Who Are the Terrorists? 582


I have a confession to make.

When a journalist writes this it generally means they will proceed to reveal something they hope will actually show them in a good light or justified in some way. But I have a real confession to make, of something I did that was wrong.

Somewhere in the UK, among the papers of a dead loved one which nobody has the heart to throw out, in cardboard boxes in dusty attics or deep in the filing cabinets of Jeremy Corbyn, exist still a few copies of thousands of letters bearing my authentic signature.

These letters, on expensive paper with an impressive Foreign and Commonwealth Office crested header, state that the British Government will not deal with the African National Congress because it is a terrorist organisation.

Many of them go on to state that Nelson Mandela is a terrorist who was rightly convicted of terrorism by a South African court after a free and fair trial.

I really did write those thousands of letters, not just sign them. I did not believe a single word of it, and was only “doing my job” as a civil servant, but in a sense that makes it worse.

So I know how many government functionaries currently feel in carrying out the government’s policy of supporting and indeed actively participating in genocide.

When I joined the FCO, in my “fast stream” intake of 22 I was one of only two who was not public school and the only one who was not Oxbridge. I also had the unusual background of being a member of CND, Friends of Palestine and various other activist groups.

I could not be excluded because in the several days and stages of public examinations I had (tied with 2 others) outperformed everybody else of the 80,000 people who had entered the Civil Service administrative exams (it was 1984 with 3.5 million unemployed).

But the security services were not happy, and my “positive vetting” was delayed. This is an extremely exhaustive process (nowadays direct vetting) for those with the highest security clearance. An MOD officer, usually retired military, is assigned to investigate everything about you for months, including interviewing many who know you.

So while I joined the FCO in September 1984, for five months I was not given a job but rather put on full time French language training together with three other misfits (one of whom I think was being given extra investigation because his uncle was Roger Hollis).

In the end my positive vetting was left with a query, and I was pulled in to see the Head of Personnel Department. They said that they had decided to grant my vetting certificate, but that I was going to be placed on the South Africa (Political) desk as a direct test of whether it was possible for me to put my politics aside and function as a civil servant.

So I did. You tell yourself many things to get by, chiefly that the UK is a democracy and ministers are elected by voters to determine policy; whereas you as a civil servant are merely carrying through the wishes of the voters.

Thatcher was Prime Minister and she simply was a straightforward supporter of apartheid. This is much denied but I am an eye witness. Geoffrey Howe was Foreign Minister and it was never easy to determine what he thought about anything. Junior ministers running day to day policy were Lynda Chalker and Malcolm Rifkind, who were both viscerally anti-apartheid.

But the line that Mandela was a terrorist and the ANC a terrorist organisation was dictated by Thatcher and absolutely insisted upon.

It is difficult now to explain the intensity of feeling in the UK and the strength of the anti-apartheid campaign. Scores of letters would arrive every day, many from MPs, and – this bit is hard to believe now – in those days every letter would be answered point by point, not with a generic reply.

I was writing those replies by hand, and then giving them to the secretaries to type up. In 1985 the Department got its first word processor and I was able to draft forty template paragraphs and select from those for the replies. But out those replies went from Craig Murray, stating that Nelson Mandela was a terrorist, thousands of them.

I was very actively involved in the Whitehall battle to change the policy, but that is a different story which I have in part explained before.

But this is an extremely important thought that I want you all to ponder.

In 1985, the Terrorism Act 2000 was still 15 years away. There was no such thing as a proscribed organisation under the Terrorism Act.

Under today’s legislation, every single one of those people writing in support of the African National Congress or out campaigning for the release of Nelson Mandela would have been liable for arrest under Section 12 1 (a) of the Terrorism Act.

That is the danger of allowing the state to dictate whom you must consider a terrorist and punishing those who disagree with the state.

In 1985 the official position of the British state was that the ANC were terrorists and apartheid South Africa were the good guys.

In 2024 the official position of the British state is that Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorists and apartheid Israel are the good guys.

The state can be wrong.

It is therefore not an irony that Starmer and Cooper banned Nelson Mandela’s grandson from entering the UK as a “terrorist sympathiser” because of his support for Palestine. In this as so much else, Starmer is a follower of Thatcher.

The difference forty years later is that the state is now persecuting British citizens and locking them up for daring to say that the state can be wrong.

The ANC example explains why it is essential we do not give way to this pressure.

Let us face facts. Like most resistance units against colonialism, the ANC were indeed forced by the exigencies of asymmetric warfare into actions that were careless of, or even targeted the lives of, colonial settler civilians.

That did not put them on the wrong side of history. Apartheid South Africa was wrong just as Apartheid Israel is wrong. Occupied people have, in international law, the right of armed resistance. Within that context of lawful struggle, individuals remain accountable for individual war crimes.

The Terrorism Act, abused by the Israel lobby to make it illegal to support Israel’s opponents, is fundamentally bad legislation. It literally provides for up to 14 years in jail if you “express an opinion” in favour of a proscribed organisation.

40 years ago it would have been used against the large majority of the population who “expressed an opinion” in favour of the ANC, officially viewed as a terrorist organisation.

The sickening ratcheting up of pressure on Palestine supporters by super Zionist Keir Starmer continued yesterday with a 6am raid on highly distinguished journalist Asa Winstanley. All his electronics and journalistic materials were seized.

Panicked Zionist “elites” who run western states are lashing out in fear at their opponents. As their popular support evaporates in the face of clear evidence of appalling Israeli atrocities, they are resorting to the methods of fascism.

 

————————————————

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 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
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a


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.

582 thoughts on “Who Are the Terrorists?

1 3 4 5
  • Anthony

    Who are the terrorists?

    Today Keir Starmer has written in the Guardian about the importance of journalism and in it he notes “the more than a hundred journalists killed reporting the unimaginable suffering in Gaza.” 

