On Wednesday we were crammed into the unsalubrious court 73 at the Royal Courts of Justice to hear the judgment from Judge Chamberlain on whether Huda Ammori, co-founder of Palestine Action would be granted a judicial review of the proscription of the organisation.
Judge Chamberlain breezed in and went immediately into a summary of his judgment, beginning with an account of the process so far. This was covered in my last report; the only new information was that the Special Advocate who had been present during the closed session was Tim Buley KC.
In this extraordinary abuse of process, the security services are allowed to bring alleged “intelligence” material into proceedings, which Huda Ammori and Palestine Action are not permitted to see. Nor are their lawyers allowed to have any idea what allegations have been made.
Instead a court-appointed “Special Advocate” is supposed to represent their interests, without being allowed to tell them what the accusations are. Nor can they tell the special advocate what points to make, as in “we absolutely have no foreign funding and have never had any contact with any foreign intelligence agencies”.
Nobody is ever allowed to know what a “Special Advocate” actually does or says in the closed session, nor what the government lawyers or those giving evidence on behalf of the security services do or say.
If I were a Special Advocate, I would do nothing except hand the judge a copy of the Dossier on Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, and say: “This shows the quality of security service intelligence. Now go and wipe your arse with it.”
Having told us there had been a closed evidence process, Judge Chamberlain then gave us what he said would be a brief summary of his judgment. The link is to the full judgment.
Chamberlain said that the claimant (Huda Ammori) had introduced evidence of police action against people expressing in various ways support for the Palestinian cause. There was also evidence of people deliberately breaking the law on support for proscribed organisations.
The Home Secretary had submitted that the correct route for an appeal against proscription was to POAC (the Proscribed Organisations Appeals Commission). The Claimant had responded that this would take too long, until June 2026 at the earliest.
There were five reasons that POAC might not be a viable alternative remedy to a judicial review:
1) Timing – the POAC process could not conclude before mid-2026.
2) The impact on freedom of expression and assembly while the proscription remained in force.
3) There would be numerous criminal proceedings over support for Palestine Action in magistrates’ courts and crown courts up and down the country, in each of which it might be argued that the proscription was itself unlawful. There was a danger of conflicting judgments in different localities.
4) The legislation did not specify that an appeal against proscription could only be through POAC.
5) A judicial review did not close off an eventual process through POAC.
In assessing that a judicial review was a permissible route, he had declined to follow the judgment over the Kurdish Workers’ Party, because new court procedures (the Special Advocate nonsense) now permitted the courts to handle intelligence material, which they did not at the time of that case. Plus, that judgment was plainly wrong.
This was stated with such offhand disdain as to be striking. Of course judges can differ, but the bland contempt of the phrasing and delivery were unusual: “plainly wrong” to a judge of equal standing.
Which brings me to the unavoidable question of Chamberlain’s demeanour.
Sometimes my powers as a writer are not equal to the occasion. I have never seen anybody quite as self-satisfied as Chamberlain; he radiates assurance. He is the walking antithesis of impostor syndrome. It is worse than smug: there is a palpable gloat about him.
Judges in the Royal Courts are seated on an imposing tiered dais, many feet above the courtroom. Some judges attempt to diminish the distance; this can come over in different ways, from condescension to chumminess to intellectual equality.
Chamberlain does not bother. He is quite happy that our only view of him is up his nostrils.
He rattled through the grounds of appeal which the claimant had put forward.
Ground 1: Chamberlain was satisfied that Yvette Cooper had not acted for an improper political purpose but in the interests of national security.
Ground 2: That the proscription was a disproportionate limitation on freedom of expression was reasonably arguable.
Ground 3: It was not arguable that Palestine Action did not commit acts intended to influence the government, or that those who did were insufficiently connected to the organisation.
Ground 4: It was not arguable that Cooper had failed to consider significant information about Palestine Action or its classes of supporters.
Ground 5: Cooper did not err in giving weight to the views of Israel, to questions of financial loss and to other stated factors in concluding terrorism.
Ground 6: That Cooper failed to give weight to the need to oppose Genocide – this could be wrapped up in the balance question of disproportionate action under Ground 2.
Ground 7: The fact that only 3 of 387 actions were deemed by JTAC (the government’s Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre) to be terrorist – this could also be wrapped up in the proportionality exercise under Ground 2.
Ground 8: That Cooper had failed to consult those affected by the proscription under her common law duty; including not consulting with Palestine Action nor with any pro-Palestinian group or individual, when she did consult with the Israeli Embassy, weapons manufacturers and others. This was a reasonably arguable point of law.
Ground 9: That Cooper had ignored her obligations to prevent discrimination under the Equalities Act by targeting a pro-Palestinian protest movement – this was not arguable.
So Chamberlain concluded that a judicial appeal was granted under Grounds 2 and 8 but dismissed on all other grounds. However, as you will have gathered, he had in effect accepted that Grounds 6 and 7 were also arguable points, but they could be taken as part of Ground 2.
Chamberlain then suggested to Raza Husain, lead KC for Huda Ammori, that he suspected he would wish to seek interim relief and expedition of the case. Raza Husain stood and said the claimant wished to request interim relief, which would suspend the proscription pending the judicial review.
Chamberlain did not answer, but he paused the court while printed copies of his judgment were handed round to the media.
Raza Husain then tried again, but Chamberlain first turned to discussion about when the judicial appeal might be heard. Ben Watson, KC for the Home Secretary, wanted a longer period for disclosure and was adamant that the process could not start until some security services-related event on 12 September, which could not be discussed in open court.
This key event and date were referred to frequently in hushed tones. Hackers and foreign spy agencies please take note: 12 September. Raza Husain pressed for the hearing to be as soon as possible. Chamberlain pointed out that the dangers of haste “cut both ways” – full disclosure was also in the interests of the client.
This was pretty ironic, as the key “intelligence” on which the case turns is never disclosed at all.
Ben Watson KC then said the Secretary of State wished to appeal the decision to grant judicial review. Chamberlain replied that could wait, as he did not wish to go into closed court at the moment.
