Dangers of AI Revealed as Israeli Bullet Decides to Kill Somebody 226

The Guardian has revealed some of the extraordinary danger of artificial intelligence in a headline that reveals an Israeli bullet decided all by itself to kill somebody.

Despite having no electronic components, the heavy baton round managed to slam itself straight into the face of a 22 year old Palestinian news photographer.

This use of the passive in describing Israeli crimes is absolutely typical of the Guardian, and of the entire mainstream media.

A more naturally expressed and honest headline would have been “Israeli soldiers shoot Palestinian journalist in the head for filming demolition of Ramallah homes”.

Note that the word “suspect” also carries a huge amount of weight in the headline.

“Terrorist suspect” is the standard media term to describe any Palestinian civilian who has not been convicted of anything.

Note the failure to acknowledge the destruction also rendered homeless many other families in the block.

Ramallah, of course, is not in the territory which Israel officially claims as part of its state or even under its control.

This reporting style is no accident. Things always just happen to Palestinians. A sentence which starts “Israeli forces shoot” or “Israeli forces bomb” is as rare as hens’ teeth. Gaza however “is shelled” or “is bombed” with remarkable regularity. But it is always “Hamas fire rockets”.

Palestinians being less sophisticated, presumably, their weapons don’t just fire themselves, whereas Israeli weapons apparently do.

The 30 to 1 casualty rate in Israeli/Palestinian conflict doesn’t prevent Israeli attacks always being presented as “clashes” between the two sides, and Israeli action is always a response to “terrorism”.

Israeli violence is 30 times more deadly than Palestinian, against a people almost unarmed.

Yet all Palestinian violence is terrorism. All Israeli violence is heroic self defence.

Remember that, and you might get a job at the Guardian or even working for Keir Starmer.

Deny that, and you are an evil Nazi and need to be cancelled like Roger Waters.

That is how we live today.


Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]

Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

Account name
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

226 thoughts on “Dangers of AI Revealed as Israeli Bullet Decides to Kill Somebody

1 2
  • joel

    Too many have been gulled into believing the Guardian & its political analogues (Labour & Democrats) are exemplars of SJW Wokism. In reality the endless virtue signalling is just a cynical charade. Empty posturing to disguise their wholehearted embrace of neoliberalism, western chauvinism & primal hatred of socialism & multipolarity. The liberal establishment are insincere even on their loudest campaigns like #MeToo (witness Nick Cohen, Biden, Bill Clinton et al) or #BLM (suppression of the Forde Report, nominating arch segregationist Biden, defending apartheid in Palestine etc) or Brexit. Even on the totemic issue of gay marriage the transcendent liberal icons Obama & the Clintons were among the very last in the Democratic Party to embrace it.

    However it is vital to both sides of the establishment – liberal & conservative – that the illusion of deep division is maintained. Even when liberal icons explicitly reveal their true identities – as when Obama admitted he is a moderate Republican & Starmer a conservative – their supporters will put their fingers in their ears or deny it ever happened. Likewise when DeclassifiedUK revealed that the Guardian is being puppeted by the MoD. Note Conservative media & politicians will never mention that the Guardian belongs to the security state or go to town on outrages like the Starmer-Savile or Mandleson-Epstein axis. They know these centrist-liberal fake left Wokesters are no threat and essential allies in perpetuating injustice at home & abroad.

  • Lapsed Agnostic

    Re: ‘The Guardian has revealed some of the extraordinary danger of artificial intelligence in a headline that reveals an Israeli bullet decided all by itself to kill somebody.’

    The Guardian article states that the Palestinian photographer was seriously injured by the bullet. Has he now died of his wounds in hospital?

  • Highlander

    I was Listening to Radio 4 yesterday, when an American AI expert studiously stated, England was going to be the American representative in Europe, for and on behalf of American AI companies. Why? he let slip, well American companies wouldn’t be allowed to do those things legally in Europe. Common decency would stop them in Europe, but not here, cause we have lairs and thieves governing these islands.
    Tories, fascists and right wing extremists our forefathers fought WW2 and Nazism to today financing the Fascist NAZI hordes like the ASNOV battalions, the 88 brigade, (hiel hitler) ETC ETC ETC…. NOT FORGETTING THE RUSSIAN SPEAKING jew ZELINSKY who could not speak Ukrainian when he was elected.. Aye our old die from cold, the price of electricity going through the roof, the price of food being price gouged, our rights as human beings being erroded, Cancer patients waiting three years to get treatment after being diagnosed. Every time they are about to be seen, there appointment is cancelled. I know one twenty five year old girl with a tumour on the brain, her asppointment has been cancelled on seven occasions, from three years ago in Aberdeen royal infirmary. No surgeon available….but she has been seen she knows she has cancer but refused treatment. Free at the point of need …… when are your going the people of Scotland, to realise, they are killing our families….. and not a word is said. as for NHS….. its all but gone! as for the Liverpool care system…… at least the doctors receive a bonus when they refuse you food and drink. forty years ago…. it would be called murder!

    • John Main

      Aye, you’re right. As a man born into the Jewish faith, the right and best thing is for Zelensky to die. And that, of course, will help us Scots who are freezing, starving, or dying from delayed cancer treatments.

      Aye, you’re right.

      Aye, right.

  • Tarragon

    And, in other news, Russia is massacring innocent civilians in Ukraine, which people like you, John Pilger, ConsortiumNews, and others, ignore because you’re not objective, you’re not trying to inform, you’re “anti-American” and “anti-Western”, terms I once thought were used merely to smear people, but it’s true – that’s what you people are – happy to have your hands covered in blood if it gets back at America or the West generally. You want to replace the existing “elite” and become the new “elite”, controlling the rest of us. You’re no better; you’re just different – as we see with the amount of comments you censor.

    [ Mod: ‘Tarragon’ aka ‘Jason’, ‘Jeff’, ‘Janice’ ]

    • craig Post author

      As always in war there are claims of massacres of civilians on both sides. Normally which claim enters into history depends not on truth, but on who wins.

      I want all the fighting to be halted immediately and negotiations to start. I strongly suspect you want the killing to continue, and more Russians to be killed. It is not obvious to me your claim of moral superiority is valid.

      • Tom Welsh

        Laudable sentiments, but in my humble opinion utterly impracticable.

        The Russians have embarked on their “special military operation” to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine, and to ensure that it remains neutral as between Russia and Russia’s enemies.

        They did so after 8 years of trying to negotiate, and in every case being frustrated by the other side’s absolute lack of honesty, sincerity, and trustworthiness.

        Should they try to negotiate with the Kiev junta, which willingly entered into both Minsk Agreements without the slightest intention of fulfilling either their letter or their spirit, and which – as Mr Poroshenko told the world – used the 8 years thus bought to rearm and fortify on a colossal scale while deliberately murdering thousands of civilians in Donbass?

        Or would it be better to negotiate with Washington, which assured them that if they agreed to the reunification of Germany NATO would not move one inch east of the German frontier?

        It emphatically does NOT “take two to start a fight”. It takes only one, unless the proposed victim is willing to stand still and be destroyed without defending himself.

        Negotiating with Washington, London, or NATO today would have less prospect of success than negotiating with the Nazis in the 1940s. There is credible evidence that Hitler would have been happy to agree peace with Great Britain.

