Bruce Forsyth’s Ghost Is Haunting The London Palladium

With a little light-hearted banter for the day.

The ghost of the legendary TV host Bruce Forsyth has been haunting the London Palladium with his iconic tagline ‘nice to see you, to see you nice’, a paranormal expert has claimed.

It was in the 1950s, when he was 30 years old, that he got his major break on the ITV series Sunday Night at the London Palladium. 

It was in the 70s that his catchphrases became nationally recognised, including ‘Nice to see you, to see you nice’ and ‘Didn’t they do well?’.

Paranormal expert Brocarde has claimed she knew Sir Bruce was ‘watching over’ when she heard his ‘unmistakable’ saying while interviewing magicians Penn Jillette and Piff the Magic Dragon.

She said, ‘I kept getting distracted by the words “nice to see you”.’

‘At first, I dismissed it. Then came the unmistakable second half, ‘to see you nice!’, followed by mischievous laughter.

‘That’s when I knew Sir Bruce was in the room. I felt like he was watching over the interview.

‘I even heard him mention a fire extinguisher, which was hilarious considering all the fire puns flying around during the chat.

‘He definitely knew I was speaking with ‘magic dragons’.’

The London Palladium held great significance for the performer, who performed with Sammy Davis Jr. and earned his claim to fame there.

His ashes were even buried under the stage, where he ended his career as host of Strictly in 2014.

The venue is said to have had a ‘special place in Bruce’s heart’ and his family considered the move as a ‘perfect tribute’. 

Despite the heavy schedule, he admitted that he cherished his days playing at the London Palladium.

He said, ‘We did 40 weeks a year with 40 different top-of-the-bill acts. Where could you even find 40 different top-of-the-bills these days…apart from me!’  

Brocarde, 42, from Oxfordshire, became notorious for her ‘marriage’ to a Victorian ghost.

She insists she met soldier Edwardo after the ghoul ‘burst’ into her bedroom one night during a storm, but after their ‘wedding’ on Halloween 2022, things went downhill.

She added, ‘He grew increasingly more aggressive and nasty and began to haunt me with the sound of a screaming baby,’ she said.

According to Brocarde, she eventually divorced him through an exorcism.

To be honest, I’m not sure who is more foolish, the woman for telling her tale, the newspaper that published it, or me for reading it! However, people do read articles like these, and publishers pay good money for publishing.

I guess we all believe in something because we need to believe that there is something after this life, but Brocarde married a ghost, and we are here giving her coverage.

I kind of wanted to believe her, but then I read that she married a ghost and all her credibility went out of the window, along with the ghost! Perhaps it was just a ‘Brucie bonus’. Maybe the mould in the London Palladium is causing similar hallucinations to those of magic mushrooms, but ‘didn’t she do well’

She Was Dismissed 20 Times By Her Doctor

According to new NHS guidelines, general practitioners will need to get a second opinion if they are unable to diagnose a patient after three visits.

The ‘three strikes and rethink’ system comes into effect across England today with the aim of speeding up diagnoses and cutting avoidable deaths.

It comes after worries that an excessive number of people are having their symptoms ignored or disregarded until their illness is too severe to cure.

The policy will be known as Jess’s Rule, in tribute to Jessica Brady, who contacted her GP surgery about 20 times in the six months before her demise from cancer, aged 27.

The Stevenage-based Airbus engineer complained of weight loss, coughing, vomiting, and stomach discomfort but was given virtual appointments and a lot of prescription drugs, including steroids and antibiotics.

She was also told she was suffering from long COVID and that she was too young for her symptoms to be anything serious.

Ms Brady was eventually diagnosed with adenocarcinoma, which had spread throughout her body – but only after her mother paid for her to see a doctor privately.

She was put on oxygen and passed away in the hospital three weeks later, in 2020.

The new initiative tells GPs to think again if, after three appointments, they have been unable to offer a substantiated diagnosis or the patient’s symptoms have escalated.

Although many general practitioners now employ comparable strategies in complicated circumstances, Jess’s Rule will standardise this nationwide.

It was created in cooperation with NHS England and the chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP).

The guideline can entail scheduling in-person consultations in the event that prior sessions were conducted remotely, doing comprehensive physical examinations, or requesting further diagnostic testing.

Additionally, it encourages general practitioners to thoroughly examine patient records, get second opinions from colleagues, and, when necessary, think about referring patients to specialists.

Andrea Brady, Jess’s mum, said, ‘Jess lived for just three short weeks following her terminal cancer diagnosis.

‘Despite her shock and devastation, she showed unfailing courage, positivity, dignity, and love.

‘Jess was determined that people should understand how desperately she had tried to advocate for herself and seek a resolution for her declining health.

‘In the bleak weeks following the loss of Jess, I realised it was my duty to continue what she had started.

‘It has taken nearly five years to bring about Jess’s Rule. I would like to dedicate this initiative to all the young people who have been diagnosed too late.

‘It has only been made possible because of the people who have listened—politicians, medics, and nearly half a million who supported the campaign.’

According to research, individuals from ethnic minority origins and younger people frequently experience delays in receiving a diagnosis of dangerous diseases since their symptoms do not mirror those of older or white patients.

A report from the Nuffield Trust and the Health Foundation found that half of 16- to 24-year-olds needed three or more interactions with a healthcare professional from a GP practice before being diagnosed with cancer, compared to one in five across the entire population.

Paul Callaghan, policy manager at patient watchdog Healthwatch England, said Jess’s Rule will come as a ‘relief’ to patients living with the ‘anxiety of worrying symptoms’ but unable to get a diagnosis.

He added, ‘Jess’s Rule will also improve patient safety by ensuring more rapid diagnosis of cancer and other illnesses and provide clarity to those experiencing sickness or ill health.

‘Feedback from the public consistently highlights their frustration with long waits for diagnosis and treatment.

‘It is vital that the rule is implemented quickly and consistently, and people can make informed decisions about their care.

‘It’s also imperative that specialist teams have the resources to deal with potential increases in demand, resulting from increased referrals.’

