I have started legal action in Scotland against the UK government over the proscription of Palestine Action, in coordination with Huda Ammori and her team in England. The petition has been accepted by the Court and served on the Solicitor General. They now have 16 remaining days to respond.
The rationale is well explained in this article by Gabriel McKay from The Herald newspaper:
“A former British diplomat has filed a legal challenge seeking a judicial review, under Scots law, of the decision to proscribe the group Palestine Action.
A petition has been lodged to hear a case in the Court of Session over the decision by the UK Government to make being a member of, or expressing support for, the group a terror offence.
If the court agrees to hear the case, and if it then declares the proscription unlawful, it would cease to apply in Scotland while remaining in place in England and Wales unless the High Court in London makes the same finding in a separate challenge.
Craig Murray is the former ambassador to Uzbekistan, an ex-rector of the University of Dundee and a political activist who was jailed in 2021 for contempt of court relating to the trial of Alex Salmond.
He has served notice to the Advocate General for Scotland, Baroness Smith of Cluny KC, as the law officer representing the interests of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Shabana Mahmood, in Scotland.
In his submission, Mr Murray argues that he has standing as someone who, prior to its proscription on July 5, expressed support for Palestine Action and took part in protest activities organised by the group.
A petitioner must show “sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application”, usually interpreted as being directly personally affected or raising an issue of general public importance.
Scottish courts are generally seen as taking a liberal and pragmatic stance on the issue of standing. For example, in the 2012 case Walton v Scottish ministers, Scottish Ministers and local councils argued that environmental campaigner William Walton lacked standing for a judicial review because he was not personally affected by plans to build a new Aberdeen bypass as he did not own property near the road or suffer direct loss.
However, the Supreme Court ultimately ruled that he did have standing as it “is sufficient that the applicant has a genuine concern about the legality of the act or decision, and that the issues raised are of general public importance”.
Mr Murray’s petition for judicial review asks the Court of Session to declare the decision to proscribe Palestine Action ultra vires (beyond the legal power or authority of the home secretary) and have it reduced, i.e to have the order annulled in Scotland as it relates to the group.
It rests on three arguments: that the passing of the order was procedurally unfair; that it violates article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression); and that it violates article 11 of the ECHR (freedom of association).
On the first, the petition argues that Palestine Action was not consulted ahead of proscription, thus depriving the group of the chance to argue for proscription being unnecessary which undermines the requirement for “a high degree of procedural fairness”.
The second ground argues that Mr Murray previously expressed support for Palestine Action but is now legally prevented from doing so, interfering with his right to freedom of expression.
The petition compares the direct action tactics of the group to those of Greenpeace and Just Stop Oil, namely that it “is not an organisation engaged in acts of violence to the person” and therefore proscription is disproportionate and a violation of the right to freedom of expression.
The third ground argues that Mr Murray’s freedom of association has been infringed due to the decision to criminalise both being a member of Palestine Action and engaging in meetings with members or supporters of the organisation.
The petition points to case law which found a measure which will cause the outright dissolution of an association may only be taken “in the most serious cases”, and the court must assess whether it is “exceptionally justified” by “relevant and sufficient reasons”.
Mr Murray’s legal challenge is separate to the Judicial Review in England and Wales brought by Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori, which is taking place in the High Court in November 2025, at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
If the Court of Session hears the case, and reaches a different decision, campaigners say this would provoke a ‘constitutional crisis’.
There is precedent in that area in the decision by then Prime Minister Boris Johnson to advise the Queen to prorogue parliament for five weeks in 2019.
An appeal to the High Court ruled it was not justiciable as it was a political matter, but the Court of Session found the prorogation unlawful as it prevented parliament from carrying out its constitutional functions.
That was ultimately ruled on by the Supreme Court which upheld the verdict of the Court of Session, finding that the decision to prorogue parliament exceeded the government’s constitutional limits.
While national security, including terror laws, are reserved a Scots court can still review how UK laws are applied in Scotland, for example under things like human rights compliance.
If the Court of Session agreed to hear Mr Murray’s case and found in his favour, there could arise the possibility of a territorial split in the application of a UK-wide anti-terrorism order, an inconsistency which would then have to be resolved by the Supreme Court.
He said: “It is a maxim in Scots law that the law cannot be absurd. To claim that Palestine Action is a terrorist organisation is plainly absurd.
“This proscription is a politically motivated action in support of a genocide and it is poisoning Scottish civil society. Entirely peaceful protestors are being arrested and charged as terrorists.”
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries added: “The proscription of Palestine Action has already spectacularly backfired on the Westminster Government, with the world looking on in dismay at the sight of thousands of elderly and disabled people in Britain being dragged away by police for holding seven word cardboard signs.
“Labour’s anti-democratic crackdown on domestic direct action groups leading to international condemnation, from global human rights experts and the United Nations. Over 2,000 people have been arrested across Britain, including people in Scotland detained only for wearing t-shirts which say ‘Genocide in Palestine. Time to take action’.
“We wholeheartedly support this legal challenge and the Scottish people’s right within their legal system to seek to overturn this absurdly authoritarian ban which has been imposed by Westminster.
“With Scotland’s legal system prioritising the rights and sovereignty of the people rather than the English doctrine of the supremacy of Parliament, this legal challenge is on strong legal footing. The potential for a constitutional crisis created if Scottish and English courts reach different decisions, further demonstrates that this ban is simply not enforceable.
“Defend Our Juries will be escalating the mass defiance of the ban next month, with peaceful mass sign-holding actions taking place from 18th-29th November across Britain.
“Throughout history civil disobedience has been used to overturn unjust laws. The movement against this draconian proscription is growing day by day – there are too many thousands of people who refuse to accept this unjust law and will not stop defying it until it is lifted.”
