August 29th, 2025 Newsletter

The Price of Progress

The purpose of my newsletter is to give you important information that is censored in the mainstream media.

“The way you get democracy to function is by informing the public.” – Robert Kennedy Jr.

“Science is more than a body of knowledge. It is a way of thinking; a way of sceptically interrogating the universe with a fine understanding of human fallibility. If we are not able to ask sceptical questions, to interrogate those who tell us that something is true, to be sceptical of those in authority, then, we are up for grabs for the next charlatan (political or religious) who comes rambling along.” – Carl Sagan

“Never worry about who will be offended if you speak the Truth. Worry about who will be misled, deceived and destroyed, if you do not.” and
”Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the one less travelled by and that has made all the difference.” – Robert Frost

Though the chapters interrelate, they are divided into six sections and have a common realisation that a cabal of corporate elites have captured global trade, global governance, mainstream and online media, and ultimately many of our minds.

As a stenographer, I link to an article or audio and paste a key section. My most trusted websites are platforms for journalists who don’t compromise on the truth and have thereby been shunned by the mainstream media. Click the button below to view my list of top trusted news sources:

Disclaimer: Farms Not Factories newsletters share and repost material that is already publicly accessible. The views expressed in the articles do not necessarily represent those of Farms Not Factories but are selected to promote open discussion on issues often overlooked by mainstream media.

Food & Farming

Wise Farmers: Will Hall

Share Retweet Insta Repost

Will Hall, 34, started farming eight years ago, midway through his PhD at Bristol University researching rainfall data using Met office radar printouts. Not seeing daylight or using his body physically during the day was adversely affecting his sleep and sense of well-being so he turned to farming that he knew would offer a wider and more diverse lifestyle than the narrowly-focused PhD research.

He got into farming through WWOOF (World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms) volunteering on a few farms in England, then in Spain and France. Back in England he did a traineeship at Tolhurst Organics and a three-year apprenticeship at Sutton Community Farm in Surrey.

After that, he and his partner Sam set up a farm in Cornwall on rent-free land, selling produce to the local community via veg box deliveries. After an exhausting year they managed to pay back their initial investment, but with nothing left to pay themselves for the long hours. In 2022 Will took on the paid role of head gardener at Forbidden Fruit and Veg, a 1.7 acre walled garden in Badminton, South Glos where he lived with the community of growers sharing free accommodation and organic food with zero living expenses.

Will managed to turn the project towards becoming commercially viable by adding three polytunnels and creating new outdoor beds. In addition to supplying veg to the local community via weekly markets in three nearby villages, he was also selling wholesale to shops in Bristol as well as filling veg boxes for collection and offering pre-packed veg from a kiosk at the garden gate where customers pay via an honesty box. Despite the increase in veg production and sales year on year, even with the help of unpaid or very cheap labour, he saw that it was impossible to make the venture profitable due to the many overhead costs.

As there are no subsidies, Will says he thinks that veg prices and food prices will have to go up to pay for the amount of labour that is needed to run a small, chemical-free farm. The government gives subsidies to large industrialised farms that use fertilisers and spray their fields with glyphosate while Will’s chemical-free farming receives no support even though it fosters biodiversity and benefits the economy by providing healthy food thus reducing healthcare costs. Also Will’s expertise gave volunteers opportunities to learn how to grow veg and how to look after themselves through healthy food and community living.

Last winter Will left to join a community in Wales where he share-owns some land and a woodland copse that will provide enough timber to build a new house for himself and Sam. Their life is in their own hands, in the health of the soils they nurture and the strength of the community bound together by their shared sense of freedom and fulfillment.

Watch the full 37minute version here: Will Hall – Head Grower at Forbidden Fruit & Veg

In 1961Joel Salatin’s parents moved to a worn-out Virginia farm with poor soils and neglected fields. Now, thanks to Joel’s vision, Polyface Farms is a thriving community of farmers who work together symbiotically, with grazing cattle, sheep and poultry providing fertility for the re-growth of herbal leys. Joel gives farm tours and teaches courses in small-scale, mixed farming, with a focus on soil health, high animal welfare and a harmonious community.

Watch; Breaking Our Slavery To The Industrial Food Complex | Joel Salatin Adam Taggart, 7 August 2025

‘Named “the most famous farmer in America”, Joel has spent his career advocating for sustainable farming practices, and pioneering models that show how food can be grown & raised in ways that:

– are regenerative to our topsoils
– are more humane to livestock
– produce much healthier, tastier food
– contribute profitably to the local economy

Who wouldn’t want that? Well, the government and Big Ag for starters.

Joel refers to himself a “lunatic farmer” because so many of the changes he thinks our food systems need are either illegal under current law or mightily resisted by the deep-pocketed corporations controlling production and distribution.

But that doesn’t stop him from his passion of inspiring others to take a better path. He co-owns and operates, with his family, Polyface Farm in Swoope, Virginia. Featured in the New York Times bestseller ‘Omnivore’s Dilemma’ and award-winning documentary ‘Food Inc.’, the farm services more than 5,000 families, 50 restaurants, 10 retail outlets, and a farmers’ market with produce and pastured beef, pork, poultry, as well as forestry products. On the farm, Joel and his staff pilot new practices, mentor young farmers, educate the public, and produce an excellent set of workshops for those looking to truly get their hands dirty learning how to farm sustainably.’

Farm experience and skills need to be passed to the next generation, not taxed on inheritance that leads towards bankruptcy. Though a new comer to farming, Andy Cato’s experiences and mistakes were solved when soil health became his focus;

Listen; Leaders – Andy Cato: Steward of complexity Farm Gate, 19 August 2025

Andy Cato; “Those people lucky enough to get a Daylesford veg box have that choice. But most people on the high street never have that choice. So how can we make this work for the greatest number of farmers?

Dr. Christine Jones, for those that don’t know, is an amazing Australian soil scientist and she’s done all kinds of work. But a real key message of hers is around plant diversity. So when you have these plants from different families growing together, it creates an explosion of life and ultimately of abundance.

If plant diversity is the key, then how can we make that as accessible to as many farmers as possible? If diversity is the key rather than perennial versus annual, then we don’t need the inter-row mower.

Companion crops, such as wheat and beans, wheat and lucerne, whatever it might be, barley and pea are a much easier way of harnessing this diversity principle which seems to be the main driver of soil recovery. When I got onto that line of thinking, I was all set up to do everything in strips, including my seed drill, twin tank strips, all the rest of it, and then realised that certainly in the case of wheat and beans, barley and pea and so on, you just put them all in the same tank and it’s fine.”

ffinlo Costain; “How do you harvest that, then?”

Andy Cato; “Well, the criteria for any sort of combination are seeds of a size that can be separated easily, so you wouldn’t want to do wheat and rye, for example, and crops that will mature roughly around the same time. There’s a very interesting thing that happens, and I’m not going to give you the biological explanation, because I can’t quite remember it, but if you’re starting with things that mature roughly the same time, then they will tend to synchronise when they’re next to each other, which is quite interesting to watch, but you do need to start from roughly the right point. And you can also decide that you’re going to favour the thing that you’re harvesting. So, if you’re doing barley and pea and the focus is the barley, you might accept that you’re going to shed a few peas, but they’ll form part of your next cover crop, so it doesn’t matter. But the actual mechanical harvesting of them is easy, it’s the standard set-up.”

I used to think that going vegan was kind to the planet and animals but Gareth Wyn Jones’s message is the right one – that pasture fed livestock have a good life while converting the UK’s plentiful grass land into edible protein, sequestering CO2 and improving soil fertility.

Watch; Hopefully the Plant based community or Vegans can understand our way of life, Gareth Wyn Jones, 16 August 2025

“The frustration with some farmers is that a lot of these plant-based people don’t really understand how food is produced. Now on uplands like this there is not going to be any cropping, there’s only livestock that will be able to transform this stuff, grass, into top quality protein which is beef or lamb in the background or mutton. But not only do they do that, but they as well help with the soil fertility and the soil health. So when this breaks down, it’s dry now, when this breaks down It will feed the soil, the grass, which then feeds them, so it’s a natural product. It’s a natural way of producing food in a very sustainable way. So if you believe that these (cattle and sheep) are destroying the planet, you’re living in cloud cuckoo land. These are part of the solution to feed the world in a sustainable, healthy, nutritional way, because if you keep eating the processed food and the rubbish, it’s not going to do you any good mentally, emotionally, physically, and thats why you have to really start asking the question of yourself, we are what we eat, and good food means good health. Anyway, another beautiful day, we are living the dream.”

Farmers have learnt to handle the shocks of extreme weather and animal diseases such as foot and mouth, but politics is destroying them.

Watch; Gareth Wyn Jones: Championing Change for Farming; Shout About Farming, 19 December 2024

“My name’s Gareth Wyn Jones. I live here in Llanfairfechan. My family has been on this land for 375 years. I’m a big believer in the countryside way of life, and I love to share it. So over many years I put my head down and just worked and did different things. Then I began to see the power that we have on our phones and started the social media journey, which has been a bit of a roller coaster. But it’s important for me because I feel as a farmer that we’ve been betrayed as the big bad wolf with pollution, with climate, and I think we’re the people that are feeding the rest of the nation in an affordable, sustainable and an environmentally-friendly way, and it needs to be showcased. So it was always about telling our stories, making sure people understood where food came from and the struggles it takes to feed people. You can be sitting in your house with a bellyful of food with no understanding how that’s produced, from the carrots to the fruit to the veg. Everything will have started either from the soil or from the sea. And for me, that’s the important message that I want to get out there, our health is our wealth, and a lot of that has to do with the food we eat. And if we can push that narrative, I think this country could be building a better Britain on our bellies.

Why should we want to ease trade with Europe when we should buy British to save our farmers? Of course the BBC reflects the needs of corporate agriculture rather than the needs of the local market in an increasingly global world. Hopefully Europe will reject our gene edited crops and keep it’s ban on GMOs of which gene editing is a part.

Listen; ‘Disappointment’ from food industry as minister says EU export checks to last until 2027, BBC Farming Today, 28 August 2025

BBC intro; ‘Changes to the costs, paperwork and bureaucracy that are hampering agri-food exports from Great Britain to the European Union won’t be in place until 2027. Nick Thomas–Symonds, the minister for EU relations, has been setting out his priorities for the future of the UK-EU relationship in a speech in front of industry representatives and journalists. We speak to trade expert David Henig and hear how food exporters are ‘disappointed’ that barriers to trade won’t be removed sooner.’

Though there are some good intentions in the government’s Food Strategy, they are unlikely to be realised; there are no set steps or timetable to realise the rhetoric, and the paper given to the Department of Trade was rejected.

Read; UK Gov reveals anticipated new food strategy, Wicked Leeks, 17 July 2025

‘Defra, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, has also convened a Food Strategy Advisory Board. Chaired by Zeichner, the board make-up is tipped towards industry heavyweights, with Sainsbury’s, Cranswick and McCain all represented.’

‘However, it is no secret that Defra holds little sway in Whitehall, especially over the Treasury. In the days after the food strategy announcement, reports emerged that a draft of the good food cycle strategy included plans to set out new policies and regulations – but these were “ditched after intervention from No.10”, according to The Grocer magazine.

The final document reads: “Many of the policy areas and strategies that will be essential to delivery of the food strategy outcomes are still under development, and all will continue to evolve.”

As ever, there will be a close eye on how any new policies affect prices, which has in recent years been used countless times by ‘Big Food’ companies to derail progressive policies, like restrictions on promotions and advertising of unhealthy foods, wider sugar taxes and the introduction of more sustainable packaging rules.

The Soil Association is among those who remain concerned that the ultra-processed food industry is having too much of an influence on food and health policy (which politicians do finally appear to be linking together).

“The government’s vision for good food ignores the ultra-processed elephant in the room,” said Soil Association campaign co-ordinator Cathy Cliff. “This is perhaps unsurprising given the involvement of the UPF industry in [the good food cycle] announcement and after our recent investigation found the UPF lobby blocked the previous government’s attempts to push shops to discount on minimally processed and whole foods.”

Death and disability from dietary risks such as eating too little fruit, vegetables and fibre, and too much food high in fat, sugar and salt has risen by 46% in the last decade. Cliff called for “explicit backing” of minimally processed and whole foods that “we know are truly good for us”.

How to curb consumption of ultra-processed foods is just one of a number of tricky challenges the government needs to negotiate. Some farmers noted that the strategy talks a lot about provenance, local food systems and cultures but fails to mention British beef, lamb, pork, or dairy. Eating less and better meat and dairy remains a bone of contention.

The government said that a food strategy is “the process by which we move from the food system we have now, to the food system we want to see in the future”. Defra relations with farmers remain strained, while supermarkets continue to strongarm progressive policies, so the real stress tests for the new strategy are surely yet to come’

As per usual the BBC didn’t give a balanced view to new tech absorbing methane in intensive units. How about treating the root cause of excess methane which would be to pasture feed cattle in appropriate numbers so that they fertilise land and live in harmony with the ecosystem? There is plenty of land and people to farm it if we ended policies that herd us into cities to labour in factories. According to Yuval Harari, WEF’s philosopher, when AI takes all the jobs, we will be given hallucinogenic drugs and video games to alleviate our boredom. If AI has nicked our jobs, how about giving us each an allotment on the outskirts of our cities, as in Russia and Ukraine, to build a small shed/house and grow our own food?

Read; Danish technology aims to eradicate methane emissions from livestock barn air; Agriland Team, 12 August 2025

‘Researchers are hopeful that dilute methane emissions from dairy barns can be effectively eliminated at commercial scale using technology. A field demonstration of the ‘Methane Eradication Photochemical System (MEPS)’ represents the “first real-world validation of a scalable technology capable of eradicating methane emissions from livestock barn air”. This is according to Ambient Carbon, a Danish company that is developing and commercialising technologies that reduce or eradicate greenhouse gases. The gas has 84 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide when measured over a 20-year period. Livestock emit approximately 30% of worldwide anthropogenic methane, with dairy cattle generating half of those emissions, the company said.’

Farming Today gives a terrifying picture of the future of farming as if it was progress. The artificial insemination of bees is yet another example of how so-called progress is in fact; excessive specialisation, tech and scientific overreach as a result of studying nature in a lab, not in nature.

You can add artificial insemination to the myriad of mistakes he mentions made by bee ‘experts’ in the past.

Farming Today 28 August 2025

intro; ‘As part of our week-long look at pollinators, we visit Bishop’s Bees in Devon, where owner Darren Molyneux is developing genetic lines suited to the UK climate using artificial insemination.

Farming & rewilding can work in harmony and not against each other but subsidies need to be provided to make transitions to ecological farming methods sustainable. They would support land sharing, where agro-ecological farming exists along side nature rather than land sparing where chemical-heavy monocultures continue with areas on the margin set aside for natural habitats, (those habitats would inevitably be impacted by the herbicide sprays).

Read; Nature-friendly farming may require subsidies to become profitable; Sustainability Online, 5th August 2025

‘A new study by the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (UKCEH) has suggested that while nature-friendly farming methods improve both biodiversity and crop yields, government subsidies may be required to make it as profitable as conventional farming. The four-year study, which was carried out alongside Rothamsted Research, was undertaken across 17 farms in southern England, and explored various agro-ecological methods as well as the financial viability of said methods.

Three systems were trialled – a ‘business as usual’ conventional intensive farming system; an ‘enhanced’ ecological approach with wildflower field margins and overwinter cover crops; and a ‘maximised’ system that incorporated in-field wildflower strips and farmyard manure to improve soil health. As it found, incorporating nature-friendly practices led to improved biodiversity, as well as higher populations of pollinators, natural pest predators, and earthworms in the ecological systems. At the same time, however, the cost of developing these habitats, coupled with the loss of land that could otherwise be used for production, affected the profitability of these systems, with the researchers suggesting that subsidies may therefore be required to support farms’ transition to sustainable agriculture.

“Without the introduction of new financial incentives, many farmers will be deterred from adopting agro-ecological farming practices and systems,” commented UKCEH ecologist Dr Ben Woodcock, who led the study. “This could leave them locked into high input, intensive farming systems, and more exposed to the impacts of pesticide resistance, declining soil health and climate change.” Woodcock added that while farmers remain focused on profitability, there is also an increasing awareness that more sustainable farming systems can help them ‘future-proof’ their farms with regards to soil health, reliance on pesticides and climate change.

“Agro-ecological methods are good for biodiversity, food security and, in the long-term, provide more secure farm incomes but habitats can take several years to establish, so agri-environment subsidies are essential to helping farmers transition to these more sustainable systems,” he noted.’

Free trade agreements and WTO rules force UK farmers to compete with farmers in countries where labour is cheap and food and animal welfare standards lower than in the UK. UK farmers need protectionist policies to allow them to produce food for UK consumers.

Take Action; 10 September 2025 – The International Day of Action Against the WTO and Free Trade Agreements: Call to Action!, La Via Campesenia 19 August 2025

‘To the workers, peasants, and all people of the world,

The 10th of September is commemorated by La Via Campesina and its allies worldwide as the International Day of Action Against the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). On this day, we remember the sacrifice of South Korean peasant Lee Kyung-Hae in Cancun in 2003, when he took his life to protest the WTO-led free trade policies.

Free-market globalisation has only created immense suffering for our people and the whole of humanity. Rampant privatisation of the territories and commons, deregulation, import surges and dumping, war-induced supply disruptions and, most recently, the misuse of tariffs and non-tariff barriers for vested imperial agendas, have only aggravated the suffering of workers and small-scale food producers. Despite its evident failures, the WTO (and the FTAs negotiated outside of it) still have a huge influence on global trade.

The recent tariff war by the U.S. government also shows that trade measures can be used to weaponise imperial foreign policy – rather than to support small-scale food producers, improve food availability, create jobs, and strengthen food sovereignty in both the Global North and South. WTO remains dysfunctional in the face of such an imperial onslaught. We must co-create – from our territories – a framework that will radically change the principles that define the global trade system and build food sovereignty, a framework that would allow countries to develop policies that ensure a decent livelihood for all people, especially small-scale food producers. Minimum support prices, public stock-holding, supply management, and public food procurement are just a few of many pragmatic policies that could ensure a decent income for small-scale food producers and that can defend peoples’ right to healthy and nutritious food. A framework that will guarantee that our food systems are democratically organised and not left to the whims of the market. La Via Campesina firmly believes that such a trade framework should mobilise tools such as tariffs, non-tariff barriers, and subsidies to prioritise support for family farmers, small-scale food producers, fisherfolk, and rural workers.’

Martin Lines, CEO of the Nature Friendly Farmers Network, and ffinlo Costain from Farm Gate discuss land stewardship, chaotic government policy and the resulting problems of cash flow on UK agro-ecological farms.

Listen; Nature Friendly Farm Gate 26 August 2025

Martin Lines; “We’re on the hill in Cambridgeshire, on heavy clay soil, and we look down across the fens, and out the other side it’s the chalks of Cambridge city and South Cambridge, pretty much in the centre. Very good connections with infrastructure and roads. That is also becoming challenging because of the growth that’s coming creeping around us. We’re basically around an arable system, we used to be very mixed, we’re trying to bring livestock back in and trying to get that balance of environmental improvements, production improvements, soil health. On my own journey, we did some stewardship and then we started to value the habitat that was in that stewardship, the pollinators or the predatory insects. And then we started focusing on soil health because I recognised our soils depleting, standing in water more often, they are becoming harder. And actually it was our cultivation systems, our then farming systems, that were actually adding cost to my business by destroying our soils. So we’ve gone on our own journey over 20-odd years now. And what I found is it also improves our business. It doesn’t make us massively more profitable than anyone else, but it de-risks us sometimes. I’ll face the same challenges. We wanted to get into the latest schemes, but because of RPA (Rural Payments Agency) delays in managing their paperwork, we missed out again with the capital grants. So I’m facing the same challenges as many farmers. I’m not gifted by having early access to information and getting a preferential treatment. We’re trying to run our business as profitably as we can by focusing on environmental improvements, soil health, more diverse cropping and, like many, we’ve gone down that regenerative, rejuvenating route. We bought a drill with a crimp roller (to bruise the cover crop before direct drilling) because if you look on social media and especially in other countries, crimp rollers are the thing for the future. We don’t use glyphosate, it doesn’t work as well as you think in Cambridgeshire. It works on some crops, but not everything. We have been learning for the last several years as much as we can and sharing with neighbours. Also recognising we were moving away from an area-based payment that gave us guaranteed payments, for more action payments, public money for public goods, which makes our business more difficult because that guaranteed payment isn’t coming. So I needed to learn early and now I want to share some of the learnings with others. That’s the beauty of the network of working with a range of farmers; sharing information.

