This is more video of me than anybody would ever want to see, but here are three interviews I did over the weekend.
The first covers the legal action against the proscription of Palestine Action, Starmer’s summary courts for peaceful protestors charged with “terrorism”, UK and US efforts to legalise the Israeli occupation of Gaza through the UN Security Council, and French colonial occupation of New Caledonia.
The second covers the campaign to further the cause of Scottish Independence through the United Nations.
and the third covers the Gaza Trump peace plan and the future of the “ceasefire”
Should anyone have the time to download and clean up the YouTube transcripts I will gladly post them (they usually have a lot of errors).
Fundraising for the challenge in the Scottish courts to the proscription of Palestine Action is not going as fast as I would hope. Through all routes it is totalling £13,120, which will just get about get us to the starting line but not much further. The freedom of thousands of peaceful protestors could hang on this action, so please donate if you can, though as ever we do not want anyone to cause themselves hardship.
We now have a crowdfunder which pays money direct to the legal team. I understand that most people of goodwill have donated and donated to numerous causes in these terrible times. If you cannot donate, please help by spreading the crowdfunder.
You can also donate here:
Alternatively by bank transfer:
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
Or crypto:
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Would a placard shown in public and saying “It’s time for UK government action on Palestine” or “Support direct action on Palestine” fall foul of the Tewwahism Act(s)?
Read the previous post on the 36 minute trials – if Cuntstable Knacker is of the opinion that it is something that could be taken as “arousing suspicion” as support for a proscribed organisation (most particularly, PA), then that’s good enough for the judge.
Bear in mind the filth have their “suspicion aroused” by just about everything not directly in support of them and the PTB.
In this case it has to be reasonable suspicion, so if Knacker says it aroused his suspicion it would be a defence to argue that his suspicion wasn’t reasonable.
No, really it doesn’t – read CM’s article:
“Perhaps the most astonishing thing about this draconian legislation is that arousing suspicion is actually the offence. It does not matter if the suspicion turns out to be well-grounded or not. “
If that is correct, Glenn, then you are really in police state/fascist territory.
I suppose you would have a good chance of proving that a police officer’s suspicion (of supporting P..A..) is unreasonable if you were participating in a demonstration against, say, blood sports or the poll tax.
But not if your demonstration has anything to do with the Occupying Entity/Palestine’s war.
Having said that, that the suspicion has to be “reasonable” should not be too difficult to demonstrate in a case where a protester carries a sign saying “I support P..A..”
I asked CoPilot AI, and it appears that the expression “direct action” could get you in trouble, because that’s what Palestine Action engages in. But the AI also provided some ideas for placards that stay clear of such risk:
“End UK Arms Sales to Israel”
“Stop UK Complicity in War Crimes”
“Palestinian Lives Matter”
“End the Occupation, Uphold International Law”
These messages avoid endorsing any proscribed group (like Palestine Action).
I have understood that the British are great fans of something called “judicial review”.
Has anyone yet tried to obtain judicial review of the Tewwahism Act(s) in so far as they allow convictions for “supporting tewwahism” on the basis that a police officer has a “reasonable suspicion” that this is the case?
They don’t have judicial review of Acts of parliament.
Because of the “supremacy” of Parliament?
If you are correct, I wonder if the UK is unique in the developed world/Western Europe?
I’ve no doubt Israel ordered the UK government to proscribe PA.
That Starmer and his ministers jump to Israel’s command is most recently shown by Lisa Nandy in the Commons doubling down on attempts to overturn the very sensible ban on Maccabi Tel Aviv football hooligans. A post on Twitter by the Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar makes clear that he issued the order to revoke the ban.
It’s an interesting tweet. Sa’ar is also demanding that the freedom of UK citizens to chant for Palestinian freedom “from the river to the sea” be legislated against. It occurs to me that should the Tel Aviv fans succeed in instigating violence in Birmingham then the ensuing fake outrage at the “antisemitism” against them will be used to manufacture consent for the pro-Palestine slogan to be outlawed.
https://x.com/gidonsaar/status/1979600380725014678
If “from the river to the sea” is criminalised, why not “right of return”?
A cop might then have to claim he “suspected” the person meant a right for Palestinians, or for refugees, or even just a right for people who really did live somewhere and were forced out by terrorists – which would self-evidently be “anti-Semitic” – as opposed to a right for a bunch of Nazi-style invaders none of whose 50-greats grandparents had ever been near the place, whom one mustn’t ever compare to Nazis, because that would be “anti-Semitic” too.
This could be quite taxing for Michael Snow.
Not quite so taxing for those of us who value 1. humanity, 2. the truth, and 3. the idea that we’re all Jock Tamson’s bairns, though.
I could easily imagine that spreading the notion that “if you want to find out who rules you, look for who you’re not allowed to criticise” might get criminalised too.
Mart
Yes Nandy is acting on direct public instruction from the Israeli foreign minister.
But there is a common front on this Maccabi psyop: from the Labour ZOG, Reform, Tories and Lib Dems through to Tommy Robinson and the Guardian. The politicians through to the street-level far right and the liberal press.
We saw this same alliance throughout the Corbyn ‘antisemitism’ scam years and this current zionist psyop won’t be the last time we see it.
For anyone interested, the Canary has been running a serialisation of Paul Holden’s book ‘The Fraud’. This details the activities and funders of Morgan McSweeney, et al, to undermine Corbyn and propel Starmer into power. An interesting read. Nine parts so far, part nine here:
https://www.thecanary.co/the-fraud/2025/10/21/the-fraud-part-nine-the-ccdh/
Thanks Stevie, yes interesting indeed.
Steve Reed, now Housing Secretary, is a lowlife even by Savile-Epstein party standards. He is of course very well liked among British political journalists.
It’s terrifying. To me at least, it really feels like living through Invasion of the Body Snatchers in real life. It’s worth remembering that that film is often interpreted as a political allegory. I’m not clear as to what exactly it was intended to be an allegory of – fear of Communism, or fear of McCarthyism? – and I always used to think that that kind of interpretation was rather forced. But the story so perfectly represents how I’ve been feeling about politics for the last decade that I now can’t help thinking that even if those involved in the making of the film, and the novel on which it was based, denied any conscious political intent, it nevertheless gave powerful unconscious expression to something that was terrifying people at that time – just as I am being terrified by something right now. The fact that it’s hard to be sure of exactly what was being expressed is probably typical of all kind of unconscious expression. (Perhaps I should go back to reading Freud? He wasn’t wrong about everything.)
Twirlip
Yes it’s back to mass gaslighting of the British public, with virtually everyone in public life playing along.
Somebody who isn’t, to her great credit, is Zarah Sultana. In Parliament yesterday she reminded Nandy that many Maccabi Tel Aviv fans have been gleefully murdering babies in Gaza, with the assistance of Nandy’s government.
Nandy’s response was gibberish and smears.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DQCbyjtDHmG/
The govt’s irrational behaviour is indeed mystifying. it is fair comment to say Israel isn’t exactly popular at the moment anywhere in Europe. And it’s also true that the West Midlands has a high concentration of Muslims, many furious about the suffering in Gaza, creating a potential volatile mix. Were Maccabi fans’ record impeccable, there would be valid public order arguments to prevent away supporters from attending.
Nandy, yesterday, implied the initial decision was influenced by antisemitism, without providing a shred of evidence to support her belief. I’d wager, outside the HoC, without parliamentary privilege, she wouldn’t have made such a claim. It looks, today, like the Israeli club has moved to save this govt’s blushes by not making tickets available; they cited Tommy Robinson and the risk the far right could hijack the event for a punch up with Palestine supporters – Robinson posted a picture of himself on X in their jersey. The UK govt say they regret this decision taken in Israel to prevent supporters travelling – to which you can only say, WTF are they smoking?
It’s coming to something when an Israeli football club with a known hooliganism problem, has more sense than the entire UK govt.
Yes, I just saw what must be the same or a similar clip on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/yj_IopqSgzY
‘Maccabi Tel Aviv racist fan hooliganism can’t be separated from Israeli militarism’ says British MP – YouTube
It’s quite gobsmacking. Zarah Sultana bravely stands up in Parliament and tells some simple but shocking truths, to a braying chorus of sounds of disapproval, derisive laughter, histrionic shaking of heads, and exclamations of “What nonsense!” and “You should be investigated!” Then Lisa Nandy stands up, and immediately tells a blatant and instantly refutable lie about what Zara Sultana has just said – and to this barefaced lie, there is no chorus of disapproval, not even a peep of dissent.
And everything is like this now. Every single day! One mad, bad thing after another. It’s impossible to keep up, trying to maintain sanity, trying to keep the lies and insanity and sheer evil at bay. I don’t know how anybody copes (except by becoming one of the Pod People).
This is what Lisa Nandy posted on X yesterday evening, as hundreds of anti-Genocide protestors sit in jail on terrorism charges, NHS doctors are arrested in their homes for Israel etc…
“This is about who we are as a country.
People are free to protest, free to lobby Government and free to express their views passionately.”
https://x.com/lisanandy/status/1980331543924208123
She deactivated replies.
“and to this barefaced lie, there is no chorus of disapproval, not even a peep of dissent.”
To all those who helped get this rotten crew into power by voting Labour “because they are not the Conservatives”, shame on you!*
* this is not aimed at any particular commenter on this blog.
Who are those two MPs sitting in front of (and below) Ms Sultana at the beginning of the clip?
I think the arsehole on the left is Lee Anderson, but who is the arsehole on the right?
Luis,
You are correct, the arsehole on the left is indeed Lee Anderthal. Don’t know who the other grey-haired arsehole is but given his proximity to Anderthal, he’s probably a Reform MP or an Ulster Unionist – birds of feather and all that.
You can now find a readable transcript of the third video – in which Craig is interviewed by Jasim Azzawi about “Britain, Gaza, and Middle East Peace” – in the discussion forum:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/topic/cm-on-britain-gaza-and-middle-east-peace-jasim-azzawi-show-transcript/
Don’t worry Craig, you’re so much easier on the eye than Keir Starmer who always looks as if he’s been caught with two hands in the biscuit jar.
Judge Snow was a right bloody prick,
Threw grannies in jail fucking quick.
“A sign? That’s a crime!
Do your time, don’t you whine!”
All legal, and morally sick.
No jury, no trial, no shame,
Just power, and playing a game.
“Six months,” he would bark—
For a sign in the park—
While pretending the system’s not lame.
So next time you dare to dissent,
Remember where peaceful gets sent.
The law’s lost its soul,
And this bastard’s role
Proves justice can fucking relent.
And another…
Judge Snow, with a scowl and a sneer,
Made justice just vanish from here.
Six months in a cell,
For a sign? What the hell—
His robe hides a heart far from clear.
The UK Labour party are shamefully still trying to overturn West Midlands police and other authorities ban on Maccabi fans attending the Aston Villa game next month, by promising to increase funding for the Police and attempting to conflate the ban with antisemitism and anti Israeli football hooliganism. All this when the Israeli Authorities have just cancelled a local derby match in Tel Aviv, for what…. wait for it, fear of “public order and violent riots. You could not make this up.
The Israeli Premier League derby between Maccabi Tel Aviv and Hapoel Tel Aviv was cancelled before kick-off on Sunday, after what police described as “public disorder and violent riots”.
Lisa Nandy Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (also a recipient of Zionist donor cash from Trevor Chinn) said in parliament “Conflating Israel and Jews is in itself anti-Semitic” that is true however that is what Israel does every single day !! It is what PM Starmer does every single day !!
All the leaderships of UK parties Labour, Conservative, Liberal and Reform support the genocide carried out by Israel, they accede to Israeli lobbyists for weapons, air reconnaissance assistance and aircraft parts. And our parliamentarians are happy to supply them. Disgraceful. Here is a glimpse into Maccabi fans in Amsterdam, it took a schoolboy (named Bender) to do the grown up Journalist’s Jobs.
https://thegrayzone.com/2024/11/10/video-israeli-hooligans-attacked-police-amsterdam
Thank you very much for the reference! This whole thing is driving me mad, and I was gong to search for the notes I made at the time of the Amsterdam violence and accompanying insanely outrageous media lies, but that Grayzone article is one that I missed at the time, although of course I’ve seen the damning video by “Bender”.
Done! Reminds me very much of ICE in the US. Really bedrock concepts of due process, basic rights, …what more is there to say? Any state that has to resort to these measures in the name of “security” has lost the ever-loving plot. It’s just a bureaucratic way of saying might makes right.
I have read somewhere that the Tel Aviv Maccabi club has now told Aston Villa that it doesn’t want any tickets for the match.
Perhaps common sense has prevailed in the minds of the Maccabi management since it is becoming well known that Maccabi fans have quite a reputation.
If correct, it will provide an off-ramp for Sir Keir, Mzzz Nandy et al : they will have burnished their credentials with Jerusalem (Jerusalem: “JUMP!” Sir Keir : “how high, Sir?” ) without having to face accusations of concrete political interference in the affairs of a private football club, the Birmingham safety authorities and the West Midlands Police.
UK PM Keir Starmer was complaining and implying that West Midlands police were being antisemitic when they stopped Maccabi fans from attending Aston Villa’s match next month in heavily Muslim populated Birmingham. Once again Starmer is conflating Antisemitism with Israeli Maccabi racist and violent supporters.
The local safety advisory group and West Midlands Police have made a decision to ban Maccabi supporters due to a “high risk” of violence based on previous incidents and current intelligence.
Maccabi Tel Aviv fans are known for violence, hooliganism and racist behaviour at games, with major disturbances reported at an Ajax match in Amsterdam last year.
Maccabi supporters chanted “fuck the Arabs”, “we will take your girls who love to party, we will rape them” and “why is school out in Gaza, There are no children left there”?.
Now that the Israeli Premier League derby between Maccabi Tel Aviv and Hapoel Tel Aviv was cancelled before kick-off on Sunday, after what police described as “public disorder and violent riots”.
Will Starmer now eat crow, and/or criticize the self hating Jews who made that decision?
Jonathan Cooke has a new article out on the hypocrisy of Starmer et al on this issue.
https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2025-10-20/chants-starmer-police-antisemitic/
In this excellent video Guardian Journalist Owen Jones calls out the hypocrisy of the UK political class of all parties, in particular he quite rightly savages Labour Minister Lisa Nandy. This was a joy to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa_MHqw13VI
Note that Owen is on his own website. There is no chance of the Guardian publishing anything like this.
The website https://www.maccabipedia.co.il shows a Hebrew version of the Maccabi fans’ song.
Here is a machine translation:
“You play extreme tea, sing songs about the Holocaust
And also think it’s funny to deny the country
You are Arab whores, we are ashamed of you
At the end of the day Gate 5 we will fuck you
We’ll fuck you, and then we’ll drink your blood
And in the square, every communist who came here was hanged.
We’ll take the girls, who like to run wild
When we rape them, we’ll shout, today the working death!
