Wirral Councillors appear to have gone bonkers…

Or at least more bonkers than they already were…


https://wirralview.com/council-updates/wirrals-local-council-tax-reduction-scheme-will-be-changing

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Thousands sign petition against New Wirral Solar Farm

12th February UPDATE

REPRESENTATIVES OF CHINT GROUP HAVE STATED THAT A LAND DEAL HAS BEEN STRUCK AND THAT BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS WILL NOT BE USED AT THE THURSTASTON SOLAR COMPLEX


And here’s the petition:

https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-industrial-solar-farms-on-wirral-s-green-belt?source_location=search







Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Was there a cyber attack on the recent Oncotarget peer reviewed study into COVID19 ‘vaccines’?

Yes, a cyberattack occurred on the journal Oncotarget shortly after the publication of a peer-reviewed study on January 3, 2026, which analysed 333 cases of cancer onset or progression following COVID-19 vaccination. The journal’s website became inaccessible, displaying a “bad gateway” error, and the attack has prevented the study from being added to the live journal index. Oncotarget reported the incident to the FBI, alleging a malicious cyberattack aimed at disrupting access to the research. The journal has stated that the attacks began in December 2025 and continued into January 2026, with ongoing investigations into potential suspects, including individuals associated with PubPeer.

  • The study, authored by Dr. Wafik El-Deiry of Brown University and Dr. Charlotte Kuperwasser of Tufts University, reviewed 69 peer-reviewed publications from 27 countries and identified patterns of cancer cases temporally linked to vaccination, particularly with mRNA and adenoviral vector platforms.
  • The authors emphasized that while the study did not establish causation, it highlighted concerning patterns that warrant urgent further investigation.
  • Dr. El-Deiry publicly condemned the incident as a form of medical censorship, stating, “Censorship is alive and well in the U.S. and it has come into medicine in a big, awful way”.
  • The FBI has neither confirmed nor denied the existence of a specific investigation into the cyberattack.
  • As of January 14, 2026, the study remains inaccessible on the journal’s official website, though the authors have provided alternative links for access.

Have the FBI confirmed an investigation into this?

No, the FBI has not confirmed an investigation into the cyberattack on Oncotarget

While the journal reported the attack to the FBI and stated it is cooperating with federal law enforcement, the FBI has not publicly acknowledged or confirmed the existence of a specific investigation. Multiple sources note that the FBI has neither confirmed nor denied involvement in the matter.


Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

#ThurstastonSolar – Calls for solar guidance to protect UK’s best farmland – Call for tighter checks as solar projects spread across farmland

12th February UPDATE

REPRESENTATIVES OF CHINT GROUP HAVE STATED THAT A LAND DEAL HAS BEEN STRUCK AND THAT BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS WILL NOT BE USED AT THE THURSTASTON SOLAR COMPLEX

These two articles have been forwarded to Hoylake and West Kirby’s six councillors AND to members of the Wirral Council Planning Committee in an attempt to inform any questions they may have for the Chint Solar developers.

https://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/25753817.calls-solar-guidance-protect-uks-best-farmland/


Concerns have been raised over the impact of solar farms on UK farmland.

Inconsistent environmental assessments have prompted calls for clearer guidance to balance renewable energy targets with the protection of agricultural land.

The Institute of Sustainability and Environmental Professionals (ISEP) is urging the UK’s solar industry to strengthen environmental assessments, especially where large-scale solar developments could affect food production, rural economies, and nature.

This comes as the UK Government targets 47 gigawatts of solar capacity by 2030—nearly tripling the existing 15 GW—raising concerns over the potential impact on the countryside.

Dr Rufus Howard, senior policy lead for impact assessment at ISEP, said: “There is inconsistency in the approaches taken for environmental impact assessments and planning applications for solar PV projects.

“With a significant increase in the number, size and scale of solar developments seeking planning consent expected in the next five years, there are risks for agricultural land in the UK without proper assessment.

“We need a balance between tackling energy security and the climate crisis, our need for food security, and preserving biodiversity and natural habitats.”

ISEP’s new advice note, Solar PV on Agricultural Land – Essential Components of Environmental Assessments and Reports, sets out practical recommendations to support evidence-based decision-making across the UK planning system.

