Byline Times Audio Articles

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

As the four great non-thinkers of our age - Donald Trump, JD Vance, Steve Witkoff, and Marco Rubio - flushed the withered remnants of America's diplomatic credibility down the gold-plated toilet of time, Vladimir Putin unleashed unholy hell on the city of Kyiv last night.

At 1 am, when everyone was home due to the midnight curfew, air raid alarms sounded in Kyiv. This is a regular occurrence; many of them are false alarms, and the tendency is to wait and see if anything happens. About fifteen minutes later, the sound of air defence rockets and heavy machine gun fire echoed through the city's suburbs. Again, this is a fairly regular event, but what followed has shaken the city to its core.

In a few moments, what began as a regular air raid escalated into a full-on combined Shahed drone, Iskander ballistic missile, and cruise missile attack. The buildings in downtown Kyiv trembled as rocket after rocket struck the city. Outside, a few revellers on the wrong side of the curfew screamed and dashed for shelter. Searchlights illuminated the night sky as air defence gunners tracked the high-pitched, tell-tale whine of drones circling the city.

At the same time, the bright orange trails of ballistic missile engines streaked across the sky, impacting with sickening, deep explosions on apartment blocks. Kyiv, usually well defended with American Patriot missile systems, was overwhelmed by the scale of the attack. As emergency service vehicles raced to the scenes, reports of fires raging across the city were posted on social media. Acrid smoke and ash drifting on the night breeze served as ominous portents of what would later emerge.

This morning, I drove to the scene of the most devastating attack: a housing

complex in the Svaytoshinsky neighbourhood, fifteen minutes from downtown Kyiv. The

destruction was total and complete. It's hard to convey the extent of the destruction; the

best I can manage is that an area of four to five football pitches was in ruins.

At a press briefing, the official death toll was adjusted from nine to eight, as rescuers had

mistakenly assumed that body parts recovered from the ruins were a victim's, when in fact

they were limbs from the confirmed dead. Over a hundred people, including many children, have been wounded.

Ten people had officially been reported as missing. Heavy-duty lifting equipment and

hundreds of search and rescue workers, many with sniffer dogs, combed the wreckage

looking for more bodies.

The elderly were the most tragic. They milled about, comforted by their neighbours, yet still in a state of deep shock as they surveyed the remnants of their lives now strewn across the rubble-filled gardens. Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko surveyed the ruins and invited Donald Trump to come and see for himself the Russian atrocities.

In total, 70 missiles and 150 Shahed drones were unleashed on Ukraine last night. Such

coordinated attacks are not spontaneous and require weeks of planning. The deep fear here is that America's slide into total alignment with Russia raises a more sinister question about the timing of the attack.

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

As Britain approaches the 1 May local council elections, it faces the alarming rise of a far-right political force. Reform UK, a party that has its roots in anti-EU sentiment and is steeped in Islamophobia and anti-immigrant rhetoric, is gaining ground.

With its rise comes a serious threat to Muslims and other minority communities in Britain. The party's record of Islamophobic rhetoric, racist remarks, and divisive policies represents a danger to social cohesion and the democratic fabric of this country.

Reform UK, formerly the Brexit Party, was rebranded in 2021 and gained a major boost with its leader Nigel Farage's return to politics. Since he was elected as an MPS for Clactor, the party has achieved alarming electoral successes.

Most recently, Reform unseated Labour in the Tameside by-election in Greater Manchester and is predicted to make further gains in the Runcorn by-election, which coincides with the local elections.

These victories are not isolated. Reform now holds 113 council seats, including 66 Conservative defections. Polling shows they are rivalling Labour and the Conservatives, and in some areas, even leading.

BREAKING

British Muslim Network Launches Amid Rising Far-Right Threat and Record High Islamophobia in the UK

Initiative backed by Baroness Warsi and Nusrat Ghani MP aims to bring Muslim perspectives to issues beyond just extremism and security

Josiah Mortimer

This surge mirrors a broader European trend of far-right advances such as the rise of parties like Alternative for Germany (AfD). In the 2024 general election, Reform secured 4.1 million votes, the largest ever vote share for a far-right party in the UK. Recent polls show their support growing, with some placing Reform ahead of both major parties.

