Stones Pelt Jewish Boy, 16, In Shocking Scene

CCTV caught the shocking moment that a teenage Jewish boy was ‘pelted with stones’ walking to the synagogue in an attack in broad daylight in north London.

The attack on the youngster, who is thought to be 16 years old, on Saturday, May 11 at around 5:55 p.m. on Rookwood Road in Hackney is being investigated as a hate crime by the Met.

Three males were chasing the youngster in the London neighbourhood of Stamford Hill while he was wearing traditional Jewish attire, and one of them was hurling stones at him.

The largest Hasidic Jewish community in Europe is in the North London area, which has traditionally been the target of anti-Semitic attacks; however, these seem to have gotten worse since the terror strikes on Israel on October 7.

Suspected hate crimes reported to police in recent months include thugs on bikes randomly assaulting pedestrians in traditional Jewish dress, a man walking down a street threatening to ‘kill’ Jews and an alleged robbery that saw a 20-year-old woman beaten unconscious.

The victim in the footage is reportedly ‘alright’ following the attack, as he has gotten used to antisemitism in the area, the JC reports.

The Metropolitan Police said: ‘An investigation is underway after a reported assault of a male in Rookwood Road, N16.

‘At around 17:55 hrs on Saturday, 11 May, the victim—a Jewish male—was walking on Rookwood Road, N16 when he was approached by another male and allegedly had an item thrown at him.

‘The incident was reported to police the next day and an investigation was launched by officers based in Hackney. At this stage, the incident is being treated as a hate crime.

‘We are aware of a video being shared online and this will form part of our enquiries. We are in contact with the Shomrim and our enquiries are ongoing.

‘No arrests have been made at this time.

‘Anyone with information should call 101, giving the reference CAD 8409/23MAY. Information can also be provided anonymously to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.’

Chief of Shomrim, a neighbourhood watch, Chaim Hochhauser, told the source that the victim was attacked on Shabbat while walking to the synagogue.

He said the perpetrators have caused ‘quite a lot of trouble’ since the October 7 attacks, in attempts to ‘frighten and harm the Jewish community’.

Although the police are looking into the alleged attack, no one has been taken into custody as of yet.

Everyone in this country should be able to walk our streets safely. It shouldn’t matter what age, sex, race or religion they are. We are all equals like it or not.

The idea that attacking a child is justified because of what adults from different religions are doing to each other is absurd.

Taking into account the events of World War II, this is tragic. You were astounded by the inhumanity against fellow humans, and it still doesn’t cease, but this is what’s happening to our once amazing country. I used to be proud to say that I was British, sadly, not so much now.

Britishness is a thing of the past. Because we let them take over and seek to replace our culture with theirs. British people in the UK are currently a minority, and what are our police doing about this, let me guess, the usual investigations that are ongoing, which is probably a code for the case is open but we’re doing absolutely nothing about it.

There are far too many migrants in the UK now, and we can’t keep up with them all, not to mention the lack of powers by the police in dealing with minors. We would need to triple the police force throughout the UK and even then that would barely scratch the surface.

A 70-Year-Old Grandmother Chased Yobs After They Broke And Destroyed Her Gate

A grandmother who chased a gang of yobs after they smashed her garden gate claims she was told off by police after telling them she would ‘wring their necks’ if she saw the teens again. 

Gillian Mears, 70, said she ‘just saw red’ after the group damaged her back gate at her house in Kessingland, Suffolk.

Following the incident, Mrs Mears, who has four grandkids, pursued the yobs with assistance from her neighbours.

She reported the damage, but when the police came to her house, she was reprimanded for her threats.

She said, ‘I just saw red and lost the plot in a fit of rage and took to chasing the gang of youths down the street.

‘Our neighbours came out of their houses to try and help me catch them, which was really nice.

‘I called the police and only when I told them that if I got my hands on them, I would wring their necks did they rock up.