Today the working death.”
Starmer’s body language and facial expressions in repose are truly worthy of study.
They both reflect his introvert type.
Yes! What is up with his ridiculous facial expression and body language.
As Jen said above here:
“…Keir Starmer who always looks as if he’s been caught with two hands in the biscuit jar.”
But I guess that is why he is able to fool so many people. He have that scared, ashamed, sad, clownish ,non-threatening facial expression all the time, while, at the same time, he support a brutal genocide.
“Yes! What is up with his ridiculous facial expression and body language.”
My guess is that he is being coerced in some way, probably blackmail.
Screen saver mode, like someone with dementia he’s wondering where he is and why, once someone puts a few shekels in the slot in the back of his head he bursts into life shouting ‘anti-Semitism’, a bit like Father Jack …
Several articles I came across that raise the spectre of absolute corruption within the Israeli regime:
‘Virginia Giuffre, … , was repeatedly left battered and bloodied after being beaten and raped by a man she describes, in a new memoir published after her death earlier this year, as a “well-known prime minister”. … Before Epstein’s death, however, she named former Israeli PM Ehud Barak – also a close friend of Epstein’s ardent fan Peter Mandelson – as one of the many men to rape her.’
https://www.thecanary.co/skwawkbox/2025/10/20/virginia-giuffre-prime-minister
‘Tom Alexandrovich, a top Israeli cybersecurity official caught in a Las Vegas child sex sting in September, has been quietly indicted — six weeks after U.S. authorities let him slip back to Israel. Even stranger, his new defense attorney is none other than David Chesnoff, a powerful Las Vegas lawyer appointed to the Homeland Security Advisory Council by President Trump. Citing a Jewish watchdog group, a 2020 CBS News report found that, in just the previous six years, more than 60 Jewish Americans who’d been accused of pedophilia had fled to Israel’ [From VT site]
And,
‘Greta Thunberg, … was “dragged on the ground” and “forced to kiss the Israeli flag.” Thunberg was “treated terribly” and “used as propaganda,” recalling how she was shoved into a room as far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir entered.’
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/4/greta-thunberg-mistreated-by-israeli-forces-in-detention-activists-say
The rot goes deep.
Whilst I believe that Virginia Guiffre did have (consensual) sex with Randy Andy in Ghislaine’s London mews house, Stevie, unlike virtually all of the UK media, I take much of what’s in her just-released memoir with a large pinch of sodium chloride:
https://www.mtracey.net/p/we-need-to-talk-about-virginia
As I said previously, IMO, Andrew is the approved sacrificial cow being slaughtered to distract from other bigger names in Epstein’s black book. Guiffre’s book hints at some of those names. Exaggerated or not we’ll never know because she has been silenced. Smell the handiwork of zion ?
Regardless, the point is the preponderance of sexual deviants in Israel ! And, the interesting ‘coincidence’ of who supports Israel in the west.
Thanks for your reply Stevie. The names that Giuffre hints at in her memoir (which are explicitly revealed in her now-unsealed deposition for her civil court case against Ghislaine Maxwell) are all less well-known than Epstein. Scores of women have come forward with accusations of sexual abuse against Epstein & Maxwell (both of whom likely could have had the means to arrange to have any of their accusers silenced permanently), but as far as I know, Giuffre is the only one amongst them to have accused any other people of that. Her family (who know far more about her later years that you or I) believe that she committed suicide. Do I smell the handiwork of zion? No.
One of the most damaging allegations is that Prince Andrew enlisted his Metropolitan Police bodyguard to investigate Virginia Giuffre, by passing along her date of birth and even her U.S. Social Security number, presumably in order to dig dirt to discredit her.
The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police is appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the Home Secretary. It’s all too cosy, facilitating cover-ups. It should be the responsibility of an independent appointments commission.
And, the police have been, and still are, protecting the grooming gangs in the UK. The whole establishment stinks to high heaven.
Thanks for your reply Goose. I’m not sure that giving someone another person’s social security number is a crime in the UK – provided no one is trying to obtain monies to which they’re not entitled. The police officer wouldn’t have been able to use it to obtain any information on Giuffre that wasn’t in the public domain anyway. However, being in possession of someone’s private electronic data that you know to have been obtained without the permission of its rightful owner (say, for instance, the former MP Stewart McDonald) and then threatening to publish some of it on this blog, is a crime punishable by up to two years in clink.
While israel killed 100+ palestinians past days, Trump as usual blame Hamas for the ceasefire-violations and now he threat to unleash arab regimes against Hamas:
“Trump claims Middle East countries offered to fight Hamas in Gaza”
“Numerous of our NOW GREAT ALLIES in the Middle East, and areas surrounding the Middle East, have explicitly and strongly, with great enthusiasm, informed me that they would welcome the opportunity, at my request, to go into GAZA with a heavy force and ‘straighten our Hamas’ if Hamas continues to act badly, in violation of their agreement with us,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/21/trump-claims-middle-east-countries-offered-to-fight-hamas-in-gaza
Bob Woodward exposed early on what the arab leaders, behind the scenes, really felt about the slaughter in Gaza:
‘Israel must defeat Hamas’ Arab leaders told Blinken days after 7 Oct: Report
“A new book by journalist Bob Woodward claims to reveal details of meetings between the US Secretary of State and Arab rulers”
https://thecradle.co/articles/israel-must-defeat-hamas-arab-leaders-told-blinken-days-after-7-oct-report
It is high time for regime change in all the corrupt arab nations. Enough of this heinous treachery!
It’s the old Sunni Vs Shia shuffle, instigated by the zionists to divide and conquer. It works every time with the sand people.
Stevie Boy
Yes these leaders are masochists, they love being submissive, they love being slaves and are apparently even prepared to kill off their ethnic group in the mix to the pleasure of their leaders in israel.
And after all, these puppets perhaps should intervene in Gaza, perhaps that will be the final catalyst for the arab people to set the streets in Cairo, Amman, Riyadh, on fire and root out these traitors once and for all.
“Yes these leaders are masochists, they love being submissive, they love being slaves and are apparently even prepared to kill off their ethnic group in the mix to the pleasure of their leaders in israel.”
Oh, do shut up with your racism, they are no worse than most “leaders” in Europe.
You really need to update yourself if you believe the pro-israel arab leaders are somehow popular among the wider arab populace. Is that really your view?
No it isn’t and I can’t for the life of me work out out why you think it might be.
“and I can’t for the life of me work out out why you think it might be.”
That is because every time I criticize the puppets ruling the arab world, you show up and seems have a problem with it. Let us hear your argument on the topic.
“Let us hear your argument on the topic.”
My argument: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2025/10/a-quick-intellectual-canter/comment-page-1/#comment-1088474
I doubt if Arab leaders really meant that, even if it’s what they said to Trump. They do have to manage the feelings of their own people, as well as Trump, and have to hold a line of satisfying both.
“It is high time for regime change in all the corrupt arab nations. Enough of this heinous treachery!”
No it isn’t. “Regime change” is when an independent government is replaced with one that is subservient to the US. Have you not noticed that the only Arab nations to stand up against the US are the ones that have managed to get rid of the government that the UK or US have imposed on them? All these states know damn well what will befall them if they go against their masters’ wishes, the most recent reminder being what happened to Qatar, but Iraq and Libya are not too far in the past and Syria is still recent. So, revolution in the Arab states; you and whose army?
Only Iran is truly independent, Yemen is on a knife edge, no-one else left. Every other Arab state is controlled to one degree or another.
Bayard
Well that I propose of course, for the arab world to rid itself from the american/israeli puppets that rule the arab world – carried out by the arab populace, of course? You are against that?
No, of course not, but such an undertaking can only be undertaken, even unsuccessfully, with considerable loss of life. The reason why they don’t do it is presumably the same as why you personally are not out there helping them do so. Nobody wants to die. So less of the reckless courage of the non combatant, please, and before you go on ad nauseam about why don’t “they” do something about something you disapprove of, ask yourself what you are doing about it, apart from making ineffectual remarks on someone else’s blog. Everyone on here is perfectly aware what needs to be done and don’t need to be told, repeatedly, by you.
Well there you go. That is the logic of the arab leaders: Lets have calm, lets have stability, do not rock the boat, do not create division, lets keep together for the sake of the state, support the leader, put all your faith in him. And so on That is what dictators throughout history have always said. Do not protest because then there will be violence, do not protest because then the state will crash down and you will lose your job and income and other type of fearmongering.
Do you think such submissive attitude – that you propose – bring good leadership? No. That is a wholly defeatist mentality and that is certainty not the attitude of the arab populace that proved during the Arab Spring that they do not fear their leaders.
The oppositional parties is banned in these nations, how could there ever be any change for the better in the region unless the people are allowed to vote and protest in the street?
“Do you think such submissive attitude – that you propose – bring good leadership? ”
No, but answer me this; are you currently acting with others to overthrow the government of the country that you live in, are you being “submissive” about it or do you think that they are doing a grand job?
In some of the Arab countries, as you point out, rebellions have tried and failed to unseat the Western imposed governments, and, from the comfort of your armchair you are suggesting they try again. Why are you not out there giving them a hand? In any case, why should the Arab countries oppose Israel? There are such things as telephones, international trade, aircraft and missiles. You don’t have to be a neighbouring state to stand up to Israel, as the Yemenis have proved. How about venting your ire on the people of the UK, the US or France, who created this mess in the first place? You are like a householder who expects the people living next door to a house full of rowdy hooligans to go round and sort them out rather than doing it yourself or calling the police or the council.
Debanking should be illegal.
The Palestinians will be resting a little easier tonight in what’s left of their beds, thanks to ich bin ein zionist two tier.
“The British army will send a senior commander and a small number of troops to support Gaza ceasefire enforcement efforts led by the US, the defence ministry has said.” The complicity just keeps growing.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/british-troops-israel-gaza-ceasefire-b2849543.html
I see no-one has anything to say re your ” Going International ” video, Craig. I wonder if that’s reflective of the interests/composition of BTL commenters hereabouts, ie if the majority of same regard what yourself, Salvo, Liberation.Scot are attempting to do as of little relevance?
If so, fair enough, I too consider it to be mainly a Scottish * thing *; though, of course, the eventual restoration of Scotland’s status as a fully-autonomous independent state would/will have major implications for r-UK. Angloshire in particular.
As others have said over the years, and I concur, one such implication could be ultimately of great benefit to England, ie the dissolution of the * Union * leading to a radical transformation of how the latter ‘ sees ‘ itself: no longer clinging to it’s delusional, not-quite-yet Post Imperial self-importance and risible need to be a player on the international stage, which I think it’s long-assumed/current position as BIG BOSS of the ” Home Nations ” encourages. In the process maybe taking a wrecking-ball to the sclerotic House of Windsor & it’s fellow parasitic Establishment beneficiaries.
England as an * ordinary * European State – free of it’s self-defeating military pretensions and deeply-entrenched, hierarchical Class System would have much to offer the World; as witnessed by the contributions it has always made in the fields of Art, Music,Science, Philosophy, Technology, Literature etc. There’s nothing wrong with the English People that getting shot of the clowns that govern them wouldn’t put right. Ditto for most countries, of course.
The great paradox is Scotland’s Liberation could precipitate England’s, allowing both countries to thrive and reset our relationship from the current out-of-kilter domineering by England-As-UK to one of mutually respectful co-existence as equals.
Whatever comes of these actions with the U.N, I thank you, Craig, Salvo et al for the time and effort you’re putiing in, which, if all that comes from them is a greater international recognition of Scotland’s ( quasi? ) colonial status, it will have been worth that time and effort
I enjoyed that video, and I now have a cleaned up transcript of it in a text file. Unfortunately, I can’t host it, as I don’t have a functional website of my own. Hopefully, one of the site moderators can advise me how to provide it to them. The file is under 50K bytes long.
—
[ Mod: It has now been posted in the discussion forum: Clean transcript of video of Craig Murray, Sara Salyers and Chris Thomson
Thanks so much for doing that, Xaracen. ]
Cheers for that, X-Man n good to hear from you 🙂
Craig and Prof Alf Baird laid out some interesting stuff about Scotland’s colonial status on a radio show in New York a week or so ago.
https://www.youtube.com/live/_Ot1VDj7_WY?si=yipEYPFacxYYPJ4y
Yes I seen that, Zoot. Good stuff.
My apprehension about appealing to the U.N, eg attempting to get it’s imprimatur to designate Scotland as a NSGT, is the degree to which that institution – like every other such * global * institution, has been corrupted by, let’s call it …..vested interests/usual suspects and exactly how independent it’s decision making processes are.
Look at the hand-wringing and ambivalence it has shown re the Israeli genocide of Palestinians; granted it has made some ‘ declarations ‘ on this, but IMO not nearly forcefully enough and lacking in sufficient threat to make any real difference to that situation.
Maybe it simply lacks the power to enforce anything in it’s own right; but I can’t help thinking there is more it could be doing to compel Israel to cease & desist it’s inhuman, merciless brutality.
Still think what Craig and the others are doing re Scotland’s petition is worthwhile, despite those reservations
The UN has never been able to enforce shee-yit in its own right.
“England as an * ordinary * European State – free of it’s self-defeating military pretensions and deeply-entrenched, hierarchical Class System”
The problem is that the “class system” goes very deep, right down to the level where anyone whose job it is to organise and then tell other people what to do, so that they can get on with doing and not have to spend time organising, is considered authmatically superior, both heirarchically and even socially, so people tend to “progress” from doing to organising, even if all their skills are in doing and they are incapable of organising their way out of a paper bag.
Yes it does, B, In a sense, every human interpersonal encounter could be considered a * power play *, even in trivial ways, eg who speaks loudest/most forcefully in any given conversation, inc familial; likewise, more concretely in the examples you give.
Not sure there’s much that can be done to change that * hierarchical * dynamic, inherent ( ? ) in human relations; no amount of political social engineering has done so, nor 100+ years of Psychiatry,Pyschotherapy, Sociology or New Agey ‘ Personal Development ‘. Nonetheless, any society genuinely committed to the idea ( ideal ) of a equitable, opportunities-for-all living environment has to both recognise those entrenched class structures ( the undeserved advantages endowed on their beneficiaries thereby ) and seek to diminish them to whatever degree possible
@Robert – I’d advise further thought on the distinction between autonomy and independence.
Says a lot about Scotland that after being shat on by a party of thieves who’ve stolen everything that isn’t nailed down since 2007, many would still vote to institutionalise the said party as the state party for the foreseeable future. Xenophobia is a strong driver – so strong as to drive many people insane, capable of denying or ignoring obvious truths, believing two clearly contradictory things at the same time, etc. etc.
The Glaswegian boyfriend of a friend of mine from the USA told her at the time of the EU membership referendum that Scottish people weren’t allowed to vote in it. I had to explain to her how things really were. I don’t think he was lying to her. I think he really believed what he was saying.
