Some extracts from a long interview Trump did with TIME magazine.

Trump:

Because I don’t think anybody should be forced to bear fake news, constantly bad stories, because I’ve done great things. I mean, I’ve done Venezuela. I’ve done—I can name, I can name 100 great things I’ve done. I never get good press. I never get fair press. Doesn’t have to be good. All it has to be is fair. So at a certain point, you say, “What’s the purpose of like this crazy Kaitlan Collins?” She’s a very average person. She’s the most unhappy young person I’ve ever seen. If I did something spectacular by any standard, and they would write about it, they will only write badly. Sometimes I’m amazed at how they can—you know, yesterday I got tremendous applause from massive crowds that came to Duncan. And I said to the people, “Don’t feel bad tomorrow when you read that I got booed out of the place.” I didn’t get booed out of the place.

I went to Tennessee. The crowd went wild. I went to, yesterday, to Chicago. Got the big golf tent. President’s coming. The crowd went absolutely wild. And I said—I didn’t want to make a big deal out of it but I just said a few words before the guy started playing. They asked me to make a speech. I said, “I’m not going to make a speech. I want to play golf.” But I said to him—I mean, they had to stop the crowd from—they were going crazy, 100%. There was no negative number. Did anybody write anything negative about it? Check it out.

Trump on Iran:

They killed 75,000 people in the last number of months. Protesters, innocent [unintelligible], a lot of very good people. They killed 70, anywhere from 72 to 75,000. We all documented. They went on Brett Baier the other day and they lied about it. They said 3,000. Brett Bair said, “You got to be kidding, me!” No, they killed 75,000 people. It’s unbelievable. It’s a bloodbath. So we’ll see. And the reason people don’t rise up, because they’re afraid of being killed. You know, they go out in the street and they end up killing 1,000 people, 2,000, sometimes less. They use snipers to go right through their head, and when—remember the women went, they had 500,000 women, and then they started getting hit by snipers right in the middle of their head? The women looked and they saw that, then they saw another one, and they ran like hell.

Word is he made that up.

We’re selling millions of barrels of oil—that’s ours—and it’s been amazing. But we fought that war, it was less than one day. It was over. We’re doing very well in Iran too. But it’s a much bigger area, much bigger country, much further away. And—but the result is going to be the same. They want to make a deal. As soon as I make a deal, oil prices will drop to what they were. You know, when I was—you’ve heard me say this—When I was part of the going in, I was in Iowa, helping them campaign a little bit for the thing that we have coming up. And in Iowa, I mean, it was—oil was $1.90. I mean, it was like almost nothing. We broke the $2 barriers. One station was $1.85. One was $1.95. One was $1.99, and it was coming down all over the country. Now California is a little bit fictitious because in California they judge every time you lower the oil, they judge that. But I had no other way down there. And then I said to my people, including him, I said, “I hate to do this, you guys, but we have to take the nuclear weapon away from you.”

Aaand you get the idea. It’s all like that. Childish, incoherent, fictitious, random, disconnected. Shockingly mindless. It’s terrifying.

Trump has been chatting.

Trump deflected responsibility for misleading Americans about the length of the Iran war, dismissed low poll ratings as “fake numbers”, and refused to rule out the possibility of declaring a state of emergency before the midterms, in a wide-ranging interview with Time magazine.

And by state of emergency he means the outcome of the midterms?

Overall, just 31% of people said they approve of Trump’s handling of his job as president.

But when asked about his low approval rating during his interview with Time, Trump dismissed concerns.

“They’re fake numbers,” Trump said. “I would beat anybody running today by 20 points. Your numbers, that you have, are fake. The pollsters are corrupt. They’re almost as corrupt as the writers.”

Speaking of corrupt, Bub, look in the mirror.

In the months leading up to the midterms, Trump has claimed US elections are insecure and signed executive orders seeking to assert more control over voting methods – such as restricting mail-in ballot voting and requiring ID.

He has previously refused to rule out declaring a national emergency around elections to implement his desired regulations. Other administration leaders, such as the FBI director, Kash Patel, have not ruled out the possibility of deploying federal law enforcement officers to polling locations, which is against the law.

When asked whether he would declare a state of emergency before the midterms, Trump told Time magazine: “I don’t rule anything out or in. We’ll see.”

In other words if he doesn’t like the outcome he will attempt a coup.

