Immigration as a tool of chaos, Palantir and Digital ID

How all three connect to a desired digital security pre crime state, and how this may start to manifest via Respect Orders under The Crime and Policing Bill 2025

It is no surprise that digital ID in the UK is again being proposed right at the same time as Palantir is being adopted into the US further. The two are likely linked in many ways.

Palantir Technologies is a data analytics company known for its software platforms, Gotham and Foundry, which help organisations analyse and integrate large datasets. It has significant contracts with U.S. government agencies (e.g., Department of Defence, ICE, HHS) and international clients. Its work involves handling sensitive data, fuelling speculation about its role in systems moving towards digital ID frameworks.

Digital IDs are electronic representations of identity used for online verification, often tied to government-issued credentials, biometrics, or other attributes. These systems are typically developed by governments or specialised identity management firms. Palantir excels at aggregating and analysing large, disparate datasets, which could support digital ID systems by linking identity attributes (e.g., biometrics, government records).

Palantir

I am not going to get into great detail about Palantir and how shady it is as that has been done by people with far more superior knowledge on this issue than me. I will however post a few thoughts about Palantir from Whitney Webb below, and I recommend everyone listen to her or read her books for a concise discussion about this nefarious company.

Webb notes that Palantir was founded by Peter Thiel with backing from the CIA’s venture capital arm, In-Q-Tel, and was designed to revive the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, a DARPA initiative aimed at comprehensive surveillance of Americans. TIA was supposedly discontinued due to privacy concerns, but Palantir effectively continued its mission. Webb explains that Palantir is deeply intertwined with the U.S. national security state, noting its contracts with the CIA, NSA, FBI, Pentagon, and Department of Homeland Security. Its software was initially developed to “uncover terrorist networks” but has expanded to broader surveillance applications.

Palantir’s software, particularly Gotham, is used for predictive policing and “pre-crime” applications, tracking individuals suspected of potential criminal activity before any crime occurs. Webb warns this enables profiling and targeting based on data patterns, eroding privacy and due process.

In a July 2024 interview on Redacted, Webb described Palantir’s data harvesting as creating detailed digital profiles of individuals, which can be weaponised for surveillance or control. This is linked to broader efforts by tech firms to monitor online and offline behaviour. Webb connects Palantir to the “PayPal Mafia,” a group of influential tech figures led by Peter Thiel, who she says wield significant political power. She argues Palantir benefits from both Democrat and Republican administrations, citing its consistent contract growth regardless of who is in office.

Digital ID in the UK

Announcements last week in the UK now indicate that once again, we are looking down the barrel of digital ID’s. On June 5^th 2025 this article appeared in The Times.

As I said on our Telegram channel the following day: “It's like clockwork. Every. Single. Time”.

"Downing Street is examining proposals to issue every adult in Britain with a digital ID card in a fresh attempt to tackle the country’s illegal migration crisis"

This article was then followed by others such as “Labour considering 'Brit Card' ID plans, minister confirms” and “Labour explores compulsory ID cards to curb illegal migration”

The US Palantir announcement and the UK digital ID announcement were then swiftly followed by unrest in LA, allegedly caused by immigration issues, and cue this:

Source: https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/1931707058987909397?t=IPNIMMfhcZRUhz-_GkLVvg&s=19

Summer of love

I believe unrest in the U.S. will now escalate following the current administration’s expansion of Palantir’s data-sharing contracts. This will be to provoke public demand for a “solution” involving comprehensive citizen tracking and surveillance, enabled by Palantir’s AI-driven profiling. Until this surveillance agenda is implemented or defeated, unrest is likely to persist as a catalyst for control.

Similarly in the UK, I suggest a looming “summer of love” may be upon us—a wave of orchestrated unrest akin to past riots—intended to justify digital ID and other measures such as further rights stripping legislation - a precursor to a digital security state. Again, this trajectory will likely continue until efforts to establish such a system are fully defeated.

How does immigration play into this? Well, in both the U.S. and UK out of control immigration is deliberate and used as a calculated tool to erode the fundamental rights of all citizens, regardless of which party holds power. All sides serve a technocratic agenda aiming for control and under the same so called elites facilitate and perpetuate legal and illegal migration to fracture social cohesion and provoke calls for punitive measures. Legal migration in the UK actually dwarfs illegal flows, while the latter, costing the UK millions monthly in housing, enriches private firms. Robust and fair laws in the UK could tackle immigration, but there’s no political will, as the goal is division, not solutions.

