Search Assist - What is Halal meat

Halal meat is meat that is prepared according to Islamic dietary laws, which require that the animal be slaughtered in a specific way, ensuring it is healthy and free from impurities. The term “halal” means “permissible” in Arabic. -zoukteabar.co.uk -

Wikipedia

Definition of Halal Meat

Halal meat refers to meat that is prepared according to Islamic dietary laws. The term “halal” translates to “permissible” in Arabic, indicating that the food meets specific religious guidelines.

Key Requirements for Halal Meat

Halal meat must adhere to the following criteria:

• Slaughter Method: The animal must be slaughtered using a method called dhabiha, which involves cutting the throat, windpipe, and jugular veins while ensuring the animal is alive and healthy at the time of slaughter.

• Blood Drainage: All blood must be drained from the carcass, as consuming blood is prohibited in Islam.

• Blessing: A Muslim must recite a dedication known as tasmiya or shahada during the slaughtering process.

What is Kosher Meat

Halal meat is often compared to kosher meat, which follows Jewish dietary laws. While both require specific slaughter methods, kosher laws do not permit stunning, whereas stunning is allowed in halal practices if the animal survives the initial stunning.

********

The government say you do not have the right to know if the meat you are eating has been slaughtered in a manner which is in your opinion humane. Preventing you from having the choice of eating meat which has not been killed according to Islamic or Jewish practice

Petitions UK Parliament and UK Government

You’re receiving this email because you signed the petition: “Require meat to be labelled if religiously slaughtered & stunned or not stunned”.

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Require meat to be labelled if religiously slaughtered & stunned or not stunned”.

Government responded:

Whilst there is no regulatory requirement for labelling of meat from animals slaughtered without stunning, any information of this nature must be accurate and must not be misleading to the consumer.

The government encourages the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter and would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter, but the government respects the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. The first national legislative requirement for stunning before slaughter was, in England and Wales, the Slaughter of Animals Act 1933. The Act also introduced an exception from the requirement to stun when animals are slaughtered in accordance with religious rites, for the food of Muslims and Jews.

A significant proportion of halal meat comes from animals that are stunned before slaughter. The 2024 Slaughter Sector Survey showed, for example, that 88% of halal meat chickens in England and Wales were stunned prior to slaughter.

Stunned halal slaughter uses the same stunning methods as general slaughter. For all stunning methods, the stun must be effective. Legislation requires checks to be made to ensure that animals do not present any signs of consciousness and sensibility between stunning and death. If animals are not properly stunned, appropriate measures, such as a back-up stun, must be taken.

Additional information can be found in a blog article published by the Food Standard Agency, available at: https://food.blog.gov.uk/2026/06/03/food-fact-check-animal-welfare-in-abattoirs-and-slaughterhouses/.

Whilst there are no regulations that require the labelling of meat from animals slaughtered without stunning, where any information of this nature is provided it must be accurate and must not be misleading to the consumer. Additionally, major retailers have sourcing policies requiring that fresh meat comes from animals that have been stunned before slaughter. They may operate limited concessions for halal or kosher food that will be clearly labelled. Some farm assurance schemes, such as Red Tractor and RSPCA Assured, require stunning before slaughter.

As set out in our animal welfare strategy, the government is committed to ensuring that consumers have access to clear information on how their food was produced. To support this, we will continue working with relevant stakeholders, including the farming and food industry, scientists and NGOs to explore how improved food labelling more generally could provide greater consumer transparency and promote better animal welfare. The government has no plans to introduce requirements for meat to be labelled according to whether it comes from an animal which has been stunned or slaughtered in accordance with religious rites.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

This is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response on the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/765849)

Click this link to view the response online:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/765849?reveal_response=yes#response

The Petitions Committee will take a look at this petition and its response. They can press the government for action and gather evidence. If this petition reaches 100,000 signatures, the Committee will consider it for a debate.

The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: https://petition.parliament.uk/help#the-petitions-committee

Thanks,

The Petitions Team
House of Commons

Duck Duck Go Search Assist

The General Court of the EU is a part of the Court of Justice of the European Union, established in 1989, that primarily hears cases brought by individuals, companies, and organizations challenging acts or decisions of EU institutions. It has 54 judges, with two judges from each EU member state, and its decisions can be appealed to the higher Court of Justice under specific circumstances. - European Union - European Union II

YouTube notes

YT Channel: The Financial Express, 626K subscribers, 508,180 views Oct 29, 2026

#ChristineAnderson #Pfizergate #UrsulaVonDerLeyen

MEP Christine Anderson calls for a formal inquiry into the Pfizergate controversy following a ruling by the General Court of the European Union concerning the European Commission’s handling of text messages between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during negotiations for a major COVID-19 vaccine contract. Anderson describes the ruling as a serious institutional failure and argues that political accountability must follow. She calls for a committee of inquiry with the powers to summon von der Leyen, obtain relevant documents and investigate the circumstances surrounding the negotiations. Anderson also challenges the Greens, Social Democrats and Christian Democrats in the European Parliament to support an investigation, arguing that transparency and the rule of law are essential to public trust in European institutions. Watch her full response to the court ruling and her demand for further scrutiny of the Pfizer vaccine deal.

#ChristineAnderson #Pfizergate #UrsulaVonDerLeyen #EuropeanParliament #EuropeanUnion #Pfizer
Subscribe to The Financial Express: https://bit.ly/2TN006o

Welcome to The Financial Express, your trusted source for world affairs, geopolitics, business news, global economy updates, and market insights.
Connect with us:

📌 On this channel, we cover:
Global news & geopolitics that impact world
International markets, trade, and policies
Finance news & global economy trends
Business analysis on global companies & economies

From breaking updates on the US, China, Europe, India, and beyond to deep dives into global markets, trade wars, and international relations, we simplify the most important stories shaping today’s world.

At The Financial Express, our goal is to keep you informed, empowered, and ahead in the fast-changing global landscape.

🔔 Subscribe now for daily insights on world affairs, finance, business, and economy.

#Finance #Economy #WorldNews #Geopolitics #StockMarket #GlobalEconomy #BusinessNews #MarketTrends #InternationalNews #TradeWar #GlobalAffairs #GlobalMarkets

Facebook:

/ thefinancialexpress
Twitter:

/ financialxpress
Website:

https://www.financialexpress.com/

YouTube notes

YT Channel: Daily Express and Express Politics, Nov 2, 2026

#DailyExpress #News #rupertlowe

CREDIT: Restore Britain

Rupert Lowe unleashed a blistering broadside against Labour’s Budget last week, tearing into Andy Burnham and John Healey with force.

The Restore Britain leader spotlighted spiralling interest repayments as a looming catastrophe for the Government and the British public, declaring that feeble leadership has saddled the nation with what he branded a moron tax.

Read Daily Express:

https://www.express.co.uk

Like Daily Express on Facebook:

/ dailyexpress
Follow Daily Express on X: https://x.com/Daily_Express
Follow Daily Express on Instagram:

/ dailyexpress

#DailyExpress #News #rupertlowe #restorebritain #ukpolitics #andyburnham #johnhealey #budget #ukbudget #budget2026 #labour #labourparty #ukeconomy

By Zia Yusef, Reform Party, 2nd 2026

We just announced an important new policy.

A Reform government will review all British citizenship grants made to the Boriswave by this Labour government as a result of today’s U-turn.

If a migrant doesn’t unambiguously benefit Britain, their citizenship will be revoked.

We are drawing a line in the sand.

Burnham has scrapped plans to extend the time for the Boriswave to gain settlement and citizenship.

The Tories imported 4 million people in 4 years, almost none of whom came on work visas.

This ‘Boriswave’ of migrants will cost each British household £20,000.

That is why this colossal betrayal must be reversed.

Mahmood said she made the changes after her ‘public consultation’.

Today we learnt just 1 in 5 people who responded to her ‘consultation’ were British citizens!

Ask the foreign nationals if foreign nationals should get faster settlement in our country.

The Tories and Labour have perpetrated a huge scam on the British people.

Reform will end this madness.

We will reverse the Boriswave.

We will put British people first.

Time is running out. If Labour wins the next election, all of the Boriswave will become citizens.

Our country will be changed beyond recognition.

If we get Nigel Farage elected as Prime Minister, this damage can be reversed.

That’s why we must work harder than ever.

Thank you so much for your support.

Watch Announcement

Yours sincerely,

Zia Yusuf

Shadow Home Secretary

Reform UK

Support Our Work

Promoted by Reform UK Party Limited, at Millbank Tower, 21-24 Millbank, London, SW1P 4QP

Copyright © 2026 Reform UK Party Limited, All rights reserved.

This email sent by Reform UK Party Limited, Registered Office at Millbank Tower, 21-24 Millbank, London, SW1P 4QP. Company Registered in England & Wales: 16260766.

Our mailing address is:
Reform UK
Millbank Tower
21-24 Millbank
London
SW1P 4QP

YouTube Notes

YT Channel: Dave Neal, 300K subscribers, 138,797 views Oct 29, 2026 The Rush Hour with Dave Neal

Trump Preps For MASSIVE WAR As Top General Fired & National Guard Deployed

Check out the audio version of The Rush Hour Podcast by clicking here, it’s totally free! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...

If you’d like to stay up to date on my standup shows and be the first to know about merchandise and other updates, please signup for my newsletter! Here’s the link, I won’t be spamming you!

https://www.rushhourwithdave.com/

tiktok & IG @dnealz

We’ve got a ton of new members of our Patreon. Patreon is a membership community where folks can be a part of my private livestreams. For as little as $5/month you can gain access to hundreds of extra archived videos not available anywhere else! www.patreon.com/daveneal

Also, I have a Dave Neal Stand Up Comedy Clips channel for all my comedy friends out there! -

/ @davenealstandupcomedyclips1088

Donations can be made to https://venmo.com/dnealz or paypal.me/dnealz
For premium membership head over to www.patreon.com/DaveNeal

#daveneal
#iranwar
#trump

BREXIT II is here. Like it or not the BREXIT I betrayal is under way and the Brexiteers must unite once more to defeat this move toward an anti-democratic, corrupt and Authoritarian Technocracy the so-called European Union has become.

The Slovenian Prime Minister is ringing the alarm bells over recent power grabs and coercive policies which highlight the true nature of the EU and its captured so-called parliament.

So we should begin to fight BREXIT II - Burnham’s Fabian Labour and the communists are a step ahead and its time to organise for Britain’s Sovereignty and freedom once more.

Published RT.com| 2 Nov, 2026 18:04| Updated 2 Nov, 2026 19:05

Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa speaks to reporters in Brussels, Belgium, October 16, 2026. © Nicolas Economou / NurPhoto via Getty Images

An EU in which Brussels approved member states annulling elections, jailing their political opponents, and replacing their citizens with migrants, would have been unimaginable when Slovenia joined the bloc in 2004, the country’s Prime Minister Janez Jansa has argued.

Polish President Donald Tusk’s raid on the country’s constitutional court last week was not the first authoritarian act of an EU leader since Slovenia became a member, Jansa claimed in a post on X on Saturday. When Slovenia completed its accession process more than two decades ago, he wrote, “no one imagined that in any of its member states or in the Union as a whole it would be possible” to engage “without consequences” in a series of self-harming and anti-democratic policies.

The Slovenian PM listed ten examples, starting out with the annulment of Romania’s presidential election in 2004. After Euroskeptic right-wing politician Calin Georgescu won a clear victory in the first round, Romania’s Constitutional Court overturned the result, citing “irregularities” in his campaign and alleged Russian interference.

The allegations of interference centered around TikTok, but the social media company revealed in a post-election report that it had actually been asked by Bucharest to stifle pro-Georgescu content, including “disrespectful” posts that “insult the [ruling] PSD party.” Using its legislative super-weapon, the Digital Services Act (DSA) the EU ordered TikTok to further tighten these measures, and the French-educated, pro-EU Nicusor Dan was eventually elected president six months later.

Read more

The US has accused the EU of censorship: Here’s how the bloc’s consensus machine works

The Romanian election set the template for EU interference in almost every major vote across the bloc ever since, including this year’s parliamentary elections in Hungary and Bulgaria. In our coverage of these elections, RT revealed just how pervasive and persuasive Brussels has become.

The victory of Peter Magyar – the EU’s favored candidate in Hungary – has set the country down an anti-democratic path, Jansa argued. The Slovenian PM pointed to Magyar’s suspension of news broadcasts on the country’s M1 TV station and Kossuth Radio in July, which precipitated a purge of editors supposedly loyal to his predecessor, Viktor Orban. Three of Orban’s former ministers have also been arrested on corruption charges since Magyar took power, and all three have had appeals against their detention rejected.

Jansa also held up his own conviction and imprisonment on corruption charges as a red flag for EU democracy. The Slovenian PM spent five months behind bars in 2014 after he was convicted of accepting bribes. Jansa maintained that the prosecution was politically motivated, and the conviction was overturned by Slovenia’s Supreme Court in 2015.

As in Hungary, Jansa condemned his predecessor, Robert Golob, and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, for purging their respective countries’ national broadcasters of political opponents. After they took power – Tusk in 2023 and Golob in 2022, both leaders claimed that their national media outlets were under the control of the right-wing governments that preceded them, and used this as pretext to sack senior managers and appoint loyalists in their place.

Read more

Europe’s next crisis is already hiding behind the riots

“There is no democracy without media pluralism or strong anti-government media, and in Poland these are the public media,” the leader of Poland’s right-wing PiS party, Jaroslaw Kaczynski said at the time, denouncing Tusk’s actions.