Raza Husain then stood and said again that the claimant wished to renew the application for interim relief – with great patience and as though he had not said it four times already.
Chamberlain said he had expected this, as though it were the most tiresome thing in the world.
He then ignored Raza and said that he had decided to grant permission to intervene in the case to Professor Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur “on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism”.
Raza Husain noted this and then said the claimant wished to apply for interim relief.
Chamberlain was somewhere else. He said that Professor Saul’s expertise would obviously be welcome, but the permission to intervene did not mean he could guarantee any particular time slot or consideration, which would be up to the court hearing the judicial review “which may or may not be me”.
My handwritten notes have a marginal entry that this was the 6th time Chamberlain had interrupted the application for interim relief. Finally Raza Husain got to embark on it.
Since the first request for interim relief a fortnight ago, over 1,000 more Palestinians had been killed in Gaza. 80 children had been starved to death. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, had made a detailed statement criticising the proscription of Palestine Action and specifically asking for it to be revoked.
Chamberlain asked what precisely he was seeking in law. Raza Husain replied it was a stay of Article 2 of the Order, the proscription of Palestine Action.
Chamberlain said that his previous judgment against an interim stay had already accepted there was a serious issue to be heard, on the effect upon freedom of speech. But that was insufficient reason for a stay.
Raza Husain said that Ground 8, which was now accepted, was extremely important. It was a very strong argument, so strongly based as to justify the suspension of a proscription not done by due process.
Chamberlain replied that he had already noted there may be an arguable case on grounds 4 to 8, in his judgment against an interim stay. The Court of Appeal had agreed with him against the interim stay.
Raza Husain then handed over to Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh KC who said people were being deprived of freedom of expression protections under Article X of the European Convention on Human Rights. The chilling effect was on thousands of people.
Chamberlain said that may be true, but there could be irreparable harm on both sides. He had to consider the harm that might be done to national security by the suspension of the proscription order for several months.
Blinne responded that it was ridiculous, on grounds of alleged national security, to arrest elderly people for holding a placard, keeping them incommunicado as terrorists and going through their property with swabs.
Chamberlain replied that the argument is that such action is necessary to suppress the organisation as a whole.
Blinne asked whether proscription is actually necessary to protect the national interest, as opposed to the large number of other legal remedies available to the Secretary of State?
There were three kinds of freedom of speech affected. These were… Chamberlain then cut her off, saying he had identified these as speech which was legal in support of Palestine, speech which was deliberately defying the law, and speech which fell in a grey area of interpretation.
This was one of many interruptions by Chamberlain who made very plain that he was not interested in hearing this argument again. Blinne appeared to be continually apologising for her own existence: “I don’t want to push this too far”, “I will only lightly touch upon it”, “I won’t take up much time”.
What she was really saying was: “I can see you are not in the slightest bit interested in listening to me”. And she was right.
But she gamely ploughed on. Blinne said that people making perfectly legal expressions of support for Palestine were being harassed by police owing to the proscription, and the grey area appeared to include people who were opposing the proscription of Palestine Action.
There was also a fourth category: the press. There was much evidence of a chilling effect of the proscription on what journalists felt able to write about Palestine, as shown in evidence submitted by John McEvoy and others.
Furthermore the situation was made worse by section 12.1.a of the Terrorism Act which specifically removed the need for intent in criminalised speech. Accidentally saying something taken to be supportive of Palestine Action could be an offence.
Chamberlain said that was for the police and the courts to deal with.
Blinne said it should not fall on the police and courts to make such judgments and it should not fall on ordinary members of the public to try and predict an invisible line they should not cross following the first ever proscription of a non-violent protest group.
People had been arrested for holding signs saying “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” That is not speech that threatens the security of the UK nor the safety of the public.
Raza Husain now took over again. He noted that the disclosure documents from the Home Office specifically stated that national security was not the “driving factor” for the proscription. They also specifically stated there was no damage to national infrastructure, nor any impact on national defence. The “attack” on Brize Norton was an act of vandalism which the Home Office documents disclosed would not affect the operation of aircraft painted.
This was fascinating. Plainly the Home Office internal documents show that what Yvette Cooper has been saying to Parliament and putting into the media is a lie.
Husain went on that the disclosure documents indicated that the timing of the proscription depended on factors including the local elections, a criminal trial, Israeli breaches of a ceasefire agreement, and a religious holiday.
That the proscription remaining in force is critical to national security is plainly therefore a nonsense, said Husain. At this point, Chamberlain interrupted him again.
My handwritten note only says “Chamberlain supercilious”. It had been obvious that Chamberlain had no interest in the arguments for interim relief. He had ruled on that two weeks ago, and as he is infallible, this was all a waste of time.
He did not actually say “talk to the hand” but his body language could not be more obvious. Occasionally he would relieve the ennui by interrupting Raza or Blinne mid-sentence.
Judge Chamberlain has never heard a sentence spoken that could not be improved by an interjection from Judge Chamberlain. Being a generous man, he declines ever to deprive the world of his great wisdom or make people suffer by listening to the uninterrupted thoughts of mere lawyers.
The effect of this is that we frequently can only surmise what the argument was going to be before it was intercepted and corrected. Chamberlain’s ability to predict what somebody was going to say and replace it with something more clever instead is uncanny – at least in his own estimation.
I do recall what Chamberlain said that caused me to write “Chamberlain supercilious”. He said that he supposed that Mr Husain would tell him that an interim stay was necessary and that Mr Watson would argue that it was dangerous.
Raza Husain was plainly annoyed. It is not just that I will say there should be a stay and Mr Watson will say the opposite, he said. It is the reasons which are important. He then continued to try to make progress, and was plainly angered by another interjection by Chamberlain.
“That’s not what I said”, Husain stated, plainly furious at being misrepresented. “That’s not what I said”, he repeated. Shortly after, he drew to a close.
Ben Watson KC for the Home Secretary had nothing to say in public that would defend the need for the proscription to continue in force. His argument both against the interim stay, and for the right to appeal against the granting of judicial review, was entirely based on secret intelligence. We therefore had to clear the court.