We’ve got a scarcity of products in this country, but globally there’s a massive amount. Because of the trade tariffs in America and their moving away from the AID program. There’s huge quantities of grain, maize, soya available in America that has no home that was going for AID that’s flooding the market. We’ve got good yields in other places because of their weather. We are a small island trading globally on commodities of grains and actually it’s quite cheap to bring it over on a boat. I think previous governments doing trade deals and not enforcing standards undermines UK farmers so much because as soon as the price point is better to import, regardless of quality, it’s imported. And actually if we had a clear standard of what healthy, good, nature-friendly production could be, focusing on quality, food quality, environmental outcomes and quality climate outcomes, and built that, we would trade globally driving standards up rather than sucking in the cheapest product that’s grown or produced globally with no care for what the impact it has there or the impact on our own health.

If you listen to the various speeches by the ministers and Secretary of State, I think there is clear language in there, but it’s not being communicated as well. The direction is to support a more nature-friendly, a more balanced farming system where food, nature, climate come together on landscapes. But that clear narrative and messaging coming out of DEFRA and of government, I think many farmers are a bit annoyed with some of the language of food securities, national security. Well, what does it really mean when we see schemes suddenly stop? Grants are available now but not tomorrow. Area payments have come off quicker than what we had budgeted. As a farmer I budgeted for a timeline of funding changes and hopefully new stuff coming in. They’ve accelerated the transition away from the payment we’re receiving but the new money is not there in front of us. We cannot apply, or many farmers cannot apply for stuff because it’s not been brought forward. And I think that’s the real challenge of a change of government. The change of focus of what they want to do from the previous government is that instability has been put into the whole system. They want to do tax changes, and commodity markets are on the floor.”

ffinlo Costain; “what’s been the impact on you and your business of those changes financially?”

Martin Lines; “Personally, it’s been pretty significant. We’re in some schemes, RPA were delayed in giving us our annual declaration and we’ve taken some options out of one scheme to make a better scheme of the next one. And we missed it because the RPA hadn’t processed the thing. The capital grants, just lately we went to apply but because the RPA hadn’t cleaned our system, cleared some options off that we’d done previously in the last round of stuff, we couldn’t apply. And I actually got an email last week to say it is now fixed, we fixed your problems. The scheme finished for me four weeks ago. So it means £180,000 of income I could have received on delivering public goods has now stopped us on this farm doing more, bringing in the right infrastructure, doing a joined-up approach without significant amount of funding coming away from us from that area-based payment stuff. On top of that we’ve had two really wet years and a dry year and the commodity prices have been really fluctual, so it’s caused us really significant pain and now I’ve also got the potential of a railway line coming through the farm from Oxford to Cambridge. They may want 40, 45% of the farm, not sure quite when it is, but they’re doing lots of work to investigate it. So what’s our future plan for our farm and our soils and our system if that infrastructure is going to come through and significantly change our business? So for us it’s quite challenging at the moment.

Food’s important. We’ve all got to eat, but it’s all of the other goods and services, the fibre, the timber, the flood mitigation, the carbon sequestration, nature access. We’ve got to champion all of it and help DEFRA demonstrate to the wider society and to wider government departments of the role of healthy soil to have healthy food, reduce the NHS, not just see DEFRA as this small department over here. What we produce from our land, from our farm to landscape, involves all departments across government. And that’s what we should be championing, that multifunctionality of our landscapes and the assets we can deliver that all departments and all governments should be invested in. Why are we investing £22 billion in carbon sequestration for tech we haven’t invented yet? Increase soil organic matter 1% and there’s most of your carbon sequestered and it delivers so many other multiple benefits, but we have not been communicating that as an industry and championing not just the food we produce, but all of the other stuff that are core to what we can and we do deliver.”

The Nature Friendly Farming Network is hosting a summit in Edinburgh on 7 October

Summit; Scotland’s first nature-friendly farming summit: Farming for nature, profit & public good 7 October 2025

Start – October 7th, 2025 – 9:00 am
End – October 7th, 2025 – 4:00 pm
Book Now

‘Join us for Scotland’s first nature-friendly farming summit, hosted by NFFN Scotland, bringing together farmers, land managers, researchers, policymakers and environmental leaders to shape a resilient future for food, nature and rural communities.

Taking place in Edinburgh, this landmark event will explore how Scotland can transition to a sustainable food and farming system that supports biodiversity, combats climate change, and secures long-term food production.Through inspiring talks, panel discussions and real-life case studies, attendees will hear from pioneering farmers already putting nature at the heart of their practices, and take part in crucial conversations about reforming funding, scaling up nature-friendly methods, and ensuring profitability alongside environmental delivery.

This is a unique opportunity to drive forward a just, nature-positive transition for Scottish agriculture – and to be part of the movement shaping farming’s role in a climate-resilient Scotland.’

Labour and Conservative policies have the same impact; reducing farmer numbers. Will they vote for Reform that have pledged to end the inheritance tax and end the destructive impact the NetZero scam has on farmers . The government may claim NetZero helps reduce petrochemical inputs but without the subsidies to help farmers go chemical-free, why would they produce less?

Read; The four-way battle for Britain’s countryside; Politico, 3rd August 2025

‘Keir Starmer broke the Conservatives’ monopoly on Britain’s rural heartlands. Nigel Farage reckons he can seize it next. Voters ditched their decades-old loyalty to the center-right Conservative Party at last year’s general election, voting in a wave of Labour MPs to represent their constituencies — in some places for the first time. It followed a charm offensive from the U.K. prime minister, who waxed lyrical in the bucolic bible Country Life about his own upbringing on the “edge of rural England.”

But, with Labour in the political doldrums, the flat-cap, wax-jacket-loving Farage hopes voters will turn to him next. Rural constituencies will be a “massive” target for Reform, Farage’s deputy Richard Tice told POLITICO in an interview. In regional elections in May, the right-wing upstart party seized control of large rural county councils — including in Derbyshire, Lincolnshire and Kent — from the Conservatives.

Controversial Labour inheritance tax changes, which will hit some farmers, have offered Starmer’s political adversaries an easy opening. Tractor protests coursed through Whitehall, the center of British power, earlier this year and Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch donned a wax jacket while Farage put on his flat cap to try to seize the agenda.’

If anyone suggests that eating franken food is better than eating cruelly-raised factory farmed animals, remind them that there is another option, less but better meat from pasture-fed animals. RSPCA is however, pushing ‘animal-free alternatives’ for those who chose to eat meat from animal factories – they are being encouraged to eat plant based fake meat & insects to reach fake environmental targets like NetZero and boost the profits of the corporations that patent the franken food.

Read; The future of Food and Farming, RSPCA

‘To tackle the huge scale of animal suffering currently present in the lower welfare farming system, we need a significant reduction in the UK’s consumption of meat, fish, dairy and eggs. A significant reduction in the consumption of animal products by 2050 would help drive a huge reduction in animals suffering, by reducing the number of animals being reared in lower welfare farming systems, while supporting climate and environmental targets.’

An informative piece calling for ‘Method of Production’ labelling to be introduced as part of the National Food Strategy this autumn. In June 2025, Switzerland approved new labelling rules that mandate businesses to declare if the meat and dairy products they’re selling are linked to animal suffering. Will the livestock industry allow this kind of clear labelling to be adopted in the UK? In Switzerland, Meat Labels Must Now Disclose Animal Cruelty Practices

Read; A CLEAR need for ‘Method of Production’ labelling, Sustainable Food Trust, 23rd July 2025

‘Ahead of the publication of the Government’s forthcoming National Food Strategy (NFS), food systems expert, Honor May Eldridge, reviews the Consortium for Labelling for the Environment, Animal Welfare and Regenerative Farming’s (CLEAR) ambitious proposal for the NFS to call for ‘method of production’ labelling to become mandatory for all meat products in the UK.

More and more of us want to make informed, ethical choices about the food we buy, and these choices inevitably reflect our concerns about the environmental impacts of food production and animal welfare. The SFT’s recent report, Grazing Livestock: It’s not the cow, but the how, demonstrates how, in relation to meat and dairy, the method of production makes a huge difference when it comes to the environment, animal welfare and much beyond. Consequently, it is critical that farmers who invest in better production methods are rewarded for that investment by the marketplace. Seventy-five per cent of UK consumers say they want supermarkets to stock only sustainably and ethically sourced food, and they’ve consistently called for more transparency about how meat is produced.

That’s where CLEAR comes in. The Consortium for Labelling for the Environment, Animal Welfare and Regenerative Farming, of which the Sustainable Food Trust is a founding member, wants to see national legislation to deliver transparent, verifiable food labelling that clearly communicates how food is produced. It is pushing for this to be a commitment within the forthcoming National Food Strategy (NFS). Defra is scheduled to publish the NFS in the autumn, which will lay out the Government’s vision to reshape the country’s food system to be healthier, more sustainable and resilient. The Strategy will guide the future of the UK food system and will (hopefully) pave the way for a Food Bill for England. CLEAR is pushing for the NFS to call for ‘method of production’ labelling to become mandatory for all meat products in the UK.

This focus is a continuation of the excellent work that CLEAR has done since its founding in 2021 when it brought together leading NGOs in the food and farming space to lobby the Government for better labelling. In 2021, CLEAR launched its manifesto at Groundswell with the aim of empowering consumers with meaningful information, bringing real transparency to the food system. Clear, consistent labelling will help people understand what lies behind the products they buy. Many of us have stood in a supermarket, holding a carton of milk, only to be confronted by a sea of labels – organic, non-GMO, fairtrade, free range. But what do they all mean? And how do they compare? For most shoppers, it’s unclear.

CLEAR’s vision includes mandatory method of production labelling for all foods sold in the UK, including imports, underpinned by strong enforcement mechanisms. It calls for independent assessment processes that are based on verifiable benchmarks, ensuring the integrity of any claims made. Crucially, the labelling must be clear and accessible, appearing directly on packaging so that shoppers can make informed choices at a glance. It is also vital to build the enforcement capacity needed to support these measures and make the system effective.

At a recent event hosted by CLEAR and the SFT to launch CLEAR’s ecolabelling review report, the authors highlighted some of the challenges of capturing farm environmental impacts on food labels. One theme which kept cropping up was the need for data that truly reflects the farming system that it describes – this usually means holistic, primary, outcome-based data. This is the type of data that the Global Farm Metric (GFM) focuses on. This data provides the truest reflection of farm sustainability, although it does require time and it does have a financial cost. The GFM team continues to work with the food labelling sector to explore how this type of data can feed into more transparent labelling efforts.

While its proposal is ambitious, CLEAR acknowledges the complexities of the current context. The UK’s departure from the European Union has left the food and farming sector in a state of flux. The UK is in the process of negotiating its phytosanitary (plant health) standards with the EU, and that negotiation will also involve consideration of labelling. The outcome will be critical for the future of the UK food system. At the bare minimum, the UK needs mandatory animal welfare labelling for poultry and pork that focuses specifically on method-of-production, strengthening country of origin labelling requirements, and establishing a regulatory basis for sustainability terms to ensure they are used meaningfully and consistently.

As the UK redefines its food system, now is the moment to ensure that transparency and integrity are placed at its core. Mandatory method of production labelling isn’t just a technical fix – it’s a vital tool for empowering consumers to make informed choices, rewarding farmers who adopt higher animal welfare and sustainable practices, and driving meaningful change in how our food is produced. With the National Food Strategy on the horizon, it’s time to embed CLEAR labelling into the future of UK food policy.’

Jane Goodall once said, “How could we have ever believed it was a good idea to grow our food with poisons?” In Denmark organic food producers have been encouraged by consumers who want healthy, wholesome food from well-tended soils. Supermarkets in the UK, instead of encouraging Organic farming, overprice organic goods to deter people from buying them, to choose nutritionally deficient, chemically-treated, factory farmed and often hydroponically-grown produce.

Listen; Denmark’s Food Revolution? BBC The Food Programme, 4 April 2025

“We’re in Copenhagen again in this edition of the Food programme, and I’m learning a few things about how policy set from on high can, in a country that takes food seriously and with pleasure, change people’s lives. This is a story about a country that’s very pro- organic, or so says Organic Denmark, one of the country’s biggest organic food industry associations. In 2023, almost 12% of the food Danes bought was organically produced. In the UK it’s 1.5%.”

“I think this is the best street food in the world and now we can get it organic. A lot of these companies were farmers who had ideals. Denmark was Big Ag in the 80s and the 90s people started wanting to do small production and for some reason all of that more or less became organic, whereas in other countries the small like this is local food. We don’t have local food that’s not organic. Very, very little.

One of the reasons why some of the fast food has become organic and popular with the young people is because the big festival, Roskilde Festival, that’s like Glastonbury, they made measures about sustainability and organic many years ago. So if you wanted to be a provider there, you had to live up to all these kind of standards. In 2017, the Roskilde Festival announced that all food traders on site had to be at least 90% organic. That then became a playground for people to try it out because they wanted to be at Roskilde.”

High-tech veg production without the ‘inconvenience’ of soil, this company grows lettuces with their bare roots fed by vapour produced by ultrasound vibrations. Coming to your supermarket soon, some more tasteless, textureless imitation greens produced in a factory. As the chemicals in the mist are the same as those used to grow conventional intensive food production, they admit that it isn’t as healthy as agro-ecologically grown food.

Listen; High-tech lettuce growing, BBC Farming Today, 22 August 2025

Presenter; “Today we’re hearing about aeroponics where the plants’ roots are grown in the air. But what’s new about this particular system is that the nutrients they need are delivered in a vapour which itself is created using ultrasonics or sound waves. Frankly that sounds very odd but as we heard yesterday as part of our week looking at salads, growers are keen to find peat-free solutions so maybe this could be one of them. It’s been developed by LettUs Grow in Bristol where they demonstrate the system to potential growers from across the world. Sally Chaloner went along to meet CEO and Co-founder Charlie Guy.”

Charlie Guy; “In front of us are a range of salad crops. We’ve got rocket, we’ve got lettuce, we’ve got spinach and we’ve got watercress. They’re all grown without any peat, so you can see the roots are growing down here into the mist. That’s where they receive all their nutrients.”

Presenter; “Between them, Charlie Guy and his team have backgrounds in engineering, renewables, biology and plant science, and in these two former nursery glass houses, they’re showing what can be done when you apply that technology. Here there are row upon row of salad plug plants grown not in soil but in trays, their roots underneath fed by vapour emitted from specially designed atomisers triggered by sound waves.”

The BBC is spreading the panic around Avian flu. Whatever is killing them, those birds that survive the disease, and so presumably are immune, will be slaughtered!

Listen; Bird Flu, BBC Farming Today, 22 August 2025

‘Avian flu is on the rise again and this summer increase in cases is being linked with seabirds. New stricter biosecurity rules have been introduced for shoots in England after a number of outbreaks in game birds, and there are also more coastal cases of the disease. Bird flu is usually associated with the winter and migratory birds, but seabirds were very badly hit in 2022 and researchers say the H5N1 virus is again affecting them. A consortium of UK scientific organisations form FluMap which is studying bird flu. We speak to Dr Tom Peacock from the Pirbright Institute who says gulls are currently spreading the virus.’

How about vet Roger S. Meacock BVSc MRCVS, being interviewed by the BBC to balance the discussion on bird flu and the PCR test? He quotes the inventor of the PCR test to back his research that it is not an appropriate test to diagnose a disease and if the individual is infectious.

Read; The Great PCR & HPAI Mistake by Roger S. Meacock, The Truth Contract, 25 August 2025

‘Unveiling the Pitfalls of PCR Testing: Misdiagnosis Risks and Policy Implications for HPAI and Beyond

Despite Kary Mullis PhD (inventer of the PCR test) saying that PCR testing cannot tell if there is disease present, or if an individual is infectious, it has become a commonly used test in veterinary medicine for certain infections. This review paper explains why clinical diagnosis and use as a standalone technique in research constitutes inappropriate usage of PCR and risks establishing false information as fact. Combined with the misinterpretation of results due to a seeming ignorance of the high incidence of false positives where disease prevalence is low, this is leading to the over-diagnosis of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in poultry and other species, and potentially other diseases too with serious implications and consequences depending on policies. When it comes to HPAI ( Highly pathogenic avian influenza) and other notifiable disease policies we must not abandon common sense nor lose sight of what is an achievable end goal that doesn’t cull unnecessarily and maintains farming viability going forward.

Full article:

The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test was developed by Dr Kary Mullis for which he was awarded a Nobel Prize. He developed it for use within a clean laboratory environment only to help detect the existence of a known sequence of DNA/RNA present only in the tiniest amount amongst other known sequences that it would be virtually impossible to detect by any other means. I’ve added bold enhancement to this explanation to accentuate a crucially important subtlety that it is essential to grasp in order to understand why PCR is totally inappropriate for disease diagnosis in a field clinical situation.

Kary Mullis’ Warning on PCR Misuse

As Dr Kary Mullis explained, PCR testing was not developed for and should NOT be used to diagnose disease and infer whether an individual is infectious.

When the original genetic material includes the looked-for sequence, each cycle of the PCR process doubles the starting amount which means it increases exponentially at each cycle, i.e. 1 becomes 2 becomes 4 becomes 8 becomes 16 etc. There is research that explains that if a positive PCR test result is only obtained by detecting the looked-for sequence following amplification of the original sample through more than 23 PCR test cycles, then the original sample did not contain sufficient genetic material to be considered infectious, assuming it came from a whole viable organism. For COVID testing, and many of the PCR tests now being inappropriately used to diagnose disease, the PCR test is being cycled more than 40 times. If you are presented with a PCR Test result it is therefore clinically meaningless without knowing this Ct number that denotes how many cycles were performed.

Limitations of PCR Amplification and Detection

It is crucial to understand that PCR only detects the presence of a selected short sequence of genetic material, not the whole sequence of the whole organism. It will therefore detect this sequence whether the organism it came from was viable at the time of swabbing, whether it was a residual fragment having already been recently dealt with successfully by the immune system, or had been otherwise broken down and shed by another individual and was an incidental finding on/in the individual being swabbed. PCR cannot differentiate whether the detected primer sequence came from the intended target organism or an entirely different organism. It will detect the sequence whether it includes a mutation and originated from another organism or not and cannot distinguish the difference.

People, animals and plants exist in a microbiome soup of bacteria, viruses, protozoa, fungi etc – including not just whole organisms but fragments of them too according to their lifecycle stage, immune interference, and/or influences from other elements of the microbiome that are in competition with each other. All of these pathogens are constantly mutating at differing rates, and will exist in different variant forms; some that we know about, and others that we don’t. We certainly don’t have all possible genetic sequences for the whole microbiome within a swabbed area, let alone know which detected sequence belongs to which individual organism in the microbiome!

The Challenge of Microbiome Complexity in Swabbing

With the best swabbing technique and will in the world, any swab taken from a person or animal will inevitably be a sample of the microbiome soup (plus contamination) at that area. It will contain microorganisms of all types of unknown genetic sequences and will contain other cells too – from the individual being swabbed plus whatever other sloughed cells they might have on them or have breathed in from the environment. I would expect that unless the person doing the swabbing is wearing a Hazmat suit there will also be their cells and other contamination too. Under those circumstances, cycling a PCR test 40+ times has a significant chance of a false positive, by which I mean the result will be clinically insignificant.

Applying PCR Flaws to HPAI Diagnosis

Question:

If we consider how this relates to HPAI now, which of the following 8 veterinary viruses is Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza’

This is a warning for Councils that consider granting applications for new-build factory pig farms;

Read; Second Norfolk megafarm blocked after legal pressure from campaigners Sustain, 13 August 2025

‘Another industrial-scale poultry development in Norfolk has been stopped in its tracks after failures to consider environmental impacts and flaws in the Council’s decision-making process were exposed.’

‘North Norfolk District Council has agreed to quash its approval for a large intensive poultry unit at Shrubbs Farm, planned to hold 310,000 chickens in six sheds alongside a biomass plant, feed silos, and other infrastructure covering land equivalent to around seven football pitches.

