The names are Michael David Hicks, Frank Maiwald, Amy Eskridge, David Wilcock, Carl Grillmair, Nuno Loureiro, Matthew James Sullivan, Monica Jacinto Reza, William Neil McCasland, Anthony Chavez, Steven Garcia, Jason Thomas, and Melissa Casias.

So what is going on here? Are these deaths and disappearances just a tragic coincidence? Is a foreign power targeting US scientists the way Israel targets Iranian nuclear scientists? Could elements of the CIA or a rogue private contractor be silencing their own people? Or is something even stranger at play?

The first thing to note is that 10-11 of these cases have prompted a congressional inquiry from the House Oversight Committee because they were tied to sensitive aerospace, nuclear, and space research programs. We are told there is an FBI investigation into the matter, but whether that is a credible investigation, or an Epstein-style cover up remains unclear.

Officially, the FBI is calling this a “national security issue” and President Trump has demanded answers so it doesn’t sound like they’re playing it down. All I know is that members of congress seem concerned about what they have been told and they are not mincing their words.

Rep Anna Paulina Luna posted on Twitter, following UFO researcher David Wilcock’s death: “If you are feeling uneasy about the amount of scientists that have gone missing, died, and recent suicides ref those scientists and others you are correct in your intuition. Something is up.”

Rep Eric Burlison demanded a full FBI probe and warned: “I would not be surprised if our adversaries, China, Russia, Iran… saw an opportunity to take out some of our nation’s top scientists.” He noted these researchers are “not hardened. They don’t have a security detail… so they would be a very easy target.”

House Oversight Chairman James Comer has said the pattern “doesn’t pass the smell test” and that the odds they are unrelated are “very slim.”

One of the most alarming threads involves NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratories. JPL develops spacecraft, instruments, and planetary defence technologies which, as you can imagine, is driving UFO enthusiasts nuts!

Let’s just look at what we know about the missing JPL scientists:

Michael David Hicks was a planetary physicist who worked at JPL for 25 years and published over 80 scientific papers. He worked on NASA missions, including Deep Space 1 and the Double Asteroid Redirection Test. His job was basically to protect the earth from asteroids! He died two years ago and the cause of death was never disclosed, but his family does not suspect foul play.

Frank Maiwald was a principal researcher and senior radio frequency engineer who served at JPL for more than 25 years. He managed development of advanced instruments and contributed to the development of Earth-observing satellites, and other space projects. Maiwald died last year, and as with Hicks, no cause of death was disclosed.

Monica Jacinto Reza is a metallurgist and aerospace materials engineer. She worked as a Technical Fellow at Aerojet Rocketdyne where she co-invented “Mondaloy,” a nickel-based superalloy used in rocket engines. She has professional ties to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base projects which, some will tell you, is where the aliens are kept!

Reza was working as Director of the Materials Processing Group at JPL when she went missing while hiking in Angeles National Forest. What is weird is she was walking with friends and trailing behind, smiling and waving. They looked away and when they looked back, she was gone. No trace has ever been found, apart from a beanie in a ravine.

Maj Gen William Neil McCasland is a colleague of Monica Reza who commanded the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright-Patterson. He has a BS in Astronautical Engineering, and a PhD in Aerospace Engineering. He oversaw multi-billion dollar classified aerospace programs, including Mondaloy-related projects.

Interestingly, McCasland had brief involvement with To the Stars Academy—a UFO group headed by Tom DeLonge of Blink-182 fame. Investigative journalists have noted McCasland’s role in earlier military UFO investigations. They have also linked him to work at Los Alamos where two other scientists—Anthony Chavez and Melissa Casias—have gone missing. In the case of Casias, her devices were reportedly wiped.

McCasland went missing in the outdoors and his story is suspicious to say the least. He was an experienced hiker who left home without his phone or prescription glasses, but took his hiking boots, wallet, and a 38-caliber revolver (another scientist called Steven Garcia went missing in similar circumstances).