Jansa also took issue with the decision of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s government this June to announce a sweeping amnesty for illegal immigrants. More than 900,000 foreign nationals have since applied for legal status in Spain, according to the country’s Migration Ministry. The conservative opposition People’s Party slammed the move as “unsustainable” given the country’s already strained housing market and public services.

In August, thousands of Moroccan migrants descended on Spain’s North African enclave of Ceuta after the country’s Supreme Court ruled that migrants intercepted at sea could not be immediately deported. Multiple EU member states have condemned Madrid’s permissive approach toward migration, with some tightening border controls for those arriving from Spain.

Concluding his list of grievances, Jansa took aim at the EU’s environmental policies, including Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear energy in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan, and Brussels’ decision to “tax carbon energy sources while simultaneously closing [Nuclear Power Plants] and relocating industry to countries with low environmental standards under the pretense that this is how we save the planet.”

All of these developments and decisions have created “an EU that must now save itself from itself,” Jansa concluded.

The elephant in the room

However, despite portraying himself as a defender of democracy and national sovereignty, Jansa’s return to office this year was tainted by allegations of foreign interference. Jansa reportedly met with executives from Black Cube, an Israeli private intelligence firm staffed by Israel Defense Forces and Mossad veterans, in Ljubljana last December. Three months later, a series of covertly-recorded conversations were released, in which members of Robert Golob’s center-left Svoboda party discussed petty corruption within the Slovenian government.

Read more

Wired for War: Why is the EU ignoring the Israeli cyber threat?

The videos weakened Golob’s standing ahead of parliamentary elections in May, and despite Svoboda narrowly beating Jansa’s SDS party, Jansa was able to build a right-wing coalition and return to office in June.

Slovenia’s Intelligence and Security Agency (SOVA) has since established that Black Cube deliberately attempted to “influence democratic elections” by releasing the videos. “This interference was most likely commissioned from within Slovenia,” the agency concluded, without directly mentioning Jansa.

During his first week in office, Jansa lifted an embargo on arms sales to Israel that had been imposed by Golob, removed import restrictions on goods originating in illegal Israeli settlements, and froze Slovenia’s planned recognition of a Palestinian state. Jansa blocked an EU condemnation of Israeli settlements in August, and after meeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in September, told Slovenia’s parliament that “under international law, there is no genocide in Gaza.”

RT examined Black Cube’s actions in Slovenia in our ‘Wired for War’ series, and discovered that the EU has consistently refused to investigate election interference by Black Cube, Blackcore, and a multitude of private intelligence and spy-tech firms linked to the Israeli state.

You can share this story on social media:

Follow RT on

European Union – EU Germany Hungary Poland Romania Slovenia Donald Tusk EU migrants influx Israel Israeli Defense Forces – IDF Mossad Spain Viktor Orban

TODAY on THE DOWNLOAD!

The Download: UK DIGITAL ID THREATENS PRIVACY & “FREE” MONEY: THE COST OF UBI

Jefferey Jaxen follows the UK’s expanding age-check proposals, the pushback over privacy and anonymity, and how similar restrictions are taking shape in the United States.

Then, with proposals to expand Trump accounts and bring more corporate money into the picture, Jefferey asks whether America is building the foundation for universal basic income without a public debate.

Plus, Jefferey wants to hear from you. Bring your questions, concerns, and comments as he opens a conversation about the headlines and what comes next.

Watch THE DOWNLOAD LIVE TODAY at 5 PM PT / 8 PM ET at thehighwire.com!

Shop All Gear at TheHighWire.shop!

SHOP NOW

HIGHWIRE HIGHLIGHTS

500 EPISODES. ONE INCREDIBLE COMMUNITY.

HOLLYWOOD’S BIGGEST REBEL IS BACK!

REMEMBERING THE WARRIORS WE LOST

FROM A DECADE OF LEGAL WINS TO TAKING DOWN THE BIG BAD WOLF

FROM THE FRINGES TO THE FOREFRONT

THE HIGHWIRE: CONTROVERSIAL FROM DAY ONE

Stand for vaccine truth and help us keep winning with your tax-deductible gift of $20, $30, $50, $100, or more today!

SUPPORT ICAN

1401 Lavaca Street, Unit #7022, Austin, TX 78701

ICAN Privacy Policy

© Copyright The HighWire 2026

CitizenGO - started this petition to The Rt Hon Andy Burnham MP, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the UK Government - 2026/10/26

Sign The Petition Here

Link: https://citizengo.org/en-gb/fr/19822

On Monday 26 October, the Prime Minister was asked on live television whether Britain will rejoin the EU.

Andy Burnham ruled it out “in this Parliament”. Then he refused to rule it out at the next election. A pledge to rejoin, written into his party’s next manifesto, is still on the table.

The day before, in the Sunday Times, he called for an “honest discussion” about bringing back EU free movement: open borders with 27 countries, the very thing the British people voted to end.

You decided this question. The 2016 referendum was the largest democratic vote in our history. In 2024, the Government was elected on a manifesto that promised no return to the single market, the customs union or free movement. Nobody voted for a government that would reopen it.

Andy Burnham has never faced the country in a General Election. He won his seat in Makerfield, a Leave-voting constituency, by promising not to re-run the Brexit arguments. Three months later he is re-running them from Downing Street.

He is not alone. On 12 October, MP after MP on the Government benches stood up in Westminster Hall to call for rejoining, and not one Government backbencher spoke against. The Government’s written position says:

‘’The UK will not be rejoining the EU.”

An MEP called the current deals “the floor, not the ceiling.” Which is it?

Why now: On 20 November, Andy Burnham flies to Brussels for the UK-EU summit, where he has promised to set out “options” for Britain’s long-term relationship. Whatever he signs up to there becomes the starting point for the next Parliament, and the next manifesto. The line he draws before that summit is the line Britain lives with.

This can be won. Burnham draws lines when he is pressed. He has already ruled out the Euro and Schengen:

“I can’t see myself ever recommending anything that would involve joining the Euro or Schengen.”

He has ruled out rejoining in this Parliament. One line is left, and he has chosen not to draw it. Opponents of rejoining the EU have already called his free-movement remarks “a total betrayal of Brexit Britain”. The Government holds dozens of Leave-voting seats like his own. A petition from those voters, asking only for the words he has so far withheld, is cheap for him to grant and very costly to refuse.

This is about more than trade. The European Commission has never been a friend to life, to the family, or to freedom. Every step back towards Brussels is a step away from a Britain where you decide those things for yourself.

--------

More information:

• I want to see the UK rejoin the EU in my lifetime, Burnham says [The Independent]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-uk-andy-burnham-referendum-b3073230.html

• Burnham calls for ‘honest discussion’ about free movement between UK and EU [LBC]: https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/burnham-honest-discussion-eu-free-movement-5HjdkPm_2/

• PM open to ‘honest discussion’ about return to free movement with EU [Sky News]: https://news.sky.com/story/pm-open-to-honest-discussion-about-return-to-free-movement-with-eu-13603444

• Burnham reignites Britain’s divisive Brexit debate with his push for closer EU ties [Associated Press]: https://apnews.com/article/uk-eu-brexit-burnham-62c959ddc92f328a6f4f92d01289e307

• Westminster Hall debate “Rejoining the EU” [Hansard]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-10-12/debates/3E0103A6-35CB-40F7-8579-61E9B8FF3872/RejoiningTheEU

  ---

By The Independent Medical Alliance, 3rd Nov 2026

After their COVID shots, thousands of Americans described serious health problems to the CDC’s V-safe program, and a React19 review found 3,329 participants whose entries were literally cries for help. As HHS plans a new NIH clinic, Dr. Elizabeth Mumper and her guests ask what comes next.

Also this week, Dr. Kat Lindley on independent practice and informed consent, plus Dr. Joseph Varon on GLP-1 drugs and the young researchers who joined IMA at CHEST 2026. Thanks to you, the match to expand IMA Academy has reached $230,000, and it ends Saturday. Make your gift count twice!

QUICK LINKS:

• 🎥 Vaccine Injury: From Testimony to Action

• 🩺 Dr. Lindley: Bring the Doctor Back

• ✋ Dr. Lindley: What Informed Consent Really Means

• 💊 GLP-1 Drugs: What We Still Don’t Know About Long-Term Safety

• 🦠 New CDC Report: Antibiotic Overuse Fuels Drug Resistance

• 🔬 IMA at CHEST 2026: Giving the Next Generation a Place at the Table

⏳ Final Week for the IMA Academy Match

TIME LEFT TO GIVE

Just $20,000 stands between us and the full $250,000 match!

🤝 Double My Gift »

EVERY DOLLAR MATCHED UNTIL NOVEMBER 7 AT 11:59 P.M. ET

🎥 Vaccine Injury: From Testimony to Action

“They treated the CDC as if it were their doctor.” Jeffrey Tucker of Brownstone Institute joins Brianne Dressen of React19, Dr. Suzanne Gazda, and Dr. Lawrence Palevsky on what happened to that trust, whether a research clinic can offer ongoing care, and what science still has to answer.

Watch Now »

✍️ Two New Posts from Dr. Kat Lindley

Board-certified family physician Dr. Kat Lindley, director of the IMA Fellowship Program, writes this week on what it takes to restore trust between patients and their doctors.

******

Bring the Doctor Back

She left the system in 2017. Here’s her case for more doctors who answer only to their patients. “Why I Left the System and Why Medicine Needs Independent Physicians”

******

What Informed Consent Really Means

It’s more than a signature on a clipboard. She lays out what real consent requires, plus seven questions to ask your doctor.

💊 GLP-1 Drugs: What We Still Don’t Know About Long-Term Safety

What happens years after patients stop taking Ozempic? Dr. Joseph Varon tells The National News Desk that these drugs deliver real weight loss, but some of his patients still have side effects two or three years later.

Watch Now »

🦠 New CDC Report: Antibiotic Overuse Fuels Drug Resistance

The CDC now estimates 50,800 U.S. deaths a year from drug-resistant infections. The agency says at least 28% of antibiotics prescribed in doctors’ offices and emergency departments are unnecessary, and Dr. Joseph Varon warns that once these infections reach the ICU, “we may have nothing left that works.”

Read More »

🔬 IMA at CHEST 2026: Giving the Next Generation a Place at the Table

Medical students working with IMA brought their research to Phoenix. Dr. Joseph Varon, who moderated 16 posters in a single day, explains why he brings them: “medical education cannot end at the classroom or hospital door.”

Read More »

$20,000 Left to Unlock the Full Match

Who pays for your doctor’s training? According to 2024 ACCME data, more than 40% of continuing medical education funding comes from pharmaceutical and medical-device companies.

Dee Adams has been a nurse since 1986, and the vaccine mandates cost her the practice she built. Now she and her husband Nick are matching every gift to expand our conflict-free education alternative, IMA Academy, dollar for dollar, up to $250,000.

Help us cover the last $20,000 by Saturday, and we’ll have $500,000 to build independent medical education.

$230,000 raised $250,000 goal

A $50 gift today becomes $100 for the courses that come next.

🎓 Close the Gap »

DOUBLE YOUR DONATION NOW

Independent Medical Alliance
2001 L St NW Suite 500 | Washington, DC 20036
support@imahealth.org

By Lord Young of Acton, 2nd Nov 2026

Free speech doesn’t defend itself – and it’s under pressure. Every month we summarise the cases, the campaigns, and the battles worth following.

Not yet a member? Now is the time to help us turn the tide against cancel culture.

Join the FSU

Donate to the FSU now

******

In this month’s edition...

• The FSU reaches 50,000 members…

• … and 7,000 cases

• Meet the new boss – same as the old boss

• Labour’s jury plans under fire from Labour peers

• Have your say on the Conversion Practices Bill

• Banter ban comes into force

• Anti-Muslim Hostility

• Help us congratulate an Oxford Provost on standing up for free speech

• Please help with two important crowdfunders

• Oh, those Russians! (as Boney M might say)

• Independent investigation launched into Cambridge’s appointment of Jason Arday

• The FSU on campus

• New podcast

• Free Speech Union Christmas Comedy Benefit, Wednesday 9 December, 7.30pm at The Backyard Comedy Club, Bethnal Green

• Sex, Lies and Statistics book launch – 12th November, central London

• How To Speak Freely: Members-only online Speakeasy with Professor Michael Fontaine, Tuesday 1 December 2026, 7.30pm - 9pm on Zoom

The FSU reaches 50,000 members…

Last month, the FSU reached a major landmark when we signed up our 50,000th member at the Battle of Ideas Festival in Westminster. At the time of the general election in July 2024, we had 14,000 members. Now that figure has increased by more than 250 per cent.

Member number 50,000 is called David, who, as a reward (and I hope he thinks it is a reward), will get a lunch with me.

This is a huge moment for the organisation I founded in 2020, little thinking that six years later our membership would be larger than over 100 trade unions (as listed here). But it’s also a testament to the scale of the free speech crisis in Britain.

Between 2021 and 2025, at least 62,199 people were arrested for speech offences. The police knocking on someone’s door for a supposedly unacceptable tweet has become a fixture of UK life. Recent polling found that 54 per cent of Britons believe the government only protects speech it agrees with.

We have a huge fight on our hands but, with our support growing all the time, so too are our chances of winning it.

And of course we’re not stopping at 50,000 – so if you’re not yet a member, please do join the FSU by signing up here.