Polarised rhetoric has fuelled this agenda, and it is now out of control. Those crying “invasion” or “Islamic takeover” are ignoring the curated nature of migration, while others downplaying violence (during riots as seen in the US), as “mostly peaceful” are increasing tensions with such commentary. Both extremes, often stoked by state actors or paid agitators, have created a false binary that has stifled truth and nuance, dividing society and leaving no room for meaningful and honest debate.

Mass unrest across the West about this issue is therefore likely to be both organic AND engineered, (and in the latter case state actors and agitators will be used) but both will usher in rights-stripping measures. Such measures will be welcomed by a fearful public. This is much like “Covid” exploited fear to justify control. What will be missed when unrest happens, is that the real fight should be against the elite-driven agenda using immigration and unrest to divide us. However, people will fight each other instead and we therefore face more hate, division, and eroded liberties.

I have no answer to the problems we are facing from deliberately orchestrated mass immigration and the issues that have arisen from the same. All I ask is that people investigate and realise that this issue is orchestrated by the usual suspects, on purpose, to fracture our societies. I appreciate that this doesn’t help shop owners caught up in violent looting if riots break out under cover of this issue, or people living next door to hotels full of migrants unlikely to assimilate into their community very easily, or genuine refugees and migrants that deserve a chance to make a new life, especially as our own state apparatus is regularly involved in turning their own homes to rubble and their countries into war zones.

However, lets blame the right people for where we find ourselves – the 1%.

The Crime and Policing Bill 2025

With all the above in mind it is fitting to now turn to this bill and talk about the Respect Orders proposed under it. The bill, introduced in February 2025 had its Second Reading on March 10, 2025. It is currently in the Committee Stage, and you can check out the discussions during the same here. Do note that House of Lords Consideration of the bill is largely expected by July 2025 and Royal Assent is anticipated by early Autumn 2025, at which point the bill will become law and its provisions will come into force.

The main difference between the Respect Orders proposed under the bill and the existing Anti-Social behaviour civil injunctions under The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, lies in the consequences for breach of the same. Breaching a Respect Order will become a criminal offence, rather than being a civil ‘contempt of court’, as is currently the case. So, whilst the criteria for proving anti-social behaviour are similar under the existing 2014 Act and the proposed new legislation, the implications of enforcement and punishment are much stricter under the 2025 bill and criminalise breaches. Hence, if it becomes law anyone convicted under the new provisions could face life-altering consequences, including difficulty finding employment or housing due to a criminal record.

In addition, and what I see as the really nefarious part of the bill – and which ties to matters discussed above about Palantir, digital ID and immigration– is the mandatory risk assessment proposed in it before a Respect Order is issued. Risk assessments are not entirely absent from existing anti-social behaviour legislation, as some current powers involve assumed or informal risk considerations. However, this moves to a mandatory requirement under the new bill and in fact introduces the concept of mandatory predictive enforcement, raising concerns about AI-driven decision-making and pre-emptive legal actions.

Courts and enforcement bodies (e.g., police, local authorities) will have to assess an individual’s risk to the public before imposing restrictions, such as curfews or bans from certain areas, under a Respect Order. These assessments rely on factors like past behaviour, associations, but crucially perceived likelihood of future antisocial conduct. StopWatch, a civil liberties group, have criticised the vague and predictive nature of such assessments under the current informal procedure, noting they lower the burden of proof from past wrongdoing to speculative future risk, undermining the principle of innocence until proven guilty. This shift risks targeting individuals based on perceived threat rather than concrete evidence. Given that such assessments will be made mandatory if this bill passes into law, this is concerning.

Mandatory assessments of course align with the UK’s growing use of predictive policing, where data analytics predict crime hotspots or individual offending risks, and the increasing use of AI in the justice system. Although the bill’s text does not explicitly mention AI, mandatory risk assessments opens the door to AI-driven tools to deal with demand, as seen in existing UK policing practices. For instance, Durham Constabulary’s Harm Assessment Risk Tool (HART) uses machine learning to predict reoffending risks, informing decisions on rehabilitation or detention.

