Social media is not conducive to nuance. In the interest of reach, cut and dried positions are more effective and binary moral judgement expected. This leads to over-simplification of complex issues, and to skipping over facts inconvenient to your chosen narrative.
There are issues affecting two high-profile people where it is worth considering the detail before coming to a firm view – and in doing so perhaps acknowledging that we may not have sufficient information to make that view more than provisional.
I want to look at the furores around Karim Khan and Delcy Rodríguez.
Karim Khan has been dismissed as Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, by the Bureau of the Court (consisting of the diplomatic representatives of its member states). This follows a lengthy investigation in which three judges found there was no evidence that met the standard of criminal proof, set against member state committee reports that argued in effect that in cases of workplace harassment, the standard of criminal proof is not applicable.
The essential background is that Khan had requested and obtained arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and two Israeli ministers, pursuant to charges of war crimes against them.
The allegations against Khan did not emerge until after the Netanyahu arrest warrant.
The effort to remove Khan was undoubtedly promoted within the ICC structures by those governments aligned with Israel. The Israeli government itself appears to have been actively pushing for Khan’s removal.
The very well-connected Israeli journalist Guy Azriel, from right-wing Israeli TV channel i24NEWS, has posted that a team of Israeli diplomats was involved in promoting the allegations against Khan. Azriel is a former Israeli diplomat himself and well plugged in.
🚨Against the backdrop of the dismissal of International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan, a senior Israeli official tells me that Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar played an active role in efforts to advance the move. According to the official, Sa’ar oversaw a dedicated…
— גיא עזריאל Guy Azriel (@GuyAz) July 24, 2026
The ICC has of course suffered from massive pressure from Israel and the United States, with sanctions applied to its judges and personal threats made directly against both judges and staff.
Karim Khan has stated that his family were threatened by Israel. But just as I noted that the allegations against Khan only emerged after the obtained arrest warrants against Netanyahu, we should note that Karim Khan only spoke about this after the sexual allegations.
Yet none of this makes the allegations against Karim Khan automatically untrue. All of that could be true, but the sexual harassment genuine.
That is the viewpoint of Em Colquhoun in this opinion piece in the Canary. Colquhoun also notes correctly that the ICC has a long history of pro-Western narrative bias in its targets for prosecution, and ludicrously targeted Hamas figures for prosecution as “balance” to the Israel warrants.
On December 3 2023 I wrote extremely critically of Karim Khan:
I saw the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court shuttled around Israel and the West Bank in a fleet of armored Toyotas, looking like the most arrogant of VIPs, while refusing to act against Israel and seeking to “bothsides” the genocide unfolding before our eyes.
I realised that Karim Khan KC, brother of an ex Tory MP, himself should by rights be charged with complicity in war crimes.
Karim Khan is not a standout crusader for justice who sought to redress the balance of ICC prosecutions. He only sought the Netanyahu charges when the war crimes of the Israelis in Gaza became so blatant that they could no longer be avoided. The limited number of warrants in circumstances where the entire Israel cabinet and senior IDF command are plainly implicated in Genocide, alongside thousands of soldiers, is glaring. But Khan did appear assiduously to be pursuing the warrants against Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben Gvir, and Israel was sufficiently worried to actively seek to displace him, with eventual success.
I part with the Canary article where it argues that where the truth of the sexual abuse allegations is not plain, the appearance of impropriety is sufficient to warrant dismissal.
What? This is extraordinary. “It doesn’t matter if you did it, it looks like you could have done it” is an extraordinary measure of guilt. What does it mean in practice?
In my diplomatic career, I frequently travelled in many countries and to many conferences with female staff who often were subordinate to me, and we would quite normally stay in neighbouring hotel rooms. I never had any non-professional relationship with any of the staff concerned and no allegation was ever made against me. But if one had been, I don’t see how I could have avoided Colquhoun’s appearance test.
What would be the consequences in practice? A man could never be alone in a room with a junior colleague, could never travel for work with one? Otherwise there is the appearance of impropriety?
This is nonsense. It is not just nonsense, it is nonsense of a return to Victorian societal standards and actually a threat to the advances in women’s professional status.
The problem with the conveniently timed allegations against Khan is that we have seen the playbook often. The state weaponises sexual allegations, and the agency of apparently left-wing commentators like Colquhoun, to undermine and even destroy those whom the state sees as a threat – as Khan had somewhat unexpectedly become.
Let me give you a personal anecdote.
When I was attempting to stop the acceptance of intelligence from torture by Western intelligence services in the War on Terror, I was suddenly faced with 18 disciplinary charges. They were sprung on me at a meeting in FCO personnel department, where I was told that they would be investigated if I did not accept reassignment to a less controversial Ambassadorship.
I did not accept and an investigation commenced.
One of the charges was that I had extorted sex from visa applicants. I was astonished by this accusation. After months of investigation I was eventually faced with a visa application form as the evidence against me. It had written on it – I do not know by whom, but not by me – “Ambassador says approve”.
The application form was for a young lady named Albina Safarova – a person I had never met in my life. Furthermore it eventually transpired Ms Safarova had not made any complaint against me and had not claimed I had ever met her. The only “evidence” of any kind was “Ambassador says approve”, written by an unknown hand on an application form.
There is more. I started to get messages from many people who had worked for me. It became obvious the FCO was systematically contacting all the women I had worked with in my 22-year career with them, and was encouraging them to make accusations against me.
They could not find one person to accuse me. Many of those contacted still worked for the FCO. It was made plain that their employer would like them to make complaints, yet none did.
In my own case, I know for certain that the state fabricated a sexual abuse accusation against me because I was seen as having become a threat.
This happened to me in 2003. I suspect in today’s peculiar atmosphere the state may have had more success in getting me completely cancelled, despite the complete lack of relevant evidence and the absence of any woman actually accusing me of anything. Doubtless there were situations where Em Colquhoun could have discerned an appearance of impropriety, even though nothing actually happened.
I was eventually cleared of all 18 charges. It is impossible accidentally to make 18 separate accusations against somebody, all of which turn out to be untrue. I was disciplined for having revealed the allegations existed, and eventually forced out.