Central to Reform's appeal has been the weaponisation of immigration, Islamophobia and national identity. Reform presents itself as the voice of the forgotten, using sensationalist media coverage and social media to target voters. While most Reform supporters are older white men, support among younger age groups is rising. Reform dominated social media interactions during the election period and are the most boosted UK politicians on X. Their messaging resonates with a demographic increasingly drawn to populist narratives that blame immigrants and minorities for national decline.

Reform's success has largely been driven by widespread public disillusionment with the political mainstream. Voters frustrated by Conservative failures and disappointed by Labour's direction, particularly their proposed welfare cuts, have been drawn to Reform. A Hope Not Hate report found 68% of people feel ignored by politicians, a sentiment Reform exploits to push its divisive agenda.

Despite its denials, Reform UK is widely recognised by experts as a far-right party and has been identified as the biggest far-right threat in Britain today. Reform UK has also been embraced by extremist groups who see it as a legitimate path to power. During the 2024 general election, far-right groups and figures, including Tommy Robinson, Britain First, and Patriotic Alternative, urged their followers to support Reform.

'Keir Starmer's Weaponisation of Foreign National Crime Statistics Risks Stoking Violence and Empowering the Far Right'

Ranking crimes by nationality risks stoking a repeat of last summer's racist riots, argues Minnie Rahman, who urges ministers to focus on fairness and rehabilitation instead

Minnie Rahman

Mark Collett of Patriotic Alternative, praised Reform for campaigning on a platform "more right-wing than the BNP" and encouraged far-right extremists to infiltrate R...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

Earlier this week, the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced that the Government will, for the first time, publish detailed data on foreign national offenders and the crimes they've committed.

Framed as a bid to "better inform the public", this move is in reality nothing short of a cynical political stunt - one designed to placate the rising wave of the radical right, led by Nigel Farage and Reform UK.

In making this data public, the Government is weaponising immigration through crime statistics. We know that this risks increasing racial discrimination and deepening the effects of the Hostile Environment for migrant communities.

In the wake of the August 2024 riots, it became painfully clear that racial tensions and the strength of the far-right had reached a dangerous peak. Any political party in power would have to think carefully about containing the threat of the radical right, and there is no arguing that Labour needs a bold strategy. However, Labour have chosen time and time again to appease the far-right by giving ammunition to their concerns about immigration.

BREAKING

Protest Crackdown in Britain Now Amounts to 'State Repression' And the Labour Government is Continuing the Trend, Warn Campaigners

Infringements on the right to protest have been 'emboldened' by successive governments, report argues

Josiah Mortimer

Labour's latest focus on Foreign National Offenders (FNOs) is not new. It follows a well-worn path taken by successive governments, one that isolates migrant communities and conflates migration with criminality. The Conservative Party spent years leaning into anti-migrant rhetoric and criminalising migrants through the Hostile Environment, in a blatant attempt to distract from their own failures on the economy, the degradation of public services and an increasing housing crisis. It is harmful and it doesn't work. Its lasting legacy has been helping to create the conditions for the far right to thrive.

This then begs the question - what problem is Labour trying to resolve by publishing this data?

Data on offenders is already collected across the justice system and publicly available. It does not currently include data on nationality, as to do so would imply that where you were born has an impact on the crime you might commit. There is a wealth of research and evidence that shows sustained poverty, peer pressure, substance abuse, family relationships, access to education and poor mental health, all contribute to risk of crime. There is no evidence to suggest that where you were born is a significant indicator.

Any selective publication of data must also be compared against the offending of British nationals if it is to be truly transparent about the concerns and risks to society. By treating statistics in isolation, the Government is reinforcing harmful stereotypes and distracting from more meaningful discussions around justice, accountability and human rights.

It is important to remember that people who are classed as FNOs have already been convicted and served their sentences. Deportation as a result of committing an offence amounts to double punishment and does nothing to aid rehabilitation. This group can include people who have lived in the UK for the majority of their lives.

'What Is the Point of Labour Winning the Next General Election if It Governs as Reform-Lite?'

