I am confident that over 2 million people in the UK have shared thoughts on the Genocide in Gaza that are stronger than anything Natalie Strecker has expressed.
I am quite certain that I am one of those 2 million.
Yet Natalie Strecker, an avowed pacifist, today faces up to ten years in prison under the Terrorism Act when the verdict in her case comes in.
Strecker is charged with eliciting support for Hamas and Hezbollah, based on 8 tweets, cherry-picked by police and prosecutors from an astounding 51,000 tweets she sent, mainly from the Jersey Palestine Solidarity Committee account.
The tweets were rather rattled off in court and referred to occasionally again in whole and in part. There may be minor inaccuracies not affecting sense, but this is the best reconstruction of those tweets that I can make (they were not displayed to the public):
“People will be individually resisting: otherwise we would be asking them to submit to genocide on their knees”
“Solidarity with the people of Lebanon and Hezbollah has the right to resist in international law, I remind you the occupier does not, and are legally obligated to try to prevent Genocide.”
“Solidarity with the resistance. In the same way that the resistance fought the Nazis in Europe, we must support the fight against the Nazis of our generation”.
“Resistance is their legal right under moral and international law. If you don’t want resistance, then don’t create the circumstances which require it. Solidarity with the Resistance.”
“This nonsense our nation has descended into, where one side is committing genocide, and the other is proscribed for fighting it. I believe Hezbollah may be Palestine’s last hope”.
“Hamas the resistance did not break out of their concentration camp to attack Jews as Jews. We can debate whether armed resistance is legitimate. Of course there should be no attacks on civilians.”
“I am sick of the MSM propaganda about “Hamas-run health ministry figures”. Hamas is the government in Gaza. Every health ministry in the world is run by its government.”
“Are you awake? So it is down to ordinary people like you an me to end it. We must take our power back. Join me in solidarity with the people of Lebanon and Palestine. Solidarity with the Resistance.”
That is it. The prosecution case is that these tweets, both collectively and individually, amount to an invitation of support for Hamas and Hezbollah resulting in up to ten years in jail in Jersey, or 14 years in jail on the UK mainland.
The prosecution explicitly stated, and the judge notably intervened to make sure that everybody understood, that it is the offence of supporting terrorism to state that the Palestinians have the right to armed resistance in international law.
Judge John Saunders interrupted the prosecution to ask whether they were saying that he would be guilty of support for terrorism if, in a lecture, he told an international law class that Palestinians have the right to armed resistance in international law.
After some kerfuffle when faced with such an awkward question, the prosecution replied that yes, it could be the offence to tell law students that.
I should point out, at risk of dying in jail, that the Palestinians are beyond doubt an occupied people in international law, and equally beyond doubt an occupied people have the right of armed resistance.
To state that the Palestinians have the right of armed resistance in international law is not in the least controversial as a statement of law. A few Zionist nutters would try to differ, but 95% of international lawyers on this planet would agree.
I assume by perfectly logical extension that this means the prosecution must believe it is a terrorist crime in UK law, for example, to quote UN General Assembly Resolution 37/43, which:
2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle;
3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;
It is also worth stating that on Friday the prosecution stated, in these precise words, that “Resistance is synonymous with Hamas and Hezbollah” and that any support for, or justification of, Palestinian resistance is support for a proscribed organisation.
To repeat, there are millions of people in the UK who have stated stronger things than the tweets above. Including me. And, as the defence pointed out repeatedly, just eight tweets had been found after hundreds of hours of police time, and found amidst tens of thousands of other tweets on the Middle East, hundreds of which specifically urge non-violence.
So why are the police doing this to Natalie? Why did six armed police storm her apartment and rouse her at 7am a year ago, seizing all her electronics and papers, arresting her and not allowing her to have a pee without leaving the bathroom door open so she could be observed?
This is where the story gets very dark indeed.
This is not a local Jersey initiative.
The prosecution is directed from London and Alison Morgan KC, senior Treasury counsel (UK government lawyer) is seated beside the local prosecuting counsel, openly puppeteering him every step of the way.
So why has the UK government chosen Jersey to prosecute a local pacifist whose statements provide possibly the weakest case of support for terrorism that has ever been heard in any court in the Western world?
The answer is that here in Jersey there is no jury.
Facing this charge on the UK mainland Natalie would have a jury, and there is not a jury in the UK that would not throw this self-evidently vindictive nonsense out in 5 minutes.
Why is it worth the time and expense for Whitehall to send Alison Morgan KC here to direct a weak case against somebody who is obviously not a terrorist?
The plain answer is that this is a pilot for what they can get away with on the mainland when they abolish juries in such trials, as “Justice Secretary” David Lammy has announced that they will indeed do.
In Jersey the system is inherited from the Normans. The judge sits with two “jurats” or lay magistrates. They determine innocence or guilt. These come from a pool of 12 permanent jurats. In practice these are retired professionals and frequently have strong connections to the financial services industry.
What the jurats emphatically are not is Natalie Strecker’s working class peers of a kind who would be represented on a jury. I strongly recommend this brief article on the corruption of Jersey society by a man who was for 11 years the Government of Jersey’s economic adviser.
The judge, Sir John Saunders, seems a decent old stick in a headmasterly sort of way. He has told the court that “Mrs Strecker’s good character is not in doubt”. On Friday he stated that this was “A very difficult and in many ways a very sad case for the court to deal with. But I have to construe it according to strict legal principles”.
In the Palestine Action proscription case, as I reported, counsel for the UK government openly stated “We do not deny that the law is draconian. It is supposed to be”. In the mass arrests of decent people over Palestine Action, people have understood what a dreadfully authoritarian law the proscription regime is.
An intelligent observer cannot sit in Judge Saunders’ courtroom without realising that he thinks this is a dreadful law, but accepts that it is his job to enforce it. He reminds me of the caricature of the lugubrious headmaster stating “This is going to hurt me more than it is going to hurt you”.
In effect, Alison Morgan and the UK government are attempting through this prosecution to make even the most basic expression of support for Palestine a serious criminal offence. Remember that a terrorism conviction destroys your life – it almost certainly brings loss of employment, debanking and severe travel restrictions.
The International Court of Justice has decided that Israel has a real case to answer on Genocide, and most experts believe that Israel is committing Genocide. In Natalie’s correct image, the UK government is trying to make it a terrorist offence to say anything other than that the Palestinians should quietly submit to Genocide on their knees.