I subsequently saw sexual allegations weaponised against close personal friends of mine, each of whom was seen as a threat to the State – including Julian Assange and Alex Salmond. I know that I was innocent, and everything I know of their cases makes me believe those two were also. Otherwise, you have to believe that people who have dedicated their lives to anti-imperialist causes are routinely, sexual psychopaths. This is akin to believing Jeremy Corbyn is an anti-Semite.
You would also have to explain why Murray, Assange and Salmond have faced formal investigation when nobody on the Epstein list has – and then further explain why all the resources of the Deep State, fully deployed, were unable to convict the anti-Imperialists.
We do not know how events in the ICC will play out. There is no doubt whatsoever that the UK, EU and allies will seek to obtain the appointment of a Zionist prosecutor who will deprioritise or even drop action against Netanyahu. I expect they will succeed; but we shall see.
I do not know the truth about the Karim Khan allegations. It is important to repeat that. But I am deeply, deeply suspicious of their timing. Any abuse of power imbalance at work, if it existed, is very bad. It has come to be a part of the narrative surrounding the ICC’s actions against Netanyahu. We also have the facts of the Genocide in Gaza and Lebanon, and the scale of the everyday sexual abuse of Palestinian detainees.
So we have potentially two wrongs, the just resolution of which has come into conflict through circumstance and timing.
The first potential wrong is an individual instance of sexual abuse in the workplace by Karim Khan. I do not know if this is true or not. But I do know it has been weaponised by those seeking to stymie the investigation of the second wrong. The second wrong is Genocide and war crime on a mass scale. I do know for certain that this is real.
If pursuing the first alleged wrong does indeed come to prevent justice for the definite crime against humanity, it is difficult to see that as a desirable outcome.
Now, gentle reader, I give you an elegant segue. Let nobody think I do not work at my writing.
Just as Karim Khan was removed as prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Venezuela announced it was withdrawing from it. Left-wing commentators immediately seized on this as further evidence that Venezuela is under Trump’s direct control. Yet the withdrawal decision was pronounced by new Foreign Minister Felix Plasencia, a man of impeccable left-wing credentials who survived Chávez’s extremely thorough purge of the diplomatic service and earlier served as Foreign Minister under Maduro. The reasons Plasencia gave were impeccably left-wing and entirely valid, relating to the ICC’s Western bias and disproportionate action against leaders from the Global South.
If Venezuela had done this a year ago, it would have seemed a move consistent with the values of the Bolivarian revolution. But happening now, it all seems too convenient that it aligns, in practical effect if not in expressed motivation, with Donald Trump’s campaign against the ICC. It does so at a time when US and Israeli troops have been in the country providing earthquake relief.
The presence of the Israelis had sparked the first demonstration in Caracas by hitherto loyalist Chavista elements against a policy of Delcy Rodríguez’s government.
There has been much written recently about the appropriation of Venezuelan oil revenues by the Trump administration. This remains an entirely illegal arrangement, with no founding agreement by the Venezuelan government and based on straight military force. The US still has naval ships off the Venezuelan coast to intercept any tanker not carrying oil to a US Treasury-approved destination.
The USA has been illegally selling Venezuela’s oil. It has not physically occupied the oilfields, but Venezuela has been filling tankers with oil for which the US Treasury has collected the payment. Trump has boasted repeatedly of the huge amounts of money his administration has made from Venezuelan oil. The Financial Times this week ran an article on Venezuela’s missing oil money.
The answer to this question is a prime example of the truth taking us away from the simple narrative that gives a comfortingly clear picture. The answer will surprise you. I have direct first-hand knowledge of this from my time in Venezuela and from access to the highest levels of government there.
The US Treasury has been paying Venezuela its oil revenue regularly and promptly. It has been paying 97.5% of it into the Venezuelan treasury within one week of receipt. 2.5% of it has been retained by the US Treasury as a “fee”. The idea of a transaction fee for illegal military seizure of control of the asset is a blatant racket, but that is the extent of the American depredation.
So the total amount the USA has stolen from Venezuela is about $300 million to date, not the billions Trump has claimed. In fact the US naval operation to blockade Venezuelan tankers (and kidnap President Maduro) will have cost much more than the money the US has made from its illegal venture. It is however not in anybody’s interest to say so, of which more in a moment.
There had been an initial period when the money was going to a personal account in Qatar rather than the US Treasury, and no doubt at that time Trump was considering what he could get away with. But that only lasted a couple of weeks, and that money was recovered quickly into the new arrangement.
I can only state for certain that 97.5% was being paid over within a week for the first four months of the period, until I left Venezuela. But it is my understanding that it has continued smoothly.
There is more. The US has been selling the Venezuelan oil at a 5% discount to the world price. How you calculate a benchmark price for Venezuelan crude before applying the discount I am not sure, as the stuff is quite particular. But – and here we get into the realms of inconvenient facts a lot of my audience will not wish to hear – this compares to the 15% discount that China was imposing when it was the main recipient of Venezuelan crude.
On top of which, China was making payment not within a week, but with a delay of months and sometimes years. Plus China was deducting money at source for repayment of Chinese loans to Venezuela. These loans were genuine and for excellent infrastructure projects, but obviously the deduction of repayments from oil revenues hit Venezuelan government fiscal flexibility hard.
So the truth is that Venezuela is (even apart from the price bonanza from the Hormuz closure) getting a great deal more revenue from the United States than it was from China (and Russia) and getting it much quicker. That is an inconvenient fact if ever I heard one.
The Rodríguez government does not trumpet this, as it does not wish to appear complicit or happy with a client relationship that is imposed on it and illegal. The Trump Administration does not trumpet this, because it wishes its base to believe it is making billions out of Venezuela, not engaged in a military-led venture that is actually costing billions.
That is why the whereabouts of Venezuela’s money is a mystery. I know the answer because I was told and shown at the highest levels of government. I actually both phoned and emailed the Financial Times to try to tell them the answer to their front-page question, but they did not reply to me.
However, the basic and rather dull answer is that Venezuela’s money is in Venezuela.
I would add to this a point which Delcy Rodríguez made to me personally. Venezuela had never voluntarily stopped selling oil to the United States. The USA imposed sanctions on Venezuela, not the other way round. In a free world, the United States would be the largest destination for Venezuelan oil and is the country’s most obvious economic partner – a point made by Anya Parampil in her excellent book Corporate Coup: Venezuela and the End of US Empire.