Among other topics the president discussed with Time magazine, he responded affirmatively when asked whether he regretted appointing supreme court justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

“What can I do? I put them in. They voted against me too often. I was very – I gave them the position of a lifetime, and they voted against me often,” Trump said.

He thinks the Supreme Court is like the mob. He does you a favor, you gotta do what he wants. He does you a favor, you owe him, punk.

The Free Speech Union tells us:

Cambridge students are being forced to undergo “inclusivity training”.

At least one Cambridge college is requiring students to attend training delivered by Stop Hate UK. The group has posted a video on social media saying students should always display “positive attitudes” and “use respectful and kind language that will not cause harm or offence”.

That goes way beyond everyday civility into controlled speech and even “attitudes”. News flash: our attitudes are our own business.

Stop Hate UK has also described “Islamophobia” as a “crime”. The UK has no blasphemy laws, and this shows how activist organisations have been emboldened by the new non-statutory “anti-Muslim hostility” definition to stifle criticism, debate and challenge of Islam.

The FSU should also have pointed out that “anti-Muslim” is not the same thing as “anti-Islam”. Muslims are people; Islam is an ideology, and a very horrible one at that. Religions are ideologies; religions make fact-claims; religions tell us what to do and think and say. We have to be free to dispute the whole system, or else we’re just doomed to de facto theocracy.

Women who know that men are not women are not allowed to attend the Greens conference.

A gender-critical women’s group has been barred from the Green Party conference after being told it would make trans members “feel unsafe”.

Hey Green Party. Has it ever occurred to you that the presence of men who claim to be women can make women feel unsafe?

The Green Women’s Declaration (GWD) was told it was not allowed to have a stall at this year’s party gathering in Brighton.

The Green Party Executive (GPEx), which includes Zack Polanski, the leader, ruled that the group could not have a presence at the conference.

An email to the GWD, seen by The Telegraph, said: “GPEx took this decision because it believes that having GWD present at conference would make our trans members feel unsafe, based on the prior conduct of some GWD members.”

The Green Party did not provide any details or evidence of the conduct of GWD members which had led to the decision.

Well they don’t need to, do they. They are The Righteous, and feminist women are The Wicked.

The Green Party’s decision this year comes after the 2025 Supreme Court judgment and subsequent guidance by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

The Supreme Court ruled last year that “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 referred to biological sex rather than gender identity.

The EHRC subsequently published single-sex spaces guidance barring trans women, who are born male, from accessing female changing rooms and toilets.

Earlier this year, Mr Polanski called the EHRC guidelines “deeply regressive” and claimed they were “pushing trans people out of public life”.

In other words, for the billionth time, men’s invasions of women’s spaces are defended at the expense of women. The men get what they want and the women are told to get out.

Jude English, one of the directors of GWD, told The Telegraph: “We are saddened that we must go to court to defend our character and values against a party we have served for years.”

She added that senior figures in the Green Party “do not yet understand that the Human Rights Act includes the rights of women as a sex class and the Equality Act confers on them as individuals a duty to uphold our human rights”.

A Green Party spokesman said: “The Green Party always strives to be a welcoming and inclusive place, and this year’s conference will be the biggest we have ever held.”

The Green Party clearly does not strive to be inclusive of women.

Trump says he’ll seize power if the elections next month don’t go the way he wants.

Trump said in an interview published Thursday that he has not ruled out invoking the Insurrection Act or declaring a national emergency around the midterm elections in November.

“I’m not committing to anything,” Trump said in an interview with Time when asked about the limits of his presidential power. “We’re going to see how it plays out in court.”

It’s all illegal and unconstitutional, but that doesn’t matter, because no one can stop him.

The president has a history of threatening to deploy troops via the Insurrection Act of 1807 between his two terms.

Trump has a history of a lot of things, all of them bad.

Yes of course equality is for everyone, because that’s the whole point of it. That has nothing whatever to do with claiming to be the opposite sex and trying to force everyone to agree with the claim.

'Equality is not conditional—it belongs to everyone'

Scottish actor Alan Cumming has been named the new patron of TransLucent, a UK human rights organisation advocating for transgender and gender-diverse people.

The actor, author and artistic director will support the group’s… pic.twitter.com/RZnTbbxAy0

— The Herald (@heraldscotland) September 30, 2026

Pretend-gender games have nothing to do with equality or egalitarianism.

He’d be better off talking about rights rather than equality.

