As global elites gather for Davos 2026, the summit faces renewed scrutiny over its nightlife and workplace culture. Reports reveal a surge in high-end escorts charging premium rates. The WEF denies these claims, citing a zero-tolerance policy.
The annual ‘escort’ surge Demand skyrockets during the summit
Every January, sex workers from across Europe reportedly travel to Davos to cater to wealthy attendees. Investigation by media outlets, including The Times, found that demand for sexual services spikes significantly during the five-day event, with escorts booking hotels miles away to commute to the resort.
Charging premium ‘summit rates’ Fees hit €2,000 per night
Due to the influx of high-net-worth individuals, escorts reportedly charge premium rates. Reports indicate that fees can range from €700 to €2,000 per night, with services often arranged discreetly through online platforms or concierges to bypass official security channels.
L’Empereur de France wearing sunnies at Davos — did Brigitte give him a couple of shiners and will he be spending a few thousand Euros on comfort women?
A new listing on the property market — it shows why people want to preserve the Garden Precinct from the ravages of property businessmen. Realtor’s webpage with lots of pics.
Trump might claim that building “Golden Dome” infrastructure there, possibly with the partial purpose of serving as a cover for deploying new offensive weapons systems in the Arctic for targeting Russia and China, is required for plugging the gap between the world’s largest island and Alaska.
Trump framed his desired acquisition of Greenland as indispensable to his “Golden Dome” missile defense megaproject and hinted at the deployment of new offensive weapons systems there too in his post announcing tariffs against several NATO allies that symbolically dispatched military units there. He’s now reportedly using similar language in private when discussing Canada, according to several administration sources, both current and former, who recently informed NBC News of this.
They claim that Trump hasn’t discussed stationing US troops along Canada’s allegedly vulnerable northern border, instead proposing “more joint U.S. and Canadian military training and operations, and increasing joint air and water patrols as well as American ship patrols in the Arctic.” The ostensibly defensive purposes that those plans would advance, however, would still leave a conspicuous gap in the “Golden Dome’s” Arctic interception range between Alaska and Greenland over Canada’s Arctic islands.
It therefore can’t be ruled out that the reported proposals are ultimately meant to advance his goal of building “Golden Dome” infrastructure on those islands for plugging this gap. Offensive weapons systems could also be placed there too, including under the cover of interceptor missiles exactly as Russia has long accused the US of plotting in Central & Eastern Europe as regards its missile defense plans in Poland and Romania, which were significantly the first source of 21st-century tensions between them.
History might be repeating itself as ominously hinted by Trump’s lack of interest in extending the New START before its expiry early next month, let alone negotiating an updated strategic arms control pact with Russia that includes new offensive weapons systems. If the US lets the agreement lapse, then it might be due to unstated plans to deploy offensive weapons in the Arctic, whether Alaska, Greenland, and/or Canada’s Arctic islands. These could cover all of Russia and even easily reach China too.
On that topic, China is assessed by the US to be its only strategic rival, not Russia. Per the Elbridge Colby-influenced “Trump Doctrine”, Russia’s role is relegated to a junior partner in a rejuvenated US-led world order in which the US would invest in its resource deposits so as to deprive China of access to them for decelerating its superpower trajectory. If tensions with Russia abate, then the US would expect that Russia wouldn’t try to intercept the US’ Arctic-launched missiles headed for China in the event of war.
Regardless of however the US’ relations with Russia evolve and whatever Russia might do in the above scenario, the US is expected to pursue the expansion of its sphere of military influence over North America’s entire Arctic domain, beginning with Greenland and ending with Canada’s Arctic islands. Its acquisition of the first can lead to a tariff-coerced deal for building military infrastructure in the second, and possibly joint resource extraction projects, which could be facilitated by promised tariff relief.
Canada is incapable of defending its Arctic islands so they’re the US’ for the taking if the push comes to shove, but Trump doesn’t seem interested in annexing them, ergo why he’ll likely opt for a coerced deal. Acquiring Greenland would enable Trump to argue that the “Golden Dome’s” expansion to Canada’s Arctic islands would plug the gap between the world’s largest island and Alaska. Canada could then reach a relatively fair deal, be coerced into a worse one after tariffs, or have the islands forcibly taken from it.
The election date has just been announced for 7 November, giving us just 290 days until New Zealand reaches a decision point.
They can rehire Labour and the Greens. They can back the status quo. Or, they can use their vote to make this Government better with a stronger ACT voice.
I’m asking you to support ACT’s 2026 election campaign so we can make the case for aiming higher – and convince New Zealanders to take the opportunity to improve their country by giving the current Government real backbone, stronger values, and better ideas.In Government, ACT has shown that with clear ideas and the courage to act, Government can change direction.
This election is about whether that momentum continues.