I don’t know what Chamberlain heard in private from the intelligence services. I should be very surprised if it was not about invented support for Palestine Action from Iran or fabricated plans to attack the Israeli Embassy, because that is precisely the kind of mendacity that Ken McCallum, Director General of MI5, considers it his patriotic duty to churn out on a daily basis.
As I waited in the corridor for court to resume, there was a rather touching moment. A Muslim patriarch with a most impressive white beard came out from the adjacent courtroom at the conclusion of another, unrelated case. He was followed by his large family.
He recognised me, shook my hand and stated “We are 100% with you, all of us. Let me know if there is anything we can do.” Turning round and gesturing to his family, he asked “Would you like us to stay here and support you now?”
I thanked him genuinely but declined, as there was absolutely no space in the courtroom. But I record it because little moments like that can keep us going in these difficult times. I was genuinely touched.
After 45 minutes of secret spook-fest inside the courtroom, honest people were allowed back in. Chamberlain then produced his decisions.
To overturn his judgment of 4 July not to grant interim relief from proscription, there would have to be a material change of circumstances in the interim. Three grounds had been advanced:
1) That he had granted permission on ground 8, which the claimant stated was especially strong. But this was not a material change as he had stated before that grounds 4 to 8 might be arguable.
2) The extent of interference with freedom of speech. But this was not a material change as he had noted the interference with freedom of speech at para 100 of his original judgment. All that had happened was that possibilities he had foreseen had turned into concrete fact.
3) That the Secretary of State had given no evidence of threat to the public. But this was not a change since 4 July.
So, said Chamberlain, there was no material change of circumstance and the request for interim relief was denied.
The Secretary of State’s application for Permission to Appeal was also dismissed. Watson would have to apply direct to the Court of Appeal.
Finally, the judicial review could not be further expedited and would have to be held in a convenient week after 10 November.
With that, the hearing concluded.
My immediate feeling was outrage at the chutzpah of Chamberlain in claiming that he had predicted the effects of the proscription on freedom of speech, when the exact opposite is true – he pooh-poohed them. He did indeed state at para 100 of his 4 July judgment:
The evidence I have seen established that the broad criminal prohibitions imposed by the 2000 Act, and the very long sentences potentially available for breach of them, can cast a long shadow over freedom of speech. This, however, is the inherent consequence of a regime which aims to disrupt and disable organisations which meet the threshold for proscription.
But that paragraph only refers specifically to people protesting
under the banner of PA
Chamberlain in fact entirely rubbished the notion that people protesting more generally on Palestine would be affected. He stated explicitly in para 96 that:
In my judgment some of the consequences feared by the claimant and others who have given evidence are overstated.
And in para 97 Chamberlain got wrong everything that was going to happen next. He states that it will remain lawful:
… 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… They will remain free to do so in private conversations, in print, on social media and at protests.
Yet Chamberlain had now been given evidence that the police were in fact, since the proscription, persecuting people for precisely the activities he had said would still be allowed.
What is more, in the 19 July hearing for a judicial appeal, Chamberlain had actually accepted that he got this wrong in his 4 July decision on interim relief. Here are extracts from the report of that hearing by Mohamed Elmaazi for this blog:
“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.
…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.
So how did Chamberlain go from openly accepting that on 4 July he got this wrong, to claiming that there had been no material change as he foresaw everything correctly on 4 July?
The answer of course lies in those secret sessions with the security services.
To connect all this back into what is really happening on the streets, the police this evening detained hundreds of people in London, as they aggressively broke up a pro-Palestinian demonstration.
In case anyone is wondering what London’s Met Police are up to, this evening they arrested multiple people on Oxford Street simply for protesting against the ongoing slaughter and starvation campaigns in Gaza.
Met Police are accomplices to the genocide. pic.twitter.com/22uXbPEk5v
— Naila (@BrownNaila) August 1, 2025
So while the granting of a judicial review represents some kind of victory, it is meaningless for now, as both the proscription and the repression continue – as does the Genocide.
I do not have any hope for success from the judicial review – all this is part of the smoke and mirrors of process and legality behind which the British Establishment seek to mask their complicity in the crimes of Zionism.
———————————
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
Depressingly similar to the Assange charade.
To paraphrase the great Smokey Robinson, I’ll second that emotion
The Parliamentary vote was held under a false pretext. Information was withheld.
Once upon a time, our MPs would have been up in arms about this abuse by the executive. The sorry collection of supermarket, shelf stackers handed £90k pa, as a result of vetting from party HQs are unlikely to show the same indignant response as their predecessors.
Party HQs have effectively fallen under the control of the Spookocracy. Their endorsement procedures for candidates should be enough to convince us not to cast a vote for that individual.
I shall not vote for party central, approved lobby fodder.
Of course, Parliament could return from its summer holibags and prove me wrong.
I live in hope rather than expectation.
Bit unkind to the shelf-stackers, no?
I’ve never seen so many bad hats 🙂
The process is worthy of Kafka. From the choice of venue to the undeclared secret accusations and evidence heard secretly, to the behaviour of the judge and inability of the defence to even fully make their case and be heard and the predetermined verdict.
This is a farce presented as a judicial procedure in a supposed democracy. Well done Mr Murray once again for exposing what is so underreported despite its serious effects on freedom of speech.
Thank you for this report. It is disgraceful that British news media have failed to report in this detail and worse than disgraceful that elected members of Parliament were proud to support His Majesty’s Government in voting to ban Palestinian Action. Sir Kier Starmer once eloquently defended a protestor who attacked a US airbase, now he is proud to follow the instructions of US and Israeli politicians to reward arms dealers and sustain the UK’s role as a dependency of the USA, happy to train soldiers, arm military missions, and pay US arms manufacturers.
Bizarre. Orwellian. Fascist pseudo legality. Unspeakably bad. Netanyahu has gone as extreme as the nazi regime. Western governments legalistic and politicians must attain active and effective control on Israeli extremism.
Thank you Craig.
