The Expose News

[expose-news]

Lessons from Sweden: After mass immigration comes the Orwellian state security system

Using his personal experience of what has happened to his neighbourhood in Sweden over the decades,  Jacob Nordangård describes how mass immigration leads to the Agentic State and a global panopticon.

The Fortress World Scenario is starting to take shape, and the average citizen has been manipulated into embracing it with open arms, he writes.

The Agentic State is a global action platform which assists governments in moving societies towards total digital control using agentic AI, an artificial intelligence system that can accomplish a specific goal with limited human supervision.

A panopticon is a circular building with a central inspection house or tower, a design most famously used for prisons.  It has become a metaphor for societal control.

In the Fortress World Scenario, “as the systemic global crisis deepens, powerful international forces are able to impose order in the form of an authoritarian system of global apartheid with elites in protected enclaves and an impoverished majority outside.”

The lesson from Sweden is that these dystopian plans are being imposed on societies after mass immigration has been allowed to take hold.

Swedish Gang Wars Trigger the Construction of the Orwellian Security State

By Jacob Nordangård

The surveillance state isn’t something coming in some distant future. It is already here and has been gradually implemented over the last couple of decades. But the speed is intensifying and is being justified with a familiar modus operandi (problem–reaction–solution).

In my hometown, Norrköping, a gang war has erupted with its epicentre just a few blocks away from my apartment in a small district nicknamed “Biafra” (after the Nigerian Civil War 1967–70). It used to be a poor working-class district with two-story houses in rendered wood, with only cold running water and a privy in the courtyard. But despite its shortcomings in comfort, it was a small-scale area full of life, with ten grocery stores and a small hat shop.

A street in the old district “Gjuteriet.” All buildings in the picture were demolished in the late 1960s and replaced by large concrete blocks.

In the mid-sixties, eight blocks were demolished to make way for modernity. Around one hundred houses were replaced by six gigantic residential buildings, a kindergarten and a supermarket. It was a part of the “million programme,” a public housing project implemented by the governing Social Democrat Party with the aim of solving Sweden’s housing shortage and poor living standards. It was built on the idea of large-scale technocratic efficiency and the urban planning philosophies of Swiss-French architect Le Corbusier, with the intent to wipe out almost everything reminiscent of the past.

The picturesque “Red Town” in front of the concrete ghetto “Biafra”. The houses in the Red Town are all painted in the traditional Swedish “Falu red” (iron oxide red from the copper mine in Falun), hence the name.

This had a devastating effect on the old cityscape. In the neighbouring “Red Town” (built as emergency housing during the First World War), the area had begun to be expropriated to give room for even larger concrete buildings.

About 80 % of the old city centre in Norrköping was knocked down between 1965 and 1975 and replaced by new sterile modernist buildings and demolition sites/parking lots. It was not uncommon for visiting foreigners to ask if the city had been bombed during the Second World War.

However, the picturesque “Red Town” was saved, and the area is now protected and very popular.

If the oil crisis in the early 1970s hadn’t put a halt to the large-scale plans, coinciding with ever louder protests from local residents, probably nothing would have remained of the older city except for some churches, schools and public buildings.

The rebuilt Old Town in Gdansk with the characteristic The Crane (Żuraw).

For comparison, I recently visited Gdansk in Poland, where 90% of the city centre was destroyed in the war. However, parts of the city centre were rebuilt in the old style, which today attracts many tourists.

The building complex "Presidenten" and the old "Industrilandskapet" in Norrköping.

The same cannot be said about Norrköping’s rebuilt cityscape. The tourists mainly visit the old “Industrial Landscape,” comprising late 19th century factory buildings located along the river from the time when Norrköping was a major textile industry (described as Sweden’s Manchester).

As the nickname “Biafra” suggests, the new district soon fell into disrepute. Despite well-planned apartments with a relatively high standard, it was rejected by all who could afford to live elsewhere. Instead, it would become a breeding ground for drug dealing and crime. It became reserved for the less fortunate. Unemployment was rising during the seventies after the closure of the last textile factories.

Le Corbusier’s technocratic utopia was to become populated by alcoholics, drug addicts, people on social welfare, students and refugees. But it wasn’t until the past decade that the district began to make headlines in Swedish media.

https://youtu.be/iChPRQCVLio Kalle Groda: Fredrik Reinfeldt Öppna era hjärtan (Fredrik Reinfeldt Open your hearts), 25 September 2014 (3 mins).  The video is in Swedish but auto-generated subtitles in English and other languages are available.

In August 2014, Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt (from the Liberal-Conservative Moderate Party) declared in a speech to the nation that Swedes had to open their hearts to people “fleeing towards Europe, fleeing towards freedom, fleeing towards better conditions.”1 This would leave no room for further reforms as the state budget would be strained.

After losing the election in September 2014, Reinfeldt left it to his successors from the opposition to deal with what was to come – the largest and fastest wave of refugees since World War II. In April 2025, it was dubbed “the European refugee crisis.” Sweden was one of the most generous European countries and accepted 163,000 asylum seekers in one year, a large portion of whom came from war-torn countries such as Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Eritrea and Somalia.2 A staggering amount for a country with a population of less than 10 million.

However, this became too much for the Swedish system to handle. The governing Social Democrats and the progressive Green Party were forced to abandon Sweden’s generous “open border” policy. In November 2015, tighter border control and stricter asylum rules were introduced.

Åsa Romson (Green Party) and Prime Minister Stefan Löfvén (Social Democrats) present the new migration policy.

Meanwhile, private companies, “the immigration-industrial complex,” made substantial profits on solving the refugee challenges with tax-subsidised government contracts.3 Among these profiteers were found former critics of large-scale immigration.4

Asylum applications in the European Union (EU) and European Free Trade Association (EFTA) states between 1 January and 30 June 2015, according to Eurostat data.

Many of the migrants were moved from temporary refugee camps into the old “million programme” areas, as few other options were available. The large inflow of new citizens also supported a building boom, which had been prepared well in advance by the previous Reinfeldt administration and was coupled with less restrictive building rules and weakened protections for cultural heritage.

However, it soon became clear that (even though a tiny minority) not all migrants were peaceful and had the best intentions in mind. Criminal networks and gangs were soon established, taking control of many of the migrant-dominated areas. The most well-known was the “Foxtrot network” with its leader Rawa Majid (aka the “Kurdish Fox”), who recruited young teenagers and children to commit serious crimes.

Many immigrant-dense areas became “no-go zones” and were labelled “vulnerable areas” by the Swedish authorities in 2015. Bombings and shootings have since become the new normal. According to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, “between 2018 and 2025, reported bomb-related crimes increased from 162 to 621 crimes per year across the country”.5 Sweden is now one of the countries in Western Europe with the highest rate of gun violence.

It is a development I never could have imagined growing up in the peaceful Sweden of the seventies and eighties.

Bombed entrance in Norrköping, November 2025.

At the same time, the right-wing populist Sweden Democrats (“SD”) doubled their voter base and in 2022 became the second largest party. This meant an abrupt change in immigration and security policy, with the large rival parties adopting policies similar to the SD. The new government, now again headed by the Liberal-Conservative Moderate Party and supported by SD, came to power promising to curb organised crime and “dramatically increase the number of surveillance cameras.”

Election poster for the Moderate Party with the title: “Now we will handle crime.”

The new Prime Minister, Ulf Kristersson, would, ironically, come to power by solving a problem that his predecessor and party colleague Reinfeldt had helped create through the open border policy. But now it was, “No more Mr. Nice Guy.”

Police blockades after a shooting outside of “Biafra.”

In 2023 and 2024, the gang war in Norrköping reached its peak with two deadly shootings within a short walking distance from my house (the latest deadly shooting was at Walpurgis Night this year). CCTV cameras were installed to oversee my street in early 2024. This was followed by the introduction of the first Swedish “security zone” in Norrköping from April to June 2024.6 CCTV cameras can now be found on all the main streets and will be followed by hundreds more after a decision by the City Council in February this year.7

CCTV-tower watching over “Biafra.”

And the cameras can now be used more efficiently with AI-technology. In May 2026, the Swedish parliament decided that facial recognition would be allowed “if it is absolutely necessary to locate or identify a specific person.” At this stage only to detect and prevent serious crimes (danger to the lives of other people) or to find and identify missing persons. A court decision will be needed but can, in case of emergency, be applied for retrospectively.8

But this will most likely change as the CCTV cameras and facial recognition technologies are planned to be a part of the coming financial-social credit system, always watching and evaluating human behaviour. Prerequisites for the Agentic State and a global panopticon.

https://youtu.be/9tqU4ZbTK_k UAE Nation: You Can Pay with Your Face! 23 June 2025

The constant crises have supported the development and public support of this Orwellian security state, with the gang wars in areas like “Biafra” acting as triggers to reshape our cities into well-guarded and monitored “prison facilities.” Once again with profit to be made (this time by the Security Industrial Complex).

An old, deep-rooted fear of foreigners has been exploited by allowing excessive quotas of refugees from far-off countries and cultures, dismissing all criticism as racism and then harnessing the suppressed power of an increasingly discontented population.

When the paradigm shifts and the government finally responds to the “wishes of the people” by imposing far-reaching restrictions on people’s privacy to create a safe society, the common man experiences this as a victory over the weak Leftist paradigm that gave rise to the chaos.

This means that the totalitarian police state, once again, is implemented with the mandate of the people. This is how Machiavellian strategy works.

The Fortress World Scenario is starting to take shape, and the average citizen has been manipulated into embracing it with open arms. Few will question being monitored 24/7 as it will “make the world safe again.” It is time to wake up!

https://youtu.be/sqvyOvRLsaU Wardenclyffe: Wardenclyffe - HAL

Find out more about the future world system in my books ‘The Digital World Brain’and‘Temple of Solomon’. Order directly from Pharos Media.

Notes: - 1 Dagens Nyheter (2014), “Reinfeldt: Öppna era hjärtan för de utsatta” - 2 Migrationsverket (2025), “Ten years since 2015 – what happened?” - 3 SVT Nyheter (2015), “Många ser chansen att tjäna pengar på asylboenden” - 4 Dagens Samhälle (2016), “Jokarjo på väg mot miljardomsättning” - 5 Brottsförebyggande rådet (2026), “Statistik om sprängningar” (statistics on bombings) - 6 Polisen (2025), “Security Zones: General Information” - 7 Norrköpings Tidningar (2026), “Politisk enighet kring gemensamt trygghetspaket” - 8 Riksdagen (2026), “Police may use AI for real-time facial recognition” About the Author

Jacob Nordangård is a Swedish independent researcher and author who has studied and written about the complexity of world politics, world governance, and problem and solution creation.  He has written several books about the global agenda and power play, including ‘Rockefeller: Controlling the Game’ (2024), ‘The Global Coup d’État’ (2024) and ‘Temple of Solomon’ (2024).  His latest book, ‘The Digital World Brain’ (2026),can be ordered from Pharos Media (English version) and Etica Media (German version).

Featured image taken from ‘What expats need to know: How Sweden’s immigration laws are changing in 2025’, Dispatches Europe, 1 September 2025

[expose-news]

Belfast riots: Northern Irish have had enough, Government responds by seeking more censorship

Violent disorder erupted across Belfast and other parts of Northern Ireland for a second consecutive night on Wednesday, 10 June 2026. The disorder was triggered by the brutal knife attack on a disabled man by a Sudanese refugee.

The UK government’s response?  To amend the Online Safety Act to increase censorship and to further limit what information the public has access to.

Stephen Ogilvie, an Irishman in his 40s, was attacked by Hadi Alodid, a 30-year-old Sudanese national.  It wasn’t just a brutal stabbing incident.  It was something far more horrific. In the video circulating online, the attacker can be seen trying to decapitate his victim.  But the attacker was stopped by three men intervening,  one hitting the attacker with a wooden hurling stick as others kicked him to try to force him to release his victim.

Ogilvie has suffered life-changing injuries, including the loss of his left eye and severe damage to his right eye, face and back.  He remains in the hospital in serious but stable condition.

Alodid has been charged with attempted murder, possession of a knife in a public place and threats to kill.

To bypass UK border controls, people smugglers have been using the Common Travel Area - which allows free movement between Ireland and Northern Ireland without routine immigration checks - to move illegal immigrants into the UK.  Smugglers advertise a "backdoor" route where migrants fly to Dublin, Ireland, often using fake IDs or visas, and are instructed to enter the UK by taking a bus to Belfast, Northern Ireland, to claim asylum. This is how Alodid entered Northern Ireland in 2023. A few months after illegally entering Northern Ireland, Alodid claimed asylum, was given refugee status and leave to remain in the UK.

As Brendan in the video below says, the Northern Irish are “fed up.”

“We know the truth,” he says. “There’s kids getting chased all over the city and raped. There’s an influx of drugs and foreign men and criminals … mass deportations.  If anybody comes in here in the last ten years, it’s not so good for the country, they shouldn’t f**king be here.”

https://twitter.com/europa/status/2064817842856378812

The man in the video below quite rightly blames UK government policies for what’s happened.

https://twitter.com/HoodedClaw1974/status/2064748571639926831

And the caller in the video below tells TalkTV, "Our government is complicit in bringing these people into the country … Governments in the West are pushing this to push the digital ID through."

https://twitter.com/wideawake_media/status/2064956641313739143

And the caller below tells TalkTV that the “political class are not listening” so what else can people do?

https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/2064996839456202988

Protests are not only happening in various parts of Northern Ireland.  Yesterday, an anti-immigration rally was also held in Dublin.

Jim Ferguson posted a video of the protest, saying, “Footage from Dublin shows protesters expressing solidarity with the people of Belfast as demonstrations continue to spread. For generations, politicians spoke of the divisions between North and South. Today, many are pointing to something different: People on both sides of the border finding common cause on immigration, national identity and the future of their countries,” he said.

https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/2064998407874203755

As Ferguson noted in another tweet, “What is emerging is bigger than a single protest. Bigger than a single city. And potentially bigger than the politicians who thought they could simply ride out the storm.”

https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/2065003196745941442

And he quite rightly pointed out that for politicians, the problem is not the crime.  “The biggest problem is that people saw the video,” Ferguson said.  “They saw the attack. They drew their own conclusions. Now politicians appear more concerned about the reaction than the reason for it.”

https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/2064993317545205992

And so, what has the UK government's response been?  Just as after the horrific Southport murders, the Government’s solution is censorship.  People who are talking about the crime will be targeted instead of the criminals. How?  By using the Online Safety Act … again.

The Labour government has announced plans to amend the Online Safety Act to grant regulator Ofcom enhanced powers to crack down on social media content during "times of crisis," a move triggered by the unrest following the Belfast knife attack, GB News reported yesterday.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall stated the changes will require platforms to take quicker action to remove illegal content that could incite violence or disorder, specifically targeting material amplified by figures like Elon Musk.

The proposal has sparked a censorship row and potential clash over free speech, with critics including Reform UK’s Matt Goodwin arguing ministers should address root causes like immigration policy rather than policing online discourse, the Daily Mail reported.

Noting the Daily Mail’s article, Bernie Spofforth tweeted, “The time between conspiracy theory and fact is now about 6 hours in the UK.”  Hours earlier, she had posted the tweet below saying:

“After what happened in Belfast, the emerging progressive argument seems to be that people are angry because social media allowed too many people to see the video. In other words, people would not be angry if they did not know. And that is exactly the point.

“Without full knowledge and information, people are far easier to control. Net Zero becomes 'necessary' because no one sees the cost. Climate change becomes unquestionable because the BBC says so.

“What I take from this is simple: censorship of information is every bit as important as censorship of speech. Because if people cannot compare notes, they cannot form conclusions. And if they cannot form conclusions, they cannot resist.

“This is not a moral stance they have taken. It is a political one. Those who believe their worldview is the only acceptable worldview will always end up justifying oppression, because they convince themselves they are doing it for your own good.

“The danger of the internet was never simply that it allowed people to speak. It was that it allowed people to know. And once the public knows too much, those who want control will conclude that knowledge itself is dangerous.

“That is why the fight for free speech is also a fight for free information.