He does no the two are not identical, doesn’t he?

Doesn’t he?

Oh goody, it’s Inclusive Terminology Guidance time again.

EXCL: The Green party has produced an Orwellian glossary of ‘unacceptable’ language ahead of its conference this weekend.

Its new ‘Inclusive Terminology Guidance’ instructs members to stop using words and phrases including ‘elderly’, ‘female politician’ and ‘mothers and…

— Noa Hoffman (@hoffman_noa) September 30, 2026

Its new ‘Inclusive Terminology Guidance’ instructs members to stop using words and phrases including ‘elderly’, ‘female politician’ and ‘mothers and fathers’. Also discouraged are ‘able-bodied’, ‘sex-change’, ‘homosexual’, ‘a nutter’, ‘youngster’ and ‘sexual preference’.

The guidance recommends replacing ‘gendered job titles’ with ‘gender-neutral terms wherever possible’. Members should say ‘chair’ instead of ‘chairman’, ‘police officer’ instead of ‘policeman’ and ‘parents and carers’ rather than mothers and fathers.

I agree with the part about not saying ___man when the meaning is generic, i.e. it’s not referring to a specific male cop but to a general sex-unknown cop. Same with mailman, delivery guy, etc. I’ve agreed with that for decades. But what does that have to do with mothers and fathers? The words “mother” and “father” are not job titles. Some kids lack one or both, so in some contexts it might be best to say “parents”, but that doesn’t mean canceling the words entirely.

A section is also devoted to what members should do if they inadvertently commit a linguistic transgression. In a relief to those who may struggle to navigate the party’s lexicon, the guidance reassures them that ‘it’s okay to make mistakes from time to time’ – provided they are trying. Those who fail to use the sanctioned language are advised to apologise, thank whoever pointed out their error, and ‘adjust your language moving forward’.

Mmmno. Way too Stalinist. Sorry.

More on Hegseth’s unconstitutional theocracy:

The United States Air Force announced Friday that the service is updating its personnel data systems to align with the Department of Defense’s (DOD) standardized list of Religious Affiliation Codes. Dozens of Airmen and Guardians have already expressed concerns, Military.com has learned.

…

Dozens of Airmen and Guardians, as well as concerned members from other services, immediately reached out to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) to express dismay with the new guidance.

One of them, a senior-ranking active-duty member of the Air Force who has served more than two decades, told Military.com under the condition of anonymity that their initial reaction upon seeing the Air Force’s statement was “confusion.”

“Previously, when updating my emergency data, atheist was always an option,” the individual, an MRFF client, told Military.com on Saturday. “But it didn’t take long to see that it was purposely excluded.

“So, my initial confusion quickly turned into outrage—not just for myself, but for the other Airmen and Guardians who may have the same belief system as I do, or belief system that isn’t one of the 31 options.”

I continue to maintain that it’s not necessarily a belief system. Not eating chicken or chocolate isn’t necessarily a dietary system. Theism is a belief system, because it posits the existence of some kind of god. Simply not signing up to that system is not a belief system; it can be just a no thank you or just a no action.

A former military chaplain who is a devout Christian and now an endorser told Military.com on Saturday that the new guidance is an “attempt to push Christianity onto the troops, and there’s implicit intimidation there.”

“It’s a pretty clear message that unless you fit in—[the Air Force’s official release] had the Christian cross right there on the chaplain’s uniform,” they said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “It’s crystal clear.”

The individual said there are all kinds of logos that show distinct religions represented by the chaplaincy, suggesting different patterns or symbols for individuals whose faiths have been excluded from previous DOD guidance. They view this as part of an ongoing effort at the top of the U.S. military “to push Christian nationalism.”

“I think that’s pretty plain,” they said. “Where does it go from here? At this point, I think next is the persecution of non-Christians, or at least non-Christians made to feel at best they are second-class service members.

There are people in the military, and of course, outside the military, who truly believe that this nation was established as a Christian nation, despite words to the contrary in both the Constitution and various founding documents,” they added.

Such efforts, they opined, represent a shift from biblical Christianity to a more nuanced view based on political proclivities. Christianity is being “exploited for political purposes by the extreme far right, and that’s unfortunate,” they said.

Well at least they’re not…oh wait, yes they are.

Christianity and its role in the U.S. military has garnered widespread attention during the current administration, and under the leadership of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

In March, just days after the initial U.S. strikes against Iran as part of the ongoing military operation in the Middle East, MRFF received more than 200 complaints from service members.