‘When they arrived, they told me off for making that threat, which was not a threat; it was me just venting my anger.’

After the attack on April 20, Mrs. Mears and her husband John had to pay a hefty amount of money to have the gate fixed, just to have the vandals come again.

When they came back, Mr Mears, who is disabled, went to confront the gang but fell over and hurt himself.

Mrs Mears then picked her husband up off the floor and called the police.

The couple claimed that the gate was broken by vandals once more and that they had to pay £520 to have it restored.

The couple also added that they are ‘living in fear’ that the group will return.

Mrs Mears said: ‘Those evil kids just laughing at me and my husband make me feel sick and full of despair with the next generation. I have no hope, and their parents should be ashamed.

‘My husband, who is not very mobile in his old age, had a nasty fall attempting to confront them.

‘I had to pick him off the floor and it was very distressing. Then, to add to the misery, we saw the damage to our gate, which had been completely smashed in.’

A Suffolk Police spokesman said: ‘The investigation is ongoing into the criminal damage and anti-social behaviour by a group of youths on April 20.’

For further information, MailOnline has been in touch with Suffolk Police.

It’s no surprise that some people do what they want to do without any consideration for others when the police certainly seem to condone their behaviour whilst condemning those who try to stop it. The police need to get their priorities right and start doing the job they used to.

This lady doubtless said what she said metaphorically, but the police took it literally. How on earth would a 70-year-old lady ‘wring their necks’, even though she probably wanted to, would not have had the strength to do so?

This saying is as old as the hills. My mother used to say it to me as a child, but wouldn’t have done it!

It was misconstrued by the police, who clearly have a literacy problem.

Instead of serving and defending people who are defending their rights by defending their property, the police have shifted more in favour of those who engage in criminal activity. This raises the question of whether we have a police force at all.

London’s Pro-Palestinian Marches Are ‘Genuinely Dangerous’ For Jews, Says Michael Gove

It is ‘genuinely dangerous to be Jewish’ near Gaza marches in London and other cities today, Michael Gove warned as he accused pro-Palestinian protesters of turning a blind eye to ‘lurid demonstrations of anti-Semitism’.

In a major speech at a Jewish community centre today, the Communities Secretary raised the spectre of Nazi Germany, warning that attacks on Jews were often ‘the canary in the mine’ for the state of a nation.

Mr Gove urged the pro-Palestine march organisers and “good people taking part” to take further action to prevent anti-Jewish hate symbols from being shown by certain participants in the marches.

He said Jews were unable to be ‘their authentic selves’ near the marches and while many protesters are ‘thoughtful, gentle, compassionate people’, they are ‘side by side with those who are promoting hate’.

In recent weeks, one man has been arrested for carrying a placard emblazoned with a swastika, while police sparked outrage by telling a Jewish woman that the notorious Nazi symbol was ‘not necessarily anti-Semitic’.

Mr Gove further attacked demonstrations on college campuses, questioning if comparable demonstrations against China, Syria, or Burma’s violations of human rights had not taken place. He brought up the fact that Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad was the only person to have killed more Muslims in the recent past.

The Cabinet minister described anti-Semitism as the ‘common currency of hate’ that is shared by the Far Right, the Hard Left, and Islamists and attacked the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement as ‘explicitly anti-Semitic’. 

Mr Gove’s speech came ahead of the publication of a long-trailed report by the government’s independent adviser on political violence, Lord Walney.

Lord Walney accused authorities of being ‘insufficiently robust’ with groups on the left.

In a long-awaited report today, he said groups like Just Stop Oil, who make lawbreaking a central part of their modus operandi, should face serious curbs on their fundraising and be liable to legal action from disrupted businesses.

He also proposed changing the legislation to make it simpler for police to deny permission for large-scale gatherings, with an eye towards pro-Palestine demonstrations. The groups could also be made to pay a portion of the costs associated with upholding the legislation.

