Incredibly, I Face Investigation for Terrorism – Defence Funds Appeal 355

My phone is not being returned to me by police as, astonishingly, I am now formally under investigation for terrorism. Whether this relates to support for Palestine or for Wikileaks has currently not been made clear.

What follows is, unspun and unvarnished, my account of my interview under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act as given to my lawyers:

I arrived from Keflavik airport, Iceland to Glasgow airport at about 10am on Monday 16 October. After passport control I was stopped by three police officers, two male and one female, who asked me to accompany them to a detention room.

They seated me in the room and told me:

I was detained under Section 7 of the Terrorism Act

I was not arrested but detained, and therefore had no right to a lawyer.

I had no right to remain silent. I had to give full and accurate information in response to questions. It was a criminal offence to withhold any relevant information.

I had to give up any passwords to my devices. It was a criminal offence not to do this.

They searched my baggage and my coat, going through my documents and taking my phone and laptop. They did not look at one document from Julian Assange’s lawyers that I told them was privileged.

They asked me about boarding cards for Brussels and Dublin they found and what I had been doing there. I replied I was at a debate at Trinity College in Dublin, while in Brussels I had attended a human rights meeting focused on the case of Julian Assange.

They asked me to identify the individuals from some visiting cards I had from the Brussels meeting (one was a German MP).

They asked me the purpose of my visit to Iceland. I told them that I was attending a coordinating meeting of the campaign to free Julian Assange. I said I had also attended a pro-Palestinian rally outside the Icelandic parliament, but that had not been a prior intention.

They asked how I earnt my living. I said from two sources: voluntary subscriptions to my blog, and my civil service pension.

They asked what organisations I am a member of. I said the Alba party. I said I worked with Wikileaks and the Don’t Extradite Assange campaign, but was not formally a “member” of either. I was a life member of the FDA union. No other organisations.

They asked if I received any money from Wikileaks, from Don’t Extradite Assange or from the Assange family (separate questions). I replied no, except occasional travel expenses from Don’t Extradite Assange. In December I had done a tour of Germany and received a fee from the Wau Holland Foundation, a German free speech charity.

They asked what other campaigns I had been involved in. I said many, from the Anti-Nazi League and Anti-Apartheid movement on. I had campaigned for Guantanamo inmates alongside Caged Prisoners.

They asked why I had attended the pro-Palestine demo in Iceland. I said one of the speakers had invited me, Ögmundur Jónasson. He was a former Icelandic Interior Minister. I said I did not know what the speeches said as they were all in Icelandic.

They asked whether I intended to attend any pro-Palestinian rallies in the UK. I said I had no plans but probably would.

They asked how I judged whether to speak alongside others on the same platform. I replied I depended on organisers I trusted, like the Palestine Solidarity Committee or Stop the War. It was impossible to know who everyone was at a big rally.

They asked if anyone else posted to my twitter or blog. I replied no, it was all me.

They asked how considered my tweets were. I replied that those which were links to my blog posts were my considered writing. Others were more ephemeral, and like everyone else I sometimes made mistakes and sometimes apologised. They asked if I deleted tweets and I said very seldom.

I volunteered that I thought I understood the tweet that worried them and agreed it could have been more nuanced. This was the limitation of twitter. It was intended to refer only to the current situation within Gaza and the Palestinian people’s right of self-defence from genocide.

That was more or less it. The interview was kept to exactly an hour and at one point one said to another “18 minutes left”. They did not tell me why. At one point they did mention protected journalistic material on my laptop but I was too dazed to take advantage of this and specify anything.

They took my bank account details and copies of all my bank cards.


This is an enormous abuse of human rights. The abuse of process in refusing both a lawyer and the right to remain silent, the inquiry into perfectly legal campaigning which is in no way terrorism-associated, the political questioning, the financial snooping and the seizure of material related to my private life, were all based on an utterly fake claim that I am associated with terrorism.

I have to date not been arrested and not charged. Contempt of court is therefore not in play and you are free to comment on the case (although in the current atmosphere any kind of free thought is liable to vicious state action). I am safe and currently in Dublin. I intend next to travel to Switzerland to take this up with the United Nations.

My legal team have already made a submission against this outrage to the United Nations Human Rights Committee and are looking at the possibility of judicial review in the UK. We also have to prepare the defence against possible terrorism charges, ludicrous as that sounds.

I am afraid this all costs money. I am grateful for the unfailing generosity of people in what seems a continual history of persecution.

Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above


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

It would be extremely helpful if you could subscribe to this blog, even if only for £3 a month. Less than 0.2% of readers subscribe, and that does make it difficult. You can use the Paypal button below or standing order to the bank details above:

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


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.

355 thoughts on “Incredibly, I Face Investigation for Terrorism – Defence Funds Appeal

1 2 3 4
  • Alastair Aitken

    Cleveland Police took my iPhone ten years ago. I got it back, but not until I gave them the access code. They didn’t find anything, but I did: things missing and my email account locked. It took me a year to get that back.

    I’ve been watched fairly maliciously now for ten years.

  • John Macadam

    The definition of a state is that entity, occupying a defined territory, that has the exclusive use of violence. This means that there are double standards applicable to Gaza. If there were a Palestinian state, matters would be different. I don’t do online banking but a [very modest] cheque will follow.

    • Ian

      And that is exactly why, for the last 75 years, Israel has deliberately kept the Palestinians stateless. It’s also the state which guarantees human rights, so that leaves them even more abject – which is of course the whole point of the genocidal policy to vanish them from history.

      • Fernando

        That is simply not true.

        Palestina rejected the offer of the UN in 1948, if i regain correct, to have two separated states. Israel and Palestina.

        The question is why UN conceded land, which belonged to the people of palestina, and a status of state to a people Who where expelled from that area in 186 AC.

        Also you have to look on how they reached to that status, ask geopolitical questions…. There is a lote of It involved

        • Ian

          You talk of truth? There is ample documentation and evidence of what Israel has done to the Palestinians, dispossessing them and exiling them, robbing them of their resources and denying them rights, for 75 years – and now doubling down in atrocities and massacres.

