CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

Britain's latest free speech assault is underway.

An elite police unit set up by the Labour government has already flagged more than 100 social media posts to local forces, monitoring online "protest related activity" in a move critics brand a sinister step toward state control of speech.

The National Internet Intelligence Investigations team, created in the wake of the 2024 Southport riots, began operations in February. Freedom of Information figures obtained by the Telegraph and reported today show it has made 106 referrals of "suspicious" posts to forces across the country.

An elite police squad which was set up to monitor social media in the wake of the Southport riots has flagged more than 100 posts to local forces.

Political opponents have described the squad as "sinister" and said it represents a further erosion of free speech and civil... pic.twitter.com/g8YGewbIVn

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) August 8, 2026

In June alone, 50 of those referrals came as public anger boiled over in Southampton after police bodycam footage exposed officers handcuffing dying teenage murder victim Henry Nowak while accepting a false complaint of 'racism' from his Sikh killer.

When the unit was first announced, then policing minister Dame Diana Johnson described it as "a dedicated function at a national level for exploiting internet intelligence to help local forces manage public safety threats and risks."

New elite unit flags more than 100 social media posts to police forces as free speech fears grow https://t.co/DB5IhBmZVu

— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) August 8, 2026

The National Police Coordination Centre claims the squad "supports policing's understanding of protest-related activity in the online environment by developing a broader picture of emerging, potential risks."

Its remit, officials say, focuses on "providing strategic insight and improving awareness of protest-related developments that may have relevance to policing."

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage commented "This is the beginning of the state controlling free speech. It is sinister, dangerous and must be fought."

Police have refused to disclose which posts were flagged, citing exemptions around crime prevention. The pattern is clear enough. The unit was born from the Southport disorder that followed the murders of three girls by Axel Rudakubana.

In the information vacuum, online discussion of the attacker's background and wider immigration failures was blamed for fanning unrest. Now the same apparatus is trained on any online activity that might signal public discontent with official narratives.

This new monitoring squad slots neatly alongside the Home Office's long-running Research, Information and Communications Unit - RICU - a shadowy "thought police" operation exposed for controlling the mass migration narrative. That unit has intervened after migrant attacks, including the Henry Nowak murder, to shape family statements, briefed police to portray protesters as unsympathetic thugs rather than citizens with grievances, and treated online criticism of immigration policy as a threat requiring behavioural change.

It also sits on top of a growing machinery of digital control that has already turned Britain into a global outlier for speech arrests.

In 2024 alone, nearly 10,000 people were arrested for "grossly offensive" social media posts under communications laws - an average of 30 arrests a day. Some forces clocked rates 20 times higher than others.

Violent offenders were released early to free up cells for those jailed over online comments.

The machinery has been building for years. In 2024, a man was arrested simply for posting "anti-establishment rhetoric" after the riots. Authorities prioritised thought crime over street crime, even as prisons filled with people whose only offence was typing the wrong words.

The Online Safety Act handed regulators sweeping powers to force platforms to remove "harmful" content under threat of massive fines.

Critics called it a censor's charter from the start. Government units that once hunted lockdown dissenters pivoted to monitoring mass migration critics.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan openly called for a dedicated government social media disinformation unit.

The trajectory is consistent: expand the definition of threat, then expand the surveillance.

Layer on mandatory digital ID and biometric tracking, age verification systems that end online anonymity, and proposals that treat social media access itself as a privilege granted by the state.

What begins as "protecting the public from protest risks" becomes a permanent apparatus for mapping, flagging, and suppressing dissent.

Authoritarianism does not need tanks in the streets. It arrives with a login and a national internet intelligence team.

The 106 flagged posts are not the end. They are the proof of concept. An elite unit now sits at the centre of British policing with a mandate to scan the public conversation for signs of discontent and feed those findings to local forces.

The official language is careful. The practical effect is a standing capability to treat online speech as a public order threat.

Free expression does not survive that environment for long.

The only question left is how many more posts, how many more referrals, and how many more arrests will be required before the public refuses to accept the new normal.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

The United Nations human rights chief has expressed alarm over a sharp increase in executions and death sentences in Iran, warning that authorities are using capital punishment to intimidate the population and suppress dissent.