… and 7,000 cases

But 50,000 members wasn’t the only milestone the FSU passed last month – October also saw us handling our 7,000th case, the vast majority of which we’ve won. Regular readers won’t need reminding how varied these cases have been, but uniting them all are attempts by parts of the government, police forces, professional regulators and others to punish Britons for expressing perfectly lawful views.

With the number of new cases increasing every year, I’d like to warmly thank our tireless casework team on behalf of all the people who’ve received help at a time when they needed it most.

And don’t forget that by becoming a member, you can get that help too – as well as funding the help we give to others.

Meet the new boss – same as the old boss

On Tuesday, Andy Burnham reached his 100th day as Prime Minister. Despite his obvious desire to define himself as Not Keir Starmer, it’s already clear that when it comes to free speech, he’s Mr Continuity, pressing on with his predecessor’s censorship plans.

The Conversion Practices Bill, for example, is still on track, apparently seeking to ban the kind of standard pastoral care and parental guidance given to confused adolescents considering harmful and irreversible medical treatment to change gender. As a result, any parents who attempt to talk their children out of mutilating themselves could face criminal penalties, and even prison terms.

Also going ahead is the social media ban for under-16s, which Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has admitted is only a “staging post” towards “a very active interventionist state, policing and regulating the online space”. So, too, the promotion of the government’s official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility”, which has already been weaponised to silence those who legitimately criticise, debate and mock Islam – and which is set to get its own “tsar” to enforce it further.

Then there’s the Watch This Space green paper, which calls for social media platforms to be forced to give prominence to “trustworthy” news sources (as defined by the government, naturally) and to demote more critical outlets. And, while Burnham has dropped judge-only trials from the Courts and Tribunals Bill, he’s still proposing to strip defendants of the right to elect trial by jury for ‘either-way’ offences – those that, being neither major nor minor, can be tried in either a magistrates’ court or the Crown Court.

You can read a full analysis of Burnham’s dismal record here – but the good news, as you’ll see from the next few items, is that opposition to many of Labour’s repressive plans continues to swell, including from within the Prime Minister’s own party.

Labour’s jury plans under fire from Labour peers

On the same day Burnham reached his 100th day as PM, for instance, several Labour peers spoke out against his jury proposals in the Lords where the Courts and Tribunals Bill had its second reading. The day before, one explained why to the Telegraph: “It’s a restriction on the right to a jury trial which, call me old-fashioned, I think is so important.”

During the debate, there was also a powerful speech by the crossbench peer behind the Battle of Ideas festival, Baroness (Claire) Fox. She took issue with the idea – put about by many of her “Labour friends” – that the dropping of judge-only trials means “the attack on juries has been halted by Andy Burnham”. This, she pointed out, “is just not true”, given that “this Bill continues an assault on juries, removing a defendant’s right to choose a Crown Court trial for either-way offences”.

Importantly, too, Baroness Fox raised the question of the government’s motivation. After all, it’s rejected any clause that would mean the curtailing of jury rights would end if and when the courts’ backlog (the supposed reason for the reforms) is cleared. “It’s hard,” she said, “not to agree with Judge Rivlin, whose recent paper on this Bill states that ‘the enormous, scandalous backlog of cases has become an opportunity – some might say, an excuse – to recycle a long-held antipathy to jury trial’.”

You can watch Baroness Fox’s speech here.

You can also see me delivering our Save Our Juries petition to 10 Downing Street here. The petition ended up with around 50,000 names – so many thanks to all of you who stood up for this ancient liberty by signing.

Have your say on the Conversion Practices Bill

The Government’s Conversion Practices Bill is now before a Joint Committee of MPs and peers, which has asked the public for evidence on it. This is the best chance we will get to stop the Bill before it reaches Parliament, and the deadline is 5pm on Monday 16th November.

The Bill is sold as a measure against abuse. But abuse, violence and coercion are already crimes, and the Government has yet to point to a single case the existing law cannot reach. What the Bill adds is a new offence, carrying up to five years in prison, aimed largely at words. Among those who could be caught by it:

— Parents who urge caution on a child wanting to change gender.
— Therapists who explore why a young person is distressed instead of affirming them.
— Pastors who pray with someone who has asked them to.

A single conversation could be enough. The Bill offers no defence for acting in good faith or in a child’s best interests. Anyone can bring a private prosecution. The new “protection orders” can be granted on the civil standard of proof, even without the other side being told. As the Cass Review made clear, cautious, exploratory conversations are exactly what confused young people need. This Bill would make them a criminal risk.

The Committee needs to hear that from as many people as possible. To make that easy, we’ve built a tool that lets you pick the issues that matter most to you and then drafts a response in your own name, which you can edit, download and send straight to the Committee.

Every response is written fresh, so yours will be your own, not a copy of a template. The Committee gives far more weight to individual responses than to identical ones.

You don’t need to be a lawyer or an expert, and it takes only a few minutes. Have your say here – and please share it with friends, family and anyone else who thinks parents, therapists and pastors shouldn’t face prosecution for a conversation.

Banter ban comes into force

Friday saw the implementation of what is, in the teeth of tough competition, one of the government’s most illiberal measures yet. “Section 21 of the Employment Rights Act” might not sound too scary, but what it could mean in practice has long been of profound concern to the FSU.

Employers are already legally liable for the sexual harassment of their staff by third parties such as customers, and can therefore be sued by employees if that takes place. Section 21, though, extends employer liability for the non-sexual harassment of employees by third parties. It needn’t even be directed at the employee personally.

In other words, a single jokey remark, including one merely overheard, could trigger a harassment suit if the employee is – or claims to be – emotionally ‘harmed’.

The implications are both farcical and far-reaching. Venue owners may feel obliged to impose speech restrictions on performers. Pubs could install ‘banter bouncers’ to eavesdrop on conversations.

The FSU fought vigorously against the introduction of Section 21 (you can see me doing it here) – and now that it’s happened, we’re offering our support to its victims. Any employers who find themselves in trouble because of this egregious legislation can contact us at help@freespeechunion.org.

Anti-Muslim Hostility

Andy Burnham met Muslim community leaders in Downing Street last week to assure them of the government’s commitment to its official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” – and to accuse political parties less willing to censor legitimate criticism of Islam of using “unacceptable” language.

Speaking to the leaders around the Cabinet table, Burnham said: “We want to counter any form of hatred, discrimination, Islamophobia, wherever we find it, and work with you to bring forward an agenda that says that to the community.”

He was accompanied by Angela Rayner, whose Working Group drew up the definition. As an FSU briefing has revealed, all five of its members have links to Islamist organisations, including some – such as the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) – with whom successive UK governments have had a policy of non-engagement.

Take, for instance, the woman in the pink hijab next to Burnham. She’s Akeela Ahmed, a member of the Working Group and now the head of the British Muslim Trust, which took over the £2.6m government grant for dealing with anti-Muslim hate crime from Tell Mama: an organisation founded by Fiyaz Mughal – who, was a vocal opponent of an official definition, seeing it as a threat to free speech.

Ahmed has worked closely with the MCB in demanding restrictions on the reporting of Muslim affairs – and with Qari Asim, an imam sacked as an adviser by the last government because of his anti-free speech views. Asim has also invited Pakistani imams who support the death penalty for blasphemy to speak in the UK.

Is this really the kind of company a British Prime Minister should be keeping?

Help us congratulate an Oxford Provost on standing up for free speech

Oriel College, Oxford is due to host an event with Dr Nathan Cofnas on Tuesday 17th November, organised by the Oxon Universities’ Reform Society. However, campaigners have been leaning on the College to cancel it because Cofnas wrote a blog in July accusing Professor Jason Arday (accurately, as it turned out) of plagiarism.

The College’s own Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech includes a strong presumption in favour of allowing invited talks to go ahead, no matter how controversial, and – to his great credit – the Provost, Lord Mendoza, has told alumni the event will not be cancelled.

I’d like to congratulate him on standing firm – and invite you to congratulate him too. You can find a template email here which will take only a few minutes to fill out.

We quite often have to call for letters of protest when academic institutions fail in their free speech duties. It makes a pleasant change to encourage letters of support when they don’t.

Please help with two important crowdfunders

In 2021 Andrew Burgess was sued for defamation by self-proclaimed property guru Samuel Leeds after setting up a Facebook group in which Leeds’s customers shared their experiences of his training courses.

As Andrew explains, when he attended one of the courses, “I started hearing of dissatisfied customers. Many were vulnerable people seeking refunds. They were lost, distressed and anxious about how much money they had spent. The penny had dropped in that they were not going to become ‘financially free’ using these methods, and had handed over their life savings.” (Leeds’s activities – and his tendency to react to criticisms of them with lawsuits – have come under scrutiny in the mainstream media too, as you can see here and here.)

With the FSU’s help, Leeds’s multi-million defamation claim was eventually struck out by the High Court – but not before Andrew, who has autism, endured severe anxiety as well as financial hardship while defending himself. He now needs your assistance to raise funds to help him recover his costs.

For more on the case, and to donate to Andrew’s crowdfunder, click here.

***

We’ve also launched a crowdfunder to support a councillor who’s suing his local authority after he was censured for criticising a library stall that contained advice about “chemsex” – where men engage in sexual activity under the influence of drugs – and displayed a large purple prosthetic penis near the children’s art and colouring area at Exeter library.

Michael Fife Cook, the leader of Reform UK on the Lib Dem-controlled Devon County Council, wrote in an internal email: “I think this makes it clear our council officers can’t be trusted in safeguarding children... any normal person would look at what was on show at this event and believe it was not appropriate for young children.”

The email prompted two senior council officials to accuse him of breaching its Code of Conduct, and he was found guilty by the Standards Board of bringing the council into disrepute. He was then ordered to make a written apology and undertake “bespoke one-to-one training”.

But Michael has refused to apologise and instead begun legal action – for which we’ve set up the crowdfunder – against the council. (Any damages he receives will go to charity.) It beggars belief that a councillor has been penalised for raising safeguarding concerns about a display like this being put on in front of children at a public library. Surely the officials who gave permission for the event – described as a “bold celebration for LGBTQIA+ young people and friends” – are the ones guilty of bringing the council into disrepute? One mother complained that she had to explain to her children, aged six and seven, what the giant prosthetic penis was.

Councillors must be free to speak up about issues of concern to their constituents without risking being put through a disciplinary process by town-hall Sir Humphreys wearing rainbow lanyards.

More here.

To donate to Michael’s crowdfunder, please click here. As regular readers will know, this is only the latest example of council Codes of Conduct being used to silence elected officials who stand up against progressive orthodoxy – a tactic roundly denounced by my FSU colleague Lynsey Metcalfe here.

Oh, those Russians! (as Boney M might say)

As we reported last month, when Andy Burnham announced plans at the UN General Assembly for a new National Centre for Information Defence (NCID) to fight “disinformation” about the UK, one key reason he gave was that the Russians are using “every means at their disposal to spread lies and disinformation and prey on people’s fears. They’ve amplified far-right narratives. And we have evidence that they tried to interfere with the 2019 general election.”

Responding to Burnham’s announcement, we noted that we’ve been here before when it comes to blaming the Russians – and that the academic research shows such claims are invariably overblown to create arguments for censorship.

In his recent FSU briefing Misinformation about Misinformation, our Research and Policy Director David Rose pointed out that in 2019 the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee suggested that Russian bots spewing falsehoods had influenced the EU referendum – which duly garnered headlines. Less well-known, wrote David, is a rigorous study by the Oxford Internet Institute, which found only a “tiny amount” of Russia-linked content about Brexit on social media platforms and “little evidence” of successful interference.

It’s therefore both telling and rather odd that Burnham has now added to his earlier claims by saying that Russian interference in British politics did indeed extend to the Brexit referendum.

Speaking on The Rest is Politics podcast, the Prime Minister said he asked whether there was Kremlin influence on the 2016 vote when he entered Downing Street and was given “the clear answer that, yes, there was” (presumably by people who hadn’t read the Oxford study).

Later, following a denial by the head of MI5, Ken McCallum, Burnham tried to pretend he hadn’t actually said what the podcast listeners heard him saying, but his accusation has fuelled speculation that he may use alleged Russian influence as a pretext for rerunning the referendum. One thing we know for sure, though, is that he’s already using it to justify Labour’s wide-ranging crackdown on online free speech – as David explained in a recent FSU podcast.

Independent investigation launched into Cambridge’s appointment of Jason Arday

The Committee for Academic Freedom (CAF) has commissioned an independent investigation into Cambridge’s appointment of Dr Jason Arday as its youngest ever black professor, amid growing professional disquiet about how it happened.

The investigation will examine whether Arday’s scholarly output and academic standing met the standards ordinarily expected of a Cambridge professorship, and if the University exercised appropriate due diligence in assessing them. It will also consider what role, if any, equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) considerations played in the appointment, including whether any positive action in recruitment was consistent with equality law.

The investigation will be chaired by Lord Singh of Solihull, a former Commissioner of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Journalist Nick Wallis, who did much to expose the Post Office scandal, will lead the research, supported by a dedicated team.

CAF Director Dr Edward Skidelsky says numerous Cambridge academics have contacted his organisation to express their concern that the University’s own inquiry will fail to confront the wider institutional culture in which the Arday affair unfolded – so that inquiry will come under scrutiny too.

The FSU strongly encourages current and former academics, students and other members of the University community, as well as anybody else with relevant knowledge, to come forward with information. This might include documents, correspondence or first-hand accounts regarding Arday’s academic record, appointment and time at Cambridge; the University’s response to questions about his scholarship and its treatment of those who asked them; and the development and application of institutional policies relating to recruitment, promotion, academic misconduct, research integrity and EDI.

