The Scottish judicial review of the proscription of Palestine Action – funded so far by readers of this blog – has been simply shelved by delay tactics that plainly break the Scottish legal system’s own rules.
Our case was ruled competent for us to serve the petition on the UK government. They replied in the last hour of their two-week deadline. The court itself then had a two-week deadline to grant a judicial review, or to call a hearing on whether to grant it.
Instead the judge has simply sat on it, preventing a judicial review by administrative delay.
This is the absolutely plain rule the court is breaking:
The permission stage
58.7.—(1) Within 14 days from the end of the period for lodging answers the Lord Ordinary must—
(a) decide whether to—
(i) grant permission (including permission subject to conditions or only on particular grounds);
(ii) grant an extension to the time limit under section 27A of the 1988 Act; or
(b) order an oral hearing (for the purpose of making those decisions) to take place within 14 days.
The emphasis is mine but the word “must” is obviously very important here!
The extraordinary thing is that our legal team is struggling to come up with actions we can take to force the court to act. The judges can freeze this out for a very long time.
The absurd proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation, and the appalling legal consequences on freedom of expression and in criminalising thousands of highly respectable citizens as terrorists, has faced the state with a dilemma which, at least in Scotland, it prefers not to resolve head on.
In Scotland, the prosecuting authorities have therefore written to over 20 activists charged for wearing T-shirts with the slogan
“Genocide in Palestine, Time to take Action”
offering to drop charges if they accept a prosecutorial warning.
In Scotland, this warning does not involve an acknowledgement of guilt (unlike a police caution), but sits on your record for two years and can be used against you in future court cases. All twenty-plus individuals we know of who have been offered the warning have responded by saying they will not accept the warning. The state’s attempt to dodge the court cases is therefore not working.
I am also hearing of activists charged for holding the Defend Our Juries signs saying
“I oppose Genocide, I support Palestine Action”
being offered deals on non-custodial outcomes in Scotland if they accept guilt, but as such prosecution deals are dubiously legal I have not yet fully managed to stand this story up.
But what is plain to me is that the authorities in Scotland are determined to keep both the judicial review of the proscription, and individual terrorist cases from the proscription, out of court.
The reason for this is that there is no confidence the Scottish judiciary, let alone Scottish juries, will uphold the proscription. The whole farce is falling apart on the basis of societal resistance to this draconian governmental overreach. This resistance runs vertically through the classes in Scotland.
I am currently in England for the judicial review of the proscription in the High Court of England and Wales. Here a different approach is being taken. They have simply switched the judges at the last minute to load the dice for Israel.
Judge Chamberlain granted the judicial review, a decision which was upheld by the Court of Appeal. As I have previously reported, he has a reputation for independence from the state, having even called MI5 out for producing dishonest evidence. I found his manner in court rather overbearing, but that self-confidence is perhaps needed to take anti-Establishment positions as a High Court judge.
Chamberlain plainly was expecting to hear the case. He has handled it all the way through, it was scheduled according to his diary, and just eight days ago he was still corresponding with counsel as the judge in the case. He has been replaced by a horror show of top Zionists. Judge Swift is the poster boy of security-service controlled judges, with a history of pro-government decisions in the Assange and Rwanda cases. He was a lawyer for the security services for many years and stated in interview that they were his favourite clients.
Swift was forced to recuse himself in the Graham Phillips case, when it was discovered he had been secretly meeting to discuss the case with the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, one of the parties, without informing the defence. That is judicial behaviour so bad I cannot begin to describe the magnitude of it.
Here is what I wrote about Swift on 21 February 2024:
The blocking of Assange’s appeal was done by Judge Swift, a judge who used to represent the security services, and said they were his favourite clients. In the subsequent Graham Phillips case, where Mr Phillips was suing the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) for sanctions being imposed upon him without any legal case made against him, Swift actually met FCDO officials – one of the parties to the case – and discussed matters relating to it privately with them before giving judgment. He did not tell the defence he had done this. They found out, and Swift was forced to recuse himself.
Personally I am surprised Swift is not in jail, let alone still a High Court judge. But then what do I know of justice?
Another of the new panel for the Palestine Action case is Judge Karen Steyn, who ruled that UK export of F35 parts was legal even though they may end up being used in Israeli attacks on Gaza. Steyn ruled that such decisions were political and a matter for ministers and not for the courts – an attitude which the government are evidently confident she will continue in the Palestine Action case.
Dame Victoria Sharp, who will chair the judicial review, is a puzzle. Completely integrated in the top Tory Establishment, her twin brother Richard gave a large personal loan to Boris Johnson and shortly thereafter, and doubtless by total coincidence, was appointed by Johnson as chairman of the BBC.
Richard Sharp has long been associated with Zionist super-donor Trevor Chinn. They served together as advisors to Boris Johnson while he was Mayor of London. Victoria Sharp moves in an entirely Zionist and high-Tory milieu, but I must say that I was struck by her honesty and good sense in the Assange hearings. Perhaps, from the Establishment point of view, Israel is a subject on which she will be “safer”.
I have no doubt whatsoever that the last-minute change of judging panel is a panicked effort by the government and its deep-state controllers, to seize control of the narrative, following the carefully timed and illegal public release of highly edited and confused police footage of the Filton action.
It may prevail with this immediate panel, but will not prevail in London in the longer term. Meanwhile, we have in Scotland to continue to press the courts to stop hiding and to face the burning questions highlighted by this crazed authoritarianism in the name of Israel.
———————————
My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.
Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.
Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.
Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
PayPal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
In whose name was the order issued to replace Chamberlain with these three other judges? Who technically has the power to do that?
Victoria Sharp issued the order, it seems; the silence in response to enquiries as to why is, to coin a phrase, deafening.
It also seems that the State has given up even pretending, even to itself, that the judiciary is in any material way independent of the state security services.
It is clear that we are witnessing a coup d’etat by (or at least in the name of) Security. Yet today’s UK is extremely secure by historical standards. The main threat we all face is uncontrolled immigration to a country that already has over 4 times as many inhabitants as it could possibly support sustainably. The UK imports half its food and an increasing amount of its energy, and if those foreign countries obliging us in those ways were to stop for any reason…
What are we threatened with?
