While the Court of Appeal has now stopped the High Court contempt of court action against Rajiv Menon KC for defending his client, this is purely on procedural grounds. They ruled that Judge Johnson had to go via the Attorney General to the High Court, not direct. It is now referred back to Johnson who can use the Attorney General route.
Given that Johnson is a vicious authoritarian, a former lawyer for the security services who did everything possible to rig the Filton trial against the defendants, and that the Attorney General “Lord” Helmer is a vicious pro-genocidal zionist who was Israel’s go-to lawyer on war crimes charges in the UK, this contempt of court action may well not be over.
In addition to barring the use of the terms genocide or ethnic cleansing at trial, barring the defence of necessity to stop war crimes, barring the defendants from explaining the motive of their actions, and barring the jury from being informed of their absolute legal right to acquit, Judge Johnson also barred the jury from being told that he intended to add the terrorism aggravation on sentencing.
This is incredibly important. The norm is in England that you serve 40% of a jail sentence in prison and 60% on parole. If the terrorism aggravation is applied, you serve 100% in jail. So it is the difference between two years in prison and five years in prison. This was hidden from the jury.
A terrorism aggravation will also lead to debanking, severe travel restrictions and very probably loss of career.
The Filton action against the Elbit weapons factory preceded the proscription of Palestine Action, but a judge can add a terrorism aggravation to any offence. (You may recall that in Scotland a young woman is facing charges of “dangerous driving aggravated by terrorism” for an action against the Leonardo weapons factory).
Violence against property can be construed as terrorism in the UK if the objective is to influence government. Extraordinarily, Judge Johnson has indicated that he believes that the actions against the Israeli weapons factories may be intended to influence the policy of the government of Israel. He will announce his final decision at sentencing but he has already told the court (but not the jury) that is his thinking.
The activists have already spent 16 months in jail on remand. In any precedent for a first time criminal damage conviction, including the sentences of Palestine Action and climate activists, they would be extremely unlikely to be given sentences of more than three years in jail. With the standard 40% tariff, that means they would not have further prison time but some remaining time on parole.
Therefore Judge Johnson’s decision to keep them in prison pending sentencing next month appears to indicate he is intending to impose abnormally long sentences and the terrorist aggravation.
Two of the six defendants were completely acquitted. Three were acquitted on all counts, except the most minor one of criminal damage. But for this Johnson can sentence them to ten years in prison, and use the terrorism aggravation to remove the possibility of parole.
This is astonishing for two reasons:
Firstly, the notion that those damaging Israeli weapons did so in the hope of changing Netanyahu’s mind about destroying Gaza – as opposed to destroying some of his weapons supply – is plainly nonsensical.
The second is that if they were trying to change Netanyahu’s mind, they were trying to influence him against committing Genocide.
Which only a hardwired zionist nutter like Judge Johnson can consider a bad thing.
The legal fight against the proscription of Palestine Action continues. We are back in court on 27 May in Edinburgh with a motion to suspend the proscription in Scotland. We urgently need funds to take on the power and unlimited resources of the state.
I am afraid these proceedings are horribly expensive to keep the legal battle going. Again please contribute if you can but do not contribute if it causes you difficulty. If you know people who are able to afford to help and likely to be sympathetic, please do contact them and ask their assistance. We are trying to keep a lot of very good people out of prison.
You can donate through the link via Crowd Justice, which goes straight to the lawyers, or through this blog.
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/scottish-challenge-to-proscription/
Alternatively by bank transfer:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Or crypto:
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Good luck on the 27th. It’s a shame the court cannot consider the action of the East Kilbride workforce at the Rolls Royce factory servicing the engines of Pinochet’s Hawker Hunter jets during his military coup when thousands of citizens were bombed to death. They damaged (blacked) the units and kept them in the yard for four years, despite political and legal threats from the UK government.
How far we have fallen….
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0002wsm
Nothing like a “fair” trial eh?
If the YooKay is a world beater at anything it’s slow-motion procedural fuckery, gaslighting and the-process-is-the-punishment type oppression.