The investigation team will consider requests for confidential treatment of identities or information, subject to applicable legal obligations. Anyone wishing to contribute can contact them through the investigation website or directly at investigator@ardayinvestigation.net.

More on the story here.

The FSU on campus

On a happier note, our wonderful Ian Mactaggart Programme is funding the Cambridge University Free Speech Society (CUFSS), launched recently by a group of students there. The students believe – with plenty of evidence to back them up – that “Cambridge has a free speech problem” which is “symptomatic of a national one”.

CUFSS aims to become “a home for open discussion”, and to help make the university a place “where everyone, of every view, can speak their mind, disagree openly, and meet views that differ from their own”.

Its President, Lavinia Rossetti, writes on the website: “Since starting my law degree, I have become particularly interested in how the state narrows the boundaries of acceptable speech through legislation drawn ambiguously enough to expand criminal liability over time, like the mission creep of online hate speech regulation. The result is uncertainty as to where the line lies, and a chilling effect on speech as people err on the side of caution.

“At Cambridge, I expected to find an escape from this self-censorial environment. Instead, I encountered a fiercely anti-free-expression culture.”

I wish Lavinia and all at CUFSS every success in this admirable new enterprise.

Meanwhile, other students interested in promoting campus free speech can apply for an Ian Mactaggart grant here. We’ve also published a students’ guide to speech rights on campuses in England and Scotland, which you can download here.

And in case that’s not enough, our External Affairs Officer Connie Shaw and our Education and Engagement Officer Vinay Kapoor have just released this video in which they discuss the FSU’s first ever freshers’ week tour and the student free speech stories making the news.

New podcast

In a special episode, recorded live at the Battle of Ideas Festival, four FSU staffers talked and took questions about our rapid growth, our approach to casework and the issue that’s overtaken gender-critical speech as the dominant theme in our caseload (no spoilers).

Their discussion was wide-ranging and the event a huge success. To see why, click here.

Free Speech Union Christmas Comedy Benefit, Wednesday 9 December, 7.30pm at The Backyard Comedy Club, Bethnal Green

Round up your comedy-loving friends and family for the FSU’s annual Christmas Comedy Benefit, a one night only extravaganza of comedy in association with Comedy Unleashed with a fabulous line-up.

Comedy legend Josh Howie is our master of ceremonies for the evening. Josh will be joined on stage by an all-star line up featuring the one and only Leo Kearse, comedy and music supremo Dominic Frisby, the indomitable Intel Lady and stylist to the stars Kelli! Taylor. I’ll also be making a guest appearance.

Join the fun with the FSU team and help us raise funds to carry on defending freedom of speech.

Get in-person tickets here. Non-members welcome. Livestream tickets, exclusive to FSU members, are also available (see your latest members’ newsletter for details). And if you’re yet a member, join the FSU today to get discount tickets, free livestreams and much more.

Sex, Lies and Statistics book launch – 12th November, central London

Join us for the launch of Professor Alice Sullivan’s Sex, Lies and Statistics: Why We Need Evidence-Based Policy on Sex and Gender, which investigates one of the most contentious and puzzling social phenomena of our time: the removal of people’s sex from data, social policy and public discourse. Clear, accessible and deeply researched, the book makes a powerful case for policymaking based on proper evidence and for honest public discussion.

Professor Sullivan has stood her ground against repeated cancellation attempts. She’ll be joined on the panel by speakers who know the importance of biological sex categories in science and medicine, prisons and official statistics. They are former prison security chief and senior civil servant Professor Ian Acheson, Professor of Health at Anglia Ruskin University Catherine Meads and that stalwart defender of academic freedom and statistical integrity, Professor Michael Biggs of Oxford University. Get in-person tickets here. FSU members can also watch a free livestream. You can pre-order the book along with your in-person ticket, for signing and collection on the night.

How To Speak Freely: Members-only online Speakeasy with Professor Michael Fontaine, Tuesday 1 December 2026, 7.30pm - 9pm on Zoom

At this online speakeasy and Q&A, Michael Fontaine, Professor of Classics at Cornell University, will talk about his new translation of Plato’s account of the trial of Socrates – condemned to death for questioning the authority of Athens’ rulers. Join us to discover how history’s first free speech martyr has lessons for us today. No prior knowledge required! This free event is exclusive to FSU members; registration details are in the latest members’ newsletter. Not yet a member? Join the FSU today to take part, and access discounted tickets to all our events and free livestreams.

Sharing the newsletter

As with all our work, this newsletter depends on the support of our members and donors, so if you’re not already a paying member please sign up today or encourage a friend to join, and help us turn the tide against cancel culture. You can share our newsletters on social media with the buttons below to help us spread the word. If someone has shared this newsletter with you and you’d like to join the FSU, you can find our website here.

Kind regards,

Lord Young of Acton

Follow us on social media

Our mailing address is:
The Free Speech Union
167-169, Great Portland Street
London, W1W 7LT

Copyright © 2026
Free Speech Union Ltd.
All rights reserved.

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• Flight attendants and pilots ranked first and second among 503 U.S. occupations for the share of deaths from radiation-related cancers, at 6.9% and 6.7%, respectively

• Aircrew receive more occupational ionizing radiation on average than any other U.S. occupational group because less atmosphere shields them from cosmic radiation at commercial flight altitudes

• Career-long exposure is the main concern, as aircrew accumulate an estimated 3 to 6 millisieverts of cosmic radiation annually, compared with about 0.4 millisieverts from 10 cross-country round-trip flights

• Molecular hydrogen and astaxanthin are two antioxidant strategies discussed for supporting the body’s defenses around flights — not treatments for radiation exposure or cancer risk

• Reducing linoleic acid from seed oils helps lower another source of oxidative damage, while adequate carbohydrates, protein, sunlight and regular movement support the cellular energy your body relies on for maintenance and repair

Flight attendants and pilots had the highest and second-highest shares of deaths from radiation-related cancers among 503 U.S. occupations. In a JAMA Internal Medicine study, researchers analyzed more than 12.7 million deaths from 2020 through 2024.¹ After accounting for age, sex and other factors, radiation-related cancers represented 6.9% of deaths among flight attendants and 6.7% among pilots.

High above Earth, less atmosphere stands between you and cosmic radiation — high-energy particles from the sun and deep space that carry enough energy to penetrate tissue and damage DNA. Commercial jets routinely cruise above 30,000 feet, so pilots and flight attendants repeatedly encounter more ionizing radiation, a form of radiation with enough energy to damage DNA.

In fact, aircrew receive the highest average annual effective dose of ionizing radiation of any occupational group in the U.S., including workers in nuclear power and medical settings.²

If you fly occasionally, those numbers sound alarming, but your exposure differs sharply from that of someone who spends a career in the air. Pilots and flight attendants accumulate an estimated 3 to 6 millisieverts of cosmic radiation each year. By contrast, a traveler who takes 10 cross-country round-trip flights in a year receives about 0.4 millisieverts. The concern centers on hundreds of hours at altitude year after year, not your annual vacation flight.

Pilots and Flight Attendants Had the Highest Rates of Radiation-Related Cancer Deaths

The JAMA Internal Medicine study examined whether pilots and flight attendants had elevated risk-adjusted mortality from cancers linked to radiation compared with people in other occupations.³ Rather than treat all cancer deaths as equivalent, the researchers built their analysis around a specific question: If occupational cosmic radiation contributes to cancer among aircrew, would deaths cluster around cancers already associated with ionizing radiation?

Read more

Sources and References

• ^{1, 3} JAMA Internal Medicine August 17, 2026

• ² TIME August 17, 2026

• ⁴ Federal Aviation Administration, CARI-7 and CARI-7A

  ---

About Dr. Mercola

• Contact Us

• Health Articles

• Media Inquiries

• Mercola Community FAQ

• Mercola Social Responsibility

• Newsletter

• Podcast

• Special Reports

More About Mercola.com

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked. The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

If you want to use an article on your site please click hereto view citations and usage terms. This content may be copied in full, with copyright, contact, creation and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission in writing from Dr. Mercola is required.

Terms & Conditions • Updated Privacy Policy

© 1997-2026 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved.

THE HIGHWIRE TURNS 500, BIG PHARMA LOSES & HOLLYWOOD REBELS UNITE

500 Thursdays in a row. Nine years of real news you got nowhere else. This week, The HighWire looks back at the stories and legal fights that shaped its first 500 episodes.

And breaking news: ICAN’s lead attorney, Aaron Siri, Esq., joins Del to discuss a historic legal victory funded by ICAN against a vaccine manufacturer. Who’s the big bad wolf, now?

Plus, our live studio audience is in for a big surprise when two well-known Hollywood rebels join the show. They’ll talk about the fight for freedom that put them at odds with mainstream Hollywood and the new series they’ve joined forces to create, which is already making waves.

On behalf of all of us, Thank you for your support, now, and in the future.

It all happens 29th October 2026, 11AM Pacific Time, 2pm Eastern, at The HighWire!

Take 10% off all books* through October 31, Get a free HighWire bumper sticker with any book purchase. Shop now at TheHighWire.shop!

Offer excludes Vaccines, Amen.

SHOP NOW

HIGHWIRE HIGHLIGHTS

A COVID LOVE STORY: THE NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE THAT CHANGED EVERYTHING

WOMEN’S HEALTH GETS ATTENTION FROM THE WHITE HOUSE

BRITAIN’S WARNING: PREPARE FOR WAR

PARIS IS BURNING, BUT WHO’S REALLY TO BLAME?

THE COVID DRUG THAT COULD HAVE SAVED MILLIONS & THE MEN WHO BURIED IT

THIS THURSDAY ON THE HIGHWIRE!

Stand for vaccine truth and help us keep winning with your tax-deductible gift of $20, $30, $50, $100, or more today!

SUPPORT ICAN

1401 Lavaca Street, Unit #7022, Austin, TX 78701

Privacy Policy

© Copyright The HighWire 2026

New Release - Grooming Gang Cover Up

This new book documents an extraordinary story of criminality and Establishment cover-up.

For more than a century organised networks of immigrant men in Britain systematically targeted, groomed and sexually exploited schoolgirls across the country. Overwhelmingly the victims were white British girls. Official inquiries later confirmed the scale was industrial: at least 1,400 victims in Rotherham alone over sixteen years, and around 1,000 in Telford over several decades. Extrapolations from these only two towns that received any kind of funded investigation point to a problem of a shocking scale - hundreds of thousands of indigenous schoolgirls groomed, pimped and passed around by immigrant men over many decades.

Throughout that century of criminality there was not a single case of organised groups of British men targeting immigrant schoolgirls in this way.

The initial grooming begins with gifts, flattery, alcohol and drugs, followed by coercion, violence and the passing of girls between networks of relatives, friends and paying customers. It traces the earliest evidence back more than a century (as far back as World War One) to Cardiff and London and shows the striking ethnic and religious homogeneity of the convicted immigrant perpetrators, often linked through family, taxi firms and other local businesses. The book lists dozens and dozens of towns across the country where, in the past twenty years, these immigrant gangs have been jailed.

But the book also examines the institutional response. From as early as 1916 police officers, social workers, teachers, doctors, academics, councillors and journalists repeatedly recorded the pattern.

For decades the reaction of the Establishment was denial of the facts, dismissal of the scale of the criminality, and political suppression of those who spoke out. Fear of being labelled racist, combined with the ideology of multiculturalism, made stating the facts punishable for an entire army of state-funded employees. Reports were buried, investigations stalled, and parents who tried to protect their daughters were ignored or treated worse than the criminals. Even when the truth broke after 2011, the response of the Establishment was to refuse to recognise a national pattern and the importation of an ideology which justified rape.

Then from 2015 to 2025 the Establishment orchestrated a cover-up involving politicians, the judiciary, and the media.

Drawing on court records, official inquiries, internal documents and contemporary reporting, the book argues that the cover-up was not a series of isolated mistakes but a sustained attempt by those with power to leave vulnerable girls as prey for the predators. It argues that the Establishment knowingly imported and shielded the predators and this was why the public was kept from the full picture for so long.

Essential reading for anyone seeking a clear-eyed account of the most serious child-protection scandal in British history.

It’s unlikely that there will ever be a more thorough account of this scandal and the cover-up.

We will send details soon so you can order your own copy.

Yours sincerely
Urban Scoop/UTK

CIRCULO INDEPENDENTE UNIPESSOAL LDA, QTA SHOPPING 108 1 QUINTA DO LAGO, 8135-107 ALMANCIL, Portugal

FEATURED

NHS trust finally changes unlawful policy

Following a three-year legal battle for the Darlington Nurses, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust has finally changed its policy to reflect the law on single-sex spaces for its staff.

The Christian Legal Centre has supported the nurses from the very beginning.

Our chief executive Andrea Williams said:

“The trust’s new policy is a complete vindication of the Darlington Nurses and everything they have fought for.

“In one clear sentence, the trust has now accepted the position that Bethany and her colleagues maintained from the beginning: single-sex changing rooms are based on biological sex, and suitable alternatives should be provided for anyone who does not wish to use them.

“Yet this elementary and lawful solution came only after years of institutional intransigence. The trust ignored the women, disregarded internal warnings, pursued them through hostile processes and spent vast sums of public money defending a policy that exposed female staff to discrimination and harassment.”