A Home Office spokesperson said: “Palestine Action has conducted an escalating campaign involving not just sustained criminal damage, including to Britain’s national security infrastructure, but also intimidation and, more recently, alleged violence and serious injuries to individuals. That kind of activity puts the safety and security of the public at risk.
“Violence and serious criminal damage has no place in lawful protests.” ”
I thought that article was worth considering in full because it is balanced and introduced a couple of things I did not know myself, such as the Supreme Court decision on standing in Walton vs Scottish Ministers.
Yvette Cooper had a duty in law to consult before the proscription. She consulted the Israeli Embassy, Jewish groups and weapons manufacturers. She did not consult any Palestinian individual or organisation, human rights groups or consult with Palestine Action themselves.
What is more, Cooper consulted nobody in Scotland. Not the Scottish government, not Police Scotland. Nobody in Scotland.
Here is an extract, released under a Freedom of Information Act request, from the Scottish CONTEST (counter-terrorism strategy) programme board meeting of May 2025. The Scottish CONTEST programme board consists of the Scottish Government, Police Scotland, MI5, COSLA and others.
Note the wording; “has not been close to meeting”.
Crucially this assessment was made after the action at the Thales plant in Scotland and the consequent convictions. Yet although both Police Scotland and the intelligence services assert Palestine Action in Scotland has “not been close to meeting” the bar of terrorism, Yvette Cooper cited the Thales action as one of three (out of 385) events which she asserted did meet the bar of terrorism.
Following its proscription of Palestine Action, the UK government has now intimated its intention to place further restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly, notably proposing to ban “repeated” protests.
The proscription of Palestine Action has led to mass arrests. Being charged with a terrorist offence is life-changing. It leads to loss of employment, debanking with loss of savings, and travel bans. This is being visited on those engaged in non-violent protest against Genocide.
We have to fight back using whatever avenues we can exploit. This Scottish legal action is one. However legal action costs money, and I have to appeal to everybody who supports this fight to help me fund it. To date I have personally contributed £5,000 and Liberation Scotland has contributed another £5,000 to uphold the Scottish people’s historic legal rights to freedom from oppressive and arbitrary government.
The sums needed to mount a successful legal challenge to the power of the state can be eye-watering. But we are the many. Every penny helps, but please do not cause yourself hardship.
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
We have discussed with crowdfunders including those which pay the money direct to our lawyers, but compliance issues re a proscribed organisation have held this up for several days. We hope to be able to offer that further donation option soon.
Far from comparably relevant but as it too is news today:
Netflix, BBC and Others Sent Legal Letter Over Israel Film Boycott Signed by Joaquin Phoenix, Olivia Colman: ‘Highly Likely to Be a Litigation Risk’
https://variety.com/2025/film/news/netflix-bbc-legal-letter-israel-boycott-1236549672/
“(…)
Some of the U.K.’s most prominent studios and screen organizations have been sent a legal warning over an industry boycott of Israeli film institutions.
The letter from U.K. Lawyers for Israel states that the boycott, which has been backed by Hollywood stars including Joaquin Phoenix, Emma Stone, Olivia Colman and Mark Ruffalo, is a breach of the U.K.’s Equality Act and may also have a knock-on impact on financing and insurance.
(…)”
Wonder if they have the guts to stand up.
I doubt it.
Entertainment people are not the ones you can use for a revolution.
I have no clue why the public always believes these folks are “special” and in the “knowing”. Beyond lying to press people and charming investors they have no moral challenges outside their actual jobs. I don´t blame them. But entertainment is just as hollow as the sets they are shooting on. It´s a fraud. Pretty. But a fraud.
In fact Craig Murray single-handedly has probably done more and achieved more in this matter of the genocide than the entire British and American film industry. It´s a shame for them but proves Craig´s exceptionalism. As above case confirms.
If I meet Olivia Colman, I’ll pee in a cup and throw it over her. (With thanks from Broadchurch).
Vulgar threats and insults are the last refuge of scoundrels and ignoramuses – ergo the polar opposite of all who fearlessly stand up for peace, truth and justice – and are willing to do the requisite deep research.
PS. What would you like to do with Jewish anti-Zionist Miriam Margolyes who has condemned Israel’s slaughter in Gaza many times…and until recently was the darling and favourite guest of the BBC’s celebrity bread-and-circus Graham Norton Show…
(Paul G)
“If I meet Olivia Colman, I’ll pee in a cup and throw it over her.”
Why on Earth would you do that? Are you a supporter of Zionism?
The Variety article is very badly worded but according to a previous report of theirs it is the pledge to boycott that Colman signed, not the threatening letter from the pro-Israel lawyers.
https://variety.com/2025/film/global/stars-sign-pledge-complicit-israeli-film-companies-1236511010/
Never had you down as an urophiliac ! 🙂
UK Lawyers for Israel are a bunch of chancers – often full of shit dressed up in intimidating quasi-legalese. A call to boycott Israeli product has sod all to do with the UK Equality Act, but much to do with the judgement from Baldassi et autres c. France, (2020:15271/16), where the European Court of Human Rights decided campaigning for a boycott of Israeli products falls under the right of freedom of expression protected by article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
The IHRA’s non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism is used by Zionist supporters to mean any criticism of Israel, Jews, Zionism and Israel are conflated into the term antisemitism, a term used to immediately smear and disable an opponent. Why have a law when calling someone an anti Semite can get you ostracized from society. (Ask Jeremy Corbyn.)
“In a first step toward a federal law punishing criticism of Israel, the House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a massive defense budget that would bar companies engaged in “politically motivated” boycotts of the country from Pentagon contracts.