          • Taeb

            And ample documentation of terror attacks against Israel, unprovoked rockets attack, denying solutions from the Palestinian side time after time.

            Again, you are presenting a one sided biased account on what happened over the years. you cannot be that naive to think exile, war and border closures just “happen”. Read more, it’s too much to explain for a comment.

          • Ian

            Of course they don’t just happen, they are a deliberate strategy of expulsion and ethnic cleansing by Israel. Meanwhile you keep repeating the pathetic Israeli string of lies and deception about recent history. Luckily there is a wealth of documentation and truth about it, much of it from Israeli resources and historians.

          • Bayard

            “you cannot be that naive to think exile, war and border closures just “happen.”

            Unlike “unprovoked ” rocket attacks, I suppose.

  • Clark

    Look at the email address on Craig’s photo of the letter he received.

    What the hell department is SCDBPCNotification? Every search engine I tried found precisely nothing. The ‘BPC’ part is presumably Border Policing Command. That leaves ‘SCD’. A Google search on “SCD border police scotland” (without the quote marks) suggests the Specialist Crime Division:

    On that page, the last couple of paragraphs seem the most relevant:

    Officers also work on providing a co-ordinated national response to tackle counter terrorism. They work together with Contest who provide the counter terrorism protective security advice to external bodies. They also deliver the Governments counter terrorism policy.

    This business area also includes Border Policing Command. They deliver security at all of Scotland’s ports of entry and work alongside partner agencies to protect the national security of the UK. [my emphasis]

    What a strangely worded page, which also apparently hasn’t been proofread (“tackle counter terrorism”?). Who are Contest? I’d never heard of them. And border policing is a “business area”? Probably just worded by some manager from the private sector.

    But the bit I find really worrying is their claim to “deliver the Governments [sic]policy“. Police are meant to enforce laws independently of the government, not “deliver” government policies. Government policies have changed many times since the Terrorism Act was passed in 2000. This all suggests that senior police officers have become far too close to politicians and no longer know what their job is meant to be.

    • Brianfujisan

      Great Digging Clark.
      I would love to Know who gave this shady outfit The
      Go ahead to treat Craig like this…
      I’m ashamed to say I reposted this on Inverclyde for Independence..only to have My Question Deleted.

    • Ebenezer Scroggie

      It was Alex Salmond who abolished the democratic accountability of local police authorities and placed the entire police force under the personal control of the First Minister – when he was the First Minister.

      That came to bite him in the arse when his successor used her power of control to have Polizei Schottland try to recruit witnesses for the fraudulent and profoundly malicious prosecution of Salmond. They introduced themselves with the words “We’re from the Salmond Squad”.

  • Spencer Eagle

    As bad legislation goes, the Terrorism Act 2000 has to be top of the pile. I recall former MP Bob Marshall-Andrews defending a guy banged up in Belmarsh on charges of “possession of an article connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism”. His crime? Shipping a pair of hiking boots to a relative in Afghanistan.

    • Allan Howard

      The Investigatory Powers Act is up there too, and open to substantial abuse, as I know from personal experience. If you cross the PTB, they can make your life a misery and ‘transform’ your reality.

      • Bayard

        “If you cross the PTB, they can make your life a misery and ‘transform’ your reality.”

        Which is exactly what they wanted, to be able to silence annoying little f*ckers like us.

  • Goose

    Surely, common sense will prevail here? Insomuch as, you obviously have no link to terrorism; no link to the organisations in question; and no intention to join or contact said organisations. And the fact that you qualified your ‘future support’ to acts of resistance, should and only should genocide occur, must also be taken into account?

      • Goose

        There are risks for authorities too, in that a precedent ruling by a higher court could unravel parts of the legislation.

        It risks bringing the legislation into disrepute if it’s misused against people who clearly aren’t, by any definition, ‘terrorists’. Prevent and other such programmes are already controversial and seen as highly discriminatory by the Muslim community.

    • Jimmy Riddle

      Goose – I haven’t seen much evidence of common sense prevailing. On what do you base your confidence?

      Craig Murray – what they are doing is outrageous. I want to convey my very strong appreciation of all your efforts – and don’t let them grind you down.

  • Dom

    It tells us everything who they are targeting at this time. If they were really after terrorists they would have swept the front benches of both sides of the Commons and every other corner of Britain’s sicko establishment. Absolute sociopaths who are facilitating, aiding and abetting world-historic war crimes. State and corporate media too, justifying the merciless bombardment and starvation of a captive population. Cheerleading the pitiless shooting of fish in a barrel. Not even in Churchill’s or Blair’s days were such brazen terrorists abroad in the land, braying with such self-satisfied glee over their crimes.

    • Stevie Boy

      We only have to look at recent history to see that the state/security services see ‘us’ as the terrorists while real terrorists are their assets to be used and protected.
      As an example, look at the recent case of the Manchester Bombing where 22 innocent people were killed by a Libyan terrorist that had been supported, trained and transported out of Libya by the UK Security Services.
      The major risk the people of the UK have from terrorism comes from the UK State and its henchmen.

      • Spencer Eagle

        It’s far worse than that. It is highly likely that Abedi actually brought the device with him to the UK in his luggage when he boarded HMS Enterprise in Tripoli with his brother and more than 200 other British citizens in August 2014. His device was not homemade as the authorities would like us to believe.

      • Bayard

        “As an example, look at the recent case of the Manchester Bombing where 22 innocent people were killed by a Libyan terrorist that had been supported, trained and transported out of Libya by the UK Security Services.”

        To be fair, if they didn’t do this kind of thing, how would they organise the by now obligatory terror outrage before any major vote?