The political strategy being pursued by Keir Starmer and his advisers means that whichever party comes first in 2029, Nigel Farage wins, argues Neal Lawson

Neal Lawson

We saw this when Windrush victims who only ever knew Britain as their home were deported to Jamaica after serving...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

Journalism is in a profound crisis. Legacy media and publishing have been starved of advertising income as billions have been siphoned off by tech giants like Alphabet and Facebook. Meanwhile, those same digital monopolies have reneged on their commitments to news and truth, instead focusing on clickbait and attention harvesting as their business models.

Look at X. The original Twitter, the world's 'town square' where Byline Times built its original audience and commissioned so many of its contributors, has been turned by the richest man in the world into a political weapon and a vortex of hate. By gaming the algorithm, twisting the verification systems and rewarding viral lies, Elon Musk actively spread the kind of disinformation that led to Britain's biggest ever post-war riots last summer.

Musk has declared (along with Tommy Robinson) that "we are the media now" - and the terrifying thing is that he's right.

It's not just former pundits or comedians who turn to Rumble and YouTube to monetise their disgrace. It's not just Russian propagandists who take over TikTok to sway electorates. These days, our conservative politicians and mainstream press take their cues from Musk more than Murdoch. While Boris Johnson gets a well-padded berth at the Daily Mail, another failed Prime Minister, Liz Truss, is starting her own social media platform to attack 'woke culture' and 'elites'. And why ever not? Politainment pays much better than political honesty.

'The Media Is Silent About Female Asylum Seekers - Yet Fixated About Men Arriving in the UK'

There's a reason news outlets never focus on the many women seeking refuge in the UK, argue Mathilda Mallinson and Helena Wadia

Mathilda Mallinson and Helena Wadia

It's a revolutionary change. Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, and in some ways the Godfather of the personal computing age, recently told The New York Times that he was optimistic about the impact of Big Tech on the world - until social media came along.

Twenty years ago, the democratisation of the means of journalistic production, distribution and exchange opened up a brave new world - new voices, citizen bloggers, live updated coverage, on-the-ground films and reports. But now?

As those innovations were gobbled up by vast global platforms, their business model relied on engagement, keeping us glued to our smartphones, increasingly through envy or outrage. Now, new voices - especially young people - are more likely to get monstered than heard. The de-skilling of journalism and the disaggregation of news have led to the elevation of conspiracy theories and inflammatory propaganda.

We've gone straight from a Gilded Information Age into the Dark Ages of Disinformation.

There is a precedent for this. The innovations of Gutenberg and the printing press 500 years ago fostered the Enlightenment and the development of science and democracy. But the democratisation of reading and writing also led to nearly two centuries of religious war. We are on the brink of something similar, as we all live in our silos of bespoke news, the loss of trust in a shared reality is fracturing any sense of common purpose.

During these days that the journalist Carole Cadwalladr has described as 'total information collapse', it is more important than ever that journalists adhere to the standards of verity, verification, accuracy and accountability for our survival. That mission must be shared and transparent to be democratic and effective. And that's why Byline Times has joined over a hundred other publishers in the only independent press regulator in the UK - Impress.

The Tribunal of Truth

Bylin...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

During the fraught process of staging Bloody Difficult Women - my 2022 play about Gina Miller's Supreme Court cases against the Governments of Theresa May and Boris Johnson - the actor Graham Seed approached me with a new problem: he was playing a gay character but he happened to be heterosexual.

He explained that, in the acting profession, this isn't really done any more - just as it's verboten for white actors to 'black up' to play characters of colour or for actors who can walk perfectly well to sit in wheelchairs.

After seeing four of the six members of the cast come down with Covid, a flurry of legal letters from the Daily Mail over our temerity to portray its Editor-in-Chief Paul Dacre on stage, and one of our actors forgetting their lines at a preview when the Guardian had come in to review, I decided that this was one additional issue I could do without.

So I sat down, got out a red pen, and hastily rewrote the script, changing the name of his character to Huw, and giving him a wife called Vicki and five children. Handing the pages over, I asked if he could possibly cope with being a married bisexual father and, happily, he could.

This was the spring of 2022 and, while a great many of my friends at the BBC had been telling me about how Huw Edwards was conducting himself, the full story had yet to break - so I thought it legally a good idea not to confide in Seed my inspiration.