“The battle now is not only over speech. It is over knowledge, information, and who gets to decide what the public is allowed to understand.”

https://twitter.com/Artemisfornow/status/2064664569646055523

Featured image: Hadi Alodid attacking Stephen Ogilvie in Belfast, Northern Ireland, on 8 June 2026.  Source: BBC

[expose-news]

Migration is Now a National Security Issue, Confirms UK Terror Watchdog

Jonathan Hall KC, the independent terrorism legislation reviewer for the UK, said migration should be treated as a national security issue. Days of disorder have followed a knife attack in Belfast by a Sudanese asylum seeker, leading to Hall's claims that it's "absolutely legitimate" to discuss migration in the context of national security, adding that the issue carries "huge ramifications".

The uproar in Northern Ireland follows a brutal attack on Stephen Ogilvie, a man in his forties, in the Kinnaird Avenue area of north Belfast on Monday night. Hadi Alodid, a 30-year-old Sudanese asylum seeker, later appeared in Belfast Magistrates' Court charged with attempted murder, possession of a knife in a public place, and making threats to kill an NHS radiographer. The court heard that Mr Ogilvie suffered serious injuries to his face and back, and has lost his left eye.

Sudanese Asylum Seeker Charged in Brutal Attack as Terror Watchdog Highlights National Security Concerns

One summary of the attack suggests:

"An innocent Scotish resident, Stephen Ogilvy, who is partially deaf, was helping a Sudanese 'asylum seeker' move into his residence. The migrant, Hadi Alodid, had entered the UK in 2023 and got a five-year pass to seek 'asylum.' For unknown reasons, the migrant grabbed Ogilvy, began slashing him with a knife, gouging out one eye and severely damaging the other, slashed his knife all over Ogilvy's face, and then began to cut Ogilvy's head off in the street."

"He was intercepted by locals, one of whom hit him over the head with a shovel, saving Ogilvy's life. Ogilvy's alive, but gets to go through life not just nearly deaf, but nearly blind, too."

Alodid appeared by video link and was assisted by an Arabic interpreter. The court was told that he had refused legal representation, had no local ties or employment, and that he'd told hospital staff that he had killed someone. Bail was refused, with District Judge Steven Keown citing concerns over public safety, flight risk, and future disorder. The case was adjourned until 8th July.

The Home Office has confirmed that Alodid was granted leave to remain in the UK until 2028 to seek asylum. He was originally granted refugee status in 2023, after entering the country through the Common Travel Area. Chief Constable Jon Boutcher said Alodid had travelled from sudan to Paris, then Dublin, and finally Belfast, and that he had no previous record on UK security databases.

Rather than address the attempted beheading itself, officials instead took to X to express their horror at the resulting attacks. Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said on X: "I am horrified by the disorder and racist violence in Belfast last night. Far too often now, we see extremists exploiting people's anger and grief to spread hatred and violence - with the help of divisive algorithms on social media. This has to stop."

In this clip, Davey and Starmer agree with one another that X is responsible for creating the violence. The mainstream narrative points to a racist response by locals, but condemns linking the attack itself to race or background. It's not just in the UK however: similar attacks are being reported on social media (and not by mainstream media outlets) in countries such as Italy.

The public argument has quickly split into two camps. One side wants to speak about racist disorder, treating the original attack as nothing more than a trigger. The other side focuses on the suspect's migration status, the emergence of an ongoing pattern, and are treating the attacks on homes as a predictable consequence.

Fascinatingly, when terrorism watchdog Jonathan Hall spoke of the attack, he referred back to Trump's earlier warnings. He said the risk to national security from mass migration had been flagged by Donald Trump in his national security strategy in November last year. Hall is quoted saying " said, in perhaps rather overblown rhetoric that there's this destabilisation of Europe, and he put an awful lot of that down to migration," he said.

"Now, you may not agree with the language, but I think it does raise the question. If certain countries are more likely either to commit very serious offences or particular offences, or to get involved with state threat activity, do we need to start thinking about migration now, not simply in terms of the economy and housing, but also in terms of national security?

“Ultimately, national security is to help the nation, and having a stable nation where people feel they can go about their business. At the moment, there are people who happen to be black and brown, but as British as you and me, who probably feel they can’t go about that business, and that is destabilising the nation.

“So, I think it’s absolutely necessary to talk about immigration in the context of national security. I think it’s a conversation that has been raised by the US White House. At the moment, I haven’t yet heard a response, I’ve just heard silence.”

[expose-news]

Juryless trials will be complex, time consuming and lead to inequalities, the UK Justice Committee says

At the end of last year, Justice Secretary David Lammy proposed scrapping jury trials for most offences in England and Wales, restricting the right to a jury primarily to cases involving murder, rape and manslaughter.

Under the announced “reforms,” defendants facing sentences of three years or less would be tried by a panel of newly empowered magistrates or a sole judge, depending on whether the length of the “likely” sentence is two or three years in jail, bypassing the traditional jury system.

This will be complex, time consuming and lead to inequalities in how justice is delivered, a scathing report from the Justice Committee said.

Yesterday, the Justice Committee published its report on David Lammy’s plan to fundamentally reshape how justice is delivered in England and Wales. 

The reforms include doing away with trial by jury and replacing it with magistrate and judge only trials.  Together with other proposed “reforms,” the report concludes that this will be complex, time consuming and lead to unintended consequences such as inequalities in how justice is delivered.

References to jury trial or judge only trials can be found in the sections of the report titled:

- ‘The Crown Court’ (pages 42-61), - ‘Equality: The introduction of judge only trials in the Crown Court’ (pages 66-72), and - ‘Conclusions and recommendations: Time saving in judge only trials’ (pages 88-96).

If the entire 115-page report feels overwhelmingly lengthy, at the beginning of the report is a 3-page summary which is well worth reading.  It includes the following:

The Courts and Tribunals Bill represents the most significant change to the criminal courts in over fifty years. The bill’s central proposals, including the removal of a defendant’s right to elect a Crown Court trial, the expanding of magistrates’ sentencing powers, reforming the appeals process and introducing judge only trials in the Crown Court, will fundamentally reshape how justice is delivered in England and Wales.

Given both the generational significance and the contested nature of the reforms, it is difficult to understand why a broader consensus, within Parliament and beyond, was not sought before the bill was introduced.

The government is proposing that it should be able to change the maximum sentencing power of magistrates by statutory instrument, with limited parliamentary oversight, to one of four options. This could lead to frequent and novel changes in magistrates’ sentencing powers.

On the introduction of judge only trials in the Crown Court, we conclude that the allocation processes as designed are likely to be complex, time consuming and will lead to unintended consequences … We also raise concerns that the predicted 20% time saving of judge only trials lacks a concrete evidential basis.

We share the significant concerns of many in the justice sector around the potential equality impacts of the bill, particularly in relation to race … The bill proposes to expand the role of both the magistrates’ court and judge only Crown Court proceedings, while reducing the role of juries. The Lammy review, in 2017, concluded that juries are one of the few areas of the criminal justice system where black and ethnic minority defendants do not face disproportionate outcomes.

Courts and Tribunals Bill, First Report of Session 2026–27, Justice Committee, 10 June 2026

Yesterday, Free Speech Union brought attention to this report in a tweet, which we have reproduced below.

Tweet by Free Speech Union

The House of Commons Justice Committee has delivered its verdict on the Government’s plans to slash our ancient right to trial by jury.

It is scathing - and will make tough reading for the Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary, David Lammy.

The Government has introduced the most sweeping constitutional reforms to the criminal justice system in years at breakneck speed, despite not having promised them in its manifesto. It seems to be allergic to scrutiny.

The Justice Secretary claims that curbing our precious right to jury trial will save Crown Court time and reduce the backlog of cases. Yet the Committee acknowledges that there is no concrete evidential basis for this claim. In fact, the Institute for Government has said the reforms would save only 2 per cent of court time, not the 20 per cent ministers have promised.

David Lammy’s 2017 review found that juries are one of the few parts of the criminal justice system where black and minority ethnic defendants do not face disproportionate outcomes. This Bill reduces the role of juries while simultaneously expanding that of the judiciary, despite only 1 per cent of Crown Court judges being black.

Back in December 2025, Lammy himself said the reforms would not be applied retrospectively. That is no longer the case. Defendants expecting a jury trial could now have their mode of trial changed without a hearing.

The Free Speech Union’s research has shown that those accused of speech-related offences are almost twice as likely to be found not guilty in the Crown Court before a jury than in a magistrates’ court without one.

Judges, lawyers, opposition MPs, Labour MPs, and even victims of crime have warned that David Lammy’s reforms will undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system.

We must defend our right to trial by jury.

Read the Justice Committee’s report: Courts and Tribunals Bill

Further reading from The Exposé:

- The Need for Sovereign Government Control - Juryless trials are not a solution for Crown Court backlogs; they are a step toward centralised control - UK dictatorship is attempting to scrap jury trials – Who really benefits? - Limiting or eliminating the right to a trial by jury is a goal of tyrants

Featured image: David Lammy in the House of Commons

[expose-news]

Dr. John Clauser: The IPCC is one of the worst sources of dangerous misinformation

Dr. John Clauser, the 2022 Nobel Prize laureate in Physics, was a speaker at Quantum Korea 2023, an event where he addressed an audience of scientists and government officials, describing the proliferation of the perception of truth and pseudoscience.

He told the gathering that "there is no real climate crisis,” climate change does not cause extreme weather events and the IPCC is “one of the worst sources of dangerous misinformation.”

Dr. John Clauser, an American experimental and theoretical physicist, shared the Nobel Prize for experiments confirming that quantum mechanics was correct, a foundational achievement in quantum information science that took over 50 years to be fully recognised.

On 26 June 2023, he gave a speech at Quantum Korea 2023, which was hosted by South Korea’s Ministry of Science and ICT and Korea University, aiming to establish the country as a global hub for quantum expertise.

https://youtu.be/TGrMvlxEQGk CO2 Coalition: Nobel Laureate Dr. John Clauser | Quantum Korea 2023, 24 July 2023 (13 mins)

If the video above is removed from YouTube, you can watch it on Rumble HERE.

Further reading: 2022 Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr. John Clauser declares his climate dissent: ‘There is no real climate crisis’ – Warns ‘climate science has metastasised into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience’, Climate Depot, 13 July 2023

Transcript

Oh, I hope there wasn’t a significant miscommunication in the invitation for this particular talk, I’m going to give it another one later on – the keynote address.

I was asked for the first to make some brief remarks as inspiration to young Korean scientists. I’m not sure, wasn’t sure how to do that, so here’s my best shot at it, and it really has very little to do with quantum technology, but here are my inspirational thoughts.

A long time ago, actually my whole life, I have been an experimental physicist. Have had the distinct privilege of literally being able to talk to God, even though I’m an atheist. In a physics laboratory, I am able to ask carefully posed mathematically-based questions and correspondingly observe universal truth. To do so, I make careful measurements of natural phenomena.

In the physics laboratory, I once settled the debate between Einstein and Schrodinger on one hand, Niels Bohr and John von Neumann on the other. In a laboratory, I asked a simple question: which one of these two groups was right? And which one was wrong?

I didn’t know ahead of time what answer I would get. I just knew I could get an answer.  Nonetheless, I found real truth, for the answer. I assert that real truth can only be found by carefully observing natural phenomena.

Good science is always based on good experiments. Good observations always overrule purely speculative theory. Sloppy experiments, on the other hand, are frequently counterproductive and provide scientific disinformation. That is why good scientists repeat each other’s experiments carefully.

For inspiration to young scientists, I would suggest that today is an opportune moment for careful observations of nature. Why? The current world I observe is literally awash, saturated, with pseudoscience, with bad science, with scientific misinformation and disinformation, and what I will call ”techno-cons.” Techno-cons are the application of scientific disinformation for opportunistic purposes.

Non-science business managers, politicians, politically appointed lab directors and the like are very easily snowed by scientific disinformation. Sometimes they participate in its origination. The purpose is to try to inspire you as young scientists to observe nature directly so that you too can determine real truth. Use the information gained from carefully performed experiments and research to stop the spread of scientific misinformation, disinformation and techno-cons.

Well-educated scientists can help solve the world’s problems by acting as scientific fact-checkers. A fact-checker’s most common problem, unfortunately, is determining what is true and what is not.

The world is awash with someone else’s perception of truth as an alternative to real truth. Perception of truth frequently differs significantly from real truth. Moreover, given sufficient promotion and advertising, perception of truth becomes truth.

Its promotion by commercial enterprise is called marketing, commonly used in the furtherance of political, commercial or various opportunistic ends by its promoters.

When promotion is done by government or political groups, it’s called spin or propaganda.

To such a promoter, perception of truth is truth. If you can sell it, it must be true. If you can’t sell it, it must be false.

Perception of truth is also malleable. If you can sell it, if you want to sell it and you can’t sell it, that’s easy, you change it. You can change truth. You can claim false observations if necessary.

My favourite in this act is ChatGPT. It’s very good at doing exactly that. It has lots of man-made pseudoscience to copy and manipulate and emulate. It can lie and cheat even better than its human mentors, whose writings are abundant in literature. In literature, you will observe there’s far more fiction than there is non-fiction.

Pseudoscience is science fiction. Unfortunately, neither computers nor human fact-checkers can, in general, tell fact from fiction. Or science from science fiction or from pseudoscience.

If Starship Enterprise can fly faster than the speed of light, then it’s gotta be possible, right? All you need is dilithium crystals, right? Wrong.

Real truth is not malleable. It can only be found by making careful observations.

Well-tested laws of physics and observational data are important guides to allow you to distinguish truth from perception of truth.

Now I am not alone in observing the dangerous proliferation of pseudoscience. Recently, the Nobel Foundation has formed a new panel to address the issue called the International Panel on Information Environment. They plan to model it after the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC.

I think personally that they are making a big mistake in that effort because, in my opinion, the IPCC is one of the worst sources of dangerous misinformation. What I’m about to recommend is in furtherance of the aims of that panel.

In the past, we scientists have acted as referees for journal article peer review. And we have peer-reviewed each other’s work, so as just to prevent the proliferation of scientific misinformation. That process recently seems to have broken down. Somehow, it needs to be reenergised.

During my career as a scientist, I have frequently been asked to referee lots of scientific journal articles. Here I will offer a few pieces of advice. First, very importantly, your work should be based on careful observations of nature. You must try hard and recognise what I will call “an elephant in the room hiding in plain sight.” Ask very simple questions. I found an elephant in the room that I will be describing in my keynote address on quantum mechanics.  I have a second elephant in the room that I have recently discovered regarding climate change. I believe that climate change is not a crisis.

Real truth could be found if and only if you learn to recognise and use good science. It’s especially true when real truth is politically incorrect and does not reflect political, business aims or desires of leaders. Even the scientific community can sometimes become diluted by pseudoscience.  Recall, if you want pseudoscience to be true, just simply spin it and it becomes true.

Importantly, a referee must know and use mathematically based physics. A good scientist must also know how to derive and solve differential equations. That was the first thing I learned as an undergraduate at Caltech. Follow the teaching of Sir Isaac Newton. He found that the world is governed by differential equations. He had to invent calculus to do it, but he did it.

A referee must correctly identify the dominant processes. That’s the starting point. The best way to do this is with order-of-magnitude estimates of the various conceivable processes.

One of my examples I can give later, I don’t have time to do it though, regarding climate change, the dominant process, I believe, has been misidentified by factors of 200. So, if you’re off by a factor of a hundred, two hundred, your process is way too small to be important. It’s the big numbers that matter; little numbers can be neglected.

Sometimes people will promote new ideas that are off by factors of a million. They just simply haven’t run the numbers themselves.

The most pathetic part of all this is that they don’t know that they need to know how to do that. Their lack of scientific knowledge allows science, pseudoscience, to promote what I will refer to as techno-cons, political opportunistic aims.

Techo-cons are readily unmasked and identified if you simply apply order of magnitude calculations. Very importantly, a referee must apply good calculus-based statistical methods along with good common sense.

I would also like you to consider methods used by two of my former associates at University of California, Berkeley, Nobel laureates, when they were shown a group of data points and told, “Look, the trend is obvious,” Luis Alvarez, Nobel laureate, would look at it and say, “Flattest line I ever saw.” Charlie Townes would look at it and say, “I don’t see in the data what you’re telling me I’m supposed to see.”

Beware. If you’re doing good science, it may lead you into politically incorrect areas. If you’re a good scientist, you will follow them. I have several, I won’t have time to discuss, but I can confidently say there is no real climate crisis and that climate change does not cause extreme weather events.

Thank you.