He also recommended that governments look at outlawing rallies outside the Houses of Parliament in the heart of London to protect MPs from harassment, which may be the most contentious aspect of the report.

Based on the visas granted, our government is bringing in 1.2 million illegal immigrants annually. Since Brexit, there has been no improvement, and the British people are now a minority.

It is time to outlaw all forms of public protest. We can protest all we want thanks to social media, and here’s Michael Gove along with his buddies who turn a blind eye to the consequences of mass migration.

Thousands of people enter the country illegally every year, yet this is legal migration, approved by our government. Rishi Sunak could halt this influx tomorrow, but he won’t since voting and cheap work are two benefits that illegal immigrants provide, and the anti-semitic, fascist, hate-filled rhetoric that’s spewing out of the mouths of these protesters is truly sickening and terrifying, and frighteningly reminiscent of Germany in the 1930s.

The UK is becoming a Muslim country and we are becoming like Germany—never again, which means never again.

London has become a no-go zone for decent people when these hate marches take place, and they’re costing the taxpayer millions and millions of pounds to police and clean up after them.

She Had A Bright Future

The parents of a baby killed by a ‘callous’ nursery worker said they could ‘never forgive’ her as she faces a lengthy jail term for their daughter’s manslaughter.

John and Katie Meehan spoke for the first time about the loss of their nine-month-old daughter Genevieve Meehan, known as ‘Gigi’ after jurors found Kate Roughley guilty of killing her.

Roughley is due to receive a maximum sentence of life imprisonment over the ‘ill-treatment’ of Genevieve, who was left for over 90 minutes before being found ‘unresponsive and blue’.

The 37-year-old worker from Heaton Norris, Stockport, was said to have ignored the ‘serious and obvious’ risks of strapping a baby face down on a bean bag to sleep.

Speaking about Manchester Crown Court today, barrister Mr Meehan said: ‘We will never forgive the callousness of Kate Roughley’s actions. She was entrusted with the care of or our daughter but instead, she treated her with contempt.’

Mr Meehan stood with his tearful solicitor wife Katie and paid tribute to their daughter, who ‘loved life, played the tambourine, and spent time with her big sister’, and was ‘kind, infectious, and mischievous’.

‘We loved every day watching her develop. We’ll never accept the cruelty of her life being taken away,’ he said. ‘Her life was full of promise and wonder, and it was taken.

‘Genevieve’s loss has destroyed our family and we grieve for her every day. We’re desperate to see her smile, see her laugh and feel her warm embrace.’

Mr Meehan said he and his wife do not want to see her defined by the manner of Genevieve’s death and that ‘our beautiful daughter deserves to be remembered for the wonderful person she was.’

During a month-long trial, jurors heard Roughley displayed a ‘lack of sympathy’ towards children, labelling Genevieve ‘vile’, a ‘whinger’ and a ‘diva’.

CCTV cameras showed her disregarding the child’s cries and frantic last-ditch attempts to live while the child was forcibly fastened to the bean bag and wrapped in a blanket.

Roughley, who had 17 years’ experience as a nursery worker but no children of her own, then ‘lied’ to cover up what she’d done, claiming she constantly checked on babies in her care. 

The prosecution said Roughley’s ‘deliberate conduct’, ‘ill-treatment’ and ‘lack of any effective monitoring’ causing Genevieve’s death.

After more than five hours of deliberation, the Manchester Crown Court jury gave their verdicts, and Roughley looked forward without displaying any emotion.

Mrs Justice Ellen Bogan adjourned sentencing until Wednesday and remanded Roughley, whose parents were at the back of court, in custody until then.

Mrs Meehan and other family members emotionally hugged outside court and thanked the prosecution.

Manchester Crown Court heard Genevieve suffered fatal asphyxia and pathophysiological stress caused by the ‘unsafe sleep environment’ at Tiny Toes Nursery in Cheadle Hulme, Stockport, on May 9, 2022.