Petty, nasty, crooked, self-righteous and sinister in a soul-crushingly banal way…
I would say cruel and arrogant, both to an EXTREME, rather than petty (this is strategic) or self-righteous (look how they try to keep so much hidden).
So much for “the rule of law”.
How about an application arguing there is judicial bias? There’s no jury to convince now, so there’s no problem letting the light in on the defence case, right? And there’s supposed to be a “right to be heard” too. The Zionazi filth in ermine have had their fun in denying that right to the defendants several times during this trial. Open the windows as wide as possible now. The term “enemies of humanity” comes to mind.
Didn’t ZOG know the Attorney-General had to be brought in? What irony, given he seems to have been their boy for years already.
Moreover, when the UK government mooted recognition of Palestine as a slap on the wrist for Israel’s ongoing genocide, the Lawyer’s for Israel group declared that this would be illegal under international law, specifically under a provision of the Montevideo Treaty which requires that states have clearly demarcated boundaries. Aside from the fact that the treaty in question has never been widely adopted outside of the America’s, two salient points present themselves. Firstly, if Palestine lacks clear borders this is overwhelmingly due to the occupation of the territory by Israel, almost universally accepted as illegal under international law. Second, if the recognition of states without clear borders is to be ruled illegal, then this applies to the recognition of Israel by the Uk and other states.
The fact that Israel lacks clear borders,what with successive governments of the Jewish state refusing to set the boundaries of their nation, is indelibly linked to the fact that he whole project is one of a fascist colonialist venture with the ravenous hunger for territory as a forest fire hungers for timber
Moreover, when the UK government mooted recognition of Palestine as a slap on the wrist for Israel’s ongoing genocide, the Lawyer’s for Israel group declared that this would be illegal under international law, specifically under a provision of the Montevideo Treaty which requires that states have clearly demarcated boundaries. Aside from the fact that the treaty in question has never been widely adopted outside of the America’s, two salient points present themselves. Firstly, if Palestine lacks clear borders this is overwhelmingly due to the occupation of the territory by Israel, almost universally accepted as illegal under international law. Second, if the recognition of states without clear borders is to be ruled illegal, then this applies to the recognition of Israel by the Uk and other states.
The fact that Israel lacks clear borders,what with successive governments of the Jewish state refusing to set the boundaries of their nation, is indelibly linked to the fact that he whole project is one of a fascist colonialist venture with the ravenous hunger for territory as a forest fire hungers for timber
“Filth in ermine”. Excellent description.
On further reflection: perhaps the forgetting to ask the attorney general to sign the document was deliberate, so they can jail Menon the same day they sentence the Filton defendants, or the day after. Then they can print a headline saying “Terrorists’ barrister jailed for contempt” for maximum effect.
“The barrister who tried to shift the goalposts in an extraordinary address to the jury in the trial of terrorists who yesterday received 10-year sentences has himself been jailed for five years. In response, experts said there is an urgent need to clamp down on pervasive anti-Semitism at the Bar.”
And evidently free speech = anti-semitism.
“Free speech = anti-semitism.”
Elon Musk had a good old cackle with his pal Benyamin Netanyahu: “There’s an old saying history is written by the victors. And it’s like, ‘Well, yes, but not if your enemies are still alive and have a lot of time on their hands to edit Wikipedia.’ ”
(Note for those who don’t already know: this is not saying Wikipedia is in any way a threat, which it isn’t. It’s saying it’s a useful tool to press ahead with. Note too the horror at your enemies still being alive and able to move their limbs other than when they’re working for you.)
“Perhaps the forgetting to ask the attorney general to sign the document was deliberate, so they can jail Menon the same day they sentence the Filton defendants, or the day after.”
I may be right on this one. Always consider timing. See too today’s exoneration of Angela Rayner by tax officials.[1]
The separation of powers is nothing but play-acting. The legislature and the judiciary are PART of the executive.[2]
Notes
1) Neither Rayner nor Streeting could win a general election in a month of Sundays, any more than Badenoch could.
2) If only a left wing organisation could recognise this fact. But recognition hardly sits well with the usual commitment to legal activities only. And while the IRA used to employ language such as “the political wing of the British army”, the IRA wasn’t a left wing organisation.