1. China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and all those other “adversaries” and “antagonists”. Britain would be better off paying no attention to the rubbish that is talked about them and using old-fashioned diplomacy to improve and further relations with all countries. As Mr Putin has said of Russia’s foreign policy, we should aim to turn enemies into neutrals and neutrals into friends. Those “adversaries” pose no threat whatsoever to us, except that many of them are honestly outproducing us through better technology, harder work, better education, more enlightened policies, and last but not least far less foolish and harmful government interference.
2. “Terrorism”, which was never a threat until the spread of modern aircraft, missiles, and computer technology finally enabled people who had long been exploited, victimised, and murdered by “the West” to start hitting back in a remarkably restrained way. True, people killed by a bomb are as dead as they can be – but the number killed by “terrorists” dwindles into insignificance compared to the millions (literally) murdered by Western governments. Stop bombing, shooting, and starving them – and supplying others who do – and in time we would find them quite decent neighbours and perhaps even good friends.
The “security” state is exactly like a spreading cancer. It gives a plausible excuse to tyrannical rulers who hate criticism and opposition and wish their power to be absolute and unchallengeable. We should get rid of it… if we still can.
Well said Tom.
All those supposed threats we are at risk of can all be compressed into one, real and present threat: our government. None of these threats can or will be addressed while the enemy resides in Westminster.
Excellent comment, Tom. That obsession with unnecessarily turning what could be friendly – or at least neutral to us – countries – that, let’s bear in mind, have NEVER attacked or even threatened to attack us, into mortal enemies that we * must * hate, demonise & fear is what I find so frustrating coming from some people on here. It’s bad enough that every MSM/Political Class source is screeching from the same script on these issues, even worse seeing the same bollocks on a site like this.
I suppose we should always bear in mind that, despite concerted attempts by the lockstepping MSM to attempt to create the illusion of public consensus, the public is never asked what it thinks, is never given anything remotely impartial or honest by way of information ( ergo, how can people arrive at an accurate perception of the causes behind any given conflict/situation? ): on the contrary they are bombarded relentlessly with wilfully distorted * factoids *, partisan opinions and unending jingoistic flag-shagging. In short…..propaganda; which the Ruling/Governing Class and it’s Typing Pool then try to present as ” Public Opinion “.
I know it’s something of a cliche that as one ages it’s easy to misremember the lived past as being ” better ” – the present being ” worse ” by comparison; but there’s no doubt in my mind, in socio/political terms anyway, things really ARE worse than previously- basically, since Thatcher, and getting more so by the day. I can’t recall a more remote, self-admiring, arrogant, & downright dangerously delusional Political Class in my lifetime
We just need people in power who don’t have a kind of misplaced, jingoistic infatuation with the security services and military establishment – the belief that they are James Bond-like and infallible.
Our elected representatives should represent us, and be skeptical and query intel chiefs’ decisions, not act as their apologists, shielding them from scrutiny. While all the Partygate stuff was swirling, eventually claiming Boris Johnson’s scalp, his Cabinet Secretary, Simon Case – former GCHQ, Director of Strategy , escaped with zero criticism, I believe, due to media reverence related to his ‘intelligence’ background. His name was never really central, despite his attendance at the controversial, Virtual Quiz Event: On December 17, 2020, the virtual quiz described as a “Christmas party” took place in Case’s office! Initially, Case was appointed to investigate ‘Partygate’ ,only to step down over the obvious conflict of interest.
We are currently in the midst of new wave of ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ paranoia. There is even a petition to investigate parliamentarians(in reality, Reform) in what would surely resemble McCarthyism, as it’d all be based on rumours and insinuations. No one in parliament has even so much as argued for something as innocuous as improved UK relations with China and Russia, let alone acted as apologists for Russia – as many do for Israel. And as much as a dislike Reform, there is clearly a BBC and press orchestrated pile-on, including over what Farage did or didn’t say, fifty years ago! Fifty years ago, we had ITV primetime TV comedy shows, like, Love Thy Neighbour, using the terms ‘n*ggers’ and ‘n*g-nog’ and references to jungles’ for laughs about a black family moving in next door to a white couple. It was literally a different world.
The AfD, in Germany, have open contacts with Russia, with politicians traveling there. Why is it taboo to talk? Who benefits from breaking off all dialogue and refusing to talk? Katja Kallas, the EU’s chief diplomat, refuses to speak to Russia or travel to Moscow then complains bitterly when the likes of Witkoff makes the running on peace proposals the EU had no voice or input in shaping – precisely because EU officials excluded themselves. Kallas ought to heed Desmond Tutu’s wise words: if you want peace , you don’t talk to your friends, you talk to your enemies. But there again, I’m not even sure Europe wants peace.
As someone drew attention to in replying to Craig’s Twitter/X post on this subject, there is some pushback from the intel services over this proscription order. Presumably, because they rightly believe the optics of arresting pensioners and the disabled – I believe a blind man was arrested and someone in a wheelchair – for basically protesting genocide, are terrible. And could risk, not only bringing terrorism laws into disrepute, but unravel the whole idea, behind proscription orders; namely, that someone’s beliefs, whatever they are, unacted upon, constitute any threat to society. Proscription orders are a very blunt tool in what is a nuanced world.
Should someone go to jail for their beliefs? I.e. beliefs that are unacted upon, t’is thoughtcrime, is it not?
the “main threat we face” is immigration? come off it. When were you ever threatened by a migrant? as opposed to a gammon fascist? Who will treat people in the NHS if all the migrants left? What are you a Faragista?! If population levels are unsustainable that is a global issue not a UK one. The main threat we face is oppression by billionaires that control the media, land assets, banking and finance (hence the obscene house prices and rent), and politics, in their own interests.
“When were you ever threatened by a migrant?”
Never, personally. That is irrelevant. The fact is that the optimum population for the UK is around 20 million or less. We can certainly get by for a while with far more, but in due course we shall run out of food, water, fuel and other vital necessities. Nature, like God, is not mocked.