The danger is that the hubris of lay magistrates will lead the jurats to try cleverly to construe Natalie’s comments as support for terrorism in line with the government’s wishes. Natalie has, however, one defence in Jersey not available in mainland UK: here in Jersey the prosecution has to show intent – that she intended to cause support for terrorist organisations.
The prosecution has also relied on the extremely wide definition of support adopted in UK terrorist cases, that “support of” merely means “expression of agreement with”.
In defending the tweet about Hamas-run health ministry figures, Natalie Strecker’s counsel Mark Boothman countered this rather well when he said: “there is no offence of causing people to think less badly of Hamas”
I confess however I am slightly puzzled that I have not heard the defence argue that the prosecution positions are grossly disproportionate violations of freedom of expression in terms of Article X of the European Convention of Human Rights.
I would have thought, for example, that was the natural thing to say in response to the prosecution’s contention that it would be a crime for a law lecturer to tell his class that the Palestinian people had the right of armed resistance in international law.
The verdict was decided yesterday afternoon between the judge and jurats. It will be presented in full written judgment in an hour’s time.
This is a truly horrifying case for Natalie, who cannot afford to lose her job with a Jersey government agency and most certainly does not wish to be jailed. I pinch myself to be sure that this is all really happening.
It is a truly horrifying case in terms of what the Starmer government intends to do on the mainland in further criminalising support for Palestine.
I do not support Hamas nor Hezbollah, being opposed to theocracy. But for it to be illegal to discuss the Genocide in Gaza and the role of these two organisations, unless you do it absolutely without either context or nuance, is Orwellian.
Western dissent is also a victim of the Zionist Genocide.
———————————
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
I am from Vancouver, Canada and i am pleased that Natalie Strecker has been found Not Guilty. The Charge against her should be condemned. Thousands of people around the world who support the People of Gaza and Lebanese People supports Hamas and Hezbollah not Genocidal Israel who is killing thousands of People in Gaza and Lebanon. I supports Hamas and Hezbollah. They are defending the people of Gaza and Lebanon !
Only Genocidal Israel and Trump would disagree with that !
We seem to have forgotten that our vaunted nation was built on resistance and that Elizabeth I and Drake etc were resistance heroes who passed this tradition to those who for example, resisted the Nazi occupation of Jersey (https://www.jerseyheritage.org/history/jersey-resistance-during-the-occupation/) – a tradition proudly used in tourist literature today.
Isn’t this case a rerun of the seditious libel brought against Sir William Jones’ brother in law, (The Dean of St Asaphs, 1784)?
“… the compulsion of legality can set in motion two very different cycles of legality. In one virtuous cycle, the institutions of legal order cooperate in devising controls on public actors that ensure that their decisions comply with the principle of legality, understood as a substantive conception of the rule of law. In the other cycle, the content of legality is understood in an ever more formal or empty manner, resulting in the mere appearance, or even the pretence, of legality. In this second cycle, the compulsion of legality results in the subversion of constitutionalism – the project of achieving government in accordance with the rule of law. Arbitrariness is covered over by what an English judge referred to recently as a ‘thin veneer of legality.’
On the argument of this article, those who participate in this second cycle risk participating in and legitimizing a sham. That it is a sham demonstrates that it is possible to govern outside the legal frame while pretending, or even believing, that one is inside it. There are, then, to revert to the epigraph to this article, some assertions of jurisdiction by judges and also by other legal actors, most notably legislatures, that are jurisgenerative while not being jurispathic. They make possible the legal frame itself.” (Dyzenhaus, 2009)
“our vaunted nation was built on resistance and that Elizabeth I and Drake etc were resistance heroes ”
Resistance heroes? Elizabeth I was monarch of an independent nation, who engaged in wars, as was usual at the time. Drake was a privateer much of his life, oppressing native populations, as much as attacking the Spanish.
““our vaunted nation was built on resistance and that Elizabeth I and Drake etc were resistance heroes ”
I think it is truer to say that our vaunted nation has been built of the suppression of resistance, given that,from 1066 to the present day, there has not been a single successful popular rebellion.
Your principal point that this is a return of the English Common Law offence of seditious libel is fundamentally true (however your Elizabeth and Drake analogy, I think rather misses the mark). It was indeed no less a jurist than Sir Edward Coke who advised the Star Chamber – the government of the day sitting as a judicial court on a famous case (Case de Libellis Famosis, 1606) that the truth was no defence in the matter. In short the libel was a provocation to revenge by the individual libelled and as such its truth was irrelevant to the magnitude of the crime.
The difficulty was historically specific: the English nobility were deeply reluctant about the then new rule of the King of Scots, even complaining that they couldn’t understand a word of his highly accented English. His homosexual proclivities were also muttered of darkly; and they might indeed be true. Nevertheless, it was illegal to state it, and hence truth was no defence. The law continued in force throughout England through to 2009, by which time it had been absorbed into the Terrorism Act.
The principal issue that troubled later jurists was how seditious libel interacted with freedom of speech. The common approach was that freedom of speech (and writing) was permitted only within the bounds proscribed by the law of seditious libel. In short, no criticism o the Crown, nor its ministers, nor even its policies, was permitted. Eventually the House of Parliament were permitted the special privilege of exemption (a privilege James’s son Charles to revoke provoking a civil war), this itself latterly gave way to His Majesties Loyal Opposition.
The significance of this case is the right of the ruled population to comment on the actions of their political lords and masters. The state is claiming a discretion to incarcerate and destroy any individual who publicly disagrees with their policies.
As Mr Murray sagaciously observed, the UK law differs from the Jersey law in the matter of intent. In the BBC report of the case, they strongly state that this was the sole reason for the jurats granting acquittal. Under English law she would be starting a long stretch.
Disturbingly enough, the absurdity is perhaps not the crackdown against Palestine Action itself, as bad as that is, but how few people, organisations, jurists, journalists, politicians protest against the crackdown.
You are in theory – and practice – free to go out in the streets and support IDF and support their genocide – but there is a high risk that you will get arrested if you protest against IDF and their genocide. This is not orwellian anymore, this is way beyond that.
“You can support genocide and not be arrested”
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/aM7k3Tmo_Q8
Thank’s Jack a very good video, I must express a word of caution, the truth is, it is actually illegal to support Genocide under UK law, i.e. engaging in conduct that is ancillary to Genocide, or being complicit in it, is an offense. Home office legal beagles will be on to this tout suite.
I could give you chapter and verse on this at my usual fee of £2,000 per hour plus refreshers. I await your call /S
The government seem to be in the old Soviet Union mode. “Give me the man and I’ll show you the crime” attributed to Soviet secret Police chief Lavrentiy Beria.