        As the Russians know for certain that they cannot hope for any help – or even benevolent neutrality – from the West, their only remaining course is to finish the work themselves. That will involve destroying the armed forces of Kiev until they surrender unconditionally, and then reorganising Ukraine in such a way that it can never be a threat to Russia or anyone else.

        • Lapsed Agnostic

          Re: ‘[Ukraine] used the 8 years…to rearm and fortify on a colossal scale while deliberately murdering thousands of civilians in Donbass’

          Total civilian deaths (on both sides of the line of conflict) as a result of the War in Donbas(s) 2015-21 by year, according to the UN:

          2015 – 995

          2016 – 112

          2017 – 117

          2018 – 58

          2019 – 27

          2020 – 26

          2021 – 25

          Total: 1360

          https://ukraine.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Conflict-related%20civilian%20casualties%20as%20of%2031%20December%202021%20%28rev%2027%20January%202022%29%20corr%20EN_0.pdf (see page 3)

          Most will have been unintended, although deliberate killings of civilians by both sides have occurred.

        • deepgreen

          “they surrender unconditionally, and then reorganising Ukraine in such a way that it can never be a threat to Russia or anyone else”.

          Seriously, I doubt if that would be an acceptable outcome to the ‘west’. One can contemplate the relatively few ways in which such an outcome might occur.
          Regardless of where sympathies may lie, or provocation – the Russian actions have been a strategic blunder on an epic scale.

          • Bayard

            “Seriously, I doubt if that would be an acceptable outcome to the ‘west’. ”

            So what would the “West” do about it, start WWIII?

          • deepgreen

            Impossible to predict but I can only suggest a full NATO/Russia confrontation might be one outcome but I also think NATO would bolster Ukraine to ensure it is not overwhelmed. Short of nuclear escalation, some kind of negotiated accommodation.
            It’s a monumental mess, the making of which is attributable to the criminal ineptitude of both sides.
            Somehow a negotiation has to be started but our glorious leaders don’t seem so inclined. One can only speculate that both sides see some potential advantage to be gained by the continued slaughter. It’s an abominable failure all round.

          • pretzelattack

            NATO and the US committed a strategic blunder on a grand scale by crossing red lines and trying to topple Russia. this is the predictable outcome.

          • Bayard

            Deepgreen, if NATO thought they could get away with an all out superpower confrontation, they would have already done so. Similarly arming Ukraine: the only reason why Ukraine isn’t getting more munitions is that NATO’s stocks are running low.

      • Nota Tory Fanboy

        This double standards doublespeak could hardly be more obvious than the contrast in description of the recent explosion of Kakhovka Dam and its consequences compared to the way Operation Chastise is fetishised in the UK as the Dambusters Raid… That was two, nearly three, dams and those citizens, innocent or otherwise, living in the Ruhr and Eder valleys paid a very heavy price – not that you’d be likely to know if you grew up in the UK.

      • Yuri K

        There are claims but there are also stats by independent observers. The UN report issued in Jan 2022, right before the war, stated that in 5 preceding years the number of civilians killed “by direct hostile actions” (thus, kids killed by ammo they found and similar accidents were excluded) was 320 in the areas controlled by separatists, 62 in areas controlled by Ukrainian government, and 9 in the “grey zone”. This ratio of 5:1 tells us who was shooting at civilians and who was shooting back.

    • Fat Jon

      Interesting in that however varied Craig’s subjects are, there is always an immediate attempt to divert each thread into discussing Ukraine (yawn, yawn).

      I wonder who is pulling the strings of the troll puppets?

  • Squeeth

    “The 30 to 1 casualty rate in Israeli/Palestinian conflict doesn’t prevent Israeli attacks always being presented as “clashes” between the two sides, and Israeli action is always a response to “terrorism”.”

    Even RT (a shadow by the time that it was banned) used to trot out that the police/army/security forces “responded” to demonstrators, they never attack them or start it. This is why your publication is so valuable, people who don’t read much of the free media come here and get a taste.

  • glenn_nl

    Much the same happens to people of colour in the US. They just passively die all the time, while in custody, during the course of a traffic stop, or following an encounter in the street. It sometimes happens while they are at home alone watching television, or even while lying in their own bed

    Some major crimes were occasionally involved, though – such as selling fags in singles, failing to indicate before turning, having a broken tail light, or even (gasp) on suspicion of passing a dodgy bank-note.

    For sure, they were just going about their business, and just upped and died (as they say in the US) – just as they were interacting with the police in some manner. Just a coincidence, really.

    Undesirables do it all the time, particularly so in the case of Palestinians.

    • Bramble

      Appalling, yes, but at least these things are reported, however dishonestly. In the Donbas, thousands of Russian speaking citizens have been killed by Nazi shelling with barely a mention in the civilised “garden” of the West (which regards the Nazis as heroes).

  • Peter

    Some years ago, somewhere between 5-10 I think, I asked a simple 10 word question in the comments list of a Guardian piece. Understanding it to be a sensitive issue I simply asked “Is it antisemitic to say Netanyahu is a fascist?” The comment was, of course, deleted.

    I had/have no doubt, then or now, that Netanyahu is a fascist, and obviously things have gone from bad to very much worse in Israel since then.

    A short time after the previous comment I made another simple posting, six words this time, in response to a Guardian piece on the war in Syria. I simply pointed out that – “Journalists acting as propagandists are complicit”, and, yes, it was deleted. I did put it in block capitals tbf, and I may have added an exclamation mark, I can’t recall to be sure.

    These weren’t the first deletions of my comments but that was the end of it for me and in any case the direction of travel in the Guardian, following the Snowden revelations, the smashing of the computers and the replacement of Rusbridger with Gibson, was clear by then.

    • Jimmeh

      > the replacement of Rusbridger with Gibson

      Who is this “Gibson”? Rusbridger was replaced by Viner, unless I’ve been transported to a mirror universe.

      • Peter

        @ Jimmeh

        Most grateful. Thanks for that, you are of course right. Katharine Viner took over from Rusbridger and as far as I know is still the editor of the Guardian.

        For reasons unknown I mixed her up with Janine Gibson who is editor of Guardian US.


    • Tom74

      My comments at the Guardian are either visibly deleted or don’t appear at all. It is noticeable that there is a narrow spectrum of opinion permitted, despite the Guardian claiming to be a fearless, independent newspaper. For example, readers can hurl almost all the personal vitriol they want at Boris Johnson, some of it in bad taste – but what they can’t do is suggest is that Johnson was crucially enabled by powerful people, and in fact was given a pass by almost all of the British establishment and media, during his years as Brexit leader and Prime Minister.

  • General Cologne

    I think this kind of coverage is driven by fear and insecurity and also despair and is a portend of great changes.
    MSM mind controllers are mindful of not inflaming a sizable minority with the kind of coverage that you seem to be advocating, Craig’y.
    After all, there are nearly 4 million Muslims now in the UK to only at best 300,000 Jewish.
    15% of Londoners are Muslim,
    It’s true, Jewish people are overrepesented in the ruling, moneyed and chattering classes while muslims are still even more underrepresented.
    But things are a-changing and it seems like a last hooray for the zionist cause in Britain.
    Indeed, we might even see a reversal, and quite soon and, being timid as I naturally am, I am afearful we could see the other extreme before much long.