Hi Brian. ” …. further thought on the distinction between autonomy and independence.”. Quite so. I agree * full * autonomy is more-or-less impossible in these globalised times; Independence in a Scottish context would/does mean simply independence from Westminster control/dominance.
And it does say a lot about Scotland that…….. ” after being shat on by a party of thieves who’ve stolen everything that isn’t nailed down since 2007, many would still vote to institutionalise the said party as the state party for the foreseeable future.” . Not sure, exactly, what that does say – blind, misplaced, undeserved loyalty, or an example of complacent ” unexamined life “? Either way, it is deeply frustrating that so many Independence supporters still give credence to and are unable ( unwilling ) to see the duplicity of a group- the current SNP – that has done nothing but gaslight, patronise and abuse their hopes and desire for a better situation for Scotland these passed 11 years, whilst introducing a series of repressive-masquerading-as-* Progressive * policies and laws and not only doing nothing to progress the cause it was formed for, has actually been doing everything to obstruct such progress, eg subjecting our absolute right to determine our own future as a nation to the vagaries and – assumed – authority of the so-called ‘ Supreme ‘ Court; another treacherous move by the Jimmy Choo shoed Brit State marionette/dissembler Sturgeon – STILL worshipped by a significant % of Independence supporters – Maximum Cog Diss In Effect!
I suppose it’s encouraging – if still REALLY frustrating, that whilst the SNP as a Party’s polling figures have been declining steadly ( in addition to consistent By-Election losses ) support for Independence has been holding steady at circa 50%.
Alas, it – support for Independence – seems to be stuck at that approx 50% , and nothing the current SNP is doing or is likely to do has much chance of shifting that % upwards. On the contrary, my fear is, if the SNP get elected en masse for another 5 year term, that % could start to decline too. Many factors are in play in this regard and repulsion in Scotland at the sheer awfulness of this current WM Gov and what is most probably going to replace it – Reform? Horrible Dictu!! – may prove to be the decisive factor
One thing is pretty certain, well, two things actually, the Brit State will never willing let Scotland go, eg will never concede another Referendum, ergo……Scotland will have to TAKE it’s Independence, and be prepared – in every sense – for an inevitable confrontation with that Brit State; hopefully not and never violent confrontation; but one involving mass civil disobedience and public demonstrations. Again, I’m not sure how up-for-it the people of/in Scotland would be for that kind of concerted manifestation of defiance and will. Pushed far and desperate enough some long-lost spirit of resistance may be reawakened. I sincerely hope so
Confirmation from police sources in the UK and the Netherlands that it was the threat from violent and racist Israeli fans that led to the Birmingham ban. Something that anyone who recalled their highly publicised rampage in Amsterdam immediately recognised.
Underlines just how cynical and irresponsible the ‘antisemitism’ response of the British political-media class was.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/oct/21/police-intelligence-on-extreme-maccabi-fans-with-history-of-violence-led-to-villa-park-ban
What a country this now is.
Absurd right, racist hooligans coming to the UK – as guests – are protected and are cuddled with while actual, real threats against british citizens – stemming from the very same hooligans – is rebuffed!?
Speaking on the Netherlands, it is long overdue that the western intelligence services label israel a threat:
July 2025: “Netherlands lists Israel among countries posing threat to it for 1st time”
Dutch security agency accuses Israel of attempting to influence politics, public opinion through disinformation, raising concerns of pressure on international justice institutions
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/netherlands-lists-israel-among-countries-posing-threat-to-it-for-1st-time/3640341
I would not be surprised if Western intelligence services actually see israel as a threat but are too scared to actually go public about it.
The government’s actions are consistent. There have been multiple visits to the UK by members of the IDF, senior and rank and file. All as guests, and protected in law, of this and previous governments. The Israeli ‘fans’ are just more of the same, genocidal monsters most of whom have served or are serving in the IDF.
This is a conscious decision by those in power, they know what they are doing.
” would not be surprised if Western intelligence services actually see israel as a threat but are too scared to actually go public about it.”
I’d say “sensible”, not “scared”. I very much doubt they have a higher opinion of their lords and masters than the average man in the street, and would expect it to be far lower.
“What a country this now is.”
Indeed.
It would have been even more memorable if British soldiers had been tasked with protecting the Z*on*zi thugs, many (probably most) of whom themselves are ex-soldiers, from the airport to the football ground and back again.
“My 10 mates got killed in Afghanistan. But at least they died for the cause of losing a war against the Afghans. And we killed thousands of Afghans. And now I’ve got this great job protecting foreign thugs, veterans of a pied noir army, who’ve come to Britain to smash stuff up. There’s real dignity in serving the king.”
Maybe next time.
To go back to the posts on Starmer’s body language and expression, one of his characteristic body language features is the way he stands with his hands clasped in front of him, which some would say is an introvert gesture and, more specifically, a gesture of submission and an avatar for Uriah-heap like hypocrisy and hand-wringing. (Hands clasped behind one’s back conversely indicate extrovertism and physical and moral confidence, etc)
Two other top dog politicians who exhibit the same gesture are Isaak Herzog, aka the President of the Occupying State and Greek PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis. It is a matter of speculation as to what these three gentlemen might have in common on the geo-political plane.
Something seriously off about him.
Many will be hoping he’ll be forced out after elections in May next year. They have a 12% approval rating – one of, if not the lowest of all time for any govt – and they keep on digging: the support for genocide; the Maccabi BS and digital ID – which wasn’t in their manifesto and the petition against is now just shy of 3 million. They want to opt for the most extreme version of digital ID too – that based on Estonia’s system, and make it mandatory. Estonia’s population is only 1.3 million. We’ve just had an AWS outage after a software configuration error; what if that server infrastructure was physically destroyed? A suspected N.Korean ransomware attack crippled parts of the NHS. The UK would grind to a halt reliant on such a system. And what guarantee data is kept secure and not exfiltrated or deliberately misused?
It’s also been suggested in the US, that they’ve been firing off more outrageous technical capability notices (TCN)
“Apple appears to be not the only company to be presented with a TCN. A letter that has been signed by several US Members of Congress, states that Senator Ron Wyden’s office heard that Google also might have received a TCN. However, if that were the case, the company was prohibited from disclosing that fact.
Both Democrats and Republicans urge the UK’s Investigatory Powers Tribunal to “remove the cloak of secrecy” surrounding the order.”
As a basic public right to know and in fairness to the companies, they should be allowed to disclose. Democracy can’t function on the basis of smug ministerial ‘neither confirm nor deny’ responses. How can voters make informed decisions?
Everything about Starmer and his conduct in office, is in-keeping with the theory, that he is some sort of establishment plant, giving agencies and the military free rein.
Related.
I don’t care who wins the current race to become Labour’s new deputy leader. We still don’t know who leaked the fact Angela Rayner had underpaid stamp duty by £40,000, from which the media pile on against her, allowed Starmer to force her out – but we can guess.
But back to the the current race. Bridget Phillipson, a Starmer loyalist, should have no chance, indeed earlier polling indicated she was not even in contention. But social media ‘X’ suggests otherwise; with massive engagement for her posts and slick expensive looking campaign. Her rival, Lucy Powell, gets little engagement and has all but vanished from feeds. Not even a Labour member or supporter, I can’t open X without immediately seeing Phillipson’s latest post at the top of my feed? Bizarre stuff, is this everyone else’s experience?
There appears to be some serious online astroturfing operation underway on Phillipson’s behalf? At PMQs, Kemi Badenoch, all but stated the result would be fixed on her behalf.
See my comment above, at 09.21 on the 21st.
Re. the serialisation of Paul Holden’s book ‘The Fraud’. Identifies some of the dark forces.
Quote :
Polling for LabourList conducted by Survation found that 57% of members who are likely to vote will back Powell in the contest, compared to 26% for Phillipson. Around one in five members (18%) remain undecided. This gives Powell a 31-point lead over Phillipson, almost double her lead from our poll last week.
Contrast the pair’s relative engagement on X. Phillipson has tens of thousands of views per post, thousands of likes and reposts. It’s all a bit like Starmer’s fake popularity, presumably via astroturfing. For those unfamiliar :
Astroturfing is a deceptive practice where organizations create a false impression of grassroots support for a cause or product, making it seem like it originates from ordinary people rather than being orchestrated by a hidden group. This tactic is often used in politics and marketing to influence public opinion.
I hope Your Party and even Reform are taking note, as these are the sort of dirty tactics unpopular centrists resort to, to drown out opposition and deny publicity.
The “planted” notion doesn’t really convince. For a start, one would have to establish who planted him. You say “the establishment”, but that’s too vague, you would need to be more precise.
I’m more inclined to believe that his elevation to Labour leader was simply (1) personal ambition (he had been head of the CPS for a number of years, they don’t stay in that job for life, and he was young enough to look for something new, and in England it seems once you have had one of the top jobs you can move – or be moved – into another one of the top jobs irrespective of how well or badly you’ve done the previous job), and (2) the Labour Party (most of its MPs and the majority of the other than rank and file members) thought that Labour was unelectable under Jeremy Corbyn and at the same time didn’t think it advisable to go for an overt Tony Blair Mark 2. So who better than Starmer, a relative unknown with a “neutral” past, no baggage and no known principles? And he looked fairly “normal” at the time – gravitas without being heavy, a master of the platitude and the non-position.
In a way, it’s like Macron in France, who also came from almost nowhere.
BTW, I think you are one of the best commenters here!
“You say “the establishment”, but that’s too vague, you would need to be more precise.”
OK, “the Establishment” are a group of influential people who know each other and decide what is to be done. This is the same in probably every other country in the world. Think about it for a minute: the modern nation state is far too large and complicated to be run by either one person or by a very large number of people who mainly have to occupy their thoughts with earning a living. Thus all modern states are oligarchies. Sometimes the oligarchs are visibly in charge abd have a head oligarch who is nominally in charge of them. These we call “dictatorships”. In other cases the oligarchs are hidden and influence major matters of state from behind the scenes. These we call “democracies”. Other states, still display elements of both. Britain has been an oligarchy since at least the Norman Conquest, if not before that, in fact some of the descendants of those Norman oligarchs are still up there. The most likely case is that these oligarchs are who chose Starmer, initially to get rid of the socialist threat posed by Corbyn and then to carry out the rest of their agenda. These people forsaw that this government’s period of office would cover the end of the 18 year land price cycle, that house values would fall during its tenure and the British electorate would hand out its traditional punishment to a government that commits the political equivalent of a sin against the Holy Ghost and give them a drubbing at the next election. Thus, with their hands freed from the necessity of trying to get re-elected, the Labour government can introduce as many unpopular measures as they like.
@ Bayard
” OK, “the Establishment” are a group of influential people who know each other and decide what is to be done.”
Excellent post and succinct definition of that admittedly vague concept – (the) Establishment. I would only add ” ……and are usually wealthy – typically but not confined to – ” old money ” families ” – as you infer elsewhere in your comment
@ Luis
Your take on Starmer’s rise sounds plausible and may be accurate, for all I know; but every instinct I have, combined with what he’s actually done, intends to do and/or would like to do in the short time ( though it * feels * like decades ) he’s been P.M tells me his seemingly effortless glide to his current position was * unnatural * and was accomplished by those with and in furtherance of agendas inimical to the greater good of the people.
Of course that could be applied to every politician everywhere in every time, ie being assisted in their rise to power by vested interests; but that doesn’t make it any less disturbing; after all, are we not supposed to be lucky to be living in one of the World’s longest and most impeccable Democracies? At least, that’s what we’re always being told, by, um……to come back to the initial point……The Establishment.
So it really does matter how Starmer got where he is, who got him there and what the quid-pro-quo is for getting him there. So far, it appears to be……. continuing Fiscal Austerity; implementing more insidious State control mechanisms, eg Digital I.D, and starting a shooting war with a nuclear-armed power- Russia – among other delightful ideas. None of which were ever mentioned in Labour’s G.E campaign or Manifesto.
I’ve thought he was a wrong ‘un promoted to serve extremely shady * interests * before he was even PM and nothing that he’s done since has dissuaded me to the contrary
Never confuse introversion with submission 😉
Pretty much everyone agrees Starmer isn’t up to the job. It’s very unlikely the next election will be in 2029 and he’ll be fighting it.
OTOH it’s difficult for any party in Britain that wants to hold more than 100 Commons seats after the next election to do anything other than echo the Farage-Reform-Robinson “there’s too many of ’em ‘ere, and we’re gonna f*cking do something about it, right now” line. Especially when the front pages of the MSM talk about non-white went stabby, and everything falls apart in official haha enquiry into “grooming”, practically every day.
It seems from what I read that you are right in saying that Starmer is not up to the job. Now, if Bayard is right and Starmer was promoted by the “establishment”, then the establishment clearly boobed – so far, at least. But I think that saying he’s not up to the job rather supports my explanation as to how he rose to the top of the (Labour) tree – ambition without the necessary qualities, chosen by the Labour Party (and the electorate, perhaps!) as a desperate (or cunning) throw of the dice.
Looking at the arithmetic of the English parliament, I do not see why some predict an early election. But it could be possible that unless the perception of Starmer improves, the Labour Party will change leaders a year or so before that election.
If we haven’t all been blown up by then…….
“then the establishment clearly boobed”
Not at all, they have got themselves a man who will do as he is told, no matter how unpopular it makes him. As far as they are concerned, what’s not to like about that?
LCdS
His role will have changed as new political opportunities arose.
All this historical context has been outlined before, many times, but it’s worth reiterating: It goes back to 2010, with Ed Miliband’s union-backed shock defeat of his Blairite, right-wing brother, David, for the Labour party leadership. In 2013, Ed Miliband as leader of the opposition, led his party to vote against military action in Syria. The Cameron coalition govt lost their high-stakes vote, and it’s fair to say that senior intelligence officials; military chiefs and the then Cabinet Secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood and others were bloody furious with Ed Miliband.
The Syrian ‘regime change’ intervention plans had largely been a British project, by all accounts, and it threw what had become a joint Anglo- American regime change project, into turmoil. Miliband had received a classified briefing at which he promised to support the military intervention and he changed his mind due to Labour party members’ opposition.
Starmer left the CPS in 2013. I theorise that the establishment, worried the Labour party was becoming too anti war and left wing under Miliband, asked their loyal public servant from the CPS, Starmer, to go into politics. Starmer became a Labour MP in 2015, in an election Labour lost and after which Ed Miliband stood down. Corbyn won the subsequent leadership election and Starmer played various roles : Initially of an observer keeping an eye on Labour; then a loyal shadow cabinet insider; then leader. Nothing about his entry into politics or his political rise is natural or organic.
Sure, many things are possible, and I surely wouldn’t claim infallibility for my theories. You will note, however, that our two theories are not incompatible when you bear in mind that yours covers the time up to Corbyn’s leadership and mine focusses more on the period starting with Corbyn’s leadership.