McCasland has not been seen since, and at the time of his disappearance, members of congress were actively reaching out to him. I understand many were eager to know what he knew and this made them immediately suspicious of his disappearance.

McCasland’s ties to Wright-Patterson make me suspect he knew something about alternative energy, but obviously I cannot prove this. One thing I can prove is that another scientist was vocal about her research in this field.

Amy Eskridge was a 34-year-old scientist who died three years ago from a gunshot wound that was officially ruled a suicide. Her father Richard is a retired NASA engineer who worked at Marshall Space Flight Center. I’ve seen some dismiss Amy as a crank, but she collaborated with her father—a plasma physics and fusion specialist—on experimental propulsion concepts. Richard Eskridge has authored 49 publications and numerous NASA Technical Reports.

Amy and Richard co-founded the Institute for Exotic Science that focused on quantum gravity, metamaterials, and propulsion systems. Amy said she set up the Institute “as a public-facing persona to disclose antigravity technology,” stating that going public was a form of protection: “If you stick your neck out in public, at least someone notices if your head gets chopped off.”

One of the Institute’s employees was Government Affairs Director Sam Reid, suggesting it was possibly seeking official approval, funding, or declassification. Eskridge needed NASA sign-off for some of her presentations so I think it’s safe to dismiss the “crank” theory.

Eskridge publicly discussed her work in presentations and videos, and in one presentation, her father hinted that the TR-3B (a rumoured triangular aircraft) could have come from secret gravity-modification research.

Amy collaborated with figures like Dr Ning Li—a deceased physicist whose anti-gravity research ended after a 2014 hit-and-run left her with brain damage. Dr Li’s research, involving rotating superconductors, grabbed media attention in the 90s, but she “went dark” in the 2000s and died in 2021.

Amy recorded videos expressing fears that she and others were going to be killed and insisted she was not suicidal. She seemed highly stressed in a 2020 interview, stating: “I need to disclose soon, man. I need to publish soon because it’s escalating. It’s getting more and more aggressive… This has been going on for four or five years, and over the past 12 months, it’s been escalating.”

Retired UK intelligence officer Franc Milburn says Amy was preparing to expose the intimidation and planned to release her findings. He says he spoke with Amy hours before her “suicide” and nothing seemed unusual. Journalist Michael Shellenberger highlighted this to congress in 2024, alleging Amy was targeted for her UFO-related work.

Even if you are sceptical about the UFO links (and you should be), these individuals worked in areas with significant national security implications. We have no autopsies for some deaths, and in some cases, no dead body.

Politicians such as Rep Eric Burlison have suggested China could be behind the deaths and disappearances. I understand that at least nine Chinese scientists have gone missing or mysteriously died in recent years. They were working in sensitive defence-related fields, such as military AI, hypersonics, space technology, microelectronics, and nuclear power.

The cases include military AI expert Feng Yanghe who died in an unexplained car crash, space expert Zhang Xiaoxin who also died in a car crash, drone specialist Zhang Daibing and hypersonics researchers Fang Daining and Yan Hong, who died from sudden medical episodes. The deaths have been described in Chinese media as “mysterious,” often with minimal official details released.

Media outlets like Newsweek are drawing parallels to the US deaths, asking whether a “silent scientist war” is underway. Another theory is that the same shady operators are behind the deaths in both countries. Both theories seem plausible, but I think it’s more likely the US deaths are the work of a rogue private contractor.

Let’s take a closer look at Amy Eskridge: one month before her death, she texted a friend: “If you see any report that I killed myself, I most definitely did not.” She said any suggestion that she had overdosed or harmed others should be treated with suspicion.

In interviews and videos, Eskridge described death threats, surveillance, stalking, and phone hacking. She even discussed attacks with “energy weapons” that left visible burns and symptoms resembling Havana Syndrome (a brain condition which has been attributed to microwave weapons). She claimed this stemmed from private aerospace contractors opposed to her disclosures.