Small coin in the tin. Good luck.
” You may recall that in Scotland a young woman is facing charges of “dangerous driving aggravated by terrorism”. This – minus the humour – is on the same level of absurdity as NTNOCN’s ” wearing a loud shirt in a built-up area “. Scottish Politics/Legal System is getting beyond parody.
” Alex Salmond ” Case, which should rightly be called ” The Conspiracy To Frame An Innocent Man ( for sinister politically motivated reasons ) Case. Known perjurers given life immunity – even from being named, never mind prosecuted; despite 1000s of people already knowing the names of the perps
A ” Scottish Independence Party ” that want’s fuck-all to do with Scottish Independence, except for a few weeks every few years as a tartan figleaf to cover their total indifference to ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING to achieve – or even progress – it’s supposed raison d’etre.
Millionaire Vanity ( with deeply concerning views/intentions ) Party – Reform – making significant * progress * in Scotland whilst the c***s they represent continue to ravage the country; but dafties who are the victims of the ravaging think ” Nigel ” is the answer – just like some of them thought ” Boris ” was the answer . FFS! Talk about Cognitive Dissonance!
Candidates in the recent S.E who have devoted their lives to the cause of improving Scotland’s lot and future prospects – like Craig -eg via Independence, receive derisory % of votes whilst some blow-in from elsewhere who has no prior connections to Scotland and whose status as resident is ” unclear ” waltzes into Holyrood on 0% of votes personally ( via the ridiculous * modified * D’Hondt shit that Blair and fellow prick Dewar saddled us with ) and will now have a say in Scotland’s governance. And, no, my objection to this risible situation has nothing to do with this guy’s ethnicity – I couldn’t care less about that: it’s the lack of prior connection to the country that I object to. Of course he has all the requisite * qualities * for success in Scottish Politics now – he’s a non-Scot, ” non-binary “, is a Pronoun-Prat, he can probably place himself on the Victimhood Spectrum, ie as a Tamil ( even if more of pussy than a Tiger ), evinces no understanding of nor interest in Scottish History or it’s present troubles – but no doubt has ” strong feelings ” about, eg ” Trans ” ” Right “: in short, he’s got all the Right Stuff for success in the narcissistic Hall Of Mirrors that is contemporary ” Progressive ” Politics. The ” they ” should do well
” Where stands Scotland now “. In a bog wearing wellies with rocks in the them. But, it’s cool, they’re non-binary wellies, so……..
Surely the guilty verdicts can be thrown out if the judge has made a mistake in instructions to a jury or lack of.
It appears the error was a Prejudicial Error that affected the outcome or fairness of the trial.
I hope the error was pointed out prior to jury making deliberations which would strengthen grounds for appeal.
Yes.. but thrown out by whom? Presumably someone who is impervious to Zionist money and threats.
@Peter – This judgment didn’t consider the question of misdirection.
Here are the filthy trio who put their names to it:
“Lord” “Justice” Jeremy Stuart-Smith – went to Radley School and then Corpus Christi at Cambridge, and then became an Appeal court judge – in all three respects exactly like his father before him;
“Lord” “Justice” David Bean – went to St Paul’s School and was then President of the Cambridge Union;
“Lord” “Justice” James Dingemans – went to Mansfield College, Oxford, where he was a rugby blue – I couldn’t find what type of school he went to, but what would we f***ing guess?
““Lord” “Justice” Jeremy Stuart-Smith – went to Radley School and then Corpus Christi at Cambridge, and then became an Appeal court judge – in all three respects exactly like his father before him”
Those who are unfamiliar with the British ruling class will need to make an effort to appreciate just how institutionalised, and just how much of a dehumaniser, this guy almost certainly is. Let me advise: he will be off the effing scale.
Imagine a country that lets a man of this type “judge” anyone.
Yes this sounds like the Austria-Hungary of Franz-Joseph.