During the trial, Peter Wright KC, prosecuting, told the jury: ‘Her death was not the result of some terrible or unavoidable accident.

‘We say her death arose from ill-treatment she suffered at the hands of this defendant.’

On the day of tragedy, deputy manager Roughley was acting as leader in the nursery’s understaffed baby room, where she was one of only two workers looking after 11 babies.

Genevieve had been dropped off by her parents, barrister John Meehan and solicitor Katie Wheeler, at 9 am and was found unresponsive at 3.12 pm. She could not be revived and was later pronounced dead in hospital.

Mr Wright said the reason for the baby’s condition wasn’t immediately apparent but became clear from CCTV footage.

He added that Roughley had put Genevieve to sleep that afternoon, wrapping her in a blanket so tightly that she was immobile.

The child had also been placed not on her back, according to safe sleep policies, but on her front and face down, strapped to a bean bag using a harness.

A blanket was also placed over her that practically covered her head to toe, with the ‘inevitable consequence’ that it would make observations more difficult and increase the risk of overheating.

He said Genevieve was visibly ‘distressed by this treatment’ yet her thrashing and cries were ignored and she was left from around 1.35 pm until she was discovered unresponsive—an hour and 37 minutes later.

Mr Wright said: ‘The risk to her of asphyxiation and death was, we say, both serious and obvious.

‘Yet the defendant ignored it and by the time she checked on Genevieve with anything vaguely representing any genuine interest, it was too late.’

The jury heard how the baby had been enrolled at the nursery just a few weeks earlier in April after she ‘thrived’ despite being born prematurely at 35 weeks.

Genevieve had been treated in hospital for bronchiolitis, which is common in young infants, and was using an inhaler but expert witnesses said the condition was not a factor in her death.

Mr Wright said that in the days leading up to the tragedy, Roughley had displayed a ‘lack of affection’ towards Genevieve that was ‘not merely visible, but tangible’.

On the day of Genevieve’s death, Roughley had used the bean bag as a ‘form of restraint’, Mr Wright said, ignoring safety advice never to place babies face down.

Under cross-examination during the trial, Roughley insisted: ‘I would never not like a nine-month-old baby. To say I disliked her is far from the truth.’

Asked if she thought that Genevieve’s death was avoidable, she said: ‘I feel that if I had checked on her a couple of seconds or minutes earlier, it may have been different.

‘It was a common practice for children to sleep in the bean bag bed.

‘I feel responsible in the fact that Genevieve was in my care that day. However, I don’t feel my actions were the reason for the death.’

She denied that calling Genevieve a ‘whinger’ and ‘a diva’ was ‘malicious’.

Roughley said: ‘Often we would say to children ‘stop whingeing’ This was not shouted at the children or said in any malicious way. They were just passing comments through the working day.’

Sarah Elliot KC, defending, told the jury Roughley looked after children in a ‘practical, responsible, no-nonsense but caring way’.

She said the defendant denied failing to make safe sleep arrangements and had ‘kept an appropriate eye’ on Genevieve.

Nine-month-old babies are not swaddled; only newborns are. It is not appropriate to strap a baby down for anything other than high chair or pram use! And why weren’t there any more cots? The proprietors of the nurseries must have been aware that the number of newborns whose parents pay a high price for their care required more than their equipment could accommodate.

Why on earth would you swaddle a child that age? Why on earth would you restrict any movement, it’s natural for them to move and unnatural to prevent it.

Newborns can’t control their movements when they’re born and often disturb themselves when they’re sleeping. Supposedly, swaddling keeps them snug as they are in the womb, but when they’re born, they should be allowed to move around freely.

To have to deal with their child’s shocking mistreatment and eventual death at the hands of this woman would be enough to rock the foundations of any loving parent. I do feel bad for the parents, who were both working to provide a better life for their child, paying handsomely in the belief that their child was being cared for with kitten gloves.