Here is another death which was apparently suicide, but perhaps there was more at play. David Wilcock, the prominent UFO researcher shot himself in the head after a stand off with police. Like Maj Gen William Neil McCasland, Wilcock was linked to UFO group To The Stars Academy. Incidentally, Wilcock’s biographer died just a few days before him and he found out while on a live stream.

Wilcock was interested in advanced propulsion technologies and had publicly warned just days ago about the growing list of missing and dead scientists, calling it “a little bit scary” and expressing relief that he was “still alive.” Could he have been told something sensitive by a whistle-blower that made him a target?

In a Twitter post, Wilcock stated: “I plan on LIVING. Not suicidal at all. Just concerned about what happens when you prove God is real.” I don’t know what to make of that, but when someone tells you they’re not suicidal, expresses concerns about others dying, and then takes their own life, that makes me suspicious!

If you think we’re done here, we’re not even close.

Let’s take a look at Carl Grillmair. He was a world-renowned astrophysicist at Caltech’s Infrared Processing and Analysis Center, which works closely with NASA JPL on missions including the NEO Surveyor for near-Earth object detection. Grillmair researched galactic structure, dark matter, and planetary systems.

In February, Grillmair was shot in the torso while on the front porch of his rural home in Llano, a desert community in LA County’s Antelope Valley. This first appeared to be a random murder from a local nut job, but the evidence suggests possible targeting.

Court documents revealed the suspect had trespassed on Grillmair’s remote property approximately two months earlier. When confronted, he claimed to be coyote hunting and the matter was reported to police. Online researchers and even congressional staff have pointed to the isolation of the home and the prior trespass to suggest there is more at play.

One killing that looked like an execution was that of Nuno Loureiro—a theoretical physicist, professor in MIT’s departments of Nuclear Science & Engineering and Physics, and director of MIT’s Plasma Science and Fusion Center.

Loureiro’s work earned international acclaim, including the Presidential Early Career Award, and helped guide major fusion experiments in the US and Europe. Now you understand why my leading theory is that this mystery revolves around alternative energy.

In December last year, Loureiro was gunned down in the foyer of his apartment building. He was killed by a former colleague who also killed two of his students and injured nine in a separate shooting, but no motive has been established.

It is impossible for me to say that all of these deaths are linked. Perhaps some are linked and others are coincidences. Perhaps none are linked, but I’m sure you can understand why the story is being taken seriously. There is clearly enough to warrant that FBI investigation that will officially lead nowhere…

While some deaths appear to be suicide, there could be more than meets the eye. People linked to alternative energy have been dying in mysterious circumstances and apparent suicides going back decades. Among them are Stefan Marinov and Stanley Meyer. Other researchers have described harassment and intimidation, such as John Searl, David Ladair, Paul Hill, and John Hutchinson.

If a new energy source could finish the fossil fuel industry, that would be a powerful motive to kill these people. One alarming possibility is that we are dealing with incredibly dangerous technology. Imagine harnessing more power than a nuke or travelling at extreme speeds—the potential for weaponisation could be huge. Perhaps keeping such technology under wraps is considered an existential issue.

Some have suggested the scientists were part of a loosely connected network, and while it sounds plausible, there is no suggestion they worked on a single breakthrough project. It could have been that they were coincidentally looking into related things that alarmed powerful people. Rep Burlison has highlighted that many worked on “cutting-edge nuclear, hypersonic missile, plasma, and UAP-related projects.”

One interesting point is that Frank Maiwald, Michael Hicks, Monica Reza, and Carl Grillmair were all located in Pasadena, just outside Los Angeles. Melissa Casias, Anthony Chavez, Steven Garcia, and William McCasland were all located in New Mexico.

Reps Comer and Burlison, along with the House Oversight Committee, are investigating potential connections to sensitive programs. The White House says it is reviewing “all of the cases together”, but I doubt we will ever be told the truth. What do you think is going on?

NOTE: Since publishing this article two hours ago, another story has come to light that I want to briefly cover. A NASA nuclear engineer called Joshua LeBlanc has been found dead so that's now 14 and rising.