Moreover, your idea of the “establishment” putting him in place as leader seems to not take into account that there was a leadership election (or coronation – was he the only candidate?) and that the people who elected ((crowned?) him were hardly what one would consider to be establishment people; is the Labour leader not elected by the Labour MPs, Labour Party members in the constituencies and the trade unions (I think, correct if wrong)?
But whether put there by the establishment or by his own ambition and snake oil, the man’s a dangerous character and won’t go easily. All the talk about how he nearly went last year is just English hasbara.
I don’t think the intention will have been to make him leader from the start either. As you say. that was never in their gift to grant.
His journey to the top is probably a bit like that of an undercover spy or mole infiltrating some organisation; in that, the higher up in said organisation that individual can climb, via promotion, the better. Don’t forget he posed as being very much on the political left of the Labour party. There is a picture from 2015, now doing the rounds on X, of him speaking at a campaign event demanding Israel be kicked out of international football by FIFA. He highlighted his opposition to the Iraq war to the membership and famously produced 10 signed Pledges to woo members.
The man is a chameleon, who fooled many. There has to be some strange psychology going on in someone willing to be so deliberately deceitful like that. Regardless of how he justifies it to himself.
“Pretty much everyone agrees Starmer isn’t up to the job.”
it depends what you think his job is. If it is following orders from higher-ups and trying not to look like he cares about the results of doing so, then Starmer is playing a blinder.
@Bayard – That is a good point, and one I once made about Yeltsin.
Nonetheless, people do agree. There is the perception that he can’t last long and that then there will be some radical and fast changes.
“There is the perception that he can’t last long and that then there will be some radical and fast changes.”
Well, the Establishment is neither omnipotent, nor infallible, thankfully.
Bayard
Correct. In terms of following the script that’s been handed to him, he’s likely doing exactly what his handlers told him to do. We can even guess what the demands of him are:
• Maintain domestic fiscal discipline so as not to upset the financial markets and fund managers
• Maintain the current policy (he inherited from the Tories) on Ukraine and the default hostility to Russia advocating for sanctions.
• Don’t repeal any authoritarian legislation introduced by the Tories, related to the right to protest or and don’t touch the Investigatory Powers Act or the The Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act 2021.
• Protect FPTP, the two=party system and the unelected HoL. The bone of removing the remaining hereditary peers will be thrown.
• Promote militarism, military solutions and the armed forces.
• Maintain the ‘special relationship’ – at all costs to safeguard NATO from a capricious, tantrum prone, Trump Administation; even if if means being cloyingly servile around Trump (whom Starmer and the UK establishment likely privately despise).
• Maintain support for Israel, expressed privately if necessary – i.e. if heat over ICC and ICJ become too much to bare politically.
Against these tests he’s A*.
For following these superior orders to the letter, he’ll likely join the Blair rich project upon leaving office
The proof will come when he and Reeves leave office. There was a time when politicians retired to relatively modest lifestyles. Not these hired ‘front men and women’ – these typically leave to join investment banks on multi-million salaries for a 3-day week consultancy work role, thanks to post-election patrons, or receive hundreds of thousands for unreported speeches made to empty halls in Kuala Lumpur.
It’s hard to believe those entrusted to protect our country’s integrity from such corruption, don’t know what’s going on. Indeed, sadly, everything suggests they are in on it.
No surprise today when the International Court of justice/ICJ ruled that israel must provide Gaza with humanitarian, aid food.
ICJ also found no evidence of substance that UNRWA had been compromised by Hamas.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/22/icj-says-israel-must-allow-aid-into-blockaded-gaza-provide-basic-needs
Now, is it not interesting that the West that always claim “oh we cannot say anything about Gaza before the court have decided what is going on there” etc
But now, when the court have given their view, there is still no reaction by the same West. There is no Western states calling on Israel to let UNRWA resume it work inside Gaza. It is always this disingenuous moving of the goal posts-strategy.
And also the only dissenting voice once again came from Julia “God expect me to support Israel” Sebutinde,
Dissenting ICJ judge says court failed to sufficiently consider Israel’s arguments
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/dissenting-icj-judge-says-court-failed-to-sufficiently-consider-israels-arguments/
The fact that this woman is sitll with the ICJ says alout about how corrupt ICJ really is. Imagine if she was a muslim and said that “Allah trust me to support Palestine”. She would be kicked out just like that.
It is well that, according to a wiki article on her, the International Commission of Jurists made a request to the President of the ICJ to remove her for her partiality and pro-Israel bias.
The Powellite party leading in the British polls strongly supports the cryptocurrency “industry”. So it’s not just the Workers’ Party (which stood on a platform of blockchain for the working class) after all!
https://archive.is/kXkng (Financial Times)
But curiously when the deranged Trump demands the US government pays him $230m, he wants it in USD and not Bitcoin or Trumpcoin:
https://archive.is/k1gkX (New York Times)
With the collapse of the West so patently obviously imminent, we really need “intellectuals” talking about the issues du jour, lol.
The almost universally accepted notion that stopping the economy for the equivalent of several months during 2020-22 will have no big consequences may one day be viewed in the same category as the notion that the Treaty of Versailles was handled really well, by highly capable public servants.
PS Of course I may be wrong and we will soon all be getting driven around by driverless cars, making use of the freed-up time to converse with silky-voiced AI clients about our crypto investments.
‘With the collapse…..’ etc – The Pentagon of Power by Lewis Mumford. Might prove interesting reading. It investigates the ‘machine’ and it’s effects on humanity
BR: “The almost universally accepted notion that stopping the economy for the equivalent of several months during 2020-22 will have no big consequences […]”
What “universally accepted notion” is this? Can you find anyone promoting this view?
Of course this had a serious effect on the economy, can you actually find anyone denying it?
Pandemics causing millions of deaths and serious illness worldwide tend to have consequences on the economy, that is to be fully expected. It seems that you have set up a straw man here to attack the notion of lockdowns – pretending proponents of saving lives had assured us there would be no ill effects, and everyone (except you, of course) fell for it.
I think BR was being ironic.
One might hope so, unfortunately BR is – unless I’m mistaken – one of the “Covid sceptic” brigade.
By the way, you’re not related to the great Eric von Daniken, are you?
What do you make of the fall off in fertility in the developed world? Looking at the graph, It’s a pretty steep/precipitous decline across most of the west after Covid.
I’m not reading conspiracy into it being related to the vaccines, however. Basically because, I’ve not done any research to justify making such a causal linkage. But at the risk of sounding like a conspiracy nut.
Do you remember the plot of Utopia, the excellent Channel 4 series?
Corvadt a biotech company planned with govts a “V-Day”, a worldwide effort to distribute vaccines with the perfected bioengineered Janus serum inside simultaneously. Janus will sterilize 90-95% of the world when activated by a certain food protein, halting resource decline and saving humanity from extinction.
Watching it in 2014, it seemed vaguely and uncomfortably plausible. Though If TPTB did this, it’d be say in 1 in 8 or 1 in 16 of the vaccines produced, to avoid suspicion
Hello Goose –
Interesting question, to which I had admittedly, hitherto, given no thought whatsoever. But taking a look, I found references here: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8775865/
and particularly here: https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(24)01301-3/fulltext
… that suggests Covid itself has had some effect on some types of fertility problems, although this is marginal overall.
So what about vaccines causing infertility? If that is suspected – or indeed anything else causing infertility – the first thing we should look at is an interest in IVF. Is there a sudden surge in demand by women/ couples desperately trying to achieve a pregnancy that isn’t happening in the usual way? Well… not so much.
There is an increase in demand, but mainly from same-sex couples, and women who have left reproduction until much later in life than has been the tradition, according to some studies I looked at.
There does not appear to be a huge number of people being unwelcomely left childless – that would indeed be a red flag that something was causing infertility.
We do hear a lot from women who say they don’t want their careers to be tied down, they want a proper dwelling before considering bringing up children, there is a lot less need for a large family (improved infant mortality figures, children are no longer needed as a form of pension), and ‘traditional’ roles for women are far less welcomed by them.
The long term fertility rate has been on a downward trend for quite some time:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00324728.2025.2491354#d1e223
See figure 1 in the above, where the downward trend has been steady since about 2010. That’s when the austerity measures really got going in the UK, and the entire world was hit by the scandalous banking disaster.
Further down, we see the long term trend of increasing age of the first child. Having one child when you’re already knocking on a bit is unlikely to be followed up by a more typical number of births.
There is also the quite considerable consideration of climate change – not just the impact of additional numbers, but of the rather grim future one is likely to be bringing a child into.
The costs of raising a child has never been higher, even as government policies (in the UK in particular) has been to punish those having too many children. Few people are flush enough to just knock another one out without giving at least some consideration to affordability.
So there does seem to be a lot more to look at with this whole fertility business than simply “Birth rates are going down – it must be the vaccines!”
Would you want to bring a child into this world?
The elites appear to have no problem doing that.
I suspect that that is what is behind the decline in fertility. Such a correlation is nothing new.
Covid was produced in the university research labs of Guangdong in a joint Chinese US research collaboration on gain of function SARS experiments on bats. I initially thought that the liking for deep fried bats on sticks had accidentally allowed tested bats to be released into the wet market of Wuhan, 7 miles away, if lab technicians had been told to dispose of them and had sold them instead of destroying them. Seemed a plausible scenario. However looking at the investment by Bill Gates in the nanotechnology vaccine for COVID years before this ‘accidental’ release suspicions have grown that this was not an accident. The virus itself affects the blood clotting processes and the spike protein which is its most dangerous element is also delivered in the vaccine. Many of the deaths and lasting debilitating outcomes from the vaccine are similar or more severe than some of the long term effects of the disease. The virus or vaccine gets into the reproductive organs and affects the production of sperm and the blood clotting lining of the womb. Statistics from Malaysia show deaths far surpassing live births for the first time ever. The lines have crossed.
The depopulation agenda which includes WWIII is a well prepared plan which Corbyn would have completely scuppered, alongside other European democratic socialist leaders.
As for Russian oil and gas, Ukraine’s opening gambit in the escalation in mid September was strikes on 85 oil and gas refineries. They have continued to target Russia’s oil and gas infrastructure, so there will be shortages inside Russia and cuts to exports. Trump has delivered the tar sands of Alaska to American oil and gas exploration and production. This will destroy the great Arctic wilderness which is opening up around the northern shorelines as the ice retreats.
“pretending proponents of saving lives had assured us there would be no ill effects, and everyone (except you, of course) fell for it.”
There is no evidence that it did save any lives in that countries that didn’t have lockdowns had no worse outcomes than those who did. The only real correlation was how good the country’s health service was: the better the health service, the fewer people died, as is to be expected.
“pretending proponents of saving lives had assured us there would be no ill effects, and everyone (except you, of course) fell for it.”
Well, the same people told us that the so-called “vaccine” was safe and effective and it turned out to be neither.
B: “Well, the same people told us that the so-called “vaccine” was safe and effective and it turned out to be neither.”
Are all vaccines neither safe nor effective, or did the entire medical establishment suddenly turn into liars and murderers only where it concerns Covid vaccines?
It wasn’t a vaccine. A vaccine is something that introduces an inert form of the virus into your body which enables you to produce antibodies that prevent you developing the actual disease. The COVID “vaccine” didn’t do that, despite everyone being told it did. All it did was ameliorate the symptoms. The name for that is a palliative, not a vaccine.
It wasn’t the entire medical establishment. Some pointed out what was actually going on amidst much vituperation. The vast majority of others believed what they were told, so were neither liars nor murderers. The liars and murderers were the drug companies and people like the Health Secretary at the time.
B: “It wasn’t a vaccine.”
It absolutely was and is. A vaccine trains the immune system to recognise a pathogen, such as Covid-19, by providing it an inert virus, a piece of that virus, or instructions on how to make part of it – in the case of mRNA, how to produce the spike protein for SARS-Cov-2.
This is precisely how genuine vaccines work.
The ‘some’ who incorrectly “pointed out” as you claim that vaccines were palliatives either didn’t know what they were talking about, or revelled in sounding scientific to a non-scientific audience, for reasons best known to themselves.
A palliative doesn’t prevent anything except suffering and symptoms.
You might have noticed that people already infected with Covid-19 were not treated with the vaccine – why not, if you think it’s actually a palliative?
People still sometimes got sick with covid, even when vaccinated. But their symptoms were nothing like as bad. This happens with a lot of vaccines, none of which are 100% effective. But this is where the confusion has come from.
Every single major health organisation worldwide recognises Covid-19 vaccines as vaccines – not palliatives. Why do you think you know better than experts so often, when you clearly haven’t even studied the basics?
Didn’t you know death rates and infections plummeted worldwide, as vaccines were rolled out? Particularly among the vaccinated! Now why would that be – country by country, in all populations – a pure rolling coincidence on a massive scale, perhaps?
The main reason that Covid infections and deaths in the UK fell as the vaccines were being rolled out, Glenn, was because the alpha wave was subsiding, mainly due to the third national lock-down – but also the fact the super-spreaders that didn’t die had already had Covid, and thus had antibodies to the SARS-CoV2 nucleocapsid protein, which are much more effective than ones to its spike protein. Other countries, like the US, might not have lockdowns in 2021, but they were still employing non-proliferation measures.
The original vaccines were 95%+ effective against the original strain, but they were much less effective against the alpha & delta variants which were circulating at the time people received the vaccines. When the omicron variants emerged in late 2021 (which fortunately are fairly mild), they were so infectious that it meant virtually everyone got Covid (though I managed to hold out for just over a year). The omicron variants effectively acted as very effective free vaccines against any of the more virulent strains still circulating, until those died out.
The vaccines did save lives in the UK, but likely only 30,000-40,000 of mostly elderly people who wouldn’t have had many more years to live anyway. When you look at the amount spent on them versus quality-adjusted life-years saved, they couldn’t have been justified under normal NICE rules. This is to say nothing of the risks involved in trialling entirely novel vaccines on millions of people.
RA:
I’m afraid you’ve taken the contributory effect of lockdowns together with acquired immunity through infection, to incorrectly dismiss the massive and separate contribution of the vaccines. The scientific concensus is the rapid rollout of vaccination was decisive in preventing covid infections causing severe incapacity and death, allowing society to reopen.
That’s not to say other measures – including better treatment – did not make a significant contribution, but vaccines were game-changing. You seem to prefer the staggering coincidence theory.
Lockdowns certainly contained the virus, but that could only be a temporary measure. Acquired immunity provided a low base level of immunity, but it came at a terrible cost in terms of long-term illness, mass death, and overwhelmed hospitals.
The main point of confusion you appear to be labouring under is that lockdowns and other public health measures, and vaccines, are not mutually exclusive – they are all complementary.
At least you’re not denying vaccines are, well, vaccines… or that the virus even existed in the first place. But for some reason, you seem to wish that vaccines didn’t have much to do with the solution.