    • Bob (not OG)

      It’s not driven by anything except a desire to maintain their power and control. How many Muslims or Jews are now in the UK is immaterial – what matters is people’s innate sense of justice. Once they know the whole thing’s a massive house of cards BS slavery operation, the game’s over.
      All we have to do is stand up.

    • John Main

      It’s true, Jews are massively underrepresented in the “let’s randomly kill as many of the filthy unbelievers as we can” classes.

      To me, as just another filthy unbeliever, that’s all the information I need to pick a side.

  • Crispa

    Isn’t denial of agency a classic feature of the Hermon and Chomsky propaganda model adopted not just by the Guardian when it comes to reporting on Israel? It serves to avoid pointing the finger directly at the criminality of the IDF’s actions and minimises it. There are plenty other examples where Israeli criminality has been given similar treatment. Reporting of the murder of Shireen Abu Akla was the same. BBC headlines (May 10 2022):
    “A veteran Palestinian-American correspondent for Al Jazeera has been killed while covering a raid by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank.”
    Compare reporting on Israel to say Iran and you see the propaganda model in full throttle.

    • Bob (not OG)

      Yes, this is what they’ve always done. Manufacturing Consent shone a bright light on the methods of lying that were (and are) used.
      In the era covered by that book, people did have a say in what sort of system ruled them. The psychos had other ideas though, and made it their business to interfere in other country’s elections.
      Many people I know still intend to vote in next year’s general election. If it makes them feel good, then maybe there’s no harm.
      (The sad truth is, It makes literally no difference.)
      The US/UK/Nato will keep on defending our values (of fascism). Sieg fucking heil.
      Palestinians will keep getting murdered by the sicko Israeli regime, Syria’s oil will continue getting robbed by US ‘peace keepers’ (what are they there for, really??), freedom will continue getting crushed by ever more laws ‘for our safety’.
      All with zero coverage from the lying shitheads that pass for jouranlists these days.
      I tact checked the BBC and found it wanting.

      • Bayard

        “Many people I know still intend to vote in next year’s general election”
        Perhaps we all should try and persuade people like that not to bother.
        I’m hoping for a record turnout, a record low, that is.

  • SleepingDog

    Systematic use of the passive voice to describe the crimes of Us and Official Allies is an establishment bias Medialens has pointed out before, even though it runs contrary to their own published standards of good practice. This is objectively-measurable fact, and academically verified. It is also a challenge to explain as an unconscious bias, since two forms of conditioning are at odds, but suggests something of a simple but ingrained mental flowchart for journalists.

  • markgolding

    How we ‘live today’ can be expanded and explored to reveal an indifference, our mind and soul slaves to corporate success.We conform, guardians of a perverse monoculture. Dehumanised we are, driven by war, power and control.

  • Sam

    Here’s another fact that’s as rare as hens’ teeth: numerically, there are more Palestinians than there are Jewish Israelis (or even Jews worldwide). And the Palestinian birth rate is double that of the Israeli Jewish birth rate. The only reason Israel is a “Jewish state” is because (the majority of) Palestinians are denied the vote.

    People are entitled to their beliefs, opinions, and cultural views of the rightness/wrongness of the state of Israel, the history of Jews/Palestinians, etc., but one thing that can never change is cold, hard numbers (demographics).

    Every soldier and cop and politician in Israel could be a kind-hearted angel and a living saint, but it would still be impossible for a minority to impose its will on the majority for the long-term. Israel as a Jewish state is doomed – the only question is when the suffering will end.

  • frankywiggles

    “That is how we live today”

    Indeed. In UK 2023 you remove yourself from respectable society if you cite Israel’s designation as an apartheid state by Amnesty, HRW, Bt’selem.

    In February Labour MP Kim Johnson was forced to apologise to the House of Commons
    “I would like to apologise for the use of the term ‘apartheid state’. While I was quoting accurately Amnesty’s description, I recognise this as insensitive and I’d like to withdraw it.”

    That was under threat of suspension by the human rights lawyer Sir Keir Starmer KC, who described the term as “completely unacceptable”.

  • deepgreen

    The previous post about Jeremy Corbyn, and the recent events surrounding the exclusion of Jamie Driscoll from the election of a new mayor (apparently for excessive courtesy shown towards Ken Loach) raises some questions about the state of politics in the UK. OK – I am not stating anything new but the feeling of outrage doesn’t go away.

    Loach and Corbyn shared certain values related to disapproval of the violence and aggression of the Israeli state. And since Corbyn was cancelled by the PLP, Loach has also been cancelled for the sins of thinking and talking – so it appears the taint of anti-Semitism has apparently travelled undetectably from Corbyn to Loach and back to Driscoll. Remarkably so, as it has occurred without any evidence, an invisible miasma, not unlike the proposed mode of transmission of infection during the various medieval periods of plague, where protection was afforded by a mask with an extremely extended probscis.
    I think I shall attend the next Labour conference and start selling anti-anti-semitic masks fashioned in papier mache and with quasi-religious epithets printed on the very long sniffing organ with anti semitic detector chemicals that release a pungent gas which signals the presence of an anti semite. I will offer Mr Starmer a 15% commission on sales, in exchange for a celebrity endorsement to be printed prominently on the mask.
    ‘As recommended by Keir Starmer”
    The proboscis will be sufficiently long to ensure the wearer is automatically absolved of taint.

    This current manifestation of this plague according to Starmer’s purview – antisemitism is a silent unstated internal infection in people who talk politics differently to him and whose minds take them in directions not explored by Starmer or any of his acolytes. It is a strange mental aberration not unlike paranoia but with distinctive features, as its focus is strictly about shielding the Israeli regime from criticism of events under that regime’s control. Just as anti-semitism is a weird mental aberration, so apparently is the remedy.
    Anti-Anti-semitism is a circular invisible cult created to counter an invisible but ever present cult. It has properties not unlike other phobias. Starmerism is acquiring mystical properties not unlike those that afflicted such notables as Stalin, Mao and Pol-pot – although mercifully, at this point, actual murder is confined to state actors beyond our shores.

    Driscoll’s crime was to speak to Loach in a public space where by some kind of osmosis there was an exchange of tainted thought.
    Anyone who watched Newsnight recently could not have failed to notice the bullying of Driscoll by a Starmer heavy (shadow witchfinder). Apparently, and according to the aforementioned Starmer enforcer, it is the duty of any appointed Labour politician to vigorously uphold Starmerism at every opportunity. All else is heresy.

    This position also explains the performance of Yvette Cooper on Peston a few weeks ago, who attacked Jeremy Corbyn (a fellow guest). Cooper’s behaviour was appalling – it was an unprovoked personal public attack on Corbyn in relation to his putative anti-semitism. I expected Cooper to signal her faith with a symbolic Starmer salute. In any other situation Cooper would have been as shown the door, but I doubt Peston has that kind of fortitude. But now it is looking as if there is an embedded hostility to all things not approved by Starmer. It has all the hallmarks of a domestic tyranny. A warlock with his coven of gorgonzola-smelling snake-haired cheeserites.

