The Starmer regime’s attitude to the law, both domestic and international, has been diseased by the doctrine of unquestioning support of Israel.
This morning the Handala became the second vessel flying the Red Ensign to be illegally seized by Israel, without a single word from the UK, which has a duty to protect its vessel in international waters. Indeed British law applies upon the vessel and the Metropolitan Police should be investigating domestic law kidnap of the passengers.
That is in addition to the international crime of seizing the vessel.
Uniquely the UK has declared itself unable to judge whether war crimes have been committed by Israel, absent a decision by an international court. That position has never been taken before, is notably not taken over Ukraine, and is at odds with Starmer’s self-declared ability to judge that there is no Genocide in Gaza.
It also ignores the fact that the International Criminal Court cannot judge, while Netanyahu ignores their arrest warrants. The International Court of Justice case on Genocide is in very slow process, but Starmer has no difficulty in pre-empting the court by denying Genocide.
Volker Turk, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, has very roundly condemned the UK’s proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation, and called on the UK government to lift the proscription.
He also has called the UK to amend its Terrorism laws to bring its over-broad definition of terrorism in line with international law standards. Turk stated:
I urge the UK Government to rescind its decision to proscribe Palestine Action and to halt investigations and further proceedings against protesters who have been arrested on the basis of this proscription. I also call on the UK Government to review and revise its counter-terrorism legislation, including its definition of terrorist acts, to bring it fully in line with international human rights norms and standards
This is a remarkable development because nobody could ever accuse Volker Turk of being anti-Western. In fact his passivity, as freedoms are extinguished across the western world in order to stifle protest against the Genocide, has been a source of frustration to the human rights community.
It is a sign of just how absurd is the proscription of Palestine Action, that even Volker Turk has now decisively spoken out against it.
Let me give you a plain example of just how absurd the law now is.
The three young women from the Shut Down Leonardo group, who drove a van into the security fence of the Edinburgh weapons factory which makes parts for the Israeli military machine, were brought to court on Monday.
They were charged with Malicious Mischief – a Scottish common law offence of serious vandalism – aggravated by terrorism.
This reduces terrorism from the gravest of crimes, to merely an aggravating factor. The driver of the van has even been charged with dangerous driving aggravated by terrorism, which when you think about it is a hilarious concept.
To further underline that nobody really believes this is terrorism, all three have been released on bail. Can you imagine accused who had carried out a genuine terrorist attack being released on bail?
I don’t want to downplay too far the dangers. Malicious mischief is a dangerous charge – being common law, there is no limit to the possible jail sentence it might carry, and furthermore lengthy jail sentences for it can be imposed by a judge without a jury.
I am unsure that this offence should meet the bar of malicious mischief anyway. The Crown Office charging guidelines state that damage must be in the thousands of pounds and damage must affect others. They read:
Malicious Mischief should only be recorded where widespread damage is caused, where the value of the damage is considerable, or where there is disruption of power supply, flooding or similar. There is no specific monetary amount where Vandalism stops and Malicious Mischief takes over but any value of damage would require to be significant (several £000s) before a crime of Malicious Mischief is recorded.
The example given is deliberately damaging power lines and cutting the power to people’s homes. I am not sure a slight dent in a fence meets the bar.
But I also want to look at the women’s treatment as an example of the pernicious treatment of protestors since the proscription of Palestine Action.
The three are not accused of membership or support of Palestine Action. Yet they were arrested under the Terrorism Act and treated as terrorists. They were taken to the specialist terrorist detention and immigration centre in Govan and held there without charge for six days.
Today, @CraigMurrayOrg informed a protest outside Govan police station that three women had been assured this morning that they would be charged only with non-terrorism offences. Yet, by 3pm, terrorism charges had been made. What, he asks, is going on?https://t.co/ClyoJdtUE9 pic.twitter.com/1DpGtCdskH
— GGEC (@ggectee) July 20, 2025
That means that some authoritarian judge must have twice secretly signed off on the continuation of their detention. Why?
They were held strictly incommunicado. I helped organise the best legal support for them, and for six days their parents, supporters and I tried to get a message to them to ask for this legal team, but we were not permitted to reach them.
The women’s parents phoned and asked the police to pass on to them a message about the lawyers organised for them. The police refused. The brother of one of the women went to Govan police station, and was also refused permission.
The lawyers we had organised phoned the police, and said they had been instructed by the families, but again the police refused to pass on any message.
The women had to make do with the bog-standard duty solicitor service. Now the police do not normally have the power to hold people without charge for six days and to keep people completely incommunicado during that time.
The Terrorism Act gives the police those powers. But it does not mean they are obliged to use them. It is extraordinary that they refused all requests to tell the women about legal support, and was plainly gratuitous victimisation, designed to prevent the women from mounting the best possible legal defence.
Yet it appears that – from a conversation with one of them – within detention the women were kindly treated, and they had the impression the police also did not think they should be there. Questioning was neither harsh nor particularly probing, and apparently by identifiable Scottish police officers.
That is consistent with the decision to grant bail – they are caught up in a system of terrorist legislation, but none of those operating the system really believes in the narrative.
On 19 July I was present at St Giles Cathedral as eleven people from Defend Our Juries held placards identical to those which have led to mass arrests across the UK, stating “I Oppose Genocide – I Support Palestine Action.” They were there for half an hour in plain view of police, but nobody was arrested.
After the demonstration, a group of demonstrators in front of the Scottish First Minister’s office held various signs and wore various T shirts identical to those which have caused arrest elsewhere, but again nobody was arrested.
In the week since, three people have been arrested and charged with terrorism offences, in relation to the above. One, Mick Napier (in the centre with the microphone in the second photo) was arrested as he left the protest on Monday 21 July outside Edinburgh Sheriff Court, for the bail hearing of the Leonardo 3.
Mick actually came up to me and said he thought he was about to be lifted, as policemen were following him around. Five minutes later he was. Since then, plain clothes policemen have been to his home three times in a campaign of intimidation.
While the Leonardo 3 are out on bail, they too are suffering from various methods of state intimidation, including the freezing of bank accounts and loss of access to money.
One distinct possibility is that the state is suspending the full implementation of legal action over the proscription, until the hearing for a judicial review of proscription is concluded, as the key argument in the judicial review is the disproportionate consequences for free speech of the ban.
Judge Chamberlain had said in his refusal to stay the proscription that the fears for suppression of free speech were being exaggerated.
I reported on these attempts to suspend the proscription of Palestine Action pending the application for a judicial review. I could now not be simultaneously at the Edinburgh Sheriff court for the Leonardo 3 case and at the High Court in London for the proscription case, but fortunately Mohamed Elmaazi was on hand to cover the High Court.
Here is Mohamed’s report, slightly modified for context:
BEGINS
“I think what you’re doing is, you’re saying, you predicted this,” Mr Justice Chamberlain told Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh KC – representing Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori the morning of 21 July at the High Court of Justice – “and what you’re doing now is sharing evidence that they have happened.”
The judge’s remarks were in response to Ghrálaigh describing example after disturbing example of pro-Palestine and anti-genocide protesters being threatened with arrest — or actually arrested – across the country, ever since Palestine Action was banned as a terrorist organisation.
Ammori’s lawyers, Raza Husain KC and Ghrálaigh, made the oral arguments advancing the Claimant’s request to appeal the ban.
Before one can appeal a governmental decision – such as the Home Secretary’s order banning Palestine Action – they require permission to appeal.
Only two and a half weeks prior, on 4 July, Ammori’s lawyers unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the same judge to temporarily delay the ban from coming into effect until they had a chance to fully make their appeal – should he grant them one.
They argued that, given the both predictable and boundless implications for freedom of speech and association, the court should stay the Home Secretary’s ban to avoid irreparable harm from occurring.
They warned of dire consequences; not only for Palestine Action and its members but wider members of the public as well.
Husain and Ghrálaigh had explained at the 4 July hearing that labelling Palestine Action a terrorist organisation would result in a “grossly disproportionate interference with the rights to freedom of expression and assembly” not only of its members but also for potentially hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people across the UK.
But Chamberlain largely dismissed the more serious of the concerns as “hyperbole”.
“In my judgment, some of the consequences feared by the claimant and others who have given evidence are overstated,” Justice Chamberlain wrote in his 4 July judgment rejecting Ammori’s request to temporarily prevent the ban from taking effect.