Created reality is clear: we are all made either male or female. It’s common sense that a man shouldn’t be using the women’s changing room. We have come a long way and spent countless hours to secure victory in this crucial case, but there is still so much more to do. Please pray that this win will be the catalyst for our national institutions to implement policies that uphold the basic fact that we are unchangeably male or female.

Read more: NHS Trust finally changes unlawful changing-room policy

“For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth”

2 Corinthians 13:8 ESV

Visiting Colombia has renewed Andrea’s urgency

Colombia is right in the middle of experiencing God’s life-altering and transformative power.

Over the last week, Andrea Williams has been in Colombia meeting members of the cabinet of new president President, Abelardo de la Espriella.

The highly progressive former president is out, and “the new generation of politicians in power are the new radicals prepared to speak openly about their faith in Jesus Christ and their desire to serve their country in accordance with his truth.”

Christian Concern’s involvement in Colombia is part of the global movement we are building. This has come about by God’s leading as we have responded to those who have reached out to us for help over the years.

We now have an established Christian Concern Colombia team which is vocal and visible at the heart of public life in Colombia, and has been essential to the overturn of government earlier this year.

In a new article on our website, Andrea writes:

“God bless Colombia and thank you Jesus for the privilege of a life and ministry that serves this nation. I believe that if she remains faithful Colombia will rise in Latin America; that we will see a ‘city on the hill’ – an end to the dominance of drug cartels and corruption and the rise of a nation that loves Christ, pursues holiness, and lives in prosperity and all the blessings that flow from him.”

Read Andrea Williams: Colombia’s new government - it’s a miracle

“Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people”

Proverbs 14:34 ESV

Use your voice: say no to conversion therapy ban

A ban on ‘conversion therapy’ - which includes jail time for five years - really targets parents who share basic and important truths about God’s design for sex.

The select committee has just published the call for evidence about this harmful bill. We have just over two weeks to respond.

It’s vital that Christians respond in big numbers - particularly to question 16.

Explain how ordinary, helpful conversations between pastors and parents will lead to accusations and drawn out investigations. Say how you and others in your church have worked through these kinds of issues. Explain how important sexual faithfulness is in the Christian faith.

In a new resource on our website, we have released a guide which will help you respond to the committee and challenge the government’s unnecessary draft bill to ban ‘conversion therapy’.

Use our guidance and say no to a ban on ‘conversion therapy’

“And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him”

Colossians 3:17 ESV

Remembering more than 11 million lost lives

On Tuesday we headed down to Parliament Square for the 59th anniversary of the Abortion Act - to remember more than 11 million lives lost to abortion since 1967.

We were pleased to stand outside Parliament alongside March for Life, CBR UK, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Carla Lockhart, and many other pro-lifers, to remember all the lives lost to abortion in this nation.

Uzochi Nwaubani from the Christian Legal Centre spoke with Isabel Vaughan-Spruce from March for Life, and pointed out that “culture is shaped by the law, but the law is also shaped by culture.”

We pray that our nation will cherish, protect, and uphold each and every innocent life. And until that day comes, we will continue to use the voice that God has given us to speak life, for the sake of our children.

Watch: Remembering 11 million lives lost to abortion

Watch Isabel Vaughan-Spruce interviews Uzochi Nwaubani

“In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will”

Ephesians 1:5 ESV

TAKE ACTION

Help protect Christian schools at Supreme Court

Christian schools in our nation are often small, charitable, or community-based institutions. Our parents and their children are ordinary families. They do not have access to unlimited funds.

And yet, Christians schools are the ones who are most penalised by the government’s VAT tax raid on private schools.

The Christian Legal Centre will be in the Supreme Court on 1-2 December backing a group of independent Christian schools, parents and pupils to challenge the Government’s draconian policy of imposing VAT on independent school fees.

Our chief executive Andrea Williams said:

“At its heart, this challenge is about whether the state can impose a blanket policy that disproportionately harms families who are simply seeking to educate their children in accordance with their Christian faith.

“The Government has formidable legal and financial resources at its disposal. These schools and ordinary families need support to ensure that their voices can be heard clearly in the Supreme Court.”

Please help us take this case to the Supreme Court by sharing this fundraiser with friends and family who are passionate about Christian education. The Government has the resources of the state behind it. Every donation, large or small, will help us prepare for this landmark hearing. If you cannot donate, please share this campaign with your family, friends, church and community.

Share and help us protect Christian schools in the UK

IN DEPTH

Can we recognise cruelty dressed up as care?

When cruelty is dressed up as care, would we recognise it?

The new Channel 4 documentary The Experiment asks a disturbing question – can ordinary people be persuaded to accept Nazi-era ideas about disabled people if they were presented as compassionate, progressive and cost effective?

Isabel Jackson reflects on the documentary’s unsettling nature and what it reveals about how easily harmful ideas can be accepted when they are presented as progressive, practical, and caring.

Every human life has inherent value, and true compassion does not present suicide as a solution, especially to our most vulnerable.

Praise God that assisted suicide was defeated in the House of Commons in September. Pray that our society will understand the deathly and inhumane nature of the legislation, and that it would not come to the shores of Britain.

Read: When cruelty is dressed up as care, would we recognise it?

Will Western civilisation really collapse?

Are we complacent about what is going on in the west?

Our Head of Public Policy Tim Dieppe has just written a commentary on the book of Daniel, a book that he believes has lessons for us as we live in a post-Christian culture.

This week, Tim wrote for Evangelicals Now on the decline of Christianity in the west and God’s sovereign rule over all nations, regardless of their submission to his lordship.

“One key lesson from the book of Daniel is indeed that civilisations are not immortal. Daniel had to tell the most powerful king that the world had ever seen that: ‘Another kingdom inferior to you shall arise after you.’ (Dan 2:39). In fact, that several other kingdoms would rise and fall after Babylon...”

Tim Dieppe in Evangelicals Now: Will Western civilisation really collapse?

“Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.”

Psalm 2:10-11 ESV

IN THE NEWS

Sexuality

The Telegraph share that a former Labour health minister has raised “serious concern” about the draft bill to ban ‘conversion therapy’.

Our chief executive Andrea Williams wrote about the bill last week:

“The definition of the bill is put in such arcane and vague language that it could apply to all sorts of things.”

“Pray for someone to be faithful to their wife? Conversion therapy.

“Tell someone to stop watching porn? Conversion therapy.

“Say to your 14-year-old daughter that she isn’t really a non-binary transmasc genderqueer demiboy? Believe it or not, conversion therapy.”

Andrea Williams: The Conversion Practices bill is weaponised vagueness

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.”

2 Corinthians 5:17 ESV

Gender

The Times report that Dr Sarah Redvers says she was forced out of her job after raising concerns about trans campaigner and medical professional, Dr Sam Hall. Dr Hall was recommending that a young person change their gender without even meeting them.

Baroness Hilary Cass is calling for an independent inquiry.

“There urgently needs to be an investigation of why every system that should have protected children, young people, and indeed young adults has failed. . . . Clearly it goes beyond NHS Sussex to other regulatory bodies.”

Pray that children in this nation would no longer be victims of transgender ideology, and that doctors and nurses like Sarah, Jennifer Melle, the Darlington Nurses, and David Mackereth would not be hounded out of their jobs for standing up for the truth that we are all created either male or female.

“Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female?”

Matthew 19:4 ESV

EVENTS

Final call for tickets to Mission of God 2026

Join Rev. Dr Joe Boot, Andrea Williams, and others at Mission of God 2026 next Saturday 7 November for a one-day conference where we will reimagine how our culture can be strengthened once again with the family backbone it needs.

How can Christians recover and promote a vision for strong families and marriages?

We believe that Christianity can return to the heart of this nation, and we know that it will take a move of God through the people of God for the glorification of God. That is what we are always working towards at Christian Concern.

Join us next Saturday 7 November and equip yourself to be an ambassador for Christ in the midst of a culture in crisis. If cost would be a barrier, please do get in touch with us, as we don’t want anyone to miss out on being with us on the day.

Join us at Mission of God 2026

‘Raise the Sails’, 6-8 Nov: IFTCC conference 2026

In a society that is sexually broken, and with the ongoing accusation of biblical truth as ‘conversion therapy’, how can the people of God present the hope found in the scriptures to others who desperately need it?

The International Foundation for Therapeutic and Counselling Choice (IFTCC) is hosting its annual conference on 6-8 November, with the theme:

Raise the Sails: Refining Language, Restoring Boundaries, Rediscovering Scripture Around Sexuality and Gender

This annual conference can be attended online, and is being hosted in Poland.

“Drawing on research, clinical practice, pastoral wisdom, and lived testimony, we will refine our language, re-establish ethical and theological boundaries, and rediscover the Scriptural story that anchors identity and hope.”

Sat 21 Nov, Belfast: Awake, Arise!

We’re partnering with you to bring the hope of Jesus to the heart of society, and Awake, Arise! is coming to Belfast in November as we continue to travel around the country to mobilise and equip delegates to make a difference for Jesus in their communities.

We have been encouraged to welcome hundreds of delegates to our recent Awake, Arise! events in London, Newcastle, Birmingham, Bristol, Manchester, Bournemouth, and Aberdeen.

If you’re in or near one of these areas, could you come and bring some friends with you?

Join us in November at Awake, Arise! Belfast

Sat 28 Nov, Edinburgh: The rise of Islam

Tim Dieppe will be joined by Beth Peltola and Niel Deepnarain in Edinburgh on Saturday 28 November to biblically respond to the growth of Islam in the nation.

Through expert teaching, practical equipping and a clear call to stand firm, we will bring clarity to the cultural moment we are in, restore confidence in the Christian foundations of our nation, and prepare believers to engage their Muslim neighbours with the gospel.

Find out more and secure your ticket to the Rise of Islam in the UK

Find out more on our website

At Christian Concern, we speak at hundreds of events up and down the country each year, including churches, universities, and conferences.

To find out more about what events we have coming up and how you can get involved, visit our website for more information.

Events at Christian Concern

Christian Concern

info@christianconcern.com

020 3327 1120

© 2026 Christian Concern. ‘Christian Concern’ is a trading name of CCFON Ltd. CCFON Ltd is registered in England and Wales (Company Number 6628490). Registered office: 70 Wimpole Street, London W1G 8AX.

By OCCRP, 31st Oct 2026,

A warm welcome to our new readers from Silver Point Capital, Hartford Consulting, Modus Ponens Analytics, AlphaDelta Advisory Group and many others! Thanks for joining this community.

This Tuesday, November 3, Americans will vote in midterm elections that will determine not only the control of Congress but also the government’s ability to fight corruption at home and abroad. This week, we examine how the Trump administration has dismantled America’s anti-corruption laws, institutions, and norms, and blown past all precedents on personal enrichment while in office.

Trump’s Corruption Rulebook

Trump’s Great Anti-Corruption Rollback at Home and Abroad

Since returning to the White House in January 2025, Trump has taken a wrecking ball to anti-corruption programs and policies that have long been a source of bipartisan consensus.

At the same time, Trump has also personally made billions while in office, in what experts say is an unprecedented level of presidential profiteering.

“I don’t think that there’s any president who has so brazenly used their office to create a web of foreign entanglements that enriches himself, his family, and some of his closest advisors and their families,” said Matthew Dallek, a historian specializing on presidential politics at George Washington University.

On the eve of the election, OCCRP spoke to experts to take stock of the state of U.S. anti-corruption efforts in the U.S. today, whether Democrats have a plan to reverse course, and what the repercussions of Trump’s actions have been at home and abroad.

Read the full story →

Our New ‘America First’ Global Anti-Corruption Sheriff

In early 2025, President Donald Trump paused enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the U.S. law targeting bribery of foreign officials.

Six months later, enforcement resumed, but under narrower rules. The shift reflects Trump’s “America First” approach, which has also led to the U.S. withdrawal from dozens of international organizations it says do not serve the country’s interests.

In this Q&A, political economist Lorenzo Crippa, who studies how corruption enforcement shapes illicit financial flows, discusses the worrying trends he sees in the Trump administration’s approach to global anti-corruption enforcement.

Read the full story →

OCCRP Interview

Serbia’s Political Earthquake, Through a Reporter’s Eyes

“For 10 years, our rule was never to discuss any important stories in the office, because we understood that the secret service was spying on us all the time.”

Stevan Dojčinović has spent more than a decade exposing Serbia’s criminals, its corrupt officials, and links between the two.

As editor-in-chief of the award-winning Serbian investigative outlet KRIK, Dojčinović and his colleagues have withstood extraordinary pressure, including personal attacks in pro-government tabloids, a steady stream of lawsuits, and even death threats.

But on Sunday, Serbia’s student-led movement delivered a stunning electoral upset, breaking longtime leader Aleksandar Vučić’s 14-year grip on power and defeating the Balkan country’s formidable ruling machine.

In this interview, Dojčinović reflects on what the past few days have meant for him, how the students pulled it off, and what challenges lie ahead.

Read the full story →

OCCRP News Exclusive

Hungarian Tycoon’s Firm Funded Pro-Orban Political Ad Agency

After launching in 2020, Megafon Digital Incubator Center became one of Hungary’s most influential political advertising agencies, running social media campaigns mainly in support of the ruling Fidesz party and its leader, Viktor Orbán.

Today, its website is dark. The site was taken down just four months after national elections ended Orbán’s 16-year rule.

Financial statements examined by OCCRP and media partner Direkt36 now reveal that a company owned by Hungarian construction mogul László Szíjj donated $863,000 to Megafon in “cash grants.” Szíjj’s companies won lucrative government contracts during Orbán’s tenure.