      • Brian Sides

        Except there is evidence that Salman Abedi did not die in the Manchester Bombing
        Eye witness say that he put down the bag and left
        There is a police recording of them following a car witness say he left to go into the arena
        There is phone video of an arrest at gun point of the occupant of car.
        Salman Abed like his father was likely an asset of the security service.
        The alleged explosive does not produce flash reported by witness

  • Harry Law

    One thing the Conservative and Labour leadership agree on is the right of Israel to defend itself, even in the face of Israel committing grave war crimes concerning collective punishment, deprivation of the means of survival of the civilian population by means of starvation etc., all well documented under the Geneva Conventions and made into UK law via the ICC Act, UK. All perpetrated against a civilian and occupied population; this is disgusting.
    However the victims of these war crimes are not allowed to defend themselves by turning to the only people who can defend them in any practical way i.e. Hezbollah and Hamas. Of course the UK government seeks to take this moral, practical and legal self-defence away from the victims and call them terrorists or supporters of same. What blatant hypocrisy! Is it any wonder Israel will shortly cease to exist when a majority of world opinion comes to the conclusion that the US and Europe are both beyond any moral justification for supporting such an obnoxious Israeli regime.

    • Peter

      Everyone everywhere has the right to defend themselves. It’s a facile comment to hide behind, and to cover up complicity in the most appalling, monstrous war crimes and crimes against humanity.

    • Tom Welsh

      For some helpful background on this “right of Israel to defend itself” – as well as the claim that it is “the only democracy in the Middle East” – this short book is highly recommended. It’s not often one can learn very important facts for the first time in one’s 70s, but I did. The book is free to read online.

      “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years” (1991)
      by Professor Israel Shahak
      Foreword by Gore Vidal

      Professor Shahak was a resident of the Warsaw Ghetto and a survivor of Bergen-Belsen. He arrived in Palestine in 1945 and lived there until his death in 2001. He was an outspoken critic of the state of Israel and a human rights activist. He was also the author of the highly acclaimed “Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel” (Pluto Press 1999) and “Open Secrets: Israeli Nuclear and Foreign Policies” (Pluto Press 1997).

    • Pyewacket

      Meanwhile Harry, the UKs absolute complicity in the historic background of the current state of affairs is never aired, nor discussed anywhere near the public’s ear. Consequential topics about; Mackinder, Churchill’s machinations, the Sykes-Picot agreement and Balfour’s letter of over a century ago aren’t ever mentioned, they’re lost in the fog of time. As is the fact that several hundred British soldiers and Policemen were murdered by Zionist terrorist gangs, the leaders of which, later assumed high political office in the new “cuckoo” state. Imho, it’s even questionable whether characters like Starmer, the Rishi the Rich, or the collective memberships of the cfi & lfi are even aware of these somewhat embarrassing historical details. Nevertheless, it appears to me a fact, that we’re up to our necks in the whole tragic state of affairs.

      • Casual Observer

        To be fair to Ernie Bevin, and the men of 45, Great Britain as it was then, simply recognised early that the situation was one that was incapable of being solved to the reasonable satisfaction of any of the two parties involved. GB then simply handed the problem over to the new UN, which had been sold at the time as being a salve that would lead to a utopian world of peace. Seventy odd years on most must be aware that the UN is pretty ineffectual, and was probably all along intended to be a game that was rigged in favour of the two new masters of the world.

        Your point regarding terrorists is spot on. Ultimately, the accusation of terrorism evaporates when the time comes for the violence to stop, with those who had been branded terrorists being invited into the negotiating chamber. Whether or not the situation in the Holy Land is capable of solution by political means must by this time be open to doubt ? More likely it will be solved by time and changes in the demographics of the area.

  • Brian Eggar

    It would appear that elements within Deep State have made you their number one target. Just why would be interesting.

    Have you thought of moving to a country where the rule of law and sanity prevails?

    Two countries that come to mind must be Russia and China. It could be in coming times that an ever growing diaspora might emerge. I suppose that this is no different than the past when people moved abroad to escape the tyrannies of their home country.

    If Julian Assange ever gets freed – which I am afraid I very much doubt as the only way he will leave Belmarsh is feet first – he will need a country to move to, so setting up base in some foreign clime would be a convenient first port of call.

    How is your Russian?

    • Pyewacket

      Brian Eggar
      October 25, 2023 at 16:11
      Re: How is your Russian ?

      I’m a fan of Akira Kurosawa’s films, in particular, one titled Dersu Uzala. I later discovered that the film is based on a true account written early in the last century by a certain Captain V.K. Arseniev, published in English under the title; Dersu the Trapper. A great read, detailing Arseniev’s mission to survey and map the Trans-Ussuria region, and their many adventures. Anyway, to cut to the quick, I showed the film to my son, when he was quite young, and then, about 5 years ago (he’s now an adult, with a family) gave him the book. One day, over a few pints we were chatting about the decline of the West and the grim future it now faces, I happened to mention that Mr Putin had recently announced that the Russian state were giving away land, for settlement, the only condition being was having the ability to be conversant in the Russian language. He’s an able and creative lad my Son, now in his early 30s and has worked on tools all his working life, so knocking up a log cabin somewhere in the Taiga would not present any unsurmountable difficulties. Maybe I’ll buy him a Russian-English phrase book for Xmas, in case he decides to take up VVP’s generous offer. Kind regards.

      • Tatyana

        WOW! Welcome! I think that you mean the development program for the Far East. By the way, they provide a large area, about 1 hectare, and you can not only live on it, but also use it for business, including tourism. You can feel like pioneers in the Wild West, only without the Indians and with a much more developed modern infrastructure. Here they explain how to

        • Pyewacket

          Thanks Tatyana, yes I think you’re correct and that was what I was on about that I’d heard. A hectare eh, that would be plenty for a decent house and smallholding.

          • Tatyana

            🙂 I turned to Math and learned that 1 hectare is 2 and a half acres. Not much for decent business, but quite enough for a family I think. Also, if having some business in mind, people may reserve several neighbouring sites for a united project.

    • John Main

      “Have you thought of moving to a country where the rule of law and sanity prevails?

      Two countries that come to mind must be Russia and China”

      Thanks, Brian, that one raised a chuckle.