“It will remain lawful for the claimant and other persons who were members of [Palestine Action] prior to proscription to continue to express their opposition to Israel’s actions in Gaza and elsewhere, including by drawing attention to what they regard as Israel’s genocide and other serious violations of international law,” the High Court judge wrote.
“They will remain legally entitled to do so in private conversations, in print, on social media and at protests” he insisted before adding that therefore it “follows that it is hyperbole to talk of the claimant or others being “gagged” in this respect (as the claimant has alleged). They could not incur criminal liability based on their past association with a group which was not proscribed at the time.”
Two weeks later, Chamberlain’s tone was somewhat modified. He appeared to accept that he may have been wrong. In fact, he actually reminded the parties of what he wrote by reading out part of his decision refusing permission.
Ghrálaigh told the court that the situation is “even worse” than even they had predicted.
One of the key arguments made by the Claimant is that it could not have been Parliament’s intention to grant the Home Secretary the power to ban a direct action protest network such as Palestine Action. This is partially why they emphasised, as strongly as they did, the actions of the police across the country since the ban took effect.
Members of the public “with flags, badges, t-shirts, and posters that support Palestine, oppose genocide and/or satirise the Government’s position on the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza” have been subjected to “heavy” policing and “other enforcement”, the Irish-born barrister explained.
“None of those had any relationship with Palestine Action” she emphasised. The examples Ghrálaigh outlined included:
1. Police stopping and asking protesters outside BAE systems factory to remove shirts reading “Free Palestine” because they may “breach the proscription order,” on 5 July.
2. An individual stopped whilst travelling through Dover by counter-terrorism police at the border for wearing a hat with “Palestine Solidarity badges” to ensure that they “weren’t a part of Palestine Action,” on 7 July.
3. A 55-year-old man arrested in Glasgow for wearing a t-shirt with the words “Genocide in Palestine, Time to Take Action” printed on it, on 12 July.
4. A 68-year-old man, also arrested in Glasgow, for holding a sign with the same text, reportedly charged and bailed under section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000, on 18 July.
One of the examples that Ghrálaigh spent some time on was the case of Laura Murton – engaged in a solo protest on 14 July in Canterbury – who was stopped and threatened with arrest by two armed police. Murton was holding a Palestinian flag and had cardboard signs that said “Free Gaza” and “Israel is committing genocide”.
The incident was recorded and a transcript was provided to the court. But Ghrálaigh thought it worthwhile to read out part of the exchange.
Officer: “What’s your intention here today?”
Murton: “My intention is to wave this flag and keep Palestine in the public consciousness right now.”
Officer: “So, do you support any prescribed group?”
Murton: “I do not I do not support any prescribed group. I support a free Palestine and the end of genocide.”
Officer: “Can I get your details?”
Murton: “Am I required to give them to you?”
Officer: “Well, you may be committing offence at the moment. So, I just need to make sure that you’re legit.”
Murton: “What offence?”
Officer: “Well, as you’re aware, it’s now become an offence to obviously support a proscribed group like Palestine Action”
Murton: “Yeah, but I don’t I am not I don’t have anything on which says that.”
Officer 2: “I appreciate that. But the way you behaving at the moment would lead me to believe that you maybe. Giving me suspicion or grounds to believe you could be.
Murton: “What suspicion? That I’ve got a sign that says free Gaza. Holding a Palestinian flag and I have a sign that says Israel is committing genocide?”
“She has never been part of Palestine Action,” Ghrálaigh told the court.
Chamberlain noted that the police were overstepping because they simply don’t understand the law.
“My Lord may say that the officer doesn’t understand the law” Ghrálaigh said. “Canterbury Constabulary has not issued an apology. The Secretary of State [for the Home Department] hasn’t said that this is a misapplication of the law.”
Chamberlain responded saying that “there will be cases where the police get things wrong”.
“There is no indication that they are getting this wrong because no one has said they are getting this wrong,” Ghrálaigh insisted, noting that the armed officers later told Murton “we could have jumped out, erased you, dragged you off in a van”.
The ban creates a “Conundrum of doubt” as to application of terrorism laws.
“I think what you say is that if you proscribe a group like this, then it creates a sort of conundrum of doubt, and that affects all law enforcement agencies who themselves have got to take decisions, some of which may be right some of which may be wrong, but it casts a shadow over a number of things which may be…fall under the scope of the offence?” Chamberlain asked Husain. “You would say that that effect is one of the things that would need to be taken into account when deciding whether the proscription is proportionate?” he added.
“Indeed” Husain responded.
Although the Claimant’s grounds of appeal are too extensive to outline in a single article, it is worth briefly visiting some of them. This is especially the case as they help explain the relevance of how anti-genocide protesters are being targeted and arrested since the ban came into effect.
The Claimant’s request for judicial review of the Home Secretary’s decision to ban Palestine Action was based on eight grounds.
They include that:
1) The decision was made for an “improper purpose, insofar as she exercised the discretion conferred by Parliament for the purpose of banning a civil society dissent group”.
2) Banning Palestine Action represents “an unlawful interference” with the Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion), 10 (freedom of expression), 11 (freedom of assembly and association) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination) rights in the European Convention of Human Rights “of the Claimant, of Supporters of Palestine Action, and of members of the general public who advocate for Palestinian rights”.
3) The Home Secretary “erred in law in concluding that: (i) Palestine Action committed acts designed to influence the UK Government; and further or alternatively (ii) Palestine Action was concerned in terrorism, in circumstances where those acts that may (quod non) satisfy the section 1(1) TA 2000 definition are isolated and peripheral to the organisation’s methods and aims”.
4) The Home Secretary acted “irrationally in taking into account considerations irrelevant to the decision before her (whether to proscribe Palestine Action); and in failing to take into account matters that were plainly relevant to that decision”.
Irrelevant considerations include her assessment as to whether Palestine Action’s protest is “legitimate” in her subjective view and whether their protests “caused loss of revenue”. “Lost revenue is irrelevant” to assessing whether a group should be banned, they argue.
Relevant considerations the Home Secretary failed to take into account include the fact that Palestine Action “seeks to prevent conduct which it and large sections of the public reasonably consider to be genocide and breaches of international law”.
The Home Secretary also failed to consider the impact the ban would have on free speech “in favour of direct action against arms companies supplying Israel” and on “low-level direct action and civil disobedience against arms companies by persons not associated with (or no longer associated with) Palestine Action.”.
She also failed to consider the availability of other civil and criminal options apart from a banning order.
5) The Home Secretary breached her own policy “which requires that a decision to proscribe be ‘proportionate’”. No adequate proportionality assessment was undertaken.
6) The Home Secretary “violated the principle of natural justice by failing to give Palestine Action the opportunity to respond to adverse findings prior to her making the decision” to ban them.
One key document government document referred to repeatedly by the Claimant is the “open” version of the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) assessment. The JTAC document, which was obtained by the authors of this article, was repeatedly referenced by Ammori’s lawyers.
Ghrálaigh noted that the JTAC assessment, as part of its determination that Palestine Action has been involved in terrorism, focused on the August 6 2024 action targeting a key drone and surveillance facility for Israel’s largest weapons firm Elbit Systems, in Filton, Bristol.
The JTAC assessment notes that none of the activists, known as the Filton 18, have been charged with terrorism offences for the August action. Yet, in a truly Orwellian development, the Crown Prosecution Services have concluded that they should nonetheless be “considered by the court as having a terrorist connection.”
JTAC then considers that Palestine Action have “promoted terrorism” simply for “sharing footage” of the Elbit action in Filton, an action for which nobody has been charged with terrorism.
“JTAC has asserted that that was a terrorist incident and therefore that supporting it has become terroristic, it’s entirely circular,” Ghrálaigh exclaimed, in a clearly exasperated voice.
“They’re just looking at the statutory definition which includes ‘serious damage to property’” Chamberlain responded.
“Indeed” Ghrálaigh noted before raising an equally disturbing point.
Underneath the subhead “promotion of the 6 August attack” JTAC refers to Amnesty International and UN reports “about the Flinton 18 and their treatment and JTAC referring to references of those statements of concern, by Palestine Action, as evidence of them fitting the definition of terrorism”.
“We’re completely through the looking glass if sharing statements from Amnesty International and the United Nations can be construed as promoting terrorism” Ghrálaigh exclaimed.
“Well once again, JTAC is just looking at the statutory definition [of terrorism]” Chamberlain insisted.