'The Neglect of Theatre in Britain's Creative Life is Costing the Country Dearly'

The stories brought to life on the stage in the past allowed people to understand that politics is something that impacts on their lives, writes playwright Tim Walker

Tim Walker

Of course, I agree with the concept of colour-blind casting, and the same goes for able-bodied actors playing disabled characters. But, when it comes to sexuality, I am honestly not so sure.

Sexuality is, for a start, often hard to define. Some people aren't entirely straight or gay, in the way that no one can ever be not entirely black or white or find themselves only ever intermittently unable to walk or just going through a 'phase'.

It complicates matters still further that some of the most resolutely masculine and heterosexual men I have ever encountered have had very feminine sides to their characters. I recall an interview with the strongman Geoff Capes and seeing him tenderly talking to one of his many budgerigars. The opposite was true of Harry Andrews - the rugged tough-guy star of war films such as The Hill and The Red Beret - who just happened to be gay and lived with his one-time Ice Cold in Alex co-star Basil Hoskins in the Sussex countryside.

If these gay casting sensibilities had existed in the past, Peter Finch would never have been allowed to play Dr Daniel Hirsh or Oscar Wilde in respectively Sunday Bloody Sunday and The Trials of Wilde. Nor would we have ever got to see John Hurt playing Quentin Crisp in The Naked Civil Servant. That would have been to deprive the world of some unforgettable performances and it is legitimate to ask whether gay actors would have acquitted themselves any better - or indeed any more convincingly - in these and so many other roles.

I need hardly add that the natural corollary to all of this would be to confine gay actors to only ever playing gay parts, which, given gay roles still don't come up all that often, would be to deprive them of a great deal of work and, indeed, their fans of much of a chance to see them.

FREE PREVIEW

Complexity Is Reality - But There's No Possibility For It In Today's Political Culture

One of the biggest triumphs of the modern political right has been to...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

In an article headlined: "Why White Lotus toothgate is a massive SCAM! Attention-seeking Aimee Lou Wood needs to get braces… or admit the truth" the Daily Mail has urged the actress to either change her appearance or make an admission of some kind.

Wood, 31, who originates from Stockport, has been under increased investigation by the publication since becoming the breakout star in the latest White Lotus TV series, in which she plays the character Chelsea.

She brought attention to the article with a repost on her Instagram page (as shown above) which showed how perniciously she was being targeted.

Since season three of the HBO TV show began in February, the paper has published dozens of articles, on an almost daily basis, concentrating, for the most part, on Wood's teeth.

Wood's treatment reveals the dichotomy women in the public eye face, given the paper's unhealthy obsession with the alterations, or 'tweakments' they believe should, or should not have, to rectify their faces and bodies.

'The Free Speech Debate Has a Lot to Do With Race - But the Media Won't Tell You That'

The 'sheer hypocrisy' of the UK's right-wing media in celebrating Trump's 'free speech ultimatum'

Mathilda Mallinson and Helena Wadia

The repost from Wood, which originated on Emily Clarkson's Instagram page, signposts another article, with the caption "The impossibility of being a woman in the Daily Mail."

However, just a day after the paper's toothgate article, the paper had taken a rather different position.

This time journalist, Cassie Carpenter suggested actress Anne Hathaway may have had plastic surgery and was 'sparking concerns' with her taut face.

Exactly what those concerns were, and by whom, the newspaper did not specify.

In other words, actresses cannot win the Daily's Mail's beauty pageant - seemingly damned if they do, and damned if they don't adjust their looks to the paper's impossible requirements.

The White Lotus star was recently ridiculed on SNL, (Saturday Night Live) in a sketch which mocked her teeth and Wood subsequently complained about the lack of sophistication in the "mean and. unfunny" send up.

"I am not thin-skinned. I actually love being taken the p**s out of when it's clever and in good spirits. But the joke was about fluoride. I have big gap teeth, not bad teeth.

"I don't mind caricature - I understand that's what SNL is. But the rest of the skit was punching up and I/Chelsea was the only one punched down on… Okay, end of."

Her post was met by widespread support from the entertainment industry and from the public.

Wood received "apologies from SNL" including an apology from the comedienne Sarah Sherman, who appeared as the actress in the show.

Following the SNL backlash, the Mail published a photograph of Wood, visibly upset and crying, which had been snapped in the street, speculating her tears were a reaction to the satire.