Accidents happen, I know that, but this was not an accident; rather, it appeared to be the inevitable result of blatantly nasty and deliberate disregard and abuse of the woman’s position.

The toddler was disturbed and sobbing on a bean bag for ninety minutes while being fastened face down. Abuse, plain and simple, was the cause of this.

This was poor practice and I wonder how many other children had been subjected to this treatment, but were lucky they did not have the same fate. The loss of a child is something no parent ever gets over, and more so when it could have been avoided.

This could not have been the woman’s first instance of abusing a child in this way. She did something inappropriate out of a fit of rage. The same is true with senior care facilities—there are many unscrupulous ones out there.

NHS’ Worst Treatment Disaster: Rishi Sunak To Apologize

Rishi Sunak will apologise to infected-blood victims, as a devastating report blames successive governments and the NHS for the scandal.

The Prime Minister will issue a formal apology on behalf of the Government for the handling of a scandal which has claimed more than 3,000 lives and continues to wreck countless others.

Plans for a major compensation programme that may end up costing taxpayers more than £10 billion will be unveiled by ministers.

According to insiders in Whitehall, NHS head Amanda Pritchard is expected to apologise for the greatest treatment scandal in the health service’s history.

The actions are being taken in response to the long-awaited publication of the public inquiry’s conclusions by retired High Court judge Sir Brian Langstaff, which were initiated in 2018. Since the inquiry’s inception, an estimated 710 more victims have passed away.

The National Health Service (NHS) and the Department of Health are likely to come under fire for allowing the use of imported blood products years after the initial alerts that they may be tainted with diseases including hepatitis C and HIV.

They will also be savaged for their evasive response to campaigners seeking the truth, in what victims believe to have been a concerted cover-up lasting decades.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the NHS supplied tainted blood products to around 30,000 patients in the UK, who subsequently contracted hepatitis C and HIV. The contaminated goods were inexpensively imported from the United States, where blood was procured from individuals who were paid to donate it, including drug addicts, prisoners, and the homeless.

Individuals receiving treatment for blood diseases like haemophilia and those receiving blood transfusions made up the majority of those affected.

Kate Burt, chief executive of the Haemophilia Society, said: ‘The contaminated blood scandal has been a stain on our nation for too long.

‘For the sake of the thousands of lives lost to this disaster, the Government must accept all the Infected Blood Inquiry’s recommendations and begin work immediately to rebuild trust in our public services. Only a commitment to deliver radical reform and to treat those it serves with compassion and respect will begin to end this shameful episode in our country’s history.’

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt yesterday described the episode as ‘the worst scandal of my lifetime’ and said the families ‘have got every right to be incredibly angry that generations of politicians, including me when I was health secretary, have not acted fast enough to address the scandal’.

The compensation plan has been approved by Mr Hunt, but the exact cost won’t be known until a new committee has created a payment structure.

Labour health spokesman Wes Streeting said he expected Sir Brian to criticise ‘successive governments’ over the issue.

Mr Streeting said an incoming Labour administration would honour any compensation deal agreed by the Government, adding: ‘Everyone has got their responsibility to bear in this appalling scandal and we have got a shared responsibility to put it right.’

Even if Rishi Sunak was not Prime Minister at the time, he is today, hence he should apologise for the wrongdoings of his predecessors! And he actively shares the same Tory ideology of treating ordinary people like dirt but it will be a farse as is every other word spoken by the Tories.

However, this isn’t the worst treatment disaster in NHS history. The damage caused by the COVID-19 jabs will massively eclipse this, so let’s see how this plays out over the next decade.

The taxpayer won’t object, in my opinion, to the victim’s recompense. But why should the taxpayer foot the bill for something they had nothing to do with? My sympathies are with the victims who have died without receiving justice, but no amount of money will make things right, and our government must bow down and acknowledge its wrongdoings.