“Well, my lord, the statutory definition cannot include sharing expressions of concern from Amnesty International and the United Nations… That cannot be any basis for determining whether an individual or organisation is concerned with terrorism!”
Significantly, even the JTAC assessment repeatedly states that Palestine Action “primarily uses direct action tactics, the majority of which would not constitute an act of terrorism” as defined under the Terrorism Act.
The JTAC document notes that it is “not the original document” but rather a “gisted version of the original” with “sensitive material removed or gisted”.
Blinne stated that any JTAC finding that Palestine Action has committed or promoted terrorism is not a legal finding and cannot supersede any decision by any jury or judge.
There are clearly many issues with how the authors of the JTAC report describe the overall context of Palestine Action’s behaviour, including by placing “Israeli genocide” in scare quotes.
The idea of criminalising an entire network as terrorist because, allegedly, at most three or four out of literally hundreds of actions could arguably be defined as terrorism – against property – is manifestly disproportionate, unjust and unlawful, the lawyers argued.
By JTAC’s own case, Ghrálaigh noted, there have been at most “four incidents out of 500” which even arguably satisfy some prohibited act under the UK Terrorism Act.
Even Chamberlain noted at one point that the JTAC “go out of their way to say” Palestine Action did not publicise or glorify violence against a person, in the one occasion in which it allegedly occurred.
A big part of the government’s argument against the High Court granting Ammori permission to appeal on Monday was that the courts were not the correct venue for the ban to be legally challenged. This is known as the “alternative remedy” argument.
The Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC) is made up of a senior judge and two other people, including potentially someone from the security services.
“Judicial review is a remedy of last resort and permission will generally not be granted where a claimant has an adequate alternative remedy,” the Home Secretary’s legal submissions state. “In the present case, there plainly is an adequate alternative remedy available to the Claimant. Parliament has created a bespoke process, which includes a right of appeal to a specialist tribunal.”
The Home Secretary’s legal team argued that Ammori’s “attempt to challenge the proscription of Palestine Action by way of judicial review at this stage subverts this process.”
Sir James Eadie KC, lead counsel for the Home Secretary, argued that the correct procedure would be for Ammori or anyone else to go to POAC.
The problem is, unlike a judicial review which can be expedited, POAC could take months or even years to come to a decision. Unlike the High Court, POAC cannot “stay” the banning order and thereby prevent further harm from occurring.
Furthermore, judicial review could potentially impact hundreds if not thousands of current and future cases by providing legal certainty as to what the law is, Ammori’s lawyers noted.
POAC on the other hand can’t make a determination about any of the arrests occurring now and in fact it can only make a decision as to whether Palestine Action should be deproscribed.
Chamberlain challenged Sir James to explain what would happen to all the different people currently being arrested if the High Court refused to hear an appeal and make a determination as to whether the banning order reflected a disproportionate interference with fundamental human rights of the public.
Many defendants could be brought before Magistrates’ Courts, possibly to face a jury in a Crown Court.
“What about them? What if one of those people want to say ‘well, the proscription is disproportionate?’” Chamberlain asked Sir James “Either they can or they can’t.”
“The problem is that either of those answers is a problem for you. If they can take the point we are saying that POAC isn’t exclusive. If they can’t you then have an even bigger problem… because the proportionality of the proscription never gets considered by any [authority]”
POAC should be the exclusive place to challenge the banning order, Sir James insisted, even if that meant in the meantime people were unjustly arrested, charged or convicted.
“Whatever deleterious consequences flow from that flow because that’s the judgement of Parliament that they flow that way” James argued.
Chamberlain asked “If I am thinking in terms of discretion, surely it would be much better for the proportionality of the order to be considered in judicial review proceedings rather than for them to be considered in a Magistrates’ Court?” the judge asked.
“The difficulty with my Lords’ inclination” St James responded “is that it risks unravelling the statutory regime. If you put in a human rights challenge everything that we’re discussing flows, which is intensely problematic because it would tend to undermine the statutory regime.”
Ghrálaigh had began her oral submissions in the morning leaving the court with no doubt as to what was actually at stake.
“Israel has killed at least 28 children. A classroom of children killed every day for 653 days [since 7 October 2023]. Israel has done this while damaging or destroying every single hospital in Gaza. Israel is starving the population of Gaza…. People are literally, medically, wasting away. They are starving to death.”
“1,000 people have been killed, including by bombs, while attempting to access humanitarian food” she said. There is near consensus in the human rights field “that Israel is now committing genocide as well as other war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
“Israel is doing all of that with arms that are being provided” including parts for the F35 fighter jet “ by arms firms in Britain”.
“Direct action protest is not unlawful. It is certainly not terrorist. This proscription renders it so” Ghrálaigh asserted towards the end of the hearing, “even when it does not amount to criminal damage.”
Monday’s hearing lasted from 10:30am to around 17:00.
From around 15:30 to 16:30 the hearing became “closed” so that “closed” (i.e. secret) evidence and arguments could be presented by the state.
Ammori would not have been permitted to hear the closed arguments.
A special advocate was present on her behalf – not part of her regular legal team – and would have to do their best to challenge the closed arguments without consulting the applicant on whose behalf they are allegedly acting.
Members of the general public, including the press, had to leave the court and returned at 16:30 for the judge’s decision.
Chamberlain stated that, because of the complexity of the case and the fact that he heard “closed” evidence and arguments, Chamberlain’s decision as to whether he will grant permission for Ammori to appeal the ban will be made on Monday.
However, it must first be reviewed by the security services to ensure that he doesn’t improperly reference closed arguments.
The next hearing is scheduled for midday, Wednesday, 30 July. That is when we will discover whether Mr Justice Chamberlain will allow the appeal to be heard or not.
ENDS
Plainly this is yet a further example of how far into fascism the UK has gone. Chamberlain reviewed “intelligence material” for an hour provided by the security services, which almost with 100% certainty will include material provided by Mossad. This very likely will be fabricated and claim links between Palestine Action and Iran.
Huda Ammori, the Palestine Action co-founder who is seeking the legal review, will never be allowed to know the contents of this “intelligence” in order to challenge it.
Furthermore on Monday and Tuesday the security services will get to vet and amend Chamberlain’s judgment.
In the meantime, persecution is at a lower level until after Chamberlain’s ruling, but there continue to be outrageous acts by the police. I leave you with this one as an example of Starmer’s Zionist Britain: a wheelchair-bound man is lifted away by six policemen for wearing a T-shirt supportive of Palestine Action.
6 cops arrest & drag wheelchaired disabled man for Palestine Action t-shirt
Real felons roam free? pic.twitter.com/vzeaWCaIob
— Middle East Today🇵🇸 (@shekelazzam) July 27, 2025
I am now heading down to London for Chamberlain’s ruling.
———————————
My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.
Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.
Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.
Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
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
Your picture at the bottom of the page shows someone being arrested at protest at the Elbit factory in Shenstone. He sat there for over an hour without the dozen or so police who were present at the start of the demonstration , taking any action. A further twelve or fifteen police then arrived together with an arrest van, clearly called out specially to deal with this situation. What a waste of police time and taxpayers money. And of course , the police being shouted at and insulted, and having to form a line because of people trying to stop the guy in the wheelchair being taken away. I wonder how necessary they thought it was.
Worth pointing out who Mick Napier is. Head of Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign for many years and as such probably well known to Zionists and Israeli intelligence.
What is so disturbing is that western leadership do not represent nor protect their own citizens anymore, they side with another state and it’s oppression of western citizens by attacking, arresting and humiliate them just because they want to deliver civilian aid to a people facing a genocide. It is like the whole of the western world have become wilful fifth-columnists for israel.
Speaking of genocide, and this is big, 2 human rights organisation in israel today concluded that israel is indeed commiting genocide:
“For the First Time, Israeli Human Rights Groups Say Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza, Call for International Intervention”
Haaretz link: https://archive.is/u48Ro
If even israeli human rights organistion could say this, then there is no reason whatsoever for western leadership to keep denying the obvious – that israel commit genocide in Gaza.
The UK Government is definitely a ZOG. Israeli groups were prominent in the proscription process for Palestine Action and, the politicians involved, particularly the poisonous Cooper, have all taken their shekels from ‘god’s chosen ones’ and had their free holidays in the promised land. It is no surprise that the UK does Israel’s bidding and is a partner in their genocide of the Palestinians. These people should be hung, for treason and for involvement in genocide.