As Michael Hudson likes to emphasise, “if something cannot go on indefinitely, it will stop”. It’s nothing to do with who the immigrants are or where they come from, or even what their culture or religion are. It’s just that they are mouths to feed and citizens (or not) to administer.
“as opposed to a gammon fascist?”
What on earth is that? Gammon, last I heard, is ham.
“What are you a Faragista?! I”
If your array of question marks and exclamation marks is meant to intimidate me, consider it a failure. In fact I am cautiously in favour of Mr Farage, as he seems to favour sensible policies that are far better than those of the three old main parties. On the other hand, I don’t like his xenophobia – but if he wants to get elected in Britain, perhaps he has to profess certain beliefs.
“If population levels are unsustainable that is a global issue not a UK one”.
I cannot believe you mean that. If there are far too many people for the food and water supplies, or for the power supplies and sewage, to the extent that in the most crowded places people start to fight one another like overcrowded rats, that is hardly a “global issue”. On the contrary, overcrowding is an absolutely local matter.
“The main threat we face is oppression by billionaires that control the media, land assets, banking and finance (hence the obscene house prices and rent), and politics, in their own interests”.
Finally you make perfectly valid point. Why couldn’t you have begun with this? But just because the excessive power of the super-rich is a serious problem, that does not exonerate us from recognising and addressing other serious problems.
‘Uncontrolled’ immigration is a major problem for the UK. If the government is going to let in five million people or more every decade then tell me where are the new schools, new hospitals, new jobs, new money, new houses to support those figures ? That’s a threat to everyone.
The government has actively, over the last 15 years, cut funding, salaries and training places for indigenous medical staff: nurses, doctors, care workers; such that we now have to rely on foreign staff stolen from third world countries to keep the NHS going. That is not sustainable and is why we have a seven million waiting list for treatment. That’s a threat to everyone.
Our little island cannot support the current population, increasing it is a threat to everyone.
Yes, all these issues are caused by incompetent, corrupt and dishonest politicians not immigrants but Uncontrolled immigration is not a solution it is compounding the existing problems and will cause problems, potentially serious problems.
A simple solution, no more immigrants until the country has satisfactorily absorbed those that are already here, and eject every single illegal immigrant because they’re illegal !
Farage won’t sort out this problem neither will any other party because investment is expensive and foreigners are cheap. A false economy that is already leading to bloodshed.
Well said Nick. Sometimes this site appears to be on the verge of being taken over by Faragista’s admirers.
Pragmatism has to set in at some point, I think most of us can agree the UK is an ever more crowded place than it was 30 years, unfettered immigration sounds like a honourable thing but when it affects the standard of living for the people who live here already, then naturally self preservation has to kick and there’s nothing wrong with that. This sort of logical reaction will take a while to work it’s way up through the economic ladder, the upper middle classes can still (just about) shelter themselves from worse effects of overpopulation and illegal immigration. I agree it’s our own upper classes that have sold this country out, they probably always have, but we must not globalise this ‘problem’ otherwise it becomes too big of an issue to solve by ourselves, which is not true. replace ‘immigration’ with ‘overpopulation’ and then we might have a more sensible conversation about this, I’m not against immigration, done right and I think it is positive for the country but we haven’t had a sensible immigration policy for decades. I have a feeling people who want out of control immigration are using it as a means to get revenge on the UK in their own personal way, they don’t like what they see so let’s accelerate the decline rather than proposing genuine reform.
@ Tom Welsh Britain ceased to be self-sufficient in food after the Napoleonic wars and turned much of the Anglo diaspora into farmers for the British table. After the Big Two, Britain came close to self-sufficiency again, courtesy of public subsidy and then Euro public subsidy. about 3% of the surface of the British Isles is built on an about another 1-1.5% is covered in roads linking the settlements. There’s plenty of room and the more the merrier.
You might consider giving
“The First World War: An Agrarian Interpretation” by Avner Offer (1989) 978-0198219460 and
“Replenishing the Earth: The Settler Revolution and the Rise of the Angloworld” by James Belich (2011) 978-0199604548
a read.
I am aware of everything you mention. It’s unworthy to suggest that all the area not covered by streets and houses is available for farming – as you obviously know. Farming in the UK is on the brink of extinction; see (for example) UK Column for chapter and verse.
There may be “plenty of room” for human bodies and their houses and vehicles, but when did you last refresh your memory about how many hectares are required to feed a family (healthily) on cereals, meat, or a combination of both?
If there is ‘plenty of room’, explain why you have locks on your doors and windows.
Explain where the jobs and infrastructure is.
Society is not just a random collection of people in a field.
Immigrants are not a solution to the ills of the UK.
” The main threat we all face is uncontrolled immigration to a country that already has over 4 times as many inhabitants as it could possibly support sustainably.”
Immigration is not the problem. The problem is the system that requires it. The system requires immigration because it requires economic growth and for economic growth, you either have to have everyone producing more economic activity in monetary terms, i.e. everyone getting better paid, or more bodies to carry out economic activity at the same or lower levels of renumeration. The system is not set up to make everyone wealthier, it’s set up to make a selected few wealthier, so more bodies are needed. Unfortunately, bodies are on a eighteen to twenty year delivery and the native Brits haven’t been diligent enough in the production of bodies, so to achieve the growth, bodies need to be imported. That’s why this island is stuffed: the population must constantly increase, or there will be the dreaded stagnation or even recession and then where will everyone find the money to pay the interest on their loans and keep the moneylenders in the style to which they have become accustomed?
you articulate it all very well… obviously those in power won’t be listening to you! there is no money, power or control in following your wisdom, but quite the opposite… thanks for stating all this.. i am happy to know there are others not fooled by what is taking place on the world stage today..
Thank goodness for some commonsense.
So how does that work? Is there a sort of hierarchy of judges that allows Sharp to pull rank on other judges, eject them and install herself on any case she chooses? Everybody keeps saying it’s been done at the behest of the ‘security services’, and I don’t doubt that, but what was the mechanism by which it was done?
“but what was the mechanism by which it was done?”