The sooner this repressive government is consigned to history the better. Would a Farage administration be any worse? Probably not. The worst possible outcome would be an alliance of Reform and the Tories, two reactionary parties doing their best to outdo the other in bids to outlaw our freedom. So our best bet must be to do all we can to support the new party being formed by Corbyn and Sultana, possibly in alliance with the Greens. We can’t wait for them to become strong enough to win the next election but one; the nee$ for change is now and it is urgent.
Repressive government? Repressive State more to the point.
Thanks to Craig for the thorough report. Chamberlain seems like a Gilbert and Sullivan caricature.
“The worst possible outcome would be an alliance of Reform and the Tories, ”
I think you mean “Reform and the Conservatives”, Reform are Tories, as are “Labour”.
IMO.
“The worst possible outcome would be an alliance of anyone with the greens ”
You only need to look at Scotland to see what dangerous and barking mad idiots the greens truly are.
Agreed ; that is if the English Greens are as demented as the Scottish Greens ; was there not a rupture of sorts between the two a while back where – though both groups were on the same spacecraft – destination Out There – the SGs decided to sever ties with the Birthing Person Ship & Earth Comms and * man * ( wots that ? ) a capsule to further explore the outer reaches of the Polyculeverse ?
In the ” worst possible outcome ” stakes , my version would be the continued existence of 99% of the current Political / MSM Class . Never has there been a more worthless collection of warmongering , blood/spirit-sucking ,moral/intellectual plankton than this mob .
And we can add to that motley the Judicial Class : from the gruesome entity who jailed Craig – on a totally invented charge ( the judicial equivalent of the infamous ” made-up drug ” – Cake ) to this legal Spookocrat , ie M’lord Chamberpot , never has the Judiciary been more obsequiously compliant with the warped * interests * of the State than presently
“Never has there been a more worthless collection of warmongering , blood/spirit-sucking ,moral/intellectual plankton than this mob .”
Oh, I don’t know. You on;y have to look at politicians in the early C19th, when rich men prepared shopping lists of the cost of buying the votes of MPs for a particular motion.
Yes , I agree that the Political Class has never been characterised by genuine commitment to noble aims or concern for the masses , other than in a few , very few exceptional cases ; but neither did they have the power to precipitate global destruction , up to and including the ending of all life on the planet . The stakes and cost of the abysmal , barrel-scaping calibre of the present Political Class are much higher than ever before
IMO. One difference between C19th politicians and the deviant bunch of incompetents we have today is that they were mostly patriotic to their country. The current bunch are mostly fifth columnist traitors.
Good point
Speaking of the new party being organised by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana (https://www.yourparty.uk), they’re still looking for a name (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3wnqj2pwvdo).
Sounds as if sh*tclowns in various British branches are so conditioned to doing whatever Zionists tell them that they’re all jumping so fast that they bump into each other. Up to a point. Because at the end of the day the masters themselves are well organised.
It might be worth trying to find out who in the courtroom, or nearby, or involved while the judgment was being prepared under Martin Daniel Chamberlain was the main contact person for the Zionists.
This could have been someone in SIS or MI5 of course. But…
Chamberlain’s wife Samantha Broadfoot is at Landmark Chambers where there seems to be a strong interest in “Israel” and they quote “UK Lawyers for Israel” more than once but prefaced with the words “according to their website”. This could be a classic case of “I’m not lying to you – of course we’re not in contact with UKLFI and we don’t have anyone here who belongs to it either – everything we know about them is only what they say on their website”.
https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/new-government-new-term-whats-ahead-in-public-law
“According to its website, UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) has sent a formal letter to the Government threatening legal action unless it cancels the decision to suspend around thirty licences for the export of arms to Israel.
According to their website, UKLFI are arguing that the decision appears to have been made on two grounds which have nothing to do with whether the banned items might be used to violate international humanitarian law.”
See also
https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/bar-human-rights-committee-report-on-the-israeli-military-courts-in-the-occupied-palestinian-territories
and
https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/The-freedom-of-speech-bill-for-universities-necessary-or-superfluous-webinar.pdf
“A shocking finding from a recent study by King’s College London was that a quarter of students saw violence as an acceptable response to some forms of speech – and indeed we have seen this played out in the appalling scenes in London, when Jewish societies invited speakers who other students did not approve of.”
^ Broadfoot chaired that webinar.
Here’s the website of “UK Lawyers For Israel”:
https://www.uklfi.com
Their membership doesn’t seem to be public. It seems they have both admitted and secret members.
I haven’t got time to look further into this. It seems there are 12 members of the Supreme Court and about 20 former members.
Whaddayaknow, none of the serving members are known members of UK Lawyers For Israel. They are all squeaky clean and doubtless totally objective where anything to do with genocide is concerned.
But wait… Of the ~20 former members, several are known to be UKLFI-ers. How strange. And remember, these are the ones who are known. These include the following “lords”:
Sumption
Wilson
Collins
Dyson
Woolf
So basically a quarter of “Britain’s” former Supreme Court judges are known, explicit, admitted supporters of the genocidalist terrorist entity.
Do you have a link or other way to verify this?
I’m not doubting you, but let’s be sure of our facts before spreading the news.
To be fair, Sumption’s Wikipedia entry says:
Of course, May 2025 was more than a year too late to do any good – if they really wanted to have an impact, the 800+ signatories would have publicly joined Palestine Action, instead of writing a letter motivated probably by CYA.
Interesting that Chamberlain has also just ruled that there must be a judicial review by the Charity Commission into UKLFI’s charity status, after a case brought by CAGE International (though please correct me if I’ve misunderstood that)
I note with interest that two of the main players in this charade are Scots: Chamberlain (the judge) and McCalum (Head of MI5). They also reflect the standard Brit division of labour – one being privately educated (the judge) and the other a product of a state school (the plod).
They are each in their own way a shining example to all would-be House Jocks of the rewards bestowed upon those in the colonies willing to show sufficient subservience and obsequiousness in the service of the Brit imperial cause.