It has nothing to do with Judaism; zionists aren’t Jews, they are antisemites who use the pose of Jews to smear their opponents. They would be as obscure and ignored as Wahabbis were it not expedient for American Caesar to use them as Brownshirt thugs to subvert the legislature in the US. Over the last couple of decades the British boss class had copied this. The zionist antisemites are proxies not a lobby.
Israel and the zionists would disagree. If it looks like something, smells like something then maybe it is something ?
I agree that not all Jews support Israel or zionism; however, I’d suggest the numbers who disagree are extremely small in regard to the overall non-Israeli Jewish population.
You can’t be something and its opposite and your parody of CommercialPrivateEquitybbc bias doesn’t alter this. There are no Jewish zionists, only fools frauds, pimps and perverts.
@Squeeth – What’s this “American Caesar” entity that you posit? I deduce from what you say that it doesn’t control Congress because if it did it wouldn’t need to subvert it. But it uses the WZO, CPMAJO, AIPAC, and the Occupation regime in Palestine as its “proxies”? Can you say more about it itself? Has it got any other proxies?
American Caesar is the President (or rather the executive that he fronts). In the C20th, legislatures were by-passed as fast as representation increased and emergency laws metamorphosed into ordinary ones. The two-tier legal system created by the Terrorism Act is the equivalent of the Enabling Law in Germany, 1933. Caesarism a-go-go.
B’Tselem refer to “a regime of Jewish supremacy” as if they oppose it. Fair enough.
So why do they refer to “Our Genocide”? That sounds as if either they see themselves as “Israeli” or they think the genocide is being done by the “Jewish people” and that the “Jewish people” have to argue among themselves and decide to take a different route.
Just FFS why don’t they say they regard the existence of “Israel”, i.e. the Jewish-supremacist occupation regime in Palestine (which in a sense they are halfway to describing as precisely that), as illegitimate, and that they are applying for legitimate identity documents from Palestinian authorities?
They would deserve much more respect if they did, and hopefully others would follow their example. It’s fine to see those with “Israeli” documents burn their draft cards in the street, but would they mind chucking the rest of their documents in the flames too, if they don’t mind, and seeking documentation from the Palestinian authorities, either the ones on the West Bank or the ones in Gaza.
That said, it’s welcome that B’Tselem call genocide “genocide”.
Yes, I think that’s called treason.
@Jack, it seems pretty obvious that Israeli intelligence has gone down a route conducive to acquiring compromising material on people that could be used for blackmail purposes, hence those technology companies specialising in mobile phone hijacking malware, and on, taking over from earlier practices to obtain similar leverage. So in the cases of some politicians, no matter how toxic Zionism becomes in the public mood, no matter how many crimes Israel or Israelis commit, their non-wavering support may indicate their capture rather than any ideological fervour.
Every day in the west is April the first.
– Starmer and Trump discuss how to end the war in Ukraine.
– Trump gives Russia 12 days to surrender to the piano playing fascist jew.
– Starmer and Trump discuss how to save the starving children of Gaza.
– Ursula von fasciststein celebrates a deal with Trump where the USA gets everything and the EU gets FA, and still pays 13% tariffs.
– ‘Sharia law administrator’ advertised on UK Government website.
I laughed so hard I almost got proscribed …
It’s kind of funny watching Trump waving round a flaccid penis under the delusion that any save the hopelessly degraded cuckolds & whores he inherited will even pretend to be impressed.
Even more funny they’re now scrambling to “end the war in Ukraine”, because it’s become too glaringly obvious that Ukraine is f*cked to hide & cope anymore.
Yet here I had been told the “brave boys” of Azov were going to have a beach party in Crimea under the command of the “new Churchill” Zelensky. Whom we’re now also *shocked* to find is a replusive lying little crook.
The US gets FA out of Trump’s trade deal too, since it’s dynamiting the very exploitative trade system it primarily set up and benefits from.
The Gaza genocide will of course continue, with full Western fascist/shit-lib support.
Under Trump, the US has dropped more bombs in his first six months in office than the number dropped during the entirety of the Biden administration. From a man who ran for office promising to end foreign military interventions, this stat really is something else.
As for his threats against Russia, secondary sanctions on India and China could well backfire – China is still negotiating US rare earth minerals access and tariffs. Imposing 100% secondary tariffs on countries that buy Russian exports – effectively, removing 4.5 million barrels of oil a day from the market, and cutting off commercial trading ties with those Russian oil importers, will cause price spikes and severely damage the global economy.
The US, like the UK, is quite capable of destroying itself through poor leadership and our rotten political systems.
“It’s kind of funny watching Trump waving round a flaccid penis….”
This looks like a good start for a Stewart Lee routine. [link]
Zelensky “playing” Hava Nagila on the piano:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nyVETNESi8
I wonder how much assistance the UK and US (FVEYs,GCHQ) are giving Ukraine in electronic warfare and their hacking activities. Reports that the Aeroflot cyberattack was quite sophisticated.
Senior British military and ministers keep talking up the prospect of war with Russia, which should seem very odd, nonsense in fact, given we aren’t at war with Russia…unless we’re already knee-deep in Ukraine’s activities – giving direct assistance, including priceless know-how and expertise? Think of the low threshold that qualifies as support in proscription orders.
There has been no debate parliament on lending such capabilities to Ukraine, as it could be seen as a direct act of war on our part. It’s like the arguments about UK surveillance flights over Gaza: at what point does assistance become complicity?
UK special forces are active in Ukraine, as they are in Gaza and Syria. They act totally independently of any UK government oversight, as do their colleagues in MI5/MI6. On that basis the UK is at war and is acting directly for USA/Israel NOT for the British people.
Yeah, the Pentagon leaks in 2023, showed the UK then had the highest contingent of special forces on the ground in Ukraine, back then it was (50). But the govt stated they weren’t under any obligation to discuss their role.
Again, serious lack of debate in the UK, or accountability. It doesn’t matter if someone thinks they are doing the right thing, in democracies representatives should have the right to know about deployments with such serious potential ramifications.
Plenty of British mercs have been killed already. Russian soldiers may have show mercy toward Ukrainians but not toward any Westerners. I’ve seen a video taken from a helmet Go-Pro of one such merc. He and his buddy fell out from their APC when it was hit and tried to take cover. When a Russian soldier approaches, they scream “Do not shoot!” (in English), but the Russian shot them both. Good riddance.
“Malicious Mischief”, indeed:
‘A 41-year-old man sparked panic aboard an EasyJet flight from London to Glasgow on Sunday after yelling “Allahu Akbar” and that he had a bomb as well as shouting “death to America” and “death to Trump.” ‘
It’s stated that the man carried refugee identification papers, FYI he is not white.
Videos being shared online are being “assessed by counter terrorism officers”.
It’ll be interesting to see where this story goes …
https://www.rt.com/news/622087-uk-flight-bomb-threat
Saw that video on Twitter. An obvious false flag piece of bullshit, and I think probably Hindutva.
Here’s a Youtube video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFEqyZHRUP0
I’m not a medic, but he seems like a mentally unstable person to me.
That will probably be the excuse used by TPTB to not prosecute this person under terrorism laws. Meanwhile, white folk get classified as terrorists because the regime sees us as the enemy.
Playing the race card and the victim card at the same time? How efficient.
Thank you, I do try. 🙂
Keep it up.
Member when they talked about Russia doing this sort of thing?
Actually as is neigh inevitable nowadays. It was projection and the YooKay is far worse for actual political dissidents and the state is far totalistic, intrusive and rapacious.
With far fewer excuses…
The Scottish government is up to its neck in shite – created by Westminster, in its attempts to protect the Zionists and their genocide – lets not forget the Scottish governments string puller Angus Zionist Robertson calls many of the shots in Scotland.
As for Police Scotland – the best wee corrupt police force in Britain, its paid out millions to gag – and shut up police officers and civilians in the last ten years – and the COPFS is even worse.
Under Starmer’s Labour Gov the UK is rapidly degenerating into a nightmarish episode of Not The Nine-O-Clock News reconfigured by Joe Orton with a screenplay by Kafka …..
” Loitering with intent to use a pedestrian crossing ” – aggravated by terrorism
” smelling of foreign food ” ( a dead give away of malign intent ) – aggravated by terrorism
” walking between the cracks in the pavement ” – aggravated by terrorism
” walking in a built-up area wearing a loud shirt ” yip ,you guessed it – aggravated by terrorism
Except , of course , there is nothing remotely funny about the outrageous attack on our civil liberties being waged on behalf of the psychotic regime in Tel Aviv by it’s compromised-up-the-wazoo poddles in the UK and most of Israel’s E.U political proxies
See also the Online Safety Act and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.