A quiet word in somebody’s club, I suspect.
Well, yes, but formally how is it then done and by whom?
All the reports put it in the passive tense, “Chamberlain was removed”.
That does tend to suggest that there is no formal process.
A mediocrity bribed by a genocidal apartheid regime. (The good kind of bribery that politicians should never be jailed for).
I give up on the UK. The only thing remaining is to free the north of Ireland, not that the Republic is much better.
No but Ireland isn’t our business.
Well, I’ve never lived there, but I think it is clearly much better than the UK. It’s not a NATO member, although it cooperates with NATO more than one might like. It hasn’t got a Royal Family. Its Parliament is somewhat more democratic than the UK’s – the lower house (Dáil) uses STV, which is better than FPTP though still not really proportional.
Perfection is not to be found in this imperfect world.
@ Townsman
If STV isn’t good enough (albeit better than the fascist FPTP) what is?
“If STV isn’t good enough (albeit better than the fascist FPTP) what is?”
Multi-member constituencies
The Irish system is multi-member. Its advantage over list systems such as the d’Hondt one being introduced here in Wales is that voters still get to choose candidates by name. With list systems such as the Welsh one, even though they are pretty proportional, it’s the parties who choose candidates’ order on the list and therefore which of them stand a chance of success. That incentivises the candidates to align themselves to gain favour with the party apparachiks. In Welsh Labour, all sitting MSes seeking re-election have automatically gone to the top of their list and, given Labour’s current unpopularity, it’s unlikely that any other Labour candidates will get elected.
I thought that they came with STV?
“The Irish system is multi-member.”
However,it still militates against the smaller parties as the larger parties have a greater chance of getting more than one candidate elected, whereas, without the ranking system, a party would have to be very sure of its support to field more than one candidate, split the vote and still get a seat.
I would agree, the d’Hondt system is pretty bad, worse than FPTP IMHO, as it makes voting entirely party-based.
“I thought that they came with STV?”
Not in the way I was thinking of, which is the method currently used to elect town councils in England: everyone has one vote: the votes are counted, the candidates ranked and the top-scoring n candidates get elected, where n is the number of seats to be filled. So in a five-member constituency, the top five are elected. Voting and counting are the same system as currently used in FPTP.
The essence of STV is that the voter ranks candidates by name rather than party in order of preference. If/when their higher rated preference is eliminated, their next preference applies. So voters who vote on party lines will have their vote counted for that party regardless of what order they put its candidates. STV can be used to elect one person, where it’s basically a form of Alternative Vote. It can also elect multiple people. That gets more complicated with the calculation of a threshold for someone to be elected that’s less than 50% and the transfer of fractions of votes when someone is elected with more votes than the threshold. No wonder counting takes a while. Anyone wanting the details can ask a search engine.
“No wonder counting takes a while.”
And what does anyone gain from such added complication over a simple “win and place” system?
Ron.
The breaking up of the UK is a priority for some – including myself.
We might be surprised to learn how many people worldwide talk about how the world would be a better place if the UK were to disappear altogether. (I am not one of them, but I am often strongly tempted, like ron, to give up on the UK).
Tom Welsh
There’s a possibility that when the UK breaks up that English/US nukes could end up stationed back in America – its even possible – that the UK could lose its seat at the UN Security Council, and be replaced with say an African – or South American rep, which if you asked me is long overdue.
RoS, I would be very much in favour of both those events.
They are also set to abolish jury trial in most cases.
The incredibly weak justification being used is the trial backlog, which was deliberately created by government under funding of the criminal justice system. (And which could quickly be cleared by keeping courts open longer).
Jury trials are a rarity and were drastically limited by the last Tory (Officials) regime. Plea bargaining is the norm and the judiciary is the froth on a pint of piss.
Getting rid of juries has been a longstanding ambition of Labour centrists/ rightwingers, since at least Blair’s time. They’re urgently pushing it through now to ensure prosecution of the Palestine Action protesters. Same reason the Labour ZOG has brought in top zionists to hear this judicial review.
Zoot, agreed, but surely it is conviction, rather than just prosecution, of the PA demonstrators, that makes the elite in so much of a hurry to get rid of juries?
I told you that all states are fascist and the only difference between them is the lies the tell about the people that they kill. The liberals have taken off their cardigans.
“crazed authoritarianism in the name of Israel.”
Ostensibly but any excuse to centralise power is characteristic of the state. The zionist antisemite connexion no doubt placates American Caesar and provides a posse of Brownshirt thugs to stop naive individuals assuming that they have freedom of speech, conscience and movement.
I may have missed this previously but saw an important story on the Crispin Flintoff platform about the many Palestine Action prisoners who are on hunger strike in jail.
Palestine Action-
Remanded- Hunger Strikers
Buried in silence
Another complete media blackout, so simply not happening. Imagine if that woman jailed by Iran had gone on hunger strike…
Yes, the difference being she was a security asset and the PA prisoners aren’t.
The spineless Scottish judiciary kowtowing to a foreign countries judicial decision yet again – there needs to be a clear out in our judicial system, the system is corrupt and broken, they are more than likely working against the will of the people they serve.
So the UK is a “free country”, is it? A regime that calmly packs judicial benches with hand-picked judges; and a plan to end trial by jury.
Very rarely since the days of King Alfred has there been such an arrogant, overbearing, entitled, ideology-driven government. But how did this happen?
I didn’t vote Labour; I voted Reform, but it was a little too early for such a vote to count. Reform got millions of votes, but a derisory handful of seats in Parliament. I suppose many of those who voted for Labour did so on a tribal basis, because their parents had done so and their grandparents before them. They forgot that their grandparents voted Labour in the hope that it would seriously try to help working people. Today’s “Labour” party has long severed any connection whatever with working people; it is just yet another collection of selfish, ambitious, unprincipled people pursuing the main chance.
The other main reason for voting Labour was no doubt to “punish” the Conservative Party – which of course, just like Labour, has long abandoned its principles and ideals and is now – why yes, yet another collection of selfish, ambitious, unprincipled people pursuing the main chance. I can’t remember the last time the so-called “Conservative Party” sought to conserve anything worthwhile. Their privileges and revenue streams, certainly, but nothing else.