“This amendment is really designed to shield Israel from any accountability by penalizing those who protest its violations of Palestinian human rights through boycotts, which should be protected by the First Amendment,”
https://joemiller.us/2025/09/the-house-just-passed-a-bill-punishing-politically-motivated-boycotts-of-israel/
I suspect the reason Palestine Action protests have been labeled Terrorism and not an ordinary criminal offence is because a Jury is unlikely to convict a person whose sole aim is to stop Genocide.
Independent MP Zarah Sultana drew a sharp comparison between Keir Starmer’s past and present when recalling how, as a barrister, he defended an activist who broke into RAF Fairford to prevent war crimes in Iraq—calling it “not terrorism, but conscience.”
“That case became a landmark in lawful nonviolent direct action against an illegal war. That barrister is now our prime minister,” she said.
Sultana’s speech came as MPs voted to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation after the activist group targeted RAF Brize Norton base in Oxfordshire, and an Israeli defence company’s UK headquarters.
https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/palestine-action-gaza-zarah-sultana-challenges-starmer-b2781375.html
Which once more confirms the old German proverb “Wes Brot ich ess, des Lied ich sing” / “he who pays the piper calls the tune” – which, like in the English I assume, belongs to the oldest sayings still in use.
Starmer´s case is especially upsetting considering how much this opportunist has destroyed on his way to Downing Street – hijacking Labour Party, destroying Corbyn´s promise for a turn to the better and the prospect for an entire country of 60M, betraying the very legal ideas he might truly have stood for a verrrrry long time ago. Disgusting and depressing this “legacy”. Apparently British upper class is very good with this, especially when it has coalesced with Labour where results of this kind are even more conspicuous.
As a wolf in sheep’s clothing, Starmer leaves much to be desired. For him to fool the few decent people still in that racist, colonialist, imperialist, racist and antisemitic party says more about them than him.
“Starmer leaves much to be desired.”
Oh, I don’t know, he’s a strong contender for the worst PM in the last hundred years, if not ever, although I suspect there were a few bad ‘uns two hundred years ago or so.
I would have thought thatcher was about 100-1000 times worse than Starmer – and he’s pretty bad.
Yep!
There is also the fact that the main target of Palestine Action activists was the Israeli weapons manufacturer and defence contractor Elbit systems, who are already a supplier for the British Army, and are in line for a multi billion dollar contract to train UK armed forces which would make them an ‘strategic partner’ to the MoD. I could actually imagine Yvette Cooper wondering how to get rid of the embarrassing activists and coming up with a plan worthy of Baldrick’s best ‘I’ll just ban then, a few kids with spray paint, no one will notice’.
The proscription was initiated by the zionists/Israel, labour was tasked to deliver such to their owners.
Fantastic work, Craig – thank you.
An important challenge to this grotesque zionist legislation.
Unfortunately as you mention the signs are the genocidaires are doubling down rather than retreating, using the Manchester attack as justification.
Not just their proposed ban on “repeat” anti-Genocide protests either. Cooper’s fellow LFI member Bridget Phillipson just announced there will be training sessions in British universities to tackle “the alarming rise in antisemitism” — aka criticism of her government’s genocide in Palestine.
The indoctrination is to be carried out by the Union of Jewish Students, an apartheid- and genocide-supporting outfit affliated to the World Zionist Organisation, which runs the illegal Settlement Division in the West Bank.
Even after unstinting assistance in shredding brown babies these people are still being presented to the public by the British media as anti-racists.
The “the alarming rise in antisemitism” pose had been going the rounds since at least the early 70s, when I started reading the papers. If it were true there wouldn’t be any Jews left in Britain. Mind you there’s a world of difference between a Jew and a zionist.
Potentially but not often enough it seems. Zionism is probably preached from most UK synagogues given that Reform Judaism is Zionist. The UK Chief Rabbi’s son has “served” in the IDF. Synagogues organise free “Aliyah” trips for British Jews to Israel – meaning “birthright” to the (Palestinians’) land. So unfortunately Judaism as currently practiced in the UK seems to be mostly Zionist.
I’d suggest that the number of Jews that don’t support zionist Israel is extremely small. Yes, they exist but in reality they are outliers/anomalies.
Sadly even those who oppose Zionism can be heard at demos shouting at the police “You can’t arrest that Jewish man/woman”. To me that translates to “Arrest those Muslims, Christians and Atheists over there instead. They don’t matter.”
Will this indoctrination be compulsory and will there be an exam at the end, after which a special badge will be awarded?
Yes. The badge, I believe, will be based upon an ancient religious/good luck symbol.
How does a government proscribe without first having some sort of consultative process with the group to be proscribed?
How does Israel compare with its mass killing of civilian women and children for about two years?
What legal standard of accountability applies to the equivalent pro-Israel protesters?
I wonder.
As I commented before, I suggest that the Westminster government is seeking to restore the recently-abolished offence of sedition and prosecute it under another name, like ‘terrorism’ offences. Therefore it might help to look through historic attempts to punish people for sedition (especially in the context of protest and rejection of official propaganda) rather than terrorism.
Sleeping Dog,
Here is an actual example of misuse ( intended use?) of the seditious libel law from the time of 1940s colonial Jamaica:-
https://forage.com/?cid=64503
@Courtenay Francis Raymond Barnett, thank you for that informative example from the Caribbean. I was aware that anti-sedition (or ‘sedition’ as whatever the authorities claim it to be) law was used (and abused) throughout the British Empire to suppress dissent, but I’m largely ignorant of specific cases.
The terrorist-label is despicable and one could only easily imagine the reaction if anti-war activists in Russia protested against the war in Ukraine and carried out sabotage against Russian arms manufacturers and that these people would then be labeled terrorists by the russian government. Of course the UK government would blast such designation. But as usual, when they themselves do it in their own nation, it is suddenly OK.