Yes , Brian , all part of the intent to assert control of/over every online platform ; and all masquerading under the pretext of ” protecting children ” . Notable that the same people have shown little interest in protecting the bodies ( and minds ) of young – often very young , vulnerable people from the unhinged advocates of physical mutilation , under the psychological scalpel of ” Gender Reorientation “
Don’t forget the deliberate blind eyes & censorship about mass-rape. Because the girls were from “troubled backgrounds” and the adult men unto middle age (often influential in their communities), have “protected characteristics”.
Orwell based 1984 on Britain *not* the U.S.S.R. Of course the regime spent generations lying about that too, which I suppose is fitting…
Indeed ,
Well, we’ve all had our telescreens for some years now, but some of us have decided to stop watching….
“Orwell based 1984 on Britain *not* the U.S.S.R.”
Yep – and on London in particular.
That said, they are quite similar. The concept of “partiiniy” (партийный), an adjective that was used of someone who was a right “party member”, applied not only to literal party members but also to those who weren’t but might as well have been, is a huge fit for those who support and enforce the regime in Britain.
Did you see tonight’s BBC news at six, and how free VPNs are now the most downloaded app in the UK? Management at the likes of Proton, Mullvad – the best two of commercial VPNs as far as I can tell – must be thanking their lucky stars for this govt.
The BBC’s tech correspondent even briefly discussed whether the govt may try to ban VPNs in response. Something that would be economically harmful, as many businesses and organisations rely on VPNs. Plus VPN providers can simply use port 443 which is the standard port for https. Or users can simply setup their own WireGuard vpn protocol VPS(requires some technical knowledge).
All this legislation will likely do is increase fraud, increase hacks, doxxing and data leaks and push young adults towards TOR and the unindexed part of the internet – the ‘scarily named’ dark web.
Regardless of the merits of age verification – I see some merits btw, ultimately it’s a parent’s responsibility. Most ISPs do already offer content filtering but adult ISP bill payers can’t be bothered to tick a box.
[ Mod: Released from spam filter. ]
—
Talk of banning VPN’s strangely enough coincides with the UK’s age verification requirement for viewing porn.
Good luck with that – I live in a country where technically VPN’s are illegal with hefty fines if caught using them particularly for criminal or terrorist acts yet everyone has one on their phone primarily to use WhatsApp for calls. There was a bit of a panic with rumors of Indian / Pakistani residents being arrested for having a VPN but it seems they were just rumours.
The main issue – MI5 / MI6 cannot easily inter ept your data thru a VPN. If you are a person of interest and have an iPhone or Android phone – rest assured you are trackable in real time if they do wish. Just as there exist the hacking tools to spy on you in real time.
Larry Johnstone recently stayed the cosy arrangement that existed pre 9/11 between the NSA and MI5. Both forbidden by law to spy on their own domestic people, they literally sat next to each other, gathered dato on each other’s citizens and passed it across the table.
Omah bombing ? The prosecutions stemmed from phone transcripts passed from the NSA to MI5.
Of course VPNs are only as ‘safe and secure’ as the organisations that provide them ! Wasn’t TOR developed by an offshoot of DARPA ?
@Stevie Boy
The US having built the network actually wanted to encourage widespread public use of TOR, as it’s much easier for their operatives to hide in a sea of encrypted traffic, rather than having just a few users only which adversary states would monitor. The thing with TOR is it requires hidden service directory servers (HSDir) to index the dark web (unindexed) sites, and relay and exit nodes – the servers aren’t cheap to run 24/7 and come with various legal risks, as does running an exit node. The only people running them are universities, brave individuals and yes, authorities, so if you acces any dark web site, you’ve probably passed traffic through state HSDir server infrastructure. Btw, I’d imagine western govts couldn’t give a damn about people who use TOR to hide their IP address when accessing mainstream porn sites with content involving consenting adults – it’s legal in most western jurisdictions. Porn sites get billions of visitors.
Similar story with VPNs, the catch – typically you resolve DNS through infrastructure they provide – thus they may technically not keep any connection records, but they have access to the DNS lookups on their DNS servers. The safest option for say an investigative journo would be a WireGuard protocol VPS server setup for them by someone with a bit of know-how, in a non Five, Nine, and Fourteen Eyes surveillance alliance country. But increasingly, every country is meddling with DNS and storing records for mass surveillance, as storage capacity increases as too does processing capability, both of which have made such things more feasible.
VPNs are a con, and all you have to know about Proton is that Tim Berners-Lee is on its advisory board.
Don’t trust this sh*t, kids.
Use PGP, keys generated offline using a standalone prog (use the oldest and most bog-standard one you can find), fingerprint confirmed directly (preferably in person, but over the phone will do), key length preferably at least 4096 bits. THAT is how to do “client-side encryption”. (Goodness know what TF other kind of encryption than client-side anyone would think might be safe.)
Things like streaming video or posting to social media – ain’t never gonna be secure, EVER.
What’s wrong with Tim Berners-Lee?
He campaigned for a Digital Bill of Rights, is anti-mass surveillance and he defended Snowden, saying ,the system of accountability is broken – and whistleblowers are the only thing society “has to hang to” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bKO0sOeCJk
Proton´s true colours got uncovered 1) when the crazy guy who allegedly threatened Fauci (I didn’t follow that) by mail over Proton and was caught via that by FBI or CIA 2) when French Greenpeace planning some action got busted by French police after French had contacted Proton to divulge the mail´s confidentials which was used for planning.
Since then Proton has updated its small print adding the fact that when authorities demand they will cooperate.
The only safe email-server as per evidence (I dont know about VPN) so far seems Swedish Mullvad. When Swedish police confiscated their servers last year I believe there was no info on the customers whatsoever. So we know (to what I read, please correct me if I am wrong!) Mullvad was not collecting data just as they had always stated in public. And police was left with nothing.
Brave, great work as always. Thank you.
Since you still don’t appear to have a BlueSky account, I hope people will post references to it there.
“UN chief (Guterres) calls for ‘viable two-state solution’ to Israel-Palestine conflict”.
Like Bantustania Plus?
Truth is that none of the veto five have ever recognised Palestine’s right to defend itself or seriously applied anti-racist and anti-colonialist policies where the offending power is Jewish. The general assembly once held that Z=R, but a fat lot of good that did.
Anyone and everyone calling for a two state solution are just playing political games and diverting attention from the genociders agenda – they are either morons or mossad.
Israel has categorically stated there will never be a Palestinian state, and I tend to believe them.
The only viable solution is a truly democratic Palestine where everyone has equal rights. This will necessitate the total dismantling of the Israeli regime.
That said, it is entirely 100% up to the Palestinian people what they are willing to settle for.
Recognition is important, whether you accept the premise behind it of there being two-states or not. The alternative – no recognition -would be simply used by UK ministers and officials slither out of the idea there was ever a viable Palestinian state. I really think that is the intention of Starmer, Lammy and other parts of the UK establishment; namely , to let Palestinian statehood whither on the vine while handwringing, feigning distress about encroaching settlement expansionism in the West Bank and possible ethnic cleansing from Gaza. That’s why it’s important for MPs to keep the heat on them too.
Watching Newsnight, journalists in the UK can barely mention starving Gazans, without the obligatory hyperbole about how uniquely evil Hamas are. No historical context about the oppression the Palestinians have faced, not a word about the historical context is permitted. US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, claimed that the announced planned French recognition would be ‘a gift’ to Hamas, does he not realise that more Palestinians live in the West Bank than in Gaza, and that Hamas don’t even rule in the West Bank? Makes you wonder?
Anyone who supports a “two state solution” is a fraud, it’s too old a trick for anyone to support it through foolishness. Two apartheid shite-stains down, one to go.
So, are there any democracies left in the West?
According to Pew Research polls published on June 3d, the majority of population in the countries polled, UK included, have negative or strongly negative opinion of Israel:
USA: 34% “somewhat unfavorable” + 19% “strongly unfavorable” = 53%
Canada: 27% + 33% = 60%
UK: 30% +31% = 61%
Poland: 40% + 22% = 62%
France: 33% + 29% = 63%
Germany: 49% +15% = 64%
Italy: 29% + 37% = 66%
Greece: 33% + 39% = 72%
Australia: 36% + 39% = 74% (note the 1% error here in their report)
Sweden: 35% + 41% = 75% (same 1% error)
Spain: 29% + 46% = 75%
Netherlands: 33% + 45% = 78%
Japan: 48% + 31% = 79%
Yet the governments of all these countries continue with their pro-Israel politics. When there is such a discrepancy between public opinion and the governments, this brings up my question, are all these countries really democratic?
