it to receive the charter, NOTUS explained, World Liberty Financial would receive "significant legal and financial benefits," including being able "to settle financial transactions akin to Venmo or PayPal on the World Liberty Financial platform, through which the Trump family could receive a cut."

David Wachsman, a spokesperson for World Liberty Financial, dismissed concerns about conflicts of interest, telling NOTUS that "none of [the company's] leadership or employees work for the US government," even though the president and his entire family stand to personally benefit from the charter's approval.

Corey Frayer, director of investor protection for Consumer Federation of America, told NOTUS that here was simply no precedent for a sitting president being granted such privileges for a company he founded by a comptroller whom he personally appointed.

"For the first time in history, a president is leaning on a bank regulator to give his private enterprise the implicit backing of the federal government," Frayer explained. “It’s outrageous."

Diana Henriques, a veteran financial journalist best known for her extensive coverage of the Ponzi scheme run by disgraced financier Bernie Madoff, also expressed horror at the prospect of the OCC carrying out the president's bidding.

"The guardrails continue to fall," Henriques wrote. "It is functionally impossible to regulate a bank owned by the president. Yet it can imperil the entire banking system if it runs off the rails. For heaven's sake, this has to be stopped."

Derek Martin, vice president at Focal Point Strategy Group, wrote that there is "no other way to interpret" the NOTUS report "than Trump using the government to advance his own firm's interests."

"World Liberty Financial's entire brand—and reason for existence, basically—is 'We are affiliated with Trump,'" Martin added. "This is just the latest way they're leveraging it."

Government watchdogs for months have been raising alarms about the president having his own cryptocurrency firm, which has received massive investments from foreign governments since its founding in 2024.

According to NOTUS reporter Jeff Stein, Trump has reported personally earning $57 million from World Liberty Financial so far, a number that could get significantly higher if the firm is granted its charter.

An analysis published by Forbes last month estimated that Trump has nearly tripled his wealth since returning to office, going from a net worth of $2.3 billion in 2024 to $6.5 billion in 2026.

SEE ALL
People hold signs reading, "Billionaire Tax Now" during a rally in Los Angeles
News

'Unlikely Bedfellows': Left-Leaning Groups Join Newsom-Backed Effort to Sink California Billionaire Tax

It comes as no shock that Silicon Valley oligarchs and other plutocrats are trying to keep a proposed billionaire tax backed by California governor and presumptive Democratic presidential aspirant Gavin Newsom off November's ballot. But the participation of progressive groups as "unlikely bedfellows" in the effort to kill the wealth tax has surprised many observers.

Introduced by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW), the California Billionaire Tax would impose a one-time 5% levy on people worth $1 billion or more, to be paid in annual installments of 1% over five years. Proponents say the tax would raise roughly $100 billion in revenue.

The proposal requires the state to spend 90% of revenue from the tax on healthcare and the rest on food assistance and public education. Opponents counter it could drive wealthy residents and investment from California.

Supporters of the billionaire tax have submitted more than 1.5 million signatures, far more than the roughly 875,000 valid signatures required to qualify for November's ballot. The signatures are still being verified, and the office of California Secretary of State Shirley Weber has until June 25, 2026 to determine whether the initiative qualifies.

The measure is backed by numerous progressive groups including the Teamsters union, California Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and Our Revolution, as well as individual progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and Democratic congressional candidate Connie Chan, who is running to replace retiring longtime San Francisco congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.

However, opponents are trying to stop the proposal from qualifying for the ballot, while preparing for a fight in the likely event that it does.

Newsom, the California Democratic Party, and a growing list of groups—including the California Teachers Association (CTA), Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California (PPAC), and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California—are publicly opposing the tax and are urging SEIU-UHW to pull the proposal before June 25.

Republicans, the California Chamber of Commerce, and other capitalist interests oppose the billionaire tax, as do both candidates for California governor, Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton, and Chan's opponent in the San Francisco congressional race, state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-11).