Disturbing also to see so many dumbed-down right-wing morons support the crackdown, not realizing that after pro-Palestinians, these fascist tools could be used against themselves sooner or later. “First they came…”
Put a small coin in the legal fund tin. Good luck.
Surely, (in a ‘reasonable’ hearing), you’ll win it on the lack of public consultation alone…?
Advocate General for Scotland, Baroness Smith of Cluny KC, would be Catherine Smith, Chair of the John Smith Centre, at the University of Glasgow, ‘till Starmer made her Advocate General.
Smith previously worked for NGO LINKS. NGO LINKS was one of those American regime change outfits (in all probability State Department rather than CIA) running political influencing operations in the former Soviet, Republic of Georgia.
NGO LINKS operated out of the University of Arizona. Its major funding came out of the US Government, National Science Foundation. Why would an agency ostensibly focused on domestic, scientific research fund political work in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia?
In her John Smith Centre bio, Smith described NGO LINKS as “London based”. Why the curious misdirection?
Smith’s mother (Baroness Smith of Gilmorehill) was of course a fairly senior MI6 Officer. In short, Baroness Smith of Cluny was / is a spook. Like mother like daughter.
“In short, Baroness Smith of Cluny was / is a spook. Like mother like daughter.”
Once a spook, always a spook.
Thank you Craig, as a little old lady with a personal interest I am very grateful for your efforts.
I’m interested to see the slippage from Yvette Cooper’s strident assertions that ‘this is not a non-violent organisation’ to now ‘alleged violence’. I sincerely hope that that trial in which those allegations are to be heard is thrown out as having been prejudiced. I cannot see how it can continue given the number of high profile and very public assertions that the use of violence was a fact rather than an allegation.
I noticed that ‘alleged violence’ accusation and thought such an assertion would need some solid evidence to be acceptable in a court of law. Clutching at straws?
As I understand it, the legal basis for proscription was ‘damage to property’, while Cooper’s rants about Palestine Action being violent (and funded by Iran, and plotting something major, etc) were all a smear campaign attempting to make the ban palatable to the public. She was lying, as Craig has covered in an earlier blog. It’s probably not likely to be useful in court, but still interesting to see the Home Office is not willing to adopt the same approach as their secretary of state.
I ❤️ CM
Whatever happened to the statute of Praemunire? If I remember my Tudor history correctly, it was one of the charges laid against Cardinal Wolsey. Essentially it is the upholding of the jurisdiction of a foreign power (in Wolsey’s case the Pope). The UK government seems to be precisely at fault here – and many of the politicians actually take coin for it too. Good luck Craig.
“Whatever happened to the statute of Praemunire? ”
From Wikipedia: As of the Criminal Law Act 1967 coming into effect, praemunire facias is no longer an offence in England, Wales or Northern Ireland.
Pity. I was mainly thinking about the abject bending over backwards by the UK government to demands and pressure from the USA and Israeli regarding the policing and suppression of protests in support of Palestine and the Palestinians. It’s as if they are writing the laws.
Of course it’s not at all suspicious that, after being on the statute books since the reign of Richard II, the Statute of Praemunire was removed by the first Labour government after the Labour Friends of Israel group was formed.
The English doctrine of the supremacy of Parliament does not have anything like the sound footing claimed for it.
Constitutionally, the UK consists of two sovereign territories, and neither had or has any legitimate claim to outrank the other. This was clearly true in 1706, or the Treaty would have been redundant.
Scotland never gave up her sovereignty as no-one negotiating the Treaty of Union owned the legitimate authority to end or subordinate the sovereignty of the Scots people, who own it under their own extant constitution, and nothing in the Treaty of Union actually obliged such submission. Thus the Scots still legally own Scotland’s sovereignty today. But England’s sovereignty stood on thin ice; until 1689 England’s sovereignty was held by its monarch, as the feudal overlord of his domains. In December 1689, the English parliament stripped its monarchy of sovereignty and held it for itself, resulting in the famous ‘unlimited parliamentary sovereignty’ of the ‘Crown in Parliament’.
It lasted only 18 years.
In 1707 England’s parliament ceased to exist, as the Supreme Court confirmed in 2022. Sadly for the new British parliament, the old parliament died intestate, so England’s sovereignty died with it, no provision for transferring it to the new parliament ever having been made, including in the Treaty, as Professor Robert Black KC has confirmed.
Scotland’s sovereignty is represented in the UK parliament exclusively by its MPs, elected directly by Scotland’s Crown -the Community of the Realm of Scotland. England’s sovereignty is not represented at all. England has no legitimate power over Scotland or her MPs, and never did. England’s much larger MP numbers are no proxy for formal sovereignty in anyone’s book. Sovereignty is not based on arithmetic, it is based on ownership. Even if England had retained its sovereignty, its MP numbers are still meaningless. Without it, and without a formal agreement in the Treaty, the very idea of overruling Scotland’s MPs is constitutionally ludicrous.
There is only one sovereign crown represented in or by Westminster, and it is exclusively Scottish. If you seriously want to challenge Westminster’s authority, that’s where to aim the lance.
Have any occupiers been killed by the resistance in the Gaza conflict since 7 Oct 2023? If so, how many?
The figures are at least 70,000 dead Palestinians. How many dead occupiers, not counting those who died on 7 Oct 2023 and not counting any who killed each other by accident. Have there been any at all? Or has this basically been a killfest duckshoot?