Then there are the demented Greens, and the equally deluded Lib Dems (are they still a thing? I forget).
So where are the honest, principled politicians for whom we can vote? Evaporated like the morning dew.
Of course they are! UK were free to support Chechen terrorists in Russia, now they are free to jail those who suppopr Palestine. Think of it: “free state” means that the state is free, not you.
Why vote reform when Liarbour is doing it for you? Deriding Liarbour voters as tribal is wrong when Liarbour voters know that transferring their vote makes no difference. The only real change is to join us abstainers, who have won most “elections” of this century.
“The only real change is to join us abstainers, who have won most “elections” of this century.”
Why abstain, when you can vote for an independent? The party system is the main corruption of the electoral process that we laughingly call “democracy”.
FPTP elections are fraudulent, If you vote in one you are rigging your own ballot. The only way to avoid this is to boycott elections. The first election I as old enough to vote in was 1983 and I spoilt my ballot as I did in 1987; I stopped wasting my time after that.
In the Scottish case, is there someone we can write to complain to Craig ?
Could Joanna Cherry be of any help?
Owen Jones is doing his best to offer an intellectual debating-style criticism of Melanie Phillips’s recent Nazi-style rant:
https://www.patreon.com/posts/melanie-phillips-144439539?utm_campaign=patron_engagement&utm_source=post_link&post_id=144439539
Owen, if you’re reading this, please get more of a clue, mate, because I know your heart is in the right place and you’ve clearly got some staying power. Debate isn’t the way. Nobody ever stopped fascism or got rid of fascism by debating with it. [1] Concentrate for a while not on the atrocity of what has happened so far, but on the atrocity still to come. Phillips is certainly concentrating on the future. Never mind countering her notion that Palestinians are land thieves from Zionists. She’ll say anything if it works. She’s beyond rabies. Next she’ll say the Palestinians control Hollywood, Hamas controls the BBC, and hooked nose Palestinians want all your money, if she hasn’t said these things already. It wouldn’t surprise me if those who control Trump studied her spiel, or took advice from those who work on Team Phillips. Anders Breivik was a fan of hers too. Think on this, please, Owen.
Then find out about the three parts of the soul in Judaist belief. Find out who is believed to have the third and divine part and who isn’t. For bonus points, look up “gilgul”.
Meanwhile David Runciman seems to have felt the vibe of the Big Cull Coming, to judge by his verbose piece in the London Review of Books.
He gets paid good money for writing cliche-ridden metadiscursive lines such as “religion seems to be an important factor, but it’s a long way from being the whole story. It is true that…” ? Yep.
https://archive.is/r8ZP5
Of course he doesn’t put his finger on the nature of the problem, which is hardly surprising because if he wanted to do that he wouldn’t be scribbling away for a per-1000 words rate of pay for the rag known as the LRB. Here’s a taster of his submissiveness, which I offer here because it is worth reading so long as you distantiate yourself from it and think about why it’s being said:
“(Israel) is unique among so-called developed nations in having a total fertility rate not simply above replacement level but pushing towards 3. What’s more, Israel has achieved this despite being a highly educated society with a tech-driven economy, both of which tend to depress birth rates elsewhere (see South Korea). Again, religion seems to be an important factor, but it’s a long way from being the whole story. It is true that the most religious sections of Israeli society – including Orthodox Jews – have the highest birth rates. But Judaism presents a mixed picture globally: secular Jews in the US have some of the lowest fertility rates in the country. More striking, Jews who move from societies where they share in the domestic trend not to have many children – for instance, from Russia, where the TFR is below 1.5 – start to have more children when they arrive in Israel. It’s Israel, rather than Judaism, that makes the difference.
This appears to have something to do with its being a country that perceives itself to be under constant threat and is in a state of semi-permanent war.” [Yeah, sure it does. He shouldn’t worry. He’s shown willing, so he won’t lose work.]
Give yourself a bonus mark if you spotted the use of a military typeface on Melanie Phillips’s podium.
Now what was all that about if you want to find out how rules you, look for who you’re not allowed to criticise?
Or the prediction of killing two-thirds of the world and then ruling openly?
Or being “like God, like the angel of the Lord”?
Melanie Phillips knows all of this very well. So should her opponents.
Note
1) The ramifications of the observation that nobody ever stopped fascism by debating with it are probably lost on Alasdair Fotheringham. He’s the guy who – I’m not joking – talked about the anti-Franco side in the Spanish civil war as containing “pro-democracy activists”. Perhaps the CNT were a movement of content-providing influencers, eh, Alasdair? Perhaps you’ve sussed what the front and Barcelona and the defence of Madrid and so on were really about – pro-democracy activism trying to get a hearing.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/longform/2025/11/20/franco-legacy-fifty-years
Only his “heart” is not in the right place he is a shape-shifter, media wh*re and liberal zionist.
https://electronicintifada.net/content/how-owen-jones-learned-stop-worrying-and-love-zionism/34986
Re Owen Jones link..This is the reason people call her ‘Mad Mel’. This rant by her probably does more to damage her racist cause than many pro Palestinian marches, keep it up Mel people can see how much of a deranged psychopath you are.
“(Israel) is unique among so-called developed nations in having a total fertility rate not simply above replacement level but pushing towards 3. ”
The correlation of high birthrate is not with nationality, as he is trying to imply, but with religious extremism. Israel has a high birth rate because it’s full of religious nutters.
But the reality is that Israel has a serious emigration problem. Many of the rats are leaving the sinking ship and that is impacting their population levels. High birth rates, Ukrainian criminal immigrants and fleeing pedophiles cannot counteract the decline.
Rather unusual coming from a German institution:
Max Planck Institute with a new study that suggests 100k+ killed in Gaza
“Study: Israeli Forces Likely Killed More Than 100,000 Palestinians in Gaza
The study also found that the age and gender distribution of violent deaths closely resembles patterns observed in several genocides”
by Dave DeCamp | November 25, 2025
https://news.antiwar.com/2025/11/25/study-israeli-forces-likely-killed-more-than-100000-palestinians-in-gaza/
The study would be here:
“Accounting for uncertainty in conflict mortality estimation: an application to the Gaza War in 2023-2024”
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12963-025-00422-9#Sec19
However my question: We had much higher estimates throughout 2024 suggesting 300k even 500k by end of 2024.