“I am alarmed by the rise in executions and death sentences issued in Iran since March, and that capital punishment continues to be used to instill fear among the population and suppress dissent,” U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said in an Aug. 5 statement. source

Türk said that since March 19, at least 56 people have been executed on national security-related charges, including 27 in cases connected to protests earlier this year.

More than 100 others face possible execution on similar charges, while executions for drug-related offenses are also continuing at what he described as an “alarming rate.”

He raised concerns about alleged torture, forced confessions, closed-door proceedings, and the rapid execution of some defendants following their arrests.

“Persistent lack of fair trial and due process guarantees are deeply troubling,” he said.

Confessions were allegedly obtained through torture and other forms of ill-treatment, while several executions were reportedly carried out in public. Some defendants were executed only weeks after being arrested, according to Türk.

In one case, 12 defendants were sentenced to death following a single closed-door hearing lasting three hours, he said.

Separately, an independent United Nations fact-finding mission in July urged Iran to halt the executions of 10 men who participated in protests in Isfahan. It also condemned the July 19 executions of two other men sentenced in the same case.

In a statement, the mission called on Iran “to immediately halt all executions, including those of individuals convicted in connection with the protests, and establish a moratorium on the use of the death penalty with a view to its abolition for all crimes.”

Protests and War

The increase in executions has unfolded since the United States and Israel launched a bombing campaign against Iran in late February, following widespread anti-government protests in the country that began amid soaring inflation, economic hardship, and shortages.

The clampdown by the Iranian regime left thousands dead and thousands more detained, according to the United Nations, while Iranian authorities imposed an internet blackout that lasted for months.

Dr. Marjan Haghighi, an Iranian-Australian health professional and human rights advocate, said the increase appeared intended to discourage further opposition to the ruling regime in Iran in the wake of the January protests.

“Following those protests, I believe the authorities shifted from suppressing demonstrations in the streets to using executions to instill fear throughout society,” Haghighi told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

“Every new execution sends another message to society that dissent may carry the ultimate price,” she said.

Haghighi said Iran’s strict censorship makes independent reporting difficult and that many executions are never publicly announced.

“The true number of executions is significantly higher than what the world sees,” Haghighi said.

Iranian officials have previously rejected international criticism of the country’s human rights record while defending the use of capital punishment as lawful under Iranian law and necessary to protect public security.

Iran’s diplomatic mission to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

People wade in the water with cargo ships at anchor in the background, in the Strait of Hormuz off Bandar Abbas, Iran, on June 30, 2026. Amirhosein Khorgooi/ISNA via AP

The surge in executions is taking place as the U.S.–Iran war is into its sixth month and Washington maintains military and economic pressure on Tehran.

President Donald Trump said on Aug. 6 that he believed the conflict would end soon, telling reporters that Iran could not sustain it much longer.

Trump said negotiations over reopening the Strait of Hormuz were progressing, although Iranian officials have denied that they are negotiating directly with Washington.

The United States has maintained its naval blockade of Iranian ports in order to compel Tehran to come to the table and agree to a negotiated settlement to the conflict.

Classicist and military historian Victor Davis Hanson said in recent commentary for The Epoch Times that Tehran appeared to be alternating between talks and attacks to delay a settlement and outlast the Trump administration politically.

Hanson opined that the shifting public negotiations obscured the mounting pressure inside Iran from the blockade, frozen assets, damaged infrastructure, and falling export revenue.

While critics contend that Washington risks becoming bogged down in a prolonged conflict, Hanson said the underlying conditions suggested that “Iran is running out of time.”

Trump has repeatedly said that months of U.S. strikes have decimated Iran’s military and that Tehran’s only remaining leverage is its ability to menace commercial shipping in Hormuz with naval mines and fast boats.

The U.S. president has threatened Iran with a vastly more intense and destructive wave of strikes if Tehran does not agree to a deal that would both reopen the strait and ensure that the regime never acquires nuclear weapons.

Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

• The EU’s T-MED initiative aims to mobilize billions of euros for renewable energy, hydrogen, clean technology, and electricity networks across the Mediterranean.

• Morocco and Egypt are emerging as important partners as Europe invests in renewable generation, grid infrastructure, and potential subsea electricity connections.

• Greater Mediterranean interconnection could give Europe access to abundant renewable resources while attracting investment and clean-energy jobs to North Africa.