There is valid reason to be concerned about Palantir’s potential involvement in this area given its data analytics and government contracts, which align with the bill’s data-driven risk assessments. Palantir’s capabilities through its Gotham and Foundry platforms excel at integrating multi-agency data (e.g., policing, social care, health), which could theoretically support the risk assessments required for Respect Orders. Currently there is no direct evidence of Palantir being linked to the bill, but its existing UK contracts (e.g., with the NHS for health data analytics) demonstrate it has capacity to handle data for such a purpose.

There is also a link to digital ID through the bill as its provisions for accessing DVLA driver licence records and sharing data across agencies (e.g., via international agreements) suggests a move toward centralisation techniques. Digital ID will better assist in this regard for any expansion of powers under such legislation, because relevant details will be centrally held through a digital ID mechanism.

There are, therefore, several important questions about what systems will be involved in the implementation of the strategies proposed under this bill, and whether digital ID will play a part - if not immediately, but in the future. As the bill also heralds punishing individuals for potential rather than actual actions, it of course also undermines the presumption of innocence and due process, and coupled with the opaque nature of AI-driven systems and the absence of a public register for police tools, you can bet that accountability on this will be limited.

Overall the bill’s data-sharing provisions highlight the potential for a broader surveillance state, where dissent or nonconformity will be pre-emptively targeted, and the bill’s data integration is, I think, laying infrastructure for a digital ID system.

Whilst it does not directly reference social media posts, do also be aware that several factors suggest a potential for the bill’s antisocial behaviour definitions to encompass online speech, particularly in the broader UK policing and legislative context. The bill retains the flexible definition of antisocial behaviour from prior legislation, which includes conduct “likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress.” This vagueness allows significant discretion for police and courts to interpret what constitutes antisocial behaviour and social media posts that are deemed offensive, threatening, or inflammatory could theoretically fall under this umbrella, especially if they are perceived to cause “public distress”.

Summary

How are all of the above issues mentioned connected? Well, when we reflect on everything said it might be wise to consider how immigration has been weaponised to normalise draconian legislative provisions such as those proposed in the Crime and Policing Bill 2025, as well as normalise surveillance of all citizens, rights being stripped, and acquiescence to a biometric state. Immigration is, of course, not the only tool being used for this purpose, but it is a powerful one in the problem, reaction, solution, circle.

We should also consider that whilst the 2025 bill may appear to tackle antisocial behaviour, perhaps even some linked to immigration, its mandatory risk assessments for Respect Orders are more likely to suppress social media speech about immigration’s root causes and orchestrators. Historically, immigration has been politicised to justify security measures (e.g., post-9/11 surveillance, UK’s Prevent strategy), and this bill may exploit similar tensions to frame public safety whilst curbing dissent.

If nothing else, the bill’s shift to AI-driven predictive policing signals a coordinated effort to install expansive tracking systems on us, and it remains to be seen whether Palantir, (or other tech giants), as well as digital ID are positioning to play a large part in this over the coming months and years.

Concurrent pushes to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 are also deliberate steps to dismantle protections and enable authoritarian control. These developments, though seemingly disparate, are interconnected parts of a technocratic agenda.

The rhetoric around immigration and other high-profile issues—whether alarmist or dismissive—divides us, distracting from the real threat: a surveillance state that harms all. Therefore, expect more laws demanding we surrender rights to counter fabricated “threats.” And above all else resist the same. It is the agenda that we should be fighting. Not each other.

Sources for Whitney Webb:

Palantir mass surveillance and pre-crime

Palantir, Mass Surveillance & Pre-Crime.

Americans are unaware of the real enemy https://www.bitchute.com/video/f9URYZsgGmVi/

Ore crime and the global panopticon https://www.tftc.io/precrime-global-panopticon-whitney-webb-mark-goodwin-tftc/

Palantir: The PayPal offshoot becomes a weapon https://www.mintpressnews.com/palantir-the-paypal-offshoot-becomes-a-weapon-in-the-war-against-whistleblowers-and-wikileaks/236545/

Unlimited hang out with Whitney Webb https://rephonic.com/podcasts/unlimited-hangout-with-whitney-webb