LeBlanc didn’t turn up at his job and was reported missing by his family after his last contact with them on Tuesday. His Tesla Model 3 was tracked stopping for four hours at Huntsville International Airport, 12 minutes from his apartment. The car then drove west along backroads and crashed in Florence, Alabama.

LeBlanc’s body was found inside the vehicle, burned beyond recognition, however, his phone and other belongings were left in his apartment (a familiar story). His family says the route didn’t match anything he had planned and believe he might have been abducted.

Thank you for reading. All of my content will always be freely available, but if you wish to support my work, you can do so at Ko-fi or Patreon. Likes, shares and comments also help massively.

Chillingly, Policing Minister Sarah Jones welcomed the judgment, saying: “Law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear.” Worse, she called anyone who opposes the technology “uncivil” and implied they are on the side of murderers and rapists. Apparently, it’s wrong to want privacy.

The High Court insisted there are adequate safeguards in place, but you can’t safeguard against the risks of function creep. The government plans to ramp up the number of surveillance vans in our cities, making LFR available to every police force in England and Wales.

Police officers are dragging people off the street and demanding their details if they refuse to have their face scanned. Only a small number of actual criminals are being caught, with one trial resulting in zero arrests, yet mass surveillance is being sold as the “biggest breakthrough since DNA” for catching violent offenders. Their solution to crime is to make your face become your ID card.

If we truly have nothing to fear, let’s put cameras in our homes, in our bathrooms even. Let’s give police remote access to our webcams. After all, we have nothing to fear, so who needs privacy, right? I mean it’s not like George Orwell warned us about this crap.

Who needs surveillance vans when we can give every police officer a pair of Mark Zuckerberg’s creepy AI glasses that secretly record bikini-clad girls at the beach? Officers could pull information about hot chicks, I mean suspects in real time. If you’ve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear from perverts with augmented-reality tech. I’m sure Wayne Couzens would have been a much more effective officer with AI glasses.

Met Police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, said: "The question is no longer whether we should use live facial recognition, it's why we would choose not to." Well, there are quite a few reasons, actually, and I don’t remember being given a choice…

Youth worker Shaun Thompson was stopped and detained in 2024 after LFR wrongly matched him to his brother, and police initially refused to accept his ID. He described his experience as “stop and search on steroids”. As someone who has been stopped and searched many times, I do not want this to become the norm. It’s harassment.

Thompson brought a judicial review along with Silkie Carlo, director of the civil liberties group Big Brother Watch. The pair warned of arbitrary or discriminatory use, the potential for a chilling effect on protests, and the risk of cameras making everyday movement impossible without biometric scanning.

We are almost at that “impossible” stage. Already, we have to scan our faces or show ID to use many websites. How long until we must scan our faces to enter a public building, board a train, or attend a rally? How long until everyone who rejects this system is cut off from society? How long until there is nowhere to hide and dissent is impossible?

The US is banning people from attending events like the World Cup if they have posted things on social media it disapproves of (such as criticism of Israel). Many countries are doing similar things.

History shows us that whenever a government introduces some kind of monitoring tool, “function creep” comes into effect. I remember during the Blair years when councils were using anti-terror legislation to monitor how people were using their bins. The point is that once a system is in place, authorities will come up with new ways to exploit it—ways we might not have thought of.

Consider how the government is banning repeated protests to prevent “disruption” under the Public Order Act 2023. With LFR technology, they could limit the number of protests you attend. Protest too often and sorry, I’m afraid you’re being disruptive. You’re under arrest.

Consider how Palestine Action protesters are treated as terrorists. It’s easy to foresee a situation where everyone at those protests has their face scanned and placed on a watchlist. Twenty years later that information is shared with an employer running background checks and their career is over because they are linked to “terrorism”.

Consider how police have contracts for pre-crime technology with Palantir, the evil AI company that intends to build a global panopticon, reintroduce a military draft, and use “hard power” backed by AI weapons to dominate the world. It’s all in their recently published “Technological Republic” manifesto, which has been compared to the ramblings of a supervillain and described as a blueprint for unchecked surveillance.