Israel admits to 915 casualties including 468 dead. No word of how many might’ve been due to ‘friendly fire’ incidents.
https://www.gov.il/en/pages/swords-of-iron-idf-casualties
Some sources claim the real figure is much higher. I’ve not been able to find out how many troops the IDF deployed but it was said that 130,000 reservists were going to be called up at one point.
Thanks for this.
Might there be something in the reports that their real number of casualties has been higher?
The settler regime that is today playing “will we, won’t we” with allowing aid into famine-hit Gaza, supposedly because the resistance have handed over a body that isn’t who it’s supposed to be, may be seeking to distract from their own lies about how many settler soldiers have died in this conflict.
It’s in their nature to taunt and threaten their starving victims anyway, but this could be a factor.
I doubt they’re hiding many of their own casualties. But IF they are, their army’s PR staff will certainly be on the case – and we can easily imagine that if there’s any possibility that part of their own market might start thinking they aren’t honouring settler dead, they’d blame their victims for not honouring (or returning) settler dead.
On the issue of bodies, the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza whose bodies have yet to be found (and who are not counted in the ~70,000 figure) is almost certainly many times higher than the number of settlers who have died in this entire conflict.
The 70k figure cannot be taken seriously as an estimate of the Palestinian body count. The system for counting corpses has been largely destroyed and in any case has no access to those under the rubble. The Lancet estimated 180k as of June 2014. “Muslims of Europe” have a recent report estimating over 650k, so nearly 1 in 3. Who knows what the real figure is? But I would wager somewhere between the Lancet’s and the latter figure. A comment by Trump may have been revealing when he said that there were 1.7 million people living in Gaza.
N: “The 70k figure cannot be taken seriously as an estimate of the Palestinian body count.”
Indeed. That’s only a count of the bodies certified dead at hospitals. Entire families (or apartment blocks) wiped out do not get counted.
If a family has someone blown up or shot dead, they can choose to risk the dangerous and arduous job of taking the body to a hospital and hope not to get killed on the way, or blown up/shot while in the hospital, or they can simply bury the body/bodies as best they can as soon as they can.
Since the above scenario represents the majority of deaths, the undercount is going to be huge.
Sorry, that’s not how it worked.
Initially, the administration quoted all fatalities where the reported names could be matched with computerised population records. Then, if you recall it, the Gaza administration suddenly reduced the fatality count. This was when they decided to report only on bodies that were identified by an identity document.
As you may know, Palestine has an identity card system, and most people normally carry id cards with them, much like in Europe or Israel.
It’s hard to explain how population records are normally managed in modern public administration to a Brit, who needs to use a gas bill, a landlord’s letter, or a photo countersigned by a school teacher whenever having to prove their existence to the government. Enough to say that the Palestinian Authority uses the Israeli population registry and data collection methods, and these tend to capture key information about all citizens. (Note: the Palestine database apparently isn’t identical to the Israeli database, however PA is required by the Oslo Accords to keep their key records in sync).
The Lancet didn’t estimate anything as @NickB suggested. It wasn’t an editorial, it wasn’t even an academic article – it was simply a Letter to Editor. Letters don’t even get peer reviewed, let alone represent the journal’s stance. Further, its authors based their estimation on comparison with historical conflicts in other parts of the world, without going into how population records are administered in the 21st century Palestine.
Then, if you suggest 700,000 killed in the ~700 days of conflict, that would mean a thousand people killed every day and approx. 10,000 wounded. Ten thousand. Injured. Every single day. That’s obviously not factual.
I’m inclined to trust the Palestinian records. 9,500 unaccounted for, the number recently announced by the Palestinians, does indeed seem low – I expected around 50,000 missing based on other conflicts. But again, this isn’t WW2, Vietnam or Afghanistan – Palestine has relatively well-equipped administration which, apparently, is capable to carry out basic population registry functions even in times of war.
In response to Kacper, yes you are right that the Lancet did not estimate and that it;s not a regular research article, that was poorly expressed by me. However it is an intelligent estimate published in a respectable source. The correspondence is subject to some kind of editorial process it is not just published as whatever junk is sent in. Here you can see that the “article” has been corrected:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext#:~:text=to%20the%2037%20396%20deaths,population%20in%20the%20Gaza%20Strip.
which is not affecting the estimates.
There have been so many cases of Israeli Government lies being shown up that there’s no reason to believe anything they say. The one that comes immediately to mind is when they claimed 99% of 300 Iranian missiles had been intercepted. Mobile phone footage of dozens descending on just one air base appeared on social media, accompanied by gleeful shouts in what sounded to me like Arabic. Israel has now blocked its residents from posting anything like that again.
Brian Red.
So the Zionist loving MSM – are utterly focused on one dead settlers/occupier, that’s been returned to the settlers/occupying force known as Israel – the settler/occupying forces stated they can’t identify the Zionist.
Meanwhile since the Palestinians – (the rightful owners of their lands) tried to rid themselves of the settler/occupying force on Oct 7th, at least 52 dead Palestinians have been returned to the rightful land owners (the Palestinians) – but the Zionist loving MSM won’t report that.
Meanwhile the settler/occupying force – still hold thousands of Palestinians abducted illegally without charge, imprisoned. tortured and starved – many of them are women and children – yet again the Zionist loving MSM will never mention that.
Good on you, Craig. No doubt UK Lawyers (lol) for Israel will be frothing and attempting to smear those involved in reversing they and their cronies plans to subvert UK freedom of speech and protest. When even Scottish Police do not think PAG is a ‘terrorist’ group, it is hard to see how the courts can uphold the ban. Although London and Starmer, McSweeney and the rest of the useful idiots for Israel will be working overtime to put the pressure on the Scottish courts. After all, their paymasters will be putting the squeeze on.
Well argued and coordinated, lets positively assume that the bend in the law will be straightened by this important case you brought to court in Scotland.