Or, 3 centuries earlier, Cardinal Richelieu’s slightly subtler version:
“If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged”.
He wasn’t as nice as Charlton Heston’s acting might suggest.
I am willing to forgo my fees in this instance and say the placard was pure satire i.e. the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues:
I have publically made statements similar or identical to those made by Ms Strecker, and I stand by them. I have been to a public lecture by an MP, who expressed the same opnions.
But that is the charm of arbitrary law enforcement. Vague laws are passed, and it is left up to the police (or their bosses) to decide which law should be enforced, when, and against whom. The law becomes less like a wall that forbids anyone to pass, and more like a sniper’s rifle that can be aimed at undesirable individuals. As a fringe benefit, this whole technique rapidly brings the law itself into disrepute.
I apologise if I have hurt the feelings of any snipers who read this.
Given a sufficient amount of this vague law and it becomes impossible not to end up breaking some part of it unintentionally. This means that the sniper’s rifle can be used on anyone who the authorities seek to coerce or silence.
I do not agree with you and she should be going to prison. She sounds like she is supporting Hamas and Hezbollah and terrorists. There is no genocide. I’m sure you fully believe what you say but from the outside it seems clear that all your opinions come from a deep seated hatred of Jews – which looks pretty demonic actually. I’m sure it is somewhat below consciousness though which is why you deny it.
It does make me queasy to read your writings now though. I used to read a lot and believe you and even contributed to raising money for your trial and imprisonment – but since Oct 7 the scales fell from my eyes and I could see who exactly were the good people and who were completely and utterly evil and demonic.
It is a shame you cannot see that.
” I used to read a lot and believe you and even contributed to raising money for your trial and imprisonment ” , did ye, aye? and then the ” scales fell from yr eyes ” and landed on yr brain? Everything you say here sounds like a very dim AI melange of stock Pro-Zionist cliches and projections; all that was missing was a reference to the Holocaust. ” It is a shame you cannot see that “, aye, I bet yr REALLY distraught at that idea, ” Gina “; or is it ” John “?
Robert Hughes – my money’s on “John”.
Hi J . Mine too n I’m sure we have the same ” John ” in mind. Hope yr well, compadre
With your ability to discern the activity of the evil spirit, I hope you see it in the racism behind the ethnic cleansing operation by Zionists in Palestine that has gone on for over 100 years. As well as in the kinship of the State of Israel to Nazi Germany and apartheid South Africa, with Palestinians in the West Bank at the beck and call of Israeli soldiers and under constant threat from settlers, and apartheid in Palestine as a whole. As well as the reaction of genocidal revenge to the uprising permitted under international law against the illegal, violent and oppressive occupation of Gaza by Israel on 7th October. As well as the attitudes of Benjamin Netanyahu, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. Last but not least, in the continual lying by Israeli spokespersons, to whom lying seems second nature almost as much as Trump.
But don’t take my word for it. Read Ilan Pappé’s The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine and The Biggest Prison on Earth, Miko Peled’s The General’s Son and Abigail Abarbanel’s Beyond Tribal Loyalties. Last not least, the reports of Amnesty International that holds Israel guilty of apartheid and genocide.
“There is no genocide”.
I stopped reading there, and I expect most decent people would do so too.
I didn’t even get that far. Thanks to those that struggled through to the end and saved me the pain.
“There is no genocide.”
If you are going to be pedantic then you have to say that the activities of the Third Reich constituted no genocide, at most a brave attempt at one which did not succeed. By the same logic, the only possible logic that can underwrite your argument, there is indeed no genocide in Gaza, but any remotely decent and no less reflective person has to aver that the actions of Israel in Gaza constitute a bloodbath, wildly disproportionate to the offence, grievous though this was, and form part of a state policy whose ultimate goal is something approximating to genocide
I think the piece was tongue and cheek just repeating the standard Israeli spiel.
Now the Oct 7th date is made notable by the death of Jews. The reality is that even on this day more Palestinians died than Israeli’s. Worth noting also that the IDF or IAF killed a significant number of Israeli’s through panicked responses.
I was just wondering , do you support the terrorist actions by Haganah, Lehi and Stern, who killed British people in Palestine in 1947\8, a couple of years after the British people saved European Jews from the Nazis?
Have you read Einstein’s letter to the NYTimes, 1948, signed by him and 40 other prominent Jews, decrying the fascist nature of Begin’s Freedom party?
Its a good read, but doubtless the letter would come under today’s proscription and Einstein would be jailed
Haganah? They had Herbert Hagen and Adolf Eichmann as guests in Palestine in 1937. Nice people.
Why would people who want justice for the Palestinians by antisemites? The zionists who occupy Palestine are the antisemites, ask Theodore Herzl.
I think Trump has lost his mind, not good when he has the nuclear trigger within reach. I often wonder why insults to female reporters do not have any retaliation, for instance Trump called a reporter from the NYT “Ugly both inside and out” and another “Quiet, Quiet Piggy” surely in order to retain any dignity the insulted person had a right to reciprocate, for instance Quiet Piggy should have been met with ‘that’s rich coming from a fat slob like you’, and its Miss Piggy to you’ That’s only fair.
Harry Law
December 3, 2025 at 16:24
Harry. Nice that we agree on something.
I suppose the craven behaviour of the journos in the WH press corps is on the orders of the media owners who want to maintain access to the Mango Mussolini?
Glad she’s been found not guiilty but anyone responsible for 51,000 tweets arguably needs help!
I do think you have a point.
Let us say she’s been tweeting for the last 10 years. That makes on average 5100 tweets a year, which in turn makes around on average 14 tweets a day every day of the year..
But at least tweets are fairly short in general. There are correspondents on blogs who also keep up a cracking pace and achieve 14 lines (not tweets) or (many) more a day!
Makes you also wonder what she does for a living. Maybe tweeting is her job.
She looks young enough to be a full-time mother.
I read somewhere she is around 50 years old.
Too young to be a retired old codger with nothing better to do. Perhaps she’s very efficient overall in all her activities?
“Too young to be a retired old codger with nothing better to do.”
Jersey is a rich place. It’s quite possible that she doesn’t have to work.
Bringing up (three, apparently) children is work, Bayard. Hard work!
Well, yes, but, then I didn’t know she was a mother (and neither did you, given your reply to my comment of Dec 5th at 08:37).