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/28/keir-starmer-journalism-lifeblood-british-democracy-labour

    Who is killing all those journalists, Keir? And who is supporting them as they do so, Keir?

    Keir claims British journalists “hold the powerful to account”, but do not hold your breath for such questions from the Guardian or any other respectable outlet.

    • Tom74

      Starmer is such a hypocrite, isn’t he, but then so are the Guardian – they bleat about freedom of speech and progressive values, but censor or ban their own readers if they express views outside the Guardian’s incredibly narrow world view.

    • Stevie Boy

      But of course the likes of Assange and Murray are not journalists to Herr Starmer so it’s okay to imprison and torture them. The UK was explicitly involved in the murder of every single journalist in Gaza, as they were in the murders of the tens of thousands of women, children and men.
      Starmer is just a corrupt, lying piece of shit.

      • Anthony

        Indeed. Given the revelations about spyplanes, Britain may very well have supplied the exact coordinates to kill many of the journalists in Gaza.

    • M.J.

      The article is subtitled “we will fight any threats to those who hold the powerful to account”. Perhaps people like Asa Winstanley, Craig Murray, Richard Medhurst, Sarah Wilkinson and any others who’ve been leaned on by the authorities with varying degres of forcefulness should write a reply. If the Guardian doesn’t want to publish it, perhaps it could be published on the internet as an open letter.

      • Anthony

        Very good point about state persecution of British journalists, especially since the genocide started in Gaza.

        Good suggestion too for a rejoinder. Whether the Guardian itself would publish one I’m not so sure, for as Tom notes above it very quickly removes any dissenting submissions to its Comment Is Free readers’ feedback. Just as a simple matter of routine.

        • Goose

          It’s hard to believe what the Western ‘news media’ have become.

          The sheer visceral brutality of Israel’s Gaza operation, makes you question everything, and wonder if the human race has a future? Israel certainly appears to have no future, not, if all it desires is forever war and mass murder. And by offering support for this slaughter, the US looks like a country led by thuggish Neanderthals – in fact, Neanderthals would’ve had more empathy for their fellow human beings than the US State Dept. Imagine images of dismembered animals: cats, dogs; horses writhing in agony, dismembered; brain injuries…there’d be a political outcry in the US and UK. But, because it’s humans, and their crime is opposing Israel their agony is dismissed and met with a shrug by these politicians. The US and UK can see that after twelve months Israel are now bombing rubble, yet still offer their support.

          It’s as though humans haven’t advanced since ancient times – 2,000 years of so-called progress for nought – with technology just making the weaponry more destructive than the clubs, spears and swords of yore.

          • M.J.

            I regret that I agree with you about what human nature is capable of. The present situation in Gaza reminds me of the Balkan wars with Serbs doing what they liked to Bosnians until, after much delay and huge loss of life, NATO intervened.

          • Goose

            In terms of bombs dropped and destruction, there is no comparison.

            To say what Israel have done in Gaza is overkill, is like saying 9/11 involved some minor structural damage to some buildings. The fact the US and UK aided and supported what may prove (because journalists aren’t allowed in) to be the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Gazans, should make everyone involved in the US and UK – from officials to top brass, through to munitions manufacturers – thoroughly ashamed.
            Hard to think of a precedent in history where a near-defenceless population has been subjected to so much unnecessary brutality outside of the holocaust. Israel points to other countries’ civil wars, but typically they are fought between roughly equal foes. Israel asserts it’s a civilised country, a Western-style democracy with advanced modern weaponry – weaponry that is being used with Stone-Age barbarity.

      • Pigeon English

        MJ
        So called Bosnian war was brutal and destructive, but nothing compared to Gaza.
        It wasn’t only Serbs committing war crimes.
        All 3 ethnic groups had people in Hague!
        Btw
        There is a pretty good documentary called: “A Town Betrayed“.
        I can’t believe how honest some protagonists were.

        • M.J.

          As I understand, The population demographics of Jugoslavia however were 36% Serb, 20% Croat, 10% Muslims. The proportions of people from ethnic groups indicted for war crimes were comparable to their fraction of the population, but the number of deaths were another matter. 60% of the dead were Bosnian, 25% Serb and 8% Croat. Thus a disproportionate number of those killed were Bosnian.
          Incidentally the total number of deaths seems to have been of the order of 100,000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War), making it comparable to Gaza in terms of loss of life.

          • Pigeon English

            You are mixing Yugoslavia and Bosnia numbers.
            Bosnia was part of Yugoslavia and those demographic numbers you mentioned are for Yugoslavia. In Bosnia, the majority were Bosnian Muslims, then Bosnia Serbs, and then Bosnia Croats.
            The % of killed is probably right, but you distorted it with numbers for Yugoslavia.
            Let’s assume 100,000 dead over 4 years in a population of about 4 million, comparing with 42000 accounted! Out of 2 million over 1 year, 42,000 is identified.
            Physical destruction is not comparable.
            A few years back I was in Sarajevo, the capital, and you could see every building damaged but nearly all of them still standing with people living in them.

          • Pigeon English

            Anecdote:
            While in the taxi, the driver pointed towards the Radio and TV station building (BBC).
            There was a HQ and Serbs were shelling it relentlessly.
            Punch line: You can’t destroy commie-built building! 😀

    • Brian Red

      “More than a hundred”, eh?

      It sounds like

      1. Someone let on to Starmer that a list is being kept of scribblers who’ve concentrated their Gaza reporting on the suffering by the victims, some even failing to refer to the perpetrators’ “right to defend themselves”, or to “October 7”, and

      2. Starmer is so habitually used to swearing blind, wearing an honest face, that X is not-X, that he or his ventroloquist decided to turn this information into an expression of crocodile tears to indicate how humanitarian the vile genocidalist lackey is – rather than what it really means.