Will England follow the older and wiser union partner against the Zionist conspiracy and their racist war?
@zoot. What are Mrs. Cooper Ball and Mrs. Phillipson MP do if Students and the existing Unions refuse to be indoctrinated by Zionist clones? Are they going disrupt education and or force compulsory false history bending by genocide supporters?
Will those Zionist infused minds have to swear an oath to adhere and respect the judgements of the ICJ? befor they are allowed anywhere near other students, no doubt, by demanding their rights to free speech.
Shall send you some money, this needs support by many.
Take you good care boar.
Nevermind
Few details have been released. It’s actually university staff rather than students who will be ‘taught’ by these characters, and they in turn will be required instruct their students on how to identify ‘antisemitic’ ‘misinformation’ online. The government has not spelt out what the repercussions will be for recalcitrant staff or students. Knowing this lot though the possibility of custodial sentences cannot be ruled out.
Thanks for that Zoot. The Government, by the sound of it, are flying kites all around, not sure..we expect it to be…once the budget comes out…
An Oxford university student has been arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred, for teaching people to chant “Gaza, Gaza make us proud, put the Zios in the ground”:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8gdelw79po
His defense will be, I imagine, that in Gaza Zios are the IDF, and therefore the chant is expressing opposition to a racist apartheid system and its supporters, and not any particular race. I can see him being acquitted, or the charges being dropped because of the likelihood of this happening.
BBC doing its thing.
Another Electronic Intifada article for you..
“BBC is a patsy of the Israel lobby”
https://electronicintifada.net/content/bbc-patsy-israel-lobby/50830
Good article.The last para seems to sum up what is going on. I hope that newer opposition parties will make use of this, come election time and develop and announce their own policies to protect the quality of democratic journalism.
The BBC has many zionists in prominent positions in management and as journalists.
For example: “Yet again the BBC’s Jeremy Bowen is misrepresenting a key issue in Gaza – and as always, he is doing so in a way that places Israel in the most flattering light possible.” Jonathan Cook via the Unz Review.
The same applies with Ukraine, the only logical explanation is that the tax payer funded organisation is morally and economically corrupt and infiltrated by agents of a foreign state.
Pro-Palestine activist couple have UK bank account closed without explanation:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/oct/15/palestine-activist-couple-bank-account-closed-yorkshire-building-society
They were officials of Greater Manchester Friends of Palestine. That was enough!
I wonder whether there’s any redress in the UK for this sort of thing. Maybe it should be established in court, that Banks can’t just withdraw services because of people’s political beliefs. This looks like a civil liberties issue.
Our host is gathering donations to fund his legal action. What’s to stop the authorities just
nicking, sorry, freezing them when there’s a decent amount tonick, sorry, freeze?Another indication of what you’re going up against confronting the British legal system on zionist issues.
Court delays Tommy Robinson’s trial verdict by three weeks to accommodate his upcoming trip to Israel.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/25542548.tommy-robinsons-trial-verdict-delayed-due-israel-visit
Judge at Westminster magistrates’ court recognises the importance of Mr Yaxley-Lennon’s visit, where he will be hosted by Israel’s minister for diaspora and combating antisemitism, following the terror attack at a Manchester synagogue.
How jolly d of them!
That’s actually a very good news. We do want the world to see Israel’s love for the ultra right.
I think their society-wide support for apartheid and racist genocide had already given the world some insight as to where Israelis are on the political spectrum!
No, this one is more valuable for what it tells us about the British legal system. Namely that it is in lockstep with the rest of the British establishment in its obeyance to the genocidal Israeli settler colony.
Retailers – whose purpose is to persuade you to buy – have long realised the interest of presenting numbers in the most “favorable” way. I think, for instance, of the habit of labelled every second article as (for example) $9.99 rather than $10.
Are critics not – unintentionally, of course – giving the Genocide Entity a easier ride than it deserves by cleaving to the figure of 70.000 Gazans killed? Would it not be preferably to use the very likely more accurate number of 500.000 in all posts, articles, discourse,demonstrations, etc?
Or, as an absolute minimum, the July 2024 Lancet figure of 140.000?
I think it quite possible that there are people who, looking at the total population of Gaza, would find the figure of 70.000 as not “too bad” for a war. Those same people might feel differently if confronted with a figure well over 100.000. And even more so with 500.000.
The Gaza administration announced last week that 9,500 people are missing on top of the published numbers:
https://english.wafa.ps/Pages/Details/163241
An assumption that one out of four Gazans were killed seems unfounded.
In any campaign, it’s always better to stick to verified numbers – made-up numbers will make the entire campaign unconvincing.
Some made up numbers have persisted since 1948, and they don’t appear to make a particular campaign unconvincing to the gullible masses.
It always appears in dealing with the persistently untruthful Israel that the onus is always on their critics to prove their data, never on Israel.
This is just what is reported. When whole families are wiped out it will not necessarily be reported. And it’;s not as if all this reporting has been completed. Doctors returning from volunteering report that typically everyone has lost someone from their family, if I recall correctly that is how they put it. The Lancet correspondence estimate BTW was for an eventual bodycount in the event that the war stopped June 2024, and will include casualties turned fatalities and deaths from war related disease and starvation. Verified numbers are certainly an under-estimate at least until what remains of the system of accounting has been rebuilt and catches up with this grim task. It is not best to stick to what are obviously underestimates.
Susan Abulhawa in a Youtube video explained the reasons why only a fraction of deaths get into official Gaza Health Ministry figures:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGcbx1uCHpk
She concludes with a lower limit for the estimate of 190,000+ and upper limit of 500,000+ a year ago, hence with real figures by now being higher.