Indeed both are worthy candidates for the Jim Naughty House-Jock award for grovelling sycophancy to their betters.
Well done to both of them.
Hi John, I see you are looking at Chamberlain too. See my above posts ^ . He must have been considered a safe pair of hands to get the Eldon Scholarship.
Strangely every recipient of that scholarship seems to have attended private school. Anyone who wants to try to find a counter-example can go through the list here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldon_Law_Scholarship
Thanks Brian.
Very interesting indeed. A classic example of the how the Brit Establishment scouts and recruits future functionaries – and of course, an exemplar of what is the purpose of private education – and the prime reason for its abolition!
A new twist is the high-level involvement of a zionist Uncle Pat — scion of one of the most corrupt families in the West Brit establishment.
https://x.com/Nick_Delehanty/status/1950823913383936163
It says:
“Did you know that Morgan McSweeney’s Mum & Dad have been paid €8.4M+ by the Irish Govt for asylum accommodation… with all profits routed through a Cyprus shell company?? …”
Certainly seems worthy of further scrutiny.
“And there’s more… Morgan McSweeney’s 1st cousin, Clare Mungovan, is special advisor and lead policy advisor to Simon Harris” (Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, previously Taoiseach from 2024 to 2025).
Morgan McSweeney’s father is her uncle.
https://x.com/Nick_Delehanty/status/1950439004211728685
Naturally no mention of this story whatsoever in either the UK or Irish media.
“….two of the main players in this charade are Scots: Chamberlain (the judge) and McCalum (Head of MI5). They also reflect the standard Brit division of labour – one being privately educated (the judge) and the other a product of a state school (the plod)”
=======
What state school? It is pretty difficult to track down. On social media there is some speculation that it was Jordanhill in Glasgow. This is denied by a woman on Mumsnet who claims her husband taught him maths in “a state school”
Other claims of an upbringing in Broomhill and McCallum’s alleged support for Partick Thistle FC, offer possible clues. If Hyndland Secondary nurtured the future head of the Security Service then it does qualify as a state school, albeit one with a selective and academic tradition – unless I am misinformed.
Well done to Huda Ammori on winning a judicial review of the proscription, even if it will take a few months to come about.
Thankyou Craig
Special Advocate what a joke – all evidence should be open available and accountable – otherwise its a farce.
So all this secret service shenanigans is protected under the Royal prerogative and all the officers given automatic immunity so even when they tell boldfaced lies and offer transparent fabrications in secret court no-one will ever be held accountable?
Hoping for positive, enlightened outcomes under this authoritarian govt is an exercise in futility. Just take solace in the fact the govt is only harming itself among its diminished support base…enough electoral rope and all that. Corbyn and Sultana won’t need expensive PR with Starmer’s Labour doing the heavy lifting for them.
Regarding the ‘not before’ 12 September.
Could that relate to the 80th Session of the UN General Assembly which starts on Tuesday 9 September; France, the UK; Canada(?), Australia(?), New Zealand(?) could be about to officially recognise Palestine.
When you’re in a hole, keep digging…
UK Government Warns Promoting the Use of VPNs Could Attract Fines.
All of this also ignores the fact that treating under 18’s, particularly teenagers in the 15 to 18 range, like they’re all five years old is going to be hugely insulting for many of them. The government might yet regret giving many in this group the power to vote.
From : https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2025/07/uk-government-warns-promoting-the-use-of-vpns-could-attract-fines.html
When even ISP review thinks the govt has been ‘heavy handed’ you know they messed up. I predict they’ll ban free VPNs. Therein lies the problem with non-tech MPs legislating; they fail to predict how one authoritarian move could well necessitate another, with an increasingly authoritarian whac-a-mole game ensuing. They implemented the OSA’s age verification without having a single safe, privacy protecting, secure system in place – getting the cart before the horse. At the very least they should have waited for the EU’s implementation of age verification and harmonised with that.
And you don’t actually need a VPN anyway – a virtual server (~£4 month) with a SOCKS5 proxy tunnel will suffice – potentially better than a VPN. Even China, with all its resources and the Great Firewall of China can’t stop its citizens, so why venture down such an unpopular path?
So it’s to be another Katherine Gun…
Umm sadly it seems September is the start of WWIII. Eight days of conventional weapons and then straight to nukes. Fifty days for Hamas to unconditionally surrender all negotiating platforms, and now all the Arab states are pleading with them to comply.
“all the Arab states are pleading with them to comply.” Unless I’m mistaken, it is in fact the pro-Western reinvented Arab League. The Arab League was historically ineffective but conspicuously pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli. However its visible failures have turned it into another US satrapy with a recent history of divisive betrayals. It is now simply an untrustworthy anti-Palestinian tool of Gulf State subservience:
https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/the-arab-leagues-many-failures/
PS Worth noting that this sudden anti-Palestinian Arab (but not Persian) unanimity comes after Syria coincidentally no longer opposes Israeli plans, Iraq has been permanently nobbled, and Iran, never a League member, is distracted by Israeli and US plans to attack it through Syria and Iraq.
That there has been, in Chamberlain’s view, no material change in circumstance between no one being arrested for stating support for Palestine Action, and the current situation in which people ARE being arrested for doing so, is frankly worse than specious. It’s idiotic.
Thanks again for your account of the proceedings, Craig – much appreciated.
Having attended the 21 July JR application hearing, I came away then with the gut-feel that Chamberlain considers the proscription order disproportionate – but (i) does not want to get embroiled in a Sisyphisean judiciary-v.-executive dispute *sans issue* over the Sec o’ State’s discretionary authority by staying the order, nor (ii) wants to risk being connected to any further Brize-Norton-style embarrassment for the government that might arise in the interim if it’s lifted.
Although the application to stay failed twice on 4 July, the fact of his refusal to consider his own under-estimation of the order’s impact, and his dismissal of the evidence amassed of consequent police overreach, is well highlighted. Surely legally slapdash ? At least no leave to appeal for the defence.