The difficulty is the United States’ unwillingness to engage in fair trade with anyone.
What Venezuela desperately wants is the normal ability to trade fairly with any other country, including the ability to supply Cuba. It has been prevented from doing so because the Western powers are desperate to destroy any state running an alternative economic model – which if capitalism were genuinely an economically superior system, they would have no need to do. China did not impose the sanctions on Venezuela, but exploited its advantage from them.
The USA has imposed a classic Imperialist resource-extraction operation.
The imperial extraction does not lie primarily in the headline price paid for the crude. The oil can only be sold through and to US-approved companies, which capture the larger margins in trading, refining, shipping, financing and marketing. Venezuela receives payment for the raw commodity (minus the small fee), but is locked out of the higher-value stages and denied the freedom to sell to other buyers. That is how classic resource imperialism frequently works: control of commodity access, logistics and the value-added chain rather than simple open seizure of the export revenue.
There was a stunning Freedom of Information release last week of a CIA note that indicated that the CIA did not believe that the Venezuelan elections from 2006 to 2020 were significantly affected by election fraud. So the imposition of the vast bulk of Western sanctions which crippled Venezuela over that period – and at one point caused devastating famine and mass emigration – were knowingly based on a lie.
My own investigations in Venezuela led me to believe that opposition claims that they won the 2024 Presidential election – claims promoted by all the Western powers – were equally untrue and the “evidence” incomplete and often forged.
Venezuela has obtained very little by way of sanctions relief from the Trump administration, and appallingly it has received no sanctions relief at all from Western nations to help it cope with the devastating earthquake. This has made it difficult for the relief charities to pay for anything, move goods and equipment to Venezuela or operate there at all. The Western media has delighted in making claims of government inefficiency in earthquake response, while never mentioning the crippling effect of decades of sanctions on government supply chains.
In truth, the resilience of Caracas has been extraordinary. I am in contact with the team I assembled in Caracas and a score or so of other friends and contacts. Mobile phone contact was never cut to the large majority and only for a few hours to those who did lose access. Electricity has been almost constant, and so has potable water supply.
What is more, the massive Russian- and Belarusian-built social housing blocks – which I had greatly feared would have collapsed with huge loss of life – withstood the earthquake comparatively well. It was the modern glass and steel blocks in the wealthier areas which proved most prone to disaster. That may be due to those areas being on flatter alluvial land more prone to shake.
Of all the decisions for which Delcy Rodríguez has been criticised from the left, the one with which I struggle most has been the acceptance of an Israeli earthquake relief team, with accompanying IDF PR personnel. For Israel, which buried tens of thousands of children under rubble, to be parading its assistance in digging people out of rubble, is too much for me.
But consider this. You are Delcy, and your capital has just suffered as much catastrophic damage and loss of life in an hour as Gaza did in many months. You have thousands of people potentially alive and desperate to be dug out. Could you turn down any offer of specialist relief in those circumstances? It was an agonising decision to be forced to make. I received a personal assurance from the Venezuelan government that the Israeli deployment was temporary and had a time limit which, if true, means they have already gone.
I have struggled with this. But ask yourself this question before you condemn, as I asked myself:
If your own children were buried under rubble, and an Israeli rescue team to hand, would you forbid them to dig your children out? When you have considered that question, then you can condemn the Venezuelan government.
I would not, I think, have allowed the Israelis to come and conduct an exercise where I suspect propaganda value to them was in the event greater than any real help: but I am not on the ground to verify what they really did.
It is worth noting here that repeated speculation that Venezuela is about to normalise diplomatic relations with Israel is so far unfounded. I was told in person by the recently departed foreign minister that Venezuela had made plain to the Trump administration that, in its new enforced relationship with the United States, a red line on the Venezuelan side was the anti-imperialist alignment of its foreign policy. That appears to be the case, as reflected at the UN, where Venezuela has not switched to the US camp. [This paragraph was amended on 28 July to reflect the fact that, while it participates in all committees and debates at the UN, Venezuela is currently suspended from voting in the General Assembly due to arrears].
Delcy Rodríguez’s point that Venezuela never voluntarily stopped trading with the USA is also relevant to its position with the IMF. Venezuela never left the IMF. Chávez said that he would, but then changed his mind. Maduro also did not leave the IMF.
Contrary to much disinformation, Venezuela has therefore not rejoined the IMF. Nor has Venezuela accepted an IMF loan, a Structural Adjustment Programme, or any IMF budget-monitoring mechanism. What Venezuela has done is to take some 500 million dollars in Special Drawing Rights to which Venezuela was entitled. Access to these had been blocked by financial sanctions, which were voided by the slight easing under Trump.
The money was Venezuela’s share of a general release to assist developing countries through the COVID years. Venezuela was simply blocked from its share. It was, in effect, Venezuela’s own money. To portray taking this as some “betrayal” of socialist values is ludicrous.
I have no reason to adjust the assessment of Delcy Rodríguez that I reached after careful study. In fact I have the strongest reinforcement, in that I now know with absolute certainty that Delcy Rodríguez did not betray Maduro. I have had direct access to documentary, eye-witness, audio and visual evidence that conclusively showed me that:
- Maduro was aware of his likely kidnap and stood down armed resistance.
- In the preceding weeks Rodríguez had been approached to cooperate with Maduro’s removal and had adamantly refused.
- On the night of his kidnap Rodríguez was present, furious, refusing US overtures and seeking every avenue for Maduro’s immediate release.
I believed these things to be true from first-hand accounts before I wrote my last major article on Venezuela: I am now absolutely certain they are true.
Venezuela abjured the path of armed resistance to the poised US forces. Venezuela is a quarter the size of Iran, has far weaker armed forces and is within direct bomber range of the United States. It is a pacific country and has chosen to try to ride out the Trump storm, while maintaining the key benefits of the Bolivarian Revolution – especially free and universal education, free healthcare, widespread pensions and the commune system.
The Chavista system already drew much criticism from the international Left for simply aiming to spread these social benefits from oil revenues, while allowing capitalists to dominate the rest of the economy. Communal ownership of means of production and distribution was growing organically, particularly through the communes, but there has been no fundamental change to the capitalist sector in a mixed economy. It is this factor which makes accommodation with US capitalist firms possible.