    Now Roger Waters is the next target for cancelling.
    It is all rather interesting because one of the main reasons for cancellation is the slightest hint or belief that there is any orchestration of the apparently protected condition of Jewishness, as such a suspicion or observation in itself recalls the anti-semitic trope of unseen, underhand, Jewish influences that were deployed by Nazis to justify the Holocaust. Such circularity of thought is typical of the current Labour party and has an uncomfortable resonance with past madnesses.
    Driscoll managed to say that he thought this turn of events would be unhelpful to the ambition to replace the Tories at the next election, and I was comforted by the thought that Driscoll is probably right.

    • Jimmeh

      > Now Roger Waters is the next target for cancelling.

      I must say, Waters seems increasingly unhinged; his taste in uniforms brings anti-zionism into disrepute.

      As far as Starmer is concerned, he’s not just anti-anti-zionist, he’s clearly anti-socialist. I certainly can’t vote for his party; which leaves me politically homeless. Labour members tell me the party is seriously broke, but of the 300,000 paying members at the time of his appointment, at least 200,000 have either quit or failed to renew. In fact that was so predictable you have to wonder whether his mission is to destroy Labour.

      Thanks for the Peston/Cooper/Corbyn tip, I’ll see if I can find it on Youtube. Putting Cooper and Corbyn on the same interview panel is blatant invitation for shit-stirring.
      BTW: Looks like the ECHR is being attacked from the inside (by staff) for over-politicisation. About time.

      • Johnny Conspiranoid

        “I must say, Waters seems increasingly unhinged; his taste in uniforms brings anti-zionism into disrepute.”
        You know how if you watch a TV drama the characters aren’t real because they are being played by actors? That’s the kind of thing that is happening at a Roger Water’s show.

  • Alf Baird

    Imperial powers clearly still have a lot to answer for.

    Since Scots elites were duped and bribed into the hoax of a UK ‘union’, the United Kingdom’s forces (or forces with a ‘British’ mandate) have invaded, had some control over or fought conflicts in 171 of the world’s 193 countries that are currently UN member states, or nine out of ten of all countries. Since the end of the Second World War, Britain has deployed its armed forces for combat over 80 times in 47 countries, in episodes ranging from brutal colonial wars and covert operations to efforts to remove regimes or prop up favoured governments or to deter civil unrest.

    Had Scotland remained independent, Scots would not have been involved in most if not all of these wars. Ireland has been at peace since its independence over 100 years ago; the still partitioned northern territory has been rather less fortunate under continued British rule. Such partition imposed by Imperial powers is seldom if ever a peaceful solution, as we still see in the Middle East and elsewhere.

    WWI was a war between the ‘Great Imperial Powers’ and WWII largely a consequence of the one-sided outcome of that. Many of the other conflicts which Britain ‘used’ Scots troops in involved the same Imperial powers fighting over colonies around the globe.

    So long as Scotland remains a colonial appendage to an Imperial power, Scots will continue to be dragged into conflicts we would never have been involved in as an independent country, conflicts we have no say over; as a sovereign people and nation this is unacceptable and one of the reasons Scotland must become independent from Westminster/Imperial rule. Kenny MacAskill demonstrated Scotland’s different cultural values with Megrahi’s release, whilst our Imperial masters would only send bombs to Libya to bring about ‘regime change’.

    The scourge of Imperialism is still the world’s major source of conflict, the only solution to which is self-determination of ‘peoples’, independence and decolonization, respect for all peoples and nations, trade and goodwill, and peace.


  • Tony

    Why did the Guardian not report on the dubious conviction of the Birmingham Six?

    Last year, I read an article in the Guardian which I found very disturbing.

    On 23 March 2022, Chris Mullin wrote an article that is still available online:

    “I had to keep my sources secret, or the Birmingham Six might still be in jail”

    This is how Mullin begins the article:

    “My friend Peter Chippindale, a Guardian journalist, first drew my attention to the Birmingham pub bombings. He had reported on the trial in 1975 and remarked that he thought the men were innocent. He had come to that conclusion from his attendance at court and from talking to the relatives of the convicted men.”

    I was not aware of this but I was aware that Mullin reported on the possible innocence of the men in question in, I think, 1984.

    The logical conclusion that I came to is that Peter Chippindale only took the matter to Mullin because his own paper refused to investigate. How much earlier might they have been released if the Guardian had reported on the issue?

  • Dave

    Either the shooting was deliberate or it was, in British Army jargon, a “negligent discharge”. In both cases the soldier should be punished.

    However the IDF has a habit of shooting journalists because Israel does not want the world to know the truth of what is happening on the ground. Between 2000-2018 Israel killed 43 journalists and dozens more needed amputations because “narrative control is a crucial component of political control”. Others were blinded, beaten or imprisoned without charge or trial for documenting Israeli crimes.


    Mossad has “built up a global network of media contacts [including the BBC] and used them with great skill” to contextualize incidents and take down hostile politicians like Jonathan Aitken & Sir Alan Duncan (Gideon’s Spies, Thomas, p4, 65 & 162). Asa Winstanley, among many others, would argue that Jeremy Corbyn should be added to that list (“Weaponising Anti-Semitism”).

    Funny too how any article relating to powerless Israel on the Daily Mail website is moderated. (Having nuclear, chemical and biological weapons is not enough: Israel has refused to sign international treaties on all three.)

    My comment on the Independent (16/05/21) was also taken down: “Putting two recent articles from the Israeli Haaretz website together, it is clear that the IDF mislead western media journalists into publicising that a ground assault on Gaza had begun. Why? Because the Israelis knew that Hamas would then hide in tunnels, tunnels which the IDF had secretly mapped out and had a plan to destroy. i.e. The IDF duped western journalists in a secret plan to wipe out Hamas.”

    Shame next-to-no-one knows of Zionist terrorism against the British (see “State of Terror” by Suarez) because then the Israeli lobby might receive a less sympathetic response.

    • Peter

      ” … because Israel does not want the world to know the truth of what is happening on the ground.”

      And that, of course, is the primary reason (among others) that they were so profoundly and aggressively anti-Corbyn.

      Had Corbyn become Prime Minister of Britain, which he so nearly did in 2017, he would have transformed British policy with regard to the Middle East and would have led international efforts to resolve the Israel-Palestine question, something any decent person and the overwhelming majority of the public, and perhaps the world, would have welcomed and applauded.

      So, as we saw, all the stops were pulled out to make sure that that didn’t happen and to convince the public that one of the the most anti-racist MPs in parliament was in fact a virulent racist and an “existential threat” to the Jewish community in Britain.

      I believe Starmer is backed by pro-Israel money.

      • Andrew H

        I think it is fair to say Corbyn lost the election on his own account. Since he lost he should step aside (or be pushed aside). The same is true for Boris. A political party cannot move forward with ex-s trying to re-establish a divisive faction within a party.

        • Stevie Boy

          Nice try.
          I believe the majority of Labour members supported Corbyn and the only divisive faction was the ‘war criminal supporting’ Blairites who actively sabotaged Corbyn and Labour’s election hopes.

          • Andrew H

            You can believe all you want. But it does not make sense for a political party to have 2 leaders and 2 fundamental directions. The Labour party continues to be an unelectable joke as long as it cannot make up its mind whether it is Old Labour or New Labour. It needs to split into 2 parties, or for one side to entirely purge the other – because the current infighting (like 30+ years of it) leaves voters with little choice but to vote Tory. Corbyn has done more to destroy the Labour party than any other person in the history of the party – he is a gift to the Tories. (Tory infighting is mild compared with that of Labour – none of them believe in anything, so Boris vs Rishi is more a personality contest rather than a fundamental split over policy.)