Fair – these are indirect victims. Usually not counted, for better or for worse. People who die waiting for ambulance, for medicine, for electricity to power their breathing machine, should they really be counted? Or those who kill themselves because of PTSD, or because their business failed because of the war, or because their loved one got killed? They also seem to be victims on the war, but should we really count them as fatalities?
Why give the lying zionist deniers implicit support ?
Yes, for the simple reason that, if it wasn’t for the war, they wouldn’t be dead.
What should now happen is that an international fact-finding Commission should be established with the remit of visiting Gaza to assess matters, including an attempt to get to the truth (or as near as possible to the truth) re. the actual number of deaths and severe injuries.
After all, now that there’s a ceasefire for the moment, who could possibly object? The argument used by the Genocide Entity against letting in foreign journalists can no longer be invoked.
Should be UN run/appointed and as neutral as possible (in terms of religion and nationality).
“Yes, for the simple reason that, if it wasn’t for the war, they wouldn’t be dead.”
Did they die of the war or with the war?
(Sorry, just couldn’t help myself)
All casualties and fatalities, both direct and indirect are because of the genocidal war for exactly the reason “if it wasn’t for the war, they wouldn’t be dead (or injured).”
“Did they die of the war or with the war?”
I wondered that too, but it’s the former; sure there will be people who died of causes unrelated to the war while the war was going on, but none of those mentioned in the comment to which I was replying fall into that category.
Why not simply reincarnate Palestine Action under another name?
(Based on Google AI response): The CPS and police can still take action if they can demonstrate that the new group is, for all practical purposes, the same as a banned one.
Al Muhajiroun, proscribed in 2006, frequently tried to reconstitute itself under new names to evade the ban. The group and its offshoots used various aliases, including Islam4UK, The Saved Sect, and Muslims Against Crusades. Despite the name changes, law enforcement was able to successfully prosecute individuals linked to these successor groups.
And it is a matter of principle. I know, quaint and old fashioned. But the government(s) of this country are getting more and more authoritarian, they need to be challenged.
Another great initiative. May the force be with you, Craig.
re: Julian Assange Archive
German blog NACHDENKSEITEN has a new entry on the “Julian Assange Archive” that is being assembled in the German city of Dessau (mainly known for its formative role in the BAUHAUS movement and the institutes affiliated since.)
use google-translate
https://www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=140605
One part of the archive are the 45-50k letters that Julian received in Belmarsh. Many he answered.
The archive team now has made a request to those who received such a letter from Julian and to possibly provide a copy to the archive.
contact:
T: +49 160 93381657
E: [email protected]
https://julianassangearchive.org/home-de
Donated
Greta Thunberg speak out about the assault, humiliation she endured under the israeli captivity, after being kidnapped from the Sumud Flotilla:
Greta Thunberg: “They kicked me every time the flag touched my face”
– They dragged me to the opposite side from where the others were sitting, and I had the flag around me the whole time. They hit and kicked me.
– They moved me very brutally to a corner that I was turned towards. ‘A special place for a special lady’, they said. And then they had learned ‘Lilla hora’ (Little whore) and ‘Hora Greta’ (Whore Greta) in Swedish, which they repeated all the time.
https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/25LgKq/greta-thunberg-they-kicked-me-every-time-the-flag-touched-my-face
Here is a photo of her bag, defaced by IDF with slurs like “whore”, star of david and phallic symbols
https://i.redd.it/greta-thunberg-describes-israeli-actions-in-prison-beat-her-v0-z52aerojx9vf1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=ed9b08f8a7e5c7f95a86ac68906e4a54355758c1
Note how brazen the israelis are, they do all this because they know they have become untouchable. So they do not only commit these nasty crimes, no, they also want really rub it in in clear sadistic fashion.
The swedish government (and majority of media) hate Greta and have refused to give her any real support. The attitude is that Greta have herself to blame.
We live in such chilling times where western governments back a foreign government violent assault against their own ciritzens. How the F did we get here?
“How the F did we get here?”
Through 14 May 1948.
The idea that a regime such as Britain’s ever had a problem with fascism in itself is completely false. It supported fascism in Spain from the 1930s through to the time when the fascists themselves thought they’d better update it and do what Franco had wanted by handing over to a “king” in the 1970s. It supported the settler state in Palestine from shortly after it was set up – de facto in 1949 and de jure in 1950 if I recall correctly. It has always supported fascism in Saudi Arabia.
“Israel” must be de-recognised – and it should not be allowed a say in that matter.
Although I do take your point. The Spanish fascists murdered many British citizens, but one does have to respect the fact that even someone like Clement Attlee (when he was in opposition) had the backbone to go and meet British veterans who had fought on the losing side, many of whom were severely wounded, when they arrived at Victoria Station in London. (Irony of the name “Victoria” is noted.)
Nowadays the returning anti-fascists would be taken straight to Belmarsh, regardless of whether there was a Tory or Labour government.
Thanks for this article. It contains a link to a report of a Palestinian young man, Ahmed Khdeirat from ad-Dhahiriya in Hebron dying in detention after severe loss of weight and chronic diabetes:
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/palestinian-prisoner-in-israeli-custody-dies-due-to-deteriorating-health/3710599
“How the F did we get here?”
We didn’t. We were already “here” and had been for decades, we just didn’t realise it, because the truth was covered up. Now, no-one bothers to do that any more.
Three quickies.
1. “While national security, including terror laws, are reserved a Scots court can still review how UK laws are applied in Scotland, for example under things like human rights compliance.”
Yes, this is true. Reservation is only relevant in respect of parliamentary writs. Scottish law is by no means limited to Acts passed by the Scottish Parliament. The application of UK laws in Scotland (and indeed everything everybody does in Scotland, including the British and Scottish governments) must abide by Scottish law – and everyone in Scotland is entitled to the protection of Scottish law.