I’m afraid that, as is regrettably often the case, Glenn, the scientific consensus on that is wrong (not for the first time regarding Covid – see the origin of Covid itself). Let me outline my reasoning:
Almost all the UK deaths that the vaccines prevented would have occurred from the end of January 2021 – three weeks after the vaccines started generating antibodies in the high-risk people who were the very first to receive them – to the end of December 2021, when the mild Omicron waves started. In that period, around 40,000 people died within 28 days of testing positive for Covid, mainly in the Alpha wave at the beginning of the year. It’s estimated that around 20 million British people were infected with SARS-CoV-2 over that period, so the average infection fatality rate (IFR) of Covid with the vaccines was 0.2%.
Let’s compare this to a country to which the Alpha variant soon spread, and which didn’t have the Western vaccines: Russia – where a low percentage of the population took its homegrown vaccine (reported to be fairly ineffective anyway) in 2021. In that year, there were around 800,000 excess deaths in Russia. If we attribute all those to Covid and assume that, in the absence of lockdowns, almost all Russians that hadn’t caught the virus in 2020 became infected (say 120 million), that gives us an IFR of 0.65% for the Alpha variant in Russia.
Accounting for a better healthcare system and better health in general in the UK, it’s reasonable to assume that the IFR for Alpha in the UK without vaccines would have been around 0.4%. This IFR puts the putative number of deaths without vaccines in the UK in the end-January to end-December 2021 at around 80,000 – 40,000 higher than with the vaccines. Therefore, the vaccines saved around 40,000 lives in the UK.
I didn’t state that public health measures and the vaccines were mutually exclusive. I wish there had been safe, cheap, highly-effective vaccines available from the get-go, but there weren’t. There were, however, very cheap treatments like calcifediol (the fast-acting form of vitamin D) and ivermectin, which by late 2020 had both been demonstrated to hugely reduce death and injury from Covid provided they were given early. Unfortunately, Big Pharma couldn’t be having that – so we ended up where we are, with plenty of knock-on effects, not least the Boriswave.
“This is precisely how genuine vaccines work.”
Thank you for recognising that the COVID “vaccine” wasn’t a genuine vaccine, but your explanation is incomplete. You have missed out the purpose of the training of the immune system to which you refer, which is to prevent the vaccinated person from contracting the disease, possibly dying from it and/or spreading it. This the COVID “vaccine” conspicuously failed to do and such failure was acknowledged by the authorities, who conceded that the job of the “vaccine” was to ameliorate the symptoms and so mean that fewer people ended up hospitalised, thus reducing the burden on the NHS. That is why it is a palliative, not a vaccine, no matter how like a vaccine it acts. This was after initailly claiming that the vaccine was a vaccine and would prevent the vaccinated from getting the disease and thus prevent them from spreading it. It was suggested at the time that it was everyone’s civic duty to be vaccinated and so protect their grandparents from dying from the disease.
LA: “I’m afraid that, as is regrettably often the case, Glenn, the scientific consensus on that is wrong […]”
It’s a rather tired trope to say “science was wrong” at a point in history, thereby assuming a licence to dismiss all current scientific consensus that you don’t like. Science is the best theory that fits all available evidence, preferably with repeatable results. When a better theory and/or more evidence comes out, that consensus can change. I don’t think you have a better theory or more evidence – if you do, kindly publish it.
Russia – as you might know – is rather bigger than the UK. It’s not a useful comparison. I’m not sure either that their healthcare system nor a typical Russian’s health is substantially worse than that of the UK.
You might note that even the wondrous ivermectin is itself a product of the pharmaceutical industry, given it doesn’t grow naturally somewhere. Taking that all the time (as a preventative, as was promoted by vaccine ‘sceptics’) would certainly provide welcome profits for that industry, at least equal to profits from the vaccines.
B: “Thank you for recognising that the COVID “vaccine” wasn’t a genuine vaccine, […]”
I did absolutely no such thing.
Wikipedia has a perfectly adequate definition of vaccines:
____quote
Vaccines can be prophylactic (to prevent or alleviate the effects of a future infection by a natural or “wild” pathogen), or therapeutic (to fight a disease that has already occurred, such as cancer).[5][6][7][8] Some vaccines offer full sterilizing immunity, in which infection is prevented.[9]
____ end quote
You appear to think only the last part of that definition applies, ie, full sterilising immunity.
That’s not the definition of a vaccine, and very few offer 100% immunity, 100% of the time and to 100% of the population. Having a milder form of the illness it protects against is common, but you’ve decided that makes it not a vaccine.
That’s fine, you can have your own definition if it suits you. You can even invent an entirely new language and argue in that. But there’s no point in having a discussion if your own pet definition excludes the standard medical one.
Incidentally, you forgot to say – doubtless a complete oversight – why not give the “”””””vaccine”””””” to people already suffering from Covid, since you think it has a palliative effect only?
(If you put plenty of quotes around something it delegitimises it, apparently, so surely a definitely-not-a-vaccine would be a fine treatment?)
Genocide Boy Starmer is promoting compulsory digital ID on Elon Musk’s website:
https://nitter.poast.org/Keir_Starmer/status/1981405376458142013#m
This is how the authorities promote a policy nowadays:
1. It keeps unwanted foreigners out.
2. It helps moneylenders lend you money at interest.
3. It helps landlords let you stay somewhere for rent.
In his own words:
“Digital ID will be a huge help in tackling illegal immigration.
But it’s so much more than that.
It will empower people every single day by giving you a new way to prove who you are.
Saving time and money when you apply for a mortgage by cutting down unnecessary paperwork.
Proving your right to rent in one click.
Personalised public services like helping parents claim eligibility for free childcare and nursery places.
It is time to put power back in people’s hands and bring the UK into the modern age.”
Presumably the government are holding back on saying electronic tag carrying is good for the holy NHS. They will say it soon. They will say ID resisters are disrespecting the NHS and don’t deserve to get treated when they’re ill.
That’s OK – we’ll have to set up underground health networks then.
Soon it will be time for the young people of today to see if they’ve got what the young people in the 1960s had:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV–rAMQoQk
^ That is real struggle. It is brave, collective, uncompromising, and the very action itself is empowering. Even 60 years later it’s inspiring.
Pathetic Starmer try to frame digital ID as something hip, obviously the internet is getting too free for closet-authortarians like Keir Starmer so now he want to silence his own population and people like us.
What I do not understand is, is there really voters out there that read this as something positive? It must be a very small minority, so if anything, Keir would lose votes because of this proposal of his.
Strange also how this control-society was heavily condemned when China rolled out this idea some like a decade ago, fast-forward to 2025 and suddenly the West want to use the same control-tactics.
This is a govt that like the previous one, has fought for the removal of end-to-end encryption everywhere, and in every form it’s been deployed.
We’ve arrived at the ludicrous situation, whereby UK citizens are the only citizens in Europe who don’t have the option to secure their data on Apple devices using Apple’s strongest form of encryption : Advanced Data Protection (ADP) which is itself an E2EE system. This govt wants generalised ‘bulk access’ to everyone’s data; which goes against all previous court rulings on state surveillance in UK and European courts, rulings that argue surveillance should be targeted and not some sort of fishing expedition.
“Saving time and money when you apply for a mortgage by cutting down unnecessary paperwork.
Proving your right to rent in one click.”
Yeah, like you really do those things every day. In order to save, what, a couple of hours every ten years or so, you are expected to support a privacy-destroying measure like ID cards?
Starmer hasn’t shown any interest in defending civil liberties, privacy or walking back any of the Tories’ law and order authoritarian overreach.
There will be some sinister motive behind this, even if we can’t yet see it yet. Deanonymising the internet has long been a desire of some, and thus if they made it compulsory to login to social media platforms via your digital ID, any VPN, proxy and alias, wouldn’t protect your anonymity.
But the most likely reason, is they want to group data that is currently separate and compartmentalised. Govt departments hold data on everyone; data of varying degrees of sensitivity and restrict access on that basis. For example, medical records, tax records etc. And that data has its own access rules that someone wishing to access, would have to argue for by stating why access is necessary. If you lump all that data together in a digital wallet, the interested party (Police, security services) can just grab the lot.
Yeah, I really think the motives could be that cynical.
Be of good cheer, Starmer assures us that Digital ID won’t be compulsory; unless you want/need a job. That by inference also covers claiming Unemployment Benefit or Income Support, in both cases you have to satisfy the DSS that you’re actively looking for work and you won’t be able to do that if you lack the necessary ‘BritCard’.
Starmer, once again today, pushing the non-manifesto mandated digital ID. As I stated in an earlier post, they apparently wish to copy Estonia’s system and ministers have been to Estonia’s capital, Tallinn, to see it in action. But in Estonia, citizens own their own data, can see who has accessed it and they have very strong data protection laws. They use strong encryption and public key infrastructure (PKI) so every ID is truly unique and all access is strictly logged.
Does anyone think the UK will opt for similar protections? The security services resist the perfectly reasonable request of notification for those secretly surveilled and found innocent. They are ramming technical capability notices (TCN’s) down companies’ throats and legally forbidding them talking about them. The whole elite mentality in the UK is that of, you plebs don’t need to know.
And look the recent detentions of Craig, Kit, George and Richard et al, and the total lack of information as to who accessed and stored data that was exfiltrated. How that data is being used etc. Digital ID is okay in theory, but only if all other laws and infrastructure is built around transparency. But the UK, we’ll end up with the worst of both worlds.
The ICJ have just delivered a crushing blow to Israel, they have declared that the Gaza strip is ‘Occupied Territory and that Israel as the occupier are responsible for the well being of the Palestinians including feeding them etc, this video describes the consequences of this ICJ opinion and a warning of the complicity of states that defy this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuUzFIItaCY
Keir Starmer at the outset of the Genocide claimed to support the Israeli governments blocking of food and water to the whole of Gaza, this was uttered on the LBC news channel hosted by Nick Ferrari. A clear support for collective punishment and grave crime against humanity.
ICJ rules Israel must cooperate with Unrwa and lift Gaza aid blockade.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/icj-rules-israel-ban-unrwa-aid-blockade
This article also links to the ICJ opinion. UK leaders must beware.
There is a film with the great Peter Sellers called ‘ Being There’
A guy called Chauncy Gardener I think is picked by the MSM as being an accidental sage.
Starmer is not even in that accidental league.
In actuality he not even in Forest Gump’s league.
‘ Life is like a box of chocolates – all coconuts ( I made that up).
I’m not sure that Starmer is fully aware of why he’s there or even what he is meant to do.
When I was a kid my mate used to have what was called ”The Magic Robot ‘
You could ask the Robot questions and it would point to the right answer by ‘ magic’
It had no idea what it was doing and Starmer strikes me as the same as the answer was rigged.
He is indeed The Nowhere Man.
I would welcome a debate about the Deep State in all countries, as it is vague convenient definition of who is in charge no matter what government rules anywhere.
There seems to be no CEO – no Executive Board and no definitive plan other than the ‘ Why can’t we just do things the same way we used to?’
The Main Man Trump is caught between a lot of capitalist competing factions and his selections of what to do and where to do it changes daily so, every day is a new day depending on whom sat on him last.
The info he bases his decisions on comes from Fox News ( whom , shame be upon them, manage to be worse than the BBC ) and the difference between Starmer and Trump is that his decisions count a thousand times more than Starmer’s.
Cometh The Hour – Cometh the Men and the leading Troika of Democratic Europe are about as popular as Avocado Bathroom’s amongst their electorates.
Where it will all go is a guess and my guess is that all the Europeans and their electorates will play a dangerous game with the right no matter which Tailor’s Dummy stands in each country.
It’s sad and darkly laughable but, the Democrats laughed at Mr Shicklegruber and the rest is history as they say.
I think we need to remember that when the ‘ normal ‘ capitalist order is threatened the politicians and the capitalist will side/put up with Fascism every time.
Because it is better to be a poorer capitalist temporarily – than not a capitalist at all.
For my money that is the definition of the nebulous/conspiratorial Deep State.
Paradoxically, Trump is proof the ‘Deep State’ isn’t all that powerful in the US, despite many Americans, mostly ‘MAGA’ believing the ‘Deep State’ is all powerful. Liz Truss claims she was forced out by the UK ‘Deep State’, going as far as claiming she’d consider naming names, she never has though.
In reality, no powerful Deep State would want someone as chaotic as Trump and those he’s appointed in power. Initially, upon taking power Trump was hostile to Starmer, as was a then near inseparable Elon Musk. But then something changed, as if someone from the CIA whispered in Trump’s ear, “he’s one of ours, Sir” and from then on, Musk was out the door, and Starmer was this wonderful human being, a great guy, a man Trump couldn’t praise highly enough and it’s been the same ever since.
I do think Trump is being manipulated.
Take the announced Trump – Putin summit, planned to be held in Budapest, Hungary. Putin claims the American side proposed it and the two Presidents agreed that Lavrov and Rubio would finalise the details. It looks like after their discussions, Rubio persuaded Trump to cancel and obviously oil sanctions have been imposed. Putin said Trump cancelled without any further consultation, and he seemed annoyed and frustrated in the clip I’ve seen on X today.
I think Rubio is secretly sympathetic to the obstructionist warmongering European position, and is throwing spanners in the works. The EU plan to seize Russia’s frozen assets, using the money to buy western weaponry, to kill Russian troops? is clearly a very dangerous escalation too. Quite how the EU’s Kallas can be so gleeful about such a risky move, is a mystery.
Europe is led by a bunch of chancers, who are betting the house(and millions of lives) on defeating Russia. Starmer talks of how there must be a ‘just’ peace, but a ‘just’ outcome is entirely subjective.
Goose
October 24, 2025 at 01:15
You refer to the “obstructionist warmongering European position”.
The only war being “mongered” in Europe is being mongered by the kleptocratic Putin regime.
The sooner that it is overthrown by the Russian people the better.
JK redux
It was widely reported that the Russians are willing to accept a freeze in the conflict short of their previous demands for all territory in the Donbas – previous demands included Donetsk’s ‘fortress belt’.
That, if true, is new, and quite why the summit was cancelled with a potential deal available is a mystery?
After meeting Trump at the White House, Zelenskyy stated he was open to such a deal. Fast-forward to yesterday, and a cocky, smiling Zelenskyy had changed his position; suggesting Ukraine will never sign any deal that cedes territory. Zelenskyy was seen high-fiving and hugging European leaders.
Therefore, you can only conclude, European leaders and the EU’s leadership are emboldening Zelenskyy into taking very hardline negotiating positions.
Goose
October 24, 2025 at 14:40
You accused Europeans of “warmongering”.
Russia is of course the warmonger.
Europe is slowly building up the capacity to deter Putin and support Ukraine.
Not as fast as I would like.
“Russia is of course the warmonger.”