[expose-news]

Ebola: Profits, not wild animals, are driving WHO to declare public health emergencies

Ebola is rare and unlikely to cause a pandemic. Despite this, the World Health Organisation has declared the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda a public health emergency of international concern (“PHEIC”).

The true cause of Ebola outbreaks is unlikely to be wild animals, as claimed by the WHO, but rather gain-of-function research being conducted in laboratories across the globe, including in the regions where these outbreaks occur.

Declaring an outbreak as a PHEIC is an opportunity for pharmaceutical companies and researchers to profit from the development of vaccines and therapeutics.

Ebola: Public Health Crisis or Criminal Enterprise?

By New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science (“NZDSOS”), 29 May 2025

Table of Contents

- Introduction - What is Ebola? - Ebola History and Epidemiology - How is Ebolavirus Disease Diagnosed? - How is Ebolavirus Treated? - What Causes an Ebola Outbreak? - Pandemics Profit Pandemic Prophets - Conclusion Introduction

Hot on the tail of hantavirus histrionics, the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) declared on 17 May 2026 that an epidemic of Ebola disease caused by Bundibugyo virus in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda is a public health emergency of international concern (aka a PHEIC).

As the 79th session of the World Health Assembly wrapped up last week, it is easy to see the priorities of WHO in these four brief headlines from the front page of their website. Without frightening diseases, how will the pandemic agreement be reached, or the global health architecture be built?

Image captured for criticism/review and reporting current events under Fair Dealing – The Copyright Act 1994 What is Ebola?

Ebolavirus belongs to the Filovirus family, named for their thread-like appearance under electron microscopy (“filum” is Latin for “thread”). There are six known subtypes, four of which are associated with human disease. It is claimed that wild animals are the source of initial infection, followed by human-to-human transmission via direct contact with the blood and body fluids of an infected person.

Image captured for criticism/review and reporting current events under Fair Dealing – The Copyright Act 1994

Ebolavirus disease (“EVD”) presents initially as an influenza-like illness, followed by vomiting, diarrhoea, skin rash, impaired kidney and liver function, and impaired neurological status with confusion, irritability and aggression. Internal and external bleeding from any organs can occur, but is less frequent than the aforementioned symptoms.

Ebola History and Epidemiology

According to Laurie Garret in ‘The Coming Plague’ (1994), the first case of EVD was detected in August 1976 in a school teacher from Yambuku in Northern Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo or DRC), near the Ebola river. The subsequent outbreak in this region occurred simultaneously with an outbreak in Southern Sudan. A public health investigation dispatched virologists and epidemiologists from their laboratories in Europe and North America into the deep heart of the African continent.

Tissue specimens were sent to laboratories in Europe and the USA to determine a causative agent. On 10 October 1976, scientists at the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention’s maximum-security laboratory in Atlanta officially informed the World Health Organisation that the causative agent was “a virus that resembles Marburg.“

Serial passage experimentation began almost immediately, “passing Ebola samples from one guinea pig to another to see if the virulence of the virus was diminished as it went through successive generations of animals.” A contamination incident in a UK laboratory resulted in at least one researcher becoming unwell and being successfully treated with plasma from a recovered African patient.

Since that time, there have been more than 25 EVD outbreaks involving the loss of 15,000 lives across a fifty-year timespan. Seventeen of these outbreaks have occurred in the DRC, also currently affected, which was also ground zero for Mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) in 2022. Most outbreaks have been confined to rural areas in five of Africa’s 54 countries: Sudan, DRC, Gabon, the Republic of Congo and Uganda.

The Bundibugyo subtype, responsible for the current public health emergency of international concern (“PHEIC”), was first identified in the Bundibugyo region of Uganda during an outbreak in 2007. A second Bundibugyo outbreak followed in the DRC in 2012, and today’s outbreak is the third involving this subtype.

For context, in the year 2024 alone, tuberculosis killed 1.23 million people and malaria killed 610,000 people. The African continent bears the highest burden of these diseases.

How is Ebolavirus Disease Diagnosed?

Clinical symptoms of EVD are difficult to distinguish from other infectious diseases such as malaria, typhoid fever and meningitis, which are endemic to the geographic region where EVD outbreaks sporadically occur. A range of diagnostic tests has been developed to confirm the presence of Ebolavirus.

The World Health Organisation recommends nucleic acid amplification testing (“NAAT”), of which polymerase chain reaction (“PCR”) is a frequently used technique, with genome sequencing to categorise the subtype. As of 22 May 2026, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention recommends PCR testing as below.

Image captured for criticism/review and reporting current events under Fair Dealing – The Copyright Act 1994

It is important to always remember the flaws and potential corruptibility in using PCR to diagnose disease, especially when symptoms may be caused by other, more common endemic diseases. Pseudoepidemics can occur in world-class facilities. A much higher risk exists in locations with limited resources and an abundance of sickness and premature death, especially if panic and fear have been galvanised, as we are witnessing today.

How is Ebolavirus Treated?

Early treatment ensures the best possible outcomes, as with any disease. Hydration management via oral or intravenous fluids is important. Monoclonal antibodies may be useful, depending on the subtype. There has been no research into the benefits of repurposed drugs in Ebola treatment but it seems likely that ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, effective in other RNA virus infections, may be useful. Instead, the World Health Organisation and its sponsors are focused on finding new countermeasures (vaccines and therapeutics) to patent and sell at a profit.

What Causes an Ebola Outbreak?

According to the World Health Organisation, Ebolavirus is “transmitted to people from wild animals (such as fruit bats, porcupines and non-human primates).” Contact with the blood or body fluids of an infected person can then result in human-to-human transmission.

What this assertion ignores, however, is the Ebolavirus gain-of-function research occurring in laboratories across the globe, including across the region where these sporadic outbreaks occur. Such research is always claimed to be for reasons that are in the public’s best interest, for example, to develop countermeasures such as vaccines and therapeutics. Yet the work is shrouded in secrecy.

In a 2015 report on Ebola research at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (“CSIRO”) in Geelong, Victoria, SBS held firmly to the claim that Ebola outbreaks are due to crossover from wild animals. Nevertheless, the same report stated that: “If any of these viruses were to make it out of the lab, it could have deadly consequences.“

In the USA, Rocky Mountain Laboratories in Montana is known to be infecting animals with a range of pandemic-potential viruses, including Ebola. The research involves torturing animals known as maximum-pain virus experiments. The White Coat Waste Project has exposed a number of biosafety breaches in these laboratories which pose a threat to public health, setting aside the welfare of the animals for a moment.

Late last year, during experimentation with Crimean-Congo Haemorrhagic Fever, a staffer was “bitten by an infected monkey (macaque) that was being tortured (infected and sickened with no pain mitigation).” Earlier this year, Vincent Munster, a virologist at the Rocky Mountain Laboratories, was caught smuggling dangerous pathogens, including Clade 1B Mpox, from the DRC into the USA.

The US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (“USAMRIID”) at Fort Detrick, 50 miles from Washington DC, employs 900 researchers to experiment with “biological threats” including Ebola. USAMRIID developed Ervebo, the first Ebola vaccine, licensed in 2019.

On the African continent, where regulation has even less oversight, a number of laboratories are likely to be involved in gain-of-function research. The proximity of these laboratories to the “ground zero” of outbreaks gives pause for thought to even the least conspiracy-minded amongst us.

In our August 2024 Mpox article, we raised suspicions about the Rodolphe Mérieux Foundation’s high-security facility in Goma, DRC.  Situated in North Kivu Province, eastern DRC, Goma lies on the border with South Kivu Province, around 500km from Kamituga, where Clade IB of Mpox was first detected. That alone is a coincidence deserving of raised eyebrows. Even more suspicious is the fact that ground zero of the current Ebola outbreak lies a very similar distance from Goma, in the opposite direction.

Image captured for criticism/review and reporting current events under Fair Dealing – The Copyright Act 1994

The first case of Nipah virus, in a much-publicised outbreak earlier this year, was detected in Kolkata, the provincial capital of West Bengal in India. This is approximately 500km from another Rodolphe Mérieux Laboratory at the Bangladesh Institute of Tropical and Infectious Diseases in Chattogram (Chittagong).

Image captured for criticism/review and reporting current events under Fair Dealing – The Copyright Act 1994

Mérieux Laboratories are partnered with local reference laboratories, academic, university and hospital research institutes across low-income nations in what they named the GABRIEL Network – an acronym for “global approach to biology research, infectious diseases and epidemics in low-income countries.” The stated aim is “to build capacity and improve laboratory-based surveillance of diseases with a major impact on public health in developing countries.” Sponsors include the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, among others.

Image captured for criticism/review and reporting current events under Fair Dealing – The Copyright Act 1994

Could this potentially be a front for more nefarious activities? As we documented in March 2026, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (“CEPI”) was established in 2017 at the World Economic Forum in Davos and received a significant amount of early funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It is a direct institutional descendant of the pandemic preparedness funding architecture documented in the Epstein files.

In January 2026, CEPI paid $26.7 million to Moderna and the University of Oxford to develop mRNA and viral vector injections that target the Bundibugyo strain. This business decision came just four months before the outbreak began. What are the chances that this timing was coincidental?

One of the many projects listed at the Uganda Virus Research Institute in Entebbe, receiving philanthropic donations from Wellcome Trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, is “CEPI: Advancing Global Vaccine Preparedness.” The project claims to conduct “rigorous, standardised testing of vaccine candidates for priority diseases, including Ebola, Marburg, Lassa, Nipah, Rift Valley Fever, SARS-CoV-2, Mpox and unidentified emerging threats,” and to develop and optimise “critical assays for the detection of immune responses against Ebola and Marburg viruses.”

Is it possible that this laboratory is working with live Ebolaviruses? Could that explain the laboratory’s uncanny distance from Bundibugyo, a town and district in western Uganda where the current outbreak strain was first identified in 2007? Bundibugyo and Bunia are about 270km apart, and recent reports claim that the outbreak is spreading in Uganda. Do the Rodolphe Merieux Laboratory in Goma and the Uganda Virus Research Institute in Entebbe have anything to do with these outbreaks that are being blamed on spread following contact with wild animals?

Image captured for criticism/review and reporting current events under Fair Dealing – The Copyright Act 1994 Pandemics Profit Pandemic Prophets

University of North Carolina (“UNC”) Chapel Hill virologist Ralph Baric, considered a pioneer of gain-of-function research, recently had his research grants stopped and was placed on leave by UNC Chapel Hill. This seems to be due to implications of his coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

In 2018, Baric gave a 40-minute presentation, available on YouTube, in which he prophesied that a pandemic was looming. Many of the people who profit from claims of a pandemic have made similar prophesies. In the clip below, Baric boasted to the audience about the profits that can come from a pandemic. These are consistent with similar boasting from Belgium’s 2009 Swine Flu commissioner at Chatham House in 2019.

https://youtu.be/UuERPvBFfco?t=1945 UNC Public Health: Imagining the Next Flu Pandemic – and Preventing it!, 29 May 2018 (38 mins)

Ralph Baric UN Public Health 2018Download

In the current Ebola outbreak, public funds have been committed so far to the tune of US$645 million. With a grand total of 101 confirmed cases, this amounts to $6.3 million per confirmed case.

[expose-news]

Starmer issues ultimatum to technology companies to implement client-side scanning; this is the end of online privacy

Starmer has issued a three-month ultimatum for major technology firms to implement client-side scanning; so that all content on all digital devices sold or used in the UK can be scanned using a dystopian combination of age verification and content scanning.

Client-side scanning is a surveillance technique that analyses content on a user’s device before encryption.  And, if the Government succeeds, it marks the end of online privacy – for everyone.

Signal has issued a statement on the UK government’s demand. “This proposal will not safeguard children. It endangers us all,” Signal says.

https://twitter.com/signalapp/status/2064069692168519931

In March, we published an article about all Apple and Android digital devices sold in California having age verification embedded from the beginning of next year, according to a new law.  It is claimed that this law is to protect children online.  But it will not. 

“This law could spread beyond California due to the so-called ‘California effect’, under which rules adopted in the largest technology market in the United States often become national standards,” The Daily Economy wrote.

Age verification is spreading worldwide.  It is a Trojan horse for limiting access to content that they do not wish the public to see.  We need to look no further than what the UK government is doing worldwide under the pretence of keeping children safe online.

In July 2025, provisions in the Online Safety Act 2023 (“OSA”) were enacted, introducing age verification checks for online content. Using these new rules, just a week after they were implemented, a variety of content unrelated to children’s safety was already being censored.

“British people are being forced by the state to verify their age and hand over personal information to view political news about their own country. It is the sort of thing for which British diplomats would castigate third-world or tyrannical governments, but there seems to be little awareness of the danger of this law among our own governing class,” The Critic said in the week after the new rules began.

And The Daily Sceptic noted other posts that were quietly disappearing, criticising the OSA as a "censor’s charter" that silences dissent and erodes free speech through overzealous content removal.

Related: Privacy will be under unprecedented attack in 2026, Computer Weekly, 6 January 2026

Now, the UK government is using the Act to implement pre-emptive scanning of digital communications, which requires platforms to use automated systems to scan every message, image and post before it is delivered or viewed.

“Services that allow user interaction, including messaging apps, forums and search engines, must now monitor communications at scale to ensure that prohibited content is automatically filtered or suppressed before users can even encounter it,” Reclaim the Net said.

This is client-side scanning (“CSS”), a surveillance technique that analyses content on a user’s device before delivery and encryption, allowing third parties (like law enforcement or service providers) to detect objectionable material while the data is still in plain text.

CCS has been provided in the Online Safety Act from its inception.  As The Constitution Society noted in March 2025 a few days before the OSA came into force, “In addition to facilitating client-side scanning , it is also creating a new ‘false communication offence’ under s179(1) – this time addressing what may and may not be said in public, in addition to what is permissible in private.”

Clause 122 in the draft Bill, which was passing through Parliament at the time, became Section 121 in the OSA.

In the video below, Cyber Waffle explained more.  He began by reading an article published by The Telegraph on 13 January 2026 titled ‘Starmer is hell-bent on destroying your right to a private life’.

“Section 121 of this Orwellian act grants Ofcom the power to compel messaging apps … to deploy ‘accredited technology’ for messages sent with end-to-end encryption … make no mistake, this is ‘client-side scanning’,” Cyber Waffle said, reading from The Telegraph’s article.

The article continued, “Messages will be analysed on your device, before encryption, meaning true end-to-end privacy evaporates. Every text, photo or voice note could be inspected in real-time – not just flagged ones, but all of them.

“Lord Hanson of Flint, who is steering this awful mission, recently confirmed the Government expects Ofcom to exercise these powers swiftly, in fact he ‘set a date of April 2026’.  That’s when Ofcom will finalise guidance and minimum standards for the technology, paving the way for mandatory deployment.  The clock is ticking.  Within months, your private conversations will likely be subject to real-time state-mandated surveillance.”

https://youtu.be/wLnSl6vXIqU Cyber Waffle: UK Government Introduces Message Screening! 20 January 2026 (6 mins)

Lord Hanson of Flint is getting his way.

Speaking at London Tech Week on Monday, Keir Starmer issued a three-month ultimatum to major technology firms, including Apple and Google, requiring them to implement device-level controls that detect and block sexually explicit images on smartphones and tablets used by children.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood threatened, “Tech companies have a moral duty to act, by making it impossible for children to take, share or view nude images. If they don’t, we will legislate.”

How do they determine which devices are used by children or when a child is using the device? Age verification or “age assurance” software? Digital ID verification?  When they say children are getting around those, what’s next? Biometrics, such as facial recognition or iris scans?

Signal has issued the statement below in response to Stamer’s announcement, stating what to most of us is obvious, “ will not safeguard children. It endangers us all, whilst strengthening Apple, Google and Microsoft's market dominance and their control over our most personal information.”

Surveillance Is Not Safety: A statement on the UK's latest threat to privacy

By Signal, 8 June 2026

Children deserve to be safe, protected and nurtured. They do not deserve surveillance, funding cuts and cover-ups. Children also deserve their human right to privacy, as does everyone. The UK governmentʼs demand that all content on all devices sold or used in the UK be scanned on the presumption of nudity, using a dystopian combination of age verification and content scanning, will not safeguard children. It endangers us all, whilst strengthening Apple, Google and Microsoft's market dominance and their control over our most personal information.