    • Brian Red

      Imagine a c*** like Starmer, a man who helped persecute Julian Assange because he was paid for it, talking about the “importance of journalism” and about “bravery”! How many “journalists” does Starmer’s government colleagues in the BBC have in Gaza right now? Maybe the Zionist butchers who’ve murdered 40,000 people, mostly children, in what’s effectively a concentration camp aren’t “powerful” and therefore don’t deserve to be “held to account”?

      • Kerch'ee Kerch'ee Coup

        My impression in Prague in 1968 was that many of the Soviet soldiers manning the tanks fighting and confronting the population were drawn from Asian areas rather than Western Russia and Ukraine.( Whether this was done to avoid fraternisation or reporting back home I do not know.)

  • Terence Callachan

    Today SKY and BBC are saying that North Korea has sent troops to Russia to help Russia fight Ukraine. They do say that the numerous satellite images they provide as evidence do not clearly show that the troops are North Korean then they say ‘but they do look Asian!’ One of their grainy images of a hill has two flags on it: a Russian flag and a North Korean flag – but to me it’s a comical image because the flags look as if they have been superimposed on a photo of a hill and the hill could be anywhere in the world; there is no way of knowing where that hill is.
    Both reports go on to say that this is an escalation of the war by Russia. Do you get the feeling this is all being done because the USA are desperate to justify a West-supporting country joining the war?

    • Goose

      Relative to its size, N.Korea has a huge army, estimated at 1.3 million personnel, but barely any have combat experience. The force numbers in Russia are too small to make a difference, so I’d guess they are most likely observers, and those sent to assist with the integration of North Korean missiles and other supplied munitions.

      Ukraine (in reality NATO) have had success in destroying Russian stockpiles in Russia, in depot attacks, forcing Russia to depend more heavily on Iran and N.Korea. These successes are a double-edged sword for the West though; as the more desperate Russia become, the higher the cost Iran and North Korea can extract in terms of technology transfers – often far more valuable than money – as Russia’s accumulated R&D in missile(incl. nuclear) technologies would cost Iran and N.Korea tens of billions and years of trial and error.

    • Jack

      I do not understand this issue at all, why do media whip up hysteria about this? So what if some north korean soldiers with alongside Russia? So? What am I missing? What is the problem? You have soldiers from alot of nations on the ukrainian side.

        • Brian Red

          I am more puzzled by South Korea reaction“.

          I would like someone to explain this too.

          It presumably can’t be because North Korean soldiers might establish an advantage over South Korea in their experience of battle, because they are obviously pretty damned battle-ready already.

          And everything else being equal, wouldn’t they prefer a potential enemy to have other commitments thousands of miles away from the Korean peninsula?

          Oh dear. My neighbour’s got four stropping great sons, who carry iron bars and always seem ready to burst through my door and duff me up. But yesterday one of them flew to Australia. It’s a bloody disgrace.

          PS – Only hypocrites would say the USA and satellites such as Germany and Britain have a right to help one of the sides in this war, but Iran and North Korea don’t.

          PPS – They’re not saying that in public about technology transfers…

      • Pigeon English

        Your example of foreign nations soldiers in Ukraine is wrong. They are not officially military personnel from foreign countries. Having said that many countries have officially present foreign military personnel on their land.

      • Tom Welsh

        During WW1 there was a similar hysteria in the UK. Reports were circulating about Russian soldiers who had been seen debarking from ships. How did people recognise them as Russians? “They had snow on their boots”.

    • Brian Red

      Whoever said “they do look Asian” should take a f*cking look at Russia on the map, if finding out about its demographics is too hard for them.

    • Brian Red

      @Terence

      Do you get the feeling this is all being done because the USA are desperate to justify a West-supporting country joining the war?

      Certainly there must be a reason why the psywar line is being put out.

      Perhaps a few months down the line James Cleverly will be smirking about an unexpected explosion or a drone attack in North Korea, saying “I’m not saying we know anything, but Ukraine has the right”…and definitely not saying anything about US or satellite special forces in the same announcement.

  • Jack

    Remember Monica Lewinsky, the girl that Bill Clinton had sexual relations with?
    Netanyahu said to have offered Lewinsky tapes for Pollard
    (Older article) https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-said-to-have-offered-lewinsky-tapes-for-pollard/

    One wonder how much dirt Israel really have on western politicians. A couple of weeks back it was reported how – most likely – Netanyahu himself or his spies had put spying devices inside of Boris Johnson’s office.
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/boris-johnson-hints-netanyahu-left-a-bug-in-his-bathroom-during-2017-tour/
    And Israel was accused of doing the same against the White House
    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/12/israel-white-house-spying-devices-1491351
    Why would Israel spy on their most close of allies? And why are west letting it go on? While we hear so much of alleged russian spying in the west I am sure that the biggest counter-intelligence in western europe is directed against israeli spies and intelligence activities on western soil.

    • Goose

      I think the whole Epstein island thing compromised far more than is common knowledge. Epstein had connections and clearly recorded his clients, presumably for leverage? As the whole scandal blew up snippets of video emerged, featuring very famous people, then the video stills just as quickly disappeared.

      Israel practices what they see as an eternal vigilance, because of their recent history; ‘never again’ isn’t just a platitude, it’s licence as they see it to seek control everywhere they can. Having people loyal to them alongside the US president is seen as essential. At a guess the TV newsroom and newspaper interference we’ve seen in the West, has become much worse over the last 30 years. Mainly because Netanyahu and his ilk are first and foremost military men; they see everything in stark terms and are far more aggressive in pursuit of control previous Israeli govts also sought, but were less aggressive in attaining.