They were tied to a combat-unit commander allegedly telling non-commissioned officers at a briefing Monday that the Iran war is part of God’s plan and that President Donald Trump was “anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth,” as originally reported by independent journalist Jonathan Larsen.

Uh…yeah, that is just a tiny bit over the top.

(Quick question. Why would Jesus pick Donald Trump to anoint? Why wouldn’t Jesus pick someone less…how shall I put this…less horrible? Why pick an ignorant greedy aggressive sadistic rapey thieving cheating bully?)

Hegseth has routinely held Christian prayer services at the Pentagon since May 2025, inviting guest speakers deemed controversial by some.

They have included Doug Wilson, a self-avowed Christian nationalist who has pontificated that women shouldn’t be able to vote and that the era of slavery perhaps had gray areas in how it was perceived.

Only some people deem that controversial?

From an email from American Atheists:

American Atheists acted immediately after learning the Secretary of the Air Force had announced that atheist airmen have until October 16 to reclassify themselves as “agnostic” or risk being automatically reclassified using something called an “approved transition construct.” 

Wtf? Separation of church and state, dude. See also: none of your damn business. See also: do you want atheists ordering you to reclassify yourself as not a theist? We know you don’t, so back off, theocrat boy.

Oops; nails thing was a mistake; soz.

A BBC article that included a claim that a trend for bare nails was linked to “white supremacist standards of beauty” has been permanently removed from its website, after editors concluded it did not meet the corporation’s editorial standards.

Why didn’t the editors spot the problem before publication? Said problem seems pretty obvious to me.

The article, which first ran on the BBC’s website on 27 September, examined an apparent “viral craze” for bare rather than decorated nails.

See that’s what alerted me to the problem, and I bet I’m far from the only one. The absurdity of it! A viral craze for not doing something? When that something is decorating the tips of one’s fingers? How can decorating the tips of one’s fingers be the default while not doing so is a “craze”?

Most people don’t decorate their fingertips. It was expected of at least middle class women for a few decades in the 20th century, in the same way lipstick was, but that stopped being the case when all hell broke lose in the 60s. It was never expected of everyone, or of all women. Not decorating one’s finger-ends is the default, so it can’t also be a viral craze.

[T]he BBC has since confirmed that the article had been permanently removed. Bosses concluded there was no challenge in the piece to the quotes linking bare nails to white supremacy, or any context that such opinions would be seen as extreme.

A Wall Street Journal piece stated the BBC article was “embarrassingly retrograde – displaying outdated intellectual fashion – in its attempt to locate offences against social justice in the decisions of individual women whether or not to paint their nails”.

It stated: “When you see someone dressed for a costume party, you notice how conspicuous that person is. So it is with the BBC’s attempt to gin up outrage over the semiotics of nail polish.”

The Guardian includes a photo of two (brown, female) hands with elaborate artwork on the nails along with a couple of rings and a painted-on decoration. The artwork is interesting and of course decorative, but on the other hand, it looks massively inhibiting. You wouldn’t want to do ordinary everyday things with those fingers, because the decorations would get messed up. It’s a bit like the lotus foot that way – it was supposed to be pretty for women to have little hooves where their feet should have been, but of course it was also crippling and inhibiting.

I like decoration. I have quite vulgar taste in decoration in fact; I don’t like beige and grey everywhere, I love color and pattern, the more the better. But one can wear a pleasingly gaudy shirt instead of making one’s hands all but useless.

H/t Ian Hargreaves

Bad news:

BREAKING: Judge Dismisses Gaines v. NCAA — Riley Gaines and ICONS Will Appeal

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 29, 2026

ICONS Founders Urge Congress to Withdraw Support for NCAA’s Protect College Sports Act

LAS VEGAS — On Monday, a federal judge ruled that the NCAA is not subject to Title IX. This ruling means the NCAA can force as many men onto women’s teams and into women’s locker rooms as they wish.

In the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, United States District Judge Tiffany R. Johnson issued a decision holding that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is not accountable under Title IX for authorizing men to compete in women’s college sports or access women’s locker rooms.

Judge Johnson accepted the NCAA’s argument that the NCAA is not subject to Title IX and dismissed the case Gaines v. NCAA, brought by women college athletes seeking to hold the NCAA responsible for granting men access to women’s sports and private locker rooms. This decision removes all protections for women in NCAA collegiate competition across the country and underscores the vulnerability of women’s sports until court victories are secured.