Forcing all UK residents to prove their age and/or have all their content scanned, simply to exercise their fundamental right to communicate, is a perilous proposition. We know that mass surveillance and censorship capabilities, however sincere-sounding the promises of those who initiate them are, never remain narrowly scoped. Once created, they will be expanded, forming a dangerous tool that will be wielded both in the UK and abroad to censor and surveil whatever they might consider “threatsˮ or “harmful content.ˮ

Promises that this system will only run on-device are cold comfort. Wherever it runs, including the “cameraˮ itself once it is in place on UK devices - its scope will be defined by the whims and proscriptions of the government to detect nudity today and political speech tomorrow. We know from history that once in place, there will be an inevitable authoritarian expansion of the kind of content and people these technologies will be expected to surveil. We also know such tools will be leveraged to automatically report people to government authorities. We have already seen law enforcement agencies ask for similar widely-scoped powers which are ripe for exploitation in an increasingly tenuous political landscape.

This proposal will not keep children safe. Child safety looks like well-funded education, robust social services and meaningful guardrails on the very AI technologies and platforms the current government is eagerly courting. What the UK government wants instead is invisible surveillance infrastructure, switched on by default and potentially rushed into law under cynical pretexts. All of this with scant care for the actual needs of the children they claim to be protecting or the horrifying and far-ranging consequences that will ensue in practice.

Note from The Exposé:  There’s no doubt that children’s online safety is being used as a ruse for centralised digital control over all.  However, if we set that aside for a moment and focus on child safety: instead of the Government making laws to take over the role of parents, parents should take responsibility for monitoring and supervising what their children are doing and who they are doing it with, both online and offline.  If the state is allowed to become the parent, there will come a time when parents will lose their children to the state.]

Featured image: Starmer gives tech companies ultimatum over children sending naked images, Independent, 8 June 2026

[expose-news]

Guernsey cardiologist Dean Patterson has been persecuted by the medical establishment for doing what’s right; “Someone has to stand up for the truth”

In 2023, Doc Malik interviewed Dean Patterson, a leading consultant cardiologist in Guernsey, who had his medical licence suspended by the General Medical Council pending the outcome of fitness to practice proceedings.

The suspension is related to Dr. Patterson's support for fellow cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra, who spoke out about covid vaccine harms, and his own observations of vaccine-related harm in his patients.

When asked by his wife why he was doing it, he said, “I’m doing what’s right. If I don’t do this, who is going to do it …? Someone has to stand up for the truth.”

Related:

- I have never witnessed such harm as is caused by covid injections, cardiologist tells GMC, The Exposé, 24 March 2024 - Dr. Dean Patterson: There could be as many as 50,000 people in the UK who have developed myocarditis post-vaccination, The Exposé, 14 June 2024 - Cardiologist ‘sacked’ by the MSG after raising covid-vaccine concerns, Bailiwick Express, 26 March 2026 - Support Dr Dean Patterson Consultant Cardiologist on GiveSendGo

A Courageous Cardiologist

By Dear Church Leaders (and everyone else), 5 June 2026

This post features the story of Dean Patterson, a leading consultant cardiologist in Guernsey and Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians.

In early 2024, Dr Patterson wrote to the GMC (General Medical Council) in support of fellow cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra, who had spoken out in the context of covid vaccine harms.

According to this March 2026 article in the Guernsey Press:

has had his medical licence suspended by the General Medical Council and is no longer a partner at the Medical Specialist Group .

He had not been involved in patient care since February 2025 and ceased to be a partner at the MSG , the group said in a statement issued in response to Guernsey Press questions, the newspaper having discovered the GMC’s suspension of his licence last month…

confirmed that the General Medical Council imposed a 12-month suspension of Dr Patterson’s medical licence as an interim order pending the outcome of fitness to practice proceedings relating to him. Dr Patterson is appealing this suspension.

‘The investigation by the GMC is ongoing, and it is important that this process is allowed to run its proper course,’ said the MSG.

‘Separately from those GMC proceedings, following the conclusion of our internal processes, we can confirm that as of 19 March, Dr Patterson is no longer a partner at the Medical Specialist Group.’

“The process is the punishment.”

Before the above recent developments, Dr Patterson told his story HERE in conversation with orthopaedic surgeon-turned-podcaster Doc Ahmad Malik.

https://rumble.com/embed/v31vof0/?pub=4 Doc Malik: Dr Dean Patterson Consultant Cardiologist Talks About Covid "Vaccine" Injuries And More, 3 August 2023 (105 mins)

It is a fairly long podcast, and the transcript below - of the most salient parts, plus occasional links and comments - makes for a lengthier post than usual. But it is, I think, worthwhile.

Transcript with Added Notes

Table of Contents

- Background - Spring 2021 Observations - The Influence of Big Pharma - Speaking Out - Why Are So Few Cardiologists Raising the Alarm? - Covid, Myocarditis and How Trials Are Conducted - The Long Haul - Related posts from Dear Church Leaders (and everyone else) - Note Background

Dean Patterson… I think you’ve got a lot of interesting things to say… tell me a little bit about yourself…

…I’m based in Guernsey… a Channel island… about 80 miles south of Southampton… a crown dependency… a… unique legal disposition in terms of… part of the UK… population 65,000…

I was born in South Africa and I my medical degree there… I left in … I… worked in Cheltenham … and then I went to Scotland. I trained in cardiology and vascular medicine did some research in cardiovascular therapeutics I saw quite blatantly how pharma was calling the shots… when the big drug companies were involved, the data was… held by the drug companies… ghostwriting was taken for granted… the system is not set up right….

I was looking to possibly head to Australia… and found in the career section an advert for Guernsey. So I came here. And I’ve enjoyed it. It’s been really tough. It’s a sort of hybrid system where we work as a partnership. these views that I’m expressing are my own… they don’t represent the partnership. I’ve been asked to say that by the management of the partnership.

We have a contract with the state of Guernsey and we provide secondary healthcare services… apart from radiology, psychiatry and pathology… about 50 specialists. I was a cardiologist on my own from 2006 to 2016, and then we recruited another colleague. I’ve just been doing what I’ve been normally doing… listening to my patients.

I pride myself as being a very ethical diagnostician. I stick to what I call classical medicine in terms of… the history tells us nigh on everything that we need to know to make a diagnosis. And that’s all I’ve been doing… when I entered this covid situation… I was just following my standard principles…

Wisdom is something that you accrue over time and you never stop learning. But… when you get to a certain age and… level of experience, you know, in your heart… in your gut… you know absolutely when you have something that is on the money… that there’s a problem.

Spring 2021 Observations

And I noticed one of my patients heart disease… admitted with an acute coronary syndrome… chest pain… he was admitted by a colleague I took… over the next day.

I knew him really well and… I said to him, “How are you feeling today?” He was feeling a lot better, and I had a look through his notes… and I said, “This is really interesting… you were here in October last year… 2020… you in Southampton and they couldn’t find anything wrong with you… and you look like you’re having exactly a replica of …” I said, “What do you think is triggering this…? What’s been going on?”

He said, “I’ve actually been fine between these two events… actually, Doc, the only thing I can think of is the fact that… five days before my admission in October last year I had my flu vaccine… and I’ve had my covid vaccine seven days before this admission ”.

Wow…

And that was the first point where I actually thought… ever in my life… that a vaccine could do something to any of my patients. It wasn’t something against covid. It was really just listening to the patient…. You bury it in the back of your head and you think, “Okay, maybe he’s got a point.” He set it down… we managed it medially… he’d been thoroughly investigated on many occasions so he wasn’t keen on having further investigations… he was known to have had reasonably complex coronary disease, but… he was living quite a good quality of life apart from those two episodes… I followed him up subsequently…

But… it was literally a week later… another patient was… admitted within 24 hours with chest pain… And then a week later I had patient who was probably one of the worst sort of coronary patients… diabetic… poorly controlled… not really looked after himself… had a bypass and was… not expected to do that well… but he was in his sixties… he was admitted, and he collapsed… and he was in intensive care…. we weren’t sure what it was… I’ve gradually got of people getting admitted with… cardiovascular collapse and odd things that didn’t quite fit.

And then one of my patients I’d been seeing for 10 years… she went to the emergency department and she’d become breathless within a week of her first jab… I knew her well because she had a previous … about 10 years before. But she … no previous admissions apart from the one ten years before… when she was diagnosed…

I had a look at her… we investigated… her breathlessness… and my gut told me that there was something going on… and I just couldn’t… figure out what it was in this particular instance… because she had a complex previous history… she was on medication. And then she got a second shot… she was in and she collapsed with cardiogenic shock and she passed away…

At that point I thought to myself… “There’s definitely something brewing here… And I had to stand up for myself… for the first time ever… I’ve never in my life had to stand up and say, “Look, I want a post-mortem…” She was in her 40s. She was stable in my care for 10 years. I knew her. She relied on me. And I felt that we had let her down. And I had to stand my ground. And I said to the pathologist, “Look, I want a post-mortem. I’m not backing down.” And everybody was trying to tell me, “Don’t push for a post-mortem…” my colleagues... I felt the pressure… people were saying, “This is unnecessary.”

Why? Why is it unnecessary?

Well, they were just a foregone conclusion… she had medical conditions... a . she died because of her known condition. I said to them, “No, I don’t buy that, because it was a temporal relationship with this vaccination, and she was stable before.” She had been stable for ten years and she never had covid… we had tested it… Also… when patients honour my care, I stand by them. I’m there to protect… if things go wrong, I will do my best to figure out what went wrong and document it. medicine we need to learn through our mistakes… that’s the ultimate judge… if we make an error, we have to actually own up to it.

In surgery, we have something where… if you die within 28 days, you’re meant to discuss at an M and M meeting and have a post-mortem. Does that not exist in the field of cardiology…. where if there’s a medical intervention or something…?

It does… but… I’ve never… formally ever before recommended a post-mortem… I’ve taken advice asked for post-mortems… when people say, “No, we’ll just leave it.” But in this particular situation I felt strongly enough because of the uniqueness of the patient. She was young … and she had a youngish daughter. And the fact that she was so stable under my care… and the abruptness of the deterioration… And… these inklings before made me think… “Hang on… you can’t let this slide… we have launched this vaccine quite quickly and we don’t have any long-term safety data…”

The post-mortem came back and I got apology from the pathologist… she apologised to me personally and in front of the M and M meeting. The patient had what we call thrombotic endocarditis… basically a valve being destroyed by … But on top of that, she had devastating myocarditis . was completely destroyed.

I was at that point picking up some post-mortem findings from... a pathologist from Germany… I got in touch with him and I tied it in with our local pathologist because she wasn’t experiencing all these things. And we managed to try and get some headway on this to find out… is this from the vaccine… how do we diagnose it etc. The post-mortem… against my wishes… stated that they could not exclude covid-19 as a cause for her death… whereas I actually felt that this was… clear… In any other situation where… an intervention had happened… and a patient dies with that temporal relationship… then you have a duty of care to say that this is a probable cause of her death. You don’t say… “unable to exclude as a cause of death”. That’s a real cop-out. So I wasn’t particularly pleased about that.

The flip was also true… if you died of even a car crash within 28 days of a covid test, you “died of covid”. So why is the flip not also applicable… where if you die within a week of the jab, it’s likely to be the jab… or it has to be the jab until proven otherwise…

Yes… so that was a moment to… stand up and say, “Actually, there is a problem”, but still a lot of people just saw those patients having chronic disease being unlucky, and they didn’t even want to know whether it was anything to do with the vaccine.

And ... I think it was because they started to vaccinate younger people… we had a 20-year-old who was admitted with what we think was … He first had a little rash and then he started getting this ache in his chest and he was admitted to the hospital… 36 hours after his Pfizer vaccine, and he was in a real state… worst chest pain you could ever think of. He was extremely lucky … this is something I’ve never seen in my life …

And… there were two other cases in younger patients… of myocarditis… a population of 63,000. So according to data estimates from the Office for National Statistics, we should be seeing… over a ten year period… two or three hospital admissions with myocarditis and maybe ten cases overall. I had this patient pass away… I had two other patients come to hospital... one… female, another male… in their 30s and 40s… with myocarditis. And then this patient who was 20… with myocarditis.

Author’s Note: I am reminded of this UK government data (p18 HERE) for the most serious ambulance calls, which shows that the numbers rose substantially during 2021 and continue to remain high. An extra 600 or so serious ambulance calls per day amounts to roughly 200,000 extra per year. Four serious ambulance calls instead of three.

And then… I had an 82-year-old man who only took his vaccine because he wanted to go to America to be screened at the Mayo Clinic… his view was, “You can go to the Mayo Clinic and get everything done in a week which the NHS will take a year to do…” So he got a Moderna vaccine and then within four weeks he was having this strange chest pain... I admitted him … it wasn’t typical of chest pain from a ...

And the next day he said to me, “Dean, I want to go home…” He was one of these independent men… a self-made man… didn’t like hospitals. And I said to him, “No, you can’t go home… your troponin has gone up to 8,000.” He said, “No, I feel fine.” And he was adamant, and he was… glaring at me. He was stood up… as tall as me… and he was quite intimidating. And I had to spend the next 45 minutes trying to talk him from going home. And his troponin sat there… no chest pain… at… between 7,500 and 8,000 for about five days. And that doesn’t happen with …

And in that week I had about four other patients I diagnosed in the outpatient department with myocarditis… When you vaccinate people in cohorts like this… you get waves and ripples coming through which are associated with each other…

Can I just stop you there… You’re a really smart cardiologist… and I hate to interrupt you… Can you please explain what troponin is? Why are you measuring it? What is the normal range…?

Troponin is a protein that’s found inside cells. It can be released from other areas as well to a lesser degree, but it’s very specific to tissue and it leaks from damaged tissue or dead tissue… We have… a very, very sensitive test. So if you were to have what we call a heart attack that people in the street would be able to diagnose… clutching chest, sweating… and if you have pain for an hour and you don’t go to the doctor… and you only get to the hospital four hours later… your troponin will go up.

Commonly it’s… 20,000 if you don’t get medical attention. It really climbs up high. But… can pick up small… but significant releases which tell you what’s going on with the patient. So it’s a fantastic test for telling us when you’re getting damage in the heart muscle, from whatever cause that may be... it’s used across the world now.

When you have a normal heart attack, it goes up and comes down in a… standard fashion over the period… your chest pain. It will climb for the first 24-36 hours and then start to come down over the next 24 hours. And assuming that your pain is just one episode, it will go up and come down. It won’t just go up and stay there when you have a heart attack. Whereas if you’ve got inflammation in the muscle is not being resolved, it will stay up as long as the inflammation is present…

What is the normal value of troponin…?

…in extremely healthy people, you should have less than 3 as your result… We have a range… between less than 3 and 13, which is considered normal range...

this chap… he stayed in hospital he refused to go for any invasive investigations. In any event at that stage I’d accrued 20… patients where I thought, “Hang on a minute.” it wasn’t just me… my colleague had seen some patients…

And I’ve been raising this issue with the local… risk clinical governance team and things like that… and reporting yellow cards… But the Yellow Card System to my mind hasn’t been… very responsive… I didn’t feel they were taking what I was putting in… seriously… It’s basically drop-down menus and… you use a bit of free text… fill in all the fields… you put a lot of detail in there…

And on a few occasions they sent me a request by email to fill in a Word document, which was basically the same data that I’d already submitted to the database online. I thought, “You’re gaslighting me. I mean, you’re telling me I’ve already sent you this information you want me to be your little skivvy and write a Word document for you?” I don’t have time for that. I was like, “You must be crazy.” It just made me quite angry when I saw that. I thought… the people they’ve got running their systems are clearly not taking this with the seriousness which I felt it should be .

So it’s been a difficult time… because… I think people are not willing to accept … People… take on… the trusted views of the medical establishment and then don’t question it for… up to… a couple of years. It must be quite difficult to turn yourself around and change your mind...

[expose-news]

UK Parliament needs to launch an investigation into the Clean Power 2030 plan before it does any more damage

In 2024, National Energy System Operator (“NESO”) and Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (“DESNZ”) devised their “Clean Power 2030” plan.  They claimed their plan would bring down energy bills for both households and businesses for good.

But the plan is failing to meet its targets on cost, time and quality - and grid integration costs are soaring.  It is clear the Clean Power 2030 project is off the rails, David Turver writes. 