It is quite amazing how stupid a significant part of the population really are on this issue – a stupidity that stems from the smearing mainstream media and their bold, anti-palestinian headlines: Brave, couragous people that merely protest against obvious human rights abuse, even genocide – are still not getting support by the public:
YouGov poll: 39% have a negative view on Palestine Action, 20% support them. 40% have no opinion:
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/53235-britons-split-on-the-banning-of-palestine-action
Taking a stance against a genocide – what is it not to support??
Jack, ‘the masses’ don’t have access to the sources that we have. Many, still, rely on sources like the BBC, ITV, Sky, Daily Mail, etc. As such they have no idea as to what is going on, although that may be changing albeit very slowly. It’s not necessarily stupidity; it’s ignorance – interestingly no defence in law on that. I’m personally not surprised, I see this ignorance every day, and I see the lies the MSM peddle. You might question who controls the media, then it all becomes clear.
I lost a great amount of sympathy and support for Craig, after his defence, and the ridiculing of the evidence of the Russian poisoners at large and loose in Salisbury, on the day in question.
Craig (along with many others) pointed out that the so-called evidence regarding the Salisbury poisonings was absurd and inconsistent as it stood. He admitted he did not know what happened on that day, but he could be sure that it was not what the government were saying it was. That’s pretty honest and an official report doesn’t disqualify it just by virtue of it being official.
Ah yes, the familiar cry of the Greater Spotted Conspiracy Theorist, ‘I don’t know what happened, I just know the official version is wrong’. Purely because it is the official version probably.
“Greater Spotted Conspiracy Theorist, ‘I don’t know what happened, I just know the official version is wrong’.
As opposed to the Common Gull, ‘I don’t know what happened, I just know the official version must be right as the government has never lied to us.”
It’s perfect;y possible not to know what happened, but still know what didn’t happen. Take the old magician’s trick of “cutting a woman in two”. You can have no idea how the trick is performed, but one thing you know has not happened is that the woman has not actually been cut in two, mainly due to the absence of large amounts of blood and the woman not being dead. Or does that make you a conspiracy theorist?
But the BBC and the government said it was the ruskies, so we know it’s all true !
Let’s put more money into ‘defence’ that’ll give us a nyet zero, safe and effective solution.
Of course the Russians were guilty!
Why, only just now, in one of my favorite news blogs, I see that a Labour MP (I forget his name, but apparently he is also former RAF, so he must know what he is talking about) is saying that the Russians have been “active” on the streets of…..the East End (of London)!
I’m trying to get a friend of mine who lives in London to get along down to the East End to see if there is any snow left on the pavement (from those Russian boots).
Perhaps you can explain, Pears, why The Mill & Zizzi’s restaurant, in which traces of Novichok from the Skripals were reportedly found, had to be closed for a year and 8 months respectively for decontamination and refurbishment, whilst the hotel room in which Petrov & Boshirov stayed in London was allowed to remain available to paying guests, despite traces of Novichok allegedly being found there as well. I would posit that it was because the authorities (i.e. MI6) knew that in reality there had never been any Novichok in there, because P&B didn’t poison the Skripals.
The Mill and Zizzi’s were declared safe and handed back to the owners in August and September 2018 respectively. That they decided to take the opportunity to carry out a refurbishment, and in the case of The Mill a renaming, was entirely their decision. The level of contamination found in the hotel room was very low and didn’t require such an extensive clean up.
Perhaps you can explain what Petrov & Boshirov were doing there, why they were travelling under false names and why they left in a hurry the day of the poisonings.
Thanks for your reply Pears. According to the Inquiry, only 30 swabs were taken from the hotel room. The room couldn’t realistically have then been declared safe: for example, Petrov & Boshirov could have spilt some Novichok on the carpet behind the bedside cabinet that a child could later be exposed to and die. As far as I’m aware, there was no mention at the Inquiry of the carpet & furniture being removed and incinerated but, apparently, nearly a million pounds’ worth of police vehicles and ambulances were sent to special land-fill due to risk of contamination with nerve agent.
It’s very likely that P&B are/were GRU agents, but that doesn’t mean that they poisoned the Skripals with Novichok. The thing is they didn’t leave in a hurry on the day of poisonings: after mooching around the city centre, they went back to the supposed scene of the crime (or very near there) 90 minutes later. Why would they do that?
“Why would they do that?”
They are Russians, they don’t need logic, they are just evil, you have to accept that.
nearly a million pounds’ worth of police vehicles and ambulances were sent to special land-fill due to risk of contamination with nerve agent.
Over reaction. These decisions are generally taken by managers with no scientific background and who are unable to quantify the risk.
Thanks for your reply Bayard. I’ll take that as sarcasm.
—–
Thanks for your reply Pears. Why didn’t the authorities similarly ‘over-react’ (or react appropriately to a small but genuine risk) by completely stripping the hotel room? The answer is almost certainly because they knew there was *zero* risk, because there had never been any nerve agent in there, and the traces of Novichok detected were either false positives or fabrications by Porton Down.
People on TwitterX seem to have got things sussed. Take a look at the number of likes for Robin Monotti’s reply to this tweet from Beeb Breaking News compared to the rest (only one was from me). No wonder European governments want Twitter banned:
https://x.com/BBCBreaking/status/1996551110329254238
To Pears Morgaine, above:
No, because it had numerous inconsistencies in it and (since it must be logically wrong) at least some of the so-called facts in it… weren’t.
Inconsistencies. Such as? The presence of ‘inconsistencies’ is not evidence of a false flag which itself has numerous inconsistencies. If it was MI5 how to explain the two Russian GRU operatives who just happened to be in Salisbury at the same time travelling under false names and the unconvincing excuse they gave in interview. If the Novichok (or whatever it was) came from Porton Down why was the residue not returned there? It would have to have been signed for. Just dropping it in a bin for Rowley to find, which was not something that could’ve been predicted, was just irresponsible.
“If it was MI5 how to explain the two Russian GRU operatives who just happened to be in Salisbury at the same time travelling under false names and the unconvincing excuse they gave in interview. ”
Had there not just been a military exercise “Toxic Dagger” in Salisbury and is this not a likely reason for the presence of Russian spies? There are an infinite number of reasons why P and B were in Salisbury at that time. Rule one out and you are left with infinity minus one, not one, the most convenient for the official narrative.
“If the Novichok (or whatever it was) came from Porton Down why was the residue not returned there? It would have to have been signed for. Just dropping it in a bin for Rowley to find, which was not something that could’ve been predicted, was just irresponsible.”