About a year ago however even Craig shifted I think quoting much lower numbers.
Why?
Was that truly due to lower numbers (which would be of course a good thing). Or was it rather for some political cause?
I had my suspicions over latter being the true reason. But then with Craig agreeing on lower figures that wouldn´t make sense.
Saw this online, don’t know if its true or not.
“The judge on the Palestine Action case has been replaced by a three-judge panel, including one with family ties to Trevor Chinn and the Quilliam outfit that funded Tommy Robinson. “
Matt Kennard knows what’s going on.
“On left: twin brother of the Judge who has suddenly been imposed to rule on Palestine Action legal challenge to its proscription today.
On right: the preeminent pro-Israel lobbyist in Britain.
Judge Victoria Sharp’s brother appointed Trevor Chinn a director of “One Million Mentors” on 10 July 2025, the week after Palestine Action was proscribed as a terrorist group.
Chinn has donated to Labour and Conservative Friends of Israel, and is a senior figure in Israel lobby group BICOM, which Palestine Action has targeted.
He also provided £50,000 towards Keir Starmer’s campaign to become Labour leader in 2020.
Last year, Chinn received the Israeli Presidential Medal of Honour for his services to Israel.
“One Million Mentors” is a strange organisation which appears to be about cultivating the next generation of leaders into thinking like the British establishment.
It used to be called “UpRising Leadership” and in 2017 it paid for Labour MP Rushanara Ali to speak at a British-American Project (BAP) event in Manchester. BAP is a US embassy front group.
Rushanara Ali is listed as the co-founder of “One Million Mentors”. She voted to proscribe Palestine Action in UK Parliament days before Trevor Chinn was appointed a director of her organisation.
Victoria Sharp is one of three judges who were suddenly chosen to replace Judge Chamberlain who was due to rule on Palestine Action’s legal challenge at the High Court.”
https://nitter.poast.org/kennardmatt/status/1993602679700885943#m
Good Lord.
Worse than any B-movie.
-“Screenplay was not greenlit.”
-“Why?”
-“Studio says it´s not realistic.”
-“I got it from the paper.”
Re: ‘The absurd proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation’
https://x.com/CourtNewsUK/status/1993273989314363683
Sorry, should have put a warning on that:
Contains prolific F-bombing plus one or two C-bombs, as well as scenes of a violent nature.
Apologies for any distress caused.
NOW I will watch.
C like Communist, F like Frank.
Thanks for your reply AG. F as in “f*** off”, “f***ing” etc; C as in “c**t”. ‘Scenes of a violent nature’ as in breaking a female police officer’s spine with a sledgehammer.
I assumed. I was of course rather cynical. Not towards you but media/awareness in general.
In case it got across wrong.
“Allegedly” The porky was off work for three months, is that consistent with having a broken back?
Thanks for your reply Squeeth. Broken spine as in fractured vertebrae. I was hoping that Avon & Somerset Police were lying/ exaggerating, but have been disabused of that hope by the video footage. She’s back at work because she’s a trouper, but is reportedly still in constant pain. Her stab vest will have dissipated the force somewhat, and probably prevented the severing of her spinal cord causing paraplegia. Here’s a photo of the (alledged) perpetrator:
https://x.com/sarahstuartxx/status/1993448810560016843
I reckon that’s the last pussy he’ll be touching for several years. I’m still not entirely convinced that Palestine Action isn’t a Mossad psy-op.
No play acting for effect then? I admire your ability to believe the British police. The bloke in the picture doesn’t look strong enough to lift a sledgehammer.
Thanks for your reply Squeeth. Having spent a fair bit of time in Leeds, the home of the infamous West Yorkshire Police (a.k.a the worst of the worst*), I can assure you I don’t believe anything the bizzies say without evidence. The evidence in this case is the video footage. A sledgehammer’s not much heavier than a fat cat, but tends to do a lot more damage when dropped on someone.
* Worst as in trying-to-kill-several-of-your-own-officers-with-fire-merely-for-trying-to-do-the-jobs-the-taxpayer-pays-them-to-do levels of bad. Not surprisingly, that was all covered up.
Actually it’s not clear what the video shows. Someone behind the camera attacks a woman (who’s wearing a red overall) while she’s on the ground, but surely that’s a protester not a police officer?
Video evidence isn’t as conclusive as it once was. The provenance of the leaked video is unclear. That little bit at the end could be AI-generated.
Thanks for your reply Townsman. Pay attention to what’s happening on the left of your screen at 3:45. The person ‘attacking’ the woman is a police officer trying to arrest her.
—-
Thanks for your reply Grhm. The footage at the end is literal evidence from a court trial for GBH with intent. If it was AI generated, the defence lawyers would be all over it.
Thank Re-lapsed, I fear that I’m out of touch are you alluding to another scandal (the fire thing)?
Thanks for your reply Squeeth. Read the blurb on this (or, better still, get a copy and read the whole thing):
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Drug-Wars-terrifying-inside-Britains/dp/1785037447
That was by no means the only such incident. The ‘informants’ are the senior leadership team of West Yorkshire Police Drug Squad, who make Detective Sergeant (soon to be Detective Inspector) Bruce Robertson, the protagonist of Irvine Welsh’s ‘Filth’, look like Dixon of Dock Green.
“Re: ‘The absurd proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation’”
I think you need to refresh your memory of what “terrorism” means. Having a few violent nutters come into your organisation does not make it a terrorist organisation in any way shape of form*. As Paddy Ashdown said, when asked about the fact that some skinheads had joined the Liberal Party, “Beliefs are not responsible for the people who believe in them”. What evidence do you have that the wielder of the sledgehammer wasn’t an agent provocateur, anyway, or are you of the opinion that those gentlemen in the security services would never do anything so dastardly?