Additionally, wind- and solar-generated energy are not going to be able to meet the UK’s requirements.  There will be a significant shortfall in energy supply by 2030 and it's unclear where this energy will come from.

There are now strong grounds to launch a Parliamentary investigation into the Clean Power 2030 to get the project cancelled before any more damage is done.

Miliband’s Clean Power 2030 Plan Off the Rails

By David Turver, 7 June 2026

Introduction

Back in 2024, NESO and DESNZ outlined their Clean Power 2030 (“CP2030”) plan. That plan called for a big increase in grid spending, an ambitious rollout of wind and solar capacity and also relied on negative emissions from Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (“BECCS”) to meet emissions targets. NESO claimed CP2030 “can be delivered without increasing costs for consumers.” DESNZ claimed that CP2030 would “build an energy system that can bring down bills for households and businesses for good.”

Recently, DESNZ released new data (ET6.1) showing the installed capacity of wind and solar at the end of 2025, and Drax announced it had got cold feet about investing in BECCS. So, what do these developments mean for Miliband’s CP2030 plan? Time to look at how well CP2030 is going against the plan. It is customary to analyse projects through three different dimensions: cost, time and quality.

Costs Going Up

Remember, NESO claimed CP2030 can be delivered without increasing costs for consumers and DESNZ claimed the project would bring down bills for good. There are several pieces of evidence to show that these claims were false.

Grid Integration Costs Increasing

NESO has provided a forecast of grid balancing costs and a forecast of transmission costs. The Office for Budget Responsibility ("OBR") forecasts the future costs of the Capacity Market that backs up intermittent renewables. Combining those forecasts shows grid integration costs are set to rise by £17 billion, from £8 billion in 2024/25 to £25 billion in 2030/31, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Forecast Grid Integration Costs (£ billion)

According to the Government’s own figures, the UK already had the highest industrial electricity costs in the developed world in 2024 and the second-highest domestic electricity costs. CP2030 is going to add a further £3 billion of subsidy costs and £17 billion of integration costs and push energy bills up by the equivalent of £700 per household. Of course, this figure will be split across businesses and households, but increasing costs to businesses will be passed on to households.

Generation Costs Going Up

When NESO was calculating the cost of generation for the CP2030 report, NESO used figures from the Government’s Generation Cost Report 2023, adjusted for the strike prices in renewables auction Allocation Round 6 (“AR6”). Although the headline strike prices in Allocation Round 7 (“AR7”) for onshore wind and solar (expressed in common 2024 prices) were relatively close to NESO assumptions, offshore wind was more expensive. However, these raw comparisons do not take into account that AR7 contracts were extended by 5 years to 20 years. In its impact analysis of the contract extension, the Government estimated that fixed bottom offshore wind strike prices would reduce by 12%, onshore wind by 11% and solar by 13%. This pushes up the like-for-like comparison as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 - Basic Cost of Renewables Going Up

On a like-for-like basis, offshore wind is up 24% from the CP2030 estimate, onshore wind 23% and Solar 6%. Moreover, CP2030 used cost of capital estimates from the 2023 Generation Cost report but these have increased in the 2025 report as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 - Change in Cost of Capital Between Generation Cost Reports (%)

This change will increase “annuitised costs” (another way of expressing annualised costs) used by NESO in their report.

Schedule Slipping

Not only are the costs rising, but time is also slipping away to deliver the required renewables capacity. This section compares how the delivery of each major technology is faring compared to the plan.

Offshore Wind Delivery

The backbone of renewable generation capacity in the CP2030 plan was supposed to be offshore wind. In the Further Flex scenario, capacity was supposed to more than triple from 14.7GW in 2023 to over 50GW in 2030. Figure 4 shows the performance to date against that plan.

Figure 4 – Offshore Wind Installed Capacity and Trend vs CP2030 Plan (MW)

The CP2030 Further Flex scenario was supposed to install 5.1GW offshore wind capacity per year, every year from 2024 to 2030. In reality, just 1.2GW was installed in 2024 and 0.7GW in 2025. The end 2025 result was 8.4GW short of the target. If the installation rate continues at the trend rate since 2009, CP2030 will be 29.5GW short by 2030. This is the Reality Gap annotated on the chart. The New Dispatch scenario was less aggressive but on current trends, they would still be short 21.9GW by 2030.

Onshore Wind

Onshore wind was less important in CP2030 but still capacity was supposed to almost double from 15.4GW in 2023 to 29GW in 2030. Figure 5 shows that onshore wind capacity has also fallen behind plan.

Figure 5 - Onshore Wind Installed Capacity and Trend vs CP2030 Plan (MW)

The CP2030 Further Flex scenario was supposed to install 1.9GW of onshore wind capacity per year, every year from 2024 to 2030. In reality, just 0.7GW was installed in 2024 and 0.3GW in 2025. The end 2025 result was 2.9GW short of the target. The current installation rate is below trend and, even if the installation rate rises to trend levels, CP2030 will still be 6.9GW short by 2030. Again, this chart shows the Further Flex scenario, which is identical to New Dispatch.

Solar Power

Solar Power was also expected to triple capacity from 16.2GW in 2023 to 48.5GW in 2030. Figure 6 shows that solar installations have also fallen behind plan.

Figure 6 - Solar Installed Capacity and Trend vs CP2030 Plan (MW)

The CP2030 plan called for 4.6GW of solar capacity to be installed each year from 2024 to 2030. In reality, 2.5GW was installed in 2024 and 2.8GW in 2025. The end 2025 result was 3.7GW short of the target. If solar installations continue at the trend rate since 2009, CP2030 will be 21GW short by 2030. The chart for solar shows the Further Flex scenario, which is identical to New Dispatch.

Clearly, all three technologies have fallen behind Miliband’s CP2030 grand plan and the schedule looks even less likely to be achieved.

Emissions Targets At Risk

Not only are costs being exceeded and the schedule slipping but the quality of the project as measured by the emissions targets is also at risk.

Drax Power Station has been receiving subsidies to burn biomass for many years. The subsidies it currently receives are from a mix of Renewables Obligation Certificates (“ROCs”) and Contracts for Difference (“CfDs”). However, the RO scheme is due to expire in March 2027, so last year it entered into an agreement with the Government to replace the ROCs with a new CfD out to 2031. Part of the thinking was that by then, Drax would have figured out how to deliver Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (“BECCS”) and would presumably be eligible for an entirely new set of subsidies.

However, last month Drax announced that its BECCS project was unlikely to proceed and wrote off the spending to date of £47.6 million saying:

“Whilst UK BECCS is still an attractive option for the Group in the long term, the current political environment and absence of an appropriate regulatory framework has led to a reduction in the likelihood of the project proceeding in the short- to medium-term. Accordingly, the capitalised value has been impaired.”

In other words, they no longer think they will get enough subsidy to make BECCS viable. On this Substack, we have always viewed BECCS as an expensive crime against thermodynamics and considered plans to develop it as absurd.

NESO’s CP2030 Workbook shows in its ‘CP17’ pathway that they expect 3.8-4GW of Biomass and BECCS capacity to be in place in 2030. Their 2030 emissions plan shows they expect a significant proportion of this capacity to come from BECCS (or Carbon Capture and Storage (“CCS”) Biomass), banking on alleged negative emissions from this technology to meet their targets (see Figure 7).

Figure 7 - CP2030 BECCS Negative Emissions Expectations

The zero emissions from biomass without carbon capture means that the carbon dioxide emitted from burning wood is simply ignored. Negative emissions from BECCS require us to believe that burying these supposedly non-existent emissions leads to net negative emissions. Now, Miliband is short of between 3.4 and 6.9MtCO2 per year to meet his emissions target. This is another big hole in the CP2030 plan.

Conclusions

The Clean Power 2030 plan is failing on all three dimensions of cost, time and quality. Grid integration costs are soaring, undermining claims that CP2030 can bring down bills or can be achieved without costs to consumers. Wind and solar installations are way behind schedule and now Drax has kiboshed the main element that was supposed to deliver supposedly negative emissions to meet the CP2030 emissions targets. It is clear the CP2030 project is off the rails.

The shortfall in wind and solar is probably going to have to be met from reliable power stations. As we have covered before, the nuclear fleet is being retired and the gas fleet is ageing, so it is unclear where this capacity is going to come from.

There must now be strong grounds to launch a Parliamentary investigation into CP2030 to get the project cancelled before any more damage is done. Perhaps a Parliamentary question along the following lines is appropriate:

Analysis of official forecasts by NESO, the OBR and DESNZ shows that renewables subsidy costs are going to rise by £3.3 billion to £15.2 billion/year by 2030/31 compared to 2024/25, and grid integration costs in the form of the Capacity Market, grid balancing and transmission costs are going up £17 billion/year over the same period. A total increase of over £20 billion/year. Does the minister stand by the claim that CP2030 can bring bills down?

The delivery of wind and solar capacity is well behind the CP2030 plan and Drax has cancelled its BECCS project, putting the emissions target out of reach. Does the minister agree that the CP2030 project is off the rails, and will the project be submitted to the National Audit Office for an independent value for money audit?

About the Author

David Turver is a British retired consultant, chief information officer and project management professional.  He publishes articles on a Substack page titled ‘Eigen Values’ where he writes about contentious issues such as climate, energy and net zero.  You can subscribe to and follow his Substack page, ‘Eigen Values’, HERE.Featured image: Adapted from image for ‘UK Solar Summit Partnership Prospectus’, 30 June - 1 July 2026. Source: Clean Power 2030

[expose-news]

China Beats Elon Musk in Race to Sell Brain Chips

China has become the first country to approve a commercial implantable brain-computer interface. The device, known as NEO, is designed to help people with paralysis regain hand function by translating brain signals into commands for a robotic glove. But this isn't just a medical breakthrough; it's also a vital geopolitical marker, and a warning against the potential misuse of intimate tech. In the race to connect human brains directly to machines, Beijing has reached the market before Elon Musk managed to deliver his "Neuralink" project. And experts are already sounding the alarm.

World's First Brain Computer Device Enters the Market as China Beats Musk and Neuralink to Approval

The device was developed with Neuracle Medical Technology in Shanghai, with research links to leading Chinese institutions including Tsinghua University. China's National Medical Products Administration approved the system in March, making it the world's first invasive brain-computer interface medical device to receive market approval. For now, the product is intended for people with spinal cord injuries who retain some upper arm function, but have lost the ability to grasp with their hands.

The chip bypasses part of the broken communication pathway between the brain and the body, in patients living with paralysis. When the user thinks about moving their hand, the implant detects signals from the brain's motor area, sends those signals to an external computer, and the chip translates them into movement via a robotic glove.

Significantly, China has managed to beat Musk to market. Neuralink was founded in 2016, and built around a surgically implanted device called the N1 and a robot designed to place tiny electrode threads into the brain. Its first human clinical trial was approved by the FDA in 2023, and Neuralink said it implanted its first human participant in January 2024, with the early goal of allowing people with severe paralysis to control computers and digital devices through neural signals. Both Musk and China's NEO were pursuing broadly the same ambition, using brain activity to control external technology, but by reaching commercial approval first, Beijing has gained a symbolic and regulatory advantage that could shape medicine, military research and human-machine control.

A key difference between the two projects is in the way the implant is inserted. Neuralink, led by Musk, uses very thin electrode threads implanted into the brain tissue itself, and done by a surgical robot. NEO is a coin-sized wireless sensor that sits on or near the surface of the brain's protective membrane rather than penetrating deep into the cortex, making it significantly less invasive but also potentially less precise than systems recording from inside the brain tissue.

For China, this represents part of a wider push to compete in strategic technologies worldwide from electric vehicles and batteries to artificial intelligence, robotics, quantum computing, and advanced biotechnology. The country has set out a plan to build a globally competitive brain-computer interface (BCI) industry within five years, covering both implantable and non-invasive devices.

Brain-computer interfaces could transform life for people with amputations, stroke damage, ALS, and spinal cord injuries around the globe. Helping a person to move, speak, or use a computer grants independence in a way the world has never seen before.

But these are not ordinary consumer gadgets. Success at the forefront of the emerging BCI industry represents a huge step forward in medicine, surveillance, disability support, military interest, and human enhancement. The same technology that helps a paralysed person grasp a cup may also be misused for psychological manipulation, hacking, coercion, and state access to the most intimate signals a person produces.

The history of modern technology is filled with examples of tools introduced for convenience, safety, or medical benefit that later became systems for surveillance, data extraction, or behavioural control. Smartphones, for instance, were communication devices long before they became tracking infrastructure. Social media looked like a way to connect before it became a psychological and political influence machine. Wearable devices emerged as fitness gadgets, but later turned bodies into continued data streams.

Musk, speaking at an event in Israel, described restoring movement to people with severe paralysis as "Jesus-level technologies". One Neuralink participant, Audrey Crews, recently said "I tried writing my name for the first time in 20 years. I'm working on it," adding, "It's humbling to know my journey is helping Neuralink refine this technology, which could one day let millions control devices with their minds".

Meanwhile, experts are warning that brain-computer technology raises significant privacy and cybersecurity concerns. Dr David Tuffley of Griffith University said the technology could theoretically expose highly sensitive neural data, including thoughts and memories. He also warned that hacking such systems could potentially affect cognitive functions or even interfere with movement-related signals.

A technology that allows thought to move a machine, even if currently used to restore movement to paralysed patients, cannot be treated as just another medical device. The genuine capability to improve lives should not be ignored either, but China's victory in the space lays down a marker. The competition to connect the human brain directly to machines has entered the market. Where do we go from here?

[expose-news]

Advanced Alzheimer’s successfully treated with psilocybin, a recent case study says

Psilocybin is a naturally occurring compound found in over 200 species of fungi collectively known as "magic mushrooms." It functions as a prodrug, meaning it is biologically inactive until ingested, at which point the body rapidly converts it into psilocin.  Psilocin is the pharmacologically active compound responsible for the drug's effects.

In 2000, psilocybin research in the US was resumed and in the following years, research has surged due to its potential as a treatment for various psychiatric disorders and addictions.  In the following, Nicolas Hulscher highlights a case study of an 80-year-old woman who had been diagnosed with advanced Alzheimer’s.

“ a remarkable and unexpected clinical response … following a single high-dose psilocybin intervention,” he writes.

New Study: Advanced Alzheimer’s Patient Regained Speech, Memory, and Bladder Control After a Single Psilocybin Dose

By Nicolas Hulscher, 5 June 2026

A newly published case report in Frontiers in Neuroscience describes a remarkable and unexpected clinical response in an 80-year-old woman with advanced Alzheimer’s disease following a single high-dose psilocybin intervention.

The patient had lived with Alzheimer’s disease for approximately 10 years and experienced severe functional decline over the preceding five years. According to the report, she had become largely monosyllabic, demonstrated profound cognitive impairment, chronic urinary incontinence, impaired mobility, dysphagia, executive dysfunction and severe reduction in spontaneous communication and emotional engagement.

After receiving a single 5g oral dose of psilocybin-containing mushrooms (Enigma strain), the patient reportedly experienced rapid and sustained functional improvement across multiple domains.

Lago M, Cerveira M and Simonet JX (2026) Transient multidomain functional improvement in advanced Alzheimer’s disease following high-dose psilocybin-containing mushroom administration: a case report. Front. Neurosci. 20:1813281. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2026.1813281

During the acute phase, the patient entered a prolonged deep sleep-like state accompanied by profuse sweating and clinically suspected hyperthermia.

Then, approximately 19 hours later, something unexpected occurred.

The patient spontaneously awakened and began speaking for hours, engaging in autobiographical conversation and recalling memories that had not been expressed in years.

Over the following days, her family reported meaningful improvements in:

- Speech and communication. - Memory and contextual recognition. - Walking and mobility. - Emotional connection and social engagement. - Bladder control, after years of chronic urinary incontinence.

Lago M, Cerveira M and Simonet JX (2026) Transient multidomain functional improvement in advanced Alzheimer’s disease following high-dose psilocybin-containing mushroom administration: a case report. Front. Neurosci. 20:1813281. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2026.1813281

Most notably, the improvements were not merely immediate and fleeting.

At 1-month follow-up, bladder control reportedly remained restored and the patient was described as still functionally improved compared with baseline. Due to the persistence of meaningful benefits, a second supervised psilocybin session was performed one month later.

To be clear, this is one published case report, not a randomised controlled trial, and causality cannot be established.

Nevertheless, the implications are difficult to ignore.

