Anti Digital ID Protest Birmingham 20 December 2025

This was the next monthly protest in the series.

On this occasion there were three main speakers, former Conservative politician Andrew Bridgen, David Icke, and Covid vaccine injured John Watt.

Former Conservative politician Andrew Bridgen

Andrew Bridgen spoke for about 4 minutes. The main theme of his speech was that digital ID is a one way street – once its introduced, it will be very difficult to get rid of. He said even if you are deluded enough to trust the current government, supporting digital ID is going to require trusting every future government. There is also a risk that the Labour government may come up with an excuse to cancel the 2029 general election. Digital ID is required for Agenda 2030, such as vaccine passports and carbon credits.

David Icke giving an interview in front of oversized Christmas baubles.

David Icke gave a long speech discussing what he called the global cult. There are similarities across countries due to the control over humanity by this global cult. The aim of this elite cult is to promote artificial intelligence and transhumanism as a means of control. The likes of Ray Kurzweil have made this agenda clear through their promotion of ideas such as the Singularity and the interlinking of AI and the human brain.

Elected politicians are deliberately idiotic and deliberately selected by the global cult to be do, so that people will be more willing to accept technocracy. They promote rigid belief systems and ideological conflict for control. Alternative media is too focused on issues like who killed Charlie Kirk, rather than exposing the real agenda.

It is better to remove the source of the problem rather than to talk about solutions. We need to stop believing in rigid belief systems as these are used for control.

John Watt spoke about the difficulties of getting help when injured by the Covid vaccine. It was good to see him give a speech since I believe at one point he was bedbound due to his injuries.

The next protest is 24th January. I will also cover that protest.

Anti Digital ID Protest Birmingham 8 November 2025

Man in a maroon shirt stands in front of a banner reading 'Say No to Digital ID'

There was another protest against the government’s Digital ID scheme on 8 November 2025. This was in the same location, Chamberlain Square, Birmingham.

Two people holding a banner reading 'Birmingham Rejects Digital ID, Freedom doesn't need a pass, we stand together'

There were fewer speakers at this event, instead there was some live music as well as speakers. Then there was a march around the city centre. They had also set up a TV screen partway through the march advertising the next protest.

Crowd sitting on steps and standing at the bottom of steps in front of large water fountain

The crowd was a similar size to last time. The speakers included an Army veteran and Fiona from the Mass Non Compliance campaign. She gave a speech focusing on the government’s One Login and the international actors who are supporting tyranny such as the WEF.

Booth giving out information with quotes from Klaus Schwab on a banner 'You will own nothing and be happy'

Some video footage from this protest and the last one has been uploaded to my YouTube account. As of yet it hasn’t been censored. I plan to upload the videos to Odysee as well but you have to reformat everything and I haven’t yet had time.

The next protest in Birmingham is 20 December 2025 with David Icke.

Anti Digital ID Protest Birmingham City Centre 11 October 2025

I went to a protest against Digital ID in Birmingham City Centre  on 11 October, 2025. I have taken some photos and video for upload (the videos will be uploaded at a later date).

The themes of the protest were basically what you would expect. There were still quite a lot of references to the Covid issue and the vaccines. Rameece, a rap artist who had previously attended some anti-Covid events, did his rap song about the Covid vaccine.

Sign taped to a step reading Instead of a pathetic Covid inquiry, let's have a covid nurenberg trial for crimes against humanity
One example among many of Covid themed signs
Rapper Rameece performing song against Covid vaccine
Rameece

Other themes that came up were 5G, the One Login system implemented by the government and its relation to digital ID, and other authoritarian surveillance legislation such as the Onljne Safety Bill. As well as usual themes of criticism of the claims of climate change, Agenda 2030, the UN, WEF, etc.

Protesters marching against Brit Card holding yellow signs. Sign reads Warning Brit Card is a trap to control freedom

The attendance for this protest was a few hundred people. It looked like primarily the people who used to attend the anti lockdown protests, I recognised several faces from those events.

Protesters holding signs reading Jail Keir Starmer for Treason, Say No to Digital IDs

Politician Andrew Bridgen also attended the protest.

He said that he knows a Labour MP who has admitted he essentially votes with the Labour whip (for non UK readers, the ‘whip’ enforces voting with the party) without even reading the legislation. 

MP Andrew Bridgen stands at the top of the stairs. Multiple yellow signs with text criticising digital ID, agenda 2030 and net zero and below him.
Andrew Bridgen

There has been an update on Digital ID since my last post. This is the new digital Veterans ID where people can prove they served in the military to get certain benefits.

I would also recommend giving Iain Davis’ article on the Brit Card a look (linked above), where he argues that the Brit Card is a distraction (politically untenable) from the real digital ID that is/will be introduced.

We should still continue to make our voices heard against all forms of digital ID. I know I haven’t done many protests recently but I plan to continue being involved in this campaign where possible.

Starmer’s Digital ID Plan

Introduction

The UK government led by Kier Starmer has recently announced that they intend to introduce a Digital ID scheme. This article will look at the roots of this scheme in a UK context, the arguments they will be using to support it, and the reasons why this is a planned step towards government tyranny.

Background

Kier Starmer is the leader of the Labour Party and this particular party has a history of wishing to bring in national ID cards.

Under the Tony Blair government (1997-2010), there was a plan to introduce ID cards. In 2006, the Labour government passed the Identity Cards Act. This act was designed to provide biometric cards backed by a government database. These were physical cards (as smartphones etc were not in mass use).

The government did introduce a pilot scheme in 2009 for these cards where people could apply for them, and around 15,000 cards were issued.

However, the scheme faced significant opposition. There were some protests against the plan, as well as opposition from other political parties. Part of the opposition was based on the fact that any such scheme would be extremely expensive, and part of it was based on surveillance/police state concerns.