Palantir is behind many of the LFR initiatives in the UK, and MPs from multiple parties are now demanding reviews of the company’s government contracts.

Palantir has access to our NHS records via the Federated Data Platform, works with the Ministry of Defence on live operational analytics, and helps police forecast potential criminal activity. An investigation from Liberty revealed the company merges criminal records with health data, financial info, political beliefs, race, sexual orientation, and even union membership. Still think this isn’t political?

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has expressed her own desire for a panopticon to none other than Tony Blair, one of the biggest cheerleaders for digital ID. In an interview, she said her vision was to achieve, by means of AI and technology, what Jeremy Bentham tried to do with his panopticon: “the eyes of the state can be on you at all times.” It’s not hard to see where this is heading.

A government consultation asked whether LFR should be used to monitor “disruptive” protests in advance, meaning police would scan crowds near the protest site, as well as routes to the event, and known meeting points. LFR would check faces against police watchlists for potential disruptors and repeat protesters. Combine this with the new face-covering ban and it would have a clear chilling effect on assembly and expression.

The government consultation quietly admits police could access passport, driving licence, and future digital ID photos for LFR. Now add Palantir AI tools into the mix and you have a recipe for dystopia. It doesn’t matter what safeguards are in place because those safeguards can be removed at any point.

Everywhere you go, your face can be scanned without your knowledge or consent. If AI misidentifies you, you can be whisked away by police while you are quietly going about your daily business. Perhaps you are on your way to work or you’re having a nice family day out: suddenly you are a suspect and you are expected to prove your innocence. You have to demonstrate that you are not who the AI thinks you are, otherwise you are going to court.

Stores up and down the UK are using the FaceWatch live AI recognition system. Shoppers at places like Budgens, Sports Direct, Costcutter, Sainsbury’s, B&M, and Home Bargains are being scanned without their knowledge and sometimes misidentified by AI.

Just yesterday, a story broke of a man who was held in custody for 24 hours and taken to court after being wrongly accused of stealing from IKEA when he was actually hosting an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting 11 miles away! One shopper found themselves on a watchlist over a 39p paracetamol dispute. Some analyses put FaceWatch false positive rates at one in 40. Now the police are using a similar system to FaceWatch. What could possibly go wrong?

Imagine you are forced to have digital ID with a biometric passport photo, linked to a GOV.UK Wallet on your phone. It gets pitched as convenience, but you are forced to use it for public services, banking, purchases, and other daily tasks, leaving a digital footprint wherever you go. If that app has access to your location data, suddenly your every movement is monitored.

The most effective way to stop dissent is to monitor people and cut them off when they step out of line. We are rapidly entering a world where that is possible. If you read the 22-point Palantir manifesto and thought it represents a future we must avoid at all costs, you need to start resisting right fucking now.

Thank you for reading. All of my content will always be freely available, but if you wish to support my work, you can do so at Ko-fi or Patreon. Likes, shares and comments also help massively.

It will come as no shock that Starmer has not been forthcoming with the truth regarding the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US. Robbins’ testimony before the Foreign Affairs Committee exposed that facts around procedure and protocol have been distorted to minimise damage and pass the buck. Robbins did not phrase it like that, of course, he was measured and polite, despite the fact Starmer sacked him, but the implications were clear.

Starmer’s line has been that the FCDO overruled advice to deny Developed Vetting to Mandelson—and the prime minister was kept in the dark. The reality is that when Robbins took the job in January 2025, he was walking into a pre-announced appointment. No. 10 had already committed to giving Mandelson the ambassadorial role, the King’s approval had been granted, and US agreement had been secured. In other words, the appointment was a done deal before the vetting process had taken place and against official advice to wait until after clearance had been granted.