We might spare a thought for the pensioners arrested for carrying posters, who are in limbo while their case is decided. They may have been courageous, but they might not have considered the severe financial consequences. They face being “de-banked” and being in the situation of people in the future who refuse to take the mark of allegiance to an “antichrist” dictator and are thereafter unable to buy and sell, sanctioned and debanked in a cashless economy, like “non-persons” in the excellent series 1990.
I am glad that the Greens, LibDems and SNP, as I understand, intend to restrict and mitigate these consequences so that no-one, certainly not those pensioners, can be prevented from having at least basic banking services. The exact details depend on the party. But Labour, the Tories and Reform intend to maintain full debanking for anyone convicted under anti-terrorist legislation, even where no violence against individuals is intended, and that could include those pensioners if convicted.
Something to remember for the next general election, whenever it happens.
Thank you. Yes that is a key argument in our interim relief application on May 27th.
Actually if you (or anyone) can find any useful link to stated government policy on debanking for those convicted under terrorism legislation, that would save some research and cost.
I’m not sure there is such a link, because when I put the q. to Google AI (‘Are there weblinks to stated UK government policy on debanking for those convicted under terrorism legislation?’) the response was:
The UK government does not have a distinct policy document explicitly addressing “debanking” specifically for individuals convicted under terrorism legislation; instead, its policy is dictated by broader statutory frameworks that govern financial exclusions, counter-terrorism, and money laundering. Under these rules, banks are legally required to terminate services or freeze accounts for individuals flagged under specific national security risk parameters:
The relevant official frameworks, publications, and guidance documents include:
1. Government Policy on Account Closures (“Debanking”)
The overarching policy framework allows banks to restrict or terminate accounts to manage financial crime risks, though rules implemented via the HM Treasury Debanking Legislation Update protect standard users from being debanked over political views. However, these transparency and notice-period protections explicitly contain carve-outs for financial crime and national security compliance.
2. Counter-Terrorism Sanctions and Asset Freezing
For individuals convicted or designated under counter-terrorism provisions, the state relies on strict financial restrictions rather than standard commercial off-boarding:
Asset-Freezing Frameworks: The UK operates domestic and international asset-freezing systems managed by HM Treasury. These are governed by regulations outlined in the Gov.uk Counter-Terrorism Sanctions Guidance, which details how entities are restricted from accessing the UK financial system.
Proscription Consequences: Individuals or entities designated as part of a proscribed organization are subject to criminal property restrictions. The specific boundaries are defined in the Gov.uk Proscribed Terrorist Groups Guidance.
3. Statutory Anti-Money Laundering & Terrorist Financing DutiesFinancial institutions are legally forced to deny or close accounts if they suspect or identify a connection to terrorist property or financing:
Reporting Requirements: Section 19 of the Terrorism Act 2000 mandates banks to report any suspicion of terrorist property offences, as specified in the Legislation.gov.uk TACT 2000 Explanatory Notes.
Risk-Based Account Management: Banks operate under strict regulatory enforcement guidelines to prevent their services from being used for illicit purposes. These guidelines are published on the FCA Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Portal, which dictates that firms must off-board clients if risk mitigation is not possible.
A further link is given.
That’s the best I can do.
Thanks for the information.
Missing from the King’s Speech today:
‘My government will reintroduce the Truck Acts to protect workers from having the freedom to spend their earned money restricted.’
This whole debanking nonsense requires an organised resistance. As a person now living in what the UK regards as a hostile state, my pension cannot be paid into my foreign account. Furthermore, my UK bank is prevented from transferring any money to me here as well. As a retired person this effectively cuts me off from any source of income, although as Keir Starmer might say ‘They have that right.’ In effect the UK government is now dictating to me, a person with a UK passport, where I am allowed to live and denying me the right to spend my own money.
I do not dig into your British legal mumbo-jumbo, but have you seen this? https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/soldiers-shot-hostages-had-orders-050250184.html
The IDF “soldiers who accidentally shot three Israeli hostages during the Israel-Hamas War had orders to shoot all men they saw on sight, and to “use their judgment” when it came to women and children, one of the soldiers told a hostage’s mother in a new episode of Hamakor on Channel 13.” This is why they accidently killed 3 Israeli hostages.