Wig No More

English courts could drop the requirement for barristers wearing wigs amid accusations they are ‘culturally insensitive’, it has been reported.

After several barristers protested that the obligation to wear wigs discriminated against people with Afro-Caribbean hair, the judiciary is reportedly in negotiations to amend court dress standards.

According to reports, judges are considering recommendations put forth by the Bar Council, which represents solicitors in England and Wales. The Telegraph said that any adjustments will be made as soon as possible in the autumn.

This happened as a result of objections made by several black solicitors who demanded that the requirement to wear wigs be removed.

Since 2007, wigs, also referred to as perukes, have not been required in civil, family, or Supreme Court proceedings. However, they continue to be necessary for criminal cases.

Barristers who like to wear a turban or a hijab to court may seek special permission if they would like to avoid wearing a wig.

Styled after 17th-century fashion, they are made of horsehair.

Over the last two years, a black barrister has been at the centre of a heated controversy regarding the wearing of wigs in court, with orders to wear one or risk disciplinary punishment.

A Bar Council spokesman told the Telegraph: ‘Following questions from barristers about wigs and hair discrimination, the Bar Council set up a working group to consider court dress in the context of all protected characteristics.

‘The findings of the working group are currently being discussed with the judiciary as part of our regular dialogue on equality and diversity matters.’

Leslie Thomas KC called for the ‘ridiculous costume’ to be brought to an end.

He said: ‘The wigs certainly should go. There isn’t any place in modern society for barristers to be wearing 17th-century fashion.’

A spokesman for the judiciary said: ‘Senior judges are in active discussions with the Bar Council about the findings of their working group on court dress.

‘We welcome these discussions as part of our continuing joint work on diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.’

How many years into his study of the profession did it dawn on him that he would have to wear a wig as part of the uniform? When the professional dress code is relaxed, so does the profession.

A formal dress code? I don’t think that wigs are necessary and never have been, but it’s an old law that needs to be updated so long as the profession doesn’t fall. However, other countries seem to get away with it perfectly fine without having them, and it doesn’t seem to have affected people receiving justice, and a fashion show is not and never will be essential for the dispensing of justice.

However, we would be removing something because of a particular demographic that finds the wig offensive or dislikes it. People lose hair, let’s face it, but they don’t want others to chop off theirs because they find it offensive.

Because barristers’ wig wear is so famous, maybe if they don’t like it, they should practise somewhere else. If wig producers stopped making wigs to appease certain groups, they would go out of business.

A barrister’s wig lends them a sense of authority, thus they should be treated seriously rather than as props for a fashion show.

I’ve seen female barristers with all manner of hairstyles and they seem to manage perfectly well with their wigs. These groups should follow our culture or go elsewhere.

However, wigs can be hot, uncomfortable, and quite unfashionable. They might have been fashionable hundreds of years ago, and maybe they need updating, but they’re still iconic, and if we are going to oust them from the courtroom, they should go because of that reason and not because it offends others.

AI Will Be Very Bad For Society, Warns Former Google Vice President 

According to a tech pioneer who helped AI become popular, a universal basic income should be provided to all people to offset the disruptive effects of this contentious technology on employment.

Former Google vice president Geoffrey Hinton said AI and robots would be ‘very bad for society’ because the millions of workers left jobless by the technology will not enjoy the wealth resulting from the boom in productivity.

Speaking to the BBC’s Newsnight, the academic said: ‘I certainly believe in a universal basic income.

‘But I don’t think that’s enough because a lot of people get their self-respect from the jobs they do.’

He continued: ‘If you pay everybody a universal basic income, that solves the problem of them starving and not being able to pay the rent but that doesn’t solve the self-respect problem.’

The expert, who said he had raised the idea of universal basic income at Downing Street, warned that many blue-collar and ‘mid-level intellectual jobs’ will disappear because of AI, but predicted that plumbing could be safe from the march of the robots.