That presupposes that firstly there was any such thing as “Novichok” and secondly that there was “residue” and that it was left in a charity bin, for which both we have no proof for but the word of the government-and-the-media-who-have-never-lied-to-us.
Perhaps you would like to give a convincing explanation as to why, even after all this time, the CCTV footage has not been made public.
2 Pears Morgaine:
“how to explain the two Russian GRU operatives who just happened to be in Salisbury at the same time travelling under false names and the unconvincing excuse they gave in interview.”
Easy. The operation was timed to their arrival.
“If the Novichok (or whatever it was) came from Porton Down why was the residue not returned there? It would have to have been signed for.”
Right…and. of course, they’ll make the log book public at once! Just kidding, Pears. This was not Novichok but most likely fentanyl.
“Just dropping it in a bin for Rowley to find, which was not something that could’ve been predicted, was just irresponsible.”
The two cases are not necessary related.
Exercise Toxic Dagger, a yearly event, took place at Westdown Camp; a good 13 miles from Salisbury. I doubt any GRU agents in the town would’ve seen very much.
The operation was timed to their arrival.,
Still doesn’t explain what they were doing in Salisbury, apart from using remote viewing to spy on a military exercise 13 miles away. Maybe they thought they’d be able to see it from the top of the Cathedral’s 123 metre high spire…
“Exercise Toxic Dagger, a yearly event, took place at Westdown Camp; a good 13 miles from Salisbury. I doubt any GRU agents in the town would’ve seen very much.”
And we know that the Russians never left Salisbury, and the exercise was confined to the camp, do we?
“Still doesn’t explain what they were doing in Salisbury,”
Easy, nearest railway station with a good service to/from London.
I’m still waiting for a convincing explanation as to why, even after all this time, the CCTV footage has not been made public.
2 Pears Morgaine:
“Still doesn’t explain what they were doing in Salisbury…”
The GRU guys most likely were somehow lured into Salisbury, like by promising some kind of new contact or information. Nothing happened, so they left promptly. But for those who planned the operation their presence was enough.
Or maybe because the official version has so many holes in it? And you are always the opposite: “‘I don’t know what happened, I just know the official version is right”.
Don’t trust liars is a good approach.
This may be of some interest John:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/topic/the-salisbury-poisonings-episode-was-all-staged/page/6/#post-103404
Just finished reading Lord Hughes’ report, which proved to be even more of a whitewash than I thought. It’s here if anyone’s interested:
https://dsiweb-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/Web_Accessible_E03283426_Project-Orbit.pdf
I’d recommend reading my report instead.
I wonder who it was that spent hours and hours and hours going through Natalie’s 50,000 odd posts. And selected – cherry-picked – just eight of them?
Now who would do something like that?!
Isn’t it strange that out of all the kibbutzim that Hamas attacked on October 7th, that the media just happen to be invited to one of them several days later, that just happens to be one where fourty babies were beheaded, and it just happens to get mentioned to one of the journalist (and only ONE!).
My point is of course that it was all planned – concocted and contrived – in advance of the Hamas attack, along with the other baby atrocity stuff, because it might have looked a bit suspect to people had babies only been killed by Hamas at the one location – ie one kibbutz.
As we all know, just one Israeli baby was killed on October 7th, ten-month old Mila Cohen, albeit unintentionally, as Israeli records themself show. And the youngest person killed at the kibbutz where the fourty babies were supposedly beheaded was fourteen years old. But hundreds of millions of people in N. America and Europe etc are not aware of the fact because the MSM in general have kept schtum about it so that they will carry on believing that Hamas did that.
Israel social security data reveals true picture of Oct 7 deaths
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231215-israel-social-security-data-reveals-true-picture-of-oct-7-deaths (France24 – 15.12.2023)
I reckon there is even as much as 98.6k tweets from her account (see top) https://x.com/JerseyPSC which of course make mere 8 cherry-picked tweets look even more ridiculous.
Jack
Takes a lot of work to trace that number of Tweets s, not down to an irate Pro Israel Peron or persons.
Only a State could organise the tracing of that as it involves a lot of people looking at all the tweets.
Which one had a look is easy too.
They give themselves away all the time.
Nowadays there are computers to do things like that. Set up to look for key words and phrases, images and shares. Probably a human to review however many tweets and posts it turns up, depending how intent they are on persecution. I know personally of a low-profile case where maybe ten posts were cited among nearer ten thousand going back several years. Whether X or Meta hand over the data themselves is uncertain. We’ve had any number of Facebook friend requests from people who were actually already Facebook friends. Anyone who unwittingly accepts one of these clones as a “friend” opens up all their friends-only posts to this unknown entity. Except I suspect, even if I don’t know, who it is and where they are located. Wouldn’t really cost that much to do.
As expected, Eurovision (that is european states) voted, in a secret ballot, not to suspend israel, remember, it took the same Eurovision organization 1 single day to ban Russia from the competition. 1 single day. But apparently, Genocide in Gaza was not enough of a crime for the nasties in europe to keep israel in the competition. Not to mention israel’s attack on Iran, West Bank, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Qatar, Sumud Flotilla and so on.
Kudos to nations like Spain, Ireland, Iceland, Slovenia that atleast voiced their condemnation against israel’s continued participation. Hopefully they will now exit the competition and by that move tarnish the competition’s brand/reputation.
Just like NATO, EU, BBC and Western democracy, Eurovision is well past its sell by date.
I have occasionally seen the contest in the past. Why do they call it a “song” contest?
What is “Eurovision”….? ;O)
Tunnel-vision?
I watched a former Jewish news host being interviewed on ‘Talk TV’ the female interviewer was very animated, almost beside herself with fury at the behavior of those four countries who have promised not to take part in the song contest. Good riddance said he. I was left with the impression that if all nations withdrew and left only Israel, these creatures would still complain of antisemitism.
Hopefully Craig’s not flying today – Edinburgh airport suspends all flights.
This is what comes of privatisation and outsourcing of essential services.
An amusing Indian TV cartoon showing Modi and Putin, with Trump as a disgruntled petrol pump attendant (if he gets fired for sleeping on a previous job, what can he do?)
I hope that Craig has overcome his cough and pluracy, he does need to impose some rest to himself and I wish him well.
Interesting. By labelling the main resistance to occupation as terrorists the western countries have annulled the right of Palestinians to resist. Explains why Starmer so confidently declared Israel has the right to defend itself against the same people who are not allowed to defend themselves and therefore also agreeing with the genocidal powers that all Palestinians are terrorists.