      Like with Gaza, then Lebanon, he is removing obstacles to destroying their main regional antagonist. Iran. If Iran has any sense they’ll avoid missile exchanges and pull out of the NPT. Iran really needs a nuclear deterrent with someone like Netanyahu happy to cause tens of millions of deaths, just so Israel can feel safer.

      • Stevie Boy

        The only way Israel can ‘feel safe’ is by becoming the ME Hegemon, ie. Greater Israel. As such, they are a threat to every single ME state. It follows that the only way to control this threat and bring peace to the ME is to remove Israel, as it currently exists. There is no other solution.

    • GratedApe

      That was surprising to see that name Pollard just now, because i only just learned about him in a totally unrelated context.

      If you’ve seen Netflix’s Making A Murderer, the circuit judge who was the pivot in ultimately keeping Brendan Dassey in jail despite his near release, was David Hamilton. He was Obama’s first judicial appointment and i wondered why him.

      I saw that his uncle, Lee Hamilton, had been a senator and seems widely involved in national security issues. And Lee had petitioned Obama to release Pollard, saying he knew his family.

      I’ve no idea what’s true about Pollard’s alleged drug use and financial motives with different countries.

      • Anthony

        The British themselves stopped funding UNRWA the day it was ruled by the ICJ that Israel was plausibly committing genocide.

        That is how much the British hate that description for what Israel is doing. David Lammy, the foreign secretary, reiterated that in the Commons yesterday, saying it undermines the seriousness of the word.

        * Mr Lammy was one of the majority of British MPs who voted to describe what China is doing in Xinjiang province as genocide.

        https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/22/uk-mps-declare-china-is-committing-genocide-against-uyghurs-in-xinjiang

        • Ewan2

          IN one of CM’s earlier posts he wrote that the cutting of UNRWA funds is not a quick decision, it has to go through channels, and as such the defunding was planned in advance.

          • Anthony

            Yes, their defunding of UNRWA was pre-planned, in coordination with other nations supporting the genocide. It was intended both to distract attention from the ICJ ruling and to punish and humiliate the UN for the ruling of its highest court. (As well as starve to death everyone in Gaza).

          • Wilshire

            Of course, it had to go through channels, to be specific the English Channel.
            Otherwise, what comes around goes around.
            Needless to say, I personally think cutting funding to UNRWA is totally shameful. An ethical disaster. One more!

          • Brian Red

            Defunding by one or two rich countries is one thing. The Zionists shutting down UNRWA operations in the whole of Palestine is another. What this might be about is turning not only southern Lebanon but also the West Bank into another Gaza. Which is not to say that they care about the lives of UNRWA staff. Just that they may be about to grind the faces of Palestinians on the West Bank into the dirt, smashing up the “infrastructure” there and probably terrorising Arabs out of al-Quds at the same time. The Zionist state is literally a terrorist entity. This is no play on words.

      • Jack

        At best we will get a “concerned” or if we are lucky we might get a “very concerned”.

        Seriously, what will it take for a nation to get kicked out of the UN? Israel have now murdered 230+ of the UNRWA staff, they have dropped bombs on their buildings, arrested them, smeared them and now they label them falsely as a threat and to be banned from delivering aid, food and that is proclaimed just days after the United Nations Day.

        Way too many nations, people of power sit in silence when they could have stopped this regime brutalization. Israel is acting like a psychotic bully in a school where hundreds of classmates, teachers and principal are afraid of Israel and/or is bribed by Israel’s step-father: the United states.

  • Jack

    Israel have unfortunately summoned enough courage past year to keep threatening and actually attacking Iran freely without any real cost. Israel see that they could get away with anything they do.
    By destroying Hamas, Hezbollah there is no longer any real risk from attacking Iran, something that was out of the question for Israel to do up until now 2024. By provoking Iran Israel also expand their targets per every time. This weekend they took out missiles and missile production sites in Iran. What is next? Attacking the house of Khamenei?

    Israel could launch more strikes on Iran – media
    Hezbollah’s targeting of Benjamin Netanyahu’s home warrants a separate response, Israeli ministers have reportedly been told

    https://swentr.site/news/606649-israel-second-attack-iran/

    I never understood the total rejection by Iran regarding acquiring nuclear weapons as a deterrence.
    Now we see the clear result of such folly. Iran is really between a rock and a hard place now.

    • MR MARK CUTTS

      jack

      According to Alistair Crooke (whom I listen to carefully on these matters) the Israel ‘revenge’ did not turn out as they planned.

      He says that the delivery aircraft did not even get to the Iranian border due to being fearful of an unknown Defence System (maybe a Russian Defence System) so they released the missiles from a long way out from Iran because the risk of the planes being brought down was too great.

      That is his view – I personally don’t know.

      So, despite the victory bluffing very little was hit and if it was then it was completely random and not “precisely targeted as the IDF advertised” according to Crooke.

      As far as the banning of UNRWA is concerned, this is pretty old hat based on unproven claims.

      It’s not impossible that UNRWA may have Hamas supporters in it, but it’s just as possible that the Israelis have their supporters in Hamas and UNRWA.

      My opinion is that being as Kamala and the Democrats want solutions to this war (cynical lies, but publicly stated) that they and other ‘trusted’ members of the UN can take over the supply of food and aid then in Gaza and The West Bank. Before the Presidential Elections.

      They are members of the UN – as are many other countries – so they can claim the moral high ground and continue to speak with forked tongues and still pretend to care about the conflict.

      My view of Israel is that if it doesn’t agree with that – they should be barred from the UN for using the blocking of food and water as well as health care as weapon of war. Starmer can join in the aid supply as well with the US if he and the government wishes.

      Let’s see just how much the Handwringers care about the upcoming situation?

      • Jack

        MR MARK CUTTS

        He says that the delivery aircraft did not even get to the Iranian border due to being fearful…

        Yes that seems to be correct, Iran pointed also pointed out that Israel used the US presence in Iraq as cover for their attack.