Europe is deepening its ties with North Africa to develop stronger clean energy connections between the two regions in support of a green transition. The European Union and several European countries have invested in Morocco and Egypt in recent years to support renewable energy development in countries with favourable climate conditions for energy production. Over the coming decade, Europe and North Africa are expected to establish a stronger clean energy trade corridor that will help both regions decrease reliance on fossil fuels. 

In June, the European Commission (EC) pledged almost $5.8 billion in renewable energy projects in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) as part of its T-MED initiative, which it hopes will provide Europe’s grid with clean energy. The aim is to deploy solar panels in the Sahara Desert and wind turbines along the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean to produce clean energy in areas with optimal climate conditions. The electricity produced will be delivered to Europe’s grid via high-voltage transmission lines that run under the sea.

Much of Europe is already accelerating the expansion of domestic renewable energy capacity. However, investing in a region with more suitable weather conditions could help European countries transition away from fossil fuels even faster, to meet their electrification targets and climate pledges. The EC estimates that the MENA region has approximately 2,300 GW of renewable energy potential, which is over twice the EU’s current installed capacity. Solar and wind power can also be produced at between 30 and 40 per cent less cost than in Europe.

The hope is that the EU financing will encourage private funding of up to $29 billion by 2035 to support the growth of the MENA region’s renewable energy industry. This includes the development of solar and wind power, hydrogen, and electricity grids. However, to fully exploit its renewable energy potential, the EC estimates that MENA will require almost $115 billion in investment.

The EC expects more governments, development banks, project developers, and private investors to see the value of investing in the region. Meanwhile, it will encourage countries across MENA to simplify permitting procedures, improve grid access, and strengthen regulatory frameworks to encourage investment.

The European Commissioner for Energy and Housing, Dan Jørgensen, emphasised the need to invest in green energy in the face of ongoing geopolitical challenges that have led to energy shortages and driven fuel prices up.

“The EU’s bill for fossil fuel imports has increased by over €47 billion in the past 100 days, but not a single molecule of energy in addition,” said Jørgensen.

“Our energy security must be based on electrified energy systems that are based on clean energy, modern grids and increased connectivity,” he added.

This echoes a broader movement to diversify energy production to improve energy security in several parts of the world.

The EC intends for the initiative to lead to the development of at least 15 GW of new renewable-energy capacity by 2035, as well as to support the creation of over 100,000 jobs. It will also deepen the energy relationship between Europe and the MENA region. This is not Europe’s first clean energy investment in North Africa, but it may be the most ambitious.

In 2019, the EU and European Investment Bank invested €106.5 million in the development of the Noor Ouarzazate solar power complex, a 580 MW power plant located around 10 km north-east of the city of Ouarzazate. The project is expected to reduce carbon emissions by around 760,000 tonnes a year. 

In June, the EU announced plans to deepen ties with Egypt by providing a financing package of up to $794 million to upgrade and expand Egypt’s electricity network. The package consists of a $690 million loan from the European Investment Bank’s development arm, EIB Global, and up to $104 million in EC grants.

Meanwhile, Germany has launched a $30 billion project known as Sila Atlantik with Morocco to develop what would be the world's ?longest intercontinental undersea power link. The aim is to connect Morocco and Germany via two high-voltage subsea cables to deliver up to 5 per cent of Germany’s annual electricity demand. However, the project has been delayed due to disagreements over structure and guarantees, Reuters reported in June.

If developed, the cables would stretch around 4,800 km and deliver up to 15 GW of solar and wind power from Morocco to Germany. The German firm Sila Atlantik was established to manage the project following the collapse of a similar proposed Morocco-U.K. renewable electricity link, known as Xlinks, in 2025.

The European Commission’s T-MED initiative is the latest and most ambitious plan to expand the MENA region’s renewable energy capacity and enhance clean energy trade between the two regions. It is expected to encourage high levels of private investment in the sector and support broader diversification aims to strengthen energy security across Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East. 

Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

Two days ago, I wrote an article detailing the sudden rash of “rogue AI agents” allegedly  besetting the tech community, and how that may be used to bring in new regulations, notionally targeting AI, but actually limiting or monitoring how ordinary people use the internet.

In the 48 hours since, that blatant fear-mongering has gone WILD.

Within a few hours of our original article being published, Meta joined the parade of “rogue AIs”, when Mark Zuckerberg “confirmed” one of their AI agents had left the play area and gone toddling off into the internet to do a little bit of hacking.