The Coalition Against Factory Farming (CAFF) warned that the Council’s original decision failed to consider key environmental risks and thus failed to allow necessary scrutiny by the public and decisionmakers. A pre-action protocol letter was sent to the Council by legal firm Leigh Day, threatening judicial review unless the approval was reversed. The Council has now confirmed it will re-determine the application and reopen it for public consultation. Key problems in the application included:

Failure to consider of the impact of spreading wastewater and other ammonia-laden material on land

Failure to assess potential contamination of soil and groundwater

No evident assessment of the impact of airborne pollutants on nearby protected nature sites.

Failure to disclose the likely climate impacts of the development, including an assessment of the direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions from the development, and whether these impacts are compatible with climate and nature targets, despite clear legal precedent that such impacts must be considered in planning decisions.

They also criticised the Council for disregarding animal welfare as a material planning consideration and for not conducting a formal public consultation.

This is the second major victory for communities and advocates against the expansion of intensive livestock production in Norfolk in months. In April, West Norfolk councillors rejected Cranswick’s proposed Methwold mega-farm, which would have housed 714,000 chickens and 14,000 pigs, after a campaign led by local residents, Sustain, FoodRise, and WWF, supported by legal arguments showing the application failed to meet greenhouse gas assessment requirements as was required by law. The Methwold decision, which also cited flawed ammonia modelling, demonstrated that councils can and must reject ILUs when environmental impact assessments are incomplete. That case is now widely seen as a blueprint for future challenges.

Ruth Westcott, Climate and Nature Emergency Manager at Sustain said:

“The era of unchecked expansion of industrial poultry and pig units is coming to an end. We have laws in place to protect our environment, and as communities and campaigners we will hold decision-makers to these laws. Councils can, and should, stand up to polluting agribusiness and support sustainable farming instead. Congratulations to everyone who made this happen. It’s a huge victory for the community and our future.”

Sustain is working with local authorities to put in place robust planning policy and guidance that ensures future decisions are legally sound and environmentally responsible. Get in touch with info@foodfortheplanet.org.uk for more information.’

This ‘suspension’ will only be a temporary disruption in the industrial production of pork at a Cranswick farm. The other farms will continue to abuse animals by illegally depriving them of bedding, confining mother pigs in narrow steel cages for five weeks at a time, and recklessly overusing antibiotics to keep the stressed, overcrowded animals alive. We can all help bring an end to factory farming by only buying pork with a label that says; Outdoor Reared, Free Range or best of all Organic.

Read; Supermarkets Suspend Supplies from Lincolnshire Pig Farm after Covert Filming of Animal Abuse The Guardian, 17 August 2025

‘Three of the UK’s biggest supermarkets have suspended supplies from a Lincolnshire pig farm after footage filmed covertly by an animal rights organisation appeared to show workers kicking piglets and hitting them with boards and paddles.

The footage also suggested the injured pigs with open wounds were packed into pens covered in faeces, with some left lame and writhing in pain.

Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons said they had “immediately” suspended supplies from Somerby Top Farm after becoming aware of the footage.

The farm was bought by Cranswick, Britain’s largest pork supplier, in late 2023 and was audited and certified by the British animal welfare and food assurance scheme Red Tractor in October 2024.

The animal rights group the Animal Justice Project (AJP) says it filmed the abuse between May 2024 and January 2025.

“During our filming, Somerby Top [Farm] was audited by Red Tractor,” the narrator said. “Yet just two weeks later, when we returned, we were met with the same squalid conditions.”

Red Tractor said it could not verify this, but responded to the “deeply distressing” footage by suspending Somerby Top Farm’s certification with “immediate effect” and referring the farm to the government animal welfare regulator, the Animal and Plant Health Agency.

“Red Tractor is conducting a thorough review of both current and historical footage, compliance and staffing on the farm,” the organisation said in a statement. “The farm will remain unassured if Red Tractor is not satisfied our standards are met.”

After all the films and NGOs fighting against Factory farming will a report from the Wildlife Trust stop this abhorrent industry?

Listen; Pig and poultry pollution, BBC Farming Today, 29 August 2025

‘A new report from the Wildlife Trusts outlines the environmental damage caused by pig and poultry pollution.’

The report says that while meat can be part of a balanced diet, organisations such as the World Health Organisation and the Climate Change Committee have recommended the UK reduce meat consumption by 25% by 2040 and 35% by 2050 to reach Netzero targets. Instead, corporate patented, plant-based fake meat, lab meat and insects are increasingly on the menu despite their contribution to CO2 emissions being higher than pasture-raised meat. So the entire article below is BS.

Read; Food companies urged to ditch meat as report warns of biodiversity ‘catastrophe’, The Grocer, 15 August 2025

‘Food companies must accelerate a switch towards plant-based diets to tackle climate change and reduce the extinction risk to nature, a new report by the Food Foundation has claimed.

It also warns the government that failure to address biodiversity loss in the agri-food sector, made worse by meat-based diets, will lead to much higher economic costs further down the line.

The Foundation, which is among those advising the Labour government on its new food strategy, says food production focused on animal-sourced foods is having a “catastrophic” impact on biodiversity and nature.’

The Big Ag lobby at work again, trampling on R F Kennedy’s attempts to save children’s health by banning pesticides and fast food.

Read; Draft of new ‘MAHA’ report suggests RFK Jr. won’t target pesticides, ABC News; 17 August 2025

‘The draft of an upcoming government report suggesting ways to improve the health of American children does not recommend severe restrictions on pesticides and ultra-processed foods, according to a copy of the document obtained by ABC News. The draft’s language, if left unchanged, would constitute a win for the agriculture industry and a potential setback for Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) allies, who have railed against the use of chemical additives in America’s food supply, arguing that they harm children. The draft of the new report does not signal any intention to eliminate pesticides from America’s food. Instead, the draft calls for “more targeted and precise pesticide applications” and research programs that would “help to decrease pesticide volumes.”

Regarding ultra-processed foods, the new report states only that HHS, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration would work to develop a “government-wide definition for ‘ultra-processed food.'” In his January confirmation hearing, Kennedy declared that “something is poisoning the American people, and we know that the primary culprits are changing food supply, a switch to highly chemical intensive processed foods.” Meanwhile, some “MAHA” influencers have loudly demanded changes to the country’s food supply, putting their faith in Kennedy to leverage his position of power to uproot the agriculture industry. But this summer, agriculture groups lobbied intensely against the inclusion of anti-pesticide recommendations in the new report. They appeared to find an ally in Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, who indicated to reporters this month that the upcoming report would spare pesticides.’

So-called philanthropist, billionaire Bill Gates is responsible for increased poverty and malnutrition across the globe.

WEBINAR: Gates’s Global Power Grab: Building a Movement Against Oligarchy, Community Alliance for Global Justice, 7 July 2025

‘In a recent webinar, five experts from around the world discussed what they say is a dangerous concentration of power in the hands of one man: Bill Gates. Moderated by investigative journalist Tim Schwab—author of The Bill Gates Problem—the panel explored Gates’s sweeping influence over global health and agriculture, and called for reparations and structural change.

On June 26, 2025, this webinar brought together movement leaders across education, public health, climate justice, and food sovereignty to critically examine Gates’ legacy—and strategise how to confront the power of billionaire philanthropy. The time for accountability is long overdue.

“Bill Gates is one of the most powerful and least-scrutinised political actors on the world stage,” Schwab said. “No other political actor in the last 25 years has done more to normalise, institutionalise and legitimise billionaire power in the body politic than Bill Gates,” Schwab argues. “And the way he has done this is…through philanthropy.” See our reporting on Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation’s influence over food and agriculture.

Tech billionaires are reshaping our world. While Elon Musk grabs headlines, Bill Gates laid the blueprint—normalising billionaire control over public policy through his foundation. Since 2000, the Gates Foundation has used private wealth to influence global agendas in education, health, agriculture, and climate toward corporate-friendly, market-driven solutions. Yet while Gates has successfully paved the way for the corporate capture of public goods, many of his ventures have ended in failure, leaving communities worse off. Now Gates is doubling down—pledging $200 billion to “develop” Africa—raising urgent questions about consent, power, and whose future is being designed.

MODERATOR Tim Schwab Journalist & author of ‘The Bill Gates Problem: Reckoning with the Myth of the Good Billionaire’.

SPEAKERS Gabriel Manyangadze on African Food Sovereignty – The Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI) Nicolleta Dentico on Public Health – Society for International Development Jesse Hagopian on Public Education – Black Lives Matter at School Anuradha Mittal on Climate – The Oakland Institute.

Hosted by A Growing Culture, Community Alliance for Global Justice/AGRA Watch, US Right to Know.’

Another blow to small scale farmers across the EU driven by the power and influence of Big Ag.

Read; Farmers reject disastrous budget proposal for Multiannual Financial Framework and CAP, European Coordination Via Campesina, 16th July 2025

‘ECVC and its member organisations reject the disastrous MFF and CAP budget proposals presented today, which completely ignore the demands of all agri-food actors for a strong CAP budget and measures for market regulation to ensure fair prices for farmers. The proposals betray both promises made to farmers and EU policy objectives within the Strategic Dialogue and Commissioner Hansen’s Vision for Agriculture, and demonstrate a clear lack of investment for the security of Europe and its food system.

Today’s proposals dismantle the Common Agricultural Policy in the EU, in turn threatening the incomes and existence of many farmers, driving inequalities between Member States and destabilising the entire European agri-food chain. Moves to further re-nationalise the CAP through National and Regional Plans are a way for the European Commission to flout responsibility and, combined with the abolition of a detached CAP budget and dilution of part of the first and the second pillar of the CAP in a general national budget, will chip away at the fabric of a shared agricultural policy in Europe. The Commission is sending a clear message that European food production is not a priority, while cowardly passing the buck to Member States in full awareness of the consequences and incompatibility with EU agricultural goals such as generational renewal.

The abolition of ring-fenced budgets for agri-environment and climate measures is dangerous and irresponsible. European Union’s capacity to achieve a more sustainable and agro-ecological transition and tackle the climate crisis will be put in direct competition with other cohesion measures, creating a lose-lose situation for European society. Furthermore, the proposals do not address the central issues of market regulation and fair prices for farmers and consumers: measures to regulate markets, guarantee prices and ensure stable incomes are all missing from the proposals, showing the European Commission have quickly forgotten the lessons of last year’s protests. Any mention of risk management only focuses on insurance mechanisms and leaves the initiative to Member States.

While the inclusion of capping and degressivity for direct payments is welcomed, the cap must be sufficient to ensure that support goes to the farmers who need it to survive. We reject the continued focus on hectare-based payments – the only payments with a dedicated budget in the new proposal. These benefit mainly the largest farms in Europe, drive land concentration and impede the inclusion of young farmers, and must be subject to a EUR 60,000 cap to minimise these negative impacts. In parallel, flat-rate payments to small farmers remain insignificant and inadequate, with no dedicated budget to prioritise young farmers and generational renewal, as the Commission claims to do, despite the fact that aid requests from new entrants already outstrip the capacity or will of states to respond.

After the protests of last year, farmers have engaged in good faith in EU policy spaces such as the Strategic Dialogue and Youth Dialogue in order to outline their priorities and needs to ensure sustainable, resilient food systems in Europe.With this Multiannual Financial Framework and CAP budget proposal, the European Commission has failed to take into account the voice of farmers in the EU. Just as ECVC members were present at the mobilisation in Brussels today, in the autumn they will be on the streets with new mobilisations or at negotiations tables. ECVC will continue to demand a strong, cohesive Community Agricultural Policy that responds to the needs of both farmers and European citizens to guarantee a more sustainable and agro-ecological farming model and local food systems, linked to the territory. The full ECVC CAP position paper is available here and farmers’ demands on the CAP budget are summarised here. ECVC will soon present a further detailed analysis of the documents.’

According to Steve Reed (Secretary of State for DEFRA), some farms in England, particularly upland farms, could be taken entirely out of food production under the new land use strategy. Why? Because they are considered the “least productive.” This land will be incentivised for rewilding or nature recovery.

But here’s the question no one seems to be asking: what do we mean by “productive”? If you define productivity solely by economic return or yield-per-acre, then yes, small hill farms or low-input systems might not make the cut. But if you factor in ecosystem services by stewarding fragile ecosystems, soil health, biodiversity, water resilience, carbon sequestration, money staying in the local economy, cultural heritage, and happy animals, the numbers tell a different story.

When you “take land out of production,” you don’t just lose food, you lose people, skills, traditions and connection.

Reed claims there will be “no compulsion” and that the government has learned from Thatcher-era mistakes. But we’ve seen what happens when support is withdrawn, the market takes over, and the most vulnerable go first.

Read; English farms could be taken out of food production to boost nature, says Minister, The Guardian, 3rd July 2025

‘Some farms in England could be taken entirely out of food production under plans to make more space for nature, the environment secretary has said. Speaking at the Groundswell farming festival in Hertfordshire, Steve Reed said a revamp of post-Brexit farming subsidies and a new land use plan would be aimed at increasing food production in the most productive areas and decreasing or completely removing it in the least productive. In reality, this means many upland farmers may be incentivised to stop farming.’

Cant read this article because of the paywall but the message is most welcome.

Read; NFU calls for ‘no more concessions’ on US trade&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2025-07-09&c=&cid=DM1222296&bid=742909255), The Grocer, 9th July 2025

This piece was widely criticised by farmers across the country. If we don’t pass on knowledge to the next generation we will lose the rural way of life completely. I would argue that while a farm is not a playground it makes a very good classroom and this government overreach is there to undermine farmers.

Read; Opinion; Children working on farms belongs in the past, Farmers Weekly, 10 August 2025

‘Yes, I was desperately keen to sit behind the wheel of a tractor as a child. But that’s not really an argument for the practice. What sort of an industry are we operating if we need child labour to underpin it, or must force-feed it from such a tender age just to get them to stay? If anything, we should be encouraging our kids to look at other options in their formative years to give them an honest choice. And what about a child’s right to a childhood? They’ve a lifetime of hard graft ahead of them in adulthood. “It’s what we’ve always done” holds true until suddenly one day it isn’t.’

All Factory farming, be it aquaculture or agriculture, is inhumane. These industrialised systems are designed to treat animals as a product and not a living being and must be banned.

Read; Hook, line & sinker – the truth about fish farms, Wicked Leeks, 31July 2025

‘Aquaculture, the farming of aquatic species (plant and animal), is the fastest growing food production sector in the world, having recently surpassed wild-caught fishing. In 2022, global production was at an all-time record high of 130.9 million tonnes. If it is difficult for you to understand what that means in practical terms, you are not alone.

Unlike farmed terrestrial animals, when it comes to determining how many fish or other aquatic creatures we are consuming, killing or impacting, we measure them by the tonnage, and have to rely on guestimates. For wild fish the figure is between 3 billion and 6 billion per day, (between 1.1. – 2.2 trillion per year) and for farmed fish it’s between 211 million and 339 million per day (between 29 billion – 149 billion per year). For shrimps alone, estimates are between 7.6 – 76 trillion shrimps per year (fishing and farming).

Much like their counterparts on land, aquacultural animals are not treated “humanely” and are subjected to extremely cruel and harmful practices, meaning various animal welfare issues arise: mutilations, overcrowding, in-fighting, injuries, diseases, parasites, stress, depression, deformities, suffocation, food withdrawal, lack of enrichment, harmful transportation or cruel slaughter – it’s no fun to be a farmed fish.

Shrimps routinely have their eyestalks removed through crushing, cutting, burning, or tying them off (eyestalk ablation), because it increases spawning and shortens the maturation time for these sentient beings.

To many, the idea of caring about, or mitigating suffering for aquatic beings is laughable. While many care about their pet dog – or even African elephants in the Savanna – we rarely extend this consideration to aquatic beings (except for perhaps whales, dolphins, and polar bears).’

Watch this webinar to find the real effects of spraying glyphosate on our food, not only on our health but on the entire ecosystem. If you care about your health, soil health and the survival of pollinators, you’ll start buying organic and avoiding products from regenerative farming systems that use glyphosate.

Watch; Glyphosate: A groundbreaking global study on the controversial weedkiller Pesticide Action Network, 9 July 2025

‘The study confirms that glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides cause multiple types of cancer, even at exposure levels deemed to be “safe” by the EU. It was coordinated by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy and involved scientists from the US, South America and Europe.

In response to this landmark study, the European Commission has said it will review the new data and “act immediately to amend or withdraw the approval” of glyphosate if it “no longer meets” the EU’s safety standards. The study’s only UK based contributor, Professor Michael Antoniou (Professor of Molecular Genetics and Toxicology at Kings College London), presented the results and consequences of the study in an exclusive webinar decision that would have huge implications in the UK and beyond.’

Read; Bitter harvest — 30 years of broken GMO promises; GM Watch, 23 June 2025

‘Whatever happened to GM Golden Rice? And wasn’t GM salmon supposed to revolutionise aquaculture? Three decades after the first GMO crops were planted, Save Our Seeds, in collaboration with GMWatch, with contributions from Beyond GM, explores the fate of eight GMO promises once presented as game-changers. The conclusion: bold claims, dismal delivery.

In 1995, the US Department of Agriculture approved the first Bt maize and glyphosate-tolerant soybean, opening the way for large-scale cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops. The promises came thick and fast: GMOs would feed the world, reduce chemical use, and save children from malnutrition. Thirty years on, GM crops occupy just 13% of global arable land, and largely concentrated in a handful of countries. Most of the promises remain unmet.’

‘Bigger yields, fewer chemicals?

The biotech industry pledged to “grow more with less” – less pesticide, less fertiliser, less environmental harm. GM crops were billed as a way to “reverse the Silent Spring scenario” described by Rachel Carson in her 1962 classic. They were said to boost yields, feed the hungry – especially in Africa – and save millions of children from malnutrition.

Instead, GM crops have led to more chemical-dependent monocultures, more environmental damage, and tighter corporate control over seeds and inputs. Rather than liberating farmers, GMOs have locked them into a cycle of patented products and costly chemicals. Countries that adopted GM crops have seen an immense concentration of the agricultural seed market in the hands of a few corporations — those invested in GM crops.

Marketing shift – from farmers to consumers and others

Facing public skepticism and unmet promises, GMO backers shifted focus. New projects targeted consumers directly, such as soybeans with a “health-conscious” genetic tweak. Others, such as GM Golden Rice and GM American chestnuts, were wrapped in moral imperatives: fighting malnutrition, saving endangered species.

But again, hype outpaced reality. Golden Rice, after decades of development, still hasn’t been widely planted or reached the target malnourished populations. And there is no evidence that GM chestnuts, which have proven defective, can help to restore American forests. These projects may serve more as PR tools than serious solutions, giving biotech companies a moral shield and a rhetorical weapon to attack critics and regulations.

Technological and market failures

What went wrong? Often, the problem wasn’t just technical – it was the mismatch between the problem and the solution. Genetically-engineered herbicide tolerance, for example, could be expected to result in overuse of chemical weedkillers. Some projects may have failed due to poor business management or public rejection. Often, non-GM alternatives were already available, cheaper, and more effective.

“In many cases, GM crops seem to offer no clear benefit – except to secure a patent and shut out competition,” Claire Robinson from GMWatch commented. “Many non-GM disease-resistant crop varieties exist and pest and disease problems can most often be solved by improving farming systems – not by genetically engineering plants, which has proven ineffective. Why choose risky and patented GM crops when better options are available?”

Gene editing: new technology, same sales pitch

Today, the hype cycle continues with CRISPR/Cas and other gene-editing tools. The language hasn’t changed much. We are told these tools will reduce agrichemical use, improve nutrition, and help crops adapt to climate change.

But the reality? Of the few gene-edited crops ever commercialised, one — a soybean with modified oil content – has already flopped. And despite industry claims that gene editing would revolutionise plant breeding, a recent review found that only three gene-edited crop plants are currently being commercialised worldwide.

“The promises of agricultural biotechnology are always miraculous – and always for some undetermined time in the future,” said Pat Thomas from Beyond GM. “The appetite for these biotech miracles is huge, but after more than 30 years, the plate is still nearly empty.”

Time for a different harvest

Benny Haerlin, coordinator of Save Our Seeds, sums it up bluntly: “For decades, we’ve been told GMOs would solve problems like hunger, malnutrition, and climate stress – to no avail. Obviously there are striking problems with the technology. However, the underlying problems of injustice, inequality, and unsustainable farming systems cannot be solved by technologies anyway. The way forward lies in fair, ecological, and diverse agriculture, not patents.”