This is dependent on the Venezuelan government tolerating US predator capitalism and the US government tolerating Venezuelan wealth distribution. This is the basis on which Rodríguez has been avoiding war and waiting for Trump to pass. It is the basis on which Trump has been exerting no pressure for regime change in Caracas, where he said again this week that Venezuela was “not ready” for early elections.
Where there is room for genuine criticism from the Left is that this approach effectively cooperates with imposed American imperialism in key economic sectors; that the US is seeking to expand its monopoly into other Venezuelan mineral resources; and that imagining this is temporary and the Democrats would now be any better is probably illusory.
But a devastating war is the only currently available alternative, and that definitely would destroy Chávez’s social achievements.
There is no plain right or wrong answer. All of Rodríguez’s options are bloody awful, compounded by the rightward shift of Latin American governments and the new US-backed electoral fraud next door in Colombia. Those who have romantic notions of wearing bandanas and brandishing AK-47s in mountains and jungles have for the most part not seen children die in agony. This is not easy.
I have addressed two apparently disparate topics. What unites them is simple. In both cases the available facts are messy, the moral weights pull in more than one direction, and the political incentives of powerful actors are obvious. Social media, and much of what now passes for political commentary, cannot tolerate that. It demands a clear good guy, a clear villain, and the suppression of any fact that complicates the story.
That demand is not moral clarity. It is intellectual laziness dressed up as principle. It produces the spectacle of people who will not look at the timing of the allegations against Khan, or at the actual flow of Venezuelan oil money, or at the evidence of Rodríguez’s conduct on the night Maduro was taken, because those facts make the preferred narrative less comfortable.
There are truths that conflict. There are sometimes choices in which every available option is bad. Facing that reality, weighing what is known against what is only alleged, and then deciding, is the actual work of political and moral judgement. Declaring the complexity itself illegitimate, and treating those who acknowledge it as morally suspect, is the opposite of seriousness.
The age we are in rewards the opposite. That is not a reason to join in. An important concomitant of this viewpoint is that I absolutely have no claim always to be right. If I have guided you through the facts and some key issues around them, and helped stimulate you to form your own opinions, then I am very happy.
————————————————————————————-
Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse my work, including in translation.
My work has no funding at all except for your subscriptions. If you already, subscribe I would be grateful if you could check if your subscription is still active. Over 80% of my subscriptions lapse when debit or credit cards expire: the systems do not warn you.
Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up additional new methods of subscription payment including 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 to this blog and read the articles for free.
I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.
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
Truly excellent piece, Craig. A troubling one also.
Troubling for the reasons you so eloquently and perceptively relate; the near impossibility of establishing objective truth in general and in the two examples you used in particular. As you also note, the damn inconvenience of facts that expose the moral ambiguity of parties we * side * with, eg the hitherto unknown fact of Venezuela actually getting a better – fiscal – deal from the U.S than from China, when we’ve kinda got into the habit of thinking of the latter as being more of an honest broker than the former. That, of course, being extremely relative given the other fact that the US has de facto taken control of what was a sovereign nation; should the slave be grateful for occasional fair treatment from the slave-master?
I think ‘ the World ‘ is waiting, fearfully but with a degree of hope, however fragile that hope, the end of Trump and his disgusting, venomous henchmen & women ( see unhinged media whore Larry Zoomer’s $$$$$ induced recanting of her former emphatic Anti-Zelensky/Proxy War stance, now another shrill shill for the continuance of the bloodbath )
The concern is the lack of any clear, obvious successor that would necessarily be any better – hard as it is to imagine anyone more pathologically venal and psychologically * unbalanced * than Trump. The US Political System being so thoroughly corrupted by money & AIPAC that it seems impossible for any potential POTUS of worth, of genuine moral and political quality to ever achieve that office without a super-abundance of ( corporate ) * sponsors * and without being, effectively, vetted and found ‘ acceptable ‘ to the Jewish Lobby.
All of which reflects another * inconvenient * fact …..the total moral collapse ( outwith small pockets of honourable exception ) of what used to be the Left – possibly unrecoverably so in the US and – a highly qualified – ‘ maybe ‘ recoverable in the UK.
Hollowed-out by submission to Manichean Neolib/con dogma and atomised by uncritical adoption of Identity Politics narcissistic navel-gazing, the Left has, no pun intended, left the door open for the jackals of US/Global Capitalism to walk through virtually unopposed.
If the only product on offer is two cans of shite, what difference is there if one has a red label and the other a blue? None, they are both shite. We desperately need something genuinely different – not more rebranding of the same emetic tripe we’ve been served for far too long
“You would also have to explain why Murray, Assange and Salmond have faced formal investigation when nobody on the Epstein list has – and then further explain why all the resources of the Deep State, fully deployed, were unable to convict the anti-Imperialists”.
SPOT ON!
“You have thousands of people potentially alive and desperate to be dug out. Could you turn down any offer of specialist relief in those circumstances? It was an agonising decision to be forced to make. I received a personal assurance from the Venezuelan government that the Israeli deployment was temporary and had a time limit which, if true, means they have already gone.”
Since when we take Israelis’ words at face value? Have we forgotten how many times Israelis have lied and reneged on their words? How many times Israelis have violated ceasefire agreements in Gaza and in Lebanon?!
“If your own children were buried under rubble, and an Israeli rescue team to hand, would you forbid them to dig your children out? When you have considered that question, then you can condemn the Venezuelan government.”
It depends. As always, it is a matter of balance between pros and cons. I hate to say this, but I have to: is it better to have a few people, including children, buried in rubble? Or is it better to be under constant blackmail by Israeli secret services for the foreseeable future?
Do I need to remind that Israelis are trying to encroach in Cyprus, as well as parts of Italy and Albania?
By the way, do you know how Israelis control Western governments? If not, you may want to read this article: https://geopolitiq.substack.com/p/israel-is-the-wests-digital-safe?r=25fc37
Would I turn down an offer of specialist relief? I imagine not.
But being what some might consider to be mildly paranoid, I’d probably also be wondering about the timing of the ‘quake and cui bono.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/venezuela-deliberate-devastation/5932476
“I hate to say this, but I have to: is it better to have a few people, including children, buried in rubble? Or is it better to be under constant blackmail by Israeli secret services for the foreseeable future?”