Read the full story →

More OCCRP Reporting

Russian Billionaire Takes Tiny Norwegian News Outlet to Court in London

Russian tycoon Vitaly Orlov is suing a small Norwegian news outlet over its reporting on sanctions against his fishing company.

The Barents Observer is a six-person non-profit newsroom in Kirkenes, a town of about 7,000 people in Norway’s far north. But the lawsuit isn’t taking place there — or even in Norway.

Instead, Orlov has lodged a defamation suit in the High Court of London.

“We don’t even have money for plane tickets to go to the court,” said Editor in Chief Thomas Nilsen, adding that if Orlov is awarded some legal costs, The Barents Observer “will go bankrupt.”

Read the full story →

Thousands of Cyber Scam Arrests in Sri Lanka, No Prosecutions

Sri Lankan authorities have failed to successfully prosecute a single transnational cyber scam case, police said, despite arresting more than 1,000 suspected members of Asian fraud syndicates so far this year.

The island nation has become a destination for thousands of scam workers fleeing crackdowns on fraud centers in Southeast Asia, as criminal syndicates shift operations to more vulnerable countries, experts warn.

But a legal limitation is making prosecutions difficult: Sri Lanka’s current computer crime law requires a victim complaint to open a case. With most scam victims overseas, few complaints ever reach police.

Read the full story →

OCCRP Video

Two New Kazakh Universities. One Young Presidential Relative.

A young Kazakh man founded two major educational ventures, including Qazaq AI Research University, that went on to receive significant state support.

OCCRP’s Deputy Editor in Chief Julia Wallace explains how reporters found that he is the grand-nephew of Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.

Watch the video →

📞 We want to hear from you!

We’d love to know why you read OCCRP and how you use our reporting. Your feedback helps us improve.

Schedule a 15-minute call with us.

News Briefs

• Criminal Probe Launched in South Africa Over Contraband Baobabs Bound for Georgia

• How IRL Story Lab is Reimagining What Journalism Can Do

• Iraqi MP Gets Six Years, $20M Fine for Oil Graft

• Lawyers for ‘King of the South’ Try to Chip Away at U.S. Drug Trafficking Case

• Flávio Bolsonaro Flees Brazil After Election Defeat and Amid Fraud Probes

• China Sentences Ex Anti-Graft Official to Suspended Death for Bribery

• U.S. Court Sentences Lender to 15 Years over $76M Ponzi Scheme

• ‘Students Have Won’: Overwhelming Turnout Shatters Serbia’s Entrenched Regime

• FBI Cybercrime Operation Nets Nine Arrests in Nigeria

• Chinese Scam Boss Murdered in Sri Lanka Had Multiple Identities

• Cyprus Parliament Reviews Reports on Abramovich-Linked Asset Transfers

Announcements

OCCRP Joins Call for EU to Improve Journalists’ Access to Documents

OCCRP joined media outlets, journalist associations, and press freedom organizations in signing an open letter urging European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to improve journalists’ access to documents held by the Commission.

Unreasonable delays, questionable denials of access, heavy redactions, and missing archives increasingly hinder journalists from reporting in the public interest.

You can read the full letter here →

P.S. Thanks for reading! Got feedback? Simply reply to this email.

Copyright © 2026 Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, All rights reserved.

Too many emails? Choose which emails you want from us or unsubscribe from all OCCRP emails

TOMMY’S TRIAL - A DETAILED REVIEW

By UrbanScoop.news, 31st Oct, 2026

Yesterday, after eight days at Southwark Crown Court, Tommy was found guilty on both counts of harassment causing fear of violence relating to MailOnline journalists Andrew Young and Jacob Dirnhuber.

The jury came from an area of the country that has only a 35.5% ‘white British’ demographic, completely controlled politically by left-wing parties like Labour, Liberal Democrats and the Greens.

Tommy remains on bail and will return to court for sentencing on 16 December 2026.

Reporting restrictions remain in place.

Those restrictions currently limit what Tommy himself can publicly say about the case.

Urban Scoop, however, is not subject to silence simply because Tommy cannot presently give his full account.

We can and will continue to examine, scrutinise and report the facts that can lawfully be published.

And there are some important facts that should not disappear beneath the headlines.

Tommy was not charged with making threats to kill these journalists.

Indeed, at an earlier hearing prosecutors confirmed that none of the alleged harassment itself contained a direct threat of violence.

The prosecution case was instead that the overall course of conduct caused the two journalists to ‘fear’ violence and that Tommy knew, or ought to have known, that it would have that effect.

The conduct concerned far more than one sentence, and it would be wrong to pretend otherwise.

The jury heard about messages, telephone contact, private investigators and photographs.

But Tommy’s evidence was that his purpose was not to attack anybody.

He said he wanted to confront the journalists on camera about what they had done, that he was not going to publish their addresses, and that he deliberately did not expose innocent members of their families in the manner he believed had been done to his own.

The charge particulars themselves record one of his posts saying: ‘I won’t identify any innocent people or give address as that’s not morally right.’

Why was he so angry?

The Daily Mail had tracked down Tommy to Cyprus while he was away with his ex-wife, his children and several other families on holiday.

It published stories about his whereabouts and photographs taken at the resort under the accusation that he was ‘stoking race riots from his sunbed’ following the Southport murders and subsequent disorder.

The evidence is that Tommy actually called for calm, repeatedly, during the riots.

Tommy denied stoking the riots and told the jury that the reporting made it easy to identify where his family was staying.

He said he was ‘shocked’ and ‘scared’ and that his family moved within the hotel on security advice.

The article also included an image of his ex-wife.

This context matters because the threat against Tommy and his family was not hypothetical, it was real.

Agreed facts put before the jury included four police ‘threat-to-life’ warnings issued to Tommy in 2018, 2019 and 2024, with the latest coming shortly after the Daily Mail article.

In separate earlier court proceedings, Tommy’s barrister told a court that there had been 12 credible threats against Tommy and his family serious enough to result in Osman threat-to-life warnings, including warnings extending to his ex-wife.

Tommy also told this jury that his 12-year-old daughter had received rape threats and that his ex-wife had previously been threatened with an acid attack.

And these were not merely anonymous words online that were universally dismissed as meaningless.

During the same period, Habeeb Khan was arrested after appearing in a video with a deactivated AK-47 while making threats towards the EDL and Tommy Robinson.

He subsequently pleaded guilty to sending a communication threatening death or serious harm and was jailed for 27 months.

Another man, rapper Omar Abdirizak, was arrested over a video directed at Tommy in which he referred to ‘artillery’, made a rifle gesture and imitated gunfire.

He was subsequently convicted of sending a menacing communication.

That provides important context when people ask why Tommy regarded the publication of his whereabouts and images involving his family as a serious security issue rather than simply unwanted newspaper coverage.

There is an important distinction here.

The journalists told the court that they genuinely feared violence.

The prosecution also relied upon threatening or unpleasant online comments from third parties, which Tommy cannot be responsible for - how can you be responsible for other people’s use of language, or their actions even?

But the contrast remains striking:

Tommy entered this confrontation with an established and documented history of police threat-to-life warnings against him, while the Daily Mail case against him did not depend upon proof that he ever intended to physically attack either journalist.

His position was essentially: you have turned cameras on me and exposed my family and location, what happens if the camera is turned back on you?

How would you feel if I did to you what you have done to me and my family?

The prosecution characterised that as retaliation and intimidation.

Tommy characterised it as attempting to protect his family, challenge the journalists responsible and make them answer publicly for what he believed they had done, also to get them to remove images of his family online to protect them from serious harm.

The jury has now rejected Tommy’s defence and convicted him on both counts.

We respect the fact that those verdicts have been returned even if we do not agree with them.

That does not prevent the verdicts, the legal directions or the process that produced them from being scrutinised.

The jury’s own written route to verdict is particularly important.

It shows that the jury did not have to find that Tommy intended to commit violence.

They could convict if they were sure that the journalists feared violence and that Tommy ‘knew or ought to have known’ his conduct would cause that fear.

A very legal low bar indeed.

The jury was then separately required to decide whether it was more likely than not that his conduct was reasonable for protecting himself or others.

They rejected that defence, which seems ridiculous considering the very real threats to his families lives and the very real and urgent need to protect their identity.

Those distinctions will matter enormously when Tommy’s lawyers prepare for sentencing and any appeal.

Urban Scoop will now be examining the judge’s complete legal directions, the summing-up, the factual basis upon which the jury convicted, the sentencing guidelines and any properly arguable grounds upon which the safety of these convictions can be challenged.

Tommy remains on bail until 16 December.

Until reporting restrictions are lifted, there are aspects of this case that Tommy himself cannot discuss.

Urban Scoop can and will continue asking the questions that remain unanswered.

When further information can legally be published, we will publish it.

Whatever anybody thinks of Tommy Robinson politically, the documented threats to his safety are real.

Your support enabled him to maintain professional security around himself while facing threats that police themselves have taken seriously.

A huge thank you to every person who has contributed towards Tommy’s security while at court.

We will send you further updates as they happen.

DONATE

Yours sincerely
Urban Scoop/UTK

CIRCULO INDEPENDENTE UNIPESSOAL LDA, QTA SHOPPING 108 1 QUINTA DO LAGO, 8135-107 ALMANCIL, Portugal

By Alliance Defending Freedom, 30th Oct 2026,

In Nigeria, a WhatsApp message can become a matter of life and death.

Yahaya Sharif-Aminu, a Nigerian Sufi musician, is facing execution for lyrics he wrote about his faith.

In 2020, Yahaya was accused by others of blasphemy for allegedly insulting the prophet Muhammad.

A violent mob then burned down his house, Yahaya was arrested by the Hisbah Islamic religious police and then sentenced to death by hanging in a Sharia court.

In the trial, Yahaya didn’t even have legal counsel.

6 and a half years later, Yahaya is still in prison, awaiting his fate, without the freedom to create, to speak, or even to know what his future holds.

Last month, ADF’s allied lawyers wrote to the Chief Justice of the Nigerian Supreme Court, urging the court to assign a hearing date as soon as possible.

“The Court has continued to stall in hearing [Yahaya’s] case, delaying what could be a decision that not only frees Yahaya, but overturns the blasphemy laws in the country, which for years have suffocated religious freedom.” said Sean Nelson, our Senior Counsel of Global Religious Freedom.

Sadly, Yahaya’s case is not an isolated one. Across northern Nigeria, Sharia-based blasphemy laws punish Christians, minority Muslims, and others for peacefully expressing their views and silence others from sharing their faith.

Alliance Defending Freedom is working to end blasphemy laws so that people like Yahaya can finally have what so many of us take for granted: the freedom to express their faith, to share our thoughts, and live without fear of persecution.

A ruling in Yahaya’s favour could set a precedent overturning blasphemy laws across the country.

You can support Yahaya and others like him with your gift today.

END BLASPHEMY LAWS IN NIGERIA

With gratitude,

Alliance Defending Freedom

Give one time | Give Monthly | Crypto

For Bank Transfers

ADF International (UK) | Barclays Bank – Sort Code 203593

Account Number 60668400

Payment Reference: Your email (For Giftaid confirmation)

ADF International (UK), trading as ADF UK, Nova North, 11 Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5BY, is a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales as a charity.

Company No. 09923116, Charity no. 1173195.

© 2026 ADF UK Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions

Free speech doesn’t defend itself - and it’s under pressure. Each week we track the cases, the campaigns, and the battles worth following. Why not gift a membership? Now is the time to help us turn the tide against cancel culture.

Gift FSU Membership

Donate now

******

In this week’s edition...

• Meet the new boss – same as the old boss

• Labour’s jury plans under fire from Labour peers

• Conversion Practices Bill could lead to “censorship of important and loving conversations within families”, says ex-government minister

• GB News accuses Ofcom of treating it unfairly

• Banter ban comes into force

• The PM and the Islamist

• When ideology trumps the safeguarding of children

• What effect has the Online Safety Act had on children? (Spoiler alert: very little)

• FSU Christmas Comedy Benefit, in association with Comedy Unleashed – 9th December, Bethnal Green, London

• Help us congratulate an Oxford Provost on standing up for free speech

• Poppy-wearer turned away from Wetherspoon pub

• The FSU on campus

• New FSU podcast

• Member Testimonials

• Sex, Lies and Statistics book launch – 12th November, central London

• How To Speak Freely: members-only online Speakeasy – 1st December

Meet the new boss – same as the old boss

On Tuesday, Andy Burnham reached his 100th day as Prime Minister. Despite his obvious desire to define himself as Not Keir Starmer, it’s already clear that when it comes to free speech, he’s Mr Continuity, pressing on with his predecessor’s censorship plans.

The Conversion Practices Bill, for example, is still on track, apparently seeking to ban the kind of standard pastoral care and parental guidance given to confused adolescents considering harmful and irreversible medical treatment to change gender. As a result, any parents who attempt to talk their children out of mutilating themselves could face criminal penalties, and even prison terms.

Also going ahead is the social media ban for under-16s, which Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has said is only a “staging post” towards “a very active interventionist state, policing and regulating the online space”. So, too, the promotion of the government’s official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility”, which has already been weaponised to silence those who legitimately criticise, debate and mock Islam – and is soon to get its own “tsar” to enforce it further.

Then there’s the Watch This Space green paper, which calls for social media platforms to be forced to give prominence to “trustworthy” news sources (as defined by the government, naturally) and to demote more critical outlets. And, while Burnham has dropped judge-only trials from the Courts and Tribunals Bill, he’s still proposing to strip defendants of the right to elect trial by jury for ‘either-way’ offences – those that, being neither major nor minor, can be tried in either a magistrates’ court or the Crown Court.