The prime minister is now feigning indignation and insisting he would never have appointed Mandelson if he had known about the red flags, but Robbins painted a rather different picture. He described “constant pressure” and “non-stop chasing” from the prime minister’s office and a “dismissive approach” to vetting. He explained the focus was never on whether clearance should be granted to Mandelson, only when. “There was already a very, very strong expectation... the focus was on getting Mandelson out to Washington quickly.”

Robbins explained that the Cabinet Office suggested Mandelson might not need full clearance at all, and that his predecessor, Philip Barton, had to be “very firm” to ensure the process proceeded. Starmer has told us every step of the way that the correct process was followed, but clearly he had zero interest in that process.

Robbins admitted that the vetting revealed high concerns, but that he had not seen the report where those concerns were highlighted. Instead, he received a briefing in which he was told those concerns could be mitigated. It seems likely that he buckled to pressure, but obviously he can’t admit to that. Absurdly, Robbins claimed he could not notify the prime minister of the vetting issues due to confidentiality.

To recap: we have a prime minister determined to push through the best friend of Jeffrey Epstein as ambassador to the US, who announced the appointment and sought Royal and American approval before vetting had been done (and before Robbins had taken the job), and who then could not be told of major concerns around his guy who was given clearance anyway. The story is a convoluted mess and is about the fifth or sixth version of events I’ve seen in the past few days.

Just look at the contradictions: Starmer says he was deliberately kept in the dark, but Robbins suggests that was normal. Starmer says clearance was denied and secretly overruled, but Robbins says he was told that concerns could be mitigated. Starmer says there was no political pressure, but Robbins says the pressure was constant. Starmer says correct process was followed, but Robbins says the appointment was already a done deal.

We know that the so-called “mitigations” around security concerns involved Mandelson not being left alone with key officials, suggesting he could not be trusted. We also know that prior to the vetting process, Mandelson was allowed into the FCDO building and trusted with low-classification IT access and even higher-classification briefings. We also know that Mandelson is now being investigated by the police for his links to Epstein. Shitshow isn’t the word…

If you thought these Mandelson revelations were bad enough, Robbins had even more to share: the prime minister asked him to find an ambassadorial role for Matthew Doyle, his former communications chief. Damningly, it was revealed that Starmer asked Robbins not to tell the foreign secretary, presumably because he would have disapproved.

It just so happens that Doyle was given a peerage by the prime minister and is now a legislator for life, even though he lost the Labour whip, due to his association with Sean Morton, a former Scottish Labour councillor who was convicted of possessing indecent images of children. You couldn’t make it up!

Everyone seems to be overlooking the most damning point of all, one that exposes Starmer’s hypocrisy and lays bare his lack of interest in process: The prime minister, who is attacking the Foreign Office for failing to follow the correct process, was deliberately not following the correct process with Doyle.

That, as much as anything else, should be a resignation offence, but Starmer will cling on for as long as he can. I seriously doubt he is even allowed to walk away without permission. If it wasn’t abundantly clear to you before, it should be now: the Epstein class is calling the shots and they want their people in as many positions of power as possible.

Thank you for reading. All of my content will always be freely available, but if you wish to support my work, you can do so at Ko-fi or Patreon. Likes, shares and comments also help massively.

Starmer has the look of a man who is not in control, who is tormented by every excruciating decision he makes, who knows he looks like a fool. It is not hard to join the dots and see that there is more at play, that Starmer was instructed to hire the guy at the heart of the Epstein blackmail ring. We can only speculate about what leverage the Epstein class has over Starmer, but it must be strong. No one would want to harm their own reputation for a guy as loathsome as Peter Mandelson.

The latest scandal involving Mandelson is that he failed his security vetting in January 2025, but was given the role of ambassador to the US anyway. The claim is that the Foreign Office overruled security officials because Starmer had already announced the appointment of Mandelson prior to the process being completed. The implication is that they didn’t want to embarrass the prime minister, so they jeopardised national security to spare his blushes.

Starmer’s only defence is that he had no idea what was going on until “earlier this week”. If that were true, he should have notified the public at the earliest opportunity, but he didn’t—the Guardian broke the story days later. The most charitable interpretation is that the prime minister is not in control and panicked when he discovered the truth. The less charitable ones are automatic resignation offences.