I must be missing something. Accepting an Israeli rescue team means the Venezuelan government will become under Israeli blackmail… how, exactly? Rodriguez, you better comply with our genocidal apartheid state, or Mossad will tell everyone how we dug some earthquake victims out of your rubble! And you don’t want that, do you?
I honestly see the issue even less than Murray. Assuming the earthquake rescue team is not up to any funny business and actually doing earthquake rescue, which I’d trust the Venezuelans to know, no such PR stunt is going to turn opinion back from the direction it turns inexorably on the genocidal apartheid state of Israel.
If it were my child under the rubble, or if I were the one under it, my priority is life being saved, and I’m not fussy whether or not it’s a saint or a psycho serial killer doing their good deed for the day who saves me.
Shortly after this visit by the Israelis: “The Venezuelan dictatorship, led by Delcy Rodríguez, has decided to abandon one of the last traces of its former foreign policy by agreeing to resume diplomatic relations with the genocidal state of Israel, led by Benjamin Netanyahu and his ultra-right coalition. Relations between the two regimes had been severed since 2009, when the Zionist regime massacred more than 1,400 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip during Operation Cast Lead.
“Both governments recognize the importance of the relationship between the State of Israel and the Jewish community in Venezuela, which constitutes an important historic bridge of friendship between the two countries,” said Venezuela’s Foreign Ministry in a press release. As with the recent restoration of ties between the Venezuelan and Peruvian regimes, the process of resuming diplomatic relations has begun at the consular level.”
(‘Delcy Rodríguez Restores Relations with Israel’, Venezuelan Voices 12 August 2026)
It’s well established by now that left media gatekeepers will enthusiastically echo establishment smears about dissenters being rapists or antisemites. Most are currently engaged in selling the Andy Burnham psyop to their audiences.
Would like to know your thoughts on why Richard Medhurst is now furiously lauding US strategy (and Pete Hegseth personally) while denigrating targeted countries and their supporters. He’s turned off replies so he cannot be asked online.
The Canary being a prime example of your first point. I stopped reading it a good while ago for that reason, ie it’s puritanical obsession with perceived infringements of the * Progressive * 100,001 Commandments
Any decent people at the Canary if they exist have little or no backbone, but presumably they get something out of running a respectable online magazine, even if running a respectable online magazine patently obviously isn’t the way to go if one wishes to do any damage to the ruling class.
Mind you, I have no idea what you mean about the 100,001 commandments.
That was just my usual ( hopefully comic ) exaggeration, B. in this instance re all the many ways and subjects about which to be ” phobic “, commit ” micro-aggressions ” and generally be a less than 100% perfect example of ” progressiveness ” personified 🙂
Well The Canary has been debanked by Lloyds, so they must be doing something right.
@ Clark. Hmmm one thing doesn’t excuse the other; why were they using Lloyds – one of the oldest, most deeply entrenched and compromised parts of the whole City of London/Globalist Banking Cartel and Financial Establishment,anyway?
The Canary is certainly not the worst of it’s kind, indeed, has done some good work and is no doubt well-intentioned; but I agree with Brian’s assessment above.
The Canary for all it’s left wing, woke faults supports Palestinian rights and is anti genocide that’s why the establishment and the banking cartels don’t like them. An example, if you like, of the link between banking, Israel and the perpetual victims.
“I stopped reading it a good while ago for that reason, ie it’s puritanical obsession with perceived infringements of the * Progressive * 100,001 Commandments”
Well, then, it seems both you and them suffer from the same fallacy: it has to be perfect or it’s no good. Why not just read the articles which are not written by frustrated perfectionists and skip the rest?
No, it doesn’t have to be perfect for me, just not fckn annoyingly sanctimonious. Do you read the Telegraph or the Sun? I’m guessing not. If I’m correct, there will be reasons why you don’t. I gave my reasons why I don’t read the Canary – that is to say I don’t make an effort to do so, but I’m not so averse that I WOULDN’T read it. It’s not something I give a fuck about one way or another, Don’t be picking nits just for the sake of saying something amigo
Well, yes, I do read articles from the Telegraph. It’s useful to know what the Blue Tories are thinking and, now that the Red Tories are in power, their articles can be a bit closer to the truth, so long as the truth is to the governmnent’s discredit. Large quantities of salt are, of course required, as with all media.
Has Medhurst ben to Stepford lately?
@ zoot July 26, 2026 at 07:56
What evidence do you have that “Richard Medhurst is now furiously lauding US strategy (and Pete Hegseth personally) while denigrating targeted countries and their supporters”?
I’m especially grateful for the last three paragraphs because they answer the question that was building up while reading the long and very interesting piece. Thanks.
“This leads to over-simplification of complex issues, and to skipping over facts inconvenient to your chosen narrative.”
This tends to occur when people and institutions are trying to defend the indefensible. Sophistry and casuistry are necessary, when public communication is intended to show the partei line. Occasionally I’m surprised to meet supporters of the Ukraine putsch regime or the zionazi occupation of Palestine. When I ask why? they trot out the partei line from CommercialPrivateEquitybbc and the corp-0-rat media and when I ask what would happen if they openly changed their minds, there’s a bit of a silence….
Like rust – Jakey’s fanatic Russophobia never sleeps. Care to add a bit more meat to the overcooked turnip of your claim to have met and engaged with ” supporters of blah dee blahski “; like when and where these encounters took place, any witnesses to this incredible ( literally ) putting down of Vlad P groupies. Did it, perchance only occur in the ” canyons of your mind ” accompanied by Bonzo Dog oompahs?
Are they still in the room with JK now?
lol, aye, probably; his problem is no-one else can see or hear them; well, maybe fellow Czarist Nostalgic – Mr Migraine 🙂
Robert Hughes
July 26, 2026 at 10:30
Robert, Russophobia – like Ukophobia (sic) – lies in the eye of the beholder.
Squeeth referred to “the Ukraine putsch regime”.
I referred to “the Russkiy kleptocrat regime”..
Both comments well within the bounds of fair political comment.
I’m not Russophobic. I had Russian work colleagues and in retirement (from my valued NATO work 😎) I count one Russian in my sports club as a friend. The latter is a decent guy but is unwilling to criticise Putin except on the ground that he is wrecking the Russian Army.
Make of that what you will.
But I do loathe and despise the Russian regime, as I do Trump’s MAGA cult and Netanyahu’s murderous settler regime.