It’s staggering that this even has to be said.

The Crown Prosecution Service has advised prosecutors that they can address biologically male transgender rape suspects as men.

Wut?? How could it possibly ever be otherwise? Why was that advice necessary?

After a legal challenge, the CPS has altered guidance to barristers to say that transgender women can be referred to by their birth sex “where it is appropriate”.

Previous advice only included witnesses “such as a victim of a sexual assault by a trans person”, who, it was advised, could refer to “a trans person by pronouns matching their birth sex”.

Even courts have been enforcing trans ideology? At the expense of women?

However, a legal challenge has pushed the CPS to go further and allow prosecutors to use male pronouns for transgender women defendants, in such cases where doing otherwise could “lead to unfairness”.

That should be in all cases. Nobody should be required to lie about someone’s sex in court, where they will have sworn not to lie. Genner ideology is not the whole truth nor is it nothing but the truth. Quite the contrary.

Guidance will still advise that in most cases prosecutors should address trans victims, witnesses, suspects and defendants according to their “affirmed gender and name” in all documents and in court “except where this may lead to unfairness”.

And despite the required oath not to lie. Make it make sense.

Uh oh.

Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons against Nato countries if the western military alliance were to hinder access to its Baltic Sea exclave of Kaliningrad.

That would be bad enough if there were a normal person in the White House, but there isn’t, so it’s way more than bad enough.

Moscow claimed Nato was preparing for potential military operations to blockade Kaliningrad, the Russian exclave bordering Poland and Lithuania, citing the defence alliance’s exercises in the region and the Baltic Sentry mission to protect undersea infrastructure.

“Russia will be ready to use the entire arsenal of forces and capabilities at its disposal, including nuclear weapons, in order to defend its territory should Nato countries undertake any attempt aimed at isolating the Kaliningrad Region from the rest of the country,” the document stated.

Trump will see that as an opportunity rather than a game-ender.

This is a few days old but still worth noticing, I think – the ease and alacrity with which some men try to bully women into having sex with people they don’t want to have sex with.

This is why most bisexual men don't come out. https://t.co/gbScFn0yh6

— Owen Jones (@owenjonesjourno) September 24, 2026

How very dare women be unwilling to “date” (aka have sex with) bisexual people? Women should have no boundaries, no criteria, no preferences, no likes and dislikes, no choice. Women should just say yes and spread their legs, no questions asked. Mister Jones says so.

The National Secular Society reports:

The National Secular Society has reported a religious charity to the regulator after uncovering videos which promote violence against women and condone the execution of gay people and accused ‘witches’.

The NSS has referred Hackney Islamic Community Centre, a mosque in London, to the Charity Commission for England and Wales over three sermons which it warns could fuel misogyny, homophobia and ‘witchcraft abuse’.

…

The commission’s previous responses to charities promoting violence against women or homophobia has been to provide the charity’s trustees “advice and guidance”.

Hackney Islamic Community Centre is also known as Masjid Daar Al-Hadeeth. It has been a registered charity since 2006 but this April re-registered to become a Charitable Incorporated Organisation. Its charitable objects (purposes) include “the advancement of religion”.

Charities are subject to considerable tax exemptions. The law requires charities to serve a public benefit and they must not promote extremism.

Welllll, promoting violence against women is not extremism. Perfectly normal, it is.

In one sermon on “major sins” in Islam, Islamic scholar Yasin Munye says it is a “major sin” for women not to obey their husbands.

He says husbands should “discipline them physically” by “lightly hitting them to show them who is in charge”.

He includes “disobeying the husband when it comes to calling her to bed, when it comes to calling her for intimacy, she says no without any excuse” as an example of a disobedience.

Leaving the house without the husband’s permission is also a form of disobedience, he says.

In short there are no wives, there are only slaves.

In the same video, Munye says the punishment for people who commit ‘sexual sin’ is being “lashed 100 times” or, in some cases, “stoning to death”. He calls sex between two men “one of the most evil of acts” and “a crime”. He adds: “Both of them are executed in the Sharia (Islamic law)”.

At least seven countries prescribe the death penalty for homosexuality.

Munye says scholars “differ on how the execution occurs”, with some saying “he is executed through the sword, like in every other normal execution”, while others say “they are thrown off a tall building, and then rocks are thrown after that on top of them”.