The scheme was scrapped by the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government after they took power in 2010.

The New Scheme

The new scheme suggested by Starmer has been outlined in the mainstream media as follows:

  • It will include a name, date of birth, nationality or residency status, and a photo
  • You won’t have to carry IDs around
  • You’ll never be asked to produce it – other than when proving a right to work in the UK
  • The ID will be on people’s phones – similar to contactless cards
  • It will be compulsory for anyone looking to work in the UK

List taken from the BBC report on the ID card scheme.

Arguments

The main argument being used by Starmer to back his scheme is that digital ID will help to combat illegal immigration. Starmer is very unpopular in the UK at the moment and one reason is that people are dissatisfied with his response to small boat crossings of people illegally entering the UK, and ‘migrant hotels’ where migrants are kept while claims for asylum are looked at. As a result, poll results are showing a significant swing towards the anti immigration party Reform UK run by Nigel Farage. As such, he hopes to boost his popularity by announcing this scheme as well as normalise a plank of planned government authoritarianism.

The argument being made is that by having a Digital ID, it would make it more difficult for illegal migrants to work in the country, reducing the ‘pull factors’ that cause people to illegally enter the country. The government also argues that it will more quickly allow people to verify their identity when accessing government services such as welfare benefits to prevent fraud.

Problems

I don’t want to spend too much time outlining the issues of Digital ID as I think they are fairly obvious to my readers. One argument that has been made by some, that I would like to bring up, is the issue of whether it would work. Farage has criticised the scheme, partially on grounds that it would be ineffective. I personally think we shouldn’t focus on the effectiveness argument either way. We shouldn’t want Digital ID even if it was 100% effective against illegal migration.

The main thrust of any argument against Digital ID should be the state tyranny aspect. Once the infrastructure is established, there is nothing stopping creeping expansion of the scheme. Mahmood, the Home Secretary, has already agreed that this can/will happen. Digital ID can be linked to any aspect of life, for example, vaccination status, which the government could use to force people to behave in particular ways.

Conclusion

There has already been much concern from the public about the use of Digital ID. The scepticism towards the scheme must be mobilised as means to prevent further state tyranny. Hopefully the unpopularity of the Starmer government combined with resistance to the scheme can prevent it ever being introduced.

Right wing causes can be used to push the control agenda – the case of immigration

Introduction

Many people know and understand that stereotypically left wing causes – such as the environment or transgenderism – can be used to promote state control agendas. However, there is much less consideration of how right wing ideas can be used to push the same control matrix. As right wingers claim to be ‘small government’, it is often assumed that right wing ideas cannot be used to push for these sinister agendas. However, there are some ideas on the right that can be used for this purpose. One of the most significant of these is immigration.

It should be noted that the terms left and right are overgeneralisations, just as not all left wingers support transgender ideology, for example, not all right wingers are supportive of the ideas outlined below. For example, this analysis would not apply to many members of the libertarian right. However, I will use right wing in this article as a shorthand.

Definitions

Certain right wing political parties – for example, Reform UK – are extremely concerned with illegal immigration and use this to appeal to voters. I would say that reducing immigration is Reform UK’s main policy. In the UK, there are a large number of small boats that attempt to land on the shore so that people can illegally enter the country. There are some examples of both refugees and economic migrants entering the country via this method. Parties such as Reform argue that this has negative effects on the country, such as crime and the risk of terrorism, as well as reducing the wages paid to British people via illegal immigrants taking jobs. They also point to costs to the stage of hosting individuals they have caught illegally entering the country (the famed ‘migrant hotels’). As such, a more robust response seems attractive to many people on the right, or many working class people who are concerned about their income.

Pragmatism

When looking at this topic, we need to consider it pragmatically. What would effectively policing illegal immigration look like?

Britain has an open coastline.

According to the Ordnance Survey: “The coastline length around mainland Great Britain is 11,072.76 miles [17,819.88 km].”

Policing simply chokeholds or more obvious areas would not be effective, since boats would simply avoid the more obvious routes even if it was riskier. Bear in mind that the boats seen on the news, etc, are only the boats that are known, there may be many that successfully crossed the border, and the people disappeared into the shadow economy. As such, there would need to be a massive increase in border control police.

This is a large amount of territory to have to police effectively. Sure, there may be some areas of this where it would be difficult to land a boat, so that may reduce the volume somewhat. Nevertheless, it is still a large amount.

Businesses employing illegal immigrants would be another significant issue, as there would need to be increased checks on businesses, and raids on businesses if it suspected they are employing illegal immigrants.

There is also the issue of removing the immigrants effectively. This might encourage more rubber stamping in the judiciary to deport people more quickly.

In other words, effectively removing illegal immigrants would require an increase in state authoritarianism. More police officers would need to be employed, and there would need to be an increase in checks, possibly arbitrary ones, to see if people were hosting or employing illegal immigrants.

Agendas

During Covid, and even before that, it became obvious that one of the key state agendas was the introduction of Digital ID. It was argued that digital identity needed to be linked to vaccine passports in order to ‘control the virus’.

However, policing illegal immigration can also be used by the establishment to promote digital IDs. On this argument, these IDs would be required to confirm that people are citizens or legal migrants. In fact, one of Tony Blair’s arguments for the original ID card scheme, which was eventually scrapped, was to crack down on illegal immigration.

Conclusion

Nominally right wing and left wing ideas can both be used to promote a state control matrix. The establishment is not concerned with which of these ideas it uses to get you to support the increased level of control. So long as it can garner enough support to get these ideas through or at least get you to tolerate them, that is the only thing that matters. People should consider whether ideas they support (whether they are right wing or not) can be used to support these agendas and not assume their ideology is immune from being used by the establishment.