        Iraq protests Israel ‘violation’ of airspace at UN
        https://thenewregion.com/posts/1055/iraq-protests-israel-violation-of-airspace-at-un

        I cannot understand how the shia-majority nation of Iraq still accept US boots on their soil, but then realize that in Iraq the pro-israel/US kurdish groups often have a great deal of power.

        • MR MARK CUTTS

          jack

          I think there are around three ‘governments’ in Iraq.

          The US-funded ISIS are parked up in Idlib in Syria as well.

          So for the US, the asymmetrical Terrorists may be released into Russia/China and any other parts of the so-called ‘Axis of Evil’ and their supporters too.

          You do have to say that after 9/11 that despite the hijackers being Saudis that the US managed to pin the blame on Iraq. Even that clever man Mr Blair fell for that. As if he didn’t know.

          • Jack

            Yes as “Downing street memo” proved:

            The memo, written by Downing Street foreign policy aide Matthew Rycroft, recorded the head of the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) as expressing the view following his recent visit to Washington that “[George W.] Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

      • Steve Hayes

        One of the Russian outlets reported a few weeks back that the US had reached an agreement with Iran that Israel could launch a symbolic attack on specific Iranian targets and Iran wouldn’t retaliate. Now whether you see those Russian outlets as reliable is up to you but a rule I generally follow (as also with the consequences of Brexit) is that if someone predicts something and that something then comes to pass, it’s probably for the reasons that led to the prediction. We’ll see if Iran does or doesn’t retaliate but it may take some time to know.
        I have suggested previously that Iran likely does have the Bomb and may well have had it for quite some time. Not long after I said that, an earth tremor occurred not far from Tehran that may have been due to an underground nuclear blast. This again was reported in various places but not in our mainstream media. All I can say is that the various powers are acting in a way consistent with Iran having the Bomb. We know they have missiles to put it on and that quite a few of those missiles have reached targets in Israel.

    • Brian Red

      I never understood the total rejection by Iran regarding acquiring nuclear weapons as a deterrence.

      I’ve never really understood the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency. I suspect there may always have been a lot about it that has been kept quiet.

      We know, though, that while Iran, which we are told has no nuclear weapons, has been repeatedly bombed by a foreign power, this is not true of North Korea, which does have nuclear weapons.

  • Harry Law

    David Lammy speaking in Parliament said that Genocide was too strong a word to describe the massacres in Gaza. This diatribe from Lammy beggars belief since he thinks too few people have been killed to describe it as such. Three genocides formally designated as such by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at the Hague since the Genocide Convention was passed in 1951. The Srebrenica massacre, with eight thousand victims, is one, Lammy is a lawyer by profession. He knows better, because he is a lawyer – and because as Shadow Foreign Secretary he spoke to commemorate the Srebrenica genocide: Over 5 times the official number have been killed in Gaza 42,000 (a recent Lancet report put the true figure at 185,000). Lammy and Starmer are degenerates who shame the human race.
    https://skwawkbox.org/2024/10/28/video-lammy-says-unhelpful-to-say-israel-committing-genocide-because-not-enough-people-killed/

    • Jack

      Modern day politicians from the west seems to have nothing whatosever in their head of value. They have no moral, legal, humanitarian principles and they do not even realize the double standards they use.
      When Lammy downplay the severity and claim that this is not acts of genocide, he also sending the signal to Israel to keep going, ‘hey Israel you have not reached a genocide yet, so keep on killing some more.’ Sigh

      Remember also how quickly the west were in claiming that Russia committed genocide in Ukraine:
      BBC Ukraine war: Is Russia committing genocide?
      https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61017352
      Atlantic Council New report highlights evidence of escalating Russian genocide in Ukraine
      https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/new-report-highlights-evidence-of-escalating-russian-genocide-in-ukraine/
      Times Magazine Is Russia Committing Genocide in Ukraine? Here’s What Experts Say
      https://time.com/6262903/russia-ukraine-genocide-war-crimes/
      The Guardian Russia is guilty of inciting genocide in Ukraine, expert report concludes
      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/27/russia-guilty-inciting-genocide-ukraine-expert-report

      And remember also how Keir just days into the war accused Russia of war crimes and called for a Nuremberg type of trial against Russia
      “Russian aggression in Ukraine is undoubtedly a breach of international law.”
      Speaking to Forces News, The Labour Party leader, Sir Keir Starmer said he has seen evidence of war crimes in Ukraine

      https://www.facebook.com/ForcesTV/videos/labour-leader-says-russia-has-committed-war-crimes/402361504989298/
      1 year into a bloody war in Gaza and he do even admit that Israel commit war crimes or crimes against humanity!

    • Harry Law

      I can quite honestly say that both Starmer and Lammy are both psychopaths, if they were not Politicians they would be serial killers.

      • Jack

        Definately, that is why they are drawn to similar individuals too, like Netanyahu. Something Netanyahu do really vibe with the inner soul of Starmer, Lammy.

        Speaking on gencoide. One wonder what message are being propagated in the sermons the very synagogue that Starmer is visiting.
        The family belong to London’s Liberal Jewish Synagogue
        https://www.timesofisrael.com/uk-labour-leader-starmer-opens-up-about-his-familys-jewish-traditions/

        When one google this synagogue they have showed very much interest in the fate of the Uyghurs in China. Using the term genocide to describe what is possibly going on.
        Faith leaders speak out against potential genocide of Uyghurs
        https://www.liberaljudaism.org/2020/08/faith-leaders-speak-out-against-potential-genocide-of-uyghurs/
        Protesting against Chinese persecution of Muslims
        https://www.liberaljudaism.org/2019/11/protesting-against-chinese-persecution-of-muslims/

        But surprise surprise, when one try to see what this particlar synagogue have written about acts of genocide in Gaza by Israel, about the oppression of muslims in Palestine you of course find nothing.