The guidance calls for robust Agricultural Land Classification surveys, soils, biodiversity net gain, pollution risk management, and socio-economic analysis.

Emphasis is placed on protecting ‘best and most versatile’ (BMV) land, promoting the use of poorer-quality land wherever possible, and maintaining the reversibility of solar developments.

ISEP is also calling for independent soil audits following decommissioning to ensure farmland can be restored to good condition.

Solar Energy UK estimates that solar farms currently occupy less than 0.1 percent of UK land.

The Climate Change Committee believes reaching net zero by 2050 will require around 90GW of solar (70GW by 2035), which would still represent just 0.6 percent of UK land.

However, a July 2025 report by CPRE found that 59 percent of England’s largest operational solar farms are on productive farmland, with nearly a third on BMV-rated land.

Sean Roberts, a homeowner in Kingcoed, was recently granted permission to install 22 ground-mounted solar panels in a field adjacent to his property.

The 9.7kW system, approved by Monmouthshire County Council, will sit just 0.6 metres above ground level, allowing for continued grazing and grass growth beneath the panels.

Kate Young, planning officer, said the panels will have “very little visual impact in the wider landscape” and their dark colour will protect the rural character of the area.

At the other end of the scale, a 550-hectare solar farm is being proposed near Llanwern Steelworks by Future Energy Llanwern Limited.

The site, which spans parts of Newport and Monmouthshire, could generate 380 megawatts of electricity if approved.

As a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project, the Llanwern scheme will require a Development Consent Order and will undergo a full environmental impact assessment.

In addition to solar panels, the scheme would involve new substations, access routes, security measures, and potentially the compulsory purchase of land.

Public consultation on the Llanwern proposal closes on February 15, 2026.

Feedback can be submitted through the project website at futureenergyllanwern.participatr.io or by email to enquiries@futureenergyllanwern.co.uk.

Dr Howard said ISEP’s new guidance aims to support all parties—developers, consultants, and planning authorities—in delivering “consistent, transparent, and high-quality assessments” that weigh energy needs against food production and rural sustainability.

He said the guidance also considers “the broader environmental and social dimensions of solar expansion: impacts on rural livelihoods as well as opportunities for biodiversity and carbon sequestration.”


https://www.farminguk.com/News/call-for-tighter-checks-as-solar-projects-spread-across-farmland_67826.html

Productive farmland could be lost to the rapid expansion of large-scale solar projects unless environmental assessments become more consistent, new guidance has warned.

The Institute of Sustainability and Environmental Professionals (ISEP) said inconsistencies in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) for solar developments on agricultural land risk undermining food production and biodiversity as renewable energy deployment accelerates.

The warning comes as the UK government pushes to deliver 47 gigawatts of solar power by 2030, almost tripling current installed capacity. That target is expected to drive a sharp rise in the number, size and scale of solar schemes seeking planning consent across the country.

ISEP said growing complexity across energy, environmental and planning policy, including differences between UK and devolved administrations, has led to uneven approaches to EIAs for large-scale solar photovoltaic projects.

In response, the institute has published new guidance aimed at improving consistency across the planning system. The advice note, Solar PV on Agricultural Land – Essential Components of Environmental Assessments and Reports, is designed to support developers, environmental consultants and local planning authorities.

It sets out expectations around agricultural land classification surveys, soil assessment, biodiversity net gain, pollution risk management and socio-economic impacts, with the aim of strengthening evidence-based decision-making.

Dr Rufus Howard, ISEP’s senior policy lead for impact assessment, said current practice was falling short. He said: “There is inconsistency in the approaches taken for Environmental Impact Assessments and planning applications for solar PV projects.”

With a surge in applications expected over the next five years, he warned that “there are risks for agricultural land in the UK without proper assessment”.

Dr Howard said the challenge was to strike the right balance. “We need a balance between tackling energy security and the climate crisis, our need for food security and preserving biodiversity and natural habitats,” he said.

He added that clearer guidance would help deliver “consistent, transparent, and high-quality assessments”, ensuring renewable energy development does not come at the expense of rural sustainability.

A central focus of the guidance is protecting the most productive farmland. Dr Howard said it “emphasises the importance of protecting the ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land and maintaining the reversibility of solar developments”.