GMO Promises website

The new website, GMO Promises, is a resource for journalists, policymakers, campaigners, scientists, and investors looking to understand the real legacy of GMO technologies, and what lessons should be learned as the next wave of biotech rolls in.

The website presents eight prominent claims, and shows what happened in each case:

GM crops to reduce pesticide use and “reverse the Silent Spring scenario”

GM cassava to “double” production of African crops

Fast-growing GM salmon for a “sustainable aquaculture industry”

GM sweet potato to “feed countless people in Africa”

GM as “shortcut to creating a truly American blight-resistant chestnut”

GM Golden Rice “could save a million kids a year”

GM crops with improved photosynthesis to “boost yields”

GM soybean with a “health-conscious” genetic tweak

You can find the GMO Promises website here.

Lies, lies and more lies from glyphosate manufacturer Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018.

Read; Glyphosate and Cancer: A Textbook Case of “Manufacturing Doubt” Sustainable Pulse, 2 July 2025

‘The recent publication of a study indicating an increased risk of various tumors in laboratory rats exposed to glyphosate has sparked numerous comments on social media and in the press, aimed at downplaying or denigrating this research. These results, published on June 10 in the journal Environmental Health, only confirm the conclusions of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which estimated in 2015 that the studies available at the time provided “sufficient evidence” of glyphosate’s carcinogenicity in animals.

Environmental Health, published by the SpringerNature group, is one of the most influential journals in its field. Its citation rate places it 32nd out of 687 indexed journals covering the fields of public health, environmental health, or occupational health, according to the 2024 ranking by scientific publisher Elsevier.

The attacks on this study published the journal, led by the Ramazzini Institute in Bologna, Italy, offer an exemplary array of the sleight of hand of “doubt manufacturing,” a rhetoric aimed at undermining confidence in scientific results, often used to delay or fight regulatory decisions. Read further here on the nature of this ongoing smear campaign.

As science historians Naomi Oreskes (Harvard University) and Erik Conway (NASA) have shown in a landmark book (Merchants of Doubt, 2012), the “manufacturing of doubt” was developed in the 1950s by tobacco companies to deny or relativise the effects of cigarettes.

This rhetoric turns science against itself, by distorting the intellectual tools at the heart of scientists’ approaches (methodical doubt, demands for rigor, distrust of claims perceived as spectacular, etc.). It is thus very effective on members of the scientific and medical communities who do not work directly on the targeted subjects, as well as on audiences attached to rationality and the defense of scientific values, or even journalists who sometimes repeat such circulating arguments without thinking twice.

A highly effective propaganda technique, “manufacturing doubt” sometimes requires lengthy explanations to unmask, especially since it sometimes mixes legitimate criticisms with others based on untruths, misinterpretations, or simply erroneous considerations. It constitutes a toolbox constantly used for decades by a variety of industrial sectors wishing to protect their activities from any health or environmental regulation.’

The lift descends to the level marked ‘Hell’. The door opens, the Devil says, ‘Monsanto? One floor down.’

Read; EU Explores Withdrawing Glyphosate Approval Over New Shocking Cancer Study, Sustainable Pulse, 13 June 2025

‘A European Commission spokesperson has confirmed that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) will be formally tasked with assessing whether the peer-reviewed findings of a new international study showing that glyphosate causes six of the most common cancers affect the “current risk assessment of glyphosate.

Meanwhile, Dutch farmers’ organisation LTO has called for a rapid assessment of the new international study. If the findings are confirmed, the LTO said the product’s approval “must be withdrawn immediately”.

The LTO said it was essential that national and European safety bodies, including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the Dutch board for the authorisation of plant protection products and biocides (CTGB), evaluate the study “as a top priority”. The CTGB says it will examine the results and methodology of the study and report its findings to the agriculture ministry within several weeks. More on the international study that’s yielding speculative action throughout the EU here.’

Read; New $4.3 million non-GMO soybean breeding program will open new opportunities for producers and processors West Central Online, 24 June 2025

‘The project, involves the launch of a new breeding program to develop early-maturing, high-protein, non-GMO soybean varieties suited to Canada’s northern climates, including Manitoba and northern Ontario.

The new varieties will be specifically bred for improved yield, resistance to soybean cyst nematode (SCN), and better adaptation to a range of environmental conditions, helping producers reduce the yield gap between GMO and non-GMO crops.

The first phase of the project involves breeding new non-GMO soybean varieties, while the second phase of the project will see the development of a novel, soy-based plant protein product. Learn more about the developments here.’

Trump calls out the UK PM for the farm inheritance tax and for blighting the countryside with renewable energy infrastructure.

Read; Trump’s Turnberry Durbar and Britain’s Farming Fiasco, Jamie Blackett, Scribehound, 31 July 2025

‘I was on top of the silage pit throwing tyres when Donald waded into the family farm tax row, so I missed it, though I knew something was up as my mobile was soon throbbing with excitement as all my contacts started sharing it on social media.

Later I tried to watch it on television news but the BBC clearly didn’t think it newsworthy. After all, the President of the United States coming here, sitting down with the Prime Minister and undermining a central plank of British fiscal policy is the sort of thing that happens every day, right?

In the same press conference, Trump also criticised what he called “the windmills” – the offshore wind turbines blighting Scotland’s seascapes – so, later the Beeb was able to go large on that on its website; climate denial and Net Zero heresy being much more up its street than the future of British farming. I suppose also they don’t want to draw attention to GB News, for it was their reporter, Bev Turner who lobbed the brilliant question about Britain’s unhappy farmers.

Will Trump’s intervention make any difference? Ironically it may harden Starmer’s resolve to stick with the policy. He won’t want to be portrayed as dancing to the President’s tune. The depressing thing about Labour is that they don’t care how damaging their policies are as long as they play to their core supporters – and they are all rabid Trump haters, so they may even think it is helpful that the President has helped to underline their differences. ‘

This article by the group, Save British Farming (SBF), calls out grassroots political group “Farmers to Action” & the “No Farmers No Food” group as just propaganda for Farage. How will we ever find solutions if we are so easily divided. SBF claims the best route forward for farmers is to rejoin the EU to export all of our produce, while Farmers to Action & No Farmers No Food support LOCAL food and food sovereignty. So the article below by a leader of Save Our British Farmers is undermining the interests of farmers and food production.

Read; Farmers to Action are undermining the interests of the countryside, Oli Fletcher; Scribehound, 1 August 2025

‘Disruptive, politicised conspiracy groups are trying to harness rural discontent for their own advantage. Their presence risks alienating the public from the plight of farmers.’

Farmers To Action campaigns against the new Inheritance tax on farms that encourages farmers to commit suicide before 5 April next year to avoid bankrupting their farm. It also campaigns against trade deals that allow substandard food imports to unfairly undercut UK farmers.

Join; Farmers To Action Trailer of Truth, Campaign Rally, Liverpool, 28 September 2025

‘Farmers launch a National campaign to expose broken promises and defend Britain’s future! Farmers to Action, in unity with other farming groups from all over the UK are taking to the roads throughout September with a bold new campaign ‘Trailer of Truth’

The trailer of truth will shine a light on:

Inheritance Tax (IHT) reform.
Rising National Insurance contributions.
Declining rural living standards.
Erosion of food and energy security.

The message ‘truth over spin, accountability over excuses’

On September 28th, the Trailer of Truth will arrive at Liverpool for a mass rally!

All welcome, we hope to meet you along the route! Please do come by, have a chat about the campaign and share your own experiences. Write on a banner, post a letter, join a convoy! We hope to send a clear message to any government ‘If you betray your promises, we will hold you to account’ You can follow the Southern Trailer of Truth at these locations, more dates to follow…

Truro Livestock Market 3/9/25
Hallworthy 4/9/25
Exeter 5/9/25
Sedgemoor 6/9/25
Blackmoor Gate 8/9/25
Frome 10/9/25
Thame 12/9/25′

British animal welfare standards rank among the highest globally but if we lose our family farms, we risk relying heavily on factory farms here in the U.K. and imports from factory farms overseas turning to alternatives like lab-grown meat and insects. Supporting our farmers by buying directly from the farm gate is essential, not only for our health and national food security but also for protecting the environment and our sentient pigs.

Read; Record number of farms shut in wake of Inheritance Tax Raid, The Telegraph, 24th July 2025

‘A total of 6,365 agriculture, forestry and fishing businesses have closed over the past year, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), the highest since quarterly data was first published in 2017. The majority of these closures took place during the first six months of the year after Ms Reeves, the Chancellor, announced in October that she would cut the amount of inheritance tax relief available to family farms. Just 3,190 businesses in the sector have been set up over the same period. It leaves a net loss of 3,175, indicating the number of farms is shrinking at the fastest pace on record.’

‘Sometimes, family farming isn’t rational. It’s emotional. It’s about history, home, and a kind of optimism that borders on madness. We keep going not because it’s easy or lucrative, but because it’s who we are and what we love. As the original post says: “We’d sooner sell a kidney than a single acre.” We must support our family farms before they disappear. Buy from your local farmers, farm shop or join a CSA and support family farms!’

Read; British Farming: On Its Knees, Yet Too Stubborn To Quit, The Farming Forum, 11 August 2025

‘Picture this: a windswept field in the British countryside, where the air smells of damp earth and determination, and a farmer—let’s call him Dave—is out there, knee-deep in mud, arguing with a sheep that’s got more attitude than a reality TV star. Dave’s family has been farming these rolling green hills for generations, each one more stubborn than the last, because let’s face it, British farmers are a special breed of bonkers. We’re not just resilient, we’re the kind of people who’d arm-wrestle a storm to save a single turnip. And yet, farming in this country is on its knees, clinging to life like a sitcom that’s been cancelled but still has a cult following.

The British countryside? It’s our love letter to nature, a patchwork of hedgerows, ancient oaks, and fields that hum with life. Farmers don’t just work this land, we’re head-over-heels for it. We’ll wax poetic about a sunrise over a barley field or the way a cow looks at you like it knows all your secrets. For centuries, family farms have been the heartbeat of rural Britain, passed down like a cherished heirloom—or a cursed family obligation, depending on the day. But here’s the rub, farming isn’t just a job, it’s a gamble where you bet everything on seeds, weather, markets and governments that seem to hate you.

Take @JeremyClarkson , the breakout star of Clarkson’s Farm, who’s basically the poster boy for this madness. His farm, like so many others, would’ve gone under without the extra cash from a farm shop and the Farmer’s Dog pub, not to mention his other businesses. Sound familiar? It’s the same old story for family farms across the UK. We’ve all been moonlighting as entrepreneurs, scrabbling for every penny to keep the dream alive. Diversification isn’t a buzzword, it’s survival. Farm shops, glamping sites, haunted hayrides—you name it, we’ve tried it. I know one farmer who started renting out his barn for yoga retreats. Picture that, downward dog next to a tractor.

Unlike most businesses, farming is a game of spending big upfront—seeds, feed, fuel, prayers to the weather gods—and hoping you’ll see a return a year later. Spoiler alert: it’s rarely enough. Year after year, farming families gather around the kitchen table, faces grim, spreadsheets grimmer, having the talk, “How the bloody hell are we going to make it through this time?” Debts pile up, margins shrink, and yet, we keep going. Why? Because these farms are more than businesses—they’re our homes, our history, our heart. We’d sooner sell a kidney than a single acre.

“It’ll be better next year,” we say, like a mantra or a bad joke. If I had a pound for every time I’ve heard that, I could pay off the farm’s bills, buy a fancy new tractor, and still have enough left for a pint at the Farmer’s Dog. But here’s the thing about farmers, we’re not just optimists, we’re eternal optimists. We’re out here, year after year, with hope in our hearts and mud on our boots, because this way of life is worth it. The love of the land, the rhythm of the seasons, the sheer insanity of betting it all on a crop—it’s who we are.

So, here we go again, another year, another roll of the dice. British farmers are down, but don’t you dare count us out. We’re too stubborn, too crazy, and too in love with this gloriously unpredictable life to give up. Pass the pitchfork, and let’s get to work.’

NetZero

This is an important interview into the flawed climate science by a respected environmentalist who sees how the ecology movement has been co-opted and repurposed by corporate, government and mainstream media narrative. He exposed one of the IPCC scientists confessing that they are not good at the science of weather cycles!

Listen; Ex-UN Scientist Challenges the Climate Narrative and More, UK Column News, 14 August 2025

Peter Taylor (Author of ‘Climate, Covid and Conspiracy’); “A thousand years ago, the Vikings were farming on Greenland. Then the cycle changed as it was peaking around 1,000 years ago the cycle changes, they had to leave. So it’s like at the same time white stork who are just now colonising Kent after an absence since the Little Ice Age, they were nesting on Edinburgh Cathedral in the year 1100 or 1200 or whatever. So as an ecologist, I’m looking at, wow, these cycles, they’re very real. So we were going to go and produce this programme, half an hour documentary. It would have done wonders for the sale of my book. And I got a call after about three meetings saying, sorry Peter, you come in, we’ll explain, we can’t go ahead. We got pressure from above. We call them the Goreites. Al Gore had set up a media empire and they had power and influence. Their science correspondent was so disgusted he said I’m resigning.

I get loads of invitations to write papers, to go to conferences, you have to pay, and I did a paper in 2019. I signed up to one conference. My colleague Jackson Davis … what I didn’t mention is that when we had our experience with the National Centre for Atmospheric Research, he came out, he said Peter, they were worried. I said darn right they’re worried, they get billions to support their models, and to give them their due that particular group did alter their models a little bit, and they did actually run a potential more than the minimum and concluded that there would be cooling. Our own Met Office did the same study but with different parameters and concluded that even if you had a more than minimum, it wouldn’t alter the global warming trajectory. So that’s science for you. But anyway, Jackson said, what can I do to help? Now he’s what I would call a proper scientist. I’m more of a policy person, forensic mind. He can number crunch, which I can’t do. And so he said, what can I do? I said analyse the I score data. Let’s show them that these cycles exist. We know they exist and you can see them in the I score data, but nobody has actually proven that scientifically. They say, oh, it’s too noisy, the data is too noisy. What they really mean is nobody’s going to pay us to study natural cycles, which is unfortunately true. So nobody paid us either. But Jackson spent seven years doing that. And we then produced several joint papers, properly peer-reviewed, properly published, they don’t get cited. So if you’ve got some awkward data, they’ll ignore it for as long as they can. But the younger scientists are going, ‘that’s a damn good paper’. And that’s due to my friend. He’s the good scientific paper writer. So will you come and talk to us on that? I thought as soon as I do the abstract, they’ll just invite me, right? No. And then they said would you share some sessions and be our keynote speaker? And I thought maybe they’re all very young and they want a greybeard, you know. But no, there were full on professors present, including I think when the IPCC realised they were up against some proper opposition, they sent their top modeller, a very nice guy called Venkatachalam Ramaswamy and he’s up there on the podium with his models and everything. And I’m able to say Professor Ramaswamy, my work and Jackson Davis’ work and yours are not compatible. Can you explain why? There’s no cycles in your models? He said, yes, we don’t do cycles very well. Now if I’d been in a more cantankerous mood, it was a very friendly meeting, I’d have said, well, why do you not tell the public that? So he said come and have lunch. And he’s and he’s director of the General Fluid Dynamics Research Laboratory in Princeton. He said come have a talk with us, and I thought, right, that’s what happened before, the UN was open on a scientific level. I go in there and most importantly, you’ve got to find a way for them to save face, fundamentally. I think I could do that. And it’s like if you trap them in a corner, they’ll fight you. So it’s all right, I’ll do that. But then Covid intervened, which is something else that we can talk about, and so that never happened. And with Covid I did get involved because right at the beginning I knew from the old days and the old skills I’d developed, that it was a bio-weapons laboratory source and that it was genetic manipulation.”

However much research to back up this hypothesis, it’s heresy to suggest that we need more CO2 not less.

Watch; More CO2 Please, by Paul Burgess, 9 December 2001

“Asking for more CO2 in the world is akin to Oliver Twist here asking for more porridge. The entire establishment would be shocked, but this is what this video is about. But we shall first need to deal with some myths about climate change and the first one is the existing climate model predictions. Well, one thing you can give them praise for is consistency. The models are consistently wrong and consistently overestimating the amount of heating. But there is one model coming from Professor William Happer that is consistently correct. It actually agrees with the observations from the satellites and agrees extremely closely, and that model states that when you double the amount of CO2 we’ve now got, there is no significant warming caused at all. Now for clarification, there is no doubt at all that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and there is no doubt at all that CO2 has contributed to the warming of the planet. In fact, without CO2 the Earth will be 25% cooler and that would cause us a shiver or two. So more CO2 must mean more warming, right? Wrong. As you add more CO2 to the atmosphere it becomes less and less effective. It’s a bit like painting a wall red, after the first coat and second coat further coats make little difference and it’s a logarithmic scale of saturation, and basically we’re almost saturated on CO2. And so adding more simply does not cause the same effect as the earlier layers. But just who is Professor William Happer and how do we know that his model is right? We’ll take in that last question first. As we have already explained, its theoretical model tallies, agrees with satellite observations, surpasses the most fundamental test of science, which is agreement with the observations, unlike of course the alarmist models which do not agree with the measured world. This is the paper describing the model. It’s easy to check it. This work also demonstrates that methane and car emissions have little to no effect on climate change. They are completely masked by other factors. Now here is a cross check on the work. This is the Antarctica model coming from the Happer paper, and what it shows is that there’s actually more cooling in the Antarctic due to greenhouse gases than there would be without greenhouse gases. The exact opposite effect of what you would think. The red dotted line is a well established line established for over 100 years of what would take place without any greenhouse gases at all. So anything above that red dotted line, like with the area I’ve shaded blue here, is actually exceeding what would be the case without any gases at all. So in other words, it is cooler in the Antarctic because of greenhouse gases than it is without them. That is such a remarkable theoretical conclusion and totally against what you hear from the alarmists that you should demand I prove it and just look across now to the actual observed. So forgetting all the theory of Happer and associates, let’s look at the observed. And the observed shows the same excess of cooling that can only be caused by greenhouse gases. And of course there is a clear reason for this. It’s the Antarctic temperature inversion. Unlike the rest of the world where as you go up in height it gets cooler. We know that from flying in aeroplanes. In the Antarctic it’s the opposite way around. As it goes up, because of the cooling effect of the ice at ground level, it actually gets warmer and the greenhouse gases help radiate the radiation to space. You don’t have to believe me or Happer, you just have to believe the observed data. Of course, the same is true of the Arctic. And that is why despite every prediction that it would be gone by 2000, be gone by 2014, be gone by now, it still hasn’t gone. Another new study to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week warns it could happen in as little as seven years, seven years from now. In the last few months, it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter. Instead, people are surprised by the significant long-term cooling trend in the Antarctic. But now we have a reason. Now we understand why. William Happer is probably the world’s number one expert on the CO2 molecule. He is a physicist that has been in this game for years, even developing CO2 molecule lasers. He knows far more about CO2 molecule than any climate scientists, because climate science is in fact a very, very broad field. It covers everything from statistics to physics to every sort of environmental issue, and these people very often do not really know the subject. They know a broad range, superficially, but not in depth. William Happer is different. He knows the CO2 molecule and its behaviour inside out and of course all a multi-billion pound alarmist world has to do to correct this and make them right and him wrong is prove that his paper is wrong. But they can’t because they would also have to prove that their own observations are wrong. We started this short video with Oliver Twist asking for more, and that is what we should be asking for with CO2. We need more of it. It’ll greatly benefit the world, and here is why. According to a NASA study, CO2 produced an extra 10 per cent of vegetation on Earth. That’s an enormous amount of extra land, almost equivalent to two USA land masses and achieved in just under 30 years. Of course, in professional greenhouses they pump in CO2 to increase the plant growth. You can see here just the extent of this with extra CO2. And then here in the UK, we are witnessing record crop yields, a lot of which is due to CO2. There are the same record crop yields throughout the world, including Southeast Asia, Africa, South America, North America, etcetera. And NASA research has also found that the Sahara Desert has decreased in size by some 700,000 square kilometres. That’s the same as adding a country the size of France and Germany together in a period of 30 years to Africa. The similar fact is that these days climate realism is almost banned. Climate alarmists are not following the scientific principle of free and open free speech debate. My videos such as this are shadow-banned on YouTube, and when I post videos based on peer-reviewed scientific papers on Facebook, they’re simply deleted and marked as extreme. Instead, children such as Greta Thunberg are open to the world when they openly admit they have no science whatsoever behind their alarmism. I encourage everybody to check out the sources of my videos and reach their own conclusions. And if you do that honestly, you will then understand that the alarmism of today is completely false. Instead of giving you the scientific proof of what is going on, for example, in Antarctica, which is observed by satellite and observed by field measurements in 41 field stations showing 40 years of continual and high cooling, no, you get reports like this. And of course, this report comes from one day temperature on the peninsula from the Antarctic that sticks out towards South America and suffers occasionally from a well known meteorological condition where the warm air from South America gets swept over it. It is a one day event and by the way, not even a record. But that one day event just discounts the satellite observations, the theory and the 41 climate stations in Antarctica, all of whom are recorded 40 years of cooling.”