The Independent knew about the failed vetting back in September—they ran a headline on it! But we’re expected to believe the foreign office overturned a decision related to our most important diplomatic role without notifying the prime minister?

Starmer announced that Mandelson would be taking up the role as ambassador to the US in December 2024, a month before the vetting process had been completed.

The Cabinet Office’s Propriety and Ethics Team had already flagged a “reputational risk” from Mandelson’s Epstein ties in a December briefing. It highlighted his “particularly close relationship” with Jeffrey Epstein after his 2008 child-sex conviction. It noted Mandelson had stayed at Epstein’s New York house while Epstein was in jail—and that contact continued at least until 2014. Starmer hired Mandelson regardless.

It’s worth mentioning that development vetting is in place to protect the public from men like Mandelson—men who have a strong risk of being compromised. It delves into every aspect of your professional and personal life to look for weaknesses, and only someone who is squeaky clean is supposed to pass. The bar is set extremely high for good reason and people are often rejected without being told why. Anyone who was best mates with the head of a paedophile ring is as high risk as it gets.

Let’s not forget that Mandelson is currently under criminal investigation for things he allegedly did as ambassador—things he could not have done if Starmer hadn’t given him the role. This means Starmer bears responsibility for any crimes he might have committed.

Mandelson failed the vetting process on 28 January 2025, but the Foreign Office overruled the decision within 48 hours, exercising a rarely used power. By February 2025, Mandelson was in the role.

Starmer not only told the press and parliament that Mandelson had passed all checks, but later, when more Epstein-related scandals emerged, he blamed security officials and their inadequate vetting process! The prime minister blamed others for his own failure—something he makes a habit of.

Starmer cannot hide behind the vetting process when he was fully aware that Mandelson has a long rap sheet going back decades. Recent revelations did not come as a shock, they simply hammered home what we already knew: that he is a scumbag.

Mandelson encouraged Epstein to fight his conviction, allegedly shared market-sensitive information, and tried to get Epstein’s goddaughter into Downing Street. When Starmer sacked Mandelson in September, he called these actions “reprehensible”, but they did not come out of the blue, they were the continuation of a pattern of behaviour.

The kindest thing you can say about Starmer is that his judgment is woeful, but again, I do not think this was a judgment call—I think his hand was forced.

The “I didn’t know defence” is falling apart because there are only two possibilities: either Starmer is lying, or he was kept in the dark about a crucial national security decision. Either he overruled the decision or the Foreign Office took a huge decision without involving him. Either possibility suggests the prime minister is a liability.

Rather than take responsibility, Starmer has once again found someone else to take the blame. He has announced that he has lost confidence in FCDO permanent secretary Sir Olly Robbins and asked him to resign. Previously, Morgan McSweeney was the fall guy. It’s always someone else’s fault–McSweeney’s, Mandelson’s, Robbins’, the civil service’s, but never the prime minister’s.

Clearly, Starmer is panicking because No. 10 is trying to withhold sensitive documents related to the vetting process that it is legally obliged to provide to parliament. Those documents will likely be the final nail in the coffin. If they’re not, the wipeout in the upcoming local elections certainly will be. Starmer’s days are numbered.

Thank you for reading. All of my content will always be freely available, but if you wish to support my work, you can do so at Ko-fi or Patreon. Likes, shares and comments also help massively.

The government is appealing the ruling, despite the utter farce of imposing the ban which remains in force until the appeal has been heard. We are now in a situation where people are getting arrested for breaking an illegal law. My head hurts.

Police had initially agreed to halt the mass arrests, only to resume them, despite the logistical problems, huge costs, and reputational damage to the police.

A staggering 2,700 people have now been detained under terrorism legislation for holding signs or attending silent vigils. The question you have to ask is why? Surely, anti-terror legislation is supposed to protect the public, not Israel and its arms manufacturers? Literally nobody else is benefitting, not even the politicians who introduced the law. It is a disaster for everyone, but particularly for the public who are seeing their rights eroded to please a genocidal foreign power.