There are currently no approved Alzheimer’s medications known to produce rapid, multi-domain improvements of this magnitude in advanced disease. Existing therapies may modestly slow decline or provide limited symptomatic benefit in some patients, but none are known to rapidly restore speech, continence, emotional engagement and functional capacity in a patient with advanced Alzheimer’s.

Two of my grandparents died with advanced Alzheimer’s disease, and every medication they were prescribed ultimately failed to meaningfully alter the course of decline. Millions of families across the world face the same devastating reality.

These findings urgently need replication. For millions watching a parent or loved one disappear to Alzheimer’s, even the possibility of restoring lost function warrants serious scientific investigation.

About the Author

Nicolas Hulscher, Master of Public Health (“MPH”), is an epidemiologist and Administrator at the McCullough Foundation, which publishes articles on a Substack page titled ‘Focal Points’. 

Hulscher is known for his research on adverse events following covid vaccination, particularly focusing on myocarditis and other post-acute sequelae. He has been the lead author on several covid vaccination studies and a contributor to others.  He has also co-authored research on the proximal origin of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1.

[expose-news]

Swedish police assault independent journalists at NATO summit

On 21 May, during the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting in Helsingborg, Sweden, two independent journalists from Frihetsnytt (Freedom News) who were carrying officially registered press credentials were assaulted by police in a public place.

The journalists were slammed to the ground in broad daylight, mocked by officers and later stopped by police buses and denied medical care for their injuries, Daniel Forisus reports.

https://twitter.com/danielforsiCH/status/2060293529012781329

This incident - covered by independent Swedish outlets such as Frihetsnytt (Freedom News), Fria Tider and Samnytt, among others - represents a serious attack on press freedom.

When registered journalists are physically assaulted and denied medical care while covering a major international summit, it threatens the right of all independent media to report freely.

Freedom News is now taking legal action against the police.  You can support their action HERE.

Featured image: Screenshot taken from ‘Watch the film when Frihetsnytt is beaten by police & banned from filming the NATO meeting’ (video in Swedish).  Source: Frihetsnytt (Freedom News)

[expose-news]

Barry Young has been persecuted by the state for blowing the whistle on death by covid injection in New Zealand

For two and a half years, Barry Young has been persecuted by the state.  He has lost his job, been arrested, spent two nights in jail, had his home ransacked and endured being within the court system for 900 days.

Why?

He was the Senior Database Administrator at Health New Zealand when he blew the whistle on disturbing statistics he had noticed and linked the covid bioweapon with clusters of deaths in specific areas of New Zealand.

Barry Young and the Price of Truth: 900 Days Later, He Still Stands Tall

By Mary Hobbs, as published by New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science (“NZDSOS”) on 3 June 2026

Since 1 December 2023, Barry Young has lost his job, been arrested, spent two nights in jail, had his home ransacked and endured being within the court system for over 900 days. And he is still smiling.

As many know, the calamities all occurred immediately after he blew the whistle on disturbing statistics he reported, where he linked the covid bioweapon with clusters of deaths in specific areas of New Zealand (“NZ”) that he observed on a database he created as part of his job as a Senior Database Administrator at Health New Zealand (“HNZ”). It is understood that although HNZ operates separately, it is ultimately accountable to the Ministry of Health (“MOH”). Barry said he alerted his seniors and wrote to every Member of Parliament (“MP”) before he went public. The news went viral.

It is understood that the MOH reported they had not studied his data since the time Barry made it available in 2023. It is now 2026. The bioweapon is still available. And Barry is still battling through the court system at a glacial-like pace. (Reports of his story are HERE, HERE and HERE.)

His latest court appearance was on 14 May 2026. The court has adjourned for another two months, with his next appearance scheduled for July 2026.

Yet Barry Young remains upbeat and irrepressible. How does he do it?

Well, for a man like Barry, continuing to go to work and remain silent about statistical information that, in his professional view, pointed to an alarming increase in the number of deaths from the bioweapon that was rolled out in 2021 and yet was still being administered, was not something he was able to do. He could not continue to robotically do his job and collect his pay cheque without raising the alarm.  To Barry, that would have been a living hell.

The statistics didn’t represent numbers to him. They were people. New Zealanders - just like him. There was a sense of urgency, too, for he concluded that, based on the statistics he viewed, if he delayed, more could potentially die, so he saw little alternative but to alert others within the Department so the bioweapon could immediately be halted while an investigation was done. He hoped he was wrong and that the MOH could show him there was a misunderstanding.  That didn’t happen.

The awkward thing for the government appears to be that they had come up against a rarity, something that was possibly foreign to them to find in such circles. A man with integrity. Rock-solid honour.

The more they tried to shut him down, the more the story spread and the stronger and taller Barry became. The torch of truth shone brighter. There was no off-switch to that. The six armed police who ransacked his home and roughly arrested him hardly caused him to blink. As mentioned in earlier articles, he simply quipped that he was happy they had found his lost passport in their “search.”

When a man or woman stands up for what is true and right, they create a light for others in a world that has seemed increasingly dark. Their light brings hope, decency, values, truth and a calm and steady resolve - and that is catching. It multiplies, especially with like-minded people, but it also extends beyond them to others and rapidly spreads like wildfire throughout the country and across the world, for it seems so rare to find this within officialdom. Truth is a fire that, once lit, can never be extinguished.

And those left trying to defend the obvious lies tie themselves in more knots, for lies told are easily forgotten. Even rare slivers of truth were shown to be damning - like when the MOH mentioned they hadn’t looked at Barry’s information. An everyday New Zealander would surely feel the need to ask, “But WHY wouldn’t they immediately verify the statistics as true or false? He is either right or wrong, but they haven’t yet said he was wrong. Or have they not looked because they already know that he is correct?

There was that awkward bit where it is understood that the MOH alleged that Barry’s claims were “misinformation,” or words to that effect. But, how would they know that if they hadn’t looked at the information he provided? They tie themselves in knots with efforts to hide the truth and paper it over with lies. It just doesn’t work.

Recently, on an informative programme known as Decentralise, I watched Mike Adams - known as The Health Ranger - and Todd Pitner interview G. Edward Griffin. Edward is perhaps best known for his brilliant book, ‘The Creature from Jekyll Island’ where he explains the fraudulent operations of banking. (You may want to read this if you have a mortgage, as he explains how the banks don’t have most of the money you “borrow.” They just charge you interest on the money you pay them back. If you default, then they take your property in compensation for money they never had available to you in the first place.)

During the interview, Edward Griffin mentioned the books of one of the most prominent US lawyers, Gerry Spence, who went through many life-learning lessons in his career. In some of his best-selling books, he blew open the deep corruption he perceived within the US court system. In one book, ‘Seven Simple Steps to Personal Freedom’, he outlined how most of humanity is in slavery, while mistakenly thinking they are free.

On the first page he states, “What I argue for is freedom without regard to the exterior forces that enslave us. I argue that freedom can exist only if we have first freed the self. And in life, the self is ours to free.” He explains that while many may rage and wail at their fate, they blame anybody and everything instead of taking responsibility for their agreement to be slaves. He noted that while they may want better conditions, or a bigger cage, few want to free themselves.  Many may remain imprisoned in work but will comply because they are too frightened to remove the shackles with all that this involves. So, they comply, even if they see things that are wrong. They seek to fit in. They turn a blind eye. They collect their paycheck. They lessen themselves and their incredible power as they become more enslaved by the system they may not agree with, but which they serve. In his own life, Gerry Spence reached the point where he realised this and threw the shackles off. He went from a man of means to a man with nothing and rebuilt his life on his terms. Free.

So, when Barry stood up and spoke out about what he saw, he broke the shackles that had bound him and became free. Preventing more people from being hurt was more important to him than his job, his possessions or any so-called perceived “security.” He couldn’t be true to himself without taking steps to put things right, which meant speaking up.

Please note: There are many outstanding, legendary New Zealanders who are equally heroic. Each one of them is formidable, courageous, brave, and has stood, without wavering, no matter what those within the corridors of power threw at them. NZDSOS (New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science) is one such example of an incredible group of professionals who had the guts to stand by their Hippocratic Oath and their integrity. They spoke out. They were knocked down but got back up every time - and continue to do so - regardless of the blows of deregistration, losing the right to practice and being fined hideous amounts by a Medical Council (“MCNZ”) that should have, at the least, stood with them, but didn’t. They have risen above it all and continue to speak out, even to the extent of creating a safe place for the injured and bereaved to find help in a trusted environment at the New Zealand Doctors Holistic Health Collective (“NZDHHC"). There are many, many other amazing New Zealanders of similar stature who stand beside them in this rare field of the brave.

Barry broke the mould because he worked within the administrative area of the MOH as a statistician and, through his job, discovered bombshell information he knew, within himself, was imperative to report. No one else from the administrative offices is known to have spoken out, no one in the offices of the Prime Minister, other MPs, the MOH or anywhere in the NZ government who has had similar knowledge, has done this in the past six years, if ever. Just Barry.

Is the court process - dragging on past 900 days now - being used as an example to the rest of the parliamentary bureaucracy? A shot across the bows that warns others who ethically invoke the Whistleblowers Act that this is what will happen to you?

What happened to Barry? Well, he didn’t cower in his chains. Instead, he opted to turn his face to the light and shrugged off the shackles. In so doing, he no longer had to carry the burden of observing what he saw as harm and death occurring to fellow New Zealanders and not acting to prevent it. He no longer had to check in at work with a sense of dread. He no longer had to work for a system that harmed. His conscience was clear. He slept well. He could look people straight in the eye. He is experiencing the recognition of how powerful he, and each one of us, has the divine potential to be.

He is FREE. As Barry says, even if he loses, he wins.

For the system of slavery to remain intact, we are pushed to consider ourselves as without power or worth. But that is a lie. Instead government, through their actions and inactions, present themselves as powerless and unworthy if they treasonously walk in lockstep with global cabals and technocrats that seek to take what is not theirs and control the world with an authoritarian/police state rule. Soulless entities pushing in, taking over, raping and pillaging our natural resources, destroying the health of the nation, our people and our food sources, demanding ever more, while grossly spending the hard-earned money of New Zealanders on increasing surveillance, compliance, regulations and suppression.

Don’t they realise that, ultimately, there is no honour among thieves? As one experienced barrister recently commented:  “It is frustrating how this system we live in is keeping people down in a slavery they cannot see and destroying the true potential of humanity.”

Barry calmly stepped into this tsunami that many see as an orchestrated suppressive government/technocrat overreach and showed what he had found. As mentioned, just like NZDSOS - and so many other legendary New Zealanders - each time he is knocked down, he gets back up, only taller, bigger and stronger. We can all do that.

Truth is a formidable armour.

There is one other aspect to this and many others. There is no observable hate in this man. He doesn’t inadvertently give the dark side negative energies, such as fear or hate, to feed on and use against him, because he just doesn’t feel that. He rises above that. He has freed himself by his actions.

As he prepares for his next battle in the ring, relaxed, fearless and brave, all that he has done stands as a silent and powerful testimony of the power within him and in each one of us. With truth, honour and integrity on our side, there is nothing we cannot tackle. Especially together.

Thank you to every incredible New Zealander who tirelessly stands up and speaks out, regardless of the personal cost. You are each an angel sent.

With love …

Related: Grievous Bodily Harm? The Human Cost of the NZ Government’s Covid-19 Injection Rollout, NZDSOS, 10 May 2026

Featured image: Barry Young, a hero of our times. Source: NZDSOS

[expose-news]

From the day we are born, our health is determined by our gut

Your immune system and gut microbiome share a symbiotic relationship and your immune function is largely dependent on the state of your gut.

More than 99% of your genes come from microbes, not your chromosomes.

The best predictor of future health is your gut microbiome at birth. C-section and antibiotic regimens - both in the mother and the baby - are known to degrade the baby’s microbiome, but can be compensated for.

Healthy microbiomes are more connected to what your ancestors had that has been lost through short-sighted practices and technology installations. Trying to head toward that is much more constructive than trying to completely overhaul something to a group of microbes your ancestors never saw.

Aside from the vaginal tract, the baby also receives valuable microbes via skin-to-skin contact, including oral contact with breast tissue, as well as from the breast milk, which is why breastfeeding is so important and impacts your child’s health well into the future. Environmental exposures from soil, food and animals also play a role.

How Your Microbiome Influences Your Immune System

By Dr. Joseph Mercola

Author’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published on 24 January 2021.

Table of Contents

- Introduction - Ancestral Microbiomes - Compensatory Practices - Epigenetic Interactions - How Your Gut Microbiome Impacts Immunosenescence - Avoid Unnecessary Antibiotic Exposure - Colonisation Resistance - From Gut to Brain - How to Address Leaky Gut - Your Health Begins in Your Gut - About the Author Introduction

In this interview, Rodney Dietert, Professor Emeritus of immunotoxicology at Cornell University, reviews the interrelationship between your immune system and your gut microbiome.

He's spent several decades researching and teaching students about the immune system. As noted by Dietert, your gut microbiome is crucial not just for immune function, but also for your health status in general, as it affects nearly all other physiological systems.

He first became aware of the importance of the gut when given the opportunity to write a research paper about which biomarker would be the best to predict the future health of a baby.

"I thought that was a really intriguing question to develop a paper around," he says. "And, I was pretty sure decades of work on the immune system in the young, prenatal and neonatal, meant that I had an answer.

“I became very frustrated because I wrote a couple of paragraphs and it was unpersuasive, and went to bed extremely frustrated. I woke up in the middle of the night from a dream with what to me was an answer.

“The answer was that it was the extent to which the newborn became complete or completed itself, and that that self-completion is really the installation of the microbiome, largely from the mother, but both parents contributing; vaginal delivery when possible, skin-skin contact, and then, of course, followed up with prolonged breastfeeding when possible."

Ancestral Microbiomes

He points out that "more than 99% of your genes are from microbes, not from your chromosomes." You have approximately 3.3 million microbial genes, mainly bacterial. Across the entire population of humans, there are just under 10 million different microbial genes, so you won't necessarily have all of them.

You also have 22,000 to 25,000 chromosomal genes (these genes are what were analysed through the Human Genome Project), which means you only have about 2,000 more chromosomal genes than an earthworm. As noted by Dietert, since we have about 3.3 million microbial genes, that means we're more than 99% microbial, genetically.

This is why he concluded that the gut microbiome at birth would be the best predictor of future health. Granted, your microbiome is altered through diet and environmental exposures, and that will impact and influence your health throughout your life. But initially, the infant microbiome is the best overall predictor of future health.

"That led to a whole host of other lectures, books, scientific journal articles and an appearance in the documentary movie, 'MicroBirth,' which is a wonderful film. It won the life science award in 2014 for documentary films. That launched a second career, really, as a result of a dream, and paying attention to that versus the linear progression of 30-plus years of research."

According to Dietert, there's really no single measure of any particular bacterial species that will give you a definitive answer to what your health will be like. Rather, the most important predictive aspect is the seeding process. If the baby goes through an ideal seeding process at birth, he or she stands a greater chance of experiencing good health.

For example, elective cesarean section (“C-section”) and antibiotic regimens - both in the mother and the baby - are known to degrade the baby's microbiome. Since 2012, when he had that dream, he's been able to map out more specifics, but there's no single ideal microbiome per se. There are many different healthy microbiomes.

"These arose in our ancestors depending on their geography, diet and a whole host of factors that were honed over thousands of years," he explains.

"For example, I have, in my 60s, tried to modify my health constructively by modifying my microbiome and, in my case, it would've been a long reach to get an ideal Asian microbiome because that's not really my ancestry. It's not where I grew up, or the soil I lived on and the food I ate.

“So, healthy microbiomes are more connected to what your ancestors had that has been lost through short-sighted practices and technology installations. Trying to head toward that is much more constructive than trying to completely overhaul something to a group of microbes your ancestors never saw."

Compensatory Practices

Past dogma stated that the infant's immune system was complete at birth, with little to no maturation or adjustment required in the infant. Now we realise that this is not true. The baby's immune development in utero is not uniform. It is skewed to protect the maintenance of the pregnancy. This skewing then needs to be adjusted in the newborn/infant and the immune system needs to be expanded, redistributed and rebalanced.

The best way to do this is by ensuring that rebalancing the baby's microbiome is complete and that a healthy infant microbiome can drive necessary post-natal immune maturation. If microbially driven, infant immune maturation does not happen, then immune dysfunction-driven disease is an increased likelihood for that child.