Thanks for reporting this is such detail Craig. I came across this interview between Vanessa Beeley and Jamarl Thomas – it’s also available on X/Twitter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tkyn5FvY1bk
The stakes seem to be huge for the US/GB/Israel not to say diabolical. The only reason, I can see, is oil, and that will become on much less importance over the next 10 years easily. There are other power sources which can be considered green and are much cheaper and easily available – one such is the thorium reactor which was in the Chinese press recently. I’m glad to hear from a comment below that Natalie Strecker was found not guilty, but she should never have been tried in the first place let alone arrested!
So it appears now Natalie Strecker is free. There are of course others locked up on similar political charges who remain in jail. Jonathan Cook mentions them in his recent post, here:
https://jonathancook.substack.com/p/the-hunger-strike-is-not-being-televised
which you might like to read.
Ah, so this explains it! Charlie Rowley just happened to find the Novichok perfume bottle on the day the Skripals were poisoned, and just happened to give it to Dawn three months later (the following from a Sky News article three days ago):
The inquiry heard Charlie Rowley, who was too ill to give evidence, has given “confused and contradictory” accounts about where he picked up the bottle – which was contained in a sealed Nina Ricci Premier Jour perfume box – with the nerve agent inside.
His previous history of drug and alcohol abuse, combined with the long-term impact of the novichok poisoning, has left him with significant memory difficulties.
In early police interviews, he said he may have picked it up on the ground in Amesbury, but later said he was “99% sure” it was from a bin in Salisbury.
The inquiry heard he would go “bin dipping”, searching for things he could sell, and a CCTV still showed him approaching large bins behind shops in the centre of Salisbury on the day the Russian suspects are alleged to have carried out the attack.
Commander Dominic Murphy said he believes Mr Rowley most likely found the bottle that day and had it for more than three months, taking it with him when he moved from Salisbury to Amesbury, before he gave it to Ms Sturgess.
But he accepted police may never be able to know the exact movement of the bottle and could not disprove a theory that the agents “cached” the poison to be picked up later.
Thing is that if you set out to kill just one man – or even one man and his daughter – then why would you need to take enough Novichok to kill thousands of people with you. Let alone take two bottles with you! It’s a complete nonsense of course, as is the whole episode. Yeah, I mean it’s just the sort of thing you’d plan to do two days before the 100 days to go to the world cup footie that Russia was hosting for the first time, and for it to hit the headlines the next day, the day BEFORE the celebrations. And just three months before the tournament itself kicked off. As if.
It can all be summed up in a simple phrase: Cui bono?
Oops….
https://news.sky.com/story/salisbury-novichok-poisonings-seven-questions-to-be-answered-by-inquiry-13478822
PS And if there WERE two perfume bottles, then what happened to the other one – ie the one they supposedly opened to apply some Novichok to Skipal’s front door handle, or door knob. In broad daylight!
I suppose the thinking was that they’d better take a spare with them in case they happened to drop one and smash it.
if there WERE two perfume bottles, then what happened to the other one
Dumped in a bin, not found by a ‘dipper’ and now buried in landfill?
Anyone who has battled to open one of those cellophane-wrapped boxes must surely realise that if it was brought as a spare, the Russians would have removed the wrapping before the operation. It’s also odd that two male agents would be given something disguised as perfume to smuggle. My personal theory is that the Skripal’s MI6 handler (the man with them in the restaurant who was reported in the Sun to look like a spy) gave Julia the sealed up bottle that had been prepared at Proton Down. She was to take it home to Moscow to be used in some false-flag operation (novichok – of course it was Russia). Looking like she’d bought it in duty-free. The Russians found out and sent their agents to douse the three conspirators with something somewhat toxic as a message not to try things like that (the handler became a policeman as he went into hospital). In the confusion, Charlie dipped into Julia’s handbag, pulled out the Porton Down bottle and thought it’d make a nice present for Dawn. Cue a panic as the spooks and plods tried to find the missing poison. After Dawn died, the spooks came calling and advised it’d be better for Charlie if he didn’t mention the handbag.
Charlie Rowley just happened to find the Novichok perfume bottle on the day the Skripals were poisoned, and just happened to give it to Dawn three months later
Did he not put it aside to give to her for her birthday (18th June)|?
Your explanation is….
My explanation is that Charlie gave it to Dawn on the morning of 30th June (12 days after her birthday) because it was the first time she’d been round to his flat since he’d found it in the bin behind the Cancer Research shop on 27th June, shortly after it had been put there by MI6.
Last paragraph of Charlie’s witness statement taken on 15th July 2019 – over a year after the incident:
‘I am now 99% sure that I found the perfume in Salisbury. I know I initially said I thought I had found it in Amesbury, but I think it had fallen out of my pocket on that occasion and I picked it back up. I recall that I found it in Salisbury, I think in the car park on Brown Street in a charity bin by the pub. It was all I found on that occasion and I put it in my pocket. It stayed there a while until I took it back to Amesbury. This is my recollection which has returned over time. I do not feel it has been influenced by what I have read or heard elsewhere.’
https://dsiweb-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/INQ005676.pdf
The ‘until I took it *back* to Amesbury [my emphasis]’ implies that he was living in Amesbury at the time he found it, i.e. after 18th May 2018. So either the bottle had been lying in a bin in Salisbury for over 2.5 months, or it had been put there by persons other than than Petrov & Boshirov.
I’ve never been to Salisbury, but I just did a search on Google Maps and found the car park in Brown Street and, as such, had a good look round. The first thing I happened to come across in one corner right beside the car park was a Barnados Childrens Store, and then further along in that row of buildings, another building with a big sign saying Barnados (but obviously not the shop front). And then quite a bit further along I found the pub that Charlie Rowley must have been referring to – ie the Bell & Crown, at the side of which were two large bins, albeit rubbish-type bins with wheels. I then looked round the front of the pub, and there was nothing there, or anywhere a charity bin could have been placed.
Now there are of course large council bins where you can recycle your paper, or textiles, or glass, or shoes. Here’s a list of the location of such bins in Thanet:
https://www.thanet.gov.uk/info-pages/recycling-sites-in-thanet/
But you can’t open such bins and look inside, so that rules any such bin out, But he says ‘charity bin’ of course, and I don’t have a clue what such a bin would look like, but, I can only assume that wherever it was placed, it would be locked on the one hand so someone like Rowley couldn’t come along and look inside and take whatever they like, AND, that it would be emptied fairly regularly.