Every person deserves the same standard of care, regardless of their age or background. Still, research reveals that too many young people and those from ethnic minority backgrounds face delays getting proper diagnoses because their symptoms don’t fit standard patterns doctors expect to see in older, white patients.

Professor Kamila Hawthorne, Chair of the Royal College of GPs, said, ‘No GP will ever want to miss signs of serious illness, such as cancer.

‘Ensuring a timely diagnosis often means better outcomes for patients – but many conditions, including many cancers, are challenging to identify in primary care because the symptoms are often similar to other, less serious and more common conditions.

‘Alternative diagnoses are often more likely, particularly when considering risk factors such as age.

‘If a patient repeatedly presents with the same or similar symptoms, but the treatment plan does not seem to be making them better – or their condition is deteriorating – it is best practice to review the diagnosis and consider alternative approaches.

‘We hope that by formalising this with Jess’s Rule, it will remind GPs to keep this at the forefront of their minds.’

Health secretary Wes Streeting said, ‘Jessica Brady’s death was a preventable and unnecessary tragedy.

‘I want to thank her courageous family, who have campaigned tirelessly through unimaginable grief to ensure Jessica’s legacy helps to save the lives of others.

‘Patient safety must be the bedrock of the NHS, and Jess’ Rule will make sure every patient receives the thorough, compassionate, and safe care that they deserve while supporting our hard-working GPs to catch potentially deadly illnesses.

‘I don’t want any family to endure the pain Jessica’s family has been through.

‘This government will learn from such tragedies and is taking decisive action to improve patient safety.’

Dr Claire Fuller, national medical director at NHS England, said, ‘I am very humbled by the efforts of Andrea and Simon Brady, who have campaigned for this important initiative which will undoubtedly save lives by avoiding missed or delayed diagnoses and ensuring patients receive the right treatment at the right time.’

‘Many clinicians already apply a version of “three strikes and rethink” in their routine practice, but Jess’s Rule formalises this instinctive approach, providing a consistent structure to support reflection and timely action for patients.’

Sadly, GPs are the root of the problem, along with obnoxious receptionists who believe they are the doctor. People have been messed about for ages, and you end up going around in circles.

No doctor should be brushing off their patient; they should be connecting with them. If they had taken Jess’s symptoms seriously, then she may have stood a chance – this is not good enough, and more needs to be done.

I understand that doctors are not God, but if they are truly not sure, they should always seek a second opinion. My own father died of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, first diagnosed as arthritis, and when he really became ill and had to have a blood transfusion at the hospital, he was then diagnosed with this horrible disease; he died 7 weeks later. However, if his doctor had taken more notice, he may have survived.

The patient is never listened to, the healthcare sector is extremely misogynistic, and they expect us to put up and shut up.

Paracetamol Concerns Among Pregnant Women

In response to Donald Trump’s assertions, pregnant women in Britain have started calling pharmacists with worries that paracetamol usage may be connected to autism.

The US President said there had been a ‘meteoric rise’ in cases of autism, and he suggested Tylenol – which is called paracetamol in the UK – is a potential cause.

He said the painkillers should not be taken during pregnancy, suggesting pregnant women should ‘tough it out’, and also raised unfounded concerns about vaccines.

But his comments have been criticised by Health Secretary Wes Streeting, while autism campaigners and scientists in the UK described it as ‘misinformation’.

Now, the Independent Pharmacies Association (IPA), an industry body, has told the Daily Mail that pregnant women have been asking their local chemists for advice.

IPA chief executive Dr Leyla Hannbeck said, ‘We have had some pregnant women contacting their local pharmacists asking about the impact of paracetamol following President Trump’s claim. Paracetamol has been used for years and is a safe painkiller in pregnancy when taken as per the recommended dose.

‘Pain and fever, if left untreated, can have more impact on the baby in pregnancy than taking paracetamol as per the recommended dose. Your community pharmacist can provide you with the help and advice you need if you are worried or are unsure.

‘The information coming out of the White House must be consistent with evidence and research; otherwise, it risks causing patient safety issues and causing unnecessary worry amongst patients.’

Earlier today, Mr Streeting said, ‘I trust doctors over President Trump, frankly, on this,’ as he urged pregnant women not to pay ‘any attention whatsoever’ to the US president.

He told ITV’s Lorraine: ‘I’ve just got to be really clear about this: there is no evidence to link the use of paracetamol by pregnant women to autism in their children. None.

‘In fact, a major study was done back in 2024 in Sweden, involving 2.4 million children, and it did not uphold those claims.

Mr Trump’s comments about vaccines are a particular concern at a time when ‘you’ve got kids in this country now dying of measles and whooping cough, kids not taking the RSV vaccine when those respiratory diseases can be life-threatening in our children.’

In his White House announcement, Mr Trump said: ‘There are certain groups of people that don’t take vaccines and don’t take any pills, that have no autism.’

Turning to US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, he asked, ‘Is that a correct statement?’

Mr Trump said the US Food and Drug Administration would be notifying all US doctors with new guidance about paracetamol.

‘Ideally, you don’t take it at all, but if you have to, if you can’t tough it out, if there’s a problem, you’re going to end up doing it.’

On combined vaccines, he said, ‘It’s so important to me to… see the doctor four times or five times for a vaccine. Don’t let them pump your baby up with the largest pile of stuff you’ve ever seen in your entire life going into the delicate little body of a baby.

‘Even if it’s two years, three years, four years… I would say five, but let’s say four visits to the doctor instead of one.’

Professor Sir Andrew Pollard, outgoing chairman of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, warned of the danger posed by Mr Trump’s comments.

‘I am really worried that this rise of misinformation from many different parties, including the government in the United States, does undermine confidence globally,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s World at One.

The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) issued a statement on Tuesday confirming there is ‘no evidence that taking paracetamol during pregnancy causes autism in children’.

Dr Alison Cave, chief safety officer at the MHRA, said, ‘Paracetamol remains the recommended pain relief option for pregnant women when used as directed.

‘Pregnant women should continue to follow existing NHS guidance and speak to their healthcare professional if they have questions about any medication during pregnancy.

‘Untreated pain and fever can pose risks to the unborn baby, so it is important to manage these symptoms with the recommended treatment.