* except to the extent that a “terrorist” is now someone of whom the state disapproves, which makes the term virtually meaningless.
Thanks for your reply Bayard. I’m afraid I don’t think I do. Terrorism is defined as non-state violence against people or property for political or religious purposes. Palestine Action’s entire stated raison d’etre is to commit violent acts against property owned by the MoD and companies involved in the IDF’s supply chain. The Filton Six have just taken things a few steps further. If you read my above comments, I literally stated: ‘I’m still not entirely convinced that Palestine Action isn’t a Mossad psy-op’ and I was only half-joking. Am I of the opinion that the UK security services could ever do something so dastardly as well? Have you been paying the slightest attention?*
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/topic/the-salisbury-poisonings-episode-was-all-staged/page/6/#post-103404
P.S. Paddy Ashdown was the leader of the Liberal Democrats (and briefly the Social & Liberal Democrats). The closest the continuing Liberal Party has come to far-right skinheads in its ranks is Derek Jackson and his mates giving Nazi salutes towards Humza Yousef at the Glasgow count during the last Scottish Parliament election.
* Lord Hughes’ whitewash, er, I mean report is scheduled to be released in a week’s time. Mine’s shorter but I would venture will prove to be better.
“”Terrorism is defined as non-state violence against people or property for political or religious purposes.”
Would this be another “official” definition, like anti-semitism now being any action criticising the State of Israel? That is not the dictionary definition, which includes the word “systematic” and doesn’t include the word “non-state”. The purposes of language is communication and making up special definitions which are not the same as the commonly accepted meaning just obfuscates things, which, I suppose is the intention. Most people, quite understandably, expect terrorism to involve terror in some form. Setting off a bomb in a crowded venue is terrorism. Attacking the police, while reprehensible and a crime, is not.
We all know, that, using the official definition of terrorism, Palestine Action is a terrorist organisation: that’s why it was proscribed, but the point Craig was making is that it is not what most people accept as a terrorist organisation, just as most people accept that calling Netanyahu probably the most evil man on earth at the moment is not anti-semitism.
In his 1994 book Don’t Mention the War – Northern Ireland, Propaganda and the Media, Davd Miller makes the interesting observation that the word terrorism is basically used to discriminate between ‘legitimate’ violence (i.e. ours) and ‘illegitimate’ violence (i.e. theirs).
Thanks for your reply Bayard. Here you go:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/terrorism
They include mere threats of violence in their definition of terrorism, and the word ‘systematic’ is not used once. I am not getting into any arguments about semantics.
Enjoy the weekend.
Did you actually read what I wrote? You can quote definitions at me until you are blue in the face, but, if they don’t correspond to what people generally think of when they use the word “terrorism”, it’s completely meaningless. English law is stuffed with special meanings for words that are different from what the popular conception is of their meaning. Take “conversion” for instance.
Thanks for your reply Bayard. You literally wrote: ‘That is not the dictionary definition, which includes the word “systematic”. I set you straight. I’m reasonably familiar with conversion as a legal term, not least because I’ve been the victim of it.
“You literally wrote: ‘That is not the dictionary definition, which includes the word “systematic”. I set you straight. ”
I was using the Oxford English Dictionary, the acknowledged authority in things dictionarial, not some dodgy online thing. Again, that is what is generally thought of as the “dictionary definition”.
“Re: ‘The absurd proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation’”
Not everyone protesting about what is happening in Gaza is Palestine Action. Even the heading to this video doesn’t say that, only “Palestine protesters”. The association seems to be entirely yours.
The lack of transparency and perceived bias in the replacement of Judge Chamberlain could be grounds for appeal. The judiciary must know this, suggesting that the replacement was a desperate move. If so, I hope it will prove futile in the long term.
“The lack of transparency and perceived bias in the replacement of Judge Chamberlain could be grounds for appeal.”
Undoubtedly, but appeals take time, very much time, if necessary, and, more importantly, money, very much money.
Related in a broader context to this culture of malfeasance a short piece by MONTHLY REVIEW about how elite British scholars are advising military institutions and their imperialist agenda. To my disappointment Gilbert Achcar is among some of the few names.
I am not blind to the fact that Achcar failed in the current Ukraine crisis. But as far as I remember he did try to fight for some decent analyses about NATO and Kosovo or the post-9/11 madness (yes, that´s some time ago now). I am not in the knowing about his particular views when it comes to Syria e.g.
Academics or consultants?
by Ian Sinclair
https://mronline.org/2025/11/25/academics-or-consultants/
Gilbert Achcar supported the ISIS ‘revolution’ in Syria, along with Owen, Monbiot, Adnan and co.
Well then it´s answered. Thanks. (I come from a time when Achcar would publish with Tariq Ali or Noam Chomsky. So my knowledge is outdated.)
British military trained in Israel amid Gaza Genocide
https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-military-trained-in-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
On the subject of the abuse of power, we have Owen Jones’ Guardian report on the ICC judge Nicolas Guillou. There are more details in this National Scot report.
We may need to develop alternative payments systems, that don’t depend on the US-dominated internet to get round such abuses of power. Paper money, silver coins, even barter!
I wonder if the BRICS countries’ proposed common currency, or payment systems that they have developed, will work in the West and could be a solution for people like Judge Guillou.
Jonathan Cook gives his reasons for replacing the Judge in the Palestine Action case…
“It is not hard to understand why Chamberlain has been removed. His earlier rulings on Palestine Action’s proscription indicated that it might be difficult for him to rule in favour of the government.
It is also clear why he is being replaced by three new judges. Backing the government’s redefinition of terrorism – leading almost certainly to the jailing of former senior military personnel, barristers, doctors, priests, Holocaust survivors, and a former adviser to King Charles, all of whom who have publicly supported Palestine Action – risks looking like precisely what it is: a political decision in favour of lawlessness by the British state”. https://jonathancook.substack.com/p/review-judge-pulled-from-palestine
Are all UK governments controlled by the deep state these days or can they refuse?
“or can they refuse?”
Watch “A Very British Coup” for the answer to that.