Democracy is a fantasy, always has been. And, since ww2 it’s been fed to the masses as the defining characteristic of the ‘good guys’, the West. Mother of Parliaments, the American Dream, Motherhood and apple pie – all BS. Meanwhile in the background the ‘establishment’ carries on it’s agenda of oppression, abuse and accumulation of power and money. The people, the real people, ‘the demos’ don’t have a voice because their views don’t align with TPTB.
Violent insurrection is the only way to get attention, hence the crackdowns on freedoms.
I’m not a lawyer, but I would be careful about your last sentence.
Anyway you reminded me of a scene from the 80s TV series Happy Days in which Fonzie takes Richie and says something like ‘Think of a green hill, with an American flag on it, and beneath it is Joanie holding a dish of apple pie. That’s what it’s all about.’ I told this (long ago) to a student supporter of the Socialist Workers party and he added ‘And Ronald Reagan, with tears streaming down their faces.’ 😁
“I’m not a lawyer, but I would be careful about your last sentence.”
Unfortunately, it’s true. The only thing that gets the government’s attention to the extent that some sort of reform happens is a riot, with a promise of more riots to come if something is not changed, and that doesn’t always work, either.
They aren’t ‘pro-Israel’, they’re creatures of American Caesar and that’s the entry ticket.
Yuri K
“Yet the governments of all these countries continue with their pro-Israel politics”
And yet sometime in the past and probably again in the future, people with these negative opinions of Israel will vote for politicians who favor pro-Israel politics.
This is because they vote on other issues that are more important to them, like taxes, welfare etc. However, the system takes care to preselect politicians of all kinds to make sure that no matter what their stance on taxes and welfare is, they will all be are pro-Israel.
“The Starmer regime’s attitude to the law, both domestic and international, has been diseased by the doctrine of unquestioning support of Israel”. One could “and unquestioning support of USA in its patronage of Israel”.
This was clearly shown this weekend when USA president Trump brings a portable White House to Scotland sets up court here and proceeds to conduct American policy from there, entertaining first Von Leyen and then Starmer as if he had with Melania’s connivance just killed Duncan and proclaimed himself King of Scotland. Starmer comes fawning along clearly avoiding Great Birnam Wood.
I think among other matters the Trump spectacle was an insult to Scotland as well as a distraction from the real injustices that citizens of Scotland were enduring at the same time.
Trump’s owners are using him to shoot across British bows in Scotland. The man himself is a deranged moron. His owners probably laugh every time he opens his mouth, if they even bother watching the tapes. Did you see what he said about there not being supposed to be another independence referendum for 75 years? It’s not simply that he said this rubbish, which implies he has no clue about how laws work – it’s the way he said it, as if a confused thought he had in his tiny mind 11 years ago (he probably saw a tweet mentioning Alec Salmond’s “once in a generation” reference) is a Great Truth that people gotta hear about because it will tell us uncontrovertibly the deep fundamental background to what some of us may be discussing or arguing about.
Imagine having to write briefings for this guy.
And such is the desperation of some Independence supporters for some light to penetrate the gloom initiated by that denizen of the sapphic closet – Sturgeon aka Sadie Macbeth , obscurity made * denser * by The Hutchie Grammar Halfwit – Yousaf aka Malcolm Y ? and currently having a grey perma-drizzle added to it by Swinney The Undertaker ( of f-all ) they are projecting absurd significance onto the fact that somewhere in Tonald Dump’s ( cartoon ) calvalcade a saltire was spotted . WOW ! Dig out yr claymores , bravehearts , Bonnie Dunce Donnie is getting ready to storm Downing Street .
I read he’d actually said 50 years before we should think about another Referendum – rather than 75 – but , hell , what’s the diff ? In Don’s World thoughts & statements are mere passing , discrete bubbles , one arises , pops and is immediately followed by another which likewise pops , with no connection to all the previous bubbles .
The only thing that might persuade Trump to vocally support Independence is if he thought – in the event of that aspiration being realised – he might become King Of Scotland and he could turn his entire Kingdom into one massive golf course
Starmer, the zionist, was put into power by Israel. International and UK law means nothing to him, in that respect he has a lot in common with King Donny.
Sturmer was put into office by the fascist electoral system, same as all his predecessors.
He was, but he was put into a position where he could be put into office by the fascist electoral system by Zionists.
Is it England and Wales, Scottish, or Northern Irish criminal law that applies on the vessel?
And can I ask the same question about British embassies. It’s as if they’re rooms in Whitehall, so it’s English criminal law and the London Metropolitan police, right? Is the position on British-flagged vessels the same??
That’s a very good question. I think every vessel is registered to a particular port, and it probably depends on that. But I haven’t looked at it. I should have.
According to some reports a complaint has been filed with the War Crimes unit of the Met in London.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/hrf-denounces-shayetet-13-commander-005429612.html
“Members of the public “with flags, badges, t-shirts, and posters that support Palestine, oppose genocide and/or satirise the Government’s position on the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza” have been subjected to “heavy” policing and “other enforcement”, the Irish-born barrister explained.”
I have seen the term ‘humanitarian’ catastrophe or crisis or other such words used by the MSM. To me it is equivalent to also how the same media say that Palestinians ‘die’ whereas Israelis are ‘brutally murdered’. This is not a humanitarian crisis; it is full-scale first-degree murder and execution and genocide. We should all be aware of the subtle power of propaganda on how words are used and not fall into the same trap ourselves.
In a quiet residential street off Hove seafront, the four uniformed officers arrived in two marked police cars. It was around 4am as they walked down the steps to the basement flat where Kerry* lives.
A single woman was arrested in Hove allegedly for complaining about the Gaza Genocide to her MP Peter Kyle, in my opinion the letters were quite anodyne, but the replies she received from Chris Henry the MP’s Aide, were disgusting, he seemed to conflate criticism of Israel with criticism of Jews.
It all happened on Tuesday, June 17, barely six days since a fateful email exchange with Peter Kyle, the Labour MP for Hove, and his so-called “Director of Operations” Chris Henry, a former Labour councillor on Brighton and Hove City CounciIt was Henry who triggered the police raid. He apparently took exception to an “anti-Israel” email Kerry sent to Sir Keir Starmer, David Lammy, and Angela Rayner on Wednesday, June 11.
Mr Kyle — a vice-president of Labour Friends of Israel until he joined the Cabinet as Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology — was copied-in “just to be polite”, because he is Kerry’s local MP.
https://skwawkbox.org/2025/07/28/how-labour-mp-kyle-triggered-4am-police-raid-on-a-constituent-for-writing-to-him-about-israels-genocide/
Here is my comment on this article in Skwarkbox.
It seems the e mails from Kyle’s office conflate being anti Israeli or anti Zionist with being an anti Semite or anti Jewish. Nothing could be further from the truth as Professor David Miller proved in his case to the Employment Tribunal.
He claimed his belief that Zionism is “inherently racist, imperialist, and colonial” was a philosophical belief, a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.
Zillur Rahman, who represented the academic at the tribunal, said his client has been “vindicated” and the “landmark case” marked “a pivotal moment in the history of our country for those who believe in upholding the rights of Palestinians”.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-68211872
Israel is a series of enclaves that are inside the borders of Palestine.
It began that way. Ilan Pappé’s A Very Short History of the Israel-Palestine conflict (ISBN 0861549716) is an excellent introduction to what followed.
Good news from the US for a change, Congressman Randy Fine removed from AIPAC’s roster of sycophants for Israel comes after the congressman has repeatedly advocated for the starvation of Gaza’s population.
In December 2024, Fine introduced a bill to the Florida Senate barring foreign flags from being flown in government buildings. His proposed legislation was ridiculed by critics, who pointed out how Fine himself ironically flew an Israeli flag in his own office. In early 2025, Fine also came under fire for suggesting that Americans posting banners critical of Israel should receive 5-year prison sentences for what he deemed to be committing a hate-crime
Glenn Greenwald@ggreenwald
America First Congressman Randy Fine — whose entire life has been devoted to Israel (and gluttony) — is denounced by the American Jewish Congress (@AJCGlobal
) for too explicitly cheering for Israel to starve Gazans to death. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2025-07-28/aipac-exiles-congressman-randy-fine-over-calling-starvation-palestinians-gaza
I find it strange that – until this year, the only person known to have been resurrected from death was Jesus.