I’ve said it many times: the Government hasn’t gone as far as ACT would like – but it has gone much further than it would have without ACT. Any Government without ACT would see New Zealand drift left, with many of the ideas we’ve worked hard to stamp out returning by default.
And on the biggest issues – the Zero Carbon Act, costly earthquake regulations, co-governance, balancing the books, and the Treaty Principles debate – only ACT has stood on principle time and time again. Other parties have bowed to what they thought was popular, at significant cost both financially and to social cohesion.
With 290 days to go, this really is time to choose. If you want New Zealand to keep aiming higher, I hope you’ll support ACT’s campaign today.
For now, ACT’s work in government continues. Delivering on commitments we made in 2023 remains our first priority. But as the year goes on, we’ll be hitting the road, inviting honest debate and asking New Zealanders for the mandate to go further.
Thank you,
David Seymour ACT Party Leader Deputy Prime Minister
In light of recent revelations regarding West Midlands Police’s use of artificial intelligence (AI) to fabricate information about Israeli football fans, you would think that the police would be a little hesitant on the wider use of such technology. But you would be wrong.
In a recent interview with the Telegraph, Sir Andy Marsh, the head of the College of Policing, said that police were evaluating up to 100 projects where officers could use AI to help tackle crime. This includes utilising such things as “predictive analytics” to target criminals before they strike, redolent of the 2002 film Minority Report. The aim, according to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, is to put the “eyes of the state” on criminals “at all times”. This is to be outlined further in an upcoming white paper on police reform.
The expansion of AI use in British policing is continually being sold as innovation, efficiency and protection. But in reality it marks a decisive step towards a society in which liberty is treated as a risk to be managed. Wrapped in the language of safety and reform, AI represents a quiet but profound transformation of the state’s relationship with its citizens: from upholder of the law to permanent overseer of behaviour.
Every policing area already has an intelligence unit responsible for ‘predictive analytics’. Crimes which are logged into police indices are scrutinised by analysts, who then produce reports and briefings relating to crime hotspots and the like. Appropriate police resources can be subsequently directed to a particular location at a particular time in order to tackle or prevent the crime. AI can never adequately replace a team of trained professionals going through data. It probably can, however, do it at a fraction of the cost, which is more important to most senior officers than civil liberties. Not so much Minority Report as Heath-Robinson.
The core injustice is clear. Policing in a supposedly free society responds to crimes that have already occurred, or prevention involving highly visible uniformed patrols. So-called predictive policing reverses that logic by directing the power of the state at everybody, nearly all of whom will have done nothing illegal. It will be based on statistical IT guesses about what they might do. This is not a mere technical adjustment to policing as some would have us believe; it is a complete change of emphasis to everyone being potentially guilty until proven innocent. Mass surveillance (for that is what it is) will be imposed without charge, without trial and without a verdict due to there being no formal accusation.
Defenders of this approach pretend that there is no threat to an individual’s liberty. That is patently false. Liberty is eroded wherever the state inserts itself permanently into a person’s life. Persistent scrutiny is a form of soft coercion. Knowing that your movements, associations and behaviour are being logged and evaluated by the state is tantamount to coercion. A society in which citizens must behave as if they are always being watched is not free; it is merely orderly.
Worse still, this system destroys any real degree of accountability. Decisions that once belonged to identifiable officers will be attributed to the system or the programme. When mistakes occur, as they inevitably will, there will be no discerning human judgement to interrogate the system, as operators will almost certainly defer to the machine in the first instance. Power will diffuse upward into institutions and outward into private sector software developers, while the citizen will be left in some form of legal limbo facing an unchallengeable process. An algorithm cannot be cross-examined or shamed.
The claim that these systems are objective is also dangerous. AI will not discover truth; it will go through past policing data, solidify past errors and enforce them with mathematical certainty. Historical mistakes will become future risk indicators.
Nobody in Government is stating that the rollout of AI is an experiment. Surveillance infrastructure never retreats. Every database, camera and algorithm built for the worst offenders will inexorably become, over time, available for broader use. Today the target is violent or prolific criminals; tomorrow it could be protest organisers or those deemed by the political class to be a problem. We have already seen this with the policing of social media and the use of Non-Crime Hate Incidents. How can the police be trusted with transformational technology such as this?
Efficiency is the final lie. Any assumed reduction of paperwork, better targeting and smoother processes do not justify expanding state surveillance. And in any case, during my time in the police, the introduction of new technology never reduced the amount of bureaucracy – it merely transferred it from the page to the screen, and often increased it. Swift injustice is not progress.
Enshrining the use of artificial intelligence across UK law enforcement will abolish any anonymity in the public space and replace it with permanent identifiability. Every journey will become traceable, every gathering recordable, every deviation from the norm potentially suspicious. Yes, this already happens during the course of a police investigation, but that is to establish the movements and behaviours of identifiable suspects, not to generally monitor the entire populace.