        Also, Starmer used the word genocide when it comes to the Uyghurs:
        https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1351557173411721218

      • Goose

        It’s elite groupthink; they really believe their own propaganda. They find it impossible to admit they are wrong about anything.

        Did you catch former MI6 chief, Alex Younger, on Newsnight last night? He discussed Georgia’s election while footage was shown of protests in Tbilisi. The only real question from Georgia, is whether the result is consistent with independent polling in the run-up to the elections? Protests, in a capital, can be deceptive and mean very little, as that’s where the pro-West, pro-EU concentrated well-financed effort is. Thus, Tbilisi is no more representative of Georgian opinion, than London was of UK opinion in the Brexit referendum. On which subject, It’s funny how the same Western media now obsessed with Georgian election integrity and govt legitimacy, ignored months of ‘yellow vest’ protests in France, and the huge pro Palestine turnouts in London featuring 500,000 strong turnouts. These same self-serving elites never once framed those protests as a fundamental challenge to the legitimacy of authority in the UK and France.

        The vast criticism on X (Twitter) people like Lammy receive, is dismissed as ‘Russian’ or Iranian’ interference operations without a shred of evidence for holding that belief. The fact that it’s from Brits (clearly) infuriated with the UK’s outrageous hypocrisy and support for Israel ,seemingly doesn’t register with these people; trapped as they are in their little ‘Westminster bubble’ groupthink. The idea their unpopularity is all due to some dastardly Russian plot is more comforting than the harsh reality, which is they are wrong and completely out of touch.

    • MR MARK CUTTS

      Harry Law

      But what Lammy is conveniently forgetting is that a Plausible genocide can be in ‘whole’ or, specifically at this time, in ‘part’

      Francesca Albanese has pointed this ‘part’ genocide out.

      Early doors, the Germans put their hands up as to what a Genocide means and how many people have to be victims of it as they knew all about genocides from WW2.

      The part has been done; the whole may follow the UNRWA banning, when people die of starvation and shortage of water by Israeli (now official) policy.

      We are still (despite when Lammy was in Opposition) in the dark as to what the Legal Advice is related to what the government of the UK is doing in assistance to Israel and the ICJ resolutions? Starmer is a great abider by International law – so what is the International Lawyers advice to the UK?

      Just using the Akrotiri Airbase (as it is UK Sovereign Territory) is actually assisting in facilitating the supply of missiles and weaponry to carry out all the illegal attacks on Gaza and now The Lebanon. Is that too difficult for the Lawyer Starmer and his fellow Lawyer Lammy to understand? Or do they think that Israel can’t lose, due to their Special Friend the USA?

      A warning: The US will ditch both of them if its interests are not protected.

      They have past form for lying and dropping once-favourable countries like hot bricks when necessary.

  • AG

    I am posting this here because it is like an inverted mirror of the above post´s headline:

    “Should the U.S. Still Police the World? with Matt Taibbi, Bret Stephens, Lee Fang & James Kirchick”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHJPg_6kWXg

    Call me naive but I did hope for a little more. But it turned out one of the worst letdowns in recent months as debates are concerned.
    I only know Fang and Taibbi. And I did learn from them about US domestic politics.
    I however also know their expertise on foreign policy is – lets put it politely – “rather limited”.

    To be fair: I have stopped at 40` for now.
    After I have more energy I will face the rest.

    But just considering that Matt Kennard, Craig Murray, Rashid Khalidi or Chris Hedges on that same stage would rip these speakes apart.

    I mean what is the level of knowledge if a Matt Taibbi is your foreign policy expert?

    He was in Russia 30 years ago and embedded in Iraq. And whenever we speak about the genocide in Gaza he shies away.

    So for me there is a clear line from our terrorism to debates like these which are so infuriatingly inept that I could despair. They enable and lay the groundwork for what is unfolding. The grease for the cogs of power among a sea of blood.

    Peope like John Mearsheimer, Stephen Bryen, Lawrence Wilkerson or Doug Bandow are a million times better informed and educated. How is this possible that we still have to rely on the 60+ year old (conservative!) warriors of the past?

    • Goose

      Compare Kamala Harris’s foreign policy knowledge with that of say Richard Nixon’s, and you’ll see how far the US has fallen in terms of the quality of candidates.

      They’ve got an unenviable choice between Trump and Harris, and they probably deserve those two, tbh. Either will likely prove disastrous, albeit for different reasons. Paradoxically, a Harris win may prove more destabilising for the US than another Trump term; as she’s a very weak candidate who has been carried by a mixture of celebrities, the Obamas, and partisan media hype. Never tested in Primaries as is the norm, nowhere has she shown any ability to lead, or inspire. Her presidency could be a complete train wreck, with negative polling levels never seen before.

      • AG

        Absolutely!
        And good point on Nixon vs. Harris

        p.s.: on that debate – rest assured their praise of free speech 🤣🤣🤣 would abruptly end if I were to lay out the argument of the ICJ, defend Hamas and Hezbollah and suggest a Bret Stephens is supporting genocide. I would be out “a” that room in a fraction of a second.
        That´s why all these so affirmatively “both-sides of the argument” debates are thinly veiled imperial lies – panels for useful idiots.

        • Wilshire

          Agreed. Nixon would have easily, easily defeated Harris. But too late, he’s no longer in the loop.
          On the other hand, I wonder if JF Kennedy would have been better on a Fox News debate than Donald Trump. Arguably not.
          But as you say, there are plenty of useful idiots, on both sides…

      • Jack

        Goose
        nowhere has she shown any ability to lead, or inspire. Her presidency could be a complete train wreck, with negative polling levels never seen before.