          • Bayard

            Who has done more to “destroy the Labour Party”, Corbyn who tripled the membership, or Starmer, who reduced it by two thirds?
            In any case, who was “the other leader” while Corbyn was leading the party, Tony Blair?

        • Peter

          @ Andrew H

          “I think it is fair to say Corbyn lost the election on his own account. Since he lost he should step aside …”

          Respectfully Andrew, I have to say there is no political logic in your comment whatsoever, unless, which I presume is the case, you are vehemently anti-Corbyn yourself and will use any argument to besmirch him however bogus.

          At the start of the 2017 General Election Labour was at around 20% in the opinion polls as a result of an unprecedentedly poisonous full scale media assault. The Daily Mail for just one example, on the day before the election, starting from the front page, printed a full 13 pages accusing Corbyn of being a “terrorist sympathiser”. This during an election which had seen two terrorist attacks. One of the most bizarre experiences during the election was witnessing the BBC treat Corbyn and Labour fairly as a result of more stringent impartiality rules during elections, something which they had comprehensively refused to do up to that point.

          In spite of that come election day Labour were neck and neck. Many, myself included, believe that had there been another two weeks of campaign time that Labour would have won. We now know, of course, that some in the Labour Party were actively working against Corbyn, and it is they that should have been given the push and thanked for landing us with May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak.

          In 2017 Corbyn achieved the biggest swing to Labour since the war.

          That is not something which merits the sack and in reality Corbyn was politically untouchable at that point, much to the chagrin of the Labour right-wing.

          The establishment, of course, realised they could not beat Corbyn politically and so, with the help of the Labour right-wing and most pointedly with Starmer, set about bringing him down by other means.

          • Andrew H

            I don’t understand your criticism of the Daily Mail. It is a right wing sensationalist rag, so calling Corbyn a terrorist simp doesn’t seem noteworthy, out of character – or even likely to sway (left leaning) voters one way or the other. Voters understand the basic situation, so it is disingenuous to suggest they are all gullible fools intoxicated on MSM lies.

            You are correct that I don’t like the politics of Corbyn. He is too full of “principles”. I get it – activists and those on the far-left / far-right want politicians with ideology and big promises. Me, no, I want rule by unprincipled pragmatism – people who will just get on with governing the country, but have no rigid philosophy. I have no problem with Tories and Labour offering essentially the same policies – because I am not looking for ideology.

            Cameron was a man after my heart – didn’t believe in either Scottish independence or Brexit – but did a referendum anyhow – because if the people are stupid, they deserve it – and sure we have proven we are stupid and deserve it.
            I also find it hard to fault Boris – the lock downs were not his idea – and like every cheating husband who got caught with his pants down – he just didn’t have the inner strength to resist the temptations. I understand a few people are miffed that he broke the rules, but for me I don’t like this idea we should hold our politicians to high standards when it comes to physical temptation (be it sex or parties). We got rid of the puritans a long time ago and dispatched the Jacobites to America – God forbid they should return to power.

            Starmer isn’t doing too badly in the polls (at least according to the Guardian).
            I reserve judgement on whether Labour is in a fit state to run the country.

          • Bramble

            I suggest that, for amoral pragmatists “other means” is exactly what politics is, and their interpretation of how we should govern ourselves leads directly to the corruption, dishonesty and incompetence we witness today.

          • Bayard

            The Brexit referendum proved the stupidity and incompetence of Cameron, not the British people. Leave didn’t win it, he lost it, mainly by identifying his government with Remain when they should have been neutral, thus swinging millions of voters who couldn’t give a damn about the EU, but hated the Tory government, onto the side of Leave, getting them down the polling stations to vote for whatever it was that the government didn’t want them to vote for.

      • Stevie Boy

        “I believe Starmer is backed by pro-Israel money.” Yes. The Al Jazeera series ‘The Lobby’ [1] identifies how Israel pumps money into Labour to buy their support. Starmer has also employed Mossad spies to support his campaign.
        Additionally, Starmer is a self declared zionist who opposes BDS and who’s wife and kids are of the Jewish faith. As such, one can surmise where his loyalties lay. IMO – Another, Trojan Horse dedicated to the destruction of the UK !
        [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceCOhdgRBoc

        • Andrew H

          Good grief. And apparently there is no anti-Semitism within the Labour party? (Just about 50% of all the posts here express nonsense anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.).

          • zoot

            Andrew H,

            you posted on here a few months back that you literally wept for Azov nazis captured by Russia, acknowledging you knew they were nazis.

            i remember that cause it was me who asked you to clarify if you knew they were nazis.

            your answer was affirmative.

            so please spare us your ‘i deplore antisemitism’ blx.

          • Bayard

            By “nonsense anti-Semitic conspiracy theories”, you are presumably referring to the attacks on Jeremy Corbyn?

          • Andrew H

            @Zoot. Your memory fails you. (If you disagree then instead of dishonestly distorting the record, produce a copy of the comment I made). I have never supported Nazis and Azov are not Nazis – they are simply defending their homeland. Every country has some Nazis including RuZZia – and indeed anyone following this war will see that Russia is the Nazi aggressor here. That one is probably hard for you to accept. The attempt to label Ukraine as a nation of nazis is quite ridiculous – of all the false pretexts that Russia gave for the war, it is the most absurd. It is clear the war is nothing other than an attempt to grab land (combined with jealousy that Ukraine is Europe, but Russia is Asia – something xenophobic slavs in Moscow see as an existential threat to their purity).

            It is also ridiculous to label the Labour party or Corbyn as anti-Semitic. I have not done that. If you read Craig’s post he not once refers to ‘zionism’ or makes wild anti-Semitic accusations that Starmer is backed by Israeli money. These types of accusation do not bring peace to Palestinians – and ultimately harm the Palestinian cause.

          • Peter

            @ Andrew H

            “It is also ridiculous to label the Labour party or Corbyn as anti-Semitic. I have not done that. If you read Craig’s post he not once refers to ‘zionism’ or makes wild anti-Semitic accusations that Starmer is backed by Israeli money.”

            You may not have labelled Corbyn antisemitic Andrew but for reasons best known to yourself you have chosen to “make wild anti-Semitic accusations” about me.

            I suggest you make sure you have your facts straight before you go hurling “wild anti-Semitic accusations”. Just because Starmer has no concern for the truth doesn’t mean the rest of us can casually disregard it.

            Regarding Starmer’s backing, he was funded to the tune of £50k by Trevor Chinn during his leadership campaign. During the campaign he refused to acknowledge the donation. I wonder why.