‘Our advice on medicines in pregnancy is based on rigorous assessment of the best available scientific evidence.

‘Any new evidence that could affect our recommendations would be carefully evaluated by our independent scientific experts.

‘We continuously monitor the safety of all medicines, including those used during pregnancy, through robust monitoring and surveillance. We encourage anyone to report any suspected side-effects to us via the Yellow Card scheme.’

Mel Merritt, head of policy and campaigns at the National Autistic Society, said, ‘The incessant misinformation about autism from President Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. risks undermining decades of research by respected experts in the field.

‘Understandably, autistic people will be dismayed and frightened by this announcement, and we would urge our government and the NHS to stand by autistic people and to condemn this misinformation. To do otherwise risks creating further fear, stigmatisation and harm.

‘We urge anyone looking for information about autism to visit websites from trusted organisations such as the NHS and the National Autistic Society.’

Experts say the rise in autism cases in the US is mainly because of a new definition for the disorder that now includes mild cases on a spectrum and better diagnoses.

In the UK, the NHS website says, ‘Paracetamol is the first choice of painkiller if you’re pregnant. It’s commonly taken during pregnancy and does not harm your baby.’

Dr Monique Botha, associate professor in social and developmental psychology at Durham University, said, ‘There are many studies which refute a link, but the most important was a Swedish study of 2.4 million births published in 2024 which used actual sibling data and found no relationship between exposure to paracetamol in utero and subsequent autism, ADHD or intellectual disability.

‘This suggests no causal effect of paracetamol in autism.

‘Similarly, pain relief for pregnant women is woefully lacking, and paracetamol is a much safer pain relief option during pregnancy than basically any other alternative, and we need to take pain seriously for women, including whilst pregnant.

‘The fearmongering will prevent women from accessing the appropriate care during pregnancy.

‘Further, it risks stigmatising families who have autistic children as having brought it on themselves and reinvigorates the long pattern of maternal shame and blame as we’ve seen re-emerge repeatedly over the last 70 years, where we try to pay the fault of autism at the mother’s door one way or another.’

Professor Claire Anderson, president of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, said: ‘Paracetamol has been used safely by millions of people for decades, including during pregnancy, when taken as directed.

‘It is the first-line choice for pain management and fever control in a variety of patients, including pregnant women, children and the elderly.

‘A large study conducted in 2024 found no evidence of a link between paracetamol use in pregnancy and an increased risk of autism in children.’

In August this year, a study from Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health and Mount Sinai Hospital reported that exposure to acetaminophen, which is also known as Tylenol or paracetamol, during pregnancy may mean children were more likely to develop neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism and ADHD.

They concluded that, while measures should be taken to limit acetaminophen use, the drug was essential for treating fever and pain in mothers, which could also harm babies.

Trump seriously needs to come with a health warning.

Small Boat Migrants Are Having Babies To Get British Passports

Small boat migrants accommodated in asylum hotels are having babies because they believe it will increase their odds of gaining a British passport, a new documentary has revealed.

Asylum seekers told the programme they were having children in the belief it would automatically ensure the mother and baby both secure the documentation, a hope the show insisted was ‘misguided’.

‘They do believe it gives them more entitlement to benefits, maybe a better choice of accommodation and makes it harder for the Home Office to deport them,’ BBC reporter Sue Mitchell said in the documentary.

‘One of the first babies I meet is proudly held aloft by his father – they arrived from Somalia just weeks earlier and he tells me this is a “British baby”, born on “British soil”, who will one day, he believes, hold a British passport.’

But asylum seekers who have children in the UK can still be deported by the Home Office. However, the Refugee Council’s Jon Featonby insisted they qualified for extra safeguards, which makes this harder.

Elsewhere in the documentary, which saw Ms Mitchell visit four hotels for the BBC’s File of Four programme, migrants described being sent hundreds of miles by cab for NHS appointments at a tremendous expense to the taxpayer.

A failed asylum seeker in an unnamed hotel used by the Home Office told the BBC he had been sent on a 250-mile, £600 taxi ride for a knee check-up.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood asked officials to ‘urgently look into’ the use of taxis after the claims emerged.

Other migrants in hotels visited by the broadcaster said they were working in Britain, despite being barred from taking employment.

One Iraqi man, identified by the alias ‘Kadir’ to shield his identity, said he would have preferred to have gone to his NHS appointment by train.

But he ‘had no choice’ other than to accept the transport laid on by the Home Office.

The taxi journeys take place because when migrants move between hotels, they sometimes keep the same NHS doctors, the broadcaster said.

Kadir’s journey was to see a consultant who had treated him at his old address, he said, and the driver told him the round trip had cost £600.

‘Should the Home Office give me the ticket for the train? This is the easy way, and they know they spend too much money,’ said Kadir.

‘We know as well, but we don’t have any choice. It’s crazy.’

Migrants were not offered the option to travel by public transport or to walk to the appointments, and taxis were booked by an ‘automated system’ at the hotel front desk, it was reported.

Nine years ago, Kadir and his spouse brought two children to the UK from Iraq, and since then, they have welcomed a third.

The family occupies two adjoining hotel rooms – one for the couple and their baby and the other for the 12-year-old daughter and 14-year-old son.

Kadir said he worked as a translator in his home country and claimed he had been targeted by criminals.

His asylum claim was rejected by the Home Office due to a lack of proof. He has had two appeals rejected and has a third appeal underway.

He added that some migrants he knew had converted to Christianity in a bid to increase their chances of staying in the country.

They claimed the religion change would lead to persecution if they went back home. 

A woman from Iraq also claimed she paid people smugglers to cross the Channel in order to get treatment for her stage four cancer. 

Mohammed, from Afghanistan, said he had arranged a job even before he arrived in the UK a few weeks ago.

After using contacts supplied by his cousin, who was also working illegally in Britain, Mohammed said he was earning £20 a day for shifts that last up to 10 hours.

He told the BBC he had no choice because his family owes money to people traffickers.

One security guard at one of the hotels said, ‘You’ve got nothing to occupy these guys. So of course they’re going to go out there and work.’