The observation regarding ‘full disclosure being also in the interests of the client’ (Claimant?) perhaps indicates that the proscription order is (already) not expected to survive JR. Cooper then needs a face-saving way back, which could well somehow germinate in the CLOSED stuff. The judiciary must of course play the field that parliamentary legislation has designed for them … but, political interference in administering the course of justice anywhere ?
We’re going to win this imv, taking us back to the *status quo ante* of 3 July, yet where the punishment will have been in the process and its myriad spin-offs around the country. A pyrrhic sort of victory then, the Situation having degraded meanwhile, with the prospect of democratic political representation for Gazans likely still remote. We have to leverage some political capital of our own from the event by raising pressure for the repeal and total overhaul of that noxious menace to the public interest residing in the swollen drivel of the Terrorism Acts.
These are the same bloody UK spooks who were right behind the Jihadists in Syria.
They are afraid of pensioners with placards.
It will be remembered forever that like Starmer, they are right behind the state on the Levant which right now, in full view, is committing the Holocaust.
Fucking bastards.
May they enjoy Hell.
This (the last two items specifically) reminded me of a scene in More American Graffiti. A woman looks at a placard that her brother plans to take to a political demonstration.
Bro: “We have to communicate in a vernacular that the police will understand.”
Sis: “Pigs eat shit”? “Pigs eat shit” does not make an understanding police officer. You’re gonna be in big trouble.”
😁
Right with you there, my old friend.
Despite everything that’s happening these days, I hope you’re keeping well.
According to Sqwawkbox, “From 2004 to 2006, Keir Starmer acted as a barrister for five people who had tried to damage RAF planes to prevent them bombing Iraq in Tony Blair’s illegal war that would eventually cause the deaths of more than 1.2 million civilians. He presented a defense on the basis that they were acting to prevent a greater evil.”
Does anyone know how to find out more about this, and what Starmer said at the time? It would be of great interest to Huda Ammori and her supporters.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/palestine-action-starmer-echr/
Thanks for the link!
” Keir Starmer argued that while their actions were unlawful, they were justified as an attempt to prevent war crimes, asserting that the Iraq War lacked legal basis under international law due to the absence of a clear UN resolution. It is reported that Starmer represented Josh Richards, who was allegedly found with a mixture of petroleum and washing-up liquid intended to ignite bomber wheels, arguing Richards believed his actions were reasonable to stop an illegal war. Richards was cleared after the jury failed to reach a verdict. ”
Intent to set fire to an aircraft (it was an American B52) is very different to just splashing some paint around.
Don’t mistake Starmer’s action here for sympathy. The way the law works a barrister can be called upon act in someone’s defence even if they know they’re as guilty as sin.
Hi. You have put your details in quotes. What and where are you quoting from please?
If you search the initial phrase is seems to lead to an article from the daily Telegraph, I cant verify any more as the item is behind a paywall, and I have no wish to add to the coffers of whoever owns that organ. If you want to it’s up to you. Judgeing by the headlines as they appear on the front pages of sites like https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk I would not give it any credibility as a reliable source for any news item.
Actions in support of Palestine Action are an arrestable offence. So what’s to stop them arresting those bringing this case and those representing them??
On a related note, in spite of on and off torrential rain, tens of thousands are right now marching across the Sydney Harbour bridge in support of Palestine, Julian among them.
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/a073149e8266db1c528326ecaca5500e7bb4f6d1/47_0_1506_1204/master/1506.jpg?width=1900&dpr=1&s=none&crop=none
A judge allowed that march to go ahead, in spite of the Premier of NSW trying to stop it. In Melbourne, police are stopping protesters from blocking King Street bridge over the Yarra river, but the weekly protest at the state library took place as usual with tens of thousands attending.
Thank you for another excellent report on a futile effort by the establishment to suppress legitimate non violent protest with obscure judicial and Zionist influenced rigmarole.
I fully agree with your last resumee, this is designed to create fear here, what is going to happen next? Shooting rubber bullets at those protesting against these genocidal maniacs who lost all trust and or morals.
The collective western war mongers have dismissed the ICJ and ICC laws they themselves created, it is like watching Rumpelstilzken tearing itself apart
The recent coverage on the main news channels like SKY and BBC of the starvation that is happening to children in Palestine
has finally made keir starmer unable to totally ignore the situation with his weak statement of possibly recognising Palestine as a state some
time in the future depending on if the news cycle should change. As he said the images were depressing. Not the actuality that has existed long before the main news images. So if the images can go away then so can the need to carry out any action. It already looks like the news cycle is moving with less coverage of the starving. Other news stories to cover is it too hot or too dry or has some celebrity died or done something mildly interesting.
“The recent coverage on the main news channels like SKY and BBC of the starvation that is happening to children in Palestine
has finally made keir starmer unable to totally ignore the situation”
Some might find it unlikely that these news channels would say anything that Starmer’s minders don’t approve of. Perhaps pressure is being put on Netanyahu to declare victory and leave because Israel is in a bad shape and its becoming harder to manufacture consent, so, time to regroup and re-think.
https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/ex-mossad–shin-bet-chiefs-urge-trump-to-push-netanyahu-to-e
Thanks, Craig, for this insightful report which lays bare the flimsy pretext for the proscription of PA. The supercilious character of Chamberlain you describe, the patronising dismissal of real concerns about the now visible effects of the proscription in free speech and protest, surely betray the original purpose and intent of the act. The smugness of his condescending and incorrect statements are entirely in sync with the political declarations of the ‘draconian’ intent of the bill on protest about Palestine, as well as the desire to protect Israel from criticism and free debate, allowing them and their pernicious front groups to write UK legislation on their behalf. Even Thatcher would have been appalled at this obsequious, cowardly, currying of favour from the US/Israel extremists. And it is an implicit acceptance of how downgraded we are as a country of any importance or relevance in international politics. Merely a willing appendage of the genocidal forces eradicating life in Gaza, and soon the West Bank. It is quite incredible that Starmer has spent so much political capital covering for a foreign country, siding with their massacring army, aiding and abetting their genocide, and importing their anti-democratic stifling of protest and debate, into UK law. But he’d prefer you won’t bring that to the public’s attention, so has come up with some handy ruses to criminalise and intimidate those that do.