Clearly not enough to deter the paper from publishing their latest slur.

Further in the article, in a somewhat threatening tone, reporter Bullock states: "It's time toothy White Lotus star Aimee Lou Wood braced herself for a reality check."

Bullock goes on to suggest the actress's indignation was born out of desire for publicity rather than being genuine.

Labelling Wood "a self-absorbed B-list leading lady buoyed by a tiresomely predictable squad of virtue signalling cheerleaders."

And her teeth being "a talking point" that she has played to her advantage.

Bullock writes: "Her buck tooth battle against the odds is a neat narrative propel her career and celebrity."

"London's Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts trained, Bafta-winning star of HBO's bi...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

UK politics has been slowly but steadily unwinding from a two-party to a multi-party system for decades. Just like going bankrupt, things in politics change gradually and then very quickly. Is our political system about to enter a new era? In an important piece for Prospect magazine, veteran pollster Peter Kellner argues that we could be at the tipping point. What's going on, why and what's it likely to mean?

If Kellner is right, and I suspect he is, then this long-time coming paradigm shift is going to have some very peculiar impacts, as a system purposely designed to create a two-party duopoly gets warped into a multi-party reality.

Back in 1951 Labour and the Conservatives secured 98% of the vote between them. By 2024 that figure had dropped to 59%. The latest polls put Labour and the Conservatives on less than 50% between them. There have been blips along the way, most notably in 2017 and 2019 as Brexit shaped the landscape and the appearance of a two-party tradition was momentarily maintained. But the underlying trend is towards fracture and fragmentation.

UPDATE

The Sheer Scale of the COVID 'VIP Lane' PPE Scandal Has Still Not Been Revealed Five Years On

New evidence published by the COVID Inquiry suggests that at least 20 more politically-connected suppliers received contracts worth £1 billion

Russell Scott

Kellner is right to argue that much of this is down to one simple word: class. In the past the two parties largely mirrored the two-class structure of society, with the battle over who could command the middle ground and enough of the middle class vote.

A three-decade long negotiated truce between labour and capital led to unprecedented growth and the greatest level of equality the country has ever known. This broke down in the 1970s as control over inflation was lost and capital gained the upper hand in a world where technology and globalisation trumped local union organising power. Instead of a broadly agreed settlement, an elite group of winners moulded the world in their image and their interests. Even that was OK while capitalism could provide consumer baubles to keep enough voters happy, but when this fatally broke down in 2008, as capital without constraints always does, then the outcome was always going to be messy.

At the same time the shift from a society in which we knew and understood ourselves and each other as producers, to society in which we knew and understood ourselves predominantly as consumers, was always going to raise fundamental questions about a political system which only offered a political choice between product A or product B. In a multi-platform, multi-channel world who was going to settle for just the BBC or ITV? Especially when neither of the two main parties seemed any longer able to deliver enough growth, to enough people, enough of the time.

The fact that the dam hasn't burst before now is only down to the electoral system, first past the post. By rewarding parties only based on who wins the most votes in any seat, massive structural barriers are raised against new party entrants who can't compete in enough places to a sufficient degree - but can still win millions of votes that go 'wasted'. This led to the lazy and cynical assumption that voters had nowhere else to go. But generations of party loyalty were slowly worn down by disappointment and disillusionment. People may not switch party immediately but first stop bothering to vote at all. And then something happens which sparks a shift to voting for someone else. In Scotland it was Labour campaigning alongside the Conservatives to stop independence that opened the floo...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

On 18 April, Renaud Camus the French far right thinker and originator of the Great Replacement conspiracy theory which states that there is a "genocidal bloc" of elites deliberately destroying the identities of white European nations through immigration, was prevented from entering the UK by the Home Office.

An email seen by the Telegraph stated that the reason given for barring his entry was that his presence was not "conducive to the public good".

The Great Replacement theory was cited as motivation in the manifestos of the Christchurch and Buffalo mass shooters.

Camus had been on his way to speak at the "remigration conference" of the Homeland Party, a fascist, ethno-nationalist party formed out of a split in the neo-Nazi movement Patriotic Alternative.