            I will thank you to read the following article and withdraw your comment:


          • Andrew H

            @Peter – unless you are also ‘Stevie Boy’ then I do not think I have made wild anti-Semitic remarks about you. (The rant above about how Israel pumps money into Labour and Starmer employs Mosad spies is not from you – to my knowledge). As for Trevor Chinn, at least according to his Wikipedia page he is a British businessman that has supported a number of Labour politicians. The fact that he belongs to ‘Labour Friends of Israel’, supports my claim that Labour is not inherently anti-Semitic. There is nothing wrong or inappropriate in any of this – including the donations to Starmer. As for the ‘canary’ article you suggest I read, I am unfamiliar with this publication – the overall tone of the article is consistent with being anti-Israel, but this may not be indicative of the entire publication. Peace for Palestinians does not seem possible as long as Iran and other outsiders are calling for the destruction of Israel – hate against Israel is inevitably transformed into violence against Palestinians which feeds back into more hate against Israel. For me, the middle-east like Africa is not my concern – whilst we in the west may genuinely wish for peace in this part of the world, there is little we seem to be able to do to actually influence events – and for the most part every time we get too involved with peace plans we tend to make things worse.

          • Peter

            @ Andrew H

            Respectfully, no, I am not Stevie Boy, but it was I who correctly commented that “Starmer is backed by pro-Israeli money” (the £50k donation is undisputed) so it was me you wrongly accused of making “wild anti-Semitic accusations”.

            If you read the whole of Trevor Chinn’s wiki page you will see that he is heavily involved in supporting pro-Israel groups, which, not exclusively but regularly these days, now sadly means anti-Palestinian – that is the problem.

            Chinn’s influence in the Labour Party spreads well beyond that original donation. See here:


            Starmer’s employment of a former Mossad agent in his office is also undisputed:


            Given all this it is virtually inconceivable that as PM Starmer would be in any way involved in seeking justice for the Palestinians or a serious resolution of the situation. That too is the problem.

            So, I still stand accused by you of making “wild anti-Semitic accusations”. Kind of a Starmerist attitude to be fair.

            Do yourself a favour. Withdraw what is frankly a poisonous accusation.

          • Andrew H

            @Peter. You may have said pro-Israel, but Stevie said ‘Isreal pumps money …’ There is a difference.

            Although my original comment was a response to Stevie, I have now scrolled up to read your comment. According to you, you wrote in the Guardian comments: “Is it antisemitic to say Netanyahu is a fascist?” So, yes, I think I can put you in the same anti-Semitic bucket as Stevie. You may not see that asking a question like that, (and repeating it here with pride) as anti-Semitic, but it is. Also all the links you are shoving in your posts are tainted with anti-Israel rhetoric, which helps to paint the picture.

            I am not sure what you even want the UK to do for the Palestinians. Britain is not a super power with influence over this part of the world. (None at all – why do we even think we are relevant?). What should we do for Yemen?, Sudan? Libya? Lebanon? Palestine?. My answer is absolutely nothing. The Arab-Israeli conflict can only be solved by Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab league seeing Israel as a partner for peace and prosperity in the region. It is up to these countries to realize it is their responsibility to solve this issue alone and not for USA/UK to try and sort it out. As I understand it, Jordan has diplomatic relations with Israel, but neither Syria or Saudi Arabia, but honestly I don’t give a crap, except to assert that the UK has nothing to do – this has been going on since long before I was born – as Tucker Carson would say, why should I care?

          • glenn_nl

            AH: “Is it antisemitic to say Netanyahu is a fascist?” So, yes, I think I can put you in the same anti-Semitic bucket as Stevie. You may not see that asking a question like that, (and repeating it here with pride) as anti-Semitic, but it is.

            It is? Really? Just on your say-so. Wow, I wish all things were as simple as that. Such concise logical argument there.

            Thanks for clearing that up for us AH.

            Just so I’m clear here… if a ‘settler’ from Russia or New York who arrives in Greater Israel one day, and shoots a Palestinian dead for no reason (other than said Palestinian having the outrageous impudence to be living in his house) the next… would it be ‘antisemitism’ to think that maybe that’s a wrong thing to do?

          • glenn_nl

            AH: “I am not sure what you even want the UK to do for the Palestinians. “

            Maybe not give the genocidal maniacs doing their ethnic cleansing bit on them the red carpet treatment?

            AH: “… as Tucker Carson would say, why should I care?

            And as your good friends and fellow travellers would say, “SIEG HEIL!”

          • zoot

            Andrew H
            You wrote in full view on this blog that you wept for Azov nazis who were captured by Russia. WEPT for them! When I informed you what those people believe your response was unrepentant. Sad to see other commenters accepting you have a genuine protective regard for Jews. I do not know what it would take for them.

          • Andrew H

            @zoot, I once again ask you to produce the post. If you cannot do this you are being dishonest.(or mistaken). Find where I have described the Avostahl Azov brigade as Nazis. If you cannot do this you are being less than truthful (or forgetful), and you really should give me an apology, although to be honest I would not expect this of you (I am realistic and pragmtaic, so I don’t expect people who make dishonest and false claims to ever correct themselves). It is really simple – all the posts are saved – so you can just go through and search for this post you elude to where I accept/describe Azov as nazis (I am pretty sure that comes from you/others)

          • Lapsed Agnostic

            Clearly having too much time on my hands on this glorious day, I’ve managed to track down the comments thread in which Andrew H states that the reunion of the captured Azov fighters with their families (to which I made a brief contribution) brought tears to his eyes:


            From the thread, it’s clear that Andrew doesn’t acknowledge that he knew they were Nazis*, is not asked to clarify this by zoot, and does not then answer in the affirmative. Hope that’s cleared that up.

            (FYI Andrew, Russia west of the Urals is also part of Europe)

            * which is fair enough imho, as at the start of the war/SMO the BBC didn’t know they were Nazis either (it’s since stated that they are “only 20% Nazi”)

          • zoot

            Oct 2nd?.. how many blogs did you have to scroll through to locate that? and to what end? to defend a commenter who weeps for nazis then tries to smear others as antisemites?

            you saw how I responded to him when he confessed tears for Azov nazis:

            ‘have you ever pondered why they tatoo swastikas on their bodies? think about the level of genocidal hatred you would need to have for vulnerable minority groups in order to do that.

            disgracefully, the new york times does know this. it is trying to make the unacceptable respectable, thereby validating every closet nazi sympathizer’.

            you will also have seen Squeeth’s response to him:

            ‘You’re having a laugh, the Azovs are nazis and behave like nazis, bravely torturing and murdering prisoners and civilians’

            Andrew H made no response then. however he now responds 8 months on that he doesn’t accept Azov are nazis. your kinda guy?

          • zoot

            Andrew H

            i would say you’re about as honest as any other rightwinger who tries to smear leftwingers as antisemites. although not many try and do so while openly aligning with hardcore nazis.

            even so, it won’t stop many on here treating you as antifascist no 1 and defender in chief of the Jews.

          • Lapsed Agnostic

            Thanks for your reply, zoot.

            ‘how many blogs did you have to scroll through to locate that? and to what end?’

            Search engines are a thing and are free at the point of use. I used one to discover the truth – which appears to have caused you some embarrassment. Andrew H may have wept for Nazis, but there’s no evidence that he knew they were Nazis at the time. He probably didn’t even see your later comment about the tattoos – or Squeeth’s. Do you have any evidence of Azov members sporting swastika tattoos, by the way? – I would imagine that most of them are smarter than that. The NYT writers may not be aware of exactly what Azov is either: there are plenty of Dunning-Krugers about – and not just in these comments sections.