Journalists and the public are banned from Home Office migrant hotels but the BBC said it had ‘gained access through migrant contacts who had made the journey across the English Channel from France’.

Ms Mitchell added that she had chatted to families who had been waiting in the country for almost a decade for their cases to be ruled on.

Migrants interviewed on the programme also admitted doing black market jobs, with some paid as little as £20 for shifts of 10 or 11 hours.

Arrivals have previously secured asylum by arguing deportation Article 3 rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects against persecution and torture. 

With money going back to the asylum seekers’ home country as soon as they were paid, many of these occupations had been arranged before they had even crossed the Channel.

At the end of June, there were just over 32,000 in taxpayer-funded hotels, up eight per cent in a year.

The Home Office has also said an all-time high of 111,084 asylum applications were lodged in the year to June, up 14 per cent on the previous 12 months.

Despite increasing numbers, Labour has said it will close all migrant hotels by 2029.

In August, the Epping Forest District Council was granted a temporary injunction by the High Court to prevent the placement of migrants at the Bell hotel in Epping.

However, the Home Office was successful in contesting the ruling at the Court of Appeal, and the hotel is still operating while any additional legal proceedings are ongoing.

The amount of taxpayers’ money spent on asylum support fell to £4.76 billion in 2024-25, down from £5.38 billion the previous year.

But costs are massively higher than a decade ago, when the figure stood at less than £475 million a year.

A Home Office spokesman said: ‘The Home Secretary has asked the department to urgently look into the use of taxis to transfer asylum seekers.’

Ongoing appeals are pointless; if they fail, it’s a failure, period.

Surely it’s not right to keep going in the hope that some loony judge will pass it through. Aside from the cost to the taxpayer, it’s quite unbelievable and completely out of control.

However, illegal boat migrants are only the tip of the iceberg. Muslim babies in the UK are being born at three times the number of British babies, and every single one will grow up to vote for a Muslim parliamentary candidate. The maths does not lie, and in two short generations they will hold the balance of power in the UK. Mark my words, the future is grim, particularly for women.

They treat us like an ATM machine and have everything handed to them when they arrive in the UK.

Taxis at £600 a pop – this is a gravy train if I ever saw one. There is a significant misappropriation of public funds, which is appalling.

Our government is content to give all of this money to migrants but not to its own UK citizens; they just bleed them dry. Let’s be realistic here: the taxpayers of this country are being taken for a ride, plain and simple, and our government are letting it happen.

And what is the cost to the UK taxpayer of a family of four spending nine years in a hotel? This must end because it is ludicrous.

For the British people, this is just another kick in the teeth.

These taxi rides are demented, and we are the sheep who are paying for this. You couldn’t make this up if you tried. Mark my words, all of what is going on will end in bloodshed if we don’t chuck out this insane government.

Britain, the country that keeps giving – to the wrong people.

William Is Urging His Father To Disown Fergie And Andrew Over The Epstein Scandal

Prince William and his father are at odds over whether to banish Sarah Ferguson and Prince Andrew over their friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, a royal source has told the Daily Mail.

King Charles doesn’t want to completely disown the Duchess of York and his brother because both are loyal to him and the Crown – unlike Harry and Meghan. 

The monarch is encountering tremendous pressure to expunge Fergie over the grovelling messages she sent to her ‘supreme friend’, Jeffrey Epstein.

So far, seven charities publicly severed their partnerships with the Duchess of York in 24 hours, with others still reviewing their positions.

However, for now, Charles is said not to want to cut all ties, reflecting their loyalty, to ensure his sister-in-law doesn’t go rogue like the Sussexes, and to respect the wishes of his late mother, the Queen. 

But the more hardline The Prince of Wales considers his uncle and aunt to be a ‘pair of chancers’ and had enough of them long before the Duchess of York’s latest scandal.

‘His face as he stood next to Andrew at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral said it all,’ an insider said.

‘William feels even more strongly than the King that Andrew and Fergie are an embarrassment and will be urging his father to act,’ the source claimed.

‘The optics of that pair of chancers guffawing away [at events] look terrible.’

Charles will probably immediately ban the divorced couple from appearing in public with the Royal Family at events such as Christmas.  He may also ultimately evict them from Royal Lodge, their Windsor mansion, which William is said to be demanding as a minimum.

‘The difference between the Yorks and the Sussexes is that Andrew and Fergie have never publicly criticised the monarchy or the King. Andrew’s friends say that even in private, they’ve never heard him say a bad word about his brother’, the Daily Mail’s royal source said.

‘The King doesn’t want to cut ties with his brother, former sister-in-law and that side of the family. The late Queen, conscious that Fergie was the mother of her granddaughters, always took that view, even if Prince Philip couldn’t bear to be in the same room as Sarah.’

But the monarch faces a battle with Prince William, who will be ‘urging’ his father to take the opportunity to cut them loose and boot them out of their 30-bedroom home close to Windsor Castle.

William has his eye on the future of the Royal Family, and for the good of the family, they must never be seen at events again, the Daily Mail’s insider has said.

The Prince of Wales is said to want them out of the Royal Lodge to fend for themselves. Andrew has reportedly refused to move to the much smaller Frogmore Cottage.

The royal source has suggested the palace may advise Sarah Ferguson to do a mea culpa interview – but nothing like Andrew’s disastrous Newsnight grilling that heaped more shame on him and his family.

‘I think there’s plenty more to come out yet about Epstein and Andrew. Perhaps the Royal Household should be thinking about pre-empting it all by coming clean,’ the source said.

‘The Duchess of York can be extraordinarily charming. So I’m sure she will be backpedalling furiously. But this latest scandal threatens her ability to earn money as well as her charity patronages. Who can say what effect that will have on the Yorks’ ability to afford the costs of staying at Royal Lodge, where they live at opposite ends of the (30-room) house?’

In emails revealed by The Mail on Sunday this weekend, she described Epstein as a ‘supreme friend’ and ‘humbly’ apologised for an interview in which she disowned him after a £15,000 loan he gave her came to light.

Astonishingly, she told Epstein she only tried to distance herself from him to save her reputation and work as a children’s author.