EXCLUSIVE

How Nazi Race Science Conquered the White House, and is Coming for Your Democracy

One of the major 'Dark Enlightenment' influencers has stepped into the light, talking of the 'negro problem'. Nafeez Ahmed explains how the Silicon Valley broligarchy has resurrected Nazi-inspired eugenics ideology and is already putting it into action

Nafeez Ahmed

Remigration is a euphemism on the far right for deportations of non-white minority populations from Western nations. The criteria that the Homeland party's website gives for being "remigrated" are immigrants that are "illegal", "unintegrated" and "unwelcome".

Critics of remigration consider it a form of ethnic cleansing of minority populations.

Camus' ban on entry to the UK sparked uproar in the right-wing media. Matthew Goodwin of GB News interviewed Camus, asking him softball questions.

In the interview Camus referred to his idea of the Great Replacement as "what is going on in Britain" and called it a "crime".

Writing in Charlie Hebdo in 2021 after Camus was interviewed on the French far right news channel C News, the journalist and specialist on the French far right Jean Yves Camus (no relation) referred to it as "Fascism invited on prime time".

Connor Mulhern of the Reactionary International Research Consortium, a group that monitors the far right told Byline Times: "The Homeland Party was formed as a splinter group from the openly white supremacist Patriotic Alternative, founded by members who sought to prioritise electoral politics over street activism. Late last year, the English branch of the pan-European extreme-right identitarian movement merged into Homeland.

At the core of the party's message is the promotion of the so-called "great replacement" conspiracy theory, coined by Renaud Camus.

Blue Labour on MAGA Square: Maurice Glasman's Journey to Trumpism

Jon Bloomfield and David Edgar look at the nationalist populist drift of Labour's anti-progressive tendency

Jon Bloomfield and David Edgar

"It claims that political elites are deliberately working to replace the "indigenous" white British population with "non-indigenous" immigrants, with the party's flyers explicitly focusing on the growing number of non-white people in the country. They assert that they are "being replaced in [their] own homeland" and advocate for the "remigration" of non-white people, regardless of whether they hold British citizenship".

This vital context was largely omitted from coverage of Camus' ban on entry to the UK. The ban was reported by the Telegraph and GB News. The Telegraph noted that Camus had been invited to speak at the Homeland conference but referred to it simply as the "nationalist and anti-immigration Homeland Party".

Aurelien Mondon, the co-convenor of the Reactionary Politics Research Network, told Byline Times, "Until recently, Renaud Camus was considered as b...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

Greetings from a gloriously sunny and warm Kyiv, quite a turnaround given it was snowing just a week ago.

As ever, the news has not stopped so let's get right into it.

The Ceasefire

It's almost as if Donald Trump isn't actually that good at making deals. Shortly before taking office, the incoming administration made a big deal of the belief they could bring peace to Ukraine in 100 days, revised slightly up from the original target of 24 hours.

As I write this, we are 89 days into those 100, and a genuine peace deal is still a long way off.

So what is the US going to do about it? Nothing. Trump is simply going to wash his hands of the whole thing.

"If for some reason one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we're just going to say: 'you're foolish, you're fools, you're horrible people', and we're just going to take a pass. But hopefully we won't have to do that," Trump said on April 18.

Russia's Murderous Ceasefires and Musk Admiration for Putin

In his latest dispatch from Kyiv, Chris York has tales of occupied territories, tariffs, stalled talks - and storks!

Chris York

What's really remarkable about this isn't the disconnect between no deal, and Trump's self-professed image as the king of deal makers, but the fact that he hasn't even put in the minimal amount of effort required to reach one.

OK, that's not entirely accurate - he put a little effort in, but it was completely misdirected.

I said this last time, but it's worth reiterating - on March 11, Ukraine agreed to a full, 30-day ceasefire. Russia refused.

A peace deal was there for the taking - all it required was just a little bit of effort to apply some pressure on the Russians.

All along, Trump has had multiple options to do this - increase sanctions on the Kremlin, impose secondary tarriffs on countries buying Russian oil, or increase military aid to Ukraine.

He used none of these. Russia even escaped his "Liberation Day" tariffs. That's right - Trump has applied more economic pressure on almost every other country in the world since taking office than he has on Russia.