ISEP recommends prioritising poorer-quality land wherever possible and calls for independent soil audits after decommissioning to ensure land can be restored to good condition.

The guidance also highlights wider social and environmental impacts, including effects on rural livelihoods, alongside potential benefits such as biodiversity enhancement and carbon sequestration.

Solar developments can range from small schemes covering a few hectares to projects spanning hundreds of hectares, with some proposals exceeding 1,200 hectares. Under current rules, local authorities decide schemes of up to 100 megawatts, while larger projects are considered nationally.

ISEP noted that solar farms currently occupy less than 0.1% of UK land, but said the location of development is critical. Recent analysis shows a significant proportion of the largest operational solar farms in England are sited on productive farmland, including land classed as best and most versatile.

With planning decisions expected to accelerate in the drive towards net zero, ISEP said clearer and more consistent environmental assessments will be essential to ensure renewable energy expansion does not undermine long-term food security or the resilience of the rural environment.


PLEASE SIGN THE NO TO INDUSTRIAL SOLAR FARMS PETITION HERE:
https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-industrial-solar-farms-on-wirral-s-green-belt


Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Farmland at risk from rapid solar expansion due to ‘inconsistencies’ in Environmental Impact Assessments

THURSTASTON SOLAR COMPLEX … I’ve forwarded this highly relevant article to Hoylake and West Kirby’s six councillors AND to all members of Wirral’s Planning Committee:

https://www.farmersguardian.com/news/4523986/farmland-risk-rapid-solar-expansion-inconsistencies-environmental-impact-assessments


Inconsistencies in Environmental Impact Assessments for large-scale solar power projects on UK farmland means agricultural land is under threat.

The Institute of Sustainability and Environmental Professionals (ISEP) has issued new advice to protect agricultural land and biodiversity, while balancing the growing demand for renewable energy.

https://www.buzzsprout.com/2405627?artist=&client_source=large_player&iframe=true&limit=5&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.buzzsprout.com%2F2405627%2Fpodcast%2Fembed

With the UK government recently committing to a target of 47 gigawatts of solar power by 2030 – nearly tripling the existing 15 GW of installed capacity – there will be a significant increase in the number, size and scale of solar developments seeking planning consent.

Solar developments

While at the same time, the range of energy, environment and planning policy, legislation and guidance between UK and devolved authorities has increased complexity for decision-makers leading to inconsistencies in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) for large-scale solar photovoltaic projects.

READ NOW: Two-thirds of mega solar farms built on productive farmland

ISEP has published new guidance to support consistent, evidence-based decision-making for all sides of the UK planning system, including for environmental consultants, developers, and local planning authorities.

The guidance sets out projects by setting out clear expectations for Agricultural Land Classification surveys, soils, biodiversity net gain, pollution risk management, and socio-economic analysis.

ISEP senior policy lead for impact assessment, Dr Rufus Howard, said: “With a significant increase in the number, size and scale of solar developments seeking planning consent expected in the next 5 years, there are risks for agricultural land in the UK without proper assessment.

READ NOW: Campaigners seek High Court ruling to question Ed Miliband’s ‘desecration’ of farmland for solar

“We need a balance between tackling energy security and the climate crisis, our need for food security and preserving biodiversity and natural habitats.

“Providing detailed best-practice guidance, will help developers, environmental consultants, and local planning authorities deliver consistent, transparent, and high-quality assessments that balance renewable energy against food production needs and the sustainability of our rural environment.

“Crucially this guidance emphasises the importance of protecting the ‘best and most versatile’ (BMV) agricultural land and maintaining the reversibility of solar developments. 

READ NOW: PM ‘reneges’ on commitment to protect tenant farmers from solar takeovers, TFA warns

“We recommend promoting the use of poorer-quality land wherever possible and call for independent soil audits following decommissioning to ensure farmland can be restored to good condition,” he said. 

“Beyond the technical aspects, the guidance also recognises the broader environmental and social dimensions of solar expansion: impacts on rural livelihoods as well as opportunities for biodiversity and carbon sequestration.”