Two fairly well know indy supporters in Scotland, arrested for terrorism ( supporting Palestine Action),they go by the handle online, as the Two-Daves. You can always rely on the, colonial police force The Keystone Cops aka (Police Scotland) to carry out England’s bidding in Scotland.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/25653585.two-pro-independence-podcasters-arrested-terrorism-laws/
Found this, another example of the PA madness, zionist influence and the corruption of the UK regime.
‘Irish author Sally Rooney has told the High Court it is “almost certain” she cannot publish new novels in the UK and may have to withdraw her current books because of the banning of Palestine Action under terrorism laws.
Rooney says UK legislation may mean she cannot be paid royalties by her British publisher or the BBC because it could leave both at risk of being accused of funding terrorism.
In August she said she intended to use royalties “to go on supporting Palestine Action.” ‘
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm20ldz0g9ro
The judges are rotten and David Lammy, by suggesting to erase ‘justice seen to be done’ in existence for nearly 1000 years, just because the judiciary has shown to be as corrupt as politician.
Ignoring the ICJ and their judgement, as well as calling non-violent protesters against the Gaza Holocaust, ‘terrorists’ who don’t deserve to be judged by their peers sitting in juries, has clearly laid bare their bias in favour of foreign Zionists.
The constant shedding of shekels to politicians and oversely to judges in return for access and compliance with their murderous takeover of Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon and vast parts of Syria, is a crime against our sovereignty and historic justice system.
Like cowards hearing the truth of their ghastly behaviour they shy away from letting the public juries decide on issues of inter/national importance, trampling on everything they ever judged – muppets and puppets for whom the day will come.
If money talks, non-compliance with tax rules, a large scale public shower of collaborated tax disobedience talks louder, for they are desperate.
To be so bold as to ignore their own rules of conduct of court proceeding, in favour of their ‘judge shell game’ is childish not worthy of the Bar, no wonder their fellow members there are not with Lammy’s action.
Genocide is proven and they are complicit with it.
The last-minute change of judges in the Palestine Action case was presumably made by the “Judicial Office”, which says its aim is to “promote and safeguard judicial independence to maintain confidence in the rule of law” (!)
Its press office appears to invite questions from “journalists” only. But there is a contact e-mail address for public enquiries and a phone number.
https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/training-support/judicial-office/press-and-communications/press-office/
Separately, I stumbled on a website which may prove to be very useful (apologies if it’s already well-known):
https://www.mpwarcrimes.co.uk/
Thanks NP, very helpful to find out that Ben Goldsborough, MP for South Norfolk voted against sanctions on Israel and voted for Palestine Action being declared a terrorist Organisation.
What aa scoundrel, he is going round to ex Tory voters, especially businesses, selling Labours economic vision, but yesterdays schmudget will not help him much.
He is very likely be replaced with a Reform/Green Party/Lib Dem.
Candidate.
I’d say the clue is in the name, go figure !
Taking the Westminster situation. In contrast to the situation in the USA, terrorism legislation is being used to close down freedom of expression. It should be limited to preventing actual or potential harm to British people. Damage to property in the pursuit of protest should be dealt with by ordinary law as criminal damage, not terrorism. Proscription of organisations should not be in the gift of the Home Secretary. Imposing a proscription should be subject to the Affirmative Resolution procedure. Lifting a proscription should be done under the usual negative procedure. In my opinion the decision to proscribe an organisation or person. Things might be different in Scotland.
Gehazi, a poem by Rudyard Kipling, 1913
(https://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/readers-guide/rg_gehazi1.htm)
Whence comest thou, Gehazi,
So reverend to behold,
In scarlet and in ermines
And chain of England’s gold?”
“From following after Naaman
To tell him all is well,
Whereby my zeal hath made me
A Judge in Israel.”
Well done; well done, Gehazi!
Stretch forth thy ready hand,
Thou barely ‘scaped from judgment,
Take oath to judge the land
Unswayed by gift of money
Or privy bribe, more base,
Of knowledge which is profit
In any market-place.
Search out and probe, Gehazi,
As thou of all canst try,
The truthful, well-weighed answer
That tells the blacker lie–
The loud, uneasy virtue
The anger feigned at will,
To overbear a witness
And make the Court keep still.
Take order now, Gehazi,
That no man talk aside
In secret with his judges
The while his case is tried.
Lest he should show them–reason
To keep a matter hid,
And subtly lead the questions
Away from what he did.
Thou mirror of uprightness,
What ails thee at thy vows?
What means the risen whiteness
Of the skin between thy brows?
The boils that shine and burrow,
The sores that slough and bleed–
The leprosy of Naaman
On thee and all thy seed?
Stand up, stand up, Gehazi,
Draw close thy robe and go,
Gehazi, Judge in Israel,
A leper white as snow!
“In March 1912, Godfrey Isaacs, the Managing Director of the Marconi Company in Britain, negotiated a contract with Herbert Samuel, the Government’s Postmaster-General, to erect a series of wireless stations round the Empire. The following month shares in the American Marconi Company were secretly bought by three Liberal ministers, Lloyd George, Alexander Murray (the Chief Whip) and Rufus Isaacs (the brother of Godfrey), who was the Attorney General. Soon rumours were rumbling about insider trading and corruption over the Government contract, and scurrilous articles appeared with exaggerated charges, fuelled in certain cases by anti-semitism. But the ministers were not entirely innocent. In the Commons debate in October Isaacs successfully economized with the truth by denying he owned shares in ‘that company’ (that is, the British one), thereby giving the impression that he had no Marconi shares at all. He later refused to tell the Select Committee, appointed to investigate the matter, about his shares in the American company; and he only revealed them in the course of a libel action against a French newspaper. The Select Committee overruled its own chairman and produced a highly partisan report that acquitted the ministers of any wrongdoing. Until then, the summer of 1913, Kipling had been silent, despite an overpowering belief in the men’s guilt…it was rumoured in July l9l3 that Isaacs would become the next Lord Chief Justice. This insensitive appointment, made in October, duly inspired ‘Gehazi’, one of the greatest of all hymns of hate.” (David Gilmour, 2002)