This is not policing by consent, as per the original Peelian Principles; it is policing by omnipresence and, unlike watching a Hollywood movie, we won’t be able to walk away if we don’t like it.
Paul Birch is a former police officer and counter-terrorism specialist. You can read his Substack here.
A recent paper examined the history of lab leaks and accidents, including 70 documented cases of laboratory-associated leaks that led to disease outbreaks.
From historical incidents, the researchers identify the characteristics of a disease outbreak that indicate the virus was leaked from a laboratory. The researchers found that the covid-19 virus outbreak shares characteristics with earlier lab leak incidents.
All these previous incidents of lab leaks demonstrate the risk of future accidental escapes of novel genetically engineered pathogens. Yet the New Zealand government assures the public that biotechnology is safe.
Worse still, the regulatory bodies in the EU and the UK have approved the use of self-replicating mRNA vaccines, despite demonstrable concerns about its safety.
The supposed ability to alter the genes of whole populations is the ultimate dream of power. In this mad dream, leaders will no longer have to put up with the deficiencies of employees or citizens, who might fall sick, fail in their appointed tasks or exercise their free will. Instead, you can aspire to create an army of long-lived, invincible supermen who will keep their noses to the grindstone, obey without question like the unsullied army of Daenerys Targaryen, whilst no longer needing to burden the health system.
Governments are keeping faith with this dream. They believe. The biotechnology failures and catastrophes of the pandemic have taught them no lessons. So, with a firm will to power, governments all over the world, including ours, are deregulating biotechnology experimentation in the hope that some wannabe Frankenstein or Rasputin will fulfil their wildest dreams.
The Truth of Biotechnology is Rather Different From the Dream
If you are wondering whether to trust government assurances of safety if the New Zealand Gene Technology Bill gets the go-ahead, you might take a look at the history of biolab security. A paper accepted for publication by the Cambridge Press journal Epidemiology & Infection last week, entitled ‘Epidemiological indicators of accidental laboratory-origin outbreaks’, has identified and listed 70 historical cases of laboratory-associated leaks that led to disease outbreaks affecting the wider public. The paper examines 7 of these in great detail, analysing the data and evidence trail:
1955 Polio vaccine incident in the USA.
1977 H1N1 influenza outbreak in China and the Soviet Union.
1979 Anthrax release in the Soviet Union.
1995 Equine Encephalitis epidemics in Venezuela and Colombia.
2003-4 Sars-Cov-1 escapes from Singapore, Taiwan and China.
2007 Foot and Mouth virus outbreak in the UK.
2019 Brucella outbreak in China.
Thematic analysis of the lines of evidence revealed seven key insights:
Unusual strain characteristics.
Peculiar clinical manifestations or affected demographics.
Unusual geographical features.
Atypical epidemiological patterns.
Delayed government action and communication to the public.
Misinformation and disinformation spread to the public.
Biosafety concerns and/or incidents predating the event.
The paper concludes that the covid-19 virus outbreak shares a majority of the characteristics present in earlier lab leak incidents. This points to the inevitable occurrence of accidental escapes of novel genetically engineered pathogens from biolaboratories in the future, which will continue to cause disease outbreaks in the community, posing significant risks to the general public, animal populations and the environment.
Genetically Engineered Virus Escapes in Spain
The latest reported laboratory escape incident occurred during November 2025 in Spain. The highly pathogenic African swine fever virus (“ASFV”) escaped from a lab that was injecting a genetically modified virus into a wild boar to test the efficacy of a vaccine (sound familiar?). The outbreak is affecting pork production in the Catalonia region, where the experiment was being conducted. The first dead boar was found within 150 metres of the laboratory and the carcass tested positive for a genetically modified strain not found in the wild.
Perhaps not surprisingly, in the rapidly expanding and wildly adventurous biotechnology world, there are a total of five labs in the small Catalonia region alone conducting exotic biotechnology experiments on ASFV. Let that sink in for a moment – five labs. You cannot separate the risks of covid and the covid vaccines from the dangers of biotechnology experimentation.
The Catalonia labs operate under a BSL-3 safety protocol, the second strictest classification, but still, the genetically engineered virus leaked out into the environment. The paper published last week points to a worrying conclusion – such leaks are not highly unusual; they appear to be routine. As we know, “to err is human.” Mistakes, even in the highest biosecurity environments, are inevitable.
If the Gene Technology Bill passes, the brakes will come off and risky experiments will be permitted and then proliferate in laboratories located in densely populated urban areas of New Zealand, raising the level of risk to the public. The escape in Catalonia is also instructive as to what can and probably almost inevitably will happen here in New Zealand to affect our main export markets, which rely heavily on animal health. As we know from the pandemic years, what seemed like a clever idea at the time soon turns out to be a monumental disaster. As we all worry over the daily violence in the Middle East and Ukraine, we should not forget that the 30 million covid excess deaths around the globe, documented by One World in Data, dwarf recent war casualty figures. The more so because, as we have reported, the long-term health outcomes are still surfacing.