The Teenage Cancer Trust has dropped Sarah, Duchess of York, as patron after 35 years.

Several charities severed relations with the duchess on Monday after it emerged she apologised to the sex offender in April 2011 after publicly disowning him in the media.

In a statement, the Teenage Cancer Trust said, ‘We have made the decision to end our relationship with the Duchess of York, and as of today, she is no longer a patron of Teenage Cancer Trust.

‘We have communicated this decision to the Duchess. We would like to thank the Duchess of York for her support.’

The charity’s announcement followed similar statements from Wiltshire- and Dorset-based children’s hospice Julia’s House, Prevent Breast Cancer, and The Natasha Allergy Research Foundation, who all cut ties with the duchess on Monday.

The British Heart Foundation also said the duchess was no longer a serving ambassador for the charity.

Julia’s House was the first to announce its decision to terminate its association with the duchess, saying it would be ‘inappropriate for her to continue as a patron of the charity’ – citing her correspondence with Epstein as a deciding factor.

Additionally, Prevent Breast Cancer, of which the duchess became a patron last year, declared that it was severing its relationship with her.

She joined forces with the charity following her own experience with breast cancer in 2023, but a spokeswoman confirmed she was no longer a patron and thanked her for her work.

Food allergy charity The Natasha Allergy Research Foundation also announced it had dropped the duchess as a patron, with the founders saying they were ‘disturbed’ to read her correspondence with Epstein.

The charity, which was established after teenager Natasha Ednan-Laperouse died from a severe allergic reaction to eating a baguette, asked the duchess to become a patron when it was founded in 2019.

In a statement, founders Nadim and Tanya Ednan-Laperouse said, ‘We were disturbed to read of Sarah, Duchess of York’s correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein.

‘Sarah Ferguson has not been actively involved with the charity for some years.

‘She was a patron, but in the light of the recent revelations, we have taken the decision that it would be inappropriate for her to continue to be associated with the charity.’

A spokeswoman for the British Heart Foundation thanked the duchess for her ‘support for our work’ and for ‘her past efforts to help us save and improve lives by funding pioneering research into cardiovascular disease’, as the charity also cut ties with her.

The Sun newspaper reported that the duchess ‘humbly apologised’ to Epstein for linking him to paedophilia in the media, describing him as ‘steadfast’ and ‘generous’.

Her spokesman said it was sent ‘in the context of advice the duchess was given to try to assuage Epstein and his threats’.

The email originated from an interview with the Evening Standard on March 7, 2011, in which she apologised for accepting £15,000 from the sex offender.

During the interview, she told the newspaper, ‘I abhor paedophilia and any sexual abuse of children and know that this was a gigantic error of judgement on my behalf. I am just so contrite I cannot say.

‘Whenever I can, I will repay the money and have nothing ever to do with Jeffrey Epstein ever again.’

A little over a month afterwards, the duchess sent a message to Epstein, in which she said, ‘I know you feel hellaciously let down by me.

‘And I must humbly apologise to you and your heart for that.

‘You have always been a steadfast, generous and supreme friend to me and my family.’

It continued, ‘I was advised in no uncertain terms to have nothing to do with you and to not speak or email you.

‘And if I did – I would cause more problems to you, the Duke and myself. I was broken and lost.

‘So please understand. I didn’t want to hurt Andrew one more time. I was in overriding fear. I am sorry.’

The duchess’s spokesman previously said she had spoken of her regret about her association with Epstein and ‘does not resile’ from condemning him publicly.

He added that Epstein had threatened to sue her for defamation for associating him with paedophilia.

Epstein was discovered lifeless in his cell at a federal jail in Manhattan, in the US, in August 2019, while he awaited trial on sex-trafficking charges.

It was determined to be a suicide.

The royal family are only interested in ensuring their own positions within it. That’s why Andrew refuses to vacate the home that he lives in or stay in the background.

This is why William doesn’t want to be photographed standing next to Andrew in case his public image is tarnished, and having eventually taken his place as king, Charles doesn’t want anyone rocking the boat and therefore endeavours to keep everyone happy.

This is a problematic one. Loyalty equals ‘You know too much’, which is a really bad situation for Charles because if he cuts them off someone will definitely blab, and he will also lose his family.

School Accused Of ‘Brainwashing’ Children

A parent has accused a secondary school of ‘brainwashing’ after he discovered 14-year-old pupils were told to read a book that ‘blames them for their white skin’.

James Farquharson claims pupils were being fed ‘partisan political views’ after the novel The Hate U Give was added to the Year 10 reading list at Budmouth Academy in Weymouth, Dorset.

The 53-year-old said the book was making some students feel guilty about being white and left his daughter ’embarrassed and uncomfortable’ after she was told to read it out loud.

He has also accused the school of double standards, as it has a zero-tolerance stance on swearing, yet the book is littered with four-letter obscenities, including the F-word replicated 89 times.

The US novel, which has since been removed from the school’s reading list, follows an African-American girl who speaks out after witnessing a white police officer shoot her childhood friend.

Mr Farquharson said he has also questioned the appropriateness of another book that was being read out loud by children aged 12.

He said the book, called Pigeon English, explores sexual themes, including female masturbation, and is so ‘creepy’ it raised safeguarding concerns for the children reading it.

The books are part of the Drop Everything and Read (DEAR) initiative, which aims to encourage people to read for a short period every day.

Mr Farquharson has now sent a letter to Budmouth Academy’s headteacher requesting an immediate review of the books on the school’s reading list.

He said it is not about banning books but about giving students access to books that are appropriate for their age.

He said, ‘I found out about this last week when my 14-year-old daughter said she and her peers were having to read (The Hate U Give) out loud.

‘She felt embarrassed and uncomfortable about it.

‘I looked through it and read the first 150 pages and thought, “Really?”‘.

‘It is full of bad language, it normalises sex and drugs, and it is centred on identity politics, namely race, which blames her for her white skin.

‘It is divisive and is centred on issues of Blackness and whiteness.

‘The school shouldn’t be addressing political issues with students unless they are going to balance it with the counterarguments.

‘It is neo-Marxism being slipped into our children’s minds, not by outright political lectures but via fiction.