        True, but she is therefore also a person that is easily moved behind the scenes. Since she does not really know anything she is easily susceptible to propaganda. Already she seems to take the cues from neocons, a very similar trajectory the equally clueless George W Bush took with disastrous result.

        • AG

          “similar trajectory the equally clueless George W Bush took”

          Interesting point! And more obvious than it appears at first sight.

        • Goose

          People really despise hawkish women.

          Clinton’s interview outtake in which she cackled saying “We came, we saw, he died” about Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi’s horrifically brutal death, revealed a very ugly side to her personality. If she wants to know why she lost in 2016, she should watch that clip again.

          I know it comes down to gender stereotyping, but women, and by extension female leaders, are expected to be the more compassionate sex. Male leaders, fueled by testosterone, are often forgiven for their aggressive impulses. Were Harris to win and choose a hawkish foreign policy approach, she’d be viciously unpopular, even among Democrats.

      • Brian Red

        Democrat stategists probably wished they’d shut Biden out earlier.

        Harris came in because realistically she was the only option once it was clear that Trump would monster Biden if Biden remained the Democratic candidate. Clearly not an ideal way for a candidate to be chosen, but that’s in the past now.

        The notion that Harris is the opposite of strong is a Trumpian talking point. But Biden wasn’t particularly “strong” in 2020 either. I fully agree with Michelle Obama that now is not the time to carp about Harris not having performed great in this or that interview or whatever.

        I would rather a train wreck than a concerted effort to deport 10, 20, or 30 million people, which is between ~25 and ~75 times the number deported each year now.

        • Goose

          I want the candidate to win who’ll be best for the furtherance of world peace. I genuinely believe in a multi-polar world (multiple power centers), all based on mutual respect, and I don’t want global US domination to continue. That isn’t the same as being anti-US, I just don’t think a nation that makes up some <4% of the world's population should get to make the rules for the other 96%. The US has never looked more unsuited for its hegemonic world leadership status by refusing to act with impartiality and fairness, as we've seen over the free rein and protection they've granted Israel.

          I've almost given up trying to predict who is best suited to ensure these things tho, because, when you think you're going to get one thing, fate has a habit of kicking you in the backside. Who is most likely to deliver a more peaceful world?
          I prefer Trump's policy on Ukraine, and I think Harris will be better for Palestine and is more likely to restrain Netanyahu over Iran. So it's finely balanced.

          On Ukraine. It may be a hard pill to swallow for some, but better an imperfect peace with territorial concessions, plus new obligations on Russia, including reparations, than another 5-10 years of a meat grinding attritional stalemate in Ukraine costing billions, with WW3 an ever present threat for us lot in Europe. All these idiots who say that just gives Putin a victory, need to provide an better alternative that doesn't involve risking European capitals being incinerated. How many Europeans truly want to put their and their families lives on the line for the hybrid regime in Kyiv? I’d wager not many.

        • Stevie Boy

          IMO. The state the world is in now is directly caused by the Democrat party, and particularly the Clinton’s and Obama’s. Harris is the continuation candidate, and unfortunately, the puppet masters are still there pulling her strings. If you think we’re in a good place and want to continue on this track then Harris is the candidate for you. Trump will disrupt this cozy, corrupt club. And, the overhyped, MSM generated chaos is to be welcomed – if you really want change. Deportations and walls are all PR BS.

  • AG

    “‘The Memorial’: South Africa Submits Evidence of Israel Genocide to ICJ”
    https://scheerpost.com/2024/10/29/the-memorial-south-africa-submits-evidence-of-israel-genocide-to-icj/

    Took place this morning.
    “In accordance with the Rules of Court, the Memorial may not be made public.”

    Why secret? For how long? secret to whom???

    “(…)The evidence is detailed in over 750 pages of text supported by exhibits and annexes of over 4,000 pages(…)”

    From the statement:

    “(…)The Memorial – the name for the document recording the main case of South Africa against Israel – contains evidence which shows how the government of Israel has violated the genocide convention(…)The evidence will show that undergirding Israel’s genocidal acts is the special intent to commit genocide, a failure by Israel to prevent incitement to genocide, to prevent genocide itself and its failure to punish those inciting and committing acts of genocide. (…)”

  • Goose

    The dog that doesn’t bark

    Looks like Lammy has been sipping on the Russiagate kool-Aid.

    https://x.com/DavidLammy/status/1851317316299977204

    What I’d like to know, is away from the scaremongering and hyperbole, just where is all this Russian disinformation? It’s pathetic to claim we’re being deluged with Russian disinformation, if you can’t provide numerous high-profile amplified story examples, as slam-dunk proof. They seem to think, that simply saying ‘trust us’ is enough: extraordinary allegations surely demand extraordinary evidence, or proof, especially when civil liberties are at stake. As Glenn Greenwald has stated,, this whole business of fighting misinformation/disinformation is an academic funding scam itself. So scant is the actual evidence, they’re having to adjust their parameters and class anyone who disagrees with foreign policy as a potential Russian asset. Make the net that wide, and you may as well accuse and investigate two-thirds of the entire UK population. When this hysteria ends, we’ll need a full investigation into the powers granted and intrusive extent of pursuing these false allegations against our own citizenry.

    There was a story in the US recently, about certain social media influencers being paid by a company connected to the Russian state. But iirc, none of the influencers knew of the Russian-linked origins of the funding they received. And, very importantly, they retained full editorial control over their streaming output to the extent that they themselves won’t face any charges.

    Authorities seem to be using this baseless ‘reds under beds’ type scare tactic as a novel way to harass UK journalists, policy critics and activists, in a way no society would tolerate without the ludicrous ‘possible Russian links’ flag attached. This is worse than McCarthyism, because McCarthyism, for all its idiocy, was at least narrowly focused.