Newsom said that the proposed tax "makes no sense" and would be "really damaging to the state."

CTA argues that the tax is a one-time revenue source, while California schools and healthcare programs need permanent, recurring funding. To that end, the union is backing a separate ballot measure—the Children's Education and Health Care Protection Act—which would permanently extend Proposition 55, California's existing high-income-earner tax, set to expire in 2030.

Jodi Hicks, PPAC's president, recently said that the California Billionaire Tax's "uncertain impacts on the state budget and lack of specificity on healthcare allocations will do more harm than good in the long term."

PPAC and aligned groups including California Medical Association and California Primary Care Association also support extending Prop 55.

Meanwhile, tech billionaires and Silicon Valley executives—including Google co-founder Sergey Brin, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, and Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen—have raised tens of millions of dollars for Building a Better California, a political action committee dedicated to defeating the proposed tax at the ballot box.

Building a Better California is also backing separate initiatives designed to weaken or nullify the billionaire tax, including a ban on retroactive wealth taxation, restrictions on how any new tax revenue can be allocated, and the imposition of new auditing requirements.

Newsom and his allies have a useful weapon to deflect claims that he's helping billionaires who are trying to defeat the proposed tax.

“This is not going to be, ‘Billionaires killed this wealth tax’ if it appears on the November ballot,” Nathan Barankin, Newsom’s chief of staff, told The New York Times Wednesday. “It’s going to be Planned Parenthood, doctors, teachers, and labor killed it.”

SEIU-UHW accused opponents of the proposed tax of “carrying water for a few of the world’s most controversial billionaires."

“Their complicity with billionaires at the expense of patient interests is no surprise,” SEIU-UHW chief of staff Suzanne Jimenez told the Times.

SEE ALL
Under-16s Ban On Social Media Backed By The House of Lords
News

Letting Big Tech Off the Hook, UK Kids' Social Media Ban Called 'Right Diagnosis' But 'Wrong Prescription'

It's not yet clear whether Australia's ban on social media for children under age 16 has had a positive impact on kids' mental health and safety, but British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Monday that the country's law is being used as a model for the United Kingdom's own blanket ban—leading critics, including the parent of a child who died by suicide after viewing harmful content on social media, to question whether Starmer was simply opting for a "politically expedient" solution to the harms of online platforms.

Banning young teenagers and children from using social media, said advocacy groups, does nothing to ensure powerful tech companies will make their products safer by design for all users.

Starmer announced the ban online in a video in which he highlighted his support for the policy "as a parent as much as a prime minister," and noted that in public comments, "thousands of parents" said their children "are addicted to social media."

"It can leave them trapped in a cycle of endless scrolling that displaces play, sleep, and time with the family," said the prime minister, who leads the Labour Party and is facing threats to his leadership following the party's major losses in May's elections. "It can harm their mental health, and frankly, parents need our support on this. That is why today the government has decided to ban social media access for children under 16."

Starmer said new age-related regulations for social media platforms including TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat, as well as gaming and livestreaming platforms, will be introduced by the end of this year, with the new laws going into effect in early 2027. The government also said it was examining restrictions for users under 18, such as "overnight curfews" and mandated blocking of "infinite scrolling."

More details about the ban are expected to be released next month.

But Kerry Moscoguiri, chief executive of Amnesty International UK, said that removing children from platforms that broadcast harmful content is "a case of the right diagnosis but the wrong prescription."

“The UK government is right to recognize that many children face serious harms online," said Moscoguiri. "Too many social media companies have built products and business models that prioritize keeping children engaged for longer, often at the expense of their well-being, privacy, and rights."

“But the problem is not that children exist on social media; it’s that social media companies have built platforms that are unsafe by design," she added. "Banning under-16s risks treating children as the problem rather than addressing the companies and systems that create the risks in the first place."