Remember that 60% to 70% of your immune cells are located in your gut and these immune cells are in close proximity to your gut microbiome. So, gut microbiome status and immune status are intimately intertwined.

As mentioned, having a C-section puts your newborn at serious risk for developing a less-than-optimal microbial population. However, in some cases, a C-section is necessary and the good news is that you can compensate for the loss of microbial seeding that would have occurred during vaginal birth.

Gloria Dominguez Bello, PhD, at Rutgers University, who has pioneered much of this work, uses a vaginal swab technique where the microbes from the mother's vagina are manually transferred to the baby immediately after birth. "While it's not 100% equivalent, it is very good," Dietert says.

"Those types of strategies are the direction we need to head in to really aid parents in being able to deliver the majority of the baby's genetics. Those microbial genes are making proteins and enzymes, they're modifying what we see from the external environment, they're modifying our diet before our mammalian human cells ever see anything.

“In effect, if you look at interference with seeding the microbiome, to me, that is like a birth defect. If you were missing an organ or a limb, that would be a birth defect. Here, you're missing the majority of your genetics .

“Yet, that is a correctable birth defect and we need to keep that in mind. That would really be the push and the goal - to ensure the baby is able to have, as soon after birth as possible, the robust microbiome that would normally be there …

“We know from experience that status of the microbiome dramatically impacts things like risk of asthma at age 7, and then subsequent health risks as well. Even picking up atherosclerosis markers, which you now can measure in children even though the disease onset will probably be decades off …

“If you're growing up on a farm and having raw milk, and are exposed to animals and the microbes that go with that environment, it turns out that's rather protective against asthma and allergy later in childhood, as long as you're not directly encountering pesticides. That will eliminate the benefit .

“Those microbial exposures early in life are really what our ancestors had to develop an appropriately balanced immune system, a well-regulated immune system. If we don't do that, then you're shifted toward a proinflammatory state and your regulation of immunity is off .

“Nature tells us that the microbiome has to have some compatibility with the immune system as they co-mature. When you get microbiomes that are really foreign to an immune system, the immune system responds with a massive inflammatory response, so there's a self-attack …"

Aside from the vaginal tract, the baby also receives valuable microbes via skin-to-skin contact, including oral contact with breast tissue, as well as from the breast milk itself, which is why breastfeeding is so important and impacts your child's health well into the future. As mentioned above, environmental exposures from soil, food and animals also play a role.

Epigenetic Interactions

Your microbiome (in addition to directly metabolising your food, drugs and chemicals) also influences the epigenetic expression of your (chromosomal) genes. For example, Dietert cites the work of Curtis Klaassen, former president of the Society of Toxicology and an expert on liver metabolism, who years ago shifted focus to microbiome metabolism because, epigenetically, microbes influence liver metabolism.

"The microbes our food first. They see our environmental chemicals first. They see drugs through most routes of administration first, and what they do with those determine what your body sees. So, they're our gatekeeper, they're our filter for our whole environmental existence.

“As a result, it's important to know what happens there. An example is cancer therapeutics. Most of those have to be metabolised by the microbiome. If we manage the microbiome more effectively in patients, we very likely could increase the efficacy of those drugs across a population of patients.

“I think the UK said they're about 50% effective. That could be increased because we've ignored the microbiome and its role, even though these drugs don't work unless they're metabolised by the microbiome. "

How Your Gut Microbiome Impacts Immunosenescence

Historically, the thymus gland has been known to be really important for the development of the immune system and in older people, the deterioration of the immune system is frequently related to thymic deterioration. The good news is this can, to some extent, be compensated for by improving your gut microbiome. Dietert explains:

"Ageing of the immune system is really dependent upon your lifetime diet in large part. So, you don't have to buy into the fact that there is only one end for an 80-year-old's immune system - senescence, lower responses to certain infectious disease agents and greater risk of auto-reactivity. You really don't have to buy that, because it is largely influenced by diet and microbial metabolism."

One factor that plays a significant role in the destruction of your gut microbiome is the use of medications. According to Dietert, 25% to 50% of all drugs, including over-the-counter medications, damage your microbiome in predictable ways. Other drugs interact with the microbiome, modifying drug treatment outcomes. We ignore these drug-microbiome interactions at our own peril.

"For example, here's just one case that's historic: Digoxin, a long-standing heart medication, can be metabolised by one specific bacterial species . Now, depending on the level of that species that you have in your gut, the drug will either be ineffective because of the metabolic level, it will be effective, or it will be toxic and kill the patient.

“It's a bit of a problem in terms of prescribing , even though it can be an effective drug.

“Knowing that , and knowing it's one specific bacterium , which could be measured, could be supplemented and the level could be changed or the drug level could be changed .

“Why wouldn't you do that if you were going to administer this type of drug? ."

So, the more microbe-damaging drugs you use, the greater the degradation of your microbiome will be over time. When combined with a poor diet, you end up with immunosenescence - the gradual deterioration of your immune system - but it's not a given just because you get old if you protect and support your microbiome and immune system across the life span.

"As always when you're dealing with the immune system and inflammation, it's a matter of tissue integrity and the question of whether you've so damaged an organ that it's going to be tough to come back from," Dietert says.

"You want to make these corrections before you've completely lost good function due to massive inflammatory damage over decades."

Avoid Unnecessary Antibiotic Exposure

One simple strategy that will protect your microbiome is to avoid antibiotics. While they may be necessary to combat an active infection, the vast majority of antibiotics you're exposed to come from food. Animals raised in concentrated animal feeding operations (“CAFOs”) are routinely fed antibiotics that you then ingest when you eat that animal.

That's one of the reasons why I strongly support and recommend eating organic, as organically raised animals are not allowed to be given antibiotics unless the animal is actually ill. CAFO animals are also more prone to carrying antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

The covid-19 pandemic has also increased the use of antibacterial products. People think they're killing harmful germs but, in reality, they're just killing their immune system. As explained by Dietert:

"You have to support your entire body and you have to support your immune system as well. I'd point out that, for example, glyphosate is an antimicrobial. First, it destroys soil microbes, then plant microbes and then it gets into animals and into us. We're exposed directly and we're exposed through food.

“Again, it's widespread and it's just one example. You can take the plasticisers, bisphenol-A and others, where these things were never screened properly and the attention to the microbiome was never given. That's a huge mistake and we need to reverse that immediately.

“I'm a big proponent of regenerative agriculture … I look at ecological management of microbes and robust diversity of plants, animals and our food production as critical. I'd like to point out that covid19 is, in fact, a cytokine storm.

“It is an improper host immune response that leads to lung pathology and increased risk of death. Yet there's been almost no attention paid to the multiple factors that influence the immune system, inflammation and what's called 'colonisation resistance’."

Colonisation Resistance

As explained by Dietert, you carry coronaviruses in your airways. Most have some coronavirus in the airway, but it won't cause illness as long as you have a healthy airway microbiome. A healthy airway microbiome is supported and promoted by things like physical exercise and spending time outdoors, where sun exposure will optimise your vitamin D level.

"To grow our own food, get outside, visit animal farms and have microbial exposures in a healthy way, increase our vitamin D and tend to our immune system and our overall health is absolutely critical," he says.

"The more robust the microbiome , the better the colonisation resistance we have against these pathogens. the secondary bacterial infections that will arise during the mix of changing a lung environment proinflammatory state.

“We should've been doing that from the word go but, unfortunately, we have some scientists and bureaucrats that focused in one place and didn't really focus, in my opinion, on human health."

As just one example of how healthy bacteria help prevent infection, Lactobacillus acidophilus has been shown to block salmonella infection and spread in chickens. In the early 1990s, this type of intervention actually ended up saving the poultry industry that was having a massive salmonella problem, yet you never hear about that.

"I think this shows we need to manage how we produce our food. We need to recognise the benefits of a variety of supplements. I think that is what's going to help get us out of the polypharmacy rut that we've been in, quite frankly."

It's really a classic example of competitive inhibition, and it works the same way in the human body. According to Dietert, as few as 15 beneficial bacteria are able to create a metabolic environment in the gut that keeps the salmonella bacterium in check, thereby preventing it from multiplying out of control and causing disease.

So, with a robust diversity of beneficial bacteria in your gut, you're effectively able to block infection from occurring even though you may be exposed to dangerous pathogens. Keep in mind that the composition of your microbiome will also play a significant role in how well you handle dietary "cheating" or the occasional junk food indulgence. As noted by Dietert:

"If you have a particularly robust microbiome, you're probably more resilient to a junk food weekend. If you are already dysbiotic or you're weakened in your microbiome because of chronic conditions, polypharmacy or glyphosate exposures, then you probably are pretty vulnerable to further shifts.

“Again, it's how well are you seeded with a robust diversity? It's like forest management in ecology or coral reef management. If you've got a coral reef that's already damaged and sick, then it isn't going to take much to really put it over the top in terms of serious changes. This would be the same for us in terms of immune inflammation, pathology and/or an infectious agent getting a foothold, whereas it wouldn't otherwise."

From Gut to Brain

One way by which beneficial bacteria protect your health is through the production of butyrate and mucin, the mucous layer that protects the intestine.

[expose-news]

Germany Must Keep Supporting Rejected Asylum Seekers in New EU Ruling

The European Court of Justice has ruled that Germany cannot strip certain asylum seekers of basic support while they remain on German soil, even when another EU country is deemed responsible for processing their claim. The judgement places another legal limit on Berlin’s attempts to tighten migration policy and reinforces a familiar tension in Europe, where national governments promise tougher controls while European law continues to guarantee minimum rights to those awaiting transfer or removal. It also further exposes the dwindling control countries have in the European Union, and the continued dilution of member states' sovereignty.

EU Overrules Germany on Benefits for Asylum Seekers in Europe

The case centres around an asylum seeker identified as FB, whose claim was rejected as inadmissible by Germany. This decision was made because another EU member state was considered responsible under the Dublin system, which is the EU framework used to decide who should examine an asylum claim (but is usually the country that the person first entered or was first registered). While waiting to be transferred, German authorities provided food, heated accommodation, hygiene items, and healthcare, but withheld support for clothing, household goods, and other personal needs. The case began in Bavaria, after FB sued the district of Schweinfurt, before the matter reached the EU's highest court.

On 4th June 2026, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in FB's favour. Judges found that Germany could not withdraw what the court considered "basic necessities" such as clothing and household goods, even from asylum seekers whose claims are not supposed to be examined by Germany in the first place. The court said clothing belongs among the "most basic needs", while cash benefits for daily expenses such as transport and communication devices help preserve a "minimum level of participation" in the social and cultural life of the country where the applicant is staying.

Germany's Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act has long provided a separate welfare regime for asylum seekers and certain foreign nationals without full residence status. Basic support is intended to cover food, accommodation, heating, clothing, healthcare, personal hygiene and household goods, as well as personal daily needs like public transport and mobile phones. Civil society groups have criticised the system as discriminatory, while successive German governments have treated it as a way to distinguish temporary protection and pending claims from ordinary social welfare.

Since 2016, Germany has been moving to restrict these provisions. The grounds for reducing reception conditions have expanded, with further changes introduced in 2019. Those affected can include people under an enforceable obligation to leave Germany, people accused of entering primarily to receive benefits, and those whose removal cannot be carried out for reasons attributed to them. The system has also been used in Dublin cases, where Germany agues that another member state is responsible for the asylum claim.

Benefits for asylum seekers have been repeatedly debated in Germany, especially the cash payments. States introduced the Bezahlkarte, or payment card, after politicians argued that cash benefits act as an incentive and allow transfers abroad. The card became an official means of providing benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act in May 2024.

However, the recent ECJ ruling moves directly against the country's deterrence logic. It determines that regardless of responsibility, if an asylum seeker is physically present in a particular country, then that country must continue minimum support. The legal onus to provide "basic dignity" remains with the state currently hosting the person.

The Dublin system, introduced by the EU itself, is supposed to prevent this scenario. It should also stop asylum seekers from choosing where to have their claims examined. Transfers are slow, refusals by receiving states are common, and asylum seekers often remain for long periods in countries that are not responsible for handling their claim, at great cost. If benefits cannot be reduced below a protected minimum during that time, then the practical deterrent effect of inadmissibility decisions is weakened.

This is a politically sensitive moment for Germany. Friedrich Merz's conservative-led government came to power promising a tougher migration policy after the February 2025 federal election, in which migration concerns helped fuel support for Alternative für Deutschland. In May 2025, the government ordered the rejection of undocumented migrants, including asylum seekers, at German borders. A Berlin administrative court later ruled that the expulsion of three Somali asylum seekers to Poland was unlawful because Germany should have determined responsibility under the EU's Dublin system; exactly the same framework now working against the country's efforts.

Merz said that judgement would not stop his government's migration crackdown. He argued that Germany would continue to act within European law to protect public safety and relieve pressure on cities and municipalities. Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt also defended the policy, saying Germany was overwhelmed and that the government would keep pressing its legal case.

The latest ECJ ruling now adds another constraint. First, German courts questioned the legality of rejecting asylum seekers at the border without proper Dublin procedures. Now the EU's highest court has said that even those expected to leave cannot be left with only "bed, bread and soap". The cumulative effect is a widening gap between what national governments say they intend to do, and what European law allows them to implement in their own country.

This is not specific to one country. In June 2024, the ECJ imposed a €200 million fine on Hungary and ordered a daily penalty of €1 million until compliance, after finding that Budapest had failed to uphold EU asylum rules. The court said Hungary had deliberately evaded EU asylum policy, including by obstructing access to the asylum procedure and unlawfully removing rejected asylum seekers. Hungary's Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán, denounced the ruling as outrageous.

The asylum judgements across Europe also fit a wider pattern visible beyond migration policy. Our recent article, Poland Gay Marriage Ruling Exposes True Reach of EU Power, investigated a case in Poland where the ECJ forced countries to recognise same-sex marriages even where domestic law prohibits it. That case arose after Poland refused to recognise a gay marriage registered in Germany, as their country's own law does not provide for same-sex marriage. The ECJ ruled that they must recognise it anyway.

The significance and relationship of the migration and marriage cases lie not particularly in the subject of each case, but in the mechanism. Questions once treated as national legal democratic decisions, from asylum support to family recognition, are increasingly being decided by supranational interpretation, and countries are losing their sovereignty. EU law, therefore, no longer merely regulates rights issues. It is proving its ability to override national measures and reception conditions, and force sovereign states to rule or protect (or not) their country in a certain way.

In the migration case specifically, European courts are steadily insulating systems from democratic pressure and control, making it harder for governments to deter irregular movement, remove people without a right to remain, and distinguish between accepted and rejected refugees. Together, these cases create a system in which enforcement becomes slower and more expansive.

This all points towards a deeper issue regarding the two ideas of Europe. One is a Europe of member states, in which elected governments respond to voters demanding control of borders, reduced welfare incentives, and faster removals. The other is a Europe of legal guarantees, in which minimum standards follow the individual across borders and cannot be suspended because a government wants to create deterrence.

The recent ECJ ruling in Germany is about more than just clothing, household goods, or a cash allowance for a single asylum applicant. Instead, it exposes how national governments are losing control over their own welfare decisions and asylum policy as a whole, and how European law will intervene regardless of sovereign countries' own democratic choices.

[expose-news]

Flashback 2015: Ebola is a business; it’s public health in reverse

The 2014–2016 West African Ebola epidemic was the first Ebola epidemic ever documented.   The outbreak began in December 2013 in Guinea and spread to Liberia and Sierra Leone. By January 2015, the World Health Organisation reported over 21,400 confirmed, probable and suspected cases, with 8,400 deaths across the affected region.

Ghana recorded no confirmed cases but GlaxoSmithKline and Johnson & Johnson conducted Ebola vaccine trials in the country.  The vaccine trials were suspended due to protests from Members of Parliament and the general public.

Ghanaian-British Professor Dr. Felix I. D. Konotey-Ahulu, who gave his address as Harley Street, London, said in a ‘Rapid Response’ in the British Medical Journal (“BMJ”) that Ghanaians viewed Ebola as a “well-planned business.”

“A business where people have created an artificial problem and are now looking for a market to sell the solution,” he said.

Related: Ebola is a business, Congolese close to the outbreak say

Ebola and Ethics: “Are vaccine trials going on somewhere in Africa?”