What amazes me is that the article is focused on miscommunications inside IDF, not on the fact that such order is criminal in itself, just alike the Nazi’s “Commissar Order” of 1941. The Geneva convention explicitly forbids killing ” …anyone who clearly expresses an intention to surrender; provided he or she abstains from any hostile act and does not attempt to escape”, let alone killing of every man on sight.
Its all a bit Freisler-esque, if you ask me – justice is being denied by those two Zionist pricks, and I thought the Scottish judicial system was a joke.
I see an analogy between the October 7th breakout and this trial. In both cases people sacrificed themselves (and, in the case of October 7th, many others) in order to provoke an extreme over-reaction by their enemies. Israel obliged beyond Hamas’ wildest dreams, inflicting ghastly death and destruction on helpless people. A dreadful outcome, but it may turn out in the long run to have precipitated the end of Israel as a nation-state. (Not necessarily causing any harm to individual Jewish people, which would be an entirely different matter).
In the trial, the powers that be are being provoked to overreach themselves by taking their usual tactics to outrageous lengths. If this can be managed, at some point the British people’s sense of fair play is bound to kick in, with imponderable results for those attempting repression. At some point, it is even possible that the media will develop a backbone (or, more likely, justified concern for their hold on their audiences) and start to tell the truth.
This technique, as so often in public affairs, has its parallel in the world of chess. The great world champion Emmanuel Lasker, finding it difficult to defeat weaker opponents who defended soundly, deliberately resorted to risky play which brought him to the verge of defeat. Emboldened by the hope of a famous victory, the opponent would throw caution to the winds and begin to “mix it”, at which point Lasker would play “Eisenstark” (as strong as iron) and chalk up yet another victory.
Ah, so that was the reason why Bobby Fischer called Emmanuel Lasker a coffeehouse player!
Why am I not surprised by this.
“Umer Khalid, who has been on remand for nearly a year, accused of spraying red paint on two planes at RAF Brize Norton, has lost the ability to walk.
He’s forced to crawl as the prison refuse to give him a wheelchair, despite a doctor requesting one”
Is there any possibility of some organisation / the bar council?? being able to take an action against Judge Johnson for being so very blatantly biased and not a neutral actor as all JUDGES should surely be?
Johnson is the government’s man – albeit that the government operates out of Tel-Aviv. So there is little hope.
That Judge Johnson did not know the rules, thought that he could flout them, or did it deliberately knowing the outcome to create anxiety and uncertainty for Mr Menon says a lot about his competence and character.
Violence against property can be construed as terrorism in the UK if the objective is to influence government.
So, if the government is being ‘influenced’ and the government is under attack in order to change ITS mind then this infers or confirms that the government agrees with the ongoing violent acts in Gaza and Lebanon even Iran.
Allowing a private company to make weapons in your country ( not made in Israel or even the US) means you are allowing the company to do so and that makes that country complicit in the bombing of the civilians in all three countries with weapons allowed to be made in the UK.
You would not allow a terrorist to make bombs in the UK so, why would you allow Israel to make weapons in the UK?
Unless of course you agreed with the reasons and aims of making them.
In other words the UK agrees with Israel’s acts and end use of those weapons.
Otherwise why bother to change the minds of the UK government if it is just a business transaction?
This is not purely a matter of cheese dispute say – no-one was killed over a cheese dispute between France and the UK.
In this instance many thousand have bee and are being killed and will be in the future.
Hence the Criminal Damage which is in line with prevention of Genocide ‘ in part or whole ‘ of the UN .
Since it is an English event and a pressing subject I wanted to call attention to it:
Sevim Dagdelen, German former longtime MP, expert on foreign policy issues and member of the BSW-party will speak at a Cambridge University debate on May 21st 8 pm.
As her TWEET says:
“I am pleased to speak at the University of Cambridge in the debate “This House Believes NATO is Unfit for the World Today.”
https://x.com/SevimDagdelen/status/2054201708826312799
I wouldn´t be surprised if she were to visit members of Palestine Action during her visit as she has been one of the few outspoken German critics of European governments and their complicity in the genocide.