The ban comes after mounting reports of Big Tech companies' efforts to keep all users, including young people, on their platforms for as long as possible using algorithms and "infinite scrolling." Numerous cases have linked children's suicides to their exposure to thousands of posts regarding self-harm and suicidal ideation, as well as to cyberbullying through social media. And reporting by Reuters last year revealed that Meta's artificial intelligence chatbots were permitted by the company to have sexually provocative conversations with minors.

Advocacy groups like Amnesty have called for restrictions on social media platforms' most addictive and manipulative features, such as infinite scrolling, autoplay, and hyper-personalized recommendations.

Moscoguiri warned that bans like the one imposed by Australia last year will force children "to surrender their privacy in order to participate in modern digital life." In Australia, companies are required to perform age verification by collecting data from bank accounts or scanning users' photo IDs.

Instead of a blanket ban, she said, "we need strong regulation that tackles surveillance-based business models, protects children’s data, and puts safety ahead of profit.”

“The responsibility for children’s safety should rest first and foremost with the companies that build and profit from these platforms," said Moscoguiri. "Government action should focus on ending invasive profiling of children, [and] tackling addictive and manipulative design features."

As children's safety groups in the UK were expecting Starmer's announcement in recent days, Ian Russell, chair of the Molly Rose Foundation and the father of a 14-year-old girl who died by suicide in 2017 after viewing content related to self-harm and suicide on social media, told the BBC that he was, "quite frankly, dismayed" that a blanket ban was likely coming to the UK.

"Keir Starmer promised to tighten up the online safety world by regulating better," said Russell, who has called for social media giants like Meta to remove and regulate content that's harmful to young users' mental health. "If he's playing politics, what he's doing is gambling with young people's lives, and I find that deplorable."

In Australia, which last year became the first country to impose a nationwide blanket ban on kids under 16 using social media, the law has had unclear benefits, with many young teens still managing to use the platforms—where Big Tech has not been forced to place controls that would make it safer for young users to be there.

Carole Cadwalladr, an investigative journalist, said that imposing a ban that includes age verification, as Australia's does, "looks like rushed populist techsolutionism that will hand more power to the platforms."

"This is going to hand even more surveillance powers to the very companies that already know way too much about us. Do you want [X executive chair] Elon [Musk] to have a copy of your biometrics? Do you want [Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg] to scan your face? That’s what we will all be doing," Cadwalladr added. "This isn’t reining in Silicon Valley power. It’s gifting them even more power. Of course, parents want these companies safe and regulated but that’s a job for government, not the end user."

Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, acknowledged that he has advocated for a ban on social media for children under 16 and called it "the right step to protect young people"—but said the UK government must impose restrictions on social media giants themselves, not just their most vulnerable users.

"Bans only treat the symptom, not the problem," said Khan. "Social media companies need to reimagine their platforms so they can offer a safe and healthy environment for all users, where restricting access wouldn’t be necessary."

"There’s nothing inevitable about algorithms which feed us a diet of dangerous content," he added. "Londoners deserve platforms which prioritize people, not just profit."

SEE ALL
Coffins of victims of the US strike on a girls' school in Minab, Iran are surrounded by mourners
News

'Mistakes Are Made': Trump Rejects Accountability for US Massacre at Iran Girls' School

President Donald Trump on Wednesday joined a long line of US leaders to brush off atrocities committed by American forces when he dodged questions about responsibility for the February cruise missile strike on an Iranian girls school that massacred students and staff.

On February 28—the first day of the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran—a US strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ elementary school in Minab killed 156 people, at least 120 of them children, and wounded 95 others.

Satellite imagery analyses confirmed eyewitness accounts that the attack was a “triple-tap” airstrike, in which an initial bombing was followed up with two additional strikes meant to kill survivors and rescue workers.

Asked by a journalist at the G7 meeting in France if anyone would be held accountable for the bombing, Trump replied, "It's such a strange question to be asked at this date, because you're talking about a long time ago."

"Nobody did that on purpose," Trump said of the school strike. "Mistakes are made. War is nasty. But I know it's under investigation."