      Not much to choose from between Russia and China, TBH. They both have high-rise buildings with very dodgy windows that seem to facilitate accidents to dissidents. Maybes Russia shades it, as if Craig gets banged up for writing truths (as is normal there), he has the out of volunteering for a penal battalion. If Craig can survive 6 months on the Ukraine front, he will be free once more.

      • pretzelattack

        it wasn’t Russia or China who arrested Craig, or imprisoned Craig, or for that matter persecuted Julian Assange. as far as I can see it is much more dangerous to be a journalist in the West than in either country.

      • Bayard

        What’s so special about people falling out of windows compared to, say “committing suicide” with no previous record of depression? Is it that you think falling out of windows is unnecessarily crude way for secret services to dispose of assets past their “use by” date?

        • Pigeon English

          British way is much nicer. Go for a walk in the forest to release a stress ( Dr K ) and …….
          Was it 70 years of ?????.

    • Townsman

      Two countries that come to mind must be Russia and China.

      Seriously, Russia and China are no better than Britain on rule of law.
      A case can be made that China is slightly more democratic than Britain, if that’s a concern.
      Switzerland has better rule of law than the UK, and more freedom. A superficial scan of their legal system will lead you to the opposite conclusion (for example, the police can enter your home without a warrant) but the State obeys the rules they do have – unlike here. However, it’s not easy to immigrate to Switzerland, and the cost of living is extremely high.

  • Brian Eggar

    Another thought
    For over four years, I have had a sticker on the back of my car which I got off Ebay from Australia saying “Free Julian Assange”. In that time, three people have come up saying they agree and four have asked “who is Julian Assange”
    Maybe you should team up with a friendly printer and start selling them.

    There are a wide range of topics to choose from such as “Not Our War(s)”, “Defund British Intelligence”, “Nyet means Nyet” the list is endless and constantly growing.

    I am sure places like The Duran would add them to their merchandise.

    • Goose

      Politically influenced prosecutorial malevolence is a relatively new thing in the West. The powers that be used to recognise delimitations, and that all that separated the West from the worst dictatorships, was having a truly independent judiciary and legal process. We know the press have been captured and are no longer in any sense free. Lose fair justice and what values are we left defending?

  • El Dee

    I assume the purpose is to discredit. I’ve been reading a lot on Reddit and see a lot of subs completely taken over by extremists pushing the most vile form of support for violence against Palestinians. Reasonable comments see people being banned.

    But interestingly your name was mentioned, and discredited, as being ‘anti semitic’

    I don’t believe in every single thing being a conspiracy but I do believe that detaining someone who is clearly NOT a terrorist under terror legislation is, in itself, a means of discrediting that person.

    I hope you have the strength to continue to be a thorn in the side of those who would walk by on the other side by doing what you do – telling the truth..

  • AG

    29 min. convers. Ex-Marine/State Depart, Matthew Hoh with “Judge Napolitano”:

    among others argueing that despite the propaganda the big majority of the US population wants a cease-fire, like 80% of the Dems. Which regarding elections he sees as the leverage over Biden to demand Israel to stop.
    (But stop when? after 6 more months of killing?). – But its mostly sound as usual with Hoh.

    e.g. stating that US Special Forces now in Israel were the same as in Iraq and Afghanistan, first creating ISIS and then forced to level cities like Mosul because they knew no other way to fight ISIS.

    Statement at 22:00 is interesting; I didnt know: US was threatening the Dutch to not leave Afghanistan

    • Goose

      ‘Massive’ ground operation in Gaza would be ‘an error for Israel’, says Macron

      He’s right, it’s a v. bad idea. And I’d wager many American and British military experts are telling them the same. Israel’s semi-professional military relies heavily on conscripts (32 months) and reservists Their families won’t tolerate huge losses on a mission (elimination of Hamas) that has little chance of success anyway.
      Look at Fallujah, and the difficulties the US had there pacifying it. Gaza is 25 miles (41km) by 7.5 miles (12km). Hamas have around 40,000 fighters who’ve been training for years for this encounter, plus countless numbers of suicide bombers, incl. females no doubt.

  • Tdg

    Issuing statements of support for a terrorist organisation is a criminal offence in the UK. You may wish to argue that murdering civilians with great relish and no security or military objective is not terrorism, and is justified by Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, but you are not free to do that here.

    • pretzelattack

      The Israeli government is currently a very large terrorist organization. you may wish to argue that the ongoing genocide/ethnic cleansing it is engaged in in Palestine is somehow a matter of achieving a security objective, and is justified by the concentration camp inmates fighting back the best they can, but all you are doing is supporting terrorism and genocide.

    • Bayard

      “Issuing statements of support for a terrorist organisation is a criminal offence in the UK”

      So is robbery with violence, but that doesn’t make it terrorism.

  • nevermind

    So they found a new way of stealing your information, much easier than following you round Germany’s railway journeys, maybe you should just travel with an empty laptop in future, sending a plug in with registered post to where you need it.

    here is one:
    Netac Portable SSD 250GB USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 Gbps, Type-C) External Solid State Drive PSSD 250GB Mobile SSD 250GB, Business Travel Essential, Deep Black

  • AG

    A few links with information on the nature and realities of Israeli Apartheid today:

    Member of the Knesset Hassan Jabareen in 2018 wrote an English text for the German (conservative) constitutional legal site “Verfassungsblog” about:

    “The Origins of Racism and the new Basic Law: Jewish Nation-State”

    The “Nation State Law” of 2018 sharpened and radicalized the norms on which the legal system is built. Everything ls written in reference to this ideological core which is the simple confirmation that Israel is a “Jewish” state.

    As Jabareen says already in 1985 it was heavily discussed whether a state defining itself as exclusively Jewish could in fact be considered democratic at all.

    This also in light of the fact that then 16% now 20% of the population are non-Jewish and simply cannot become Jews. They only can improve their legal status by marrying Jews.

    This in itself is absolutely scandalous in the year 2023.