You can read a full analysis of Burnham’s dismal opening to his reign here – but the good news, as you’ll see from the next few items, is that opposition to many of Labour’s repressive plans continues to grow, including from within the Prime Minister’s own party.

Labour’s jury plans under fire from Labour peers

For instance, on the same day Burnham reached his 100th day as PM, several Labour peers spoke out against his jury proposals in the Lords, where the Courts and Tribunals Bill had its second reading. The day before, one of them explained why to the Telegraph: “It’s a restriction on the right to a jury trial which, call me old-fashioned, I think is so important.”

During the debate, there was also a powerful speech by Baroness (Claire) Fox, who sits as an independent. She took issue with the idea – put about by many of her “Labour friends” – that the dropping of judge-only trials means “the attack on juries has been halted by Andy Burnham”. This, she pointed out, “is just not true”, given that “this Bill continues an assault on juries, removing a defendant’s right to choose a Crown Court trial for either-way offences.”

Importantly, too, Baroness Fox raised the question of the government’s motivation. After all, it has rejected any time-limited clause that would mean the curtailing of jury rights would end once the courts’ backlog (the supposed reason for the reforms) is cleared. “It’s hard,” she said, “not to agree with Judge Rivlin, whose recent paper on this Bill states that ‘the enormous, scandalous backlog of cases has become an “opportunity” – some might say, an “excuse” – to recycle a long-held antipathy to jury trial’.”

You can watch Baroness Fox’s speech here.

Conversion Practices Bill could lead to “censorship of important and loving conversations within families”, says ex-government minister

Burnham is also facing a backlash from inside his own party over the proposed ban on conversion practices.

Preet Kaur Gill, a former Labour Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, told the Telegraph: “The intentions of the Bill – seeking to protect vulnerable people – are laudable. Yet there are serious concerns about the draft text that undermine what has become clear in recent research about the vulnerability of children exploring gender ideology.

“As the Cass Review [into gender services for children and young people] advised, parents and guardians must have freedom to take a cautious approach when navigating sensitive topics with their children. But the Bill could undermine this advice, and ensnare parents who simply want to properly examine the risks involved with early transition, and where appropriate, advise against rushing into the use of such serious interventions.

“It would be wrong if a Bill created to protect vulnerable people would overreach into potentially causing unnecessary censorship of important and loving conversations within families.”

Also last week, the charity Sex Matters wrote to Bridget Phillipson, the Minister for Women and Equalities, urging her to think again. Earlier this month, it published a report, based on 30 in-depth interviews with mental health professionals, which suggested that the fear of being charged with a criminal offence would push parents to accept their child’s trans status even if they didn’t believe it was in the child’s best interest.

Other charities, including such unlikely allies as Gay Men’s Network and the Christian Institute, have also pressed the government to reconsider.

More here.

And don’t forget to sign our own petition against this obviously anti-free-speech measure here.

GB News accuses Ofcom of treating it unfairly

GB News is hitting back against its potential government-backed downgrading on social media, as proposed in Watch This Space.

As we reported a few weeks ago, Ofcom’s own research found that GB News viewers score it more highly for trustworthiness than viewers of the BBC, Sky News, ITV and Channel 4 score those channels – all of them networks that the government has said internet platforms should prioritise. And yet, this finding was mysteriously absent from the regulator’s latest news consumption survey.

According to Ofcom, the omission was simply an “administrative error”. But it seems, at the very least, curious that it should be an error which allows the government to stick to its story that public service broadcasters remain Britain’s “most trusted news sources” – even though they apparently don’t.

Certainly, GB News isn’t buying the ‘honest mistake’ line. Instead, it has threatened to escalate its complaint to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy.

In a letter to the regulator, GB News’s CEO, Angelos Frangopoulos, wrote: “It is difficult to avoid drawing a conclusion that Ofcom is failing to apply a fair, consistent and transparent approach to its own research findings across broadcasters.” He also asked Ofcom to hand over the correspondence to Nandy, saying he would contact her directly if it failed to do so.

“Given the crucial significance of the issue of ‘trusted’ news to future legislative reform,” Frangopoulos said, “I would appreciate a thorough response.”

We will, of course, let you know if he gets one.

More here.

Banter ban comes into force

Today (Friday) sees the implementation of what is, in the teeth of tough competition, one of the government’s most illiberal measures yet. “Clause 20 of the Employment Rights Act” mightn’t sound like the scariest of phrases – but what it could mean in practice has long been of profound concern to the FSU.

Employers are already legally liable for the sexual harassment of their staff by third parties such as customers, and can therefore be sued by employees if that happens. Clause 20, though, extends employer liability for third-party harassment to protected characteristics like race, gender or sexuality. Moreover, the harassment needn’t even be directed at the employee personally.

In other words, a single remark, including one merely overheard, could trigger a harassment suit if the employee is – or claims to be – emotionally ‘harmed’.

The implications are both farcical and far-reaching. Venue owners may feel obliged to impose speech restrictions on performers. Pubs could install ‘banter bouncers’ to eavesdrop on conversations.

The FSU fought against Clause 20 vigorously – and, now that it’s here, we’re offering our support to its victims. Any employers who find themselves in trouble because of this egregious legislation can contact us at help@freespeechunion.org.

The PM and the Islamist

Andy Burnham met Muslim community leaders in Downing Street this week to assure them of the government’s commitment to its official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” – and to accuse political parties less willing to censor legitimate criticism of Islam of using “unacceptable” language.

Speaking to the leaders around the Cabinet table, Burnham said: “We want to counter any form of hatred, discrimination, Islamophobia, wherever we find it, and work with you to bring forward an agenda that says that to the community.”

He was accompanied by Angela Rayner, whose Working Group drew up the definition. As an FSU briefing has revealed, all five of its members have links to Islamist organisations, including some – such as the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) – with whom successive UK governments have had a policy of non-engagement.

Take, for instance, the woman in the pink hijab next to Burnham in the photo. She’s Akeela Ahmed, a member of the Working Group and now the head of the British Muslim Trust, which took over the £2.6m government grant for dealing with anti-Muslim hate crime from Tell Mama: an organisation founded by Fiyaz Mughal – who, coincidentally or otherwise, was a vocal opponent of an official definition, seeing it as a threat to free speech.

Ahmed has called for the police to be given powers to arrest people and the CPS to prosecute them for ‘Islamophobia’. She’s worked closely with the MCB in demanding restrictions on the reporting of Muslim affairs – and with Qari Asim, an imam sacked as an adviser by the previous Conservative government because of his anti-free-speech views. Asim has also invited Pakistani imams who support the death penalty for blasphemy to speak in the UK.

Is this really the kind of company a British Prime Minister should be keeping?

When ideology trumps the safeguarding of children

Dr Sarah Redvers, a former NHS Sussex safeguarding GP, says she was forced to resign after raising concerns about the prescribing of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to vulnerable young people by Brighton GP and pro-trans campaigner Dr Sam Hall.

Her case for constructive dismissal against NHS Sussex’s Integrated Care Board and its former Chief Executive Adam Doyle concluded at an employment tribunal this week, with a judgment expected in the coming months.

Redvers first raised her concerns in 2020 when she discovered, as part of her safeguarding role, that Hall was recommending testosterone for teenagers with a range of mental health problems. NHS England investigated but somehow found no problem with his behaviour.

Redvers then referred Hall to the General Medical Council (GMC) – and he complained to NHS Sussex that she was victimising him. As a result, it was she rather than Hall who became the focus of investigation. The subsequent “interrogation”, she said, was “brutal”. She was signed off work immediately afterwards and, feeling suicidal, was prescribed antidepressants.

Redvers resigned in July 2024 after years of feeling undermined and being accused of transphobia. She believes that fear of similar accusations prevented effective intervention by colleagues and NHS bosses to defend her.

An independent patient-safety investigation published in June this year duly substantiated many of her original objections. Of the 78 children it examined who were prescribed puberty blockers or hormones by Hall’s practice (and there were many more than that), 51 were under 16 when first prescribed them, and four were aged 12. His assessments were described as wholly inadequate, and his level of care as far below acceptable safety requirements.

Even by the depressing standards we’ve come to know, this is a shocking story: one which Baroness Cass has said “dwarfs” what she found at the Tavistock Clinic and denounced in the Cass Review. She’s called on the GMC to suspend Hall immediately, and demanded an urgent inquiry into why “every system that should have protected children and young people failed”.

Part of the answer, we’d suggest, is the self-censorship Redvers identified among her colleagues – the kind that inevitably comes with the chilling of free speech by activists, however cruel the consequences may be.

More here.

What effect has the Online Safety Act had on children? (Spoiler alert: very little)

In distinctly non-shock news, Ofcom has found that the Online Safety Act has made no difference to what children see on the internet. Its first report under the Act, published last week, sheepishly admitted: “We have not observed any significant changes in the incidence or severity of any kind of content over the first nine months after the children’s safety duties came into force.”

For some people (including, presumably, those at Ofcom) this only goes to show that the big social media platforms are dragging their feet. For others, perhaps, it’s evidence that, for all its big talk, Ofcom’s self-proclaimed ‘safety’ mission is somewhere between temporarily stalled and fundamentally doomed.

It doesn’t augur well, either, for the success of the social media ban for under-16s due next March.

More here.

FSU Christmas Comedy Benefit, in association with Comedy Unleashed – 9th December, Bethnal Green, London

Round up your comedy-loving friends and family for the FSU’s annual Christmas Comedy Benefit, a one-night-only extravaganza with an all-star line-up.

Comedy legend Josh Howie is our master of ceremonies – and he’ll be joined on stage by the one and only Leo Kearse; comedy and music supremo Dominic Frisby; the indomitable Intel Lady; and stylist to the stars Kelli! Taylor. There’ll also be a special guest appearance by FSU Director Lord Young.

Join the fun with the FSU team and help us raise funds to carry on defending freedom of speech.

In-person tickets can be bought here (non-members welcome).

FSU members can also watch at home on a livestream. Click here for livestream tickets or use the ticket access code FSUcomedy2026 on the ticket page to unlock them. Once you’ve purchased them, register for the event using the Zoom link provided.

Help us congratulate an Oxford Provost on standing up for free speech

Oriel College, Oxford is due to host an event with Dr Nathan Cofnas on Tuesday 17th November, organised by the Oxon Universities’ Reform Society. However, campaigners have been leaning on the College to cancel it because Cofnas wrote a blog in July accusing Professor Jason Arday (accurately, as it turned out) of plagiarism.

The College’s own Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech includes a strong presumption in favour of allowing invited talks to go ahead, no matter how controversial, and – to his great credit – the Provost, Lord Mendoza, has told alumni the event will not be cancelled.

We’d like to congratulate him on standing firm – and we invite you to congratulate him too. You can find a template email here which will take only a few minutes to fill out.

We quite often have to call for letters of protest when academic institutions fail in their free speech duties. It makes a pleasant change to encourage letters of support when they don’t.

Poppy-wearer turned away from Wetherspoon pub

Footage has emerged of a British Army veteran being turned away from a Wetherspoon pub on Sunday afternoon for the offence of wearing a Remembrance poppy.

The footage showed a doorman at The Star pub in Gosport, Hampshire telling the veteran: “Really sorry mate, you can’t come in with a poppy I’m afraid. It’s political.” When the veteran pointed out that it’s “not political at all”, the doorman replied, “I’m just doing my job.”

The doorman then said the man could come in if he pocketed the poppy, but if he put it back on inside, he’d be asked to leave. George Madgwick, the leader of Reform UK in Hampshire, who also posted the clip on X, claimed that the pub’s manager had cited “company policy” as the reason.

A spokesman for the pub chain was quick to deny this, saying: “Wetherspoon has been a long-standing supporter of the Royal British Legion Poppy Appeal, with poppies for sale in our pubs, including The Star.” Instead, the company attributed the episode to “standard security measures” put in place because that afternoon around 400 people were marching through Gosport to protest against small-boat arrivals on the Hampshire coast.

Yet, even allowing for a certain amount of confusion caused by the demonstration, the incident raises an obvious question. If the measures were concerned only with controlling pub numbers amid a tense atmosphere, why would a doorman ask someone to pocket his poppy unless someone had told him – or he’d come to believe himself – that it was, indeed, political?

What happened at The Star is a small but telling instance of a familiar, sad pattern. Faced with the possibility of disorder, an institution concluded that the safest course was to suppress lawful expression on the grounds that someone, somewhere, might take it as a provocation.

More here.

The FSU on campus

As ever, we’ve got plenty going on for students.

In this video, Connie Shaw is joined by Vinay Kapoor, the FSU’s Education and Engagement Officer, to discuss our first freshers’ week tour and the student free speech stories making the news as the academic year gets underway.

We’ve also published a students’ guide to speech rights on campuses in England and Scotland, which you can download here – and which Vinay introduces here.

And finally, it’s deadline time for our fantastic student membership offer. Until tomorrow (31st October), any students who aren’t already in the FSU can join for £14.99 for their first year – half the usual rate – using the code FRESHERS26. And if you have a child or grandchild at university, or know any other students who’d appreciate it, you can buy a membership on their behalf. To do any of that, please click here before it’s too late.

New FSU podcast

In this week’s episode, Connie Shaw talks to Dr Zoe Hollowood, Chair of Liberal Voice for Women.