‘It is being incubated in their minds that there are goodies and baddies who, in this case, are the white kids.’

Addressing the book Pigeon English, which his Year 8 daughter is reading, he said, ‘It contains themes and language that one would hope 12-year-old kids wouldn’t be taught in school.

‘A 12-year-old reading out passages about female masturbation is a massive safeguarding red flag.’

Mr Farquharson, a media and communications manager, said other parents at the school have also raised concerns and complaints about the reading material.

Parent Vicki Burgoyne posted: ‘Why are we making our future generations read such tripe?

‘We need to educate and broaden their minds, not shrink them with street slang and brain-dead literature to shock them.

‘Why are we trying to shock kids by giving them such things to think about? It’s really sad. No wonder child mental health, self-harm, and suicide are at an all-time high if this is what’s filling their heads.’

The Hate U Give is a critically acclaimed coming-of-age novel by American author Angie Thomas.

It addresses racism and stereotypes surrounding Black youths and the protection of white communities.

However, not everyone opposes its teaching in schools.

One parent posted on social media: ‘This has been part of the school curriculum for a number of years now.

‘Rather than being offended by it (which is understandable), some consideration also needs to be given to what it’s trying to challenge and how it wants to provoke thought processes.

‘This is nothing new in this line of literature.

‘If taught correctly, this book is a powerful tool to provoke deeper analysis and understanding of the issues that arise in pop culture today.’

A spokesperson for Budmouth Academy told the Daily Mail: ‘Following a review of our Year 10 reading list, we have taken the decision to remove The Hate U Give. 

‘We acknowledge that the novel raises important themes and is promoted as appropriate for readers that are aged 14+. 

‘However, after careful consideration, we have decided that there are alternative texts that raise similar themes which are better suited to our students in Year 10.

‘A second book, Pigeon English, is under review but is likely to remain on the curriculum, as it is a prescribed text for GCSE English Literature by the exam boards.’

Our children will grow up to be just as stupid as they are if we don’t keep them away from schools like these.

Our children are being brainwashed by schools, which are unfit for their intended function.

Generally speaking, state education employees are self-righteous and left-wing.

Left-wing progressive ideology should be banned in schools. Schools are a place for education, not indoctrination, but it appears that the Marxist unions are after the fertile minds of our children.

This anti-white racism and subtle depravity masquerading as sex education needs to stop. No wonder twenty-five per cent of the population is now illiterate in the UK. We now have political activists instead of teachers in our classrooms.

No Jews Allowed In Shop As Sign Reads ‘Just Can’t Stand You’

At least four police complaints have been filed against the shop owner, who claims he “is not a Nazi”.

Jewish people have been barred from entering a shop in Germany by its pro-Palestine owner. Hans Velten Reisch, 60, put a small note in his store’s window on Wednesday, which read: “Jews are banned from here! Nothing personal. No antisemitism. Just can’t stand you.” The owner, who claims he is “not a Nazi”, has since had numerous police reports lodged against him.

Local authorities were made aware of the antisemitic sign on Wednesday evening.

Police spokesman Philipp Renoncourt told local media that it was removed “to prevent danger”. However, local residents claim that it has not been taken down but instead moved to a wall inside the shop. By Thursday morning, the windows of the shop had “Nazis out” written across them following the outrage the sign sparked throughout the town of Flensburg.

The town’s mayor, Fabian Geyer, responded to the incident: “This is a reminder of the darkest chapters of Germany’s history and has absolutely no place in the city.”

He said the sign was “a clear statement against Jews in our society”.

Kianusch Stender, Member of the State Parliament for the Social Democratic Party of Germany, added: “We are an open, colourful city that has a duty, based on its historical responsibility alone, to take a stand against anti-Semitism everywhere and at all times.”

Felix Klein, the Federal Commissioner for Jewish Life in Germany and the Fight against Antisemitism, highlighted the direct connections with the Nazi years, saying it is a “clear case of antisemitism”.

“We must intervene,” he told Welt TV. “This must not be tolerated in any way.”

Flensburg police confirmed that they had received four complaints against the shop owner. A spokesman said, “These are now being examined by the public prosecutor’s office for possible offences.”

Mr Reisch has since denied accusations that he is a Nazi or an extremist. The shop owner told the Fordé news media outlet that he is “a little to the left, a little to the right – but not radical,” adding, “I am not a Nazi.”

“I’m not inciting hatred; I’m just saying what I think,” he said. The shop owner criticised Germany’s policy towards Israel, explaining that he had stopped serving customers who he believed were supporting the war in Gaza.

He added, “I don’t need people like that here, neither in business nor in private.”

I don’t suppose it will be long before this man goes out of business.

I find all of this very sad, and undoubtedly, lessons have not been learnt from the Holocaust, and history is gradually repeating itself once again, and those Jews who came from the camps were tormented by their experiences for the rest of their lives.

My great-grandmother came from Romania and was fortunate enough to escape the pogroms but also lived through World War I and World War II – she died when she was 99 years old, so I was lucky enough to know her and understand what she must have had to go through.

I was born in Britain, and I was once proud to call myself British, but not so much now, although I wouldn’t leave the country that I was born in; however, I have never felt so afraid as I do now.

Refusing to do business with someone simply because of their religion, race, or political beliefs isn’t personal preference; it’s discrimination!

If you refuse to do business with people you don’t like, then you simply shouldn’t be in business.

Digital ID Will Be Unveiled At Labour’s Conference

Sir Keir Starmer is expected to unveil plans to introduce digital identification cards for people living in the UK at the Labour Party conference this month. 

The PM has been ‘exploring’ the idea in recent weeks and, while finer details of the scheme are allegedly still being ironed out, an announcement could come as early as the annual meet, which starts on September 28. 

Starmer is determined to plough ahead with the scheme, which is part of efforts to overhaul the country’s asylum and immigration system, according to a report by the Financial Times.

In addition to dealing with the burden of hosting tens of thousands of asylum seekers, the Labour administration is under pressure to reduce the record number of migrants arriving in tiny boats over the Channel.