This is ” some of my best friends are * name target group type “- bollocks and attempted get-out-clause for your absolute refusal to even minutely concede the legitimacy of Russia’s concerns leading to that country – finally, after years of warning about consequences and in the face of decades of West bad faith and provocations – drawing a line in the sand regarding how much it would accept from the U.S/EUK/West generally Cuckoo’s Nest inhabitants. Thus far and no more
How many more Ukrainian & Russian corpses will it take for you and your ilk to also say ” thus far and no more “? Another couple of million do it; or are you going for a Mortician’s Jackpot of a the Mass Death Event that would – WILL – result from unrestrained Global War? That do it for you?
“The latter is a decent guy but is unwilling to criticise Putin except on the ground that he is wrecking the Russian Army.”
Maybe he knows more about Russia than you do.
Robert Hughes
July 26, 2026 at 11:14
You did ask ” Care to add a bit more meat to the overcooked turnip of your claim to have met and engaged with ” supporters of blah dee blahski “; like when and where these encounters took place, any witnesses to this incredible ( literally ) putting down of Vlad P groupies.”
So I did.
Meh.
You asked ” How many more Ukrainian & Russian corpses will it take for you and your ilk to also say ” thus far and no more “?”
The answer is of course that your boy Vlad can pull his armies out and use his controlled media to paint the campaign as a victory.
No more corpses…
“Jakey’s fanatic Russophobia never sleeps.”
Who wouldn’t support the Donbas loyalists and their Allies? They’re at war with nazis and Americans FFS!
Indeed, S. Our man in Wallonia seems to think Azov Blood & Soil Fascism & perverted Yank Imperialist manipulation/resource exploitation more beneficial to UKrainian welfare than the elimination of those twin evils via Russian intervention. Such a shame, they could have continued enjoying the benefits of those two benign entities indefinitely had the more altruistic of the pair – Weird Uncle Samuel – not been so insistent the lesser partner become of part N.A.T.C.H.O
I reply Chamberlain-Daladier–Hitler Pact. QED
Name a regime that isn’t kleptocrat.
Well Craig, you are doing your readers an enormous disservice here.
You know about my own case. I have told you many times.
But you have chosen to de-platform me.
Fair enough, it’s your website, your property, your choice.
So I’ll say no more about the case that’s crashing around the “international community” right now.
Instead I want to take you back to the very genesis of the International Criminal Court.
The actions against Slobodan Milosivich in what was then the International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia.
Did you know that of the three sitting judges presiding over that case, two had sworn their judicial oath to the same person?
Richard May, of the English Court, and Patrick Robinson, of the Jamaican Court, both swore to obey the same person.
Do you know the identity of that person? Yes, you do. It was Queen Elizabeth II.
In other words, one bureaucrat appointed two other bureaucrats to sit in judgement over an elected politician.
The Americans have, finally, seen the dangers I’ve been highlighting for twenty five years.
If you want to pretend those dangers, and that specific threat do not exist, that’s up to you.
But the International Criminal Court is not long for this world.
Hi John. Would you mind maybe posting a link to your case, or giving a brief overview of it? I know nothing of it so it’s difficult to get a sense of why you appear unhappy with Craig in regard of it. I will understand if you decline to do so for whatever reason
Delighted to do so Robert. Here is the Proton Link
https://drive.proton.me/urls/0J0FYKBG24#F9ZfxS0qYcr6
Please confirm you can see four documents there. This is a small subset, but quite sufficient to determine if I’m telling the truth.
Yes I have them downloadable. Thanks John
@John – Don’t trust Proton. If you have yet to question the idea of trusting them, start maybe by considering the role of Timothy Berners-Lee on their advisory board,
That may be true Brian, but it’s a massive step up from gmail.
I’m not really worried about security and never password protect my devices. With the enemies I’ve got they can get through anything if they want.
And it’s Sir Timothy to you! 😉
I haven’t deplatformed you at all. And indeed, here you are. I apologise if I have not paid much attention to your own case. SImply put, there is only one of me.
Very well, Craig. I have the highest respect for your word.
That being the case, I suggest you read the truth about what happened to John Smith.
It’s straight out of MacBeth
“Something Wicked This Way Comes”
It’s a great tragedy that there is only one Craig Murray, but also a great fortune we do have him! Craig, thank you very much for all you do; you are a truly wonderful and inspiring man, and we are very lucky to have you in the face of all this darkness. I mean that most sincerely.
This impressive article is why we need journalists like you, evidently with impressive connections gained from impressive experience, tied to impressive knowledge and abilities!
All the best.
Regardless of whether the accusations against Khan are true or false, the arrest warrants MUST stand for Netanyahu and his minsters, as you say the timing is very suspicious to say the least, the captured ICC – has a history of prosecuting African warlords and Eastern European leaders who don’t bow to the West narratives, unlike Blair and Bush Jr, both war criminals and both will never see the inside of a prison cell.
Lets wait and see if the warrants are quashed, I’d bet that Putin’s arrest warrant isn’t quashed.
Excellent, thank you Craig.
Hello Craig. The link is broken in your sentence:
– “On December 3 2023 I wrotw extremely critically of Karim Khan:”
—
[ Mod: Thanks, Clark. The correct URL has now been added and the typo corrected. ]
Thakyou so much for so much enlightenment.
You confirm my belief that Trump in Venezuela, Greenland, and even Iran is simply changing the narrative, but not actually changing reality.
We have gone from the USS Enterpice/Star Trek with the US as the good Policeman.
To the Dark Star Star Wars with US as horrendous bully.
But actions remain pretty much the same.
As the stick grows smaller, Trump has to speak in a louder and louder voice.
I accept most of what you have written here about complexity at face value simply because you are obviously much better informed and have consistently done the level of journalism that most in the legacy MSM either refuse to do or are actively prevented from doing (with certain exceptions where you plainly aren’t as directly invested, like your “journalism” around Brexit vs your journalism around Assange, Salmond, Gaza, Venezuela etc.). Where I might split hairs is the seemingly propagandistic description of the nature of surviving buildings, given some of the opinions of Japanese experts in designing infrastructure to survive seismic activity (particularly since they have significant expertise necessitated through actual experience in that area). There are Japanese humanitarian and disaster aid organisations on the ground, amongst the few actually able to enter Venezuela. Even if one were to accept only the minority of this article at face value, it is still abundantly clear that the situations and choices are complicated.