Now, according to the IDF propaganda/lies campaign, despite 20 months of saturation bombing, flushing out tunnels, and demolishing hospitals, plus the assassination of their senior commanders; Hamas operatives seem to have risen from the dead and are now stealing food aid.
It’s either a series of amazing miracles, or the evil psychopathic Israelis still need a reliable excuse to kill women and children which will continue to be swallowed and regurgitated by the Zionist MSM.
Apparently, there are six million members of Hamas in Gaza, no wait, it’s just two million. Our favourite victims miscounted.
Read that there was one black guy on the Handala, and that the Zionist IOF singled him out and beat him up quite badly – his crime? wanting to give starving babies in Gaza Baby Formula Food – to keep them alive.
Oh, I thought his crime was standing up while black and wearing a keffiyeh. Racism in Israel as well in American trade unions (as shown by their failure to condemn the racist assault) is being exposed by this incident.
Mj.
I think his name is Chris Smalls.
Thanks, with apologies for the omission – his name in full is Christian Smalls.
Chris Smalls appears in articles on the incident, e.g.:
https://newrepublic.com/post/198550/israel-detains-beats-amazon-union-leader-chris-smalls-flotilla-gaza
If one reads carefully, with today’s announcement of the (unlikely) recognition of Palestine, Starmer is giving his nod for Israel to annex the Gaza Strip. After the initial (staged) “disappointment”, annexation will then be presented as “substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza”, and Starmer will then announce that the recognition of Palestine is no longer justified. End of story.
Never trust Starmer. Never.
Kacper
The question for Bob Geldof and the media camps is;
Why were you not predicting starvation a month or two ago?
The experts were and it was waved away as an exaggeration by the media.
The answer must be that enormous pressure globally is being put on the respective leaders
who have been defending the indefensible.
Is this an atrocity too far?
Yet again if you watch Israeli Ministers and their media using starvation as a weapon of war
was a stated aim ( policy) – you could not miss it and you can’t miss it now.
It is all policy – not accident or fallout. as happens in wars across the world.
It all was planned from the start.
The latest ‘food aid?’ opening hours are now known – so that’s good to know for
the MSM to try and con people that the US and the UK are doing ‘ All we can ‘ to
alleviate starvation and hunger in Gaza.
Anyone who even knows a bit about Gaza knows that buildings are flattened – that
dead people are underneath the rubble and that people in tents are being systematically
targeted supposedly in order to destroy Hamas.
They now know also that trying to get food will cost you your life.
Yet again no-one can say we didn’t know even though they knew these things way before
the starvation came into being due to policy not ‘ Man Made’ starvation and the West is
just as guilty ( if not more so ) than Israel for causing this.
It may be policy for Israel but, the West has always tried to dodge responsibility by feigning concern.
It’s a lie not just from Israel but the West in total.
It looks as though the lid may be coming off hopefully and Israel will be forced to make concessions.
The bad part is that Netanyahu and Maybe Trump need a war more than anyone else in the world at
this moment.
Watch this space.
@Bob, true, but how does this relate to my comment?
The game I think is about changing the Israeli ruling coalition (it’s always a coalition there), because hardly anyone (except Orbán perhaps) feels like working with Netanyahu’s government any longer (including even Trump). I read the French, Dutch and now British move as a message to Netanyahu: if you want to work with us, either you get rid of your extreme right allies in the government, even though it would cost you parliamentary majority – so essentially we don’t care if you lose power; or the political losses on the international scene will weaken your support in Israel anyway and you’ll lose power, too (however at the risk of strengthening the far right – siege mentality).
Netanyahu will now have to give something to the West, especially to the UK, to avoid that. Starmer doesn’t really care about the Palestinians. So, what will he get in exchange for non-recognition?
Two tier-Keir is the correct phrase after reading this episode from a court case in 2003 when Starmer was a so called Human rights Lawyer [no don’t laugh].
It has now emerged that the Prime Minister represented a defendant in a similar case in 2003. A group of anti-war protesters had broken into RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire to sabotage US bombers before they flew to Iraq.
Sir Keir argued that while the actions were against the law, they were justified because they were trying to stop the planes from committing war crimes. Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, tweeted: “Worth noting that Keir Starmer defended an activist who broke into an RAF base to set fire to aircraft. Starmer claimed his client was legally justified because it might stop a war crime. Sir Keir argued in court that Mr Richards believed any force he used was reasonable in an attempt to stop alleged war crimes.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06/20/starmer-defended-protester-who-sabotaged-military-aircraft/
Thank you for the report from court, hope all goes well today in the dungeon of stairs and corridors. Take care Craig
“Lammy hopes plan to recognise Palestinian state ‘will get ceasefire’ ” – according to British regime media.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c23p8gl05r2o
Lammy’s on Mastermind again? Can you imagine the scene when Netanyahu hears? “London has made a statement! Get me Hamas on the phone! Give them anything they want so long as we agree to cease fire!”
The real British foreign minister, to the extent that it makes sense to think of the sh*tclowns in the sh*tty banky dependency as having one, is Jonathan Powell.
“BREAKING: UN special rapporteur Ben Saul has been given permission to intervene in the judicial review of the decision to proscribe Palestine Action.
His evidence can now be considered as part of the legal challenge against the ban.”
A glimmer of hope? At the very least a counter to the torrent of lies via UK Lawyers for Israel.
And further to the above:
“Palestine Action have won their bid for a full legal challenge against the British government’s decision to ban it as a terrorist group
The High Court ruled that an internal Home Office process was “not suitable”, partly because “many people now subject to criminal proceedings” linked to the ban”
i am sure Craig will be following closely, hope to get his thoughts on it. But it seems that the High Court has established a very good principle, ie that ‘internal’ government decisions of such consequence are not suitable, or valid, when the stakes are so high for democratic and political action. The alternative would appear to be to concede, as some judges seem to, that the executive overrules their court in its decisions – which is essentially a despotic, tyrannical rule (as Trump has successfully argued in the USl, giving himself arbitrary and exclusive power, unconstrained by law or the Senate). Perhaps we should call him Strumper if he succeeds in bulldozing this ban through (and this was a man who at one time championed international law and human rights, and of course the rule of law).
Press Release here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8nZUeEY7MrNFRFth8wPS9ICXBvrdbIAz_u-4cjYVEI/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0#heading=h.z011send4osu
Interesting to note that the judgement allows that the proscription is arguable on three different articles of the ECHR – articles 6, 10 and 11 (the human rights that Starmer used to defend and argue for)
Also, by applying for a legal review, the government was forced to reveal that the advice it commissioned was contrary to its own arguments for proscription. “It emerged that Home Office insinuations that Palestine Action is violent and funded by Iran were directly contradicted by the assessments provided to her (Cooper)”
Hard to see how the government has a leg to stand on, and that Cooper shouldn’t resign. But we will see if the court acts according to the law, or to the executive, against the democratic principles enshrined in law.
It’s an important test case of our system of accountability and scrutiny which will be important for other cases, like Gaza, arms supply, international law etc.
None of these disgusting people ever resign, regardless of monies, deaths or incompetence. The worst they get is an honour and move to the Lords. The morals of the swamp.
Ian
That’s good news.
The thing is: is that the UK is a signatory to the UN Rules vis: the prevention or the further enhancing of Genocide.
The Legal irony being that the PA protesters are trying to uphold that law but, the ones who are proscribing them aren’t.
Despite the prosecutors being signatories to the UN Laws on genocide.
Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori has won permission to challenge the proscription of Palestine Action:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jul/30/palestine-action-co-founder-wins-permission-to-challenge-ban
Time to go on the offensive.
ICC: a petition to the United Nations General Assembly to seek prosecution of British war criminals.
Herewith a petition to the United Nations General Assembly to refer certain members of British governments since 7 October 2023 to the International Criminal Court for prosecution for war crimes.
https://tinyurl.com/4f77u8kr
Precedent for UNGA referral to the ICJ/ICC
This would not be the first time for such a referral from UNGA to an international court, an example being Britain’s criminal treatment of the population of the Chagos Islands over 50 years. On 22 June 2017 the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 71/292, in which, referring to Article 65 of the Statute of the Court, it requested the Court to render an advisory opinion on the matter. Thirty-one Member States of the United Nations and the African Union filed written statements, and ten States and the African Union filed written comments on the written statements. Twenty‑one States and the African Union participated in the oral proceedings, which took place from 3 to 6 September 2018.