I’m a hardcore charity shop addict, and have been for decades, and I’ve never come across a charity shop bin – which one would imagine would be relatively small compared to the size of the council recycling bins AND be placed in front of the shop – out of the dozens I used to regularly check out (in Edgware, Burnt Oak, Mill Hill, Hendon and Harrow etc), or the seven (at present) in Margate/Cliftonville where I’m now living (and have been for eleven years), or the several I check out in Ramsgate when I occastionally go over there (for one reason or another).
Anyway, it just occured to me to do a search re >what do charity bins look like<, and some images came up at the top of the results, and then quite a lot more when I clicked on 'more images' (with duckduckgo), and the vast majority are as good as inaccessible. And quite big in fact.
Your thoughts?
PS It's a shame that Charlie's memory is so vague. And contradictory.
“PS It’s a shame that Charlie’s memory is so vague. And contradictory.”
Probably because he keeps forgetting what he has been told to say.
Thanks for your reply Allan. The bin that Charlie believes he obtained the bottle from was almost identical to the bins you saw behind the Bell & Crown (which was known as The Cloisters in 2018). The Cancer Research charity shop used it to get rid of the stuff that they couldn’t sell. They had a contract with Veolia, who emptied it three times a week. It had a lid but was trivially easy to access, and the shop workers reported that they regularly saw people rummaging through it – as, I imagine, did MI6.
What shop workers? Where? Anyway, whatever the case, I don’t believe it. And perhaps you – and Pears – would like to address the other points I made, re the footy and Cui bono etc.Let alone Novichok on the doorknob!
And then there was the cat and the guinea pigs, and all the disparities there, not least of all why Nick Bailey and his two colleagues wouldn’t have removed the guinea pigs – and the cat if it was in – when they went to the house on the Sunday night. Of course you would. Oh, but we’re supposed to believe the guinea pigs were found dead some three weeks later, and the cat had to be put to sleep because it was in such a bad way.
Forgive me for saying so, but it’s ALL complete bollox. And the cat(s) and the guinea pigs were all shortly thereafter reunited with Sergei and Yulia. Etc, etc, etc…..
Thanks for your reply Allan. I meant the workers in the Cancer Research charity shop. You asked me for my thoughts on their bin and I provided you with them. You can believe what you wish. I’ve already stated that I don’t believe Putin would have ordered an assassination in the run-up to the World Cup in Russia, and that I believe that the Novichok found on Sergei’s door *handle* was put there by the British security services, on a forum in which you participated:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/topic/the-salisbury-poisonings-episode-was-all-staged/page/6/#post-103494
I have no idea what happened to Sergei’s cat & guinea pigs, but I don’t see why the authorities would lie about them being dead if they were still alive. It seems to me that some people care more about the Skripals’ pets than they do about the Skripals.
Meanwhile, in other news, Simon’s having another of his Sunday Tisdalls in the Guardian, with readers comments censored unless they agree, of course… Comment isn’t even allowed never mind being ‘free’.
“Putin should have accepted Trump’s deal. Now Russia’s collapsing economy could lead to his downfall
Simon Tisdall”
While Trump is trying to end involvement in the Ukraine war which the US started, the Europeans are doubling down, they now want to use/steal Russian sovereign funds held in Euro clear (Belgium) to give to Ukraine in the form of a loan, to be paid back when Russia pays reparations. Good luck with that, don’t they know the winners never have to pay reparations?
The implications of this to Europe as a whole are breathtaking. Russia will hit back hard, it is calculated that western holdings in Russia amount to £1 trillion which Russia can nationalize at the stroke of a pen. Europe has in effect said it will forgo all the natural resources Russia controls Oil, Gas and every mineral known to man, in a futile quest to defeat Russia, it is not going to happen, wake up you bozos.
Here is today’s leader from the Observer/Guardian, who still think the Empire never died.
“Every European government, including Britain’s, needs to recognize the choice the continent faces: decline and irrelevance or cooperation and revival. Before it’s too late, they need to join forces in Ukraine’s defence, and their own. There’s not much time”. https://observer.co.uk/opinion-and-ideas/leaders/article/putin-is-laughing-at-europe
” the Europeans are doubling down, they now want to use/steal Russian sovereign funds held in Euro clear [Belgium] to give to Ukraine in the form of a loan, ”
Is it just me, or does it look to you as if the $140Bn in Euroclear is simply the bait in a very large trap?
Reckless warmongers’ Von der Leyen and kallas are gambling with the EU’s entire future in stealing Russia’s sovereign assets. Belgium, which holds the funds, wants long-term guarantees, so in the event of Russia successfully suing they aren’t left financially on the hook. The Belgium PM, Bart De Wever, rightfully and perfectly understandably, insists that those EU guarantees must outlast current EU sanctions against Russia. Four EU countries have objected to the Belgium PM’s request, because it would put their own countries’ financial viability at the whim of a future court ruling — potentially exposing them to billions of Euros of repayments years after the war ends. “If [the guarantees] are infinite and without limits, then what are we getting ourselves into?” an EU diplomat said anonymously.
And…the UK, as a keen supporter of this plan, will likely be asked to commit to contribute to these ‘blank cheque’ guarantee proposals, despite not being an EU member state. That’s my guess anyway(?), if it wants to benefit via Ukraine’s military procurement using these funds.
My conclusion exactly, Bayard. A huge and very clever trap, which could destroy NATO and go a long way to ending dollar domination – without Russia and China lifting one finger in aggression. They will be able to say, with a happy smile, “They did it to themselves”.
” There’s not much time “. Correct, there’s not much time left for Europe to do what it absolutely must do, ie rid itself of the collection of breathtakingly imbecilic clowns that comprise it’s collective Political Leadership. Starting, as an absolute priority, with ( unelected by the public ) Idiot-In-Chief Von der Leyen; domestic ( Netherlands ) ( unelected by the public ) upward-failure Rutte; screaming harpy and ( unelected by the public ) anti-MENSA candidate Kallas: and from there to every current Head-of-State with the exception of Orban & Fico. The Unholy Trinity – MacStarMerz look likely to be slung by their respective electorates in the next domestic elections: assuming they don’t simply dispense with that inconvenient throwback to ( more-or-less, often less ) democratic times. Or find other ways to stay in power, eg actually be insane enough to start a hot war with Russia.
If anyone STILL needs convincing of the degenerate worthlessness of those once-quite-decent comics, ie Guardian/Observer, those quotes, above, really should be sufficient
I completely agree. But the big question is: how can we reconstitute our governments with honest, intelligent, educated, patriotic people? And how could they get control of the enormous sprawling machines that our societies have become? Especially in the face of massive systematic passive aggression from civil servants and NGOs.
