David Kurten understands the levels of psychological manipulation the West will engage in to want war by special interest groups and the military industrial war complex.

The Watchman
A change of pace today: Brian Gerrish sits down with Ben Rubin to explore the origins of UK Column — and to talk duty, nation, and the trials of modern life.
https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/the-watchman

Please edit accordingly. If the same submission is filed, duplicates can be ignored:

Submission to the UK Parliament: Call for Evidence on Digital Identity

I am writing to register my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed implementation of mandatory or universal digital identities in the United Kingdom.
While digital identity systems are often promoted under the guise of “convenience,” “efficiency,” or “security,” the reality is far more troubling. The implementation of a digital ID infrastructure — particularly one tied to access to public services, employment, health, or financial systems — carries profound risks that are being dangerously overlooked.

- Mass Surveillance
A mandatory digital ID system would enable unprecedented levels of surveillance. Every time a citizen uses their ID to access services, that interaction is logged and potentially tracked. This undermines basic civil liberties and creates a culture of state oversight incompatible with a free society.

- Data Breaches and Security Risks
Centralised databases housing sensitive biometric and personal information are extremely high-value targets for hackers. We have seen this with India’s Aadhaar system, where hundreds of millions of records were exposed. No system is immune — and the fallout from a breach would be catastrophic for individual citizens.

- Government Overreach and Mission Creep
Once a digital ID system is in place, its use inevitably expands — from health access, to financial services, to social media, and even protest monitoring. This kind of mission creep is well documented and effectively turns a “convenient” tool into an instrument of control.

- Exclusion and Discrimination
Digital ID systems have historically excluded vulnerable populations: the elderly, the homeless, those without documentation, and people in rural or impoverished areas. These systems are not neutral — they disproportionately harm those already at the margins of society.

- Infrastructure Fragility
Systems relying on electricity, internet access, and complex servers are prone to failure. What happens during an outage, cyberattack, or system failure? Citizens should never be at risk of being locked out of basic rights because of a technical glitch.

- Corporate Influence and Data Monetisation
Public-private partnerships often accompany digital ID rollouts. This raises major questions around data ownership, consent, and commercial exploitation of identity information. Citizens should not become data products.

- Lack of Public Mandate and Trust
There has been no democratic mandate for a national digital ID, nor widespread public support. The rushed and opaque manner in which these schemes are often introduced erodes trust in government and institutions.

In summary, I strongly urge Parliament to reject any move toward mandatory or universal digital IDs. The risks to privacy, liberty, security, and social cohesion far outweigh any superficial benefits. We should be investing in resilient, human-scale systems that protect people, not tools of surveillance and exclusion.

Yours faithfully,

Committees:
New inquiry: Harnessing the potential of new forms of digital ID

Dame Karen Bradley said:

“Introducing digital ID could help the Home Office achieve its ambitions to reduce crime and improve control over the immigration system. But there are also fears that ID schemes could infringe on people’s privacy or be costly to implement effectively.

“The debate around digital ID is growing and we want to find the best evidence for how digital ID could be used by the Home Office to implement its priorities. We will be exploring the benefits and risks of digital ID systems as well as the practical challenges to their introduction.”

The deadline for written submissions to the inquiry is Thursday 21 August.

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/9176/harnessing-the-potential-of-new-digital-forms-of-identification/news/207446/new-inquiry-harnessing-the-potential-of-new-forms-of-digital-id/

No Smartphone = no digital ID + no programmable digital currency

Abortion up to birth is a monstrosity in all but a limited situation where a baby has died in the womb and is somehow life threatening to the mother after that

But...I'm not just blaming repugnant politicians that vote for such laws - although they represent the worst of evil

I'm also blaming anyone that would use the "service" for birth control

It matters not what the law says. Just what one does with it. And like a good friend always says to me, it's always the people that do this shit and follow along with it

No one has to abort their baby just before birth, no matter what the sick twisted law allows

People need to take responsibility for their own repugnant morals that would allow them to murder a full term baby. Hiding behind "the law" to enable them to do something so wrong, will not hide their EVIL

The end

https://www.gov.uk/driving-licence-codes

I was listening to a rather shocking discussion about organ donation in U.K. I was vaguely aware that the law changed a few years ago such that we’re all presumed to have consented to have our organs removed and donated, unless you went to the trouble of explicitly opting out. I have done so, or at least, I thought I had.

Have a look at your photo card driving licence. If you see “115” in the bottom left corner of the reverse, you’re classified as “organ donor”. Mine says 115, despite updating it upon changing my address, after I’d opted out online. I now must find out how to delete the 115 code.

https://www.gov.uk/driving-licence-codes

Best wishes
Mike

Tonight on UK Column, I chat with Stew Peters about his career and why he believes we're winning the information war.

And a bunch of other stuff.

ukcolumn.org | 7pm UK

We live in a country that says killing babies is fine.

We live in a country that says killing old people is fine.

We live in a country that says killing anyone for the good of everyone else is fine.