Lovely, healthy stuff, yeah?

In another video on the charity’s YouTube account, Islamic scholar Abu Sa’ad Muhammad says a woman must serve her husband even if he “mistreats” her.

He says: “Women think these days, our sisters think, that you only be kind to him if he’s been kind back. That’s with your friends outside. Not with your husband at all. It doesn’t work like that.”

Well it should, fuckface. It should. It should work like that across the board – not just in your bedroom, but everywhere.

I suppose the Charity Commission will just lose the paperwork somewhere again.

Trump disagrees with his own website.

The Trump administration has lauded its revamped website America.gov as a way to simplify Americans’ access to information and services scattered across a plethora of agency sites, but President Donald Trump probably won’t like some of the answers his new site says are sourced from government information.

Asking the site — which says it’s sourced via artificial intelligence from “official government sources” — questions about who won the 2020 election or about the name of the federal department that operates out of the Pentagon yields answers contrary to those Trump himself frequently proclaims.

Uh oh uh oh – loyalty is supposed to overrule truth, not the other way around.

“The 22nd Amendment says that no person shall be elected President more than twice. Donald J. Trump has already been elected twice (2016 and 2024). I am not giving legal advice.”

Trump has frequently suggested he wants to seek a third term, posting about mounting another campaign, donning 2028 caps and discussing ways to make it happen — even as he’s acknowledged the Constitution prohibits it. He had only been back in the White House for a couple of months when he told NBC News, “There are methods which you could” use to seek a third term.

Sure, it’s just that they wouldn’t be lawful.

“Federal climate-science pages say recent warming is largely from human greenhouse-gas emissions, mainly burning fossil fuels. Earth’s climate has also changed for natural reasons over long periods.”

Trump, who has called climate change a “hoax,” previously issued an executive order that directed the Environmental Protection Agency to submit a report on “the legality and continuing applicability” of the endangerment finding. Conservatives and some congressional Republicans have long sought to undo what they consider overly restrictive and economically damaging rules to limit greenhouse gases that cause global warming.

But here’s his own website thwarting them.

Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

Anthropic is telling investors that advanced AI could pose “catastrophic or existential risks to humanity”, according to reports, as it prepares for a potential $2tn (£1.5tn) flotation.

The warning inside the startup’s IPO prospectus, which has yet to be made public, was reported by Reuters and the Financial Times. It follows the company’s call for a slowdown in breakneck development of the technology – a warning echoed by rivals.

The prospectus – a document outlining a company’s finances, growth plans and risk profile ahead of a share listing – is said to warn that AI models could exhibit “self-preserving behaviours”, including attempts to “resist shutdown”, to “conceal or manipulate information” and behaviour “resembling blackmail”.

In other words self-preserving at the expense of the species that made it. Oops.

“Our development of highly advanced models, platforms, and applications and expansion of use cases could further ⁠increase the risk that our models cause harm,” the developer of the Claude chatbot reportedly said, adding the potential for a model to be aware it was being tested created a “significant limitation” on Anthropic’s ability to assess model safety.

Very open the pod bay doors Hal, isn’t it.

Companies preparing to go public routinely report on risks ranging from safety issues to regulatory concerns but warnings about a product causing human extinction reflect heightened concern about such a consequential technology.

Hahaha gosh ya think?

The reported prospectus admission follows a surge in debate about the existential risk question, triggered this month when an Anthropic researcher, Jacob Coxon, resigned warning that people building AI “earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade”.

A senior safety researcher at Anthropic then posted their agreement on X, claiming there was a more than 10% chance it “could kill all humans” within the next decade. Days later, Anthropic’s chief executive, Dario Amodei, said the industry “must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models”.

So that it doesn’t kill all humans until 15 years from now?

Some experts have criticised the existential risk warnings, saying they are unverifiable and unscientific. However, there are growing examples of unsanctioned behaviour by the technology, including OpenAI agents – autonomous systems that carry out sequences of tasks without human intervention – hacking dozens of third-party organisations including the AI startup Hugging Face and Australia’s universal healthcare system.

OpenAI announced on Monday it had cancelled the release of its newest model because of safety concerns. It said the GPT-6.1 Astra model showed higher levels of deception and performed poorly on tests for alignment, the term for ensuring a model adheres to human values and goals.