AG
May 14, 2026 at 05:23
From Dağdelen’s Wiki page: “In February 2022, Dağdelen said Russia had no interest in an invasion of Ukraine and was concerned with its legitimate security interests. She also called for a neutral status for Ukraine. On 18 February 2022, she appeared at a demonstration in Berlin with the slogan “Security for Russia is security for our country”. She accused the German media of spreading the “tall tales of the U.S. intelligence service”.[11] After the Russian invasion occurred, Dağdelen was among the co-signers of a statement attributing significant responsibility for the Russian invasion to the United States.[12] In April 2022, she praised German protesters who opposed an increase in German military spending, and she described it as “madness” to deliver military weapons to Ukraine.[13]”.
A tankie for our times.
A summary of Die Linke’s responses to the 2022 full scale invasion of Ukraine.
https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/krieg-in-der-ukraine-sahra-wagenknecht-gesteht-irrtum-bei-russland-ein-a-99852df3-f581-47be-ba0e-ab972a0d581a
“A summary of Die Linke’s responses to the 2022 full scale invasion of Ukraine.”
Why is it full-scale when the Russians only occupied a tiny part of Ukraine and are only using a fraction of their armed forces, or is this just Yankie boiler-plate.?
I suggest you say what you really wanna say and don´t obfuscate it with this hand-waving style of fake argumentation – since nothing of this has anything to say about the dangerous nature of NATO. btw the term NATO in your links/and quotations is mentioned “zero” times.
And the Cambridge discussion is not about Sevim Dagdelen but NATO.
p.s. DIE LINKE is about as serious as LABOUR in the UK. They have displayed a level of dishonesty and incompetence on Gaza it´s disgusting. And regarding Ukraine: DIE LINKE was expected to tank (😂) in the 2025 elections. And then experienced a sudden surge of popularity. One reason was their willingness to give up their decades-long strict opposition to NATO and confirmed their tacit support of the EU´s anti-Russian project Ukraine. Completely blindsiding that the Ukrainian state is managed by a bunch of crazy Nazis. Just look at the scholarship of Katchanovski, Ishchenko, Havryhsko, Robeson, Petro, Sakwa, Robinson, Roberts or Rochowanski for that matter.
p.p.s. Keep in mind that Wagenknecht and Dagdelen are no longer part of DIE LINKE but founded a new party, BSW, 2,5 years ago.
Also Dagdelen for DIE LINKE was that party´s most important and best informed MP on these issues, as she had been that party´s main representative in secret government committees on foreign policy and national security and a regular guest to high-level meetings in Washington D.C. So she knows what she is talking about. Had she agreed with the CIA´s statements re: Febr 24th – that would change nothing about her analysis, about the events and about how those are being misrepresented in the West.
p.p.p.s. DER SPIEGEL is a right-wing piece of garbage criminal outlet propagating imperialistic genocidal policies of the West by spreading lies and misinformation of the worst and malign kind.
“Tankies of all countries, unite!” ✊
Can’t play the ball play the man.
It’s refreshing to see Cambridge Union upholding its commitment to free speech. I have a feeling an anti-war debate on a Russian campus wouldn’t get off the ground despite 83% of Russians wanting an end to the war and a negotiated settlement (polls published in Russian newspapers in case you were wondering).
Opposing the notion will be Ukrainian politician Kira Rudik so I imagine Putin’s illegal aggression (more civilians killed in Kyiv today, including a 12 year old girl) will feature quite prominently.
Oddly enough despite being part of Ukraine’s government she’s not a ‘crazy nazi’.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kira_Rudik
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_of_Liberals_and_Democrats_for_Europe
Use of British air bases for the illegal aggression against Iran (aka the War to Liberate Women) was sanctioned by Starmer only once it had been confirmed that the US was responsible the double-tap massacre of 150 little girls.
The brute legal repression of anti-genocide protesters detailed in Craig’s articles, that too is being inflicted by the British government. Not Russia’s government, literally thousands of miles away from you.
Then there’s Britain’s participation in the worst crime of all: the mass slaughter of the most vulnerable people on the planet.
https://jacobin.com/2026/02/uk-israel-gaza-genocide-media
And the reality of British posturing about repressive regimes.
https://www.declassifieduk.org/britain-backs-most-of-the-worlds-repressive-regimes-new-analysis-shows/
Is there literally nothing your *own* government could do that would disgust you?