In its Advisory Opinion delivered on 25 February 2019, the Court concluded that “the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when that country acceded to independence” and that “the United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible”.
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/169
Signed.
When it comes to the British facilitators something that ought to be added to the indictment is that the starvation killing people in Gaza every hour is the direct and inevitable consequence of the policy Keir Starmer verbally sanctioned: a siege withholding the essentials of life from millions.
This is undeniable. You’ll never hear it said in the media but it would certainly be referenced if Sir Keir ever appeared in the dock at the Hague.
Thanks. I just posted it a few hours ago. One more signature and it goes live.
I did mention Starmer’s “I believe Israel has the right” comment and Lammy’s monstrous statement.
I can continuously update it and will welcome suggestions, but particularly self-incriminating comments by those I have accused.
Ah I didn’t realise you initiated this petition yourself Walt. And I see you did include Starmer’s comment in the appendix, forgive me!
Thank you for doing this. Britain’s role from the start has been by far the most sensitive, suppressed and denied aspect of the Genocide. Palestine Action were only banned once they began directing attention towards Britain’s participation and we are now seeing all manner of slippery maneuvers by Starmer and Lammy to try and disguise what they have done (and are still doing) to aid the Genocide.
” we are now seeing all manner of slippery maneuvers by Starmer and Lammy to try and disguise what they have done (and are still doing) to aid the Genocide.”
For instance the stuff about recognising Palestine.
Signed, thank you.
Yvette Cooper Ball should resign, her allegations of violent conduct by PA.activists was made up. By the evidence shown of police arrests in Kent, Edinburgh and at protests everywhere, it is obvious that she has not briefed her chief constables of their powers of arrests, leaving vaccums for the police to act up unlawfully.
Further her arrangements of prison authorities and lack of trust by prison officers in her leadership is calamitous to say the least.
She should. I doubt she thought her lack of evidence coupled with her blatant prejudice against Palestinian support would be exposed to the public. Thanks to the appeal it is. It is also on the record that she received around £200k from the Israel lobby via its various fronts, so is clearly compromised and unfit to make the kind of judgements which could put someone in prison for 14 years for holding a placard. She has also, fundamentally ignored the laws of the land which has incorporated the ECHR into UK legislation, so is legally and intellectually unfit for her job, not to mention of course morally.
She has put the courts and police in a situation none of them are comfortable or adequately informed about, with the consequences that justice is compromised, unclear and liable to be misused in the pursuit of vague, badly written legislation for the benefit of a foreign country. Definitely a sacking offence, to have brought the government and country into such disrepute and contradiction of its own laws.
If only the cabinet had a legal expert on human rights in it, who might have advised her, eh?
BTW half of the cabinet have received funding from Israeli sources. When will they ban all donations in order to make a transparent, accountable government? I’ll wait.
Whilst admirable and more than I have made the effort to do myself (besides directly assuring UN representatives of the British Public’s majority understanding and support for Palestinians, with despair at Starmer et al’s fully cognizant crimes*), if you want it to be taken seriously, rewrite it yourself from scratch (or sufficiently modify what you’ve published) without needing to put
“Source: DeepSeek AI”
…because if you don’t also disclose that you have proofread and evidence-based every claim in triplicate, the application will be fobbed off as a “hallucination”.
Not to mention, using “AI” to produce pieces for us makes us more stupid – and less productive!
*though of course if you have done such yourself then “besides” is redundant – not trying to turn this into a competition, particularly since my contribution doesn’t amount to much, just attempting to establish bona fides
The latest stunt by the west is the noise about recognizing a palestinian state by september, but why would that stop the Genocide and why would such vocal announcement make any difference on the ground? It is just a useless PR effort set off with the intention to make people believe that the west somehow now pressure israel, it is just a move to kick the can further down the road for another month and making the western elite feel good about themselves. Palestine do already exist regardless if the western world recnogize the palestinian statehood or not, especially if the western recognition will not be backed up any enforcement.
“Can Europe Go Beyond Words and Empty Gestures in Its Emerging Recognition of Palestine?”
Haaretz link: https://archive.is/zoLkC
No, instead of this western blabbering the only thing the west should be talking about is putting sanctions on israel, obviously israel only know the language of pressure, force, threats and physical violence, so the west world should use the same tactics against them.
Also the lousy arab world should pressure israel now when the starvation is in full glare – but as one have seen past days, the arab world instead call on Hamas to put down their weapons and give up and in Lebanon it is the same campaign where US/Israel and the pathetic lebanese government pressure Hezbollah to give up.
Not sanctions, war.
Yes, if an arab and/or muslim nation committed the same heinous human rights violations, the west would have bombed that nation to bits within weeks.
Kaja Kallas claimed that Russia committed genocide in Ukraine, where is she now?
Kaja Kallas on X: “@ZelenskyyUa @Riigikogu Looking at the Kremlin’s words and deeds, it’s becoming clear that Russia’s crimes committed in Ukraine can amount to genocide. All those guilty must face justice and be punished accordingly. Estonia will support investigations every way we can. 2/2” / X
https://x.com/kajakallas/status/1514187870923333634
Worth reading, not least because the Israeli ambassador to the UK, Mt Sacerdoti and Mr Wallis Simons clearly don’t need to read it as they know it must be wrong.
https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/genocide-in-gaza-physicians-for-human-rights-israel/
A British woman who also carries Occupation-issued documents and who was held prisoner by the Resistance in Gaza before they released her last month, has allowed her name to be put to a statement saying that Starmer’s supposed plan to “recognise Palestine” shows “moral failure”.
This wretch was fed and housed by the Resistance for more than a year while they were living under Occupation bombs and finding it hard to feed their own children, at least the children who were fortunate enough not to be murdered.
Don’t tell me about “morals”, girl!
“(L)awyers representing British families of hostages held in Gaza by Hamas said the UK government’s intention to recognise a Palestinian state ran the risk of disincentivising the release of captives.”
Foreign policy is subject to vetting by British judges who pocket Zionist money now?
Talk about “enemies of the people”!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/30/freed-british-israeli-hostage-accuses-keir-starmer-moral-failure-recognise-palestine
For some reason I’ve never read any stories about lawyers for British Palestinians going to British courts to oppose the British regime’s support for the Zionist entity, assistance with its crimes, and “recognition” of its sovereignty in Palestine. The judges wouldn’t consider such people to have any “standing”.
Why isn’t this zionist terrorist in gaol? Oh, I think I’ve answered my question.
A new flotilla aimed at breaking the Gaza blockade by the Zionists hopes to set sail – if it leaves from Bristol its should be sailing under a British flag of protection – no doubt the British government will turn a blind eye as the IOF board this flotilla and gets very heavy handed as they tend to do.
“The atmosphere at the Malcolm X Center in the English city of Bristol is charged with purpose. Activists from across the UK and abroad have come together under a new banner, one committed to breaking Israel’s blockade on Gaza.
They call it the global Sumud Flotilla.
What we are going to do next is to go in a mass movement of boats to break the seas, so tens of boats going through different ports, mobilizing so many countries. 44 countries are involved.
Saif Abukeshek, Global Sumud Flotilla, Spokesperson”
Chris Smalls has been released – not to fly out from Tel Aviv, but cross the Allenby bridge to Jordan, as Palestinians have to. I imagine that Israeli racism will apply to the Sumud flotilla as well. Black members, especially anyone wearing a keffiyeh can expect the same racist treatment as Chris Smalls, and the Americans, with the president they have, won’t give a damn.
What has Mahmoud Abbas ever done to liberate Palestine?
Anybody who can answer that question, please do.
He is a stooge to Zionism and should retire now, making space for a democratic process once a ceasefire has led to a lasting peace.
“What has Mahmoud Abbas ever done to liberate Palestine?”
He drafted the Beilin-Abu Mazen agreement (a type of two-state solution, based on the pre-1967 border), which was however stymied by the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin and the subsequent election of Benjamin Netanyahu. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Today many might regard Abbas as a sort of Gatsha Buthelezi or collaborator with the apartheid regime. But imagine if Rabin had not been assassinated and the agreement had gone ahead …