    The Western media seem to be incapable of accepting that racism/apartheid are simply this racism/apartheid regardless where, be it South Africa or Japan or the US or Russia or India or Israel.

    Last year there was an online panel by 4 Israeli experts, 60 min.:

    “Legalized Discrimination: How Israel’s “Citizenship & Entry” law harms Palestinian families by design”

    Co-hosted with Adalah: the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel

    featuring Member of Knesset Aida Touma-Sliman (Hadash/Joint List), Dr. Morad El Sana (American University) and Dr. Hassan Jabareen (Adalah) in conversation with Lara Friedman

    B´Tselem has a blog piece describing the various laws and regulations that constiute apartheid in Israel (see also the other materials and many hyperlinks) :

    topics explained:
    Divide, separate, rule
    Immigration – for Jews only
    Taking over land for Jews while crowding Palestinians in enclaves
    Denial of Palestinians’ right to political participation
    Restriction of Palestinians’ freedom of movement

    Above all this of course the indescriminate bombings, killings and abductions by IDF units or fear of settlers, de facto military rule and martial law executed over the Gaza and West Bank (West Bank as being not one territory but Hundreds of separate enclaves with inhabitants harrassed when trying to cross into another enclave – something we owe The Oslo “Peace” Accords.)

    None of this is in effect known to the European public because nobody tells them.

    However: No sane person would NOT be infuriated on hearing and learning about these facts.

    Unlike with Ukraine there is no academic debate about these issues. They are day-to-day realities for decades now.

  • james

    craig… clearly you are doing something right, which is more then we can say for the intel agencies or gov’ts beholden to them… in fact, the laws they are supporting are draconian or worse, and they would probably be the last to acknowledge any of this, being the mindless foot soldiers they are for empire..

  • H.

    I just don’t understand: why are Western leaders queuing up to support an apartheid state’s “right to defend itself”?

    IMO; the only right an apartheid state has, is to abolish itself.

    • Tom Welsh

      ‘[W]hy are Western leaders queuing up to support an apartheid state’s “right to defend itself”?’

      That is a really good question, H. It has often been observed that the path to knowledge begins with the right questions – which are never asked until a sufficiently perceptive and original mind looks at the things in a new way. As Isaac Asimov remarked towards the end of his long and incredibly productive life, “The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not ‘Eureka!’, but ‘That’s funny …'”

      To begin with, I think it’s essential to distinguish between a given nation state or community and its political leaders. The normal assumption is that such leaders represent the beliefs, feelings and interests of their community – and I think that it is utterly false. On rare occasions good and honest leaders crop up, but it’s definitely the exception rather than the rule. Mr Biden certainly does not represent US citizens (nor does Mr Trump), and Mr Sunak in no way represents British people. Such leaders apparently act in their own individual interests; so one must ask “How does he (or she) stand to gain from this?” Given such a broad hint, I think most people will be able to follow the implications.

      Then there is the surprising phenomenon that is also behind “wokeness”; in a large community of people, most of them with very few strong or definite opinions, a very small number who act in a determined, coherent and well-coordinated way can often impose their views on everyone else. One sees this over and over throughout history, in every time and place. One moment Florence is wealthy, luxurious, abounding in wonderful art, sculpture, music, and scholarship; the next Savonarola appears to denounce it all as worldly and sinful, and people, from the poorest to the duke himself, are vying to pile their precious paintings and other possessions on bonfires – literally – and repenting of their evil ways. (Savonarola himself was soon condemned and hanged, his dead body ironically being burned like all the precious items he had destroyed).

      Last but definitely not least there is the immense influence exerted by Israel and its supporters abroad. While intentionally concealed, this influence is the most amazing part of the whole syndrome. It would richly repay study.

  • AG

    NYT again after reviewing videos contradict Israeli claims regarding the rocket attack on hospital

    “Visual Investigations
    A Close Look at Some Key Evidence in the Gaza Hospital Blast
    A widely cited missile video does not shed light on what happened, a Times analysis concludes.”

    Blinken apparently asked Qatar to scale down Al Jazeera reporting on Gaza:

    (That it´s always the media who contradict us are thereof “mouth pieces” goes without saying. Whereas with the WaPo “Democracy Dies in Darkness” – even for a film that would be a rotten title)

    p.s. Now WHO in Europe will report the above items?

    • GreatedApe

      That seems a careful analysis of what can be determined from the clips of rockets flying around that hospital.

      So the allegedly veering Gazan rocket was a red herring, they’ve traced it to landing two miles on? But they’re still saying it could have been one of that barrage? But by the end are they implying it was more likely a stray interceptor from the town in Israel, or just an equal possibility? Having noted that “Israel…even hit Al-Ahli Arab Hospital with an illumination artillery shell three days earlier”. Still no fragment evidence produced though… I read some expert saying there’s always fragments?

      Either way are they indicating no one deliberately targeted the hospital?

    • Fat Jon

      It would appear that a few level-headed voices at The Guardian are still allowed their opinions….

      This must surely be a step in the right direction? Especially if the poll result showing that 75% of British people want an immediate ceasefire is correct.

      If our politicians really are the democrats they would have us believe, they would side with the majority, rather than the Zionist supporting hawks who seem to be running the show of human butchery.

      • zoot

        they are not democrats in any meaningful sense. that is why they did everything they could to destroy Corbyn and extinguish the threat of pro-human policies. the bi-party neoliberals/neocons will not tolerate meaningful choice in British politics. particularly not on foreign policy and especially not the issue of Israel, the apartheid colony that bankrolls both parties. they will not tolerate divergent opinions on Israel anywhere in public life, least of all on the justice of Palestinian resistance. that is why they are targeting Craig Murray.

  • Tatyana

    Israel calls on the UN Secretary General to resign and also denies visas to UN representatives.
    How do you like it?

    And this is how it was:
    At a UN Security Council meeting in New York on Tuesday (*Oct 24), Guterres noted that violations of international law in Gaza were a matter of grave concern.
    “I am deeply concerned about the clear violations of international humanitarian law that we are witnessing in Gaza. Let me be clear: No party to an armed conflict is above international humanitarian law.”