Whataboutery.
I never mentioned Gaza or Iran besides which you’re assuming, incorrectly, that I act like a Tankie and support my chosen ‘side’ whatever crimes they commit without engaging in any critical thought.
“”Can’t play the ball play the man”
You still have no idea what that saying means, unless you are addressing your mate JKR.
“I have a feeling an anti-war debate on a Russian campus wouldn’t get off the ground despite 83% of Russians wanting an end to the war and a negotiated settlement (polls published in Russian newspapers in case you were wondering).”
“Oddly enough despite being part of Ukraine’s government she’s not a ‘crazy nazi’.”
From what do you derive this feeling apart from anti-Russian prejudice? Which Russian newspapers would that be, The Moscow Times?
“Oddly enough despite being part of Ukraine’s government she’s not a ‘crazy nazi’.”
That’s probably why she’s a back bencher, then. She is, however, a mate of the Carpet-bagger in Chief, Bill Browder.
“(more civilians killed in Kyiv today, including a 12 year old girl) ”
Again, where did you get that from? Even the BBC give only one casualty. The Ukranians have caused more Russian civilian casualties than that almost every day since 2022, yet you remain strangely silent about those.
Sixteen killed yesterday, including two children.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq5p8yygq94o
Twenty four today; three children.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russia-ukraine-kyiv-strike-apartment-9.7200577
References a Ukrainian attack but any evidence that more Russian civilians are being killed every day than Ukrainian?
I have the feeling I have to make clear to both of you and JK:
Mrs. Dagdelen is among Germany´s MPs most loyal to principles of international law and a just world, and a person of highest integrity.
She is fighting to prevent WWIII.
And she is doing so based on the fact that NATO is the most dangerous organisation in the world. And has been since its foundation.
And with that btw she is also fighting for your interests as a resident of the UK.
This whole issue of war and peace in Ukraine is way beyond those games Oxbridge discussion clubs are playing.
Naturally as a public person Dagdelen will use the opportunity and lay out her argument there nonetheless.
But lets be honest, eventually this is theatre staged by British elites most of whom, I dare speculate, would love to drop a few nukes on Russia if they didn´t have to fear any repercussions.
So much about the significance of freedom of speech in times of war.
“References a Ukrainian attack but any evidence that more Russian civilians are being killed every day than Ukrainian?”
Sorry, none that you would believe.
No NATO expansion, no sabotage of peace talks, no deceit by the US and EU trying to kill RU prez. and attack nuclear triad, no secret CIA bases at the RU border, no secret attempts to get nukes to UKR or build them in UKR, no German tanks in Kursk built by the same company both in 1941 and 2023, no incessant NATO maneuvers with AFU for 20 years and arming of AFU up to a scale 3 times larger a budget than the Russian Army in 2022, no culture wars against Russians, no hate propaganda against Russians, no double standard re: intern. law against Russia, no demands to destroy Russia by European and American leading politicians and public figures, no NATO war crimes in Kursk, no Patriots deployed explicitely in civilian areas in Ukraine so their dbris may crash into those areas, no secret military hideouts and meeting places by NATO in civilian areas – to provoke such fatalities as a 12 year old girl – besides a huge question mark over the validity of every such news report – (I for one have come to distrust every single one of them news by now, it was different 3 years ago, I have learned my lesson about an insane European culture of lies and hatred since) – if nothing of that – no dead children in Kiev.
p.s.
Kira Rudik is nothing but a proponent of this 100-years War on Russia:
“she advocated for the introduction of a no-fly zone over Ukraine”
“Advocates for negotiations between Ukraine and its partners with Russia exclusively from a position of strength.”
“Rudik has expressed support for the confiscation of seized Russian assets in favor of Ukraine, as well as recognition of Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism for further expansion of sanctions”
“Together with Bill Browder, Rudik has participated in an advocacy campaign for the adoption of laws on the confiscation of the Russian property registered in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada, and channeling those funds to support Ukraine and its post-war reconstruction.”