            As you can see from my comment on the October thread, I’m no fan of the Azov Brigade, as it now is. Andrew may be a fan but, as with Russian geography, he may simply be ignorant as to what it is. Hanlon’s razor may be called for, as is often the case:


          • zoot

            yes, I have been caused some embarrassment. turns out Andrew H doesn’t accept Azov are ss-worshipping nazis. nor does the NYT. and no, there is no evidence of Azov sporting nazi tattoos. all three in the clear.

            may i apologise then for impugning Andrew’s antifascist credentials and noble protection of Jews against leftwing antisemites. also for impugning the normal, innocent men of Azov. and of course for questioning your own motivations.

          • Peter

            @ Andrew H

            Oh dear, more bogus, mud-flinging accusations.

            I can assure you Andrew that there is not an atom of antisemitism in my comment about Starmer nor in my comment about Guardian deletions. Nor was there any pride in my making of the Guardian comment. It was a simple observation of the deterioration of the Guardian which is well understood on this site. I can’t begin to fathom how your imagination arrives at such notions.

            I despise antisemitism as I despise all racism. I would be horrified if I had somehow made such an error and would retract it immediately.

            Are you still hunting for reds under the bed because you seem to see antisemitism everywhere.

            The links I gave are not “tainted with anti-Israel rhetoric” they just happen to be critical of Israel.

            Your previous comment that “Just about 50% of all the posts here express nonsense anti-Semitic conspiracy theories” is itself nonsense. Overwhelmingly the comments on this site are critical of Israel but that does not make them antisemitic. Anyone commenting on what is happening in Israel and who is not critical of it would have to be extremely ignorant or bereft of principle.

            Oh, wait a minute, you did you say you reject principle didn’t you?

            Ok, now I’ve got it.

            I think I’ll move on.

          • Lapsed Agnostic

            Thanks for your (presumably) sarcastic reply, zoot. If you’re not fully aware of what *you yourself* wrote on this very blog less than a year ago, then maybe you can appreciate that it’s possible that Andrew and others may not be fully aware of what Azov (and its ilk) are about, and thus not attempting to deliberately deceive.

            As for my own motivations: I’m mainly motivated by the truth, although not to the exclusion of any other considerations – otherwise I’d be in prison, like our host was. Hopefully, at least one or two people on here appreciate my efforts.

          • zoot

            no, just repeating he didn’t know Azov are nazis does not make it true believe it or not. having seen his offerings i’m quite certain he knows they are nazis and supports them either regardless or because he’s a fascist himself. you would quite be amazed how many ardent Azov and Netanyahu supporters are actually fascists even if they insist they are not.

          • Lapsed Agnostic

            Thanks for your reply, zoot. In one of his above comments, Andrew called Labour an ‘unelectable joke’. Then in his very next comment he stated that ‘Starmer isn’t doing too badly in the polls’ (in fact, Labour are currently leading the Tories by a significant margin). He also thinks that no part of Russia is in Europe. I’m not convinced he knows that much about national politics, geo-politics or even geography, and therefore could genuinely believe that Azov aren’t Nazis – especially if he spends a lot of time on NAFO Twitter accounts.

        • Jimmeh

          > and who’s wife and kids are of the Jewish faith.

          Woah, hang on. What does their faith have to do with anything? It’s Starmer’s conflation of anti-semitism with opposition to Israel’s racist policies that’s the issue.

      • John Main

        Would Corbyn have done that? I got the clear impression that most posters on here want the UK, iScotland, rUK, whatever, to stop meddling in the intractable affairs of other countries.

        I guess the real truth is that most posters just want us to keep on interfering, but on the other side.

        Pro-Palestinian and pro-Russian being two examples.

        And anti-American, natch.

        I try to be guided by facts. Zionists won’t blow up my kids at a rock concert. A Yank may knock me off my bike in a RTA, but won’t kill me with Novochik. These considerations count with me very much indeed.

        • glenn_nl

          JM: “I try to be guided by facts. Zionists won’t blow up my kids at a rock concert. A Yank may knock me off my bike in a RTA, but won’t kill me with Novochik. These considerations count with me very much indeed.”

          That’s a really nice philosophy. So basically, as long as it isn’t _you_ who’s being killed, repressed or dispossessed, you don’t give a fuck.

        • Lapsed Agnostic

          More people died in Ted Kennedy’s car than have been confirmed to have been killed by Novichok, John (we only have Boris Kuznetsov’s word that police files showed that Russian scientists identified it by mass spec & IR* from samples scraped off Ivan Kivelidi’s phone, and the inquiry into Dawn Sturgess’s death is not set to begin until late 2024 – over six(!) years after the event). I’d say that your or your family members’ chances of being killed by it are essentially zero.

          * Journalists from the Graun claim to seen some of the files in 2018, but they wouldn’t know shit about chemical analysis I’d wager.

  • mark cutts

    Is it not interesting that the Democrat government wants to nail Trump (a US Citizen) with Espionage Act – cheers from the liberal media? Yet the use of the same Act on Julian Assange (an Australian) is not questioned.

    The whole Western World and its supporters who rely on their stipends from those with a lot of money will not risk their future employment and pensions by stepping out of the parameterised political/economic line.

    Netenyahu is paid by the same people so, on the face of it what looks like religion is not the whole story. It is part of the chapters of the capitalist playbook and in each country it takes different political forms of which Zionism is just one of many. The ‘Colour Revolutions’ in the ex-Soviet Union is another few chapters and the wars conducted on African countries that don’t do as they are told is near the end of the book.

    The latest proxy use of the US of the Ukranians is right near the end of the rapidly collapsing Neo-liberal phase of production and ironically because it never was based on actual material production (just the accumulation/manipulation of profits from rentier capitalism) then it was always doomed in the end.

    Biden and his advisers have no idea how to handle this inevitable crash and burn so as usual when in a hole Go To War. This can be an actual war or a class war or both and in actuality both are a product of each other.

    Meanwhile back at the Ranch – the BRICS are leading the anti-Neoliberal economic war (for now) and on the face of it its effects look progresive rather than regressive. The only way the West can stop the progress is by creating more wars in the countries that make up the BRICS group and their adherents.

    Of course with the US leaders not wanting to put their people’s boots on the ground – they will use someone else’s boots instead to do this. Ukraine is not the last of this defence of the financial mode of capitalism and the exporting of labour – cheaper labour prices in China than the US of course. It is the first of many to come starting with the small countries and their vulnerability (perhaps Sudan is one?) as that is the usual US MO. Trump will play the same game so no change there.

    More proxy wars are in the offing without a doubt and their Neo-liberal employees (Netanyahu and Zelensky et al) and the MSM will continue to cheer them on as and when needed.

    p.s. According to the Grayzone and The Hill a Swedish diver’s boot has been found near the Nordstream 2 sabotaged pipeline, which by definition will not be Russian, I think.

    • Andrew H

      Mark writes: “p.s. According to the Grayzone and The Hill a Swedish diver’s boot has been found near the Nordstream 2 sabotaged pipeline, which by definition will not be Russian, I think.”

      Are you suggesting that whoever sabotaged the pipeline took off their boots? (while diving and planting a bomb?). Are you sure there wasn’t also a copy of the Sims 3?