” how can we reconstitute our governments with honest, intelligent, educated, patriotic people? ” That is indeed the question, Tom. One to which I have no real answer; beyond the somewhat trite observation that * we * must, somehow, attract people of a much higher moral/intellectual ( even ” common ” sense would be a vast improvement ) calibre into Politics. Even if that were possible, the stranglehold of ” vested interests ” on 99% of MSM outlets – the pro-Zionist Plutocrats are working on that remaining 1% – and the immense power/ vast reach of Big Tech/Pharma/Weaponry ( think Blackrock ) present a formidable obstacle to genuine humanity-centred Politics
As well as forgoing trade with the largest country on earth covering 11 time zones with natural resources which are the envy of the world, the Euro loons are separating themselves from more than half the world represented by the BRICS. The only benefit I can see is the massive inflow of refugees from a dismembered, land locked and destitute Ukraine. Time for Starmer to plead with UK citizens to take in, possibly millions, we can afford it /S
I wonder if the Observer scribblers have read this assessment….
“The result is that the Russians are making major offensive moves in the north, central and southern areas of the Donbas and AFU positions are crumbling due to lack of food, ammunition and manpower. By this winter, there will be little standing in the way of a full-on Russian race to the Dnipro”.
“Beyond that, the Russians would look to the eventual taking of Kharkiv, Odessa and the portion of Kherson on the western bank of the Dnipro. Russian control of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and the entire Black Sea coast of Ukraine would be complete”. There would be nothing left of Ukraine except a landlocked rump state and the cities of Kyiv and Lviv. https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/trumps-3-choices-ukraine-win-win-win-russia
The loss of thousands of Ukrainians while this stupid war continues is a passing thought to the ‘coalition of the willing’ Starmer, Macron and Merz, far more important to them is their falling credibility with their own electorates, What a shambles.
U.S. and NATO weapons have been of no benefit to Ukraine. Armored vehicles including Abrams, Challenger and Leopard tanks and Bradley Fighting Vehicles have been left burning on the battlefield. Precision artillery has been made useless by the Russian ability to jam the GPS guidance systems. Ukraine’s initial advantage in drones has been crushed by Russia’s war mobilization and ability to produce thousands of drones per month.
F-16 fighter jets are shot down with ease by advanced Russian anti-aircraft systems. Patriot anti-missile systems are being blown-up by Russian hypersonic missiles that the west does not even possess. Ukraine has managed some attacks on Russian energy infrastructure inside Russia, but these have been no more than pinpricks and have been easily repaired. Meanwhile, the entire Ukrainian power grid has been severely degraded by Russian drones and missiles as bitter cold winter weather approaches.
If things are really that bad for Ukraine Russian forces should be on the banks of the Dniper already. Anyway I thought they’d scaled back their demands to just the Donbas.
Zerohedge was outed as a far-right propaganda mouthpiece before this sorry war began. “Tyler Durden” doesn’t even exist, it’s a pen name used by 40 different people.
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-coronavirus-pandemic-health-moscow-media-ff4a56b7b08bcdc6adaf02313a85edd9
I forgot:-
The entire Ukrainian power grid has been severely degraded by Russian drones and missiles as bitter cold winter weather approaches.
An admission that Russia is targeting Ukraine’s civilians.
Um. Electricity is used in arms factories, you know. Maybe you also recall the US dropping stuff onto Iraq’s electricity substations to knock out power during “Shock and Awe”.
“An admission that Russia is targeting Ukraine’s civilians.”
Only to you and those other Humpty Dumpties for whom words mean what they want them to mean. To everyone else: “targeting” means “aiming munitions at” and “civilians” are “non-combatant human beings”, so if someone is not aiming munitions at non-combatant human beings, they are not “targeting civilians”. You may think it does, but since you think that blowing up a railway bridge in front of a civilian passenger train is legitimate warfare and not at all “targeting civilians”, it does appear to most readers that your own special definitions for terms are somewhat warped, to say the least.
Electricity is used in arms factories,
So why not attack those factories, who probably have their own back-up supplies anyway, instead of the entire grid? The inference of ‘bitter cold winter’ is quite clear, it’s the civilians who are going to suffer the worst.
Pears, considering the suffering inflicted on countless civilians around the world by the USA and its allies, including 50000+ dead in Gaza, I respectfully suggest you climb down off your high horse.
“If things are really that bad for Ukraine Russian forces should be on the banks of the Dniper already.”
Why would they want to be there?
According to the Zerohedge propaganda piece it’s where they’re heading.
Professor Richard D Wolff explains how the EU and UK find themselves in this war and pleading with the US to join with them wholeheartedly against Russia. The interview starts off with a quote from Kaja Kallas High Rep foreign affairs EU …
“if we want to prevent this war to continue [sic] we actually should curb the army of Russia and also their military budget”.
Oh dear, how is she going to do that? Professor Wolff says its because your losing sweetie pie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkTn3sEsaCs
When will European Governments realise that the younger generations want a peaceful future, not one that is marked by cold war fever and genocide in Gaza as well as in Lebanon & Syria.
If EU members had supported a ceasefire after openly pledging when Minsk 1/2 was signed, a completely different outcome would today form the grounds of a lasting peace agreement.
To fuel this nationalistic, almost fascist, attitude to ones populace and shower them with daily Russophobia will not entice young people into apprenticeships or to take on debt/mortgages for the rest of their lives.
Politicians in bed and steered by warmongering and zionist backhanders are the architects of an unsustainable future.
Discuss that when you meet for more of the same at Downing Street, if you will.
“When will European Governments realise that the younger generations want a peaceful future, not one that is marked by cold war fever and genocide in Gaza as well as in Lebanon & Syria.”
More to the point, when will they care? I’m sure they realised it long ago.
I suspect Craig’s initial words actually sum up what was actually going on here. The rulers need and want highly publicised and controversial cases like this to demonstrate their power, delineate the ‘acceptable’ bounds of ‘debate’ and warn others. The more average and/or high profile the person the better, and the only support from the supposedly free media always mealy-mouthed or non-existent. The Joey Barton case was something similar in a way – in the sense that any football fan thinking of making horrible comments about celebrities will think again now, because look what happened to Joey? I am glad the outcome in Ms Strecker’s case appears fair.
Prosecution hedging their bets: “it COULD be the offence to tell law students that”