    “The grievances of the Palestinian people cannot justify the horrific attacks by Hamas. Those horrendous attacks cannot justify the collective punishment of the Palestinian people.” (Oct 25, Guterres on Twitter)

    “The @UN Secretary-General, who shows understanding for the campaign of mass murder of children, women, and the elderly, is not fit to lead the UN.
    I call on him to resign immediately. ”
    Gilad Erdan, Permanent Representative of Israel to the UN

    Israel has already refused to issue a visa to Martin Griffiths, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs. And does not intend to issue them to other employees.

      • zoot

        the UN that birthed it was a very different beast. that was before decolonisation and the new UN was dominated by the colonial powers. there is no way only a few years later that the UN would have voted Israel into existence. for decades now the UN has ruled Israel an illegal occupier and lately an apartheid state.

        • H.

          Oh, definitely.
          But that doesn’t stop pro-Israeli advocates arguing that “Israel accepted the partition, the Arabs didn’t” (never mentioning why), and using that as justification for their actions.

          Playing “Blaming the victims”-game.

          • Tom Welsh

            Yes. If some stranger came along and demanded seven eighths of all I have, I would not agree to the “partition”.

            But he would.

      • Tom Welsh

        “If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a man and a dog”.
        — Mark Twain

    • Goose

      Surprised Zelensky has thrown his lot in with Israel, rather than staying silent and neutral.

      He’s left them vulnerable to the question: Does Ukraine’s decision to support the Israeli occupation mean it’s time for them to accept the Russian occupation?

      Zelensky looks like a hypocrite.

      • Pears Morgaine

        Israel is supplying Ukraine with electronic warfare kit amongst other stuff. I don’t suppose Zelensky wants to upset them.

        Israel’s main motive here might be to gather data on how well their jammers work against Iranian made drones.

  • james b

    i read your article on consortium news and came here to voice my support for you and that which you stand up for and that which you stand against. if i were able i would gladly send financial support but alas i am not in a position financially to do so.

    as i have seen that which transpires over the decades i have been aware of what has been going on globally i find myself being disillusioned that the world will ever be able to right itself/change direction for the actual betterment of societies in general. it would seem we are beset and run asunder by so many driven by personal gain of wealth and power to the detriment of the vast majority of peoples worldwide.

    as a citizen of the usa i am even further saddened as it would be my assessment that my country is the biggest cause of all that has transpired over these many years, pretty much my entire life. as an american citizen i have been privy to interaction with many of my fellow americans and find them woefully ignorant at best and thoroughly supportive of what our country is responsible for at worst.

    to be sure there are many here who are aware and are supportive of positive change but it would seem they will never be strong enough to really provide an effective enough counter to what transpires. i see people who stand wholeheartedly with the democrats here and just spend their time focusing on subjects such as trump and i see many who counter that with the republicans and focus on biden and his corrupt clan and colaborating miscreants. unfortunate as the truth is both are so perverse and pervasive. A Clown Show In High Def 3D.

    i would endeavor to suggest that many who are sucked into the circus of lies/the manipulation of public perception/the manufacture of global consent for atrocity have not a clue as to what they support in truth and if all is considered so many from opposing sides actually have the same aspirations and desires. that of a better life for themselves and their families/friends/communities, a future that allows them the peace and prosperity they desire in common and yet they will not see the truth until the destruction and mayhem is visited on their doorsteps. unfortunately that will be the point for most where they succumb to tragedy and will be unable to do anything about it.

    In Hopes Of A Better World.

    Peace Out/Peace Forever

  • Townsman

    Someone else has posted a link to the actual legislation (the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019):
    “(1A)  A person commits an offence if the person—
        (a)  expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, and
        (b)  in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.”
    There’s also a summary at which explains what a “proscribed organisation” is:

    The Home Secretary may proscribe an organisation if they believe it is “concerned in terrorism”.
    As of August 2021 there are 77 international terrorist groups proscribed under the Terrorism Act

    (so it depends on the opinion of one person, the Home Secretary.)
    The legislation defines several “proscription offences”:

    The 2000 Act sets out a number of proscription offences. These include belonging to or inviting support for a proscribed organisation; arranging or assisting with the arrangement of a meeting that supports a proscribed organisation; addressing such a meeting; or wearing clothing or displaying articles in public which arouse suspicion of membership or support of a proscribed organisation.

    So you’re committing a criminal offence if you wear clothing that “arouses suspicion” (in anybody) that you support one of the 77 proscribed organisations. You’d better research those 77 groups immediately, to be sure that what you’re currently wearing doesn’t “arouse suspicion of support” of one of them.

    • Bayard

      That’s a very long winded way to say, “we’ll lock you up if we don’t like you”. The authorities may not yet have absolute power, but they’ve got the “arbitrary” bit nailed.

    • Stevie Boy

      Predominantly Arab/Islamic groups with a couple of US Nazi groups, Irish groups, some Sikh groups and ETA !
      This says all you need to know about what Western regimes classify as terrorism.

  • Jm

    Looks like the MSM has been completely captured, certainly the Daily Mail comments section seems to be a massive Hasbara training op screaming for blood.

    Very worrying lack of balance and nuance, but it’s the DM so par for the course sadly.

  • Goose

    Facing facts.

    Any genuine resistance movement to Israel’s brutal occupation is going to be proscribed due to Israel’s undemocratic, unscrupulous influence in Western capitals.
    And whether it be Hamas, Jamas or Gamas, because the name really is immaterial – and fighting Hamas is merely tackling the group, not the legitimate grievance that led to Hamas. Moreover, that grievance will just as easily spawn a new outfit in the unlikely scenario of Hamas’s elimination.
    The only reason Fatah and the Palestinian National Authority in Ramallah, West Bank, aren’t proscribed, is because they basically passively police the occupation for Israel. Settlers there are doing all they can to provoke a fight; guns have been handed out by Israel’s politicians and the West Bank is more like the Wild West in terms of lawlessness. Recently arrived settlers feel free to claim and steal land, and kill without consequence. While the IDF look on and laugh. And this is what ignorant US and UK politicians are cheering on.