Approval of Self-Replicating Vaccines
It is in this context that we have to regard the recent EU and UK approval of a self-replicating mRNA covid vaccine known as Kostaive for people over 18 years with deep distrust and suspicion. The current generation of covid vaccines has essentially failed to be either effective or safe. The so-called replicon Kostaive vaccine adds another novel technology on top of the mRNA process. This involves the ability to encode viral replicase that actually repurposes the cells of vaccine recipients to host a continuous process of vaccine production. In effect, the vaccine is empowered to mimic the self-replicating, self-spreading properties of a virus. This process is fraught with risk. Not the least of these is the possibility of person-to-person vaccine transfer, which we first discussed in our October 2024 article ‘Self-Replicating Vaccines and the Cloud of Unknowing’.
During the clinical trials for Kostaive reported in 2024 in Nature Communications under the title ‘Safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of the self-amplifying mRNA ARCT-154 COVID-19 vaccine: pooled phase 1, 2, 3a and 3b randomized, controlled trials’, 90% of injected participants experienced adverse events, with 75% reporting systemic reactions and 15% requiring medical attention after the first dose. The potential to generate autoimmune conditions has also been widely discussed. Do you think this is acceptable? Apparently, it is to medical bureaucrats. In the absence of long-term trial results, following approval of Kostaive, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) has announced it will be monitoring adverse effects through its Yellow Card system which, like our CARM system, so evidently failed during the covid pandemic.
Governments Need to Gain a Realistic Perspective on the Risks of Biotechnology Experimentation
It is the reckless pursuit of biotechnology applications and government approvals, even after trial results have raised red flags, that is the current modus operandi of biotechnology and pharmaceutical research companies. They need the government funds and speculative investment that follows approvals in order to survive and turn a profit. Concern for public health and safety has taken a back seat. This is the prospect that awaits the New Zealand public if the Gene Technology Bill goes ahead.
It is not too far of a stretch to suggest that billions of years of evolutionary history is being put at risk. No one really understands what it is about our human genetics that sets us apart from animals. Why can we exercise free will, yet animals are firmly in the grip of natural instinctive behaviours? Humans share about 60% of their DNA with a banana, 90% with a dog and 98% with a chimpanzee. This reflects shared ancestry and co-evolutionary processes, but the network of human cells has a unique capability – the capacity for self-referral reflection, the hallmark of higher consciousness. How the DNA and cellular functions of humans are structured to achieve this is not understood. Wholesale gene editing automated by artificial intelligence (“AI”), novel vaccines capable of taking control of little-understood internal cellular processes and mobile genetic sequences that can reproduce are dangerous forays into the highly networked worlds of physiology, brain chemistry and human society that underpin our physical and mental health and civilisation as we know it. The power to interfere with evolution is not a blessing; it is a curse.
About the Author
Guy Hatchard, PhD, is a New Zealander who was formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID, a global food testing and safety company (now known as FoodChain ID).
You can subscribe to Dr. Hatchard’s websites, HatchardReport.com and GLOBE.GLOBAL, for regular updates by email. GLOBE.GLOBAL is a website dedicated to providing information about the dangers of biotechnology. You can also follow Dr. Hatchard on Twitter HERE, Facebook HERE and Substack HERE.
Note: there is considerable evidence now that viruses are part of mainstream’s decades long lying, read Dr Sam Bailey’s info at her website. She co wrote ‘Virus Mania’ and her partner Mark has written ‘A Farewell to Virology’. All well referenced. See other books at her website.
It’s unclear exactly what is happening here — back in 2020 (yes, 6 years ago) Margaret Stevenson Wright when she was on the Community Board raised the need for a safe crossing for elderly wanting to cross the road between the park on the north side and the cafes / the convenience store on the south side.
From the council–
You may have noticed the safety improvements on Elizabeth Street, Waikanae, began in early January.
Crews started with excavation work on the southern side of Elizabeth Street in preparation for construction of the raised pedestrian island. The current work includes utility trenching to install new crossing light poles, and kerb and drainage upgrades to support a new disability parking space outside businesses.
These improvements are designed to make crossing the road safer for people of all ages, and abilities, help slow traffic where needed, and maintain convenient access for local businesses. Thank you for your patience while this work continues.
Follow their coverage from Davos and support independent journalism ►http://WEFReports.com As world and business leaders travel to Switzerland for the annual World Economic Forum summit, Rebel News’ Ezra Levant and Avi Yemini gave viewers an exclusive look at the secluded private airport used to shuttle elites to the Swiss Alpine town of Davos.