Zoe, a scientist, gender-critical feminist and Lib Dem activist, argued at the party’s 2026 conference that women’s sex-based rights should continue to be recognised under the Equality Act. The conference rejected her plea.

According to Zoe, most Lib Dem members and voters agree with her but much of the leadership has been captured by trans activists. She shares her experience of fighting back against censorship and discrimination in her own party.

To watch, click here.

Member Testimonials

This week, we’ve got not one but two new testimonials for you.

The first features Janet Murray, founder of the Singing Striders choir, which had performed twice before as a “cheer squad” at the London Marathon on behalf of the disability charity Scope. Two days before this year’s race, though, Scope informed Janet that the choir was no longer welcome because of her online criticism of trans ideology. With our help, she’s now received an apology from the charity and a public acknowledgement that its decision was wrong.

In the second, Brodie Mitchell talks about the help he received from the FSU after he was suspended from Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL) for nine weeks when, in response to a pro-Palestine activist calling him a “wannabe Jew”, he said her keffiyeh looked like a “tea towel”. And not only was he barred from campus, he was also reported to the police. With our support, he mounted a legal challenge and in an out-of-court settlement RHUL expressed regret for its treatment of him and paid him an undisclosed sum as “a gesture of goodwill”.

Recording the video at RHUL, Brodie says: “If it wasn’t for the Free Speech Union, I wouldn’t be here today, back in my degree and doing really well in my final year of studies.”

Sex, Lies and Statistics book launch – 12th November, central London

Join us for the launch of Professor Alice Sullivan’s Sex, Lies and Statistics: Why We Need Evidence-Based Policy on Sex and Gender, which investigates one of the most contentious and puzzling social phenomena of our time: the removal of people’s sex from data, social policy and public discourse. Clear, accessible and deeply researched, the book makes a powerful case for policymaking based on proper evidence and for honest public discussion.

Professor Sullivan, who has stood her ground against repeated cancellation attempts, will be joined on the panel by two speakers who know the importance of biological sex categories in such key areas as prisons and official statistics: former prison security chief and senior civil servant Professor Ian Acheson and that stalwart defender of academic freedom and statistical integrity Professor Michael Biggs of Oxford University.

In-person tickets are available here, with an option to buy the book for signing and collection on the night.

Alternatively, you can register for the free members-only livestream here – and buy a signed copy of the book, with free UK delivery, here.

How To Speak Freely: members-only online Speakeasy – 1st December

At this exclusive event for FSU members, Michael Fontaine, Professor of Classics at Cornell University, will talk and answer questions about his new translation of Plato’s account of the trial of Socrates – condemned to death for questioning the authority of Athens’s rulers.

Find out how history’s first free-speech martyr has lessons for us today. (No prior knowledge required!)

Register here for free access.

Sharing the newsletter

As with all our work, this newsletter depends on the support of our members and donors, so if you’re not already a paying member, please sign up today or encourage a friend to join by gifting membership, and help us turn the tide against cancel culture. You can share our newsletters on social media with the buttons below to help us spread the word. If someone has shared this newsletter with you, please find our website here.

Kind regards,

Bansi Peshaweria
Head of Membership Communications

Follow us on social media

Our mailing address is:
The Free Speech Union
167-169, Great Portland Street
London, W1W 5PF

Copyright © 2026
Free Speech Union Ltd.
All rights reserved.

• The Netherlands Case Website: https://thenetherlandscase.com

• Donate to the legal costs of the case: https://thenetherlandscase.com/donate

• Donation Link: https://gofundnow.nl/campaign/give-the-victims-a-voice-support-our-fight-for-justice-6adccf2e0c014

  ---

A Landmark Civil Lawsuit in The Netherlands

The Case at a Glance

A definitive, historic legal proceeding marking an unprecedented confrontation over global pharmaceutical and institutional accountability.

The historic civil lawsuit in the Netherlands is brought by seven Pfizer “vaccine”-injured individuals, represented by attorney Peter W.H. Stassen, seeking individual accountability from global figures like Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, Mark Rutte, along with the State of The Netherlands and no fewer than thirteen high-ranking defendants from politics, business, media, and science.

This lawsuit marks an unprecedented confrontation between citizens and global institutions. While defendants cling to the official narrative of “safe and effective” mRNA injections, the plaintiffs’ case presents an uncompromising clash of hard facts substantiated by expert evidence. The divergence is so profound that the plaintiffs’ pleadings formally characterise the rollout as the greatest genocide in history, putting the establishment’s preferred pandemic narrative directly on trial.

The core argument in the proceedings is as brief as it is clear: COVID-19 is not a disease but a project known as “Covid-19: The Great Reset.” The defendants in these civil proceedings are being held personally liable with their private assets on the grounds of tort. Through their actions and omissions, they unlawfully misled the plaintiffs, as a result of which the latter received a Covid-19 injection, causing serious damage to their physical integrity and their mental and physical health.

After Bill Gates lost his initial jurisdictional challenge, the court ordered the case to move forward into a highly significant substantive merits hearing scheduled for 22 October 2026. This landmark case marks the first time global architects of the Great Reset are legally compelled to present a formal defence against substantiated allegations of institutional deception and public harm in an open court of law.

Powerful, compelling and explosive evidence has been submitted to the Court in these proceedings (September 22) by Sasha Latypova, Dr Mike Yeadon, Catherine Austin Fitts and Joseph Sansone. The significance of that evidence extends far beyond the hearing itself. It forms part of an extraordinary evidential record which can be examined, scrutinised and built upon long after these proceedings have concluded. What has been assembled and placed before the Court provides a substantial body of material from which future lawyers, researchers and litigants can draw... in the Netherlands and in jurisdictions around the world.

This case is bigger than one judgment. It will not result in prison sentences, but the evidence placed on the judicial record and the legal ground broken here can have consequences far beyond this courtroom — providing a foundation for future cases and, we hope, inspiring lawyers around the world to stand up and pursue further routes to accountability.

Read More

Start here. Get straight into the case with a concise overview and an explanation of the issues at the heart of the substantive hearing in Leeuwarden on 22 October. We recommend reading this first before exploring the full Case File!

OVERVIEW & SUBSTANTIVE HEARING INFO

A truth left unseen can still be buried. Our job now -and yours- is to make sure the world sees it.

The Oct 22 Hearing Is Over. What Happens Next?

The court has indicated that a judgment may be delivered on 9 December, although that date is not guaranteed... as it could be delayed until February 2027 due to complexity of the case!

Remember, this is a civil case seeking damages, while placing the wider narrative itself under legal scrutiny. The claimants are pursuing the defendants as individuals, alleging unlawful conduct under Dutch tort law and seeking to establish personal liability, involving their private assets.

There are several possible outcomes.

The court could issue an interim judgment, order further evidentiary proceedings or deliver a judgment addressing whether the claimants have established the five legal requirements necessary for liability and damages.

If those requirements have not been established, the claims could be dismissed. But that would not necessarily mean the end of the case, because the claimants may have the right to appeal.

And importantly, an appeal in the Netherlands can involve a substantive reconsideration of the facts, evidence and legal arguments. It is not simply a challenge to whether the first judges made a mistake.

The 5 requirements that the plaintiffs and lawyer peter Stassen must fulfil are:

Under Article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code, a civil claim based on an unlawful act requires five legal elements to be established.

1. Unlawfulness – Was something legally wrong?
The defendant must have acted unlawfully, for example by violating someone’s rights, breaking a legal obligation or acting contrary to standards of reasonable conduct recognised by law.

2. Attribution – Can the defendant be held responsible?
The unlawful conduct must be legally attributable to the defendant. This can involve fault, but responsibility can also arise on other grounds recognised by law.

3. Damage – Was actual harm suffered?
The claimants must establish that they suffered legally recognised harm or loss. This may include financial loss, physical injury or qualifying non-material harm.

4. Causation – Did the defendant’s conduct cause that harm?
There must be a legally sufficient connection between the unlawful conduct and the damage suffered. In simple terms: did what the defendant did cause the harm being claimed?

5. Relativity – Was the rule intended to protect against this kind of harm?
The legal rule or duty that was breached must be intended to protect the claimant against the type of harm suffered. It is not enough simply to demonstrate that a rule was broken.

The essential point

All five requirements must be satisfied for a damages claim based on an unlawful act to succeed. Establishing that something was wrong is only the beginning; the court must also consider responsibility, harm, causation and the purpose of the legal protection involved.

So What happens if the claimants do not succeed?

If the claimants are unable to establish all five legal requirements, and the court consequently dismisses their claims, that does not necessarily mean the end of the proceedings.

Under Dutch civil law, the claimants can generally appeal the judgment to a higher court.

Importantly, an appeal in the Netherlands is not simply an argument that the original judges made the wrong decision as it is in the UK and US, for example.

The Court of Appeal can reconsider the substance of the case, including the facts, evidence and legal arguments. Depending on the procedural circumstances, parties may also introduce further evidence, develop their arguments and address matters that were said to be not fully established during the original proceedings.

There are rules and limitations governing this process, but an appeal offers a genuine opportunity for the case to be reconsidered and a new judgment delivered.

In simple terms: an unsuccessful first judgment does not mean the case is over. And an appeal is absolutely intended in this case, if necessary.

If the claimants are unsuccessful, they could also face an adverse costs order, which I understand may be around €13,000. The Dutch system uses a points-based approach to recoverable legal costs, rather than automatically awarding hundreds of thousands in legal fees to the defendants.

That makes the Netherlands an important place to pursue this litigation to its conclusion!

So, watch this space, keep checking the website for updates!

Thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for helping bring The Narrative on Trial to the world!

Peter W.H. Stassen’s Statement to the Court: 22 October

The Narrative on Trial: The Claimants’ Case Before the Court

READ FULL STATEMENT IN ENGLISH

Donate To The Netherlands Case Fundraiser

This is the new and OFFICIAL local/Dutch-based fundraiser in the Netherlands to support the continuation of the legal proceedings, with contributions directed towards litigation costs through the claimants.

• https://gofundnow.nl/campaign/give-the-victims-a-voice-support-our-fight-for-justice-6adccf2e0c014

This fundraiser is now run by Reggie Dijkstra (plaintiff) who spoke at our Press Conference and is dedicated to and will focus directly and solely on litigation costs. Reggie and the co-plaintiffs have jointly launched this fundraising campaign to help cover the legal expenses necessary to continue the case.

World Council for Health Newsletter Part II -29th Oct 2026

By The World Council For Health Team, 29th 2026

OUR SUBSTACKS

Cause for Hope: Courageous Doctors Are Building a Parallel World

In Germany, good doctors who risked their licenses, their reputations and their freedoms to stand by their oath to first do no harm are now building new infrastructure alongside lawyers and politicians. Christof Plothe D.O., WCH Health and Science Lead, was a keynote speaker at their recent conference.

Read here

Pregnant Women Should Never Have Been COVID Jabbed

Worldwide, WCH-aligned groups and individuals are demanding accountability and justice for COVID crimes. This Icelandic case demanding an investigation into the process that led to pregnant women receiving experimental genetic COVID injections is one of several cases WCH Iceland currently has before the parliamentary ombudsman in Iceland.

Read here

“Common Hearts” Create Community Through Quality Food Produced Locally

At World Council for Health, we support initiatives that defend health and freedom and promote healthy lifestyles, self-mastery, and community governance. This week, we are reporting on the October 2026 Common Hearts initiative and podcast with Mark Byford aka the Bowler Hat Farmer, Charles Fernandes, Andrew Munroe, Maria Addison, Paul English and Geoff Wallis.

Read here

UPCOMING EVENTS

A FRESH LOOK AT CANCER - EARLY BIRD TICKETS NEARLY SOLD OUT! One Day Intensive Workshop - Where YOU Ask the Doctors

We are so excited to be hosting an amazing panel of world-renowned cancer specialists – back by popular demand!

Attention all practitioners: this event offers six CPD credit hours.

Hear from four leading voices:

• Emeritus Prof. Angus Dalgleish

• Dr. Paul Marik

• Dr. Sarah Myhill

• Christof Plothe DO

With a welcome from Dr. Tess Lawrie.

Join us in London on Thursday 28 January 2027 for an intimate, intensive day exploring new approaches to cancer prevention and treatment, covering both conventional and natural approaches.

NEW: ASK THE DOCTORS PANEL

There will be opportunities for a Q&A session following the talks, culminating in a dedicated ASK THE DOCTORS PANEL where attendees can put their questions to the speakers.

The day also includes an exhibitor area, live blood analysis, thermography imaging and free adaptogenic coffee.

• Thursday 28 January 2027

• 8:30am–5:00pm

• 25 Percy Circus, King’s Cross, London WC1X 9EU

🎟 Early bird tickets from £95

This event will not be livestreamed - book now to avoid disappointment as spaces are limited and tickets are already selling fast!

Buy tickets:
https://www.tickettailor.com/events/ebmc2/2443246

DONATE TO THE WORLD COUNCIL FOR HEALTH

Please consider donating to World Council for Health - every donation we receive is used to support our worldwide coalition and fund initiatives that promote wellbeing for all. We safeguard health freedom for the world and we will always remain free from corporate interests.

PLEASE DONATE TO WCH

JOIN US ON SOCIALS

Telegram | Substack | Facebook | Instagram | X | TikTok | YouTube

Have a wonderful weekend!

World Council for Health Team

World Council for Health

EBMC SQUARED CIC,

The Rosa Room, Hartham Park, Corsham, Wiltshire, SN13 0RP.
United Kingdom