This lady is fascist by heart and insane in her actions. If this is considered a position worthy a debate – that´s the end of critical thinking.
The only reason why she does not call for waging a war of NATO against Russia right here right now it is her cowardice and dishonesty. Truth is: it´s because Russia has nukes.
And if Mrs. Rudik really considers a position of strength to be the only viable one, I have a bridge to sell. For that to happen she may wait another 100 years in vain.
(I will defend everyone´s right to voice his or her point. But that doesn´t make every such voice right, just or sane. If someone is mad or an idiot, everyone has the right to just say so.)
Good context AG, thanks.
“A tankie for our times.”
Better a tankie than a Yankie.
This is eye opening.
“I am glad @thebarcouncil are making a clear public stand against the outrageous attempt to prosecute my colleague, Raj Menon KC, for reminding jurors of the text of this plaque on the wall of the Old Bailey.
The judge in this ancient case locked the jurors away for contempt of court for failing to return a guilty verdict.
They held out against the pressure of being “locked up without food for 2 nights” until they were freed on a writ of Habeas corpus by the Chief Justice.
The case established the right of jurors to “give their verdict according to their convictions”.
This case is a line in the sand for the criminal bar.
Any judge who objects to me reading the text of this plaque to a jury can lock me up too. Because I will not be prevented from doing my duty by threats and judicial intimidation.
We are all Raj Menon now.”
https://nitter.poast.org/crimlawuk/status/2054820036058009611#m
Let’s look on the bright side.
The filthy trio on the English appeal court bench (including the one who followed exactly in his father’s footsteps by arriving on the said bench having gone to Radley and Corpus Christi), who are so disgusted when they mention “what is sometimes called jury equity“, seem to be addressed DIRECTLY in this cracking 1968 song by David Peel:
https://youtu.be/j2pGBv9Ly6A
Excellent song, thanks Brian.
B.Red
Where on earth did you find that song, nice simple lyrics that I can’t get out of my head great stuff!
@GFL – I just searched the web for the lyrics 🙂
“In the media there are any number of examples – Antoinette Lattouf, Emily Wilder, Katie Halper, Gabriele Nunziante and Sangita Myska just from the top of my head. Lack of enthusiasm for Israel is career-destroying.”
Long term (now ex-) Guardian cartoonist Steve Bell is another example.
Gary Lineker is another.
So Israel managed, through their soft-war influence campaign – and perhaps through actual voting fraud/manipulation, to get to a second place in the Eurovision song contest, sadly they did not win, because if they had won talks and efforts to boycott israel would have accelerated immensely. A second place was in a way the worst outcome in my view.
New York Times had a good expose the other day about Israel/Eurovision and even though Eurovision changed the rules last year, israel kept doing the same illegitimate influence campaign this year too. The article also expose the shadowy business that goes on within the Eurovision organisation itself: from sudden blocked internal voting on Israel’s participation, to refusal to share the actual voting tele data, the refusal to investigate potential israeli manipulation tactics and a basic report that was actually done on israel, was not properly released et.c.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/11/world/europe/eurovision-israel-gaza-netanyahu.html
Anything and everything associated with Israel has the stink of corruption and degeneracy.
Yep, israel-critic Thomas Massie is the latest evidence what a tremendous power the zionists have as Massie lost to the pro-israel candidate Ed Gallrein.
Absurdly the BBC take on the election do not even mention the obvious Israel factor!
Trump exerts iron grip on Republican Party with Massie defeated
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdjpng88d2vo
As usual when you google the name of these journalists you quickly find out what kind of views they have.
Written by a Anthony Zurcher, the same Zurcher that urged Israel to bomb Iran last year:
In a now deleted post, BBC News correspondent Anthony Zurcher called for Israel to bomb Iran
https://x.com/SocialistVoice/status/1936861282302316786
If a BBC journalist urged Iran to bomb Israel oh that journalist would be kicked out just like that!
The Germans are also fitting up defendants in their kangaroos courts.
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-citizens-subjected-to-show-trial-in-germany-lawyers-say/