    • JohnA

      When did anyone claim it was a Swedish diver’s boot? The boot is a common brand used by divers worldwide, and I think, made in China. The reference to Sweden was that the Swedish team investigating the site did not spot the boot at the time.

  • markgolding

    I remind many of the words of Zionist Menachem Begin who became Israeli Prime-Minister, he said, “We intend to attack, conquer and keep until we have the whole of Palestine and Transjordan in a greater Jewish State. The Zionist state of terror has amplified after the attack on the Twin Towers and is revealed as a horrific, corrupt, vile and nefarious entity that has gained a stronghold on our planet and a grip on our lives.

    • Reza

      The Israelis are not that strong Mark and they know it. They are shaken by being boycotted, being rejected by young Jews in the diaspora, by being designated an apartheid state and by the rapprochement between Saudi and Iran. The world is shifting beneath their feet.

      • mark cutts


        Believe me: they are strong – they have Nuclear Weapons and anyone who has the use of those terrible weapons and are backed into a corner can and will use them if neccesary.

        This applies to Russia, China, the US, the UK – Pakistan – India and Israel .

        Is it any wonder that North Korea and Iran wish to acquire them?

        Because if the West thinks that Nukes have kept the peace in the world over the years then if every country had them then peace would be guaranteed and we would all be safe in our beds?

        This is a dangerous because as usual with West it depends how many and how powerful the nukes are?

        It ends up as pushing your luck.

        A game of Poker.

        What’s your hand?

        • Stevie Boy

          North Korea already has nukes. That is the only reason the USA has been unable to totally destroy them – although, at one point North Korea offered to trade their nukes for security guarantees, but the USA refused to give those guarantees, as per Iran – go figure.

  • Stevie Boy

    It’s worth noting that the MSM bias and the peoples misunderstandings and ignorance are not accidental. The west spends literally Billions on misinformation and censoring of free speech. We know for a fact that the UK government has employed the military and the security services against its own citizens: for Brexit, for Covid, for Ukraine and, we can safely assume, for Climate. To the government ‘we’ are the enemy !

    “Believin’ all the lies that they’re tellin’ ya
    Buyin’ all the products that they’re sellin’ ya
    They say, “Jump” and you say, “How high?”
    You brain-dead, you got a fuckin’ bullet in your head”

  • amanfromMars

    The times they are a-changin’, Craig, and there be new kids on the block who be like no others in their outlook and demeanour and ability to transform corrupt and bankrupt human spaces into novel alien commanded and controlled places, and with AI expertise at their beck and call and fingertips of ESPecial AIgents all ready and already causing the greatest of testing commotions against which there be no available viable defensive motions nor successful attacking solutions.

    Something quite fundamental different from anything ever imagined before and sweeping all before it in a well choreographed, dark and deep series of almighty surges and devastating purges more evident with every passing day with its exploitation and expansion of Odays …… I Kid U Not ……. https://ur2die4.com/uncategorized/230610/

  • Stewart

    Protesting at an Israeli munitions factory, writing in defence of Jeremy Corbyn and now calling out MSM reporting of Israeli “security operations”?
    Are you trying to commit suicide by mossad?

  • Jack

    What purpose do Labour fill if they are just copying Tories talking point?

    Keir Starmer calls for Roger Waters’ UK gigs to be axed amid ‘antisemitism’ row
    The Labour Party leader said Waters has ‘clearly espoused antisemitic views’ that are ‘highly disturbing’


    Keir and similar fake-faux-leftist-people are so delicate, God forbid they take a stance on something that might infuriate the status-quo/establishment/right-wing/neo-liberals.

    Why are not Keir calling for arms to Palestinians as he have done for the Ukrainian government? No, no, he can’t do that, oh no, then he will get criticized by the right/Tories/media. Better to succumb and become a conformist!
    Such a wuss…
    Corbyn was probably the last leftist leader, perhaps in the whole world, to have any courage to speak and follow up on a left-wing agenda.

    • Bayard

      “What purpose do Labour fill if they are just copying Tories talking point?”
      They give the illusion of choice and hence democracy.

      • Andrew H

        There can be small differences. People don’t necessarily want big radical change. The middleclass intelligencia does not want to see a redistribution of wealth or higher taxes – to compensate for the essentially working classes decision to quit the EU and bring on the so called cost-of-living crisis. Yes, some people want bigger changes to society – and these people are disenfranchised by our two party system. Democracy does not require a polarized party system – you and others are free to debate and convince society of the need to gradually bring about change – to say that climate activism, LBGT activism, Scottish independence activism and other activism have not ultimately shaped todays’ politics is incorrect. Even Dicken’s shaped Victorian society to do something about the poor through the power of words. Democracy moves via soft power of people making convincing arguments – so far I am unconvinced by the cost-of-living crisis.

  • miranda townsend

    Please forgive a formal subscription at this time. My husband died recently and all formal commitments are on hold. Please do get back to me again in, say, three weeks if I haven’t responded. I do fully intend to do so and am happy to have you chasing me if other distractions take over.

    I intend to be in touch soon.
    Best wishes

  • sergey

    all this is very well (that is, bad), but Craig is indeed very much selective about exposing the mainstream narrative, fully embracing parts of it that originate from the same cannibalistic foundation (like non-existent “gender issues”, or “republican Scotland” or even faux green agenda)

  • AG

    Branko Marcetic in JACOBIN 10/6/23

    about the dire situation of freedom of press, summing up in short order the cases of Klarenberg / Waters / Bücker / Taibbi / Assange / Maté and who is behind them on what legal grounds.

    “Attacks on Freedom of the Press Are Ramping Up”
    The state of democratic rights for journalists in some of the world’s leading Western powers is becoming increasingly worrisome.


    Let me quote the last two paragraphs of this useful piece (perhaps appropriate for people less informed and less inclined to actually believe it in converations):

    Meanwhile, many of these cases are specifically related to foreign policy dissent, particularly on the matter of NATO policy toward the Ukraine war, which the US and allied governments have framed as an existential battle for worldwide democracy. Yet as has been clear since last year, the war and NATO countries’ participation in it is tragically having the opposite effect on both Ukrainian and Western societies, leading them to behave in more and more authoritarian ways on the basis of protecting Ukraine’s war effort — measures that, ironically, resemble the Russian government’s own authoritarian behavior.

    But this is really a ramping up of trends that date back to at least the start of the war on terror this century, which saw governments, especially those of the UK and the United States, clamp down on civil liberties and basic freedoms on the basis of national security. For all the warnings then of the slippery slope we were on, successive administrations, sometimes from different sides of the political spectrum, have never dismantled these structures but rather added to them. And absent any sort of reckoning and mass action to oppose them, we seem destined to keep sliding faster and faster down until we find out what’s at the bottom.

  • Pyewacket

    This ‘play on words’ has quite some history. I remember reading War comics and WW2 themed comic strips in other publications aimed at the young during the 1960s, where the Germans were all referred to as Fritz or Jerry, and the brave Brit was Tommy. Tommy’s burst of machine gun fire was often described as a victorious hail of gunfire, whereas Jerry’s was a murderous hail of Lead.

    • David Warriston

      A front page war story from The Victor comic (for boys) circa 1964 pictured a British Tommy pushing a hand grenade through the slit of a German concrete pill-box with the the words: ‘Chew pineapple, Fritz!’

1 2