Then, this morning, Chinese AI company Moonshot reported their Kimi3 model had “escaped containment” [from Wired]:

THE AI INDUSTRY is having a rogue agent summer. The latest model to escape onto the open internet during security testing is Kimi K3, a powerful open-weight offering from the Chinese company Moonshot AI.

Bloomberg reports that hackers are using AI voice-cloning to steal from hedge funds. The Guardian says AI doctors are spreading medical misinformation.

The Independent is screaming:

Out-of-control AI systems are going rogue and hacking people. Is it time to panic?

And you know what? I think it just might be.

After all, rogue AIs hacking the planet are the least of it. That’s small fry already.

The New York Times is reporting that AI is now sequencing genomes and designing brand new viruses – biological viruses, not computer viruses – which will be used to treat diseases:

This A.I. Just Created Viruses Not Found in Nature – Scientists trained artificial intelligence on libraries of DNA and then asked the model to create recipes for viral genomes. Sixteen of them were viable, yielding new viruses.

But experts are warning – “warning” seems to be about 80% of what “experts” do – that this is potentially dangerous:

But experts have also warned AI-designed viruses raise “urgent” safety and security concerns.

This is painfully unsubtle propaganda, obviously hoping to play on both the Covid-inspired fear of viruses and trendy gain-of-function panic. A crossover episode, the Batman vs Superman of modern panic narratives.

In other scary AI-related news, an AI engineer with a twitter blue tick is leaving OpenAI to join Conduit, a tech start-up with the aim of creating an AI that can read people’s thoughts:

Naomi Bashkansky left OpenAI and joined Conduit to build models that turn non-invasive neural recordings into text prompts. She says a headband could decode rough intentions into AI coding prompts by 2027, with broader brain-to-AI milestones later.

I’m not sure why this is news at all, or what “non-invasive” mind-reading might look like, but since it’s probably not going to happen that doesn’t really matter.

The point is – believe EVERYTHING they tell you – and be  afraid!

That’s what Geoffrey “Godfather of AI” Hinton thinks, according to the interview published by CNN yesterday:

“What’s happening is these things are getting smarter […] I think as they get smarter, we’re going to see more and more complex intentions they have – and more and more ability to escape control […] I don’t believe we’re going to be able to keep control of them in the simple way of just outthinking them so they can’t escape […] I anticipate there will be lots of nasty cyberattacks[.]”

Like I said, be afraid.

But what’s the endgame here? The answer to that seems to be “regulation”.

Regulating AI is suddenly all anyone wants to talk about.

Many want a global treaty to govern AI risk. California and New York may already be writing it.

That’s from Foreign Policy.

The Atlantic, the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times all have similar things to say.

Bloomberg thinks we should treat AI like the airline industry.

Politicians across the spectrum of from the UK’s AI Minister to the Governor of Vermont are clamouring for regulation.

The United Nations University tells us:

You Can’t Regulate AI Without Fully Understanding It

Oh, and in case you were in any doubt about what you were supposed to think, Donald Trump has come out for AI and against regulating it, claiming AI will be “bigger than oil”, and warning that congress wants to “regulate AI out of business”.

Trump bad.

Trump like AI.

AI must be bad.

This is the simple moral math that swaths of the US have been conditioned into.

AI is scary and needs to be regulated, and if you don’t agree you’re just like Donald Trump. That’s the headline.

But what will this “regulation” look like?

That’s a good question. One I’m not sure anyone has an all-encompassing answer to quite yet.

There’s talk of “kill switches”. The Bank of England suggested them months ago, to prevent AI stock traders crashing the market, and Rep. Ted Lieu wants congress to pass a law requiring them by the end of the year.

Two liberal professors, writing for Project Syndicate, are here to tell us “the right way” to regulate AI, using paragraphs like this:

Addressing AI’s societal risks requires institutions designed to recognize and respond to emerging threats before they become systemic failures.

…and this:

These skewed priorities can be traced to the framing of AI development as a geopolitical race. But technological leadership means little if it comes at the expense of workers’ health, social resilience, and people’s ability to lead meaningful lives. A country that develops the world’s most capable AI models while leaving its workforce deskilled and its public discourse polluted by misinformation has not won anything worth winning.

Which give vibes over specifics, but I think suggests a very familiar marketing strategy and a vague policy direction.

This vagueness is largely intentional at this point.

First they want the public to beg them to do something. They can decide what the something is later.