If the cause was genuinely good for humanity, the cost would not be important. But when the reason to spend our taxes is based on a lie and all debate cancelled, it’s agony to witness..

Read; The Frightening Cost of Net Zero; by Paul Homewood, 28 July 2025

‘I was reminded last week in a conversation with a GB News Editor about just how little understanding there is in the MSM of just how much Net Zero could end up costing the country. To some extent this ignorance has been deliberately engineered. The original Climate Change Act in 2008 included no sort of cost/benefit analysis at all; it was passed almost unanimously through Parliament on the basis that when you are saving the planet, costs do not matter. It was the same story when Theresa May amended the 2008 Act to set a Net Zero target. The idea that the public should know the cost of decisions made by their MPs was regarded as abhorrent by them and still is. Since then, much of the media has been complicit in refusing to discuss the issue of cost. Nevertheless, there have been attempts to put a figure on it. In 2019, then Chancellor Philip Hammond warned May that reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050 could cost the UK more than £1 trillion.

Earlier this month the OBR published the costs to the public sector of the transition to Net Zero – note this just accounts for the cost to government, not the wider UK economy. The bill comes to £257 billion over 26 years. As is usual with Net Zero, most of the cost is frontloaded. Supposedly these costs will start to rapidly decline in the 2040s. Only a fool would believe that. We are expected to believe in jam tomorrow! Using the OBR’s high-end scenario, that cost could be 50% higher. In the next fifteen years alone, the cost will be £204 billion, all to be funded by higher taxation, reduced public spending or borrowing. Most of this expenditure will have little added value, for instance installing heat pumps in public buildings, electrifying buses. It also includes the tens of billions handed to Ed Miliband to waste on Great British Energy, carbon capture and other nonsense.’

The more countries that drop out of the Net Zero scan, the better;

Read; Poland’s Pragmatic Energy Approach Pays Off, Vijay Jayaraj, 29 July 2025

‘By refusing to play by the European Union’s restrictive climate rules, Poland has begun to build one of Europe’s most energy-secure economies. While much of the bloc marches in lockstep toward a self-inflicted economic wound called “net zero,” Poland has chosen a different path—one of pragmatism, national interest, and, most importantly, energy security. And this path is paying handsome dividends. At the heart of Poland’s defiance is a steadfast refusal to abandon coal, the bedrock of its energy system. In 2024, coal, oil, and natural gas accounted for more than 85% of total primary energy supply, the highest share in the EU. Coal alone generated 55% of the nation’s electricity in 2024, powering homes, factories, and businesses.

Though news media were excited about renewables’ increased share of power generation in June, the country is actively finding ways to make coal a mainstay. The Energy Policy of Poland 2040 (EPP2040) outlines a plan for major utilities like PGE and Tauron to spin off coal-fired plants into separate entities by 2025. By isolating coal assets, Poland delays aggressive transition timelines, ensuring that coal assets are spared from EU transition rules. Jakub Jaworowski, Poland’s minister of state assets, reinforces this strategy, noting that government analysis found no economic justification for divesting coal assets. Maciej Bando, Poland’s deputy climate minister, has been unequivocal on this point: “I have no doubt that coal units will be needed in the system until they are naturally replaced by nuclear power plants.“

The idea that you can power a modern industrial economy with intermittent and unreliable sources of energy like wind and solar is a dangerous fantasy. Poland must be careful to not follow the examples of Germany and the United Kingdom, where domination of power grids by wind and solar has resulted in unstable power supplies, surging imports, and unaffordable power prices. But Poland’s success story does not end with coal. The country is also blessed with newfound reserves of natural resources that promise to further enhance energy security and fuel economic growth. In early 2025, the state-affiliated Orlen Group announced the discovery of a natural gas deposit in western Poland, with estimated reserves of nearly 250 million cubic meters. The crown jewel, however, is the July discovery near Poland’s Baltic coast of what has been hailed as the nation’s largest-ever oil and gas find. This deposit rivals or surpasses the Barnówko-Mostno-Buszewo field—previously Poland’s largest, with 400—500 million barrels of oil. Experts suggest its recoverable reserves could make this one of Europe’s most significant hydrocarbon discoveries in a decade. For Polish families, this translates to lower prices, reduced reliance on imports and billions in royalties to fund public services.

Polish reliance on fossil fuels has not hindered growth; it has fueled it. From 2022 to 2025, Poland’s gross domestic product grew by an impressive 11.6%, outpacing economic giants like Germany, France, and Italy and surpassing the EU average. In 2024 alone, Poland’s projected growth of 2.9% dwarfed the EU’s sluggish pace. Poland’s unemployment rate stood at 5.2%, lower than the EU average. What if other nations were to abandon the self-destructive dogma of net zero and embrace a more rational approach to energy and climate policy? The results would be nothing short of transformative. We would see a resurgence of economic growth, a decline in energy prices, and a return to a more common-sense approach to environmental stewardship. The climate industrial complex, which has grown rich and powerful by peddling fear and misinformation, would be exposed for the fraud that it is. And the people of Europe, who have been forced to bear the brunt of this failed experiment, would finally be set free.’

Censorship / Surveillance / Coercion/ Corruption / Blackmail

The UK’s leading critic of zionism, Professor David Miller uncovers how UK intelligence use far-right propaganda, not least locals aversion to mass immigration, to discredit UK Muslims who were against the wars in Iraq and are now against the genocide in Palestine. Thanks to the West backing 11 years of war in Syria to oust its democratically elected leader, Bashar Al-Assad, a prescribed terrorist now rules Syria.

Listen; The Flag Wars: What’s Really Behind Britain’s Latest Symbolism Battle UK Column News, 27 August 2025

Mike Robinson; “Here we have Robert Jenrick committing criminal damage as he, perhaps unwittingly, stokes racial tensions here, by hanging the union flag on a lamppost. While he might be considered at best naive, there’s no doubt that others know exactly what they’re doing. The reason I describe it in this way is that the flag campaign is called Operation Raise the Colours and has been started, or at least claimed to be by Andy Saxon. He’s supported by Urban Scoop, a pro-Israel and very much anti-Islam film production company. They’re promoting a campaign to save Tommy Robinson with Rebel News, a known zionist-affiliated organisation. So some of the response to this campaign has been alive to the dangers of the manipulation and the unfortunate likelihood of this demonising in particular anyone perceived as Muslim or Asian. This tweet is saying ‘this is Raise the Colours’. In practice it’s not pride, not heritage, it’s intimidation, racism and hatred dressed up as patriotism. And this video in effect proves the point that this person is trying to make.

It’s very easy to see how a campaign that may be perceived by many as a noble and indeed fairly straightforward campaign could actually very easily be subverted. Now, Urban Scoop further promotes the idea that the Quran is in fact condoning acts of violence. It’s at this point that I would cite David Miller’s most recent article on the UK Column website. If you could just tell us a little bit about your article, please.

David Miller; “The article is an in-depth investigation based on leaked internal government documents which tries to look at the way in which the British government, in particular the Home Office and its Homeland Security Group, which is an intelligence agency within the Home Office, has engaged in effectively astroturfing a whole number of different Muslim groups as part of their effort to effectively domesticate Islam and especially to respond to the threat which they perceived as coming from Islam after the success or the size of the anti-Iraq war demonstrations in 2002 and 3 and 4. So the government’s response to that was to try and say, well, we want to change Islam, Muslims shouldn’t be engaged in criticising government or foreign policy, especially over the war in Iraq, but also in relation to the question of Palestine. And so the reason that they’ve done this and they’ve astroturfed a huge number of Muslim groups is to try and suggest that Muslims are British patriots and that it’s wrong and indeed extremist for Muslims to oppose Western wars. So of course that’s been a long term campaign of theirs and what they’ve done effectively is they commissioned a PR firm to set up a whole number of different Muslim organisations or to work with existing known Muslim organisations, whereby the government would write the messages that these Muslim organisations would give out, and these messages would be given to the PR firm and the PR firm would give them to the Muslim organisations, so that sometimes the Muslim organisations didn’t even know that it was British intelligence officials who were actually writing their key messages. So the investigation really is an attempt to show how that process worked and how the government was able to keep secret their involvement in it. And so of course what they did there was they wrote a whole series of contracts with the PR firm which in very great detail showed how the operation worked, such that they would create this new office which is called the Hub, and Muslim organisations would be brought into the Hub as if it was a pro-bono, free community relations organisation. Actually it was run directly by this PR firm and secretly in the Hub, this office, there would be PR firm staff and secretly there were also two British intelligence officers sitting in the back room making sure that they checked and cleared every message which went out. So this is a quite elaborate attempt to manipulate the Muslim community and actually to also manipulate non-Muslims in this country into effectively not supporting the anti-war movement and the movement for Palestinian rights. That’s the purpose of it.”

Mike Robinson; “David, I suppose my first question would be is there any evidence to suggest that aside from not supporting the anti-war movement, that there’s been any effort to manipulate opinions about each demographic as it were. So Muslims versus other communities in the UK, and particularly the white community versus Muslims?

David Miller; “Well, the idea is to try and destroy the possibility of white people and non-white people coming together to oppose UK foreign policy. And the reason that they wanted to do that was, of course, they saw that there was a unity in 2002, 3 and 4, between aspects of the conscious Muslim community and the left and the anti-war movement, and that frightened elements of British intelligence. So this whole effort has been to try and split that asunder and to make it clear that, first of all, Muslims shouldn’t support the anti-war movement, they shouldn’t oppose Western wars, they should adorn themselves with the Union flag, which is one of the key themes of one of these campaigns. And also that they wanted to split the Muslims apart from white left groups, if you like. And part of the effort, therefore, was to say that there are these good Muslims who are the community groups working with them, although they didn’t say they were with them, and there are these bad Muslims, and these are the Muslim extremists. And so they try to show that people, the Muslims who were conscious and who are saying, we don’t want to kill a million Iraqis, we don’t want to participate in the genocide in Palestine, they tried to smear them as being extremists, as being what they were called jihadis, etc. Now, of course, this is at exactly the same time as actually the British government was supporting Al Qaeda and similar groups in Syria. And we’ve seen, of course, the effects of that in the coming to power of the Jolani government in Syria in recent months. So there’s a deep malaise inside the intelligence services, such that they are both, on the one hand supporting people they call extremists, on the other hand smearing honest Muslims who oppose Western government policy as being extremists, and thirdly, trying to wrap some elements of the Muslim community in the Union flag. And I think that’s a profoundly mistaken approach.”

Mike Ronbinson; “And David, when we look at the types of organisations that you talk about in your article, we’ve obviously got the Research Information Communications Unit, we’ve got reference to the old Information Research Department within the Foreign Office, which of course we know has been succeeded by the Counter Disinformation Media Development Programme in the Foreign Office. And then later on in the article, you are talking about Breakthrough Media Network, now known as Zinc Network Ltd., and so we’ve got parallels here between what’s going on with the manipulation of the Islamic narrative, but also the manipulation of the Russian narrative. And so it’s pretty cynical in both cases.”

David Miller; “Well, yes, the stuff that you’re talking about, the Counter Disinformation Unit, is run by MI6 and by a guy called Andy Price, and he was involved in running the Integrity Initiative, which you’ve covered on your show before, which was an anti-Russian thing, part of the whole Russiagate farrago of nonsense which was created and which has now actually been exposed by the Trump administration just in the last few days by Tulsi Gabbard. So that’s part of the same thing, there’s the anti-Russian stuff, which of course is in favour of the adventures in Ukraine and supporting Zelenskyy and indeed the neo-Nazis who support Zelenskyy at the same time as trying to target those who were against the Iraq war or who are against the genocide in Gaza. Now, this is a set of organisations which are closely related to the intelligence agencies, as I mentioned RICU (Research, Information and Communications Unit) the organisation you mentioned there, which is effectively today’s Information Research Department, is part of the Homeland Security Group, which is a British intelligence agency inside the Home Office and comes under effectively the rubric of MI5. The organisation you refer to, Counter Disinformation Unit, comes under the aegis of MI6, which of course was key to the propaganda operations in Syria, where they employed a whole number of people to promote, effectively, Al Qaeda in Syria against the government of Bashar al-Assad. So there’s a deep cynicism inside British intelligence and inside the strategy of British government. And what we’re trying to do here is to show how that works, to illustrate to people that these people are not honest and that they are engaged in a huge apparatus of deception.”

Mike Robinson; “And we should point out that this is part one of two, Is that right?”

David Miller; “Yes, the first part is a long article and it goes into great detail from the leaked documents with all the contracts, et cetera, and in part two, what I will go on to do is to look at the specific organisations that work very closely with British intelligence. And there’s quite a number of them, but I’ll look in depth at about four or five of them.”

Mike Robinson; “David, thank you very much. Just to finish off, have you got any thoughts on the general situation in the UK at the moment and how you think this might pan out?”

David Miller; “Well, I think it’s extremely worrying. We are seeing a huge escalation in Islamophobia. You mentioned Tommy Robinson and rebel media there, and of course, I’ve done investigations of Robinson’s background and his alliance with the zionist movement and the funding that he’s had from the very beginning of the English Defence League from the zionist movement. I think there’s a great need to disinter some of what’s happening just in the way that you started to do there with the flag thing. I mean, the whole question of re-migration as a concept, where does that come from? It clearly is linked to earlier zionist themes about, for example, the concept of Eurabia, which was popularised by a woman called, using a pen name, Bat Ye’or. Her real name is Gisèle Littman who is a former Mossad operative. Her and her husband operated in Morocco for the Mossad. And so there’s a need to look at the links there are between the zionist movement and this current activity. In the film that you just played, of course, one of the key indications that there’s a zionist connection is the fact that they’re taking down, what was it they called it? ‘Islamic terrorist flags’, the flag of Palestine. Now that’s an indication of the way in which the zionists are involved, deeply involved with the far right in this country in a way which people haven’t understood in the past. They understand the zionists are involved with the neo-con think tanks and with the pushing of Islamophobia and all that, but they’re deeply involved in the far right, as we’ve shown with, for example, Tommy Robinson. And that’s something, I think, which requires much more research work and I’m glad to see that you’ve started to do some of that.”

The Online Safety Act is the government’s agenda to ban the freedom of speech to challenge its lies.

Watch; Starmer’s mechanism to control UK internet The Duran, 10 August 2025

Alexander Mercouris; “This Act is intended to control and regulate internet contents serving in all kinds of ways, and as is so often the way today, in order to get public acceptance of it, it’s been packaged, sold and explained as intended to protect minors, children.

It sets up all sorts of mechanisms where people who publish content on the internet, if that content could nationally cause somebody psychological harm or injury or lead them astray into all kinds of ways. Anyway, they could be regulated and they might have to give personal information about themselves. They may be obliged to put all sorts of restrictions on who can view this content, which is very ownerless and very expensive and very complicated for many sites to do. And ultimately of course more severe legal sanctions can be imposed upon somebody who doesn’t do these things. Already we’re hearing reports across the country, special units within the police are being set up to investigate and regulate and enforce this act. So you can see that the police are becoming involved. And there’s also a prosecution, I’m sure coming along the line before long.

And initially it was discussed as being intended to combat pornography. Which is surprising because there’s already regulation about pornography. But already we can see that online discussion for example about immigration issues about religious and racial intolerance, all of these kind of things are falling within the scope of this act already and there is government guidance that it can be used to patrol and to do these things.

And the population is responding and we’ve had a massive search in the UK of people are now acquiring VPN’s for example. There’s talk about the government banning the use of VPN in Britain. The government says that they’re not going to do that yet, but they’re already looking for ways to restrict VPNs and they’re talking about contacting the platforms to make it more difficult for apps that enable people to have VPN to be operated as well. It’s all about censorship, it’s all about media control.’

More on the censorship-enabling Online Safety Act

Listen; UK Column News 25 August 2025

Mike Robinson; “Let’s move on to online safety. And I just want to everybody know what 4chan is, for those that don’t 4chan is a discussion group, a forum based in the United States. It has quite a reputation for hosting pretty much any kind of content that possibly exists. Some of it’s very unpleasant, but nonetheless it’s there because apparently the United States has a constitutional right to freedom of speech. But Ofcom, as we know, is the body in the United Kingdom that is required to implement the Online Safety Act and to act as the generator of government censorship in the UK. And Ofcom has decided that it is going to be a regulator of the entire Internet and on the entire globe, so they decided in June actually to open an investigation into 4chan, so what it says is we’re initiating an investigation to determine whether the online discussion board 4chan has failed or is currently failing to comply with its obligations under the Online Safety Act. Our investigation will focus on potential breaches in the following areas. Failure to respond to statutory information request. Remember, they’re based in the United States, they’re not based here, there is no statutory information request that applies to them. Failure to complete and keep a record of suitable and sufficient illegal content. Risk assessment and non- compliance with the safety duties about illegal content. So that was in June. And then 10 days ago or so they issued a notice to 4chan saying Ofcom is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the provider has contravened its duties under Section 102B of the Act to comply with two requests for information. We’ll consider any representations provided in response, blah, blah, blah. The Ofcom statement then doesn’t go on to define sanctions, but 4chan’s lawyers are saying that Ofcom has imposed a £20,000 fine with daily penalties after that. And I’m pretty sure that there’ll be interest applied to any outstanding payments. That’s what they’re going to try anyway. But unfortunately for Ofcom, the 4chan lawyers have decided to reply with a statement which, although it appears quite long on screen there, ends with the word ‘off’. So you can imagine what that said. Now, as I say 4chan is controversial because people are able to post just about anything that they like. But of course, as we’ve seen with the issue of age assurance and so called pornography or pornography sites, but I say so called because that’s how it’s being presented in the media, that age assurance and the requirement to identify yourself to websites now is just about pornography, when in fact it’s about just about every social media platform that’s out there at the moment. And of course we’ve seen as a result this massive rise in people getting interested in VPNs, Virtual Private Networks and the ability to be relatively anonymous in your Internet usage, but also to appear to be coming upon these sites from a different country and therefore not subject to the age assurance requirements. Other related news then is that TikTok has decided that they…. now just before we say about this, TikTok is the most censorious social media platform that we have ever come across. If you speak to Kenny later, who’s at the back of the room will tell you that we are regularly having TikTok channels shut down and he’s regularly having to buy another SIM card, get another mobile phone number and open it in order to open another TikTok account. And, but so they are the most censorious. So you, you perhaps understand that I’m not terribly sad that they’ve decided to fire or at least make redundant most of their moderation team. Hundreds of hundreds of jobs being lost in the UK just at the time that of course they’re required to start implementing an even more rigorous regime as a result of the Online Safety Act. That’s the good news. The bad news is that the reason that they feel they can get rid of all these people is they’re going to be increasingly relying on AI to make these decisions. Okay, good news. Yeah. It’s perhaps a bit ironic then that they have decided to update their terms and conditions and their policies in this area. So this is safety and civility and as you can see at the top there in the pink area that is basically saying that as from 15th September, the rules are changing and that the new rules are going to be implemented. So let’s just have a look at the new rules here and let me just find this here. So the ones that I want to highlight, hate speech and hateful behavior. We don’t allow content that provokes hate or attacks people based on protected attributes like race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. Okay. Violent and hateful organisations and individuals. We don’t allow people or groups that, I advise you just to sit carefully in your chair because you may fall off as I read this, violent and hateful organisations and individuals. We don’t allow people or groups that promote violence or hate, including violent extremists, criminal organisations or those responsible for mass violence. Right. If we post anything to TikTok talk about Israel, it’s taken down immediately. Am I right, Kenny? So that’s why we haven’t posted in TikTok for a while. It’s taken down immediately, any criticism of Israel. And yet in their terms and conditions, it says including those responsible for mass violence. Is Israel not responsible for mass violence? What’s the next one then? The next one is integrity and authority. Misinformation. We don’t allow misinformation that could cause significant harm to individuals or society. Define it, please. Right. What is the definition? It’s what they decide and it’s completely arbitrary. And of course, this is a reflection of the legislation. It is undefined in the legislation, it’s undefined in their terms and conditions. They make it up as they go along. But more importantly, UK government is sending little hints, maybe UK Column shouldn’t be on this platform, maybe 21st Century Wire shouldn’t be on this platform, this kind of thing, so I just want to finish this segment then with a report that’s appeared in the Register, it’s an opinion piece I should say, it’s entitled ‘The Online Safety Act is about censorship and not safety’. Patrick, how many years have we been saying this? Seven, eight years we’ve been saying this. The Online Safety Act was never about safety, never about the safety of children, it’s only about censorship.”