    Sunak calls for Israel to respect International law,. The question to all politicians should be how and when will you assess whether they are respecting their obligations under Int law? We are watching war crimes unfold in real time on TV, and disconnected Ministers are sticking to their script, as if they are living in a parallel universe where Israel’s conduct is faultless.

    • Goose

      Since they have political wing and were elected free and fairly, due mainly to the perceived widespread corruption of the PNA, proscribing Hamas looks like a slap in the face for Palestinians from the West. It was pushed through under intense Israeli and US lobbying.

      I don’t understand why Western politicians didn’t just proscribe the military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades? Or is that distinction too sophisticated for Western politicians? Every political resistance movement has an armed wing. They’ve done same with Hezbollah, who are part of the govt in Lebanon. Hezbollah’s paramilitary wing is the Jihad Council.

      It’s analogous to Sinn Féin and the IRA, which only had a silly broadcast ban with Irish actors speaking the words of its then leader, Gerry Adams.

      • Lapsed Agnostic

        The al-Qassam Brigades have been proscribed in the UK since 2001, Goose. The political wing of Hamas was only proscribed in 2021.

        • Goose

          Hamas are the elected representatives of Gazans, whether we like it or not.

          How can politicians claim to be serious about peace and delivering two-states if they’ve banned the elected representatives of the Palestinian people? I wish someone would ask these sort of questions in parliament.

          • Yuri K

            C’mon, maybe you should stop spreading this BS? Hamas was elected in 2006, but there were no elections ever since. Why? Because Hamas staged a bloody coup next year to stay in power. This was a cosplay of the events of 1932-3 in Germany, but somehow nobody pays attention.

            On the left, folks like you want to legit Hamas because they “represent the Gazans”.

            On the right, the hardliners want to justify the collective punishment they bring upon the Gazans because “they represent the Gazans”, therefore, the Gazans (children who don’t vote yet included) deserve the same brutality as Hamas.

            Both are wrong.

          • Goose

            Yuri K

            Well, who else can legitimately claim to speak for the Palestinians?

            Mahmoud Abbas? Holed up in Ramallah like cursed King Théoden in LOTR, with Western Grima (Wormtongues) popping by for a photo op. Is his ancient mandate superior? 2005 was the last Presidential election and Mahmoud Abbas gained 62.52% of the vote.

            ‘The January 2005 presidential election was won by Abbas of Fatah, while the January 2006 legislative election was won by Hamas. In 2007, a presidential decree abolished the constituency seats with all seats to be elected from a national list, and prohibited parties which did not acknowledge the PLO’s right to represent the Palestinian people (specifically Hamas) from contesting the election. An opinion poll suggested that a majority of Palestinians supported the change, while Hamas called it illegal. ‘ – Wikipedia

          • Yuri K

            Goose, I’ll give you a hint: who spoke for the Germans in 1945?

            The Great Powers created this mess that has been lasting for 75 years, they have to clean it. They have to (1) defeat Hamas and temporary occupy Gaza and West Bank, and (2) impose complete blockade of Israel until it evacuates all settlements from West Bank and Golan Heights and goes back to the 1967 borders. Then, and only then they can supervise elections in Gaza and West bank. Which will be free and independent states but with peace forces for some time. And not just observers but real heavy armed battlegroups who will shoot and kill anyone who breaks peace, both sides of the borders.

            But this is not going to happen, of course.

  • Reza

    Israeli Channel 13 journalist Zvi Yehezkeli admits the IDF purposefully and premeditatedly murdered the family of Al Jazeera Gaza bureau chief Wael Dahdouh: “Generally we know the target. For example, today there was a target: the family of an Al Jazeera reporter. In general, we know”.

    • H.


      Journalists, also Western journalists are usually very vocal when other journalists are targeted. (Remember Khashoggi?)
      Not now; -while it looks like Israel is literally hunting down anyone reporting from Gaza.

      Extremely shameful silence from Western Media.

  • Harry Law

    Craig Murrays latest tweet states that the US, EU and UK not call for a ceasefire but a “humanitarian pause”. This is how the House of Commons handled the matter.
    The Labour party – via front-bencher Florence Eshalomi – has asked Parliament to edit the official Hansard record of yesterday’s Commons discussion of the Gaza crisis to remove Eshalomi’s comment supporting a ‘humanitarian ceasefire’ in Gaza to protect civilians and allow proper aid, food and medicines to reach more than two million Gazan civilians, more than half of them children, facing constant bombardment by Israeli armed forces.
    Eshalomi told Tory PM Rishi Sunak whether he agreed that a humanitarian ceasefire is needed – but the official written record now states that she asked about a ‘humanitarian corridor‘ – but the footage of the exchange shows what she really asked:

    • GreatedApe

      Found an article by a Hansard reporter (typist) a few years ago saying they edit MP’s statements for clarity but they don’t change the meaning, yet then says “We might remove some repeated words but the MP should be able to recognise their words and their meaning. They get a chance to read their speech before it’s published so, if they think we’re representing them incorrectly, we can discuss it with them in person. Language is complicated so it’s important to talk about interpretation.”. ??

      Reminds me of a publication by the House of Commons library, which is private for MPs, which they edited after publication. By their own rules they’re supposed to flag a change in the text if it was a substantial error. They didn’t, yet it was changing their very answer to the titular question, as they’d misrepresented disability /pregnancy protections in the Equality Act in a way that favoured “landlords”.