‘My best bet about a job that is safe is plumbing because these things [AI] aren’t yet very good at physical manipulation,’ he said. ‘That will probably be the last thing they are very good at.’

His caution follows the IMF’s forecast that artificial intelligence will impact 40% of jobs globally. According to the Institute for Public Policy Research, the deployment of AI in the workplace might result in the loss of eight million jobs in the United Kingdom.

Hinton, who quit Google in 2023 to sound the alarm about AI, said he was pleased that the world was now taking its ‘existential threat’ to humanity seriously, as well as its impact on society.

‘I am very worried about AI taking over lots of mundane jobs,’ he said. ‘That should be a good thing. It’s going to lead to a big increase in productivity, which leads to a big increase in wealth, and if that wealth was equally distributed, that would be great, but it’s not going to be.

‘In the systems we live in, that wealth is going to go to the rich and not to the people whose jobs get lost, and that’s going to be very bad for society, I believe.

‘It’s going to increase the gap between rich and poor, which increases the chances of Right-wing populists getting elected,’ he warned.

Just a few days ago, Sainsbury’s and Microsoft agreed to deploy AI capabilities from the tech giant to enhance the shopping experience for consumers and free up staff members’ time so they can concentrate on important duties.

Permanent job loss and high immigration rates are two incompatible things, particularly if the individuals who are already here cannot be sent back.

We thus know that AI will eliminate hundreds of millions of jobs worldwide, and therefore we need to decide as a society to prioritise human life over AI, but corporate greed won’t allow that to happen, and civilisation will not survive when you have hundreds of millions of people with no purpose. Advanced technology (AI) will not benefit society, it will destroy it!

AI is already devastating the creative industry, and the news industry will be quickly devastated as well because no one will know what is true and what is AI-generated. Menial jobs may hang around for a little while but AI will eventually create robots that will be just as good as any craftsman. I bet you don’t think ‘Terminator’ was just fiction now!

It’s Not A Great Day For London’s Buses

London’s bus network was thrown into chaos as three buses were taken out of action by fire and crashes.

Incredibly, one bus in Twickenham burst into flames before burning completely, and in Southall, the E5 to Perivale crashed into a bus stop on South Road, causing extensive damage.

On the opposite side of London, on the 5 route between Canning Town and Romford, a new-style Routemaster struck the side of a home on East Ham’s Claughton Road. The three incidents all took place on Saturday.

Transport for London (TfL) had a hectic day. This was the fourth significant bus fire to affect its fleet this year, following similar occurrences in Wimbledon on January 11, North Woolwich on January 12, and Putney on January 25.

The East Ham incident went viral on TikTok and X, formerly Twitter, with a copy of the video on the Elon Musk-owned site picking up 60,000 views in a matter of hours.

The video showed the crash from multiple angles – as the bright red people mover was seen crashed into the house, mounted on the pavement.

It seems to have hit and knocked off a section of the roof of a building across the street. An alternative viewpoint indicated that it was a number 5 bus, which passes through the region along the adjacent Barking Road, a major thoroughfare.

Why the bus was on the residential street is a mystery. There does not appear to have been any scheduled detours on the route, according to London’s roadworks registry.

Multiple angles of the Southall crash were shared on social media. The shunt is believed to have happened sometime between 5 pm and 6 pm and decimated the bus stop, which was later seen wrapped up in tape.

The vehicle was dealt heavy damage in the collision, smashing the left side of the front windscreen and splitting open its front bumper.

There were pieces of safety glass strewn all over the pavement. The LED screen that showed the arrivals of upcoming flights stayed operational despite the disaster.

It had been changed to read: ‘Bus stop closed. Please use the next stop or the previous stop to catch your bus.’

The TfL website has been updated to say the bus stop is ‘reporting access issues’. Videos shared on Snapchat suggest the bus was removed from the scene sometime after nightfall. 