Not content with censoring the internet through the Online Safety Act (see above) Starmer’s autocratic surveillance state is also pushing the Data Use and Access Bill which, if passed, will allow the government unlimited access to data in a huge legalised data grab.

Watch; Wake up, because the government is coming for your data, StarmerOut, 16 August 2025

James Melville; “Wake up, because the government is coming for your data. Everything you’ve bought, every website you’ve visited, every location you’ve been to, every financial transaction you’ve made. They want it and they are changing the law so they can legally take it, use it, and share it without your permission. Now I know what you’re thinking. Who’s this guy? What’s he talking about? That sounds illegal. They can’t just take my data. Ding, ding, it was illegal, so they are now changing the law to make it legal. And you can see it’s right here. It’s called the Data (Use and Access) Bill. It was last updated on the 13th of February 2025 at 16.41. So far it has gone through the entirety of the House of Lords. It is now in the committee stage in the House of Commons. I’ll bet you have not heard a single thing about this in mainstream media. Unless of course you follow me on TikTok and watch the video I did on this four months ago when it entered Parliament. No, I suggest you pay attention now and let’s make this abundantly clear. This isn’t some online safety policy or a vague data protection law. This is a 270-page government bill quietly running through parliament while everyone is too distracted by tax rises, NetZero policies and the usual media circus to notice. It’s called the Data Use and Access Bill and if you don’t understand what’s coming, you’re in for a very big shock. So let’s explain this in simple terms because I’m not some high-end lawyer who sits reading through hundreds of pages of government legal jargon just for the fun of it. Now what I do is use AI to rip these documents apart, extract what actually matters and expose what’s buried inside. Because let’s be completely honest, who has time to decode 270 pages of legal jargon? And when you strip away the fluff, this bill is one hell of a power grab. But what does the bill actually do? Because this isn’t about protecting your data or making life easier. This is about total control over digital identity, financial transactions and online access. And it expands government control over data access. It introduces centralised digital verification, fingerprints, face scans and iris scans, and it lets them go back years and retrieve past transactions, purchases and digital history. And it aligns perfectly with EU digital identity laws. Because we left the EU, right? We weren’t automatically subjected to their data control laws that they’re pushing on the other 27 countries. So what’s the UK government doing? Copying them anyway. We were supposed to be free of EU overreach, but instead our own government is aligning us with Brussels under a UK-branded version. And you won’t hear a word about this in mainstream media until it’s passed through. So let’s talk about how far this Bill goes. Let’s break it down section by section. First up, we’ve got data access expansion. They’re going back years. This bill doesn’t just apply to your future data, it actually gives the government legal access to your historical digital records, purchases, transactions, financial history. They can dig back years into your past, so if you ever thought your old transactions were private and long forgotten, you’d better start thinking again. Then there’s the DVS, the Digital Verification Services. Welcome to mandatory biometrics. The government is building a centralised digital ID system and it will require facial scans, fingerprints, iris scans and biometric data for verification. And let’s be real, you’ve been trained for this. You unlock your phone with your face, you use your fingerprint to approve payments and you ask Alexa for your shopping, your weather and your news. They now have all of that. The government is formalising it all into a legal framework in a centralised system. But don’t worry, it’s not like they’re tracking you, it’s not like they’re listening to you, right? Wake up, they’re going to have everything you’ve ever done. And then there’s government agencies sharing your data without your consent. This bill actually allows all public bodies to freely exchange your personal data. That includes the HMRC, the Home Office, the NHS, financial regulators and even private corporations. Your data will no longer be restricted between departments. The government will have full centralised access to everything.

Then there’s big tech and government coordinating control. The bill creates government corporate data hubs that will control who gets access to what. If you’re not part of the system, you’re locked out. Then there’s international data sharing. Your data can be sold overseas. This bill allows your data to be transferred to foreign governments and corporations, and this means your private records could now be accessed abroad. Then we have the next one, financial surveillance, banking control under consumer protection, because the FCA, the Financial Conduct Authority, gets expanded power to monitor your financial activity. So expect tighter restrictions on bank accounts, credit, loans and transactions and businesses will be forced to comply. A levy system means businesses will have to pay for compliance, non-compliance, fines, penalties and restrictions. This isn’t just a UK thing, it’s an EU blueprint. This is straight out of the EU’s digital control playbook. Then we’ll have EU Digital Identity Regulation, the EUDI, because the EU is creating a centralised digital identity wallet for all citizens. Governments will store and control personal and biometric data, and you’ll need it to access services. And that brings us on to the Data Governance Act. The EU is expanding data sharing laws between governments and corporations. Sound familiar? It should, because our government is copying it word for word. But they said it’s about making life easier. Of course they did, just like they said lockdowns were temporary, digital currency was just a conspiracy theory, vaccine passports were never going to happen, fifteen-minute cities are just a convenience, and yet here we are. But the next thing you’re going to ask is what can you do? Well first up, I’ve been showing you the Bill. You can read it. Don’t take my word for it, see what’s in there for yourself. Contact your MP, ask them if they support handing more of your data to the government and share this video because once this system is in place, there is no opting out.”

UK Column are closely following government double speak in criticising China’s National Security Law while we have an equally draconian National Security Act that allows the government to prosecute people outside the UK if they so wish, echoing the criminal persecution of Julian Assange by the US.

Listen; UK Column News 25 August 2025

Charles Malet; “National security is coming into the headlines at the moment from Hong Kong via the South China Morning Post, talking about the protracted trial of Jimmy Lai, which I won’t go into great detail on, but suffice it to say that this is being documented, at least in the mainstream, as being a pro-democracy trial. So we’re just going to examine some of the things that have fallen out from it and indeed some of the things that it’s pointing towards. But the situation in Hong Kong, at least, is that they’re in the concluding phase of the trial. Now, in the United Kingdom, this is being something that’s reported as going back to 2019, the protests which were apparently being supported by Lai’s media organisation, Apple Daily, subsequently having closed, reported or reputed to have links at least with the Pentagon and indeed with a number of other organisations. But that will be something for you perhaps, to look into further. The point I want to make is that the government has put out a document about this is, that they have in here referred to what China did in 2020, which was to pass the National Security Law. Now, the way that’s been written up, as it were, by both Hong Kong and the United Kingdom is that Hong Kong lacked sufficient political will to do it, so China stepped in and made it happen, which was deemed to be a contravention, at least, of Hong Kong’s status as a Special Autonomous region. So the point here to be drawn out is that the National Security Law was being deemed to be inappropriate, or indeed to have been conducted in a manner that didn’t befit the correct and lawful system, rather than dealing with the content therein. And that’s the bit that I want to concentrate on. Now, the fallout from this, as far as the United Kingdom was concerned, was that as a result of the apparently draconian National Security Law passed in Hong Kong by the Chinese authorities, there was a concession made by the United Kingdom under the British National Overseas Visa, which was effectively to grant status of British nationality to people in Hong Kong that wanted to move into this country. And just to give you an idea of the effect of that, we’ve got a government document there talking about people coming via safe and legal humanitarian routes. Updated just two days ago, or if you’re watching on screen, four days ago. This is the graph that shows that effect. And I think it’s worth pointing out, because not only does it deal with the Hong Kongers who are at the lower end of the thing, if you’re listening and not watching, then I’m showing a bar chart that has, at June 2022, an enormous spike in the number of people coming into this country described as having safe and legal humanitarian passage. And the top of the bar is dominated by 179,000 people from Ukraine and a slightly lesser figure from Hong Kong. So with migration so much in the news at the moment, it is worth looking back to this, as it’s described, safe and legal route and the hundreds of thousands of people that do come into the United Kingdom that way. Now, also recently, and this is where the hypocrisy becomes most obvious, we have what’s called the G7 rapid response mechanism, the RRM, who’ve made a statement on what they’re describing as being extra-territorial arrest warrants. And the crux of the statement here made by the government and sponsored by other governments, is that the Hong Kong authorities have put out arrest warrants for bounties on individuals outside of Hong Kong’s borders, including in the G7 countries, for exercising their freedom of expression. So that’s what we are to take away. We are to take away that because of a law that China put in where Hong Kong lacked the political will, the consequence of this is that Hong Kong is now prohibiting people from exercising their freedom of expression. Now we will go to examine whether we think this is really the case. They go on to say this form of transnational repression undermines national security, state sovereignty, human rights, and the safety of communities. So we’ve heard of all this. What we don’t really get to hear quite so much about is our own National Security Act, which came through in 2023, shown here on the headline, as it is on the government page. I would just make the point that in relation to part of the policy and indeed regulation that’s enabled by this, which is the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme, which you will have heard Dan Jarvis, the Security Minister, talking about the entire time, I would just like to point out the failure to use any sense of objectivity when evaluating what might be constituted as undue foreign influence or indeed foreign interference. And I’ve got on screen a particular clause about there being an enhanced tier where foreign influence is concerned. There are only two countries in that enhanced tier at the moment, and you’re probably already there, but they are Russia and Iran. It is not substantiated as to why they should be, but they are, and this is all part of the way in which the narrative is developed via means of the legislative tool that is there to create that particular situation. Now, I’ve talked about the registration scheme FIRS, as it’s abbreviated to. I just thought I would point this out, which I have done before, just to articulate really the hypocrisy. It says that it requires the registration of particular activities in order to strengthen the integrity of UK politics and institutions and protect the country from state threats. Quite rich language, one would say, in 2025. Now, additionally, they do go on to talk about freedom of expression, which is exactly what the Rapid Response Mechanism has just been complaining about in terms of extra-territorial warrants. And they say, no, absolutely, this will not affect people’s freedom of expression and nor will it prevent anyone from engaging in political influence activities. It simply requires openness and transparency. Well, how much openness and transparency really is there? Because we are talking about the situation of extra-territorial activities where criminal proceedings are concerned. So I have on my UK Column clipboard the particular sections of the National Security Act 2023, which of course is the British law which has extra-territorial powers. Section one concerning espionage. Absolutely. The British government may do precisely what they’re accusing Hong Kong of doing now. Section two concerning trade secrets. Section three in terms of assisting a foreign intelligence service. Section 35 concerning bodies corporate. And this of course is the most explicit, which is Section 36 specifically labelled ‘offences committed outside the United Kingdom’. So the level of hypocrisy here is absolutely spectacular. And I should also point out, as has been referenced, for those of you sitting in the talk tent earlier today, I appreciate to people watching the news on the screen this might not make much sense, but we’ve talked about the way in which the Terrorism Act 2000 is used in absolute multitude of ways now, incorrectly. But of course, one such would be Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which includes action taken outside the United Kingdom and of course stipulated in Section 1, including action taken for the benefit of a proscribed organisation, which takes us straight back to the whole idea of freedom of expression. And at the moment we are talking a lot about Palestine Action and its proscription. But what I’m getting to is that if you were to express support for Palestine Action from a foreign country, then you would still be captured by both the National Security Act and indeed the Terrorism Act 2000. So what the government are putting out about the Hong Kong authorities is absolutely disingenuous. Now, the reason I mention this is because, as we all know, freedom of expression is lumped into what’s described loosely and lazily as conspiracy theory and how that is taken on and used and manipulated. And of course, we are at Hope Freedom being run by the Hope Sussex community. And I would just remind you, if you are not already aware, that they chose to speak to the BBC the other day and were, as you might imagine, misrepresented, to put it diplomatically. But I think the key bit of text to draw out from the BBC sounds advertisement is this bit of text here saying, is a home educating community really teaching children conspiracy theories? Now, the answer to that question is neither here nor there. The point is really that the BBC are conceding that they have an issue with children learning anything that hasn’t come from either the government or the BBC. I think that’s the inference to be drawn from that. And just to draw that point out a little bit further, in terms of where one is meant to receive information from, I would point you towards GCHQ, where on their culture page they have a section about education and outreach, which means they are running courses and classes for young people during school holidays in order that their minds might be set on the right path. So we go back to more or less where we started, which is the National Security strategy from 2025. And as it says in that document, extremist ideologies are on the rise. All of this has a link going right the way through it and you are in the middle of it here by being in this talk tent at this magnificent Hope event. So that’s where we go from the trial of Jimmy Lai straight through to our own National Security Strategy with many gargantuan lies told upon the way.”

Listen; All Roads Lead To The Agenda 2030 Control Framework Sandi Adams, UK Column News, 27 August 2025

Sandi Adams; “There’s so many things going wrong in our world and it kind of brings it all back and, you see where it’s all radiating from. So my first slide is really a kind of a visual of that. In the centre is Agenda 2030. And I will explain all these other ones radiating out, because all of it is linked in 2030, Agenda 2030, which originated from Agenda 21, it became 2030 in 2015 at the Vatican by President Obama, where the 17 goals were launched. So the next slide is really about the control framework and how that works. We’ve got one of the branches is DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) mandates, enforcing ideological compliance in workplaces, education and government, undermining meritocracy and creating division. And then we’ve got Net Zero policies, costly energy transitions that dismantle reliable infrastructure, raised living costs and energy costs and give over the energy control to global actors. And then we’ve got mass migration, overloading housing and services, changing demographics, rapidly and eroding national cohesion. We’ve got a lot of these attacks on farming, land rewilding, carbon offsets that drive farmers out of business and reduce domestic food security, ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance). We’ve got environmental and social governance contracts for businesses which will dictate corporate policy via environmental and social scorecards. This sidelines profit and market choice. We’ve got BNG, (biodiversity net gain), which is a really big one on scoring and literally commodifying agriculture and nature. So the next one is digital ID systems, again, centralised databases, enable surveillance and control. We’ve got the C40 cities with devolution, with the transfer of power from Westminster to the smart cities and that means bypassing local democracy. We’ve got CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currency) and financial centralisation, programmable money and education reform and indoctrination, replacing knowledge with ideology, global citizenship training and climate and social activism. And the next one is obviously the NHS. That’s another arm of it, digitising and centralising health data, enabling predictive surveillance and global health governance, property rights erosion, 15- minute cities, mobility restrictions and surveillance infrastructure, facial recognition, AI monitoring, predictive policing. And then there’s the water resource one. We’ve got water resource control privatising and rationalising resources under environmental quotas, banning private collection in some cases. International treaty overrides, cultural deconstruction, monopoly consolidation, destroying small and medium sized businesses again and data mining, and data mining in schools and impact investing all the children in schools, data mining them. So this all comes back to the 17 sustainable goals. And though each one of those is instrumental in the destruction of everything as we know it, I go into it a little bit deeper just with two of those goals, what they really mean related to food. We’ve got ‘no poverty’ and ‘zero hunger’. So let’s start with no poverty, it’s gold number one, poverty alleviation and social protection. So the UN solution is AI- enabled digital footprints for credit and mobile money access, blockchain identity solutions to enable economic identities for all. It’s like a levelling up of communities. Rally what it means is to make everyone equally poor. UBI (Universal Basic Income) with fixed amounts of carbon credits and digital footprints that are all feeding into this data-mining facility that they’re creating. The next one is ‘end hunger’ – UN access to food, improved nutrition and food production, low cost GMO mass produced food production by Monsanto, (which is now Bayer), synthetic food proteins, insect proteins, no meat, AI sensors and blockchain to eliminate waste loss in food value. But the real meaning of that is to push everything into fake meat, in mass food production and all that stuff that we know is happening. But this is where it puts it all into one place. Agenda 2030 is really the nub of everything that is happening to us right now.”

Watch; Silicon Valley insider exposes cult like AI companies by Aron Bastani, Novara Media, 29 June 2025

Aaron Bastani; “”At the intersection of particularly politics and technology, the coverage by political journalists at Westminster, Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves say we’re going to build more data centres, isn’t that fantastic? Actually, not necessarily. They’re not going to create that many jobs. Once they’re built, they can use a tonne of energy, funnel water. What’s the upside for the UK taxpayer? There is very little interrogation of just the press releases, and it’s really interesting to me that you’ve come out of MIT and then you’ve taken this trajectory. Is this stuff you just talked about, knowing these people, this tiny group of people whose decisions now affect billions already, is this stuff up on the present trajectory? Is it an existential challenge to democracy? Is it going to end democracy?”

Karen Hao; “I think it is greatly threatening and increasing the likelihood of democracy’s demise. But I never make prediction that this outcome will happen because it makes it sound inevitable. And one of the reasons why I wrote the book is because I very much believe that we can change that and people can act now to shape the future so that we don’t lose democracy.

So there have been rapid data centre expansion in rural communities in both the US and the UK. And they always end up in economically vulnerable communities because those are the communities that often actually opt in to the data centre development initially because they are not informed about what it will ultimately cost them and for how long. And so I spoke with this one Arizona legislator who said I didn’t know how to use fresh water. And for the UK audience, Arizona is a desert territory. There’s a very, very stringent budget on fresh water. And after that legislator found out, she was like, I would have never voted for having this data centre. But the problem is that there are so few independent experts for these legislators, City Council members to consult that the only people that they rely on for the information about what the impact of this is going to be are the companies, and all the companies ever say is we’re going to invest millions of dollars, we’re going to create a bunch of construction jobs upfront and it’s going to be great for your economy.”

Aaron Bastani; “That’s all we hear about data centres in this country and it’s a great top line for the Chancellor and the Prime Minister because they can say 10s of billions of pounds worth of investment. OK, but in terms of long term jobs, how many? And also, by the way, for that rural community in God knows where, the Northeast of England or whatever, you’re not telling them that actually they can’t use their hose pipes for three months a year because all the water’s going to that local data centre. And it’s quite extraordinary. And the most scary thing about all of it is in the UK at least, the politicians don’t know any of that. I sincerely don’t think the Chancellor knows any of that. And if you use the prism of colonialism, imperialism with regards to exploitative economic relations between the United States and other parts of the world, they think you’re a Trotskyist. That’s the crazy thing, they can’t even look after their own people because if looking after your own people boils down to being too left wing.”

Karen Hao; “Well, I think part of it is also that they don’t really realise that it’s literally happening in the UK. So to connect it to the UK data centre development along the M4 corridor has literally already led to a ban in construction of new housing in certain communities that desperately need more affordable housing. And it’s because you cannot build new housing when you cannot guarantee deliveries of fresh water or electricity to that housing. And it was due to the massive electricity consumption of the data centres being built in that corridor that led to that ban.”

Listen; Understanding Psychological Warfare, UK Column News, 10 July 2025

‘In this conversation, David A. Hughes, a British academic and author known for his critical analysis of psychological operations and power structures, discusses the intricate web of psychological operations that shape public perception and control narratives, particularly around major events like 9/11 and the Covid-19 pandemic. He stresses the importance of recognising these operations, the role of misinformation, and the need for individuals to take personal responsibility in resisting the growing technocratic agenda. David argues for a collective awakening to the realities of power dynamics, the necessity of building a positive vision for the future, and tackles the challenges of perception management and political control.’

Listen; The Ritchie Allen Show, 17 June 2025

‘Richie is joined by Kate Shemirani. Kate is a former NHS nurse who now works in private practice. Kate gained national attention in 2020 when she spoke out against the lockdowns at mass gatherings in London and beyond. Last night, the BBC’s Panorama programme alleged that Kate was responsible for the death of her daughter, Paloma. Paloma died of heart failure while she was battling non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Panorama featured interviews with Kate’s estranged sons and Paloma’s former boyfriend. They alleged that Kate filled Paloma’s head with medical misinformation which contributed to her death. On today’s show, Kate tells Richie that these allegations are completely untrue and why she believes that Paloma died as a result of gross medical negligence.’