    • U Watt

      It says everything about media in the UK that Lammy has complete confidence to condemn Russian (and not Israeli) disinformation. He is rightly certain that there is not a single journalist in Britain’s mass media ecosystem (conservative or liberal) who will reference his claim on Sky News that Palestinians raped babies. Every British journalist knows Lammy made that claim to try and justify the genocide of Palestinian children and that even Israelis themselves did not repeat Lammy’s claim.

      It would be impossible to get a clearer picture of British journalists’ willingness to hold the powerful to account on disinformation.

      • Goose

        I think Lammy and the FCDO are referring to stuff aimed at influencing Estonians, Latvians and of course Ukrainians. They seem to be the countries where there is some, albeit limited, evidence of amplified false stories.

        But isn’t that kinda expected, given they have Russian speakers and share a border? Quite why the FCDO thinks we have a ‘world police’ role to fight that stuff, I don’t know? I’d wager the average Brit couldn’t give a fig about how Russia tries to influence opinion in its Baltic neighbours and Ukraine.

        • Goose

          Tbh, I don’t even believe Western claims about Russian hacking e.g. SolarWinds.

          In the world of cyber security, penetration testing (pen testing) is standard practice. Surely the FVEY’s are authorised to proactively attack each other(?) to discover national vulnerabilities that actual adversary states could potentially exploit? It makes total sense they’d do that.
          However, because most of this stuff is so technical – way beyond politicians’ understanding, and because nation state level identity obfuscation makes attribution so very difficult. How can we, as members of the public, be certain that these exercises aren’t being misattributed to further damage adversaries, and help arguments for increased budgets?

          • Goose

            On the subject of journalists and privacy…

            I recently switched internet service provider. Some interesting things, with potential privacy implications I noticed: most ISPs have moved landline customers to Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) and use Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation(CGNAT). Carrier group NAT means you’re given (via DHCP) a private address in place what should be your own unique external WAN address, typically either static (permanent) or dynamic (temporary).
            Private network addresses are non-routable LAN addresses like those you use in the home, e.g. Class A 10.0.0.0 -10.255.255.255, Class B 172.16.0.0 – 172.31.255.255, Class C 192.168.0.0 to 192.168.255.255.
            CGNAT disrupts the end-to-end communication principle, which could potentially lead to security and reliability concerns. VoIP means they can probably bypass rules around call monitoring (warrants) and being on a private network, and means they could be doing anything with your data as it transits their network e.g. redirecting, DPS, downgrade encryption. It’s interesting how the govt claims they only collect metadata, yet became furious about the implementation of end-to-end by Zuck’s Meta. Data is meant to be already safe with https, so what is really going on?

            The official (seemingly reasonable) justification given by ISPs for CGNAT is to conserve IP addresses, as many customers can use the same WAN address (The IPv4 or IP (32bit) 4.3bn total address stack is running low due to demand from the increasing number of IoT devices). But it begs the question as to why the rollout of potentially more secure IPv6 is so slow in the UK? By contrast, China will have 100% IPv6 deployment by 2025. So in theory, domestically, the Chinese may well have more peer-to-peer privacy than Brits.

          • Goose

            Many wonder where the radical politicians and radical movements of the 1970s 80s have gone? Ultimately, those radicals – initially opposed by the establishment – are the engine of change in any society (e.g. Suffragettes), not the folks defending the status quo.

            You think about privacy in the 1970s, and how easy it was for individuals (incl. investigative journalists) and radical groups to maintain their privacy, in large part due to technical limitations on authority. To record a phone conversation they needed a warrant and it involved literally ‘tapping’ the exchange with a hook-switch. Medical records were locked away in filing cabinets; they’d need to break in and jemmy it open. Now they’re digitalised and likely easily accessible to all and sundry, despite assurances to the contrary. Mobile phones are obligatory just to function in modern society: they are basically voluntary tracking devices; albeit ones with recording capabilities and deliberately insecure protocols. Internet privacy is non-existent as highlighted above. Even mail, which was once protected from opening in transit, is now digital, therefore vulnerable.

            Citizens have had all their privacy rights removed, and barely noticed, like the proverbial slowly boiling frog.

          • Goose

            And yeah, I know the Suffragettes long predate the 1970s. That movement bests highlights hows fringe ‘radical’ thinking can be opposed, often brutally, before becoming the mainstream accepted norm.

            The suffragettes were viewed as terrorists by the then govt.

  • Stevie Boy

    Who are the terrorists ?
    Interesting little story hidden away in the daily Sceptic.
    Apparently, the government has stopped any debate in Parliament about Axel Rudakubana, the teenager accused of the Southport massacre – he attacked eleven elementary school age girls attending a dance class (and two adults), killing three of them and severly wounding the others – , charged with possesion of an Al-Qaeda training manual and producing the poison ricin. The question is was he known to the security services ? But we’re not allowed to ask or to know.
    https://dailysceptic.org/2024/11/01/reform-banned-from-discussing-southport-attacker-in-parliament-nigel-farage-reveals/
    This case also ties in with the Tommy Robinson imprisonment at Belmarsh, sentenced to 18 months for contempt of court, held in solitary confinement, ‘for his safety’. Again, the crime was pointing out publicly that the profile of an offender put out by the establishment was not accurate.
    Step back and ask yourselves what’s going on ?

    • glenn_nl

      What’s going on?

      Yaxley-Lennon is a racist scumbag, whipping up anti-Muslim mob violence with lies and hate speech, in service of his Israeli paymasters.

      That’s what’s going on.

    • Stevie Boy

      Here’s another one to tickle those inherent prejudices:
      Russell Brand now being chased for historical sexual allegations. Funnily enough these always seem to follow people who make positive statements about the Palestinian issue.
      How long before the esteemed Mr Murray is accused of something similar ?

1 3 4 5