"I would ask Pete Hegseth," the president added, referring to his defense secretary, who said at the war's start that US forces would not be bound by “stupid rules of engagement” and would instead prioritize “lethality.”

Fragments of a Tomahawk cruise missile found at the school and marked with the names of US weapons companies, a Pentagon contract number, and “Made in USA” added to the body of evidence pointing to the United States as the perpetrator of what numerous experts called a likely war crime.

Trump first claimed that Iran bombed the school, and when it was revealed that a Tomahawk missile was used in the strike, he risibly asserted that Tehran had such highly restricted US missiles in its arsenal. The US has not sold weaponry to the Iranian government since the 1970s, with the extraordinary exception of during the Iran-Contra Affair, in which the Reagan administration secretly sold arms to Iran in the 1980s to fund anti-communist Contra terrorists in Nicaragua.

A preliminary Pentagon probe indicated US responsibility for the Minab massacre—and that the building was struck intentionally, raising questions about the possible use of artificial intelligence for targeting purposes. The US military has confirmed use of AI in the Iran War, which is being carried out in partnership with Israeli forces that have used artificial intelligence extensively in their genocidal assault on the Gaza Strip. More than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded—most of them civilians—since the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023.

Numerous investigative journalism outlets and rights groups—including Bellingcat, The New York Times, Sky News, NPR, The Associated Press, the BBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera, CNN, and Amnesty International—also investigated the attack and concluded the US was responsible.

Trump administration officials and Republican US lawmakers dismissed or stonewalled efforts by journalists, activists, and Democratic legislators to seek accountability for one of the deadliest US civilian massacres in modern times.

The Minab strike ranks up with the bombing of a Baghdad bomb shelter during the 1991 Gulf War—which killed more than 400 people, mostly women, children, and elders—and the March 2017 slaughter of at least 105 people in an apartment building in Mosul, Iraq during Trump’s first-term “war of annihilation” against the so-called Islamic State.

The school massacre also drew comparisons with the 1968 wholesale slaughter of 504 unarmed villagers, mostly women and children—at least some of them raped before being killed—by US troops at My Lai in Vietnam.

Trump joins a long line of US leaders who have ducked accountability for—or worse, tried to justify—atrocities committed on their watch.

Faced with what was then commonly called the "Indian problem," a young Virginia governor named Thomas Jefferson justified what he called "their extermination, or their removal," because "the same world would scarcely do for them and us.”

During the Civil War, Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, commander of an indiscriminate scorched-earth campaign during his March to the Sea, wrote that "war is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."

President Theodore Roosevelt attempted to defend US troops accused of mass murder and torture—including what's now known as waterboarding—during the Philippines War by shaming critics who condemned those crimes but turned blind eyes to the lynching of Black Americans in the South.

After ordering the only nuclear war in human history, against a defeated enemy making efforts to surrender, President Harry S. Truman said of his Japanese victims, "The only language they seem to understand is the one we have been using to bombard them."

After US forces killed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian civilians in the 1960s and 1970s, US Army Chief of Staff Gen. William Westmoreland attempted to rationalize the slaughter by explaining: "The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does the Westerner... Life is cheap in the Orient."

As US-driven United Nations sanctions reportedly killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children in the 1990s, Madeleine Albright, President Bill Clinton's secretary of state, opined that "we think the price is worth it."

During President George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq, US Central Command chief Gen. Tommy Franks said, "We don't do body counts" when asked about the staggering number of civilian casualties, while Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed waterboarding as a mere "dunk in the water" amid a worldwide torture scandal.

When President Barack Obama's drone war killed an American teenager in Yemen, administration spokesperson Robert Gibbs deflected blame by arguing that the child should have had "a far more responsible father.”

As Trump loosened rules of engagement meant to protect civilians during his first-term campaign to "bomb the shit out of" Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria and "take out their families," his defense secretary, James "Mad Dog" Mattis, announced that the US was shifting from a policy of “attrition” to one of “annihilation."

“Civilian casualties are a fact of life in this sort of situation,” he said.

SEE ALL