A few miles away, at approximately 1 pm, Richmond Road in Twickenham, southwest London, was engulfed in massive flames and billowing smoke.

The London Fire Brigade said that although the fire damaged a single-decker bus, the driver and passengers managed to escape before rescue personnel could reach.

The road remains closed, with people advised to avoid the area for the rest of the day. 

The issue is that foreign nationals operate an excessive number of buses, but let’s face it—if they can manoeuvre a dinghy, they can certainly operate a bus.

All fares please “Dinghy, Dinghy!”

A ban on the majority of these new drivers is necessary, as they have been engaged in several accidents and near misses, and it seems that a lot of these drivers are now quite reckless and it must be said that they seem to treat the public roads like a race track.

Bus drivers are dangerous, especially around London. They speed along or just take up two lanes, and now this is Khanage in Khantown, and now Whacky Races.

The majority of bus drivers in London are foreign nationals who most likely passed their driving exam while riding a donkey. They also don’t truly understand the English language.

In Hot Water!

Britain’s ‘kindest’ plumber has had his citizen award rescinded after the trader faked stories about helping vulnerable people and pocketed £10,000 in donations.

The award was granted to James Anderson, 56, in 2023 in recognition of his efforts to provide free plumbing services and boilers to individuals in need.

Anderson is a resident of Burnley, Lancashire. He is the owner of Depher, which stands for Disabled and Elderly, Plumbing and Heating Emergency Response. Anderson also frequently updates his social media accounts with free boiler repair and replacement services.

However, a BBC investigation found that to generate thousands of pounds in contributions, the firm staged stories about assisting individuals.

Because of the newly discovered facts about the plumber, the British Citizen Awards have revoked their prize, citing a conflict with their principles.

Social media posts about Anderson’s charitable endeavours gained widespread attention during the UK’s high cost of living problem.

Anderson’s business gained recognition for providing free plumbing services and installing boilers for the elderly.

However, a BBC investigation claimed that he was selling false information and taking advantage of the weak while receiving £2 million in donations from the general people and £75,000 from celebrities like Hugh Grant and Lily Allen.

Anderson faced accusations of fabricating tales of saving an eighty-four-year-old woman from suicide and of disclosing his clients’ personal information without their consent.

A spokesperson for the British Citizen Awards told the BBC: ‘We pride ourselves in recognising individuals across the UK who work tirelessly and selflessly to make a positive impact on their communities and charities.’

They went on to say that the plumber’s behaviour didn’t align with their principles and that they had revoked his award.

When recently challenged by the BBC and GB News about the posts he’s allegedly faked, he didn’t explain but denied using the raised money for his own benefit.

However, he told GB News: ‘I’m only human, I’m doing the best I can.’

Speaking on the channel, he said: ‘I think in hindsight I’ve done too much too quick on my own, instead of getting in other people to help me and support me. Saying that it’s no excuse. But today has been very horrendous for me.’ 

The Fundraising Regulator launched an inquiry into the plumber’s business in response to the BBC’s disclosures to determine if Depher violated any provisions of the code of fundraising practice.

Elements of the code include being legal, transparent, and respectful.

This man has now been called out. His claims didn’t add up, but people being the way they are now believe the social media hype and ignore the red flags, including celebrities. People are suckers for a sob story, and people seem to live in a fantasy world, and this has been going on for a very long time.

He’s been plumbing the depths of the abyss, to effectively steal an image of being the good samaritan, so the opposite of Robin Hood.

Sadly, there are decent tradespeople out there who are unfairly characterised by individuals such as this plonker.

He’s a nasty guy, and I don’t know how people can act this way. It’s known as temptation and human nature, I guess. He’s certainly plumbed the depths of dishonesty, and criminal investigations should be initiated against him, especially when he’s received all that money.

Ultimately, if you’re a kind person and you help others, you shouldn’t feel the need to boast about it or even get paid for it. You should never ask for anything in return; you help others because you want to.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started