Thus the smug inference that arresting elderly protesters and raiding their houses, confiscating computers and drives, disrupting their lives, for holding a placard, is ‘necessary to suppress the organisation as a whole’. Which it clearly is not, except in the sense that innocent people must suffer as a deterrent to anybody who may, even unknown to themselves, give the impression that they support PA, by any method whatsoever – holding a placard, saying a sentence with the words Palestine and action in them, or simply standing in the street vocally supporting Palestinians and being agains genocide. Such is the very much intended effect of this bill, and they are being explicit about it. As your article says, ‘section 12.1.a of the Terrorism Act which specifically removed the need for intent in criminalised speech. Accidentally saying something taken to be supportive of Palestine Action could be an offence.’
It is now coming into focus how the ‘narrow’ target of proscribing PA was a very intentional dragnet in which thousands of innocent people can be caught by the very deliberate creation of ‘grey areas’ which are not in reality grey, but are the wider target which the government wanted to attack, with great chicanery and ‘plausible deniability’ (oh we didn’t intend that a granny with a placard should be facing a prison sentence – except Chamberlain is now admitting that they did).
It is cynical and manipulative to a fault. Combine the two known facts – that the internal Home Office review did not consider PA a risk to national security or were associated with violence, and that hundreds of people are being arrested for nothing other than a policeman arbitrarily deciding that a protestor, or speaker, falls under the remit of the bill; and you have the intent, the means and the implementation of the proscription of free Palestinian speech and action. Keeping it arbitrary and vaguely implemented keeps it intimidating and real, while giving them the get out they can parade when it suits them. And then combine that with secret courts where assertions are not challengeable, or even knowable, and you are not represented in any remotely fair or competent way, and you have the desired effect of suppression, intimidation and threats of draconian jail sentences for a word out of place.
Suppressing opposition, frightening and intimidating their own population, and supporting a foreign regime they are in cahoots with is not the sign of an independent or mature democracy. No wonder we have come under scrutiny from the likes of the UN and other human rights groups, and are quickly becoming notorious for our slide away from free speech and democracy. The utterly farcical secret testimonies and ‘special agents’ are the stuff of cold war novels about the old Eastern bloc. Now they are here and we hear hardly a word of protest or opposition. And it is only through your reporting that we are made aware of how blackly farcical and repressive the UK has become. No media that I know of has even outlined the basic case of the injustice and diminishing of human rights in this hearing. Pity we don’t have a PM who is experienced and knows his way around human rights legislation, and will fight on their behalf eh? What ever happened to that man?
The silencing of witnesses to the atrocities in Gaza by Israel is just the same policy imported here by the ‘UK’ government. It’s all part of the same strategy
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/aug/03/gaza-aid-israel-authorities-hospitals
Extraordinary How Cooper and Starmer are so servile to Israel. What motivates such debasement? Not only the money that is shovelled their way surely.
Yes, is it a “Sunk cost fallacy” at play here or what cause the western leaders to keep defending and whitewashing israel regardless how severe and flagrant israel’s crrimes are? As you say it could hardly be only about money, right? While one could “understand” western sympathy right after 7th of october it is also true that just days after it was apparent that israel had far more sinister aims with their “defensive” acts in Gaza. There have been so many times during this genocide when the western leaders, without risk, could have jumped off the pro-israel-bandwagon due to israel’s obvious human rights violations, instead, the rhetoric is pretty much the same as on october 7: “israel has the right to defend itself and that deaths in Gaza is the fault of Hamas.”
The western world do not benefit one iota from supporting israel. There is for example so much anti-immigration rhetoric in the west but it is of course israel that cause palestinians, lebanese, iranians and syrians to flee to europe. There is so much talk about the alleged threat from “islamic terrorism” in the west but by supporting israel’s maiming and killing of arabs, muslims 24/7 the west have made sure that the “islamic terrorism” will bloom coming decades.
Another issue is the loathsome subserviance the western leaders show to israel, bending over backwards proving israel is above the west, meanwhile west do not get any respect back, when some european leaders said they might recognize Palestine past week, it was met with slander and attacks by israel! The nerve of this regime, after all the western nations have done by covering up their genocide, this is the response. Such chutzpah.
Let’s remember that the 7th Oct did not come out of the blue. The Palestinians were and are the most surveilled population on the planet. And, the West are big purchasers of their ‘battle proven’ surveillance tools. Also, there are many Palestinians who act as mossad spies becauseof blackmail or money. Israel and probably their allies were fully aware of planning for 7th Oct. They let it happen. All deaths and hostages are down to Israel, and the West.
The west is only interested in what they can get out of Palestine and what they can get by bending over for the zionists: oil, money, power and influence. They won’t let a few thousand dead babies stand in their way. Recognition of Palestine is too little, too late and entirely empty, political posturing.
There is growing evidence of ” high level ” Netanyahu Gov complicity in the events of Oct 7 ; if not direct involvement in the planning & execution of the attack – though that is certainly possible , can we put anything past the Zionist fanatics ? – then foreknowledge and enabling .
The Jimmy Dore Show: “We Were ORDERED To Stand Down On October 7th!” – Says IDF Soldier (YouTube, 16m 33s) – 3 Aug 2025
A very good question.
We know that Mossad used Epstein to get material that was (and is) used to blackmail US politicians.
Maybe there is a European equivalent of Epstein? Someone apparently wealthy, using the wealth to develop friends in high places, who are then invited to a chateau .. or a yacht … or an island where under-age sex partners are available – supposedly “privately” but actually recorded for blackmail purposes. Speculation, of course. But it would explain a lot.
Or possibly, it’s only the blackmailable ones that are allowed to get into positions of power. It is said that one of TPTB’s problems with Corbyn was that he had no skeletons in his cupboards.
From the Guardian:
“UK to evacuate ill and injured children from Gaza to receive NHS care. Government to announce taxpayer-funded initiative after three children were brought to UK under private scheme“.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/aug/03/uk-injured-children-gaza-nhs-care
^ Those are the headline and strapline. Note the words “NHS care” and “taxpayer-funded”. (“Under private scheme” may have been added by committee.)