Deadly Lies: Ukraine on Tenterhooks as Putin and Trump Talk of Truces

In his latest dispatch, Chris York reports on overnight attacks on Kyiv, Trump's diplomacy and the latest drone and media manoeuvres

Chris York

And now that his absolutely toothless approach to reaching a peace deal is looking like a dud, he appears to be blaming both Moscow and Kyiv equally.

Again, Ukraine already agreed to a full, 30-day ceasefire. On April 17, Russia's UN Ambassador Vasily Nebenzya said a full ceasefire in Ukraine is "unrealistic".

There's only one side not playing ball and the frustration here in Ukraine has you screaming "how can you not see what's going on?" every time Trump or one of his minions opens their mouth.

You could argue that that Trump administration is compromised, the US President is a Russian asset, or that the White House has fallen victim to Russian propaganda.

But look a bit wider - Trump has failed to stop the Israeli slaughter in Gaza, and this week his officials will begin negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran that's almost certainly going to look a lot like the one he tore up when he was last president.

He's just stunningly, and devastatingly incompetent and has surrounded himself with people of the same caliber.

The Minerals Deal

Unlike the ceasefire, there does actually appear to be some progress on this front. This week will see a new round of negotiations between the US and Ukraine following the signing of a memorandum on April 17.

Although not all the details have been made public and officials on both sides say there...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour.

To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.

Help us build the better media Britain deserves

Last week the UK Supreme Court decided that I was legally male. It no longer matters what papers I have, what medical interventions I'd had, or how I live my life. It was important to strip me of recognition to bring "clarity" to the law.

What the Court also tried to say was that the impact of their ruling was extremely limited, as trans people would still be protected by provisions in the Equality Act. Lawyers have tried to give support to emotionally devasted trans communities by parroting these statements.

But all of it, the ruling and the attempts to limit its impact, is fundamentally untrue. The highest court in the land can't lay out detailed arguments supporting their view that some women are legally male, and then say but it only has impact on one specific law in Scotland.

Sure enough, the following morning, the Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission was on national radio saying the ruling clearly meant that trans women should not use any women's single-sex spaces or facilities. Because trans women were legally male, if they used such spaces, the spaces would cease to be single-sex.

'The Sullivan Review Treats Trans People as an Inconvenience Whose Experiences Can Be Dismissed as Invalid'

The Government has accepted a skewed report authored by people with 'no skin in the game', argues Helen Belcher

Helen Belcher

And later on Thursday the British Transport Police announced that, when strip searches of trans women were required, they'd now be carried out by male officers. Well, that happened a lot quicker than I thought it would. It doesn't matter how we look, what paperwork we have or what medical procedures we've undergone, it's men's hands around our privates now.

Other women, the ones who the Supreme Court still recognised as legally female, started to ask questions. How would the BTP know who was trans and who wasn't? Some trans women are physically indistinguishable from other women. What would happen if a woman who wasn't trans couldn't prove they weren't trans? After all, weren't all trans women simply going to deny the fact?

Legal clarity - apparently.

The UK has moved into a space where all women, trans or not, will now be legally judged on their appearance. You can't rely on paperwork. The Gender Recognition Act allowed trans women to obtain a birth certificate marked with an F sex marker, so birth certificates aren't proof. Some trans women will have vaginas, so that's no use either. Nope. And what happens if a woman discovers she was born without a womb? How does she prove she isn't trans? Don't think people are arrested without due cause? Think again. Men's hands around women's privates - legally, just following procedure. Just hope they don't share the videos, again.

'Wes Streeting's Regressive Ban on Puberty Blockers is a Betrayal of Trans People'

The Health Secretary claims to be led by the evidence but has merely furthered the fact-free anti-trans agenda pursued by the Conservatives, argues Helen Belcher

Helen Belcher

Remember that ten years ago, some papers were still using the "Trans or Woman" "game". It's pretty much impossible to identify trans women as trans all the time, despite what the haters say. Heck, they even think Michelle Obama and Brigitte Macron are trans, so they clearly can't always tell.

Instead people are going to base decisions on how someone looks, moves and sounds. It won't catch some it's supposed to, and it will catch some it's not. But a small price to pay, according to the trans abolitionists who have pushed and pushed and pushed for this outcome.

And that's why I don't buy the arguments that this ruling...