2. “Yvette Cooper had a duty in law to consult before the proscription. She consulted the Israeli Embassy”
It might be worth looking at the possibility of using the Scottish law of treason. Curiously the explanatory notes to the Scotland Act 1998 say there is no separate Scottish law of treason, but they then say the crime of treason is based on the Treason Act of 1351, which was of course English legislation.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/notes/division/5/5/9/6
The situation is complicated. There was a Treason Act of 1708 which required Scottish courts that were trying treason to follow English rules of procedure and evidence, but this requirement was repealed by the Treason Act of 1945. The latter was subsquently repealed in Scotland by the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980, and the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 is also relevant. The 1995 Act does NOT say that the position has been restored that Scottish courts must apply English judicial rules when trying a person for treason. What it says in s289 is that “The procedure and rules of evidence in proceedings for treason and misprision of treason shall be the same as in proceedings according to the law of Scotland for murder.”
Might the authors of the explanatory notes to the Scotland Act 1998 have been mistaken? Might it be the case that there actually is still a Scottish law of treason? This is assuming the law didn’t change between 1995 and 1998. So the question is – has Yvette Cooper committed Scottish treason?
I don’t know the answers, but this is worth some legal time to research.
3. “(T)he petition argues that Palestine Action was not consulted ahead of proscription, thus depriving the group of the chance to argue for proscription being unnecessary which undermines the requirement for ‘a high degree of procedural fairness’”
This one probably isn’t the petition’s best chance of success.
Brian Red.
Excellent and very true article.
https://europeanpowell.substack.com/p/the-stories-the-mainstream-media
“Britain isn’t being changed by immigration. It’s being transformed into an authoritarian corporate client state – where public assets serve private profit, where your health data enriches tech monopolies, and where elected representatives have handed planning and regulatory power to investment funds.
That’s the story. That’s the seismic shift secretly remaking Britain.
And the mainstream media is making damn sure you’re looking the other way.”
This is a cringe making sick joke – but it’s real, not AI !
This is the quality of Ambassadors representing one of the most powerful countries on the Planet.
Brain dead doesn’t even come close. It explains a lot.
Enjoy.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/trending/trumps-ambassadors-drop-cringe-fest-music-video-greater-israel
Huckerbee seeing the youth support for Israel all over the world, particularly in America sink like a brick, is only doing his bit to promote his Evangelical Zionist shtick. Will it get to number 1 in he charts? George Formby singing ‘My Grandad’s flannelette nightshirt’ has more chance of influencing today’s youth.
https://youtu.be/yCPst8ggKZU
Meet incoming Tiktok owner (int the US’): jewish/american pro-israel billionaire Larry Ellison.
“Ellison is also close to the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and has donated heavily to the Israeli military through the non-profit Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. In 2017, he gave the organisation its biggest-ever donation at the time – $16.6m”.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/who-is-larry-ellison-richest-person-oracle
…and yeah, his son will become the owner of CBS and other media channels:
“After reaching an agreement with President Trump, David Ellison—the son of the second-richest man in the world, Larry Ellison—has acquired Paramount Global, the media giant that owns CBS News”.
https://www.transcend.org/tms/2025/08/israels-biggest-us-donor-now-owns-cbs/.
Now, is it not funny to watch this farce after the US for years accused Tiktok of being a tool of the chinese? But apparently Tiktok being a tool in the hands of the israelis are apparently just fine.
If you are a rich Zionist and your country Israel starts getting a bad press, why you buy all the media up.
The rabid Zionist Bari Weiss, former New York Times editor and founder of The Free Press, has joined CBS News as Editor-in-Chief following Paramount Skydance’s $150 million acquisition of her media company.
Methinks this will all backfire.
To judge by reporting in the Global Times, the US-Israeli-UAE Tiktok move doesn’t seem to have bothered Chinese interests.
Gotta wonder whether China owns a share in Trump. I’m sure one would have been available at the right price, but would they have been interested in buying? Justin Sun, the world’s most famous China-born Kittitian and an investor in Trump crypto, may be worth looking at.
Out of interest, does Tiktok wield the whip on pro-Uighur reporting, as Reddit (also partly Chinese-owned) does?
If, let’s just speculate, Musk and Ellison and other “friends of Netanyahu” part-owned big high-tech slavy operations in Xinjiang, dunno where we might read about it in the sewer that’s called “online”.
Have you noticed there is one country that the Democrats never allege Trump is owned by — even as he openly boasts about it to the whole world in the Israeli Knesset?
Why do you think that is?
Relatedly, I see protesters at the Democrats’ “No Kings” anti-Trump rallies this weekend are being told to wear *yellow ribbons*, they say to demonstrate solidarity with …. Hong Kong and Ukraine.
It is not suggested that the protestors should also demonstrate solidarity with the people genocided in Gaza. Any idea as to why that might be?
So far as I know, the change in ownership only affects TikTok in the USA. I imagine China doesn’t care a whole lot about what indoctrination of the inhabitants of that Hermit Kingdom takes place.
Tiktok was already infested in other ways too unforutanely
From last year:
“TikTok’s pro-Israel investors face dilemma as platform blamed for fueling antisemitism
Jewish billionaires Arthur Dantchik and Jeffrey Yass support numerous Zionist causes, leading many to wonder why hate speech is proliferating on the service they have a stake in”
https://www.timesofisrael.com/tiktoks-pro-israel-investors-face-dilemma-as-platform-blamed-for-fueling-antisemitism/
Excellent initiative, Craig – all the best for the hearing. Modest contribution to the fighting fund should arrive shortly …
Can you give an update on whether this is going forward please?