Read; Schwab walks free Davos Crowns New Kings George Christensen, 16 August 2025

‘Yesterday the global elites circled the wagons. The World Economic Forum, the Davos club that has tried for decades to dictate your future without ever asking your consent, has announced that Klaus Schwab, the man who built the Forum into his personal empire, has been “cleared” of all “material wrongdoing.” At 87 years of age, Schwab leaves the chairmanship not disgraced but congratulated. His wife Hilde, who has sat beside him for 50 years, was cleared too. And who takes the reins in this so-called “new chapter”? None other than Larry Fink of BlackRock, the man who controls more money than the GDP of most nations, and André Hoffmann, vice-chair of the pharmaceutical giant Roche. Finance and Big Pharma now sit proudly at the very top of Davos.’

The UN is plotting a global speech crackdown

Petition; Defund the UN’s Global Censorship Agenda Citizen GO

‘Trump is close to defunding the UN. And Keir Starmer could do the same. But only if he feels the pressure and popular support for such a bold move.

Add your name to stop global censorship and tell Keir Starmer and President Trump that the free world will not fund tyranny disguised as ‘human rights.’ Here’s why your signature can’t wait. Right now, behind closed doors in New York and Geneva, UN officials are finalising global pacts on digital censorship, radical gender policy, and compulsory Digital ID. Once that machinery is bolted into place, there will be no easy democratic off-ramp. Nations will be boxed in by treaties, buried under bureaucracy, and told their new “international obligations” are almost impossible to unwind.

If we stay silent, here’s what comes next:

– Carbon-copy censorship laws flood every parliament/LEGISLATIVE BODY.
– Parents lose control of their children’s education and medical choices.
– Churches are muzzled and pro-life voices criminalised.
– Free speech, especially online where most of us now share information, will be controlled, manipulated and even criminalized.

And when we ask, “Who voted for this?” the answer will be the same: Nobody. It came from Geneva or UN Headquarters in New York City. If we lose this fight, Keir Starmer will sign, spend, and legislate your rights away and pretend they had no choice. Perhaps even the next President of the United States will whittle away the right of his citizens on the altar of UN globalism, too. But if we win, we send a shockwave through global politics. Remember when President Trump yanked funding from the World Health Organisation? One stroke of the pen, and the juggernaut screeched to a halt. He acted because ordinary people roared. He’ll do it again if we show this matters. And he will do it again if we prove this issue matters to the people. Keir Starmer might not be a Trump, but most politicians are reactive. If enough citizens demand action, they will respond. A global petition showing unified outrage from thousands of people across dozens of nations is a political weapon they cannot ignore. It forces them to choose: Do they side with the UN elite or stand with the people who elect them?’

Read; The Daily Insider: Why most herd animals – Sapiens included – tend to stay in crowds, Alec Hogg, 22 October 2021

‘In his excellent book Beyond Order, Jordan Peterson shares a story from polymath Robert Sapolsky, a Stanford professor of biology, neurology and neurosurgery. It explains why most herd animals – Sapiens included – tend to stay in crowds. And why someone like Rob Hersov is such an exception.

Sapolsky and his team were struggling to differentiate individual wildebeest whose behaviour they were studying. Someone had the bright idea to drive up to the herd in their Jeep and dab a red spot on the haunches of one animal. “Guess what happened?” Peterson writes. Time and again predators killed the differentiated animal.

He explains: “Lions cannot easily bring a single wildebeest down unless they can identify it. They cannot hunt a blur of indistinguishable herd animals. They would rather dine on a healthy wildebeest than one that is tiny, old, or ill. But they must be able to identify their prey.”

Moral of the story, he adds: “Make yourself colourful, stand out and the lions will take you down and the lions are always there.” For humans too. Which is why we should celebrate the Hersovs, Nick Hudsons, Herman Mashabas and others prepared to stick their necks out. For it is these outliers who keep our species moving forward.’

Pedophiles can run to Israel to dodge punishment.

Listen; Terms of Servitude The Electronic Intifada, 26 August 2025

Ali Abunimah; “I’m going to talk about a story I wrote about earlier this week, one that a lot of people are talking about right now. It’s the story about Tom Artiom Alexandrovich, a senior official in Israel’s National Cyber Directorate, an electronic warfare unit that works directly under the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. And Alexandrovich was visiting the United States to attend several cyber security conferences on behalf of the Israeli government. Alexandrovich is reportedly the main architect of Israel’s so-called Cyber Iron Dome, and he’s the head of the Defence Division at the National Cyber Directorate. So that gives you a sense of his importance in Israel. But while he was in Las Vegas earlier this month, he was arrested in a child sex predator sting. On August 15, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police announced that it had arrested eight child sex predators in a multi agency sting involving local, state and federal authorities, including the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. This operation was conducted as part of the ongoing efforts to reduce violent crime and protect children in our community, the police said. They identified Alexandrovich, who’s 38, as one of the suspects who were arrested and taken to the Henderson Detention center on felony charges. Alexandrovich is charged with attempting to lure a person he thought was a 15 year old girl for sex and then going to meet her. That’s when he was arrested. I’ll come back to this in a bit when we look at the arrest report. But this is a serious felony, carrying up to 10 years in prison and has a minimum sentence of one year. And in fact, I was able to find news reports of people being sentenced to the full 10 years on this same charge. What happened next, though, is causing a lot of controversy and I think it’s heightened by the lingering concern over a Trump administration cover up over Jeffrey Epstein, the pedophile sex trafficker. We published a piece by Jim De Brosse last month headlined ‘US media barely touches Epstein links with Israeli Intelligence’. As the headline indicates, it’s about how even with all the reporting on Epstein and all the attention, the considerable amount of evidence about his ties to Israel and its intelligence agencies is being ignored by mainstream media. But let’s get back to Tom Alexandrovich. He was arrested, charged, then immediately bailed out of prison and flew out of the United States back to Israel. That’s significant because Israel is known as a haven for Jewish pedophiles and sex criminals because it rarely extradites them back to the United States or it delays such extraditions for many years. You can see a couple of stories about that here. Here’s a CBS headline from 2020, ‘How Jewish-American pedophiles hide from justice in Israel’. And here’s another one from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in 2022, ‘How foreign sex offenders find refuge in Israel’. Alexandrovich’s next court date is set for August 27th. Is he going to show up? That’s the question. This is causing outrage among at least a handful of supporters of President Trump. Here’s Republican Congressman Thomas Massie posting yesterday on Twitter X about the Alexandrovich case. Massie shared a story from the website Axios with the headline ‘Maga Erupts After Israeli Official Charged in Child Sex Ring Flees US’. But as you can see, Massie offers a correction suggesting that Alexandrovich was allowed to flee. In other words, that someone helped him to get away. And Marjorie Taylor Greene, another far right member of Congress, has made similar points. She posted this extraordinary tweet criticising the Trump administration for two recent decisions related to children. The first is its decision to stop issuing visas for Palestinian children injured in the genocide in Gaza to come to the US for medical treatment. She writes, ‘When did America’s heart grow so cold to refuse innocent children privately funded surgeries and then they return home after they recover? Wouldn’t we allow Israeli children if they were the ones needing surgery or war torn children from any other country?’ And then the other decision she criticises is, of course, related to Alexandrovich. And she says the most concerning question is when and how did America become so subservient to Israel that we immediately release a child sex predator after arrest with a 100% locked-up case with evidence and let him off to fly back home to Israel?”

Covid / Vaccines Scam

Professor Jeffrey Sachs said Covid came from the University of North Carolina.

Watch; Covid was created by the US Global GeoPolitics, 10 August 2025

Jeffrey Sachs; “I’ll tell you a sad truth, also a little surprising and I have to admit what I’m about to tell you is only 99% sure. But my view, based on very extensive work over the last 4 1/2 years, is that Covid came from the University of North Carolina, which is the leading researcher on beta coronaviruses, working with the US government on a set of grant proposals that identified putting in the viral change that created SARS COV 2. It’s a grim truth. It’s ugly, it’s been hidden from view. The reason I mention it in this context is we don’t have any global governance that is effective right now to control the manipulation of dangerous pathogens like the manipulation that created the pandemic. And when it happened, and officially it took 7 million deaths, but probably if you count all of the deaths associated with Covid, it was probably closer to 20 million deaths. Even when that happens its never properly investigated, its covered up, its hidden from view.”

Read; Judgment in Leeuwarden: The Vaccine Trial That Could Trigger Nuremberg 2.0 by Jim Ferguson, 8 July 2025

‘A court case unlike any other is about to begin — one that could shatter the silence surrounding vaccine injuries, lift the veil on pandemic-era corruption, and place global elites under the microscope of justice.

At the heart of the case is Batch EM0477, a shipment of Pfizer’s COVID-19 injections alleged to have caused devastating harm, including death. A staggering 146 pieces of evidence — including internal emails, autopsies, government contracts, and whistleblower testimony — have been submitted. But this is not just about one batch. This is about the entire system that knowingly endangered millions of lives.

Who’s on the Line?

The names linked to this scandal are some of the most powerful on the planet:

– Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer, accused of misleading the public on the safety and necessity of the vaccine.
– Mark Rutte, former Dutch PM, deeply connected to the WEF and accused of concealing critical safety data.
– Ursula von der Leyen, EU Commission President, under fire for secretive vaccine deals and suppressed side-effect reports.
– Bill Gates, the billionaire philanthropist whose fingerprints are all over global health policy and funding.
– Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, whose Great Reset agenda loomed large over pandemic policymaking.

This is not conspiracy theory. It’s a court of law. And the world is watching.

The Evidence

From brave whistleblowers like Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt, to financial insiders like Catherine Austin Fitts, the prosecution is prepared to unveil the inner workings of a global alliance between Big Pharma, media, and governments.

Key questions include:

– Why were dangerous batches never recalled?
– Why were injury reports censored or ignored?
– Why were contracts signed that gave Pfizer immunity from liability?
– And most chilling of all: Was this a military operation disguised as public health?

Time for a New Nuremberg?

The original Nuremberg Trials brought Nazi war criminals to justice. Today, we face a different kind of crime — not committed with tanks or bullets, but with syringes, lies, and psychological warfare. When governments and corporations conspire to suppress life-saving data, coerce populations with threats, and profiteer from harm, the crime is no less grave. In fact, it’s global in scale. That’s why many are now calling for a new international tribunal — a Nuremberg 2.0 — to:

– Hold corporate CEOs, political leaders, and media collaborators accountable.
– Strip them of immunity.
– Enforce permanent bans from public office or business leadership.
– And most importantly: deliver justice to the injured and the dead.

Military Tribunals — Why They May Be Necessary

If civil courts prove incapable of holding elites to account — due to corruption, cowardice, or political interference — then military tribunals become the last line of justice. Why? Because when treason is committed at the highest levels of power — against a nation’s people, constitution, and sovereignty — only a military tribunal has the jurisdiction to respond appropriately. This is not a witch hunt. This is a reckoning.

What This Means for the World

This case in Leeuwarden could be the spark that ignites a global fire of truth. If successful, it may:

– Trigger similar legal actions in other countries.
– Encourage whistleblowers to come forward.
– Destroy the false immunity surrounding pharma giants.
– And restore public trust in justice — something that has been sorely lacking since 2020.

Justice Is Non-Negotiable

Tomorrow is only the beginning. The world will not forget what was done. The censorship. The mandates. The deaths. The lies. The trillions made in profit. Now is the time to demand justice, not just for the victims of Batch EM0477 — but for all victims of this orchestrated global deception. Let the court in Leeuwarden be the first blow in a wider campaign for truth. And if justice is not served in the civilian courts… Then we must press for a global Nuremberg 2.0 — peaceful, lawful, and unstoppable.’

Watch; How Rockefeller destroyed natural cures and founded so called modern medicine! Truth_Teller, 22 July 2025

“Around the same time the John D Rockefeller seized U.S. media, he also hijacked US medicine. When it was discovered that drugs could be produced from petroleum, America’s top oil mogul ordered his army of propagandist to invert reality. Accordingly, medicines used for thousands of years were suddenly classified as alternative, while the new petroleum-based, highly addictive and patentable drugs were declared the gold standard. After buying a German pharmaceutical company that manufactured chemicals of war for Adolf Hitler, Rockefeller leveraged his political influence by pressing Congress to declare natural healing modalities unscientific quackery. Rockefeller then took control of the American Medical Association and began offering massive grants to top medical schools under the mandate that only his approved curriculum be taught. Any mention of the healing powers of herbs, plants and diet was erased from most medical textbooks. Doctors and professors who objected to Rockefeller’s plan were crucified by the media, removed from the AMA and stripped of their licence to teach and practise medicine. Those who dared to speak out were arrested and gaoled. When evidence began to emerge the petroleum-based medicines were causing cancer, Mr Rockefeller founded the American Cancer Society through which he suppressed that information. John D Rockefeller is duly credited as the founder of the Pharmaceutical industry and the reason that medical error is currently the third leading cause of death in America. This is not an indictment against doctors. More than anyone, they are under the stranglehold of the single largest lobby in power in Washington. Every year, the Pharmaceutical industry spends at least twice the amount as Big Oil to influence laws, policies and public perception.”

Watch; Muammar Gaddafi delivered this prophetic speech in 2008, Global GeoPolitics, 22 July 2025

Muammar Gaddafi; “What is the reason for the destruction of Iraq, the invasion of Iraq, and the killing of 1,000,000 Iraqis? Let our American friends answer this… ah, this puzzling question: Why Iraq? What was the reason? Was Bin Laden Iraqi? Were those who struck New York Iraqis? They were not Iraqis. Were those who struck the Pentagon Iraqis? They were not Iraqis. Did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction? It did not. And even if Iraq had them—Pakistan has a nuclear bomb, India has a nuclear bomb, China, Russia, Britain, France, and America all have nuclear bombs. Doesn’t everyone have nuclear bombs? Should we destroy all the countries that have weapons of mass destruction? Listen—an occupying foreign force comes to occupy an Arab country and hang its president, and we just watch and laugh. Why was Saddam Hussein hanged? How can there be a war, and then he is hanged—he was the president of an Arab state, a member of the Arab League. We are not talking about Saddam Hussein’s policies or political disagreements—we may all disagree with him politically, and we even disagree with each other here now. We have nothing uniting us except this hall. Why was there no investigation into the killing of Saddam Hussein? Executed entirely by Arab hands. Hanged—and we watched. Why? Could it not be your turn next? Yes, why not? America once fought alongside Saddam Hussein against Khomeini. Cheney was his friend. Rumsfeld, the American Secretary of Defense when Iraq was being destroyed, was once a close friend of Saddam Hussein. In the end, they sold him out and had him hanged. Even you too.”

George Orwell’s Animal Farm was rejected by T S Eliot, who was then a director of publishers Faber and Faber, because he believed ‘experts’ should make all the decisions! whether communist or capitalist, Experts should not trump the views of constituents.

Read; better pigs this time El Gato Malo, 20 August 2025

‘On Aug 17, 1945, Orwell published “Animal Farm,” his prescient critique of communism in the form of a fable about barnyard animals taking over the farm from the oppressive farmer and forming a collective commune with equal rights and mantras of “all animals are equal” and “from each according to his ability, to each according to their needs.” in, what to modern eyes constitutes a familiar pattern, this alleged utopia rapidly devolves into “some animals are more equal than others,” with the pigs taking over, living in the house, oppressing and suppressing other species, doing all the things they once vilified, and ultimately resorting to scapegoating, violence, and brownshirts to continue living high on the hog (sorry) upon the forced labour of others.

It’s the exact story that plays out every time and this has made the book a classic, but at the time, many still saw collectivism, communism, and “rule by smart elites” as the way forward, scientific modern government for modern people, and we are far from rid of this view.Such sentiments seem eternal, the endlessly seductive siren song for the self-styled smartypantses: put us in charge and we will order your lives for you. we’re the experts. trust us. you’ll be better off for it.

T S Eliot rejects “animal farm” for publication because “it really should have said that we just need to put good people in charge this time and communism will work!” and as it does not espouse such sentiments that it “goes against the current moment.” TS sees no reason to have the conviction that “animal farm” needed saying or added anything to the debate. His certitude that “of course the pigs should be in charge, they are more intelligent. you could never have animal farm without them!” seems unshakeable.’

Provoked War with Russia

With the rare exception, Elon Musk’s algorithm ‘Grok’ makes sure that X parrots Western propaganda and lies, repeats fake news from the legacy media and discredits journalists who reveal uncomfortable facts, such as Ukraine’s inhumane, criminal use of tiny anti-personnel mines that it agreed to destroy, which have maimed and crippled 186 civilians, including children, in Donbas.

Read; Grok is a crock of… by Eva Karene Bartlett, 20 August 2025

‘Is it possible to trust Grok? Let’s explore it using the example of Donbas.’

‘Increasingly on X, people are relying on Elon Musk’s “Grok” algorithm for verification of information in posts. However, while to some this may seem a useful tool, what it is doing is reinforcing Western and allied regimes’ positions and whitewashing their crimes.

Grok draws information from dominant narratives—usually established by legacy media with its very long track record of pro-Western lies and war propaganda—to conclude whether information in a particular post is true. When it comes to matters in which the West and Israel (among others) have a vested interest in controlling the narrative, Grok sides with the claims purveyed by legacy media. Instead of providing objective, truthful, answers, it creates a propaganda loop of actual disinformation.

Thus, as was the case some days ago, Grok determined that a post of mine on Ukraine’s use of internationally-banned PFM-1 “Petal” mines against Donbas civilians was “pro-Russian disinformation” and that, “Evidence suggests PFM-1 use in Donetsk (2022) was likely Russian false flag, not Ukraine…”

This is in spite of the fact that I was back in Donetsk in late July 2022 when Ukraine fired rockets containing hundreds of these mines on Donetsk and surrounding areas. On July 30, at 9:23 pm, I wrote on my Telegram channel about a strong explosion I’d just heard in central Donetsk. An hour later, DPR journalist Georgy Medvedev wrote on his channel warning civilians not to go near the mines and not to walk on grass or areas where they could have landed. In fact, for weeks after, I walked constantly looking down at my feet and avoiding anything that was visible on the pavement, so tiny and difficult to see are the mines.They are the size of an average lighter, brown or green, and blend in very well wherever they land. Even when I saw a sign warning of a mine, it was difficult to initially see them.These high-explosive pressure mines mutilate or tear off feet and legs up to the knees, but also explode hands or animals. According to Konstantin Zhukov, Chief Medical Officer of Donetsk Ambulance Service, a weight of just 2 kg is enough to activate one of the mines. Sometimes, they explode spontaneously. If they aren’t disturbed, they can lie dormant for years.

As I wrote at the time, according to DPR Emergency services, Ukraine fired rockets containing cluster munitions, with over 300 Petal mines inside. The cluster explodes in the air, disseminating the mines widely. Due to their design, most land without exploding. Even after sappers had cleared an area of the mines, a strong wind or rain could, and did, dislodge mines which landed on rooftops or in trees. The mines are indiscriminate weapons which pose great danger to civilians. Ukraine signed the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention, under which Ukraine was obliged to destroy its 6 million stock of the mines. However, reportedly, it still has over 3.3 million such mines.

I documented the mines, and the Emergency Services sappers’ clearing and destruction of the mines, in various regions of Donetsk and Makeevka (east of Donetsk). I wrote about them, then wrote a follow up article three weeks after the late attacks, highlighting that by that point 44 civilians had been maimed by the mines, 2 of whom died of their injuries. In November 2022, I met a 14 year old boy being treated in a Donetsk hospital after he stepped on a mine in a playground, losing his foot to the explosive.It should be noted that Ukraine first deployed these mines in March 2022, during the battles for Mariupol. As of July 9, 2025, 186 civilians have been maimed by the mines (including 11 children), three of whom died of their injuries.

Grok’s determination that my reporting is false reads like one of the many smear campaigns I and colleagues have been subjected to, with the usual insertion of the “Kremlin disinfo” qualifier meant to discredit my writings. In fact, Grok drew from the Wikipedia smear entry on me, citing Wikipedia’s incorrect claim that I’ve lived in Russia since 2019, when in fact I moved to Russia in 2021. Who did Grok deem credible? The very partial Western NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW), which in February 2023 surprisingly issued a report about Ukraine’s use of the mines in Izium, but (unsurprisingly) not on Ukraine’s use of the mines in the Donbas. Grok cherry-picked aspects of the HRW report to whitewash Ukrainian culpability in the Donbas, adding claims from various Western media agencies (DW, France 24, Reuters) to accuse Russian forces themselves of dropping the mines on Donbas cities.