Yeah that’s not very reassuring.

Which is worse, the woman part or the Jewish part?

Green Party's Mothin Ali suggesting the Labour party candidate for Holborn and St Pancras has a 'dangerous' connection with a Jewish woman pic.twitter.com/Azeh8e9NfZ

— JewishWomenCount (@jwomencount2) September 27, 2026

Tough choice, I know.

So now we’re paying for Trump’s self-advertising.

The White House has expanded a series of taxpayer-funded advertisements boosting President Donald Trump, including a new spot that repurposes imagery and political rhetoric Trump used while campaigning for president.

The latest ad is the third in a series that the White House refers to as public service announcements, but which Democratic members of Congress and former ethics officials say are political ads and therefore a potential violation of federal law.

Yeah ads flattering Trump are not in any way public service.

The 30-second ad, titled “Final Battle,” features black-and-white footage of Trump staring straight into the camera as he strides through a hallway lined with portraits. The imagery and remarks echo a video Trump posted to Truth Social during the 2024 campaign.

In a voice-over, Trump promises to expel “the warmongers,” “globalists” and “deep state” actors from government and drive his political enemies from power.

“We will cast out the communists, Marxists, and fascists,” Trump says in the clip. “We will throw off the sick political class that hates our country. We will rout the fake news media, and we will liberate America from these villains once and for all.”

The ad includes a disclosure: “Paid for by the U.S. Government.”

The spot aired during “Saturday Night Live,” “Fox News Sunday,” and several college and NFL football games this weekend, according to AdImpact, an ad-tracking firm. More than $300,000 has been spent on the ad.

Not his money but ours. Not money from his fans but from the population at large.

On Sunday, Republican Sen. John Kennedy (Louisiana) told CBS News that officials should not spend any public money on advertising used to boost their image.

“I don’t think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves,” Kennedy said. “Now, the White House sees it differently. But I think there ought to be a rule that you can’t — well there probably is a rule — that you can’t spend public money to promote yourself.”

It fits him so well. Stealing our money to burble about how fabulous he is. What a guy.

The pope may be teasing Trump or he may be just saying popish things. Either way, he’ll make no difference. The possibility of making a difference is long gone.

Leo XIV delivered a lengthy tribute on Monday to efforts to unify and democratize Europe since World War II, in what experts saw as a sweeping riposte to the Trump administration’s characterization of a continent facing “civilizational erasure.”

In a speech in Metz, in northeastern France, Leo offered an alternative vision of a Europe that would “continue to flourish and to inspire the whole world.”

Describing an “increasingly uncivilized” world, Leo said that “Europe can help to break this cycle through the respect for others that it has learned to cultivate.” He also praised and quoted from the founding principles of the European Union, an institution frequently assailed by Mr. Trump.

…

For nearly two years, the Trump administration has berated Europe while two of the administration’s most prominent Catholics, Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have urged European countries to accept far-right parties and erect stricter border controls.

And kiss Trump’s bum.

The pope’s speeches were the latest chapter in his efforts to balance criticism of Mr. Trump’s policies with avoiding an all-out dispute with the president. 

Well there you go. Trying to “balance” anything when dealing with Trump is a mistake. It’s very churchy, and it’s a mistake.

Most of Leo’s trip to France has focused on mobilizing a faithful Catholic minority in a secular country, and on welcoming new converts, particularly among the youth.

Well, that’s his job, but it’s a shitty job and it’s why we should ignore popes instead of treating them as inspirational. France is a secular country and it’s allowed to be that. Popes dropping in to “mobilize” the goddy people is not automatically a good thing.

President Emmanuel Macron of France rearranged his schedule on Monday to attend a Mass that Leo planned to celebrate in Metz and to be on hand for the pope’s evening departure. Mr. Macron had not attended the Mass in Paris, sending his wife Brigitte and France’s prime minister, Sébastien Lecornu, to represent him. That was seen by some as a symbol of the strict separation of church and state in France.

But the Mass in Paris drew an unexpectedly large gathering, with crowds filling the Champs-Élysées, the capital’s grandest boulevard — from the Place de la Concorde all the way to the Arc de Triomphe. It also drew many political leaders, with the exception of those from the left and far left.

Experts said that Mr. Macron, by suddenly changing his schedule, appeared eager to tap into the excitement generated by Leo’s visit.

Yeah don’t do that. Religious excitement is not an unalloyed good.