How long until the British authorities and their media push a story about how a 16 year old boy from Gaza wasn’t as ill or as injured as originally thought, and that he had to be detained by police after he touched up a female nurse, or after he assaulted the young daughter of a white native British patient in the same ward? Or that he kept saying “Allahu akhbar” while watching beheading videos on his taxpayer-provided smartphone? Probably all stirred together with something to do with Hamas. Or that he was 23 not 16. Or that he kept demanding a shattafa (bum gun)?
It won’t surprise me at all if the line of “we don’t want those Gaza types here” is pushed in the relatively near future. The rulers have no humanity.
A further note: the term “UK” appears 17 times in this 685 word article in the Guardian. If one calls it a word, this means 1 in every 40 words is “UK”. I see this disgusting royalist digraph so often that I am almost becoming a supporter of Scottish independence!
It’s getting similar to “Heil Hitler” and “Za dom spremni” becoming standard greetings in Nazi Germany and Ustashist Croatia. (Does 1 in 40 beat the frequency of “DPRK” in press articles in North Korea?)
Actually, this is just rubbing the British publics noses in the western supported genocide.
We’ll bring a few injured people to the UK drop them onto a non functioning NHS and pretend we’re doing something. Meanwhile we’ll keep supplying arms, training, special forces, Cyprus to the murderers and we’ll actively prevent food and medical supplies from getting to the Palestinians.
Don’t be fooled, the UK government and most MPs are just a bunch of c*nts.
“In this extraordinary abuse of process, the security services are allowed to bring alleged “intelligence” material into proceedings, which Huda Ammori and Palestine Action are not permitted to see. Nor are their lawyers allowed to have any idea what allegations have been made…”
Did someone say “Guantanamo”?
However.
Those detained at Gitmo who faced accusations based on secret evidence were foreigners, designated as “unlawful enemy combatants”. My understanding is, UK treats its own citizens in the same way, correct?
People will find a way. The lies from the so called in tell service have been seen before. They have form. But they would do wouldn’t they. Those people act for invested interests. Interests for other people’s resources at bargain basement prices. Or just plain theft.
” It was not arguable that Palestine Action did not commit acts intended to influence the government”
If this is the criteria, is there any action at all that cannot be proscribed…writing a letter to the times, emailing an MP, having a televised debate about the pros and cons of a third runway, voting the wrong way in local elections, setting up an opposition party, resigning from the ruling party…….an all expense paid trip to Israel!!!…yeah that last one…
This whole circus is just one more way for the UK establishment to ingratiate and align itself with US policy especially with regard to Israel.
Fortunately the world is rapidly coming to the conclusion that Israel is the villain on the world stage as indicated by UN votes where most states in the world do not back Israel, their support consists of Israel/US and a few Micronesian states. One of the biggest challengers to the status quo is Thomas Massie [Republican] who is hated by the orange Zionist bloviator Trump. The new Super PAC launched solely to support a primary challenge against popular Republican Congressman Thomas Massie is funded entirely by three Israel-backing billionaires from Nevada, New York and Florida, according to disclosure filings posted on Thursday.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/super-pac-targeting-massie-funded-three-israel-backing-billionaires
This is a glaring example of the corruption of “The Citizens United” legislation proving that special interest money in the form of ‘Israeli first’ Billionaires forming a group to destroy a candidate who does not put Israel first.
Of course this will be preceded by the election of the excellent Mamdani in New York another one to watch.
When this Genocide is over, Politicians like Starmer and Lammy who have and continue to deny Genocide is taking place, will have nowhere to hide, they are a disgrace to humanity and deserve to be removed from power and prosecuted at the highest level for their complicity in mass murder.
“The Government Media Office in Gaza said that there are “more than 22,000 humanitarian aid trucks currently parked at the Gaza Strip crossing gates,” blocked by Israel.
“The Israeli occupation is deliberately preventing their entry as part of a systematic policy of engineering starvation, siege, and chaos,” the office said in a statement, adding that most of the trucks belong to the UN and international organisations and various entities.
Describing the situation as a “full-fledged war crime”, the media office said blocking the humanitarian aid violates international law and contributes to what it called the ongoing crime of genocide against the people of Gaza”..
https://www.middleeasteye.net/live-blog/live-blog-update/more-22000-aid-trucks-blocked-israel-says-gaza-media-office
“We hold the Israeli occupation, along with the states involved through silence or complicity, fully responsible for the worsening humanitarian catastrophe,” the statement added.
“When this Genocide is over, Politicians like Starmer and Lammy”, will take all their honours and retire to the Lords where they will interfere with British law and accumulate corporate riches, and the orange one will retire to his golf course to admire and polish his Nobel peace prize maybe shared with Bibi.
Sorry but if you think there will ever be any real justice or consequences you are sadly mistaken.
“When this Genocide is over, Politicians like Starmer and Lammy ” and the other national socialists masquerading as Labour will be voted out of office, but not for anything to do with the genocide, but for the sin of being the government when the end of the eighteen year property price cycle comes round. Foreigners being massacred is nothing compared to the enormity of your house being worth less than you paid for it.
Over 300,000 people crossed Sydney Harbour Bridge today in solidarity with Gaza.
https://x.com/Partisan_12/status/1951963003676397755
Julian Assange led the march, good to see their attempt at silencing him has failed spectacularly
Does anyone have a link to the text of the open letter by ex-Mossad chiefs to Trump asking him to use his influence to end the war in Gaza? There are several news reports (eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crkznje8nz8o), but I haven’t found a link to the actual text. BTW Netanyahu doesn’t like it, one good reason to get hold of it.
PS. The last sentence is a probable guess based on Netanyahu calling a letter from IAF reservists calling for an end to the war “marginal and extremist”, as reported e.g. on Al Jazeera: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/10/netanyahu-slams-reservists-urging-end-to-gaza-war-as-army-warns-dismissal