However, on the nature of complexity, I am equally wary of those from (or adjacent to and heavily influenced by) a Whitehall/BBC background declaring as a generality “oh but it’s all so complicated”. Invariably this same clique seems to love the phrase “cockup not conspiracy”, leading to serious obfuscartion, dumbing down and gaslighting of the wider public. This clique is intellectually dishonest and fundamentally unserious. I am not saying that is the case with the majority of your article – far from it – but your conclusion at the end would imply that people can only be taken seriously if they acknowledge that as a general rule things are complicated. It seems to me that such a “general rule” should be avoided and – not to make the mistake of declaring that “things are in fact simple with simple solutions”, which charlatans of the far right love to engage in with their cultists – a more nuanced position ought to be taken where things are assessed on a case-by-case basis. Some may be complicated. Some may be simple.
Regarding your own personal anecdote, 18 false allegations do not suddenly present themselves of an instant. Which means – especially if they hadn’t been false but true and thus to be taken seriously, treated with legitimacy – the person “collecting” them must have been doing so over a period of time and only chose to reveal them at a moment convenient to them. Not convenient to any purported “victims”. Which means, regardless of investigation outcome, that person should have been sacked. So if you had been found guilty, they should still have been sacked for not having you investigated at allegation #1, rather than after allegation #18. These are also the unserious people. Unserious about human rights, dignity, national and global interest.
I should have written “almost invariably” since merely “invariably” is not a true statement (e.g. you can definitely see/hear it from some former civil servants and serving/ex- BBC staff but it certainly could not be said in your case). Also meant to describe your insights here as fascinating, as well as include Corbyn alongside Assange, Salmond etc.
On a different note, there sure do seem to have been some very strangely timed and convenient earthquakes of very recent years… (again, not convenient at all to the victims, obviously)
Are we to expect an earthquake in Cuba next…?
Indeed so. Look at the types who have insisted for the last three years that the Palestine issue (and western participation in genocide) is ‘incredibly complicated’; likewise Trump’s criminal assaults on Venezuela/Iran/Cuba.
Exactly the same people, as you say, who reflexively declare ‘cockup not conspiracy’ in the face of the most brazen establishment conspiracies.
‘It’s complicated’ is often the first resort of the most disingenuous, slippery defenders of the indefensible.
Constant use of the adverb ‘incredibly’ is a reliable guide to the credulous amongst us.
Another of my favourites is when the police state than an investigation is ‘complex, fast-moving and ongoing’: which means they haven’t got a clue.
That was a Sir Keir favourite too. All he needed to say for British journalists to allow him to weasel his way out of condemning Israeli atrocities.
Another classic still being used unironically by the political class and acolytes in 2026 is ‘difficult choices’.
Another one is the Whitehall narrative to describe Morocco’s recent actions… (definitely not related: Morocco has a “security” arrangement with Israel and has made use of NSO Group’s products)
The most spontaneous complaints I got at work was eleven (1994) the last time was seven, I’m losing my touch. ;O)
You must have been a nightmare for management, well done 🙂
Fantastic reportage, Craig. Unraveling the complexities of these compromised situations is a huge contribution to helping us understand the threadbare and misleading scraps of manipulated information we are usually fed. Food for thought indeed. Having some well informed and researched insight like this is invaluable and, as ever, shames the mainstream organisations, on all sides, with their entirely superficial reports. A window into a complicated world we seldom have access to.
First the kidnapping, murdering Zaka enters Venezuela, now the some of the most vile Zionists are there as well, not long to go until the Zio-Monsters burn down conservation lands in Venezuela – as they did in Argentina.
https://nitter.poast.org/RepFine/status/2081118190419996782#m
Excellent, informative article.
It was always the case that Khan was put into place by the UK government to ensure the ICC ‘behaved’. However, that’s not to say the allegations are true or false, just that he is the establishment’s man.
An interesting aside is that Russia is now looking to bring criminal charges against Khan for charges bought against Russian ‘individuals’.
https://sputnikglobe.com/20260726/former-icc-prosecutor-khan-stripped-of-international-immunity—russian-foreign-ministry-1124498539.html
The bottom line is that the ICC is another totally corrupt organisation that is no longer fit for purpose.
I must stress that all historic reportage on Venezuela’s election has been that they are some of the fairest anywhere. I understood the system to have been made in Taiwan and bought by Chavez. Current ownership is said to be in the Netherlands.
At any rate, the exceptionally-transparent system enables receipt of paper confirmation of a voter’s choice and is a legal document in case of disputes. The baranquero gangs of Savage Henrique Capriles-Radonski had to rage on zero cred charges, unsustainable in any court. This reportage came from none other than Jimmy Carter’s Carter Centre monitors, who were on the ground during some Venezuelan polls.
It is so hard to comprehend the reach of the administration.
‘In a story that gets darker by the minute, an Ecuadorian prosecutor named Alexandra Bravo was murdered in broad daylight June 14 after investigating allegations that uniformed U.S. military personnel attacked civilian fishing boats, kidnapped and tortured survivors, then dumping them in El Salvador
According to Drop Site News, Bravo was shot to death as she left a café with her sister, who was also killed. Police reported the security detail that was supposed to be protecting her were nowhere to be found.
Bravo had been investigating three incidents involving Ecuadorian fishing vessels. Crew members accused armed men in U.S. military uniforms of bombing their boats, abducting survivors, and then blindfolding and starving them for eight days before abandoning them in El Salvador.
The United Nations has called for an investigation and asked the United States for information about eight fishermen who remain missing. The U.S. has not publicly responded. The Pentagon, U.S. Coast Guard, and U.S. Southern Command have all denied any knowledge of or responsibility for the incidents.
But the timing is extremely suspicious. Bravo was removed from the case just days before her murder, and her replacement was reportedly told not to speak with journalists.
Adding more fuel to the fire, Democratic Reps. Joaquin Castro and Bill Keating sent a letter to Secretary of War Crimes Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Coast Guard leadership just one day before Bravo was killed, demanding answers about any U.S. involvement.