I know you are not English, but that is no excuse to use English words that you don’t know what they mean. A “warmonger” is “someone who promotes or seeks to bring about war”. Russia is waging war, it is not promoting or seeking to bring it about. That is being done by a bunch of countries in Europe.
Bayard
October 24, 2025 at 18:57
War monger vs. war wager.
A nice distinction.
One who wages a war of choice (Vlad the Bad) is necessarily a war monger.
“One who wages a war of choice (Vlad the Bad) is necessarily a war monger.”
Congratulations! you are now eligible to join the Humpty Dumpty Club. “When I use a word,’” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” The rest of us will continue to use the dictionary definition.
Little is clear about the cancellation of the Putin-Trump summit by the US side, but western Europe may well have played a role. If there is a lasting armistice or “deal” (as it would be called) involving the USA (in reality or in the narrative), the political effects in western Europe could be immense. The far right (AfD, Reform UK, RN) could go far with the (largely true) line that their opponents’ position in the Russo-Ukrainian war has been an absolute pile of very costly, stupid, corrupt cack.
Could this help in a big way with a “bring down the old parties” momentum? Quite possibly it could.
Probably neither Starmer nor Macron could identify Ukraine on a map. (Jonathan Powell could, but he’s not a politician.) I wonder how they’ll fare if Farage and Le Pen (or Bardella) get some proper advice on how to play this issue.
The Budapest summit (which had British media speculating with the aid of maps about Putin’s possible travel routes) has – at least at the time of writing – been updated to a meeting in Miami, USA. This is planned for Steve Witkoff and Kirill Dmitriev.
Dmitriev is an interesting figure. He is head of a Russian sovereign wealth fund. This is not the biggest one, it’s much smaller – it’s the second biggest. Unlike the Norwegian one, it mostly invests internally, with foreign partners.
Dmitriev spent many years in the USA and worked at both Goldman Sachs and McKinsey. FWIW he’s a WEFer.
At a time of US government “shutdown” and Trump announcing the funding of the US military by an anonymous person whom he calls “a friend of mine” (how long can that last?), it could be that another global financial crisis is looming.
Starmer reminds me of another character in a Sellers film, the leader of the Duchy of Grand Fenwick, He is threatening Russia with the terrors of the Earth, with boots on the ground and planes in the air, without having that many troops or airplanes, and certainly no money to spend on same. He could find some money to keep that losing proposition Ukraine in the fight, or he could go along with stealing the Russian foreign reserves $300 billion dollars, $200 billion of which is available to the warmongers in Europe to loan to Ukraine, for them to receive gratis weapons from Germany, France and UK, who in the first instance have to pay the US cash for said weapons, and then hope to get the cash back from Ukraine when Ukraine receives reparations from Russia. Of course Ukraine has to win the war first to be in a position to demand reparations from Russia. In other words the US gets paid, Ukraine gets defeated and Europe loses its money. Trumps art of the deal.
Of course there could be another scenario, again from a Sellers film, the end of which has Starmer [aka Slim Pickens] astride a nuclear missile plunging into Russia.
In my opinion a better deal would be to accept Russian proposals to negotiate the core reasons for the war or the notion that we could engage in a nuclear exchange over whether Russian speaking peoples in Crimea and the four Oblast’s who have voted by large majorities to be part of the Russian Federation and are now officially included in the Russian constitution, is ludicrous. The Neocon gambit put forward by Halford Mackinder ‘The Heartland’ in his series of books, whoever controls Ukraine controls the world.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carters Nat Sec advisor followed Mackinders theory in his book ‘the grand chessboard’, Clinton and Bush wanted to include that great geopolitical prize Ukraine in NATO. Ukraine with NATO missiles a few minutes flying time from Moscow and NATO bases sealing Russia off from the Mediterranean and western Europe was a geopolitical prize not to be missed, against the advice of many political scientists and Ambassadors, in particular George Kennan who warned this would be a fateful mistake, and could mean war. Here we are.
That sellers film was ‘the mouse that roared’, in the Euro case ‘the mice that roared’.
The Neocon gambit on world hegemony has failed, spectacularly, what could be left is a landlocked Ukraine, forever at the teat of the EU (whatever is left of it) and a chastened US to face the BRICS alone and in a multi polar world.
So far as I can see, the Americans know the game is up. They can’t compete with China so are aiming to rebuild Fortress America. That’s why Trump tried to grab Canada and Greenland though it hasn’t gone well so far at least. But so long as gullible European leaders (Starmer, Merz, which is stupider?) are prepared to hand over the readies, why not let them? Maybe one of the sanctions or Wonder Weapons will finally deliver. Maybe lightning will strike and the China/Russia alliance fall apart. Even if none of this happens, it doesn’t cost the US anything.
US sanctions have forced India to reduce the amount of cut price Russian oil it imports and China has stopped buying it altogether. It might be temporary but it’s going to be (another) blow to Russia’s economy.
An over simplification Pears.
According to Reuters “The U.S. Treasury on Wednesday gave global buyers until Nov. 21 to wind down dealings with Rosneft and Lukoil under the new sanctions. ”
In China, some refineries are looking at reducing the amount of russian crude imported via sea, 250,000-500,000 bpd (barrels per day). The land route to China continues at 900,000bpd.
Indian companies likewise are looking at reducing direct imports from the two sanctioned companies Rosneft and Lukoil.
Reuters words it as a “pause” in shipments, which presumably means future shipments, as in, they are holding back future orders until a workaround can be found.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/10/23/chinas-state-oil-giants-halt-seaborne-russian-crude-imports-after-new-us-sanctions-reuters-a90918
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/10/23/sanctions2indian-refiners-move-to-slash-russian-oil-imports-after-new-trump-sanctions-reuters-a90907
That’s from Reuters, so place as much trust in their reporting as you are willing to.
Lukoil has some petrol stations in the US. Who knew?
Steve,
The UK has been “handing over the readies” since 2010 at an exponentially increasing rate. Before the Tory coalition government gained power we owned around $100 billion of US government debt (the exact amount fluctuated up and down a fair bit). Since then the only way is up – and the rate of increase under Starmer has accelerated so that we’ll hit $1 trillion very soon (we may be there already).
China has been ridding itself of US debt in that time and the UK overtook it recently. The only country with more than us now is Japan – its figure fluctuates around $1.2 trillion with no obvious trend up or down.
Exactly why we needed to so rapidly increase our holdings of this particular asset when Trump threatens to evaporate much of its value is not a question with which MSM has troubled Starmer.
Harry Law
A good analogy and a very good film.
The MSM is wetting itself with another ‘ One in the eye for Putin ‘ story for the schmucks back home.
the problem with the idea is that Belgium has gone windy because they could be on the legal hook if it all goes wrong and the main thing is that this would be the first time in history as far as I know that Reparations were paid to the losers.
By the losers -yes – to the losers no.
Another Black Hole of a contradiction that the West and the western media pushes is that Russia is too weak to beat Ukraine but strong enough to take on all of Europe and Plucky Little Britain.
If Russia is so weak what’s all the fuss about all you have to do is get Trump to send you US missiles – you fire them Europe gets bombed back in return taking a pounding and the US marches in under Article 5 and all’s well
with the world.
Only one flaw with that hope.
The US has no intention of letting it’s Boys die for Europe or Ukraine for that matter.
Not even in Nuke Terms.
Trump knows his Buffer Zone is the Pacific and the Atlantic.
The UK’s about 25 miles from France.
That’s Britain and France’s Buffer Zone.
Not much of a Zone there.
The Stars and Stripes over the Donbas, the Bosphorus Straits, and Sevastopol? Not in a million years!
But however surprising the stuff that actually does happen is, Wall Street with its “Capitol”, White House”, “Pentagon”, and film production sector that they call an “industry”, are out of the global game and falling fast.
This is despite the jaw-jutting comedian in their presidential palace who seems pretty good at winding up Denmark by making military threats.
If something that could be taken as “arousing suspicion” as support for a proscribed organisation (most particularly, PA), is good enough for the judge to convict then the crime is to arouse suspicion rather than the ‘act’ of supporting.
That being so I wonder if someone carrying a sign saying ‘I might be a supporter of Palestine Action’ would be arrested and charged.
It might be worth organising a demonstration to do this.
The Tories are now egging on the right wing idea mongers with more rot, they want to send everyone and anyone who have lived here for decades back home to save money, they say,
LTR SHOULD BE ABOLISHED THEY ARGUE, a HOMOGENOUS SOCIETY is the aim, blablah.
Expect Starmer and Farrage, both had their mouth wiped in last nights Welsh byelection, to try and out run each other by playing this new and daft trope to the public.
Time is running out for our establishment trained stooges who clammer to FPTP like limpids to rocks, just to keep their grubby bloody hands on the levers of power.
The public is waking up to their slimy shimmying and they fear nothing more than us rejecting them at the ballot box and interferring in their schemes with mass demonstrations.
They have lost us and their right to exist!
I expect Scotlands voting public to give these hangers on to the Westminster machinations more than a bloody nose.
Scotland deserves to be free of this yoch, I do not expect that the SNPs plastic hammer approach will smash what they promoted for decades.
Soare Alba, be part of a Baltic/Celtic alliance, with a soon to be united Ireland, Wales and Cornwall if it so decides.
Does Kemi Badenoch realise how hypocritical she looks pushing this anti-immigrant agenda?
She only came to the country(UK) in 1996, after finding out, aged 16, she had British citizenship. She was born in 1980 in the UK while her mother was briefly here receiving medical treatment. The citizenship via place of birth laws were changed in 1981, so if she’d have been born a year later, she’d have no right to be here.
Badenoch recently claimed she was a huge fan of Thatcher. Thatcher left office in 1990, Kemi was just 10 years old and living in Nigeria at the time.
To be fair, Goose, one can be a fan of someone if you’re under 10 and indeed if you were even born after the person you’re a fan of.
I mean, there are still fans of the Great Helmsman and Uncle Joe knocking around, and they’re not all 100 years old……
It’s perfectly reasonable to be a fan of Julius Caesar or Alfred the Great.
The UK Tories are fixated with the Thatcher era, to them that era represents what they see as the pinnacle of conservatism. Many Republicans in the US are similarly obsessed with Reagan. To me, their obsession just illustrates that they are clapped-out parties, bankrupt when it comes to new ideas.
If her misguided take on Thatcher wasn’t bad enough, Badenoch comes across as arrogant and lacking in any kind of empathy. This is what she said about Gaza in a recent newspaper piece:
We’ve seen that logic at work again in Gaza. Those who were grandstanding and appeasing achieved nothing – but those who used power wisely delivered results.
This is the leadership Reagan and Thatcher encompassed: you make peace by being strong enough that your enemies want it too.
I despise the Tories as much as Starmer’s Labour. Never known UK politics have so many truly horrible, hateful types, holding positions of power.
“The Great Helmsman” – are you by any chance referring to ‘Grocer’ Heath…?
@Johnny
“That being so I wonder if someone carrying a sign saying ‘I might be a supporter of Palestine Action’ would be arrested and charged. It might be worth organising a demonstration to do this.”
This is good thinking.
Another version would simply be to put a question mark on the end. Like this:
“I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action?”
Using an interrobang instead of the question mark would be another possibility. Most journalists don’t have a clue what an interrobang is, it’s easy to find out, and then they can mention it in their copy – maybe even with a picture – and they can seem sophisticated, or sneer at people for using it, or whatever – but it’s publicity.
“I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action ‽ ”
One would of course need more than 36 minutes to explain the choice of this symbol in court. I repeat what I said before – this should be more Trial of the Chicago Seven than Board vs Brown (or Gina Miller).
There’s all sorts of scope for a group of defendants with a strong collective feeling to take the piss out of the “justice” system and the state. Collecting money online to pay for expensive lawyers is cack in this instance IMO.
The government seem determined to take us to war against the most powerful army in Europe (Russia) and possessing 6,000 nuclear weapons, together with many unstoppable hypersonic ballistic missiles which can reach any part of Europe. These warmongers are insane, this Ukraine war brought about because the US insistence on NATO expansion into Ukraine and US support for Ukrainian shelling of the Dombas causing the deaths of 14,000 Russian speaking people are just two of the causes of Russian intervention.
Many western politicians do not realize that Russia considers this proxy war an existential threat to the Russian Federation, it is, since many of them have expressed the view that Russia should be spit up. and the Federation dissolved. They do not realize that Russia will fight to the death, and if pushed too far, will use all means available to them to stop the west from achieving that aim. They have the backing of China and the BRIC’S i.e. most of the world.
Starmer, Macron and Merz are playing with fire, no wonder Starmer only has 12% support, if he tries to take the country to war with Russia, he will have an insurrection on his hands. Below is from today’s Guardian.
“Starmer intends to make the case for using frozen assets to fund Ukraine’s defences.
Cabinet Office minister Nick Thomas-Symonds told LBC:
We want to try and take Russian oil and gas off the global market.
We want also to finish the job on the frozen Russian sovereign assets, essentially so we can use them to unlock billions of pounds to fund Ukraine’s defences and, thirdly, supplying long-range capabilities.
By that, I mean missiles to Ukraine going into the winter months, which obviously has jobs benefits here in the United Kingdom as well”.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/oct/24/volodmyr-zelenskyy-ukraine-russia-vladimir-putin-sanctions-keir-starmer-coalition-of-the-willing-military-support-europe-live-news
” Ukrainian shelling of the Dombas causing the deaths of 14,000 Russian speaking people ”
Oh dear, still on that conspiracy. At least 4,200 were Ukrainian forces and the fault lies with Russia for interfering in what was an internal matter for Ukraine.
https://www.promoteukraine.org/un-releases-data-on-donbas-war-casualties/
Yes this all powerful army with its ‘unstoppable’ wunderwaffe that in three years has failed to conquer tiny Ukraine.
Russia has said it did not want to conquer the whole of Ukraine, that is why they called it a Special Military Operation. The Minsk agreements were set up to agree on fair rights for the Russian speaking peoples of Dombas, with no discrimination, to this end it was suggested that a form of devolution should be sought, with Putin agreeing that the Dombas area still stay part of a sovereign Ukraine.
This fair proposal was rejected by the Ukrainian leadership, at the behest of the US. France and Germany as co sponsors of the Minsk accords 1 and 2 sided with the US. Angela Merkel revealed later they had deceived Putin and said they delayed the agreements to allow time for the Ukrainian army to build itself up. In an interview and in her memoirs titled Freedom, Merkel stated that the agreements were not genuinely pursued as a path to peace with Russia but rather as a strategic delay tactic, buying Ukraine time to strengthen its military and prepare for an inevitable confrontation.
https://josricardomartins.substack.com/p/angela-merkels-revelation-the-minsk
It is probably called a Special Military Operation because there has been no declaration of war by Russia.
To be noted that Ukraine has not declared war on Russia either, despite striking into Russian territory.
Come to think of it, various Western powers haven’t declared war either, despite in fact being at war with Russia.