An admission buried in the HRW report—which Grok did not highlight—was that it, “has not verified claims of Russian forces using PFM mines in the armed conflict.” None of Grok’s sources were anywhere near Donetsk to investigate Ukraine’s deploying of the mines. Similarly, some months ago I came across and refuted Grok’s repeating of the legacy media 2022 claims of alleged “mass graves” outside of Mariupol. I had actually gone, in April 2022 and in November 2022 to each of the three sites named in media reports and found no mass graves, but normal, functioning, cemeteries, with individual plots and in the case of the largest, Stary Krim, a chapel and a funeral ongoing at the time I was there, a recently-deceased elderly man being buried in the cemetery.

None of the sources cited in the media’s baseless accusations were anywhere near the three cemeteries which they dubbed mass graves. The issue is not even about this algorithm’s discrediting of my reports (reports which other journalists find credible), but that it is using the same clearly partial sources that legacy media uses to justify or whitewash NATO and allies’ crimes. As I’ve written previously, HRW is one of many Western-funded NGOs with a history of downplaying or ignoring crimes committed by Western governments or proxies. HRW, Amnesty International, and many more oft-cited supposedly neutral bodies have very clear ties and allegiance to Western governments. Citing them as credible, as noted previously, creates a propaganda loop of disinformation that aligns with Western objectives around the globe. This isn’t accidental, it is by design.

While Grok does seem malleable, if enough people contribute non-Western talking points (as was the case on the thread in question, with Grok eventually admitting my reporting was factual), its go-to programming is to recycle Western narratives, particularly anti-Russian ones, including parroting Western think tanks calls for regime change in Russia.’

Independent experts confirm that the West blew up the Nord Stream pipeline. However, to distract from the need to end this war asap, the who-did-it debate rages.

Watch; UK Column News 25 August 2025

Patrick Henningsen; “First thing I’m going to say is we have to get out of this paradigm that we’re stuck in extremism, extremist ideologies. There’s nothing extreme about what we’re talking about here. They’re the extremists, okay? They’re the extremists. What’s going on at the high echelons, the wealth gap that we’re seeing is just unbelievable. Historically, that’s extreme. Okay? This is not a counterculture event. You got to get out of their framework, okay? This is the culture. They’re the counterculture, just understand that they try to disempower you. This is one of the hangovers of the 60s. The counterculture. No, we’re the culture, McDonald’s is the counterculture, okay? The investment banks, global transnational corporations, that’s the counterculture. Okay? Just want to get that straight. I’ll talk about the Nord Stream pipeline a little bit. If you’ve watched the headlines, it’s an interesting story. It doesn’t have an effect on our lives, of course. It affects our fuel bill, it affects the cost of heating and powering our homes. And if you read the news, there’s been an arrest.The Germans are on the case. Rest assured, they’re going to get to the bottom of it. They have their best people on it. They’ve nabbed a Ukrainian named Sergey Kuznetsov, okay? Arrested in Italy on holiday with his family and they believe he’s one of the Nord Stream saboteurs connected to the crack team of Ukrainian super soldiers that were seen drunk on the pier in Poland with a cigarette hanging out of their mouth with a 50-foot sailboat. Pretty plausible, isn’t it? That’s the story they’re going with. So this is the biggest red herring story imaginable. So what I’m going to say is pay attention to the timing. Why have they arrested this guy all of a sudden, this Ukrainian? They’re keeping the story alive. There are political negotiations going on vis a vis Ukraine with the United States and the European powers. And trust me, the Russians have made Nord Stream an issue and they made it known to the Americans and whoever their counterparts are in negotiations that that is one of the chips in negotiations. They want to have an independent investigation as to who did it. Now, the Germans did an investigation. They’ve been sitting on their findings for a year and a half. And Sweden and Denmark, the Nord Stream pipelines were blown up in their exclusive economic zones, okay? They sent investigative teams and reconnaissance teams immediately. But Sweden can’t release any of that information because of sensitive national security concerns. As far as the Danish go, a similar excuse. So it is very likely that the Swedes know and it’s very likely that all of the NATO countries, in my opinion anyway, based on the evidence that I’ve looked at exhaustively, some of which we published and reported on at UK Column, that most of the NATO countries that were involved in the drill which took place in the Baltic Sea in June and July, Baltops 22 in 2022, they know about the Nord Stream sabotage, okay? At least at the higher echelons of the European Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, and NorthCom as well. All of these countries, United States, Britain, Norway, Germany would very likely have been involved in this. That’s my understanding, and I don’t share that opinion alone. Many top investigators agree with that and many mainstream pundits are now saying the same thing. But still we have this Ukrainian story that’s being drifted out. So I think this is designed to deflect and distract from the real saboteurs, and that’s all this story is, they want to kick the can down the road for another 10 years and we’ll still be arguing about it, like JFK’s assassination in 20 years, if we’re still around. This is one of the biggest acts of industrial infrastructural sabotage, really, in the modern era. It’s state terrorism and it’s gone unpunished. But the worst thing about it is you’re not allowed to talk about it. If you’re in the mainstream media, imagine something that significant and that consequential to the cost of living in Europe and our economies you can’t even talk about. It’s verboten. So that in itself is incredible. It tells you the type of situation, the type of time in history we’re living in.”

Aaron Maté: The Dangerous Consequences of Russiagate and Its Role in Fueling Conflict; The Grayzone, 2 July 2025

‘In this talk, Aaron Maté examines the Russiagate conspiracy theory, arguing that it was a baseless narrative that served elite interests while exacerbating geopolitical tensions. He traces the origins of Russiagate to the Clinton campaign’s funding of the Steele dossier and CrowdStrike’s unverified claims of Russian hacking, which were amplified by media and political figures to deflect blame for Trump’s 2016 victory. Maté highlights how the scandal distracted from substantive opposition to Trump’s policies and created a perverse incentive for Trump to adopt hawkish stances toward Russia to disprove allegations of collusion. This, in turn, escalated tensions with Russia, undermined peace efforts in Ukraine, and prolonged the conflict there. Maté critiques the elite “protection racket” that scapegoated Russia instead of addressing domestic failures, polarizing discourse and fostering contempt for ordinary voters. Ultimately, he frames Russiagate as a disinformation campaign with far-reaching, destructive consequences for U.S. politics and global stability.’

Watch; China Will Catch up & The US Will Learn To Cooperate Jeffrey Sachs, 31 July 2025

Jeffrey Sachs; “Russia will catch up, China will catch up, Africa will catch up, and the United States will find out that being 4% of the world population is just 4%. It’s not enough to rule the world. The US will have to learn to be cooperative and we’ll have to learn that statecraft is more than overthrowing governments. But the US still does not understand this till today. And the wars that we see and the crises that we see are still crises of the old imperial mentality. So the war in Ukraine is a war that the US caused by expanding the military alliance, NATO, eastwards and trying to set up military bases in Ukraine and in the South Caucasus, especially the country, Georgia.”

Watch; John Mearsheimer: DANGER REMAINS Should the Ukraine Russia War Become a Frozen Conflict; Deep Dive, 31 July 2025

John Mearsheimer; “Well this is the argument, pretending we’re Trump here, we’ve worked out a deal, Vladimir Putin and I, and it’ll shut the conflict down if everybody accepts it. And you’ve made it clear, Ukraine and Europe, that you don’t accept it. That’s fine. But we’re out of here. You’re on your own now. And then you trust that the situation on the battlefield is such that the Ukrainians and the Europeans have no choice but to accept the deal with the Russians.

But just on Trump, the problem that Trump faces is that he didn’t shut this down immediately. What he had to do was act decisively and use that honeymoon period that he had for a month or two or three to basically coerce the Europeans and even the Ukrainians to play real hardball with them and play the peacemaker. But he didn’t do that. And the problem is he’s waffled. He’s just been all over the place. And for him to do 180° turn now it’s just hard for me to see how we can do this.

He just doesn’t have any allies. It’s not like the head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Armed Services Committee is in complete agreement with Trump and they want to work with Trump. There’s nobody wants to work with Trump, right? They’re all opposed. They all want to continue this war forever. And that’s where we are. And of course, the Europeans and the Ukrainians think the same way. So in a funny way, Trump is the outlier. But because he was incompetent, and let’s face it, he was incompetent and he played his hand so poorly, he’s not in the position now where he can overcome all those forces that are arrayed against them.

Trump is, in effect, not making a gesture, a diplomatic gesture, to try and work out some sort of modus vivendi between Moscow and Washington. He’s doing the opposite, in fact. And I think given all that’s happened since January 20th in terms of relations between Moscow and Washington, this will just make a bad situation worse. And once we get that frozen conflict, we will have poisonous relations between US and Russia for as far as the eye can see. And there’ll be that ever present danger, which we were talking about, of those potential flashpoints turning into conflicts. And by the way, again, you want to remember we are deeply mired in the Middle East, we’ve got a forever war now with Iran, which is going to continue to do nuclear enrichment. The genocide in Gaza goes on. The Israelis who we’re joined at the hip with, are there fighting wars in southern Lebanon and southern Syria. And then there’s East Asia, amd the potential for something to go wrong out there is real, and you just really wonder where this is all headed.”

Listen; Scott Ritter : The Limits to Putin’s Patience, Judging Freedom, 25 August 2025

Scott Ritter; “Let’s not forget that Donald Trump is fully aware of a certain reality. That reality is if there are strategic strikes into the depth of Russia carried out by non-nuclear powers acting at the behest or empowered by nuclear powers, Russia will treat that attack as if it came from the nuclear power. This is Russia’s nuclear doctrine, the one that was promulgated last year in November. At that time, the CIA, when reading this nuclear doctrine and considering the fact that Joe Biden was about to give permission to the Ukrainians to use America provided ATACMS missiles to strike into the strategic depth of Russia, the CIA said there’s a better than 50% chance there will be a nuclear war by the end of the year. That’s the CIA, that’s not Scott Ritter talking. You know, the sky is falling, That’s the CIA given a cold-hearted assessment that if we allow Ukraine to strike Russia strategically using American-provided weapons, Russia could very well use nuclear weapons in response.

What the Russians are very good at doing is letting actions speak for themselves, and what we’ve seen over the course of the past week is Russia has begun the deliberate targeting and destruction, not just a signal. In the past they’ve sent a cruise missile in (to Ukraine) to blow up a workshop here, a workshop there, to send a signal, we know what’s going on. Now they’re coming in and levelling facilities. They’ve levelled an electronics facility, American-made Flex, they’ve taken out the facility that was built by the Germans to produce long range missiles, including analogues of the Taurus. And they’re showing that their intelligence is impeccable, meaning that they can track material into Ukraine and target it before it becomes operational. And this should be a lesson to anybody talking about the ERAM (missile), it will never be used. They’re going to show up in airfields in western Ukraine and the Russians will deploy the weapon systems necessary to take them out.”

Watch; Douglas Macgregor: Ukraine War Is Over & NATO Exhausted Itself; Glenn Diesen 13 August 2025

Douglas Macgregor; “Well, I think we have to understand that there really is no strategy on the Western side. There is a wish list. And the people in charge had decided early on in Western Europe and in the United States that Russia presented a threat to globalism, a threat to their plans for Europe and their plans here in the United States. The same people that want the borders open and have invited millions of non-Europeans into the Western world for the purpose of essentially destroying what I would call the core populations of Europe and the United States. They’re the ones that want desperately destroy Russia. It’s a very interesting connection. Now I think it’s failed, it’s winding down in terms of the war with Russia. But why? Why Russia? Well, Russia was this tasty morsel that everyone had wanted to consume back in the 1990s. When things fell apart, everyone poured in. When I say everyone, who are we talking about? We talking about the financial capitalists, the people that make money through transaction fees by buying up things, dismantling them and selling them off. People like this man Browder, who is very prominent in his criticism of President Putin. President Putin emerges at a very important point in the history of Russia because up until that point, Russia was essentially defenseless, naked in the face of all of these people determined to destroy it. And when I say destroy, I mean break it up, take whatever there is of value, using any lever that they had, whether it was organised crime or or direct influence from states. The idea was you break it up and you steal the 40 trillion plus resources and whatever is left over, you set up a puppet regime, you install somebody just as we installed the regime in Kiev in 2014 and have subsequently installed other leaders. That was the plan for Russia. We’ll do to Russia what we’ve done to Ukraine. And Ukraine was simply a useful tool, that’s all. Well, that’s all failed now, that’s not going to happen. But we in the West, in Western Europe, in the United States, we’re stuck with the 10s of millions of people that were introduced into our countries that we didn’t ask for, that we didn’t want and we can’t employ and we can’t pay for. So what is going to happen? I think the whole shift is going to be away from Russia at some point, and it’s all going to become internal. And when that occurs, all these governments, Vance’s government, Macron, Starmer, everyone, they’ll all be swept away, which needs to happen. I think to some extent, President Putin has exercised restraint and patience because he’s awaiting this development. He’s not foolish or stupid, he knows what’s going on in the West, he’s one of the few in Moscow that has a real appreciation and understanding for what’s happening in the West. So he’s probably counselled people privately, look, let’s stand by, don’t be excited, don’t try to launch any major offenses, we’ll grind forward, we’ll atrit this army until it doesn’t exist and then we’ll take whatever we think we have to to secure Russia. And again, he’s never been interested in governing non-Russians.That’s one of the things that nobody seems to get because of the media and the lies that everybody tells at the top of the political structures. There’s no interest in going into Europe, he doesn’t want to rule any Western Ukrainians, that would be a headache on a scale that we can’t even begin to imagine. He knows that, he doesn’t want anything to do with it. He’s been looking for people that are willing to step up and say, look this war is over, you get to keep what you’ve won which is Russian anyway, now its up to us to deal with the Ukrainians. He’s been hoping that that would happen, in Warsaw, in Berlin, in Bratislava, in Budapest. It hasn’t happened yet but I think we’re getting closer. But the reason it hasn’t happened is because of us.”

Violent, racist, ultra-nationalist, neo-nazi Ukrainian fascists have been weaponised against Russia by US/UK/EU warmongering politicians and predatory businesses like BlackRock that has already grabbed huge areas of Ukrainian farmland.

Watch; French monitor: Ukraine, NATO provoked Russia in Donbas war; Aaron Maté, The Grayzone, 19 August 2025

‘Benoit Paré is a former French defence ministry analyst who worked as an international monitor in eastern Ukraine from 2015 to 2022. In his first interview with a US outlet, Paré speaks to The Grayzone’s Aaron Maté about the hidden reality of the Ukraine war in the Donbas region, where the US-backed Kyiv government fought Russia-backed rebels following the 2014 Maidan coup. Russia now demands that Ukraine accept its capture of the Donbas as a condition for ending the war.’

Benoit Paré; “From 2015, there was a law passed by the Ukrainian parliament, which I mentioned in my book, basically it was a law that was primarily meant to forbid signs of communism, so then throughout Ukraine, they they started to dismantle statues of Lenin. They started to even change the names of every village, every single street that was linked to the history of the USSR. They changed everything, but also within the same law they actually wrote an article about the the fact that symbolism of Nazism would be forbidden as well, so maybe they did that because Western governments advised them to do so because the fact that Azov was portraying a Nazi symbol was already well known back in 2015. So I guess Western powers probably advised them please delete these Nazi symbols because it doesn’t help us to sell the narrative of the freedom fighters of Ukraine that defend democracy against the the Russian barbarians. But once Russia launched its Special Major Operation 2022, if you looked carefully at Telegram channels, you could say that the discreet Nazi symbols starting to appear again on the uniforms of the Ukrainian armed forces, but they were not as obvious as the swastikas, swastikas are too obvious so they would use all the means like the Black Sun and other symbols. Some of the symbols I didn’t even know myself were associated to Nazism before I went to Ukraine and I just found it later on when I was exposed to them and when I read about them.”

Aaron Maté; ” And it’s also my understanding that they renamed streets after Nazi collaborators.”

Benoit Paré; “From what I read they they started to call streets after Bandera, which was pretty common in W Ukraine, also after people you could consider as war criminals who are known to have ordered or participated in major war crimes in 1943.

The Ukrainian parliament voted what they call the Law for Reintegration of Donbas. It was the first draft was published at the end of 2017. And in that first draft, there was even an article that specified that the Ukrainian government would actually sue everyone who collaborated with the so-called occupation authorities. And the way it was worded, you could assume that they could even allow themselves to arrest cleaning ladies in kindergarten because they were paid by the separatist authorities. So that’s a form of collaboration with the occupation authorities. So they could arrest tens of thousands of people if they wanted to with this article. After tremendous pressure from the Western powers, eventually the Ukrainian authorities withdrew that article. But as it was confirmed to me, but one member of Parliament afterwards, OK, the article was withdrawn, but it was not replaced by any article mentioning an amnesty, which meant that the authorities would reserve themselves a right to do whatever they wanted to arrest people if they wanted to. Nothing would prevent them from doing so. So if you are a separatist, you know that the intent of the Ukrainian authorities is to arrest every single one of them. You know that from the end of 2017. How can you trust them you can in government? How can could they just become in government to basically grant them this amnesty in case they got control of the border first? First of all it was a non starter. It was for me a pretext when they came up with this reasoning. It was for me, not this pretext, that they would never implement the Minsk agreement. And when I heard Zelensky repeat the same argument as Poroshenko again told myself, OK, the Minsk agreement is dead once and for all, even with Zelensky, even with majority. And that was December 2019. Yes, and what’s happening during that and what’s happening during that time in the US in December 2019, that’s when Democrats are impeaching Trump after he pauses some weapons to Ukraine. And that’s when people like Adam Schiff are getting up in Congress and saying that the United States aids Ukraine so that we can fight Russia over there and we don’t have to fight Russia here. The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there and we don’t have to fight Russia here. And that cements his consensus inside the US that the proxy war in Ukraine should go on. And that sends a message to Zelensky that he has no US backing for the Minsk accords and to make peace. So you had a convergence of the pro-war forces in the US and Ukraine that further undermines Minsk.”

Grayzone heroes all speak about War in Ukraine and Near East

Watch; The Grayzone LIVE at Icarus Fest 2025 – Session 1, The Grayzone, 23 August 2025

Join us for the first of a series of panel discussions with The Grayzone and friends at Icarus Fest in Rutherford, NJ featuring:

MAX BLUMENTHAL
AARON MATÉ
JUDGE NAPOLITANO
GLENN DIESEN
KATIE HALPER
ANYA PARAMPIL
SABBY SABS
WYATT REED
JEREMY LOFFREDO
KIT KLARENBERG
CHRISTIAN PARENTI
THADDEUS RUSSELL

Please donate

Forgive me for pointing out that, while we receive some one-off donations, I am funding Farms Not Factories myself, and if we are to continue to fight the cruel, antibiotic-led factory farm system, we will need some regular donations from like-minded people. Please consider a monthly subscription of £2/month and help us support a network of smaller scale, humane and healthy UK pig farms, local abattoirs and butchers.

“Our message is simple, we want to help bring an end to this dangerous, inhumane system. Vote for real farming over factory farming.”
– Tracy Worcester, Director

Share This Article

Related ArticlesView All

October 31st, 2025
0
Find A Farmer

The purpose of our newsletter is to give you important information that is censored in the mainstream media. “The way… Read More

Newsletter
October 3rd, 2025
1
Zionist Money Rules

The purpose of our newsletter is to give you important information that is censored in the mainstream media. “The way… Read More

Newsletter
July 1st, 2025
0
Silencing Dissent Through Fear

The purpose of my newsletter is to give you important information that is censored in the mainstream media. If you… Read More

Newsletter
May 30th, 2025
1
Ukraine and Israel – A United Force

The purpose of my newsletter is to give you important information that is censored in the mainstream media. If you… Read More

Newsletter
May 2nd, 2025
0
Buy From UK Farms, Or Lose Them

The purpose of my newsletter is to give you important information that is censored in the mainstream media. If you… Read More

Newsletter
March 28th, 2025
0
Group Think

The purpose of my newsletter is to give you important information that is censored in the mainstream media. If you… Read More

Newsletter