  • Tatyana

    At the Turkish Grand National Assembly Group Meeting President Erdoğan addressed Israel:
    *I don’t know Turkic, so I run the text through Google Translate. Mostly understandable result, the source is here

    Erdoğan stated that Turkey does not have a problem with Israel and said:
    “We do not have a problem with the State of Israel, but we have never approved the atrocities that Israel has not committed and act as an organization rather than a state, and we will not. Since October 7, Israel has been carrying out one of the bloodiest, most disgusting and brutal attacks in history against innocent people in Gaza. Almost half of those killed in Israel’s attacks on Gaza are children, and the remaining half are their mothers and family elders. This picture alone is enough to show that the aim was not self-defense, but deliberate brutality aimed at committing crimes against humanity.”
    “You cannot find another state or army in the world that bombs cities day and night with warplanes, drowns hospitals, places of worship, schools, marketplaces, buildings and streets with fire, and continues this inhumane action with its tanks, cannons and weapons, just to kill children” he said.

    Addressing Israel and the world, President Erdogan said:
    “They are holding meetings, they came together again in their last meeting, the entire West sees Hamas as a terrorist organization.
    Now I’m calling out from here:
    Hey, Israel, you can be an organization, because this West owes you a lot, but Turkey does not owe you anything. And Hamas is not a terrorist organization, but a group of liberation and mujahideen who struggle to protect their lands and citizens. What is Israel doing? He’s killing children. We saw the state of those children, we saw what they did.”
    “We can never allow these children to be killed or torn to pieces, because we have our share of humanity,” he said.

    “I shook the hand of this man called Netanyahu once in my life. Where? In our own home, in the Turkish House, in America,” he said.

    Erdoğan said, “We had good intentions, but he abused our good intentions. We had a project to go to Israel, it was cancelled, we will not go. If it had continued with good intentions, our relations might have been different, but unfortunately that will not happen now, because they abused our good will. Yes, we say to those who kill children with war planes that spew death from the clouds, you also ran like this once, gentlemen, do not kill children. In a world where children hug the bodies of their parents and parents hug the bodies of their children, she does not hug the body, and writes the name of her child on her body so that I can find it when I look for it. Oh Israel, you cannot go anywhere with this mentality. Whether you take America, others, or the West with you, you cannot go anywhere. And because America does not ensure and does not want the world to be ruled with justice, it will also lose. The whole point is to establish a just world,” he said.

    Would be nice if someone could correct the translation. Anyone with the knowlege of the language here?

    • Goose

      He also said that unlike the Europeans, Turkey owes you nothing, Israel. (to loud parliamentary applause) .

      Germany being Europe’s dominant country due to its economic strength, and as a key financial backer and pillar of the EU. There has definitely been an attempt to spread its guilt, along with that of Vichy France, among all member states. Including among countries like the UK, which had nothing to do with the holocaust. Israel has been more than happy to exploit this ‘collective’ European guilt myth.

      The sensitivities to alleged antisemitism burn just as brightly in the halls of power in the UK, as if we were somehow complicit in the holocaust. And before that the widespread discrimination against Jews in the mid-late 1930s.

      It’s also probably why Ursula von der Leyen finds it nearly impossible to criticise Israel. She’s the wrong person to lead the EU at the best of times, right now though, she’s a disaster.

      • Anthony

        “The sensitivities to alleged antisemitism burn just as brightly in the halls of power in the UK”

        That’s completely false. They could not care less about antisemitism.

        What outrage did the halls of power express when Boris Johnson penned a novel full of AS stereotypes? When Alastair Campbell told journalists to get lost and worry about something important when he ran AS ads against Michael Howard? When Rachel Reeves revealed she is a big fan of notorious antisemite Nancy Astor? The British press had a field day when Ed Miliband uncomfortably ate a bacon sandwich.

        You know very well when and why the British elite all began pretending to be outraged by non-existent antisemitism. 2015-19 is not ancient history.

        These people’s support for Israel has nothing at all to do with guilt over antisemitism. Do you really still believe even now these are compassionate people!?

        • Goose

          You make a fair point.

          The establishment realised the true power of weaponising antisemitism under Corbyn. They couldn’t attack his policies, too popular, so they went after his supporters and the man himself. Before 2017’s GE, antisemitism wasn’t a problem. Indeed, prominent Jewish Labour MP, Luciana Berger, who later went on to become a key accuser, in her first resignation letter told Corbyn:

          “You have served with great principle and have shown me nothing but kindness and courtesy since appointing me” .

          Chuka Umunna, another MP at the time, who later went on to make claims that the party was institutionally anti-Semitic wrote on Facebook :

          “Some have suggested that there is institutional antisemitism across the whole Labour party – this is not a view I share, not least because I have not seen one incident of antisemitism in almost 20 years of activism”
          — Chuka Umunna 16th October 2016

          It was a dirty establishment plot to deny democratic choice, sadly, aided by parts of the Jewish community. One that many on the left cannot forgive and will not forget.

          • Anthony

            Yes, sorry if I was sharp but I do consider the Westminster elite the most disingenuous and unscrupulous of people. Perfect allies for the Tel Aviv regime that pays them.

      • AG

        The problem is that this psychosis over rational thinking and principled verdicts in Germany is completely gone overboard.

        Out of 100 outlets 1 may be 2 are capable of thinking normally outside this self-serving manipulative dishonesty.

        Just look at §130 of German law: It has been expanded to views neglecting war crimes in general. If you now publicly (but that also can include posts on fb, a case has been reported) contradict that a certain action is a war cime or war of aggression (RU/UKR) you can be held accountable for expressing that view.

        Now this was pushed through Parliament with hardly any no-votes one year ago in regard of RU. It was not expressed that way but everyone KNOWS its an anti-RU law.
        However now 1 year later whats about Israel?

        ICC and UN have both for decades in the case of latter condemned Israel´s occupation as war crime. So it should qualify under said German §130. But do you think there is a single person pointing out this incredible double standard?

        Now I am clearly against the entire idea of curtailing and criminalizing speech via such horrific tools as §130.
        But for fuck sake: If you introduce it have the guts to apply it in consistence with that very law´s formulations and put into prison all those who defend “Russia´s war of aggression” as much as those who defend “Israel´s occupation and war crimes”. Because thats what the words seem to suggest.

1 2 3 4