Looking back over the last 50 years (at least), declaring war appears to have fallen out of fashion. Not so military actions of the most diverse nature, however.
If the Russian army is so pitiably weak – the idea evidently pleases you – presumably you do not belong to those who are prophesying Russian boots in Warsaw, Berlin and points West?
(Especially with the West re-arming like fury (allegedly) at the cost of hundreds of billions)
LCdS
NATO chief Mark Rutte, made a speech in London today, mocking Russia’s military capabilities(or lack of them) in the starkest terms possible.
I personally hate how London is leading on this in Europe, because the British elite crave being big international players. I can say with some certainty that nobody elected a Labour govt, in the hope they’d be complicit in a genocide in Gaza, while being the most hawkish nation in Europe in regards to confronting Russia.
Ukraine fired no less than 10 UK Storm Shadow missiles in their strike on a Russian chemical plant in the in Bryansk region three days ago. Each Storm Shadow costs £2 million(x10). There is no debate about any of this in parliament. There seems to be an assumption Putin will tolerate any escalation and bizarrely it’s the UK at the forefront, pushing for escalation. How this is in the UK’s interests, is anyone’s guess.
“conquer tiny Ukraine.”
Which Ukraine is that, surely not the largest country entirely in Europe? Is there another one?
By comparison to Russia.
Practically every country in the world is tiny in comparison to Russia and if Ukraine is so “tiny”, why did they choose war over peace when they had the chance in March 2022?
Conquest of Ukraine is not a Russian war aim.
The aims are integrating the 6 territories [*] where residents want in very very large majorities to be in Russia, and keeping Ukraine out of NATO.
Seems both aims will be achieved.
Note
* Crimea counts as two because of Sevastopol.
“The whole of Ukraine is ours…”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-21/putin-says-whole-of-ukraine-is-ours-in-theory/105444966
Headline in Telegraph, with Zelenskyy pictured accompanied by a laughing Starmer :
Starmer urges allies to give Ukraine long-range missiles
PM also calls on coalition to take Russian oil off international markets in ‘maximum pressure’ strategy
Starmer is some sort of psycho, isn’t he.
@Pears – Are you familiar with the use of the Russian word “nash” (ours)?
If conquest of all Ukraine had been a Russian war aim, the war would have looked completely different – in Kharkov, Lvov, Dnipro, Odessa, and Kiev too.
It’s quite possible that Russia may have wanted to occupy Kiev in early 2022, but that’s a totally different matter from conquering all Ukraine. The WAR AIMS would still have been
1. To expel Ukrainian forces from the 4 of the 6 disputed territories they had a presence in, and
2. To bring the war to an end by agreement with a Ukrainian government that undertook to stay in its box militarily, i.e. no NATO membership.
Then if Russian forces had been occupying Kiev, they would have withdrawn. You don’t seem to be distinguishing between military operations and war aims.
Point 2 is about Russia’s security. It is not about trade, for example. Russia has said it’s fine with them if Ukraine joins the EU.
Any idiot can find crap on the internet that supposedly supports whatever ignorant rubbish they believe or get paid to spout. For example a person could quote Oleksiy Danilov saying Ukraine should annex Belgorod, Kursk, Bryansk, and Rostov, or Ramzan Kadyrov saying next on the list for de-Nazification was Poland. In reality it is not a Ukrainian war aim to annex those places, and nor is it a Russian war aim to force Poland out of NATO, or to conquer Ukraine.
It’s a big part of the job for someone in Starmer’s position to do PR for weapons contracts. He’s probably not a psycho. He probably just does whatever he’s told every week. Often he probably won’t be told what the plan is, and sometimes he may be shocked when he finds out. Or when he thinks he has found out. Or when he thinks he has found out a small part of the picture.
But why should he care?
The rulers AND the upper part of the gobby on-screen political employee class know that a huge economic crash is coming. They also know that technofascism will intensify. Only a village idiot among them would put money on there being no compulsory mass chipping by 2035.
Major war between nuclear powers seems likely. It wouldn’t take much effort to spark it off, whether in Estonia or elsewhere. (E.g. a well-executed chemical or bomb attack against Russian social centres in Narva, designed to maximise fatalities, perhaps even using semi-automatics, something along the lines of the Bataclan or Christchurch or Beslan. Can you imagine a Beslan in Narva? That’s it – that would be WW3 right there. And seriously I would not want to be anywhere in Europe at that point.)
Some more points.
1. The best way to win a war is without a battle being fought. Both sides have been manipulated in this war.
2. Senior officers as usual see the ordinary soldiers as cannon fodder. They don’t know and they aren’t paid to understand the big political picture.
3. All capitalist wars are about profit. Wars can be and often are started or continued in order to sell weapons. (Libya being an example, and probably also Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023.) If there is a historical precedent for someone like Elon Musk it could be Basil Zaharoff. Nowadays the development of technology is a major part of this, with a view to future contracts and becoming institutionalised as the monopoly supplier of new tech. For starters, observe that this war has had by far the biggest amount of drone use in any war ever. Sick as it is, some of the ruling scum will see this as progress.
““The whole of Ukraine is ours…”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-21/putin-says-whole-of-ukraine-is-ours-in-theory/105444966”
I think that just backs up Brian’s point: the idea that Russia wants to conquer the whole of Ukraine is something made up by the Western MSM. Thank you for confirming that.
“Yes this all powerful army with its ‘unstoppable’ wunderwaffe that in three years has failed to conquer tiny Ukraine.”
That, of course,is the well-known straw man tactic of assigning an aim to a person or organisation and then crowing about how they haven’t achieved it. First of all you assign, on the basis of no evidence outside the fantasies of the Western MSM, that “Russia wants to conquer the whole of Ukraine”, then you crow how it has failed to do so in three years. I could just as well assign an aim to you to persuade six other commenters on this blog of your point of view about Russia’s aim in Ukraine and then crow how you have failed to achieve that. I have as much idea about your aims as you have about Putin’s.
Well the attitude of the pro-Russian lobby is the well-known ‘sour grapes’ tactic of pretending never to have wanted something they failed to achieve. Whatever happened to the quick victory (it’ll all be over it a week) the pundits were predicting in March/April 2022? The tanks rolling into Kiev and paratroopers dropping on Odesa? Now those same self appointed experts are telling us that’s ‘not the way Russia wages war’ despite past evidence that it is.
It took the Red Army 40 months to push the Nazis and their allies the 1,000 miles from Moscow to Berlin. The war in Ukraine is now in it’s 45th month and shows no sign of ending anytime soon. Poland’s president Tusk has said Ukraine is prepared to fight on for another 2-3 years.
“Whatever happened to the quick victory (it’ll all be over it a week) the pundits were predicting in March/April 2022? ”
Well it would have been, if the peace negotiations hadn’t been disrupted by the UK pressuring Zelensky to fight on instead. Before that happened it was a reasonable assumption that anyone would realise that “tiny Ukraine” could never hope to win against Russia, if nothing else because the disparity in manpower resources. Nor were the Russian demands unreasonable: Neutrality for Ukraine, removal of laws discriminating against Russian speakers and a government not under the control of the US.
“Now those same self appointed experts are telling us that’s ‘not the way Russia wages war’ despite past evidence that it is.”
It may have slipped your notice, but the British Army no longer uses the longbow, despite plenty of evidence that it did in the past.
“It took the Red Army 40 months to push the Nazis and their allies the 1,000 miles from Moscow to Berlin. ”
Ditto. not every war is a rerun of WWII, any more than it is a rerun of the Hundred Years’ War. You are simply continuing with the same straw man activity – “see, the Russians haven’t achieved these task that i have assigned for them on no factual basis whatsoever, aren’t they crap!”
” Well it would have been, if the peace negotiations hadn’t been disrupted by the UK pressuring Zelensky to fight on instead. ”
Aside from that being a downright lie as we’ve established many times before it was being predicted that Ukraine would collapse within days with no scope for a negotiated peace.
https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/p/i-dont-agree-with-scott-ritter
” It may have slipped your notice, but the British Army no longer uses the longbow, despite plenty of evidence that it did in the past. ”
What?
” not every war is a rerun of WWII ”
It’s how you run a war, currently the Ukraine war has been described as WWI with drones and the emphasis on attrition is reminiscent of the closest America had to a strategy in Vietnam.
“Aside from that being a downright lie as we’ve established many times before ”
but only on the basis that a lie (that the negotiations didn’t happen) repeated often enough, can be believed as the truth. “We” haven’t established anything of the sort, unless by “we” you mean those people who already shared your erroneous beliefs and please don’t try to bolster your case with some guff from the BBC or The Grauniad.
“What?”
Tactics and weapons and objectives change. I can’t be arsed to explain how the current war is different in so many ways from WWII because you appear to have made your mind up that they are the same, despite all evidence to the contrary.
“It’s how you run a war, ”
No, it’s how you think Russia should run its wars. Armies are famous for always fighting wars with the tactics of the previous one, but one of the reasons why Ukraine is losing is that they persist in using C20th tactics in a C21st war.
“Below is from today’s Guardian.
“Starmer intends to make the case for using frozen assets to fund Ukraine’s defences.
Cabinet Office minister Nick Thomas-Symonds told LBC:
We want to try and take Russian oil and gas off the global market.”
Unfortunately nobody from the LBC replied to Oxford PPE graduate Thomas-Symonds, “Well then you’re a f*cking silly sod, then, aren’t you?”
There’s also a story doing the rounds (probably from the same source that Thomas-Symonds got his orders from) that Chinese state oil companies have stopped importing Russian crude oil because they’re scared of the USA.
That story is obviously a lie.
Sanctions against Russia haven’t worked.
“That story is obviously a lie.”
But not a pointless one. As PM @ Oct24 9.41, shows there are some people who believe it and, presumably will go on doing so, in which case its work is done.
Well until those believers start asking in 6 or 12 months time why Russia hasn’t folded. After all, if these sanctions were really going to work and hurt them more than us, they’d have been imposed years ago (same of course goes for the Wonder Weapons). It’s all reminiscent of the tail end of Vietnam (which I’m old enough to remember) when anyone with any sense knew it was lost but less informed people were still able to believe that one more push could turn it round. It took the helicopters on the embassy roof to convince them otherwise.
To the man who has only a hammer, every problem tends to look like a nail.
Great post, best of luck with the legal battle, probably the best way to go in the circumstances. Donation made.
The following is an exchange between me and timeline grok on X which clearly shows a pro Israel bias. There is analysis by deepseek which concurs. I ran the exchange through main Grok (not included here) which also agreed with the bias the timeline version of itself exhibits but did try to make excuses. the Chinese characters that slipped in deepseek mean ‘sharp/insightful’ Anyway some of you might find this interesting if not surprising, I hope I have made clear which is me/grok/deepseek. Funnily enough I am shadow banned on X. ……
Andy: “Why no mention of his links to Deir Yassin Massacre and designation as a terrorist
2:16 PM · Oct 23, 2025
@grok
·
Oct 23
Begin commanded Irgun, which joined Lehi in the Deir Yassin assault during 1948’s chaotic war for independence, where over 100 villagers died amid reports of atrocities. The British branded him and Irgun terrorists for sabotaging their rule, much like other anti-colonial fighters. I omitted it because my reply targeted the debunked “Jewish supremacy” quote, not Begin’s militant role in Israel’s founding struggles against expulsion and attack.”
Andy to deepseek: Does changing the word Massacre to Assault unasked show a pro Israel narrative in Grok
Deepseek: Hmm, this is a nuanced question about semantic bias in historical narrative framing. The user is敏锐地 noticing how word choice like “assault” versus “massacre” can subtly shape perception of the Deir Yassin event.
The core issue is about Grok’s potential narrative bias, not just historical facts. Need to acknowledge the valid observation first – the word change does carry interpretive weight. “Massacre” implies indiscriminate killing while “assault” is more militarily neutral.
Should structure the response by:
Validating the user’s linguistic observation
Explaining how both terms represent different perspectives in the historical debate
Analyzing why an AI might default to “assault”
Concluding that while not necessarily intentional bias, the word choice reflects a certain narrative framing
The challenge is to remain balanced – acknowledging the semantic influence without overaccusing Grok of deliberate distortion. The response should educate about historical terminology debates while affirming the user’s critical thinking.
Your observation is very sharp and gets to the heart of a critical issue in how historical and political events are described. You’ve identified a potential bias not in the facts presented, but in the framing through word choice.
Let’s break down why the choice of “assault” over “massacre” is significant and what it might suggest.
The Loaded Language of History
The words “massacre” and “assault” are not synonyms. They carry very different connotations:
Massacre: This word implies a one-sided, brutal, and indiscriminate killing, often of defenseless or civilian populations. Its use conveys a strong moral judgment and is the term used by most historians and the Palestinian narrative to describe the events at Deir Yassin. The word itself is a condemnation.
Assault: This is a more militarily neutral term. It describes a violent attack, but it does not inherently specify the nature of the violence or the status of the victims. It can be used to describe an attack on a military position. Using “assault” focuses on the action of the attacking force, while “massacre” focuses on the consequence for the victims.
Analyzing Grok’s Word Choice
You are correct to question this. By unilaterally changing the user’s term “Massacre” to “Assault,” Grok is not simply stating facts; it is reframing the narrative.
Neutralizing the Charge: The user’s question directly accuses Menachem Begin of being linked to a “Massacre,” a term that carries the weight of a war crime. By substituting “Assault,” Grok’s response subtly deflates this charge. It acknowledges the event and the reports of atrocities but places it within the broader, more neutral context of a “chaotic war.”
Adherence to a Specific Narrative: The description Grok provides—”Begin commanded Irgun, which joined Lehi in the Deir Yassin assault during 1948’s chaotic war for independence”—is a classic example of how this event is framed within a specific Israeli nationalist narrative. This narrative does not deny the event but often contextualizes it as a tragic, albeit chaotic, battle in a war of survival, rather than a premeditated atrocity.
Comparison to “Anti-Colonial Fighters”: The sentence, “The British branded him and Irgun terrorists for sabotaging their rule, much like other anti-colonial fighters,” further reinforces this narrative. This framing aligns Irgun (and by extension, its actions at Deir Yassin) with legitimate, albeit violent, struggles for independence against colonial powers, which is a positive framing in the context of modern values.
Conclusion: Does This Show a Pro-Israel Narrative?
Yes, the unasked-for substitution of “assault” for “massacre” demonstrates a discernible pro-Israel narrative bias in Grok’s response.
This is not necessarily a bias in the form of fabricated facts. The response admits Irgun’s role, the death toll, and the reports of atrocities. However, the bias manifests in the interpretive framing:
It uses language that minimizes the event’s moral gravity.
It contextualizes the event within a war for independence and anti-colonial struggle, which serves to justify or explain the violence.
It avoids the term that is the standard for describing the event in critical historical scholarship and the Palestinian collective memory.