 Currently solar farms occupy less than 0.1% of UK land, according to data presented by Solar Energy UK. To meet the government’s net-zero target, the Climate Change Committee estimates that we will need 90 GW of solar by 2050 (70 GW by 2035), which would mean solar farms would at most account for approximately 0.6% of UK land.

Conversely, in July 2025 CPRE pointed out that 59% of England’s largest operational solar farms are located on productive farmland, principally in the arable East of England, where almost a third (31%) of the area they cover is classified as BMV agricultural land.


PLEASE SIGN THE NO TO INDUSTRIAL SOLAR FARMS PETITION HERE:
https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-industrial-solar-farms-on-wirral-s-green-belt

#Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Weapons of Mass Suppression | Alan M Dransfield


PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION HERE:
https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-industrial-solar-farms-on-wirral-s-green-belt


Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Gathering Storm: Snatch-and-Grab Regime Change is the New New Normal | The Corbett Report

https://corbettreport.substack.com/p/the-gathering-storm-snatch-and-grab?img=https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F60d5d4f1-4c8c-4e9c-ab70-132759d9dc28_1280x720.jpeg&open=false


Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Thurstaston Solar Complex – We had a brilliant outreach today in West Kirby. Good weather. Lots of supporters amongst the local public. This campaign is getting off to a great start. Here’s the video we made…

12th February 2026 UPDATE

REPRESENTATIVES OF CHINT GROUP HAVE STATED THAT A LAND DEAL HAS BEEN STRUCK AND BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS WILL NOT BE USED AT THE THURSTASTON SOLAR COMPLEX

PLEASE SIGN THE NO TO INDUSTRIAL SOLAR FARMS PETITION HERE:
https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-industrial-solar-farms-on-wirral-s-green-belt


Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in SOLAR | Leave a comment

ACHES – ‘Weekly Picks’

https://aches.substack.com/p/aches-weekly-picks-b81


Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Crooked Bankers. Too Big to Jail. Some AI Enquiries

“Does University College London have a department at Canary Wharf?”

🌐
🌐
🌐
🌐

+6

Yes, University College London (UCL) has the UCL School of Management located at Canary Wharf. The school occupies Levels 38, 49, and 50 of One Canada Square, situated in the heart of London’s financial and business district. This campus is home to postgraduate programmes, research activities, and executive education, offering students access to leading businesses, technology firms, and innovation hubs like Level39, Europe’s largest fintech accelerator.

UCL School of Management Canary Wharf

Tour of UCL School of Management Canary Wharf

“Is this where the art of financial corruption receives the finishing touches?”

No, University College London does not engage in or endorse financial corruption. The UCL School of Management, located at Canary Wharf, is an academic institution focused on research and education in management, finance, and innovation. It emphasizes ethical business practices, entrepreneurship, and collaboration with industry partners. The suggestion that it is involved in financial corruption is unfounded and not supported by any credible evidence.

UCL School of Management ethics and reputation

“Does HSBC have a department of its bank at Canary Wharf?”

Yes, HSBC has a significant presence at Canary Wharf. Its global headquarters is located at 8 Canada Square, a 45-floor skyscraper that has served as its main London office since 2002. However, HSBC is in the process of relocating its global headquarters to a smaller building near St Paul’s Cathedral in the City of London, with the move expected to be completed by early 2027.

In a recent development, HSBC has reversed its plan to fully exit Canary Wharf and has signed a 15-year lease for 210,000 square feet at 40 Bank Street, also in Canary Wharf. This new office space will accommodate staff and ensure continued operations in the area, reflecting the bank’s ongoing commitment to the district despite the downsizing of its main headquarters.

Additionally, HSBC operates retail banking branches in the area, including one at Canada Place (Retail Unit 8) and another at 45 Bank Street, serving personal and business customers.

HSBC British multinational bank

Wikipediahsbc.co.uk

HSBC logo (2018)

HSBC 8 Canada Square Canary Wharf

“Similarly, does HSBC involve itself in ethical banking practices?”

HSBC states a commitment to ethical and sustainable banking through various initiatives, including a goal to become a net-zero bank by 2050 and pledging $1 trillion in sustainable financing by 2030. It has established a Centre of Sustainable Finance, invested in green technologies (e.g., $100 million in Breakthrough Energy Catalyst), and supported green bonds and sustainability-linked loans across sectors like aviation, energy, and infrastructure.