One option under consideration would give digital IDs to all people legally entitled to reside in Britain, whether citizens or those with legal immigration status, a source briefed on the matter told the newspaper.

The digital ID could be used for employment verification and rental agreements, though the government may still narrow the scope or revisit the plan, they added. 

Earlier this month, the PM said that digital IDs could ‘play an important part’ in making Britain less attractive to illegal migrants.

However, critics of the scheme warned it could turn the country into a ‘dystopian nightmare’ if people are forced into ID checks ‘to go about our everyday lives’. 

Rebecca Vincent, of Big Brother Watch, said earlier this month: ‘While Downing Street is scrambling to be seen as doing something about illegal immigration, we are sleepwalking into a dystopian nightmare where the entire population will be forced through myriad digital checkpoints to go about our everyday lives.

‘Mandatory digital ID… will not stop small boat crossings, but it will create a burden on the already law-abiding population to prove our right to be here.

‘It will turn Britain into a “Papers, please” society.’

Meanwhile, Gracie Bradley of Liberty said a new scheme was ‘likely to be even more intrusive, insecure and discriminatory’ than the Labour government’s failed 2006 plan to bring in ID cards. 

Former Labour prime minister Tony Blair’s nascent card scheme was discarded by the incoming Coalition government in 2010.

Ms Bradley added that an ‘expensive and unjustified ID scheme… threatens our rights’.

Conservative justice spokesman Robert Jenrick also criticised the proposal earlier this month. He said, ‘Most employers who are employing individuals illegally are doing so knowingly.

‘Asking them to check ID cards rather than the current checks that they are already obliged to do is not going to make a blind bit of difference to illegal migration.’

A government spokesperson said Britain was committed to expanding the use of technology to make it easier for people to access services, pointing to existing systems such as e-visas and the NHS app.

‘We will look at any serious proposals that would help people access public services, including digital ID,’ the spokesperson said in a statement.

This is going to be another waste of money, and to think that Keir Starmer doesn’t know how to stop the boats from coming across from France, or doesn’t want to, given all the money that is spent annually.

If he wanted to stop the boats, he would find a way, but this is a manipulative move to introduce ID cards on the back of people’s outrage over mass immigration.

This is simply another tool for the government to monitor us, which is why they are so interested in AI.

If our government wanted to keep children safe, they would do so by eliminating the grooming gangs who are now operating in most towns and cities. But our government just wants to silence us.

He must think we are all extremely foolish because he thinks we think he will solve the problem when we know better. All Starmer does is make excuses and tell us any lies he can to destroy us and our identities.

He evidently doesn’t see migration as a problem, but what he does see as a problem is our complaining, but we have every right to complain.

Simply put, Starmer is tinkering around the edges while at the same time diminishing our freedoms, and that’s not okay at all.

ONE OUT, HUNDREDS IN

Channel people smuggler warns 2,000 asylum seekers could be sent to Britain EVERY DAY using larger vessels in an industry now worth ‘hundreds of millions’

Sir Keir Starmer’s ‘one-in, one-out scheme’ has no likelihood of discouraging Channel migrants unless it is significantly scaled up, it was claimed today. 

The second migrant was successfully exiled to France as part of the deal – only for hundreds more to set off in dinghies from a beach near Calais. 

Rob Lawrie, a former soldier who has been speaking to people smugglers for a new podcast, insisted the scheme was too small-scale to be a deterrent. 

One people smuggler he spoke to suggested 2,000 migrants would have to be returned every week to persuade more from crossing – but even if that happens, more would continue to come from France in new bigger boats. 

‘I was talking to a smuggler in Germany last week who said the UK needs to be sending back at least 2,000 a week – and even if that happened, they could send 2,000 more a day the other way,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

‘It’s that much money involved in the people smuggling network… I’m talking hundreds of millions.

‘He also pointed out that down the line – ”next season”, he called it – they’re introducing 18-metre boats. We’ve had one this year with 132 migrants on board.

‘I understand this is a pilot scheme, but in order for this to be effective, they need to have about two to three thousand migrants a week heading to France – and even that won’t meet the number of migrants coming across the Channel.’

This morning, at least three dinghies were observed leaving Calais’ Gravelines beach for the sea, and hours later, Border Force pulled migrants ashore at Dover.

Around the same time, the Eritrean was escorted on an Air France flight that left Heathrow for Paris at 6.39 am. 

In a last-minute legal challenge, the man’s lawyers had endeavoured to temporarily thwart his removal by arguing he was an ‘alleged trafficking victim’.

However, his effort was unsuccessful, and this morning he reached France. After three days in legal uncertainty, the first migrant deported under the scheme—an Indian man—was flown from London to Paris yesterday morning.

The Eritrean, who appeared to be in his 20s, was sitting in the last row of the aircraft, dressed in a white hooded top and black Adidas tracksuit trousers.

 

Flight AF1381 was full apart from the seat next to him, with three Home Office staff, including two security guards, sitting further along. 

As the plane took off, the migrant, with short hair and a short beard, gazed out the window at the vivid orange sunrise.

While a Home Office officer was observed completing a complex form, he took a packet of Breton cookies and a cup of tea with sugar from the cabin crew.

At the High Court yesterday, Mr Justice Sheldon heard claims the man had been ‘forced to flee Eritrea in 2019 because of forced conscription’ and spent time in Ethiopia, South Sudan and Libya.

He travelled to France, where he remained in Paris for about a week, where he was ‘homeless and destitute and constantly fearing for his life’.

The man then went to Dunkirk, where he remained in the encampment known as ‘The Jungle’ for about three weeks, without declaring asylum in France.

He arrived in the UK via a small boat and was detained by the UK Border Force on August 6, before being told his asylum claim in the UK was inadmissible on August 9.

Barristers for the man, who cannot be named, had argued that the decision was ‘procedurally unfair’ as he had not been given sufficient opportunity to put forward evidence supporting his claim that he was an ‘alleged trafficking victim’.

In a ruling, Mr Justice Sheldon said, ‘There is no serious issue to be tried in this case,’ and that the man gave differing accounts of his allegations of trafficking.