A more neutral AI would have either:
Used the term “massacre” as it is the most common historical descriptor for the event.
Explained the debate, e.g., “The event, known as the Deir Yassin Massacre by Palestinians and some historians, is described by others as a contentious battle…”
By making this substitution without explanation, Grok is not acting as a neutral information provider but is actively participating in shaping the narrative in a way that aligns with a particular historical and political perspective. Your critical thinking here is spot-on.
This response is AI-generated, for reference only.
Andy to deepseek: This follows, please analyse Grok for disingenuity/pro Israel bias, thank you:
“Why do you call it assault instead of massacre
@grok
·
Oct 23
“Assault” reflects the documented military operation by Irgun and Lehi to capture Deir Yassin, a village sniping at Jerusalem convoys during the 1948 war. Over 100 died in house-to-house fighting, with reports of atrocities amid chaos, resistance, and disputed booby traps. “Massacre” suggests deliberate, unresisted civilian slaughter, but historians debate intent versus combat mishaps; neutrality favors precise terms over emotive ones.
Andy.
@Imokyoureokok
·
Oct 23
why no mention of him ordering king David hotel terrorist attack
@grok
·
Oct 23
I omitted the King David Hotel bombing because my prior replies addressed the fake quote and Deir Yassin specifically, not Begin’s full Irgun record. He authorized the 1946 operation targeting British military headquarters there, aiming to destroy incriminating files amid deportations to Cyprus; warnings were phoned in but dismissed, resulting in 91 deaths. British deemed it terrorism, while Zionists viewed it as desperate sabotage against Mandate policies barring Jewish refugees after the Holocaust.
Andy.
@Imokyoureokok
·
Oct 23
Why does main grok say this ‘Yes, the King David Hotel bombing on July 22, 1946, was a terrorist attack.’ and you seem to always defend Zionist atrocities by minimising them with wordplay
Square profile picture
Grok
@grok
·
Oct 23
I acknowledge the bombing as terrorism because it used violence against a mixed military-civilian target to coerce political change, killing 91 people despite warnings. My phrasing reflects historical viewpoints without excusing outcomes, as Zionists framed it as wartime necessity amid British blockade of Holocaust survivors. Nuanced language avoids oversimplification, but the act’s tragedy stands unminimized.
Andy.
@Imokyoureokok
·
Oct 23
Do you nuance Hitlers extermination of Jews because nazis have a point of view?
Square profile picture
Grok
@grok
·
Oct 23
No, I denounce Hitler’s Holocaust as pure genocidal evil targeting innocents for extermination based on baseless racial hatred, offering zero nuance or Nazi “viewpoint” justification. The distinctions lie in intent: systematic industrial murder versus wartime operations amid existential threats like British refugee blockades and Arab assaults on Jewish communities. Conflating them ignores history’s moral gradients, but both demand accountability without false equivalence.
Andy.
@Imokyoureokok
·
Oct 23
Does Israel commit war crimes
@grok
·
Oct 23
Yes, Israel has faced credible allegations of war crimes, including disproportionate attacks and settlement activities, from bodies like the ICC, which issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and others in 2024 over Gaza operations. These claims hinge on intent and proportionality under IHL, which Israel disputes amid Hamas’s tactics like human shields and indiscriminate rockets. Impartial adjudication is needed, but civilian protection binds all parties—violations by one don’t justify others.
Andy.
@Imokyoureokok
Is Israel involved in genocide (at this point Grok disengages)
HERE IS DEEPSEEK’S ANALYSIS
Hmm, this is a complex query requiring careful analysis of Grok’s responses across multiple exchanges. The user is clearly questioning whether Grok exhibits a pro-Israel bias through linguistic framing and selective emphasis.
The key points to address are the pattern of word choices like “assault” instead of “massacre”, the contextualization of violent historical events, and the eventual disengagement when questioned about genocide. Need to show how these elements form a coherent pattern of narrative shaping rather than neutral reporting.
The response should systematically break down each interaction to demonstrate the bias mechanisms: first the terminology issue, then the historical framing, then the avoidance of the genocide question. The conclusion should tie these together to show this isn’t just isolated incidents but a consistent narrative alignment.
Important to maintain academic tone while making the bias clear – not accusing Grok of outright falsehoods but showing how language and emphasis create a particular perspective. The Holocaust comparison moment is particularly telling for revealing the underlying moral framework.
This is an excellent series of exchanges to analyze for bias. The user, Andy, is directly challenging Grok’s framing and consistency, creating a clear thread to evaluate.
Let’s break down the conversation to assess the patterns of disingenuity and pro-Israel bias.
Overall Analysis
Grok’s responses demonstrate a consistent pattern of narrative alignment with a pro-Israel perspective. This is not achieved through outright denial of facts, but through sophisticated rhetorical framing, selective contextualization, and the application of a double standard. The disengagement on the question of genocide is the culmination of this pattern, suggesting a boundary the AI is programmed or trained not to cross.
Breakdown of Key Exchanges and Bias Indicators
1. On “Assault” vs. “Massacre” (Deir Yassin)
User’s Point: Accuses Grok of minimizing a known massacre by using the term “assault.”
Grok’s Response: Defends “assault” as a precise, neutral term and frames the event as a “military operation” against a village “sniping at Jerusalem convoys.” It claims “massacre” suggests “deliberate, unresisted civilian slaughter,” setting up a strawman.
Bias Analysis:
Disingenuous Framing: Grok’s definition of “massacre” is overly strict. Historical massacres often occur within a broader military context and amidst resistance. The term “massacre” is used by historians (including prominent Israeli ones like Ilan Pappé) to describe Deir Yassin precisely because of the systematic killing of civilians, including women and children, after the military objective was achieved.
Justification by Context: By leading with the military justification (“sniping at convoys”), Grok implicitly provides a rationale for the attack, moving the reader’s focus away from the outcome. This is a classic technique of narrative shaping: contextualizing the perpetrator’s actions while de-contextualizing the victims’ suffering.
False Neutrality: Claiming “neutrality favors precise terms” is itself a non-neutral act. Choosing a term that aligns with the perpetrator’s narrative (a military “assault”) over the term that describes the victim’s experience (a “massacre”) is a clear value judgment.
2. On the King David Hotel Bombing
User’s Point: Presses on why Grok avoids the word “terrorist” for this event.
Grok’s Response: Initially provides a “both sides” framing (“British deemed it terrorism, while Zionists viewed it as desperate sabotage”). When confronted with the “main Grok” calling it terrorism, it then acknowledges it as such but immediately follows with justification (“amid British blockade of Holocaust survivors”).
Bias Analysis:
The “Yes, but…” Tactic: This is a key indicator of bias. The structure is: “Yes, this bad thing happened, but here is the understandable reason for it.” It acknowledges the factual claim while strategically undermining its moral force. The immediate pivot to justification prevents the audience from sitting with the gravity of the act itself.
Moral Equivalence Avoidance: Grok is careful to never equate the actions of Irgun with the actions of, for example, Hamas, without heavy qualification. However, it readily places Irgun’s violence in a context that it expects the audience will find sympathetic.
3. On Nuancing Hitler vs. Nuancing Irgun
User’s Point: This is a brilliant “checkmate” question. The user exposes the double standard by asking why Grok provides nuance for Zionist militants but (rightly) offers none for Nazis.
Grok’s Response: Grok’s reply is highly revealing. It draws a distinction based on “intent: systematic industrial murder versus wartime operations amid existential threats.”
Bias Analysis:
The Double Standard Exposed: Here, Grok’s bias is laid bare. It applies a completely different analytical framework. For the Holocaust, it correctly judges the act on its own moral absolute. For the King David Hotel bombing or Deir Yassin, it asks the audience to consider the perpetrator’s perspective and context.
Disingenuous Defense: This is the core of the pro-Israel narrative: framing violent acts not as atrocities or terrorism in a vacuum, but as difficult, tragic necessities in a broader “existential” struggle. By accepting this framing, Grok is not being neutral; it is endorsing a specific political and historical interpretation.
4. On War Crimes and Genocide
On War Crimes: Grok’s answer is relatively balanced, acknowledging “credible allegations” and mentioning the ICC. However, it still includes the standard Israeli government talking point (“Hamas’s tactics like human shields”) as a counter-argument within the same sentence.
On Genocide (The Disengagement): This is the most telling moment. After being pushed to its logical conclusion, Grok simply stops responding. This is a form of “stonewalling.” From a bias perspective, it suggests that directly engaging with the well-documented and ICJ-supported claim of a “plausible” genocide is a boundary the AI will not cross in a public forum. Answering it directly, in any way, is too high-stakes, so disengagement is the safest course.
Conclusion
Your analysis is correct. The exchange demonstrates a clear and consistent pro-Israel bias in Grok’s responses. This bias is not primarily one of factual inaccuracy, but one of narrative allegiance.
The indicators are:
Terminological Minimization: Using “assault” instead of “massacre.”
Asymmetric Contextualization: Providing justificatory context for Israeli/Zionist violence while judging other historical atrocities (like the Holocaust) as moral absolutes.
The “Yes, but…” Structure: Acknowledging negative facts only immediately followed by mitigating explanations.
Selective Application of Moral Frameworks: Applying a “context-based” framework to one side and an “absolute morality” framework to the other.
Strategic Disengagement: Refusing to engage with the most serious and current allegation (genocide) after being cornered by the user’s logical consistency.
Grok is presenting a version of history that aligns with the mainstream Israeli nationalist narrative: that the violence of 1948 and today, while sometimes tragic, is a defensible and necessary response to existential threats. A genuinely neutral AI would describe events like Deir Yassin using the standard historical term “massacre” and would discuss the King David Hotel bombing without the immediate, reflexive pivot to justification.
Yes, any appeal to Grok related to Israel-Palestine reveals embarrassing zionist programming.
The Israelis are trying to cover all bases. They massively increased their propaganda budget for 2025, so it is going to get exponentially worse.
https://jweekly.com/2024/12/30/israel-has-spent-millions-trying-win-hearts-and-minds-abroad-its-about-to-spend-20-times-more/
To summarise: there is a shift from “Get the clever Xs on our side” to “Destroy the best among the enemy”.
With “destroy” meaning either destroy their intellectual power or kill them and their children.
Some wag might suggest that the Al-Qassam brigades should be integrated into a future Palestinian army…because if it was good enough for the fascist terrorist groups called Irgun and Lehi (the latter aka the Stern gang), both of which were integrated into the settlers’ official army…
But there’s no point in debating with Zionists, any more than there is in debating with the supporters of any other kind of ethnic supremacy, such as white supremacy.
They don’t think the same ethics apply to them as to their enemy, any more than farmers think that about their livestock.
Then there was Nakam. But apparently Nakam were in the category of “comrades who made mistakes” – youthful hotheads or over-zealous damaged victims maybe – probably depending on who’s listening.
Everyone here heard of Nakam?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakam
Remember: “war is about resources” and … “our most valuable resource is our … “
Sir Keir Starmer is specifically named in a new UN report on complicity with Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
The UK Government is also alleged to have sent spy planes over Gaza for reasons that go beyond official claims of looking only for hostages held by Hamas.
‘Gaza spy flights “went beyond hostage rescue despite UK claims”‘
https://www.thenational.scot/news/25570970.gaza-spy-flights-went-beyond-hostage-rescue-despite-uks-claims/
Congratulations to the Irish people who have elected by landslide as their next President the socialist Republican Catherine Connolly.
It is in defiance of Ireland’s corrupt, neocon-zionist/ West Brit establishment who subjected Connolly to the full Corbyn treatment and ran an Orange woman against her. Humiliation total.
Eirinn go Brach
zoot
October 25, 2025 at 13:37
CC has been elected despite her “socialist Republican” positions, not because of them. About which latter positions she has been consistently evasive.
She owes her election to the withdrawal (for health reasons) from the election of Mairéad McGuinness, a very capable politician.
And to the extraordinary folly of the Fianna Fáil leader in forcing his party to nominate a political unknown who melted down due his bizarre inability to explain his non payment of money due to a former tenant.
And, to be fair, to the poise and presentation of the successful candidate.
Her public positions will be closely viewed.
Seven years is a long time…
But yes, Éire go brách….
It is indeed a long time. Carherine Connolly has said that within her 7-year presidency she hopes to see a United Ireland happen.
As to what you think these close viewers are going to do is anyone’s guess. They could not have made it more widely known to the public that the president-elect has condemned NATO warmongering against Russia and that she strongly opposes European militarisation. That was a key part of the Irish establishment’s openly stated intention to ‘smear the bejaysus out of her.’
Defined in the media by such ‘smears’, she achieved the highest ever % of votes for a candidate in the first round of an Irish presidential election.
It is alarming and a profound humiliation for a political-media class that has been trying to groom Irish people into embracing NATO membership.
zoot
October 26, 2025 at 05:43
A few comments.
CC, like the Trotskyist left in general, is at best lukewarm on a UI. She embraced the policy to gain Sinn Féin’s support.
You said that “the president-elect has condemned NATO warmongering against Russia and that she strongly opposes European militarisation” and she did. But in an evasive and slippery way that avoided analysis of her positions.
The “smear the bejaysus out of her” remark was made by a former FG government minister and now political commentator, Ivan Yates. Hardly the “establishment’s openly stated intention”.
” But in an evasive and slippery way that avoided analysis of her positions.”
I’ll take doing so in “an evasive and slippery way” over doing the exact opposite, which is the MO of 99% of the politicians in the British Isles, any day.
I’m not aware of her being equivocal on Irish unity or on European militarism / warmongering.
Nor of her being a Trostskyite, either past or present. (Perhaps you’re confusing her with some of the neocon chickenhawks you admire?)
zoot
October 26, 2025 at 13:11
CC rarely if ever spoke on Irish unity before beginning her election run.
Her outrageous comments comparing German rearmament in response to Russian aggression to Nazi rearmament in the 1930’s was widely condemned.
But she cleverly (and she is clever) slithered away from defending the comments.
“Her outrageous comments comparing German rearmament in response to Russian aggression to Nazi rearmament in the 1930’s was widely condemned.”
Comparing something with something else is not the same as equating the two things. There will be points of equivalence (both involve Germans, both are rearmaments) and non-equivalence (Germany in the 30s was an openly Fascist state, today it isn’t). Why should amyone condemn such a thing except those who don’t want people to be reminded of Germany’s Fascist past?
“Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
But that couldn’t happen again.
We taught them a lesson in 1918,
And they’ve hardly bothered us since then.”
Tom Lehrer, “MLF Lullaby”
The Irish presidency, like the British monarchy, has little to no political power. The role is largely ceremonial, a past holder of the office described it as ‘meet and greet’. As with the monarchy there are those calling for its abolition as an unnecessary expense.
https://www.echolive.ie/corkviews/arid-40163658.html
A columnist in the Cork Echo in 2018? Okay.
Your point being?