We live in an insane, morallly-inverted country and it's time we shouted it from the rooftops, because most other people also think it's insane as well, but we have been browbeaten and feared into staying silent, in case we get called hurty words.

Well you can stick your antisemitic, racist, sexist, phobic slurs right up your arse - we love the truth and we're going to shout it until it's heard.

with peace & love & faith, Darren :)

This is the moment the Rothschild finance stock exchange was obliterated in occupied Jaffa.

🚨 Digital ID: Voluntary or Unavoidable?
Paul G Conlon, in Issue 18 of The Light Australia, warns that while Digital ID is officially "voluntary," it’s becoming unavoidable in practice. From accessing essential services to complying with policies like the under-16 social media ban, Digital ID is creeping into our daily lives.
💡 What can we do?
*Make ID requests socially unacceptable.
*Boycott platforms using Digital ID for age verification.
*Vote for candidates committed to repealing Digital ID laws.
📖 From Issue 18: Conlon outlines a four-tier strategy to resist Digital ID, urging Australians to take cultural, political, and personal action to protect their privacy and freedom.
❓ Question for you: How do you feel about Digital ID being used to access basic services or monitor your child’s online activity?
🔥 Let’s channel the spirit of the 1980s when Australians defeated the Australia Card. Together, we can stop Digital ID!
📌 See pinned posts @thelightpaperaustralia for further resources!

Tonight at 7pm on ukcolumn.org

Jerm Warfare (@jermwarfare) speaks with journalist Eva Bartlett (@Reality_Theories).
Three years in Gaza, time in Syria — harsh realities, media lies, and the roots of a humanitarian crisis.
A vital frontline perspective.

7pm | UKColumn.org

👏In just 5 days, over 20,000 people have signed our petition REJECTING Government plans for a 'BritCard'

Introducing a digital ID in Britain would change the nature of our relationship with the state, eroding our rights & freedoms

Sign & share⤵️
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/reject-plans-for-a-mandatory-britcard-digital-id

Subscribe | @BigBrotherWatchHQ

https://thelightpaper.co.uk/subscribe/monthly

Subscribe to The Light, and recieve the latest issue delivered direct to your doorstep 🙌🏼

https://substack.com/@drmikeyeadon/note/c-126981586

This article is among the most horrifying things that i have ever read.

It will be impossible for an open minded person to conclude reading this & to also maintain that vaccines are a thing that a responsible member of society ought to administer to babies and children, indeed to anyone.

Best wishes
Mike

#GraspingTheBiggerPicture throwback

⭐One to Watch

The other side of the coin:

👇 This is Fred Schwarz video - he talks a lot on tactics used by the #communists in controlling the opposition to further their own agenda, this was filmed in 1966 and is just a short excerpt from his full speech. "they believe the thesis/antithesis conflict is the dynamic of progress'- when one overthrows the other, the communists define this as the revolutionary point.

https://youtu.be/DgDpJg2Tnug

Have a blessed weekend 🤍

https://escapekey.substack.com/p/the-death-of-democracy

Hot on the heels of an almost impossible to believe article on (lack of) regulation of biological products, notably vaccines, where there has never been any at all, is this dense and highly referenced thumper of an article from an anonymous author (is it a team? Their output is truly prodigious) called ESC.
This traces the evolution of governance from local, national and visible to obliquely classified, inter- & especially supranational groups, all of whom ultimately were aimed at a vision of unified, top-down, automated “governance”, which completely excludes democratic institutions and in particular the individual, and subsumes everything under the banner of “the common good”, be it “disadvantaged groups” all the way up to “spaceship Earth”, via natural ecosystems.

Naturally, digital ID & digital-only money feature, but only rather late in the day. The bulk of the heavy lifting was done before my children were born (in the 1990s) and was halfway completed by the time I was born (1960).

This particular article might stray occasionally a little further than the references cited to undergird it. But I’m not sure that it does. It certainly reads like a Philip K Dick novel. I used to be a fan, but I now think it’s likely he had knowledge at least at high level, of the end game of extraordinary control at the level of the individual which, despite the galactic magnitude of the monster being finished off all around us, is the real difference in kind feature distinguishing this from all previous totalitarian systems.

Up to you if you choose to read it. If you find it intriguing, there’s a veritable library of similarly dense works by ESC.

Best wishes
Mike
Ps: although I wonder if ESC is an individual or a team, I’ve exchanged a few emails with them and they sound as real as can be. They’ve been a career systems analyst for large corporations and has developed methods based on how they know documents are written in corporate land. At it’s base, there aren’t that many types of strategy document & most are formed by presenting *boiler plate text and layout, with the specifics edited it where required. The tools used to unpick them includes text analysis, looking for style transitions and movements from conceptual to practical over a single paragraph. I’m told AI now highlights pieces most likely typed by a single author at the time the document was finalised, even decades ago, which I admit is pretty cool 😎
(*I’d never heard of the term boiler plate until I got into contributing to patent applications and inter corporate legal agreements, which are heavily laden with standard language, terms and a few, absolutely key specifics, on which legal judgments often turn when challenged, which they usually are, if oodles of money end up depending upon it).