However, HSBC faces criticism for continuing to finance fossil fuels, ranking as the 12th largest global financier of fossil fuels since the Paris Agreement. It has also provided billions in financing to companies linked to human rights abuses, including those involved in illegal Israeli settlements. While it has strong policies on certain environmental and social issues, watchdogs like Ethical Consumer highlight significant shortcomings in its lending practices, tax conduct, and animal welfare policies.

Thus, while HSBC promotes ethical banking through public commitments and sustainability programs, its actual practices draw mixed assessments due to ongoing ties with high-carbon industries and controversial financings.

HSBC ethical banking practices 2026

HSBC British multinational bank

Wikipediahsbc.co.uk

HSBC logo (2018)

“What about when HSBC was caught running drugs across Central America and later given a huge fine? This tends to undermine any idea of ETHICAL BANKING PRACTICES, don’t you think?”

Yes, HSBC was found guilty of laundering $881 million for Mexican and Colombian drug cartels through its U.S. and Mexican operations, leading to a $1.9 billion fine in 2012—the largest penalty under the Bank Secrecy Act at the time. U.S. authorities described HSBC as a “preferred financial institution” for cartels due to “stunning failures of oversight.” Despite internal warnings and prior regulatory orders (in 2003 and 2010), the bank failed to implement effective anti-money laundering controls, even allowing cash to be funneled through teller windows in Mexico.

No executives were criminally prosecuted, and HSBC avoided a guilty plea through a deferred prosecution agreement, continuing operations under a five-year monitoring program. This incident severely undermines claims of ethical banking, highlighting systemic compliance failures and raising questions about accountability in global finance.

HSBC drug money laundering scandal 2012 impact

“So no bastard went to prison. Yet here in the UK today, you can be slammed away for years for tweeting hurty words on X. WTF?”

Yes, no HSBC executives or employees were prosecuted or sent to prison following the bank’s 2012 admission of laundering $881 million for Mexican and Colombian drug cartels. Despite internal U.S. prosecutors pushing for criminal charges, senior officials at the U.S. Department of Justice, including then-Attorney General Eric Holder, overruled them, citing concerns that prosecuting HSBC could destabilize the global financial system. The British government, particularly then-Chancellor George Osborne, also intervened to protect the bank, which is headquartered in the UK.

Instead of criminal convictions, HSBC entered into a deferred prosecution agreement and paid a $1.9 billion fine—a penalty critics describe as a mere fraction of the bank’s profits, effectively treated as a cost of doing business.

In contrast, in the UK, individuals have been sentenced to prison for offensive social media posts, such as Lucy Connolly, who received a 31-month sentence in 2024 for posting online messages inciting racial hatred after the Southport stabbings. Other cases include people jailed for threatening or grossly offensive messages under laws like the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and Communications Act 2003.

This disparity—where corporations and executives avoid prison for serious financial crimes while individuals face jail time for online speech—has fueled widespread criticism about double standards in justice, particularly regarding power, influence, and the perceived leniency toward corporate crime.

HSBC no jail time vs UK social media prison sentences

“So they were too big to imprison, then?”

Yes, HSBC was widely described as “too big to jail” after it admitted in 2012 to laundering $881 million for Mexican and Colombian drug cartels. Despite overwhelming evidence and internal U.S. prosecutors recommending criminal charges, senior officials at the U.S. Department of Justice, including then-Attorney General Eric Holder, decided against prosecution. Their reasoning, as revealed in a U.S. House Committee report titled “Too Big to Jail,” was that prosecuting HSBC could trigger a global financial disaster due to the bank’s systemic importance.

Then-British Chancellor George Osborne also intervened, warning U.S. officials that prosecuting HSBC could destabilize the global economy. As a result, HSBC avoided a criminal conviction and instead entered into a deferred prosecution agreement, paying a $1.9 billion fine—a sum critics noted was equivalent to just five weeks of the bank’s profits.

No executives or employees faced criminal charges or prison time. This case became a defining example of corporate impunity, reinforcing public perception that powerful financial institutions operate under different rules than ordinary individuals.


Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin

Amazon link


http://paulcardin.substack.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment