Royal Marine guarding nuclear weapons grilled by terror cops over alleged neo-Nazi links
Security sources said he was grilled over his extremist views and links to far-right groups
'NAZI' LINK Royal Marine guarding nuclear weapons grilled by terror cops over alleged neo-Nazi links
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
A ROYAL Marine guarding nuclear weapons has been grilled by counter-terror police over alleged neo-Nazi links.
Commando John Carr was interviewed last week when he flew to Scotland.
Sign up for Scottish Sun
newsletter
Sign up
3
John Carr serves with 43 Commando, guarding the UK's Trident 2 missiles and nuclear submarines
3
Carr was interviewed last week over alleged neo-Nazi links
Credit: YouTube
He said it was 'political bullying' as he had campaigned against women joining the Marines, which he claimed lowered physical standards.
But security sources said he was grilled over his extremist views and links to far-right groups.
Carr serves with 43 Commando, guarding the UK's Trident 2 missiles and nuclear submarines at HMNB Clyde, Faslane, in Argyll and Bute.
The Sun understands he is a member of the far-right Homeland Party — which splintered from a neo-Nazi party in 2023.
Speaking on YouTube Carr said: 'I am a member of a political party.
'I don't think it's their business or anyone's business to know what that is, but know that it isn't the main political party.
'It isn't Labour.'
Carr lost his security clearance and will work from home pending an investigation.
Police Scotland declined to comment.
3
Carr serves at HMNB Clyde, Faslane, in Argyll and Bute
Credit: Alamy
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
7 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
How to watch Trump's address to the nation at 10 p.m. ET
Live updates: Trump says US launches strike on three nuclear sites in Iran The conflict began a week ago when Israel started conducting airstrikes against Iranian nuclear and military sites, primarily targeting uranium enrichment facilities to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The two countries have been engaged in aerial strikes and Trump had been pondering U.S. involvement for the past week. Trump ended his posting saying, "Now is the time for peace." What time is President Donald Trump's address? The Republican president said he will deliver a televised Oval Office address at 10 p.m. ET How to watch Trump's address on bombing of Iran: Watch the address live on USA TODAY's YouTube channel here. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
New Statesman
a day ago
- New Statesman
Where have all the anti-war Democrats gone?
To bomb or not to bomb? President Trump treats waging war with the same gravity he might deploy when deciding whether to play golf. He said this week that 'I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do'. Call it strategic ambiguity, or flagrant honesty. You get the sense that the president doesn't know himself whether he will give the order. The White House line right now is that the president will decide over the next two weeks. Cue chatter that this is a ruse to discombobulate the Iranians before an imminent American strike. Whatever he decides, Trump's attempt to save face after Netanyahu ignored his plea to leave the negotiations with Iran alone has exposed fissures between the neo-cons in his administration and the Maga isolationists. The Maga activist Laura Loomer has started a list of those who criticised the president, presumably for a future purge. What, then, are the Democrats doing to exploit this chink in the normally preternaturally cultish Maga movement which rarely turns on itself? Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate, issued an milquetoast statement when Israel first struck Iran. Hakeem Jeffries, his counterpart in the House of Representatives, issued a similar statement but called for American troops not to be put 'in harm's way'. As Peter Beinart wrote in the New York Times, neither Democratic leader instructed the President that the authority to go to war resides with Congress. (Schumer later did, but took no action to that effect.) There is a tendency within the party to treat war as a non-partisan issue, as if bombing another country in the name of national security is a foregone conclusion. A rally-around-our-troops effect takes hold. This might be a missed opportunity for the Democrats to become the anti-war party, a position Trump has dominated since he won in 2016. A YouGov/Economist poll found that 60 per cent of Americans don't think Trump should get involved in the war, including over half of Republican voters, with only 16 per cent supporting action. Yet, the anti-war Democrats are confined to the party's populist left, or what you could more generously call the left who wants to be popular. Bernie Sanders has introduced a No War Against Iran bill in the Senate. Ro Khanna, the progressive Democratic representative, has emerged as the party's leading anti-war figure. Khanna opposed the Iraq war in 2003 and sees interventionism in the Middle East as yet another example – alongside globalisation and a pro-rich tax policy – of how communities in states such as Pennsylvania were shunted to the bottom of Washington's priorities. It's a message Trump has put to good use for over a decade. Democrats' pitch to voters could now include both opposition to Trump's militarism at home and abroad. Challenging Trump's potential strikes could become a chance for the Democrats to tap into that populist anger which Trump has so deftly mined for so long. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe [See also: Is Trump the last neoconservative?] Related
North Wales Chronicle
2 days ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Opponents of assisted dying vow to fight on as MPs back Bill
Ms Leadbeater's Bill passed what could be its final Commons hurdle by 23 votes, down from the majority of 55 it secured when MPs first voted on it in November. The Spen Valley MP declared 'thank goodness' after the result while Rebecca Wilcox, daughter of campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen, said it was 'wonderful' the result had come ahead of her mother's birthday. But opponents vowed to fight on against what they called a 'deeply flawed Bill'. A group of 27 Labour MPs who voted against the legislation said: 'We were elected to represent both of those groups and are still deeply concerned about the risks in this Bill of coercion of the old and discrimination against the disabled, people with anorexia and black, Asian and minority ethnic people, who we know do not receive equitable health care. 'As the Bill moves to the House of Lords it must receive the scrutiny that it needs. Not about the principles of assisted dying but its application in this deeply flawed Bill.' But Ms Leadbeater told the PA news agency she hoped there would be no 'funny games' in the Lords, as her Bill faces further tough hurdles in the upper chamber. She added: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.' Meanwhile, one of the leading opponents of the Bill, Conservative Danny Kruger, described its supporters as 'enemies', saying he felt 'like Evelyn Waugh at the time of the Nazi-Soviet Pact in 1939'. In a series of tweets on Friday night, the East Wiltshire MP accused assisted dying campaigners of being 'militant anti-Christians' who had failed to 'engage with the detail of the Bill'. He added: 'It's the revenge of the middle-aged against their dependents.' Ms Leadbeater's Terminally Ill Adults (End Of Life) Bill will now proceed to the House of Lords, where it will undergo further scrutiny before becoming law, should peers decide to back the legislation. But some peers have already spoken out against the legislation, with the Bishop of London, Dame Sarah Mullally, saying they 'must oppose' the Bill as 'unworkable and unsafe'.