Just look at the arrested terror suspects: they were aged from 18-87 and included Massive Attack musician Robert Del Naja who said: “the actions of Palestine Action were highly patriotic, because they were pretty much protecting our country from getting involved in serious war crimes, and breaking international law."

For legal reasons, I’m not saying that I do or do not agree with Del Naja, and I’m certainly not inviting support for Palestine Action, but I am saying the arrest of this man, and many others, is an affront to our so-called democracy. Any country that decides such people are terrorists has clearly lost the plot.

As protest organisers Defend Our Juries pointed out, this is about everyone’s right to protest: “If left unopposed, what starts with an unlawful ban on one direct action group will lead on to the removal of everyone’s rights and freedoms.”

Former Met Police chief superintendent Dal Babu could see the obvious problems. He said: “I think the difficulty is, when you’ve got 700 or 800 people who are willing to be arrested, that just isn’t practical. The optics of this will be very challenging for the police.” No shit.

One elderly man was arrested while using a walking stick and an elderly woman was carried away as the crowd chanted "shame on you" at officers. One woman was such an extremist she made a peace sign as she was dragged into a police van. All I can say is those officers must feel like real heroes. They’re really keeping the public safe here.

The Metropolitan Police said the decision to make the arrests was an operational one, based on intelligence they have obtained. What the hell did that intelligence say? That a bunch of Grannies had been spotted buying stationery at Staples? That they were coming armed with cardboard and Sellotape? That they were wielding marker pens with lethal intent?

We are witnessing the largest wave of civil disobedience in recent British history in protest against the genocide in Gaza that has spread into Lebanon. Meanwhile, the retrial for the Filton 6 is underway after they were acquitted of the most serious charge of aggravated burglary. Shockingly, they are barred from explaining their motivations to the jury, despite this being what won their previous acquittal.

As Israel sets the Middle East on fire, the British government’s priority appears to be silencing those who are calling for peace. No civil disobedience would be happening if the UK simply halted arms exports to Israel, as required by British and international law.

In late March, Belgian authorities seized a British arms shipment heading to Israel after an investigation by Declassified UK exposed discrepancies in the cargo manifest. Officials opened 33 crates and discovered undeclared military items such as laser sights, fire control systems, and spare parts for fighter jets.

While Belgium is treating this as a breach of its own export controls, the shipment has drawn little scrutiny in the UK. Instead, British police seem far more focused on arresting critics of Israel.

As Tucker Carlson recently put it to Victoria Derbyshire:

“It is illegal. It is a crime for which you can be arrested in Britain right now, criticising Israel. If you say you’re for Palestine Action, you can be arrested. A lot of people have been arrested. So in other words, it is not legal in Britain to criticise another country.”

He added: “Why is it banned? It is banned because the Israeli government wanted it banned.”

Clearly, this wave of mass arrests is not about terrorism. It’s about protecting a deeply unpopular foreign policy at the expense of our basic democratic rights. We are locking up our peace makers for the sake of the worst people on earth.

Thank you for reading. All of my content will always be freely available, but if you wish to support my work, you can do so at Ko-fi or Patreon. Likes, shares and comments also help massively.

Read more

Read more

Now you don’t have to share Mace’s politics to pay attention to what she has to sa…

Read more

Let’s start with the suggestion that Epstei…

Read more

The Epstein files show that the Israeli consulate installed a security system in a New York apartment that was managed by Epst…

Read more

Now before I go further, I mus…

Read more

Read more

Read more

The proscription of Palestine Action meant not only was it an offence to be a member of the group, but even to express support. As a result, thousands of peaceful protesters, who had never committed a crime, were…

Read more

Read more

Now the DOJ is revealing some of the names it had concealed, likely due to pressure fr…

Read more

Read more

Is Netanyahu saying Israel was working for Epstein?! In all seriousness, there …

Read more

Read more

We are all aware…

Read more