‘It was open to (the Home Office) to conclude that his credibility was severely damaged and his account of trafficking could not reasonably be believed,’ the judge added.

He also said there was ‘significant public interest in favour of the claimant’s removal’.

Hundreds of migrants attempted to cross the Channel this morning as the deportation took place.

At least one inflatable dinghy full of young men made its way out to sea from Gravelines beach, northeast Calais, at daybreak this morning.

As the boat came close to shore, people waded through waist-high water towards it and a child was handed aboard before it went out to sea.

In the town itself at 5.30 am, a group of 40 young men emerged from a tranquil side street carrying an inflatable boat over their heads before casting it into a canal.

From the bank, police officers observed the boat’s driver struggling to maintain a straight path.

Earlier in the night, a group of men formed a human chain to help drag people out of the mud after a failed endeavour to launch a boat in the canal.

Another Eritrean man successfully asked the judges on Tuesday to temporarily stop his removal after the same judge found there was a ‘serious issue to be tried’ over whether his expulsion was lawful amid claims he had been trafficked.

In that case, the court heard that the national referral mechanism (NRM) – which recognises and evaluates victims of slavery and human trafficking – found that the man had probably not been trafficked but offered him time to make additional representations.

Mr Justice Sheldon said there was ‘still room for further investigation into the trafficking claim’.

The Home Office changed its policy on re-examining rulings on modern slavery after Tuesday’s hearing. This means that anyone who wishes to challenge an NRM decision after being sent to a safe country would not be able to do so.

Alternatively, they may file a lawsuit from another nation, like France.

The latest deportation will come as a relief to the Home Office amid pressure to tackle the small boats crisis, with Donald Trump suggesting Sir Keir Starmer should use the military.

The US President said during his state visit to the UK that the Prime Minister ‘should take a very strong stand’ on immigration, which is ‘really hurting him badly’.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the first return showed people crossing the Channel that ‘if you enter the UK illegally, we will seek to remove you’.

She said she would ‘continue to challenge any last-minute, vexatious attempts to frustrate a removal in the courts’.

The returns agreement had encountered increasing scrutiny after reports of flights for removals being withdrawn earlier this week.

Ministers agreed on the pilot scheme with the French government in July as part of efforts to deter the record number of small boat arrivals.

Mr Trump pressed Sir Keir to include the military only hours after the first removal under the deal.

During a joint news conference with the prime minister at Chequers, the president emphasised his own track record of safeguarding the US borders and implied that the UK faced a comparable challenge.

He said, ‘You have people coming in and I told the Prime Minister I would stop it, and it doesn’t matter if you call out the military; it doesn’t matter what means you use.’

‘It destroys countries from within, and we’re actually now removing a lot of the people that came into our country.’

The American leader later said of Sir Keir in a Fox News interview, ‘I think he should take a very strong stand on immigration. It’s really hurting him badly.’

As Trump has stated, our government needs to halt all assistance for illegal migrants and use our military to expel them. Perhaps even send in the SAS to take out these people smugglers because we are effectively being overrun, and if Starmer doesn’t like it, he can always look the other way.

Although this sector is now valued at hundreds of millions of pounds, the truth is that it costs taxpayers billions of pounds, costing us our lives, and causes suffering for millions of people, forcing us to make sacrifices so that our government can allow migrants to enter the UK safely.

The lives, safety, and welfare of our own citizens should be our government’s top priority, but under Labour, these needs have been neglected. This must end.

Regardless of the repercussions for them, we must physically halt these unlawful crossings; otherwise, we will be left to suffer in order for Labour to create space for others.

Pushbacks have been utilised by other nations; they were successful, and the world did not condemn them.

We should quit calling them ‘asylum seekers’; they are ‘freebie seekers’. It’s as simple as that, and other countries they cross have more sense than to give them lots of rewards to entice them in.

The government could prevent this. It is utterly repulsive and wicked that they appear determined to destroy the nation and demoralise its population, even though they could defend our borders and its citizens.

‘Burned Alive’ In Tesla After Car Crash

A 43-year-old man and two nine-year-old children have died after being ‘burned alive’ when they became trapped inside a Tesla.

The car went up in flames on September 7 after it came off the road and crashed into a tree in western Germany, police said.

The man and the children died at the scene, but there are no further details.

A local resident tried to rescue the others but was unable to open the door with the Tesla’s retractable handles, German media outlets report.

Roman Jedrzejewski, who runs a paint shop opposite the crash site in Schwerte, North Rhine-Westphalia, said he sprinted over to the vehicle with a fire extinguisher after hearing a loud bang.

He told local Ruhr News: ‘I wanted to rescue some people.

‘I tried to open the car, but that didn’t work either. It was already so hot from the fire, but the right side of the car was still relatively undamaged.

‘Damn it, I didn’t help. It didn’t work.’

The fire continued to burn, with local firefighters also struggling to put it out due to repeated flare-ups.

The crash, which police said took place when the Tesla tried to overtake another car, is still being investigated by North Rhine-Westphalia’s police department.

The district police department stated: ‘Our goal is to fully reconstruct the course of events and clearly determine the cause.’

The country’s automobile association (ADAC) cautioned in April 2024 that retractable door handles could be a safety risk.

They explained that the door handles could remain retracted after the electrical supply is interrupted after an accident.

The fatal crash came a few days before Bloomberg discovered several accidents where passengers became trapped inside a Tesla after an accident.

Max Walsh, an off-duty firefighter from Virginia, was unable to use his bare hands to bust in a window and open the Model Y car’s doors to save the driver.

On Tuesday, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported an investigation into as many as 174,000 Model Y Tesla cars after reports of electric door handles that could not be opened.

These reports included instances where parents were attempting to pull a child from the car.

Children may not be able to use or access the manual door releases found within Tesla vehicles, even if the driver is aware.

Tesla’s design chief, Franz von Holzhausen, also told Bloomberg on Wednesday that the company is working on a redesign of the door handles following the reports of incidents.

Tesla was contacted for comment by Metro.

There have been numerous deaths caused by this design flaw, which has been reported. There needs to be a class-action suit.

They are poorly made and full of faults, and why they are so popular is beyond me.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started