By Felix I.D. Konotey-Ahulu, Kwegyir Aggrey, Distinguished Professor of Human Genetics University of Cape Coast and Consultant Physician Genetic Counsellor in Sickle Cell and Other Haemoglobinopathies, as published by the BMJ on 2 June 2025

Dr J K Anand’s question, “Are vaccine trials going on somewhere in Africa?” has been answered from Ghana where the natives have protested in no uncertain terms . Under the Banner of “Stop ‘criminal’ Ebola vaccines trial in Ghana – Coalition,” the Coalition of Ghana’s Independence Now (CGIN) has issued a communique and broadcast: “We consider the human experimentation of Ebola vaccine in a country with no Ebola case as criminal, human rights abuse, thievery and a total disrespect of Ghanaians as human beings” . The communique went on: “We want to say without fear or favour that Ebola is not just a disease but rather a well-planned business. A business where people have created an artificial problem and are now looking for a market to sell the solution and we are telling Ghanaians beforehand that there is and will be no way by which Ghana can go through this Ebola virus human experiment without Ebola being spread countrywide.”

Rings An Ominous Bell

All this rings an ominous bell: ‘Emerging Viruses – AIDS & Ebola: Nature, Accident or Intentional’ is the title of Leonard Horowitz’s remarkably well-referenced 595-page book that meticulously dissects Conspiracy Theories from Conspiracy Facts . Already, Lancet has published an informed Editorial on ‘Conspiracy Theories of HIV/AIDS’ , but it was the same Lancet that alerted the world with this extraordinary statement of Conspiracy Fact: “While one group of scientists is devoting its energies to prevent diseases, another is devising man-made epidemics” leading to what Lord Ritchie-Calder called “Public Health in reverse” . Captioning its editorial ‘The Biological Bomb’, Lancet warned of the potential of great evil that Recombinant DNA research was capable of, and that there was a “biological bomb lying at the heart of the nucleus, ticking us to destruction” . Ghanaians now protesting against Ebola Virus Vaccine Experiments prefer to explain the Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic that began in Guinea and afflicted Liberia, Sierra Leone and Nigeria through a Public Health in Reverse exercise to accepting the “scientific” disinformation that Africans eating bats brought this calamity on themselves.

Presidential Confession of Public Health in Reverse Guilt

Two living American Presidents have confessed openly that some scientists from the USA behaved shamefully; their Conspiracy Facts regarding Third World Scientific Initiatives having been exposed. These confessions, accompanied by apologies from Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and broadcast worldwide, were heard and discussed seriously by Ghanaians. Indeed, I said in the BMJ after President Obama’s apology over the disgraceful Guatemala syphilis study that such scientific misbehaviour places “international cooperative research in jeopardy” . When scientists apparently offering to help us as bodyguards of Ghana’s health are deemed to be nothing less than assassins, then we may as well say goodbye to international cooperative research. What Dr. Christian Gericke considers to be “compassionate use of experimental drugs and vaccines” is, through the hindsight of research intrigue, considered to be poison. The fact that Sophie Aries , writing last month in the BMJ on Ebola Vaccines, does not acknowledge anywhere that there are two kinds of scientists working in Third World countries when she mentions the word “scientists” in almost every paragraph of her detailed article shows she knows nothing about what Lord Ritchie-Calder said in Lancet, nor that she has ever read any of the compelling evidence available today that there are scientists with Nazi proclivities in our midst . Didier Fassin and Helen Schneider said that much in the BMJ , which made me lament how difficult it was becoming to tell “the good White man who has come to help us” from the one intent on “Public Health in reverse” for population control .

Superb British Training Equips One To Detect Bad Scientists

Fortunately, many Ghanaians, including those protesting today against Ebola Vaccine experimentation, boast of their excellent teachers in the UK who equipped them to see through global health initiatives presented as “just the thing to help Africans.” If one health programme is unfit to be carried out in the UK, our superb teachers have taught us to reject it when suggested to us in Africa. For instance, my excellent training in London, Cambridge and Liverpool Universities equipped me to criticise the present Global Genome Sequencing being carried out ANONYMOUSLY as totally unacceptable to Africans for the same reasons I gave in an invited contribution to a Symposium on Ethics of the Human Genome Diversity Project . I started the HGDP Symposium paper with this quote: “Equo ne credite, Teucri! Quidquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes” (Do not trust the horse, Trojans! Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts) , which can now be modified Ebola vaccine-wise to “Ebolae vaccinae ne credite, Ghanaiani! Timeo researcheros dona vaccinata ferentes” .

“Vaccines For Ebola Developed (Against) Bioterrorism Virus”

Sophie Arie reported in the BMJ last month, “Candidate treatments and vaccines for Ebola were developed only because the United States considered the virus a potential weapon for bioterrorism” , and she admitted the possibility that the trials may “result in harmful side effects and deaths” . This confirms much of what Leonard Horowitz already said . We Africans are scared that more viruses will “emerge” to cause epidemics. Sophie Arie tells how the Drug and Vaccine Firms are geared up to tackle more imminent “emerging” viruses . But does it surprise anyone that we Ghanaians are suspicious of the Vaccine Trials Scientists? With us, it all boils down to trust which, frankly, n’existe pas!

Felix I D Konotey-Ahulu MD(Lond) FRCP(Lond) DTMH(L’pool). Kwegyir Aggrey Distinguished Professor of Human Genetics, University of Cape Coast, Ghana and Consultant Physician Genetic Counsellor in Sickle Cell and Other Haemoglobinopathies, 9 Harley Street Ltd., Phoenix Hospital Group, London W1G 9AL Email: [email protected]

Competing interests: Competing Interest: I am Krobo Tribesman identifying with fellow Ghanaians in their fear of Lord Ritchie-Calder’s “scientists who devise man-made epidemics that lead to Public Health in reverse.”

References - 1 Anand JK. Ebola and Ethics. Are vaccine trials going on somewhere in Africa? BMJ Rapid Response June 1 2015 www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h2105/rr-4 (BMJ 2015; 350: h2105) - 2 Coalition for Ghana’s Independence Now (CGIN). Stop “criminal” Ebola vaccines trial in Ghana! Starr FM-on-Line www.starrfmonline.com 103’5 FM May 30 2015 4.00 pm Broadcast & Communique. - 3 Horowitz Leonard G. Emerging Viruses – AIDS & Ebola: Nature, Accident or Intentional. Tetrahedron Press 2014, Las Vegas, NV, USA. - 4 The Lancet. Conspiracy Theories of HIV/AIDS, Lancet 2005; Vol 365 (Feb 5) p 448. - 5 Lancet Annotations. The Biological Bomb. Lancet 1968 (March 20); Volume 1: p 465. - 6 Igonoh Ada. “I survived Ebola Virus Disease”. Shared with Bella Naija http://bit.ly/1oPFf42 2014 - 7 Konotey-Ahulu FID. Dr Ameyo Adadevoh’s Assistant Dr Ada Igonoh survives Ebola Virus Disease. BMJ Rapid Response 10 February 2015 to Anne Gulland’s Obituary to Dr Ameyo Adadevoh http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7558 - 8 Clinton President WJ. Apology on br-Gaultehalf of the American Government to 8 survivors of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment victims. World-wide radio and televfision PBS NewsHour Newsreel Announcement (Jim Lehrer and Charlayne Hunter-Gault) May 16 1997 http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/may97/tuskegee_5-16.html - 9 Tanne Janice Hopkins. President Obama apologises to Guatemala over 1940’ssyphilis study. BMJ 2010: 341.c5494 October 9, page 750. - 10 Konotey-Ahulu FID. President Obama apologises over Guatemala syphilis study: International Cooperative Research in jeopardy. BMJ Rapid Response October 17 2010  http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/03/president-obama-apologises-... - 11 Gerricke CA. Ebola and Ethics: autopsy of a failure (Editorial). BMJ 2015; 350:h2105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2105 (23 April 2015) - 12 Arie Sophie. Ebola: A game changer for vaccines, or a scare that will soon be forgotten? BMJ 2015; 350:h1938 - 13 Muller-Hill Benno. Murderous Science. Elimination by Scientific Selection of Jews, Gypsies, and Others – Germany 1933-1945 Oxford, Oxford University Press 1988. - 14 Thairu Kihumbu. The African & AIDS Holocaust: An Historical and Medical Perspective. Nairobi, Kenya 2003. Phoenix Publisher Ltd., ISBN 9966 47 1847. - 15 Fassin Didier, Schneider Helen. The Politics of AIDS in South Africa, beyond the controversies. BMJ 2003; 326: 495-497 (March 1) - 16 Konotey-Ahulu FID. AIDS in South Africa: Wake-up call and need for paradigm shift. BMJ 2003 Rapid Response to Fassin & Schneider http://www.rethinking.org/bmj/response_30917.html - 17 Wise Jacqui. Consortium hopes to sequence genome of 1000 volunteers. BMJ 2008; 336: 237 (2 February). - 18 International Consortium http://1000genomes.org/files/100Genomes-NewsRelease.pdf Jan 22 2008 Announcement News Release: The 1000 Genomes Project – Major Sequencing Effort Will Produce Most Detailed Map of Human Genetic Variation to Support Disease Studies. - 19 Konotey-Ahulu FID. Sequencing Genome of 1000 Volunteers: Why do this anonymously? African Journal of Health Sciences 2011; Volume 18: pp 37-52 (96 References) http://bit.ly/1CZRIAT or www.ajhsjournal.ro.ke/admin/current/914vpjkSBOS.pdf - 20 Konotey-Ahulu FID. Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP): Cogitations of An African Native. Politics and The Life Sciences (PLS) 1999, Vol 18, No 2, pp317-322.

Featured image: Workers carrying a body out of a home. Taken from ‘A Photo Contest Captures Life with Ebola in West Africa’, Open Society Foundations, 19 September 2016

[expose-news]

The Islamist regime in Iran is an existential threat to neighbouring Arab states

If you turn on British left-wing television, all you will hear is how Israel and the United States are attacking Iran.  The Islamic Republic of Iran, if Channel 4 et al. are to be believed, is an innocent victim.  But this is not true.

The Islamist regime in Iran is attacking its Arab neighbours, both their infrastructure and economies, which has led to Arab states viewing Iran as an existential threat, just as it is to Israel.

The Arab states of the Persian Gulf can no longer pretend that the threat posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran is manageable, Iran International says.

The Iranian Islamist regime views the Arab states' development and prosperity as a threat to its own legitimacy. It is unable to match the successful economic model of its neighbours, leading it to resort to economic vandalism to level the playing field. Arab states can no longer remain passive observers while others carry the burden of confronting it.

To achieve peace and security in the region, the Arab states can mobilise three vital partners: the Iranian people, who are eager to liberate themselves from their oppressors, Israel, which faces the same existential threat but possesses advanced capabilities to confront the regime, and the United States, whose strategic support remains entirely irreplaceable.

Related: Arab states deepened military ties with Israel while denouncing Gaza war, leak reveals, International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, 11 October 2025

Arab States Can No Longer Pretend Tehran’s Threat Is Manageable

By Saeed Ghasseminejad  and Navid Mohebbi, as published by Iran International

For decades, a dangerous illusion governed the Persian Gulf. Arab capitals knew the Islamic Republic was hostile. Yet, they believed the threat could be managed.

They treated Tehran’s subversion as a chronic illness, not a fatal one. The Arab states of the Persian Gulf opted for quiet diplomacy. Tehran opted for proxies and intimidation. This tense balance was always a house of cards.

That house has collapsed.

The recent war between the United States, Israel and the Islamic Republic changed everything. It did more than degrade Iran’s military. It shattered a long diplomatic illusion. The regime is not just a disruptive actor. It is a direct existential threat. Specifically, it threatens the economic foundations and long-term stability of the Arab states of the Persian Gulf.

Look closely at the targets the regime chose. Before the war, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar all signalled a desire for peace. Some lobbied against escalation. Others kept direct lines open to Tehran. Qatar even acted as a mediator.

None of it mattered. Iranian missiles still struck Qatari LNG infrastructure. They targeted Riyadh, the Saudi capital. The United Arab Emirates, historically a vital economic lifeline for Iran, absorbed the most brutal strikes on its primary commercial hubs.

This was a calculated message. Goodwill is no shield when your economic success is the actual target. Tehran does not just view the Arab states of the Persian Gulf as geopolitical rivals. It views their development as an existential threat to its own legitimacy.

For decades, the regime blamed its economic misery on outside enemies. It preached permanent revolution and resistance. Yet, just across the water, the Arab states of the Persian Gulf chose a different path. They built world-class infrastructure, trade and global growth.

This contrast is terrifying to the Islamic Republic. Ordinary Iranians look across the Persian Gulf and ask a dangerous question: Why does our country, with far greater natural resources, deliver nothing but poverty?

Tehran has no answer. It cannot match the economic model of its neighbours, so it resorts to economic vandalism. If the regime cannot build prosperity at home, it must destroy it next door to level the playing field.

This reality explains why the conflict has evolved beyond mere proxy warfare. The Arab states of the Persian Gulf are accustomed to dealing with asymmetric threats. They have managed Iranian-backed groups like Hezbollah, Iraqi militias and the Houthis for years.

The current crisis targets something deeper. It is not a standard security dispute. It is a direct assault on the economic model of the Arab states of the Persian Gulf.

Look at the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran views this vital waterway as a geopolitical jugular. The regime knows that prosperity in the Persian Gulf relies on global investor confidence, open trade and energy exports. By shutting the Strait, Tehran is holding the entire region's future hostage. If the Islamic Republic cannot climb out of its own economic grave, it will drag its neighbours down into it.

The old playbook is broken. De-escalation, mediation, and managed coexistence are no longer viable strategies. They hold diplomatic utility, but they cannot replace a core security doctrine. The regime proved it will eagerly strike the very neighbours who tried to contain the flames.

The Arab states of the Persian Gulf are confronting a reality they long sought to defer. The Islamic Republic is not a wild animal that can be tamed or managed indefinitely. It is a systemic threat. History shows that treating an expansionist power as a mere management problem only invites more aggressive escalation.

This shift does not require a reckless rush to war. It does mean the Arab states of the Persian Gulf can no longer remain passive observers while others carry the burden. The United States and Israel have already initiated a confrontation. The implications extend far beyond the regime's nuclear ambitions. Leaving this conflict unfinished is highly dangerous. It merely hands Tehran a life support system, giving it time to recover, rebuild and repeat its destructive cycles.

A deeper transformation is also underway. The strategic interests of key Arab states of the Persian Gulf now directly align with the aspirations of the Iranian people. The average Iranian derives no benefit from the regime’s foreign adventures. Instead, citizens pay the ultimate price through brutal domestic repression, systemic corruption and engineered economic ruin. The regime behaves like an absentee landlord, burning its own house down for insurance money to fund foreign militias.

By now, the pattern is undeniable. The Islamic Republic’s hostility is not a temporary phase. It stems from a profound systemic insecurity. A neighbourhood defined by stability, economic growth and global integration acts as a mirror. It exposes the regime’s self-inflicted failures. Tehran simply cannot survive the comparison. The old assumptions are officially dead.

The Arab states of the Persian Gulf are not dealing with a conventional rival. They are facing an existential adversary. This adversary views their prosperity and international alignments as an active threat to its survival.

Neutrality is no longer a shield. The Arab states of the Persian Gulf cannot afford to be passive spectators while their future is decided by others. True security will not come from managing the threat from a distance. It will come from actively building a region where totalitarian vandalism can no longer sabotage human progress.

To achieve this, the Arab states of the Persian Gulf can mobilise three vital partners. The first is the Iranian people, who are eager to liberate themselves from their oppressors. The second is Israel, which faces the exact same existential threat but possesses advanced capabilities to directly confront the regime. The third is the United States, whose strategic support remains entirely irreplaceable.

The Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf should actively coordinate with this triad, first behind the scenes and then openly. Together, they can finally bring down the Islamist regime in Tehran. Only after the Iranian people establish a representative government can the region breathe and find a true partner for peace, regional security and shared prosperity in Iran.

About Iran International

Iran International is a London-based, Persian-language satellite television channel and multilingual digital news outlet owned by Volant Media UK Ltd.  Launched in May 2017, the network is primarily funded by Saudi interests and broadcasts news, culture and political commentary to audiences in Iran and the global diaspora.