Whether Bravo’s murder was directly connected to her investigation into these alleged U.S. military actions remains unproven. She is among more than two dozen members of Ecuador’s justice system to be assassinated since 2020, and was amidst other high-profile investigations at the time. ‘
From a Facebook post by Occupy Democrats
Re: ‘You would also have to explain why Murray, Assange and Salmond have faced formal investigation when nobody on the Epstein list has’
Here goes:
Unlike in the three cases mentioned above, nobody apart from the late Virginia Guiffre has come forward to credibly accuse any British nationals/residents on the ‘Epstein list’ (or indeed anyone on the list at all) of sexually abusing them, let alone making any official criminal complaints. Guiffre accused Ghislaine Maxwell and the then Prince Andrew of abusing her, but she never approached British police about it, prefering to sue in the US civil courts. She also retracted her allegations against Alan Dershowitz, claiming mistaken identity.
I think it’s worth mentioning that everything Epstein was convicted of, and circa 90% of what he was credibly accused of doing, would have been completely legal in the UK at the time and, absent the cash changing hands, 100% of what he was credibly accused of doing is still legal in around a dozen European countries that have an age of consent of 14 today. It may also be worth mentioning that, in helping his clients to avoid billions of dollars in federal estate tax, Epstein will have done more to deprive the US military-industrial complex of funding than this entire blog’s readership put together – probably by several orders of magnitude.
– “…nobody apart from the late Virginia Guiffre has come forward”
Er, in the tiny percentage of Epstein Files released by the USA authorities so far, there are numerous allegations from potential victims. Due to the illegal releases of their names by said authorities, many more such potential victims may now be afraid to come forward:
– Epstein victims claim DoJ un-redacted their names to intimidate them
– In an interview with NBC, victims of Jeffrey Epstein have accused attorney general Pam Bondi of foul play:
https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-news/2026/02/14/epstein-victims-names-un-redacted-by-doj/
I did write the word ‘credible’, Clark. The Epstein files do contain testimony from people claiming to have been sexually abused by people on the list. However, having read some of them, these are almost certainly the fantasies of mentally incapacitated individuals. As far as I’m aware, no one on the list has even received any civil writs (which can be done anonymously) in connection with Epstein. In contrast, dozens of women & girls from West Palm Beach were prepared to tell police very similar stories of what Epstein had been doing to/with them – and no fewer than ten women were prepared to make (undoubtedly false) statements to Polis Scotland that Alex Salmond had sexually or indecently assaulted them, or even attempted to rape them.
Correction to above post: I was forgetting that Sarah Ransome has claimed that the former Prince Andrew briefly placed his Spitting Image puppet on her (fully-clothed) breast as a twenty-something in Epstein’s New York mansion. Not sure whether that counts as sexual abuse.
“However, having read some of them, these are almost certainly the fantasies of mentally incapacitated individuals.”
A perfectly reasonable explanation for that would be that no-one in their right mind would go up against the sort of people who are on the Epstein list and their almost boundless resources of money with which to pay lawyers in the country that has the best justice money can buy.
Thanks for your reply Bayard. Literally scores of people were prepared to go to the police and credibly state that Epstein – a shadowy multi-millionaire with money for lawyers, and who some say had links to Mossad (that’s the Mossad that has a reputation for putting three* bullets in the back of people’s skulls in their own homes) – had engaged in illegal sexual activity with them. I’m sure that they would have few qualms about telling the cops had some politician or hedge-funder on the list done the same.
* Three to make absolutely sure that their victims die – they’re professionals.
And are all these “literally scores” of people all supposed to be mentally incapacitated?
Ah, sorry Lapsed Agnostic. My confusion arose from overlooking that you were replying regarding accusations from the UK only. However, you proceeded to dig yourself deeper by dismissing US accusations as “the fantasies of mentally incapacitated individuals”. Lovely.
I think that Robin Cook said at the time that the ICC was set up that there were ‘safeguards’ to ensure that no western figure would be prosecuted. It seems he was right.
Does anyone know what expertise that the zionazis have in getting people out of ruins rather than putting them in? As for pragmatism, I don’t want to be on the same planet as those filth.
When the Zionazi helpy squads go to disaster zones in places like Haiti and Nepal, the most likely explanation is that it’s to do with the trade in organs and orphans.
It doesn’t seem to have crossed their tiny twisted minds that if they want to demonstrate their rescue credentials for people buried under rubble, there are tens of thousands of victims requiring immediate assistance a few miles away from them . Of course their great humanitarianism could be best demonstrated by not putting those innocent people under rubble in the first place. I wonder why that is, and why they feel the need to fly 5000 miles to get some favourable coverage for the news bulletins. I remember they weren’t particularly welcome in Haiti, and didn’t hang around after they got their photos taken. Such a caring country. They will be handing out medals for ‘bravery’ in staying at international hotels for a photo op, no doubt.
Their expertise lies in patching up ISIS and ISIS-affiliated terrorists in their hospitals during the de facto NATO war against Syria from 2011 to 2018.
Yes, as Priti Patel can testify …
The truth is that when you have the most powerful nation in the world on your case you
are left with trying to do the things which are the least harmful to your people.
Notably after earthquake the MSM did their fake concern bit then went back to reporting
every utterance of the Wiseman Donald.
Having said that does Venezuela have some money now to get the poor people out from under
the rubble?
For the reasons mentioned above I don’t know how they are doing and The Gazans/Lebanese/ Sudanese
either.
In the UK it’s Donald Trump and Andy Burnham and the big fires in Spain and France.
Oh ( and of course ) the UK Weather Forecast.
Dear Craig
Thank you so much fot your hatd work an reporting from Venezuela. However, there are some parts missing in your story. If Maduro “stood down” resistance to the gringos, how came his 42-man Cuban security detail to be killed? How were Delcy R and Diosdado Cabello in contact with the Americans throughout the kidnapping? Why did Telesur not report on CIA head Ratcliffe’s meetings with Delcy? And why did she agree to deport diplomat Alex Saab, pretending that his papers were not in order?
You have the highest contacts there, and I hope you can ask these questions, as the true story of Maduro’s kidnapping remains to be told.
They were killed in their barracks, by missile, and completely unnecessarily.
If they had died in a firefight, there would be a lot of dead Americans. I should have thought that was obvious.
Nothing is obvious in this affair.
I agree wholeheartedly. As far as Khan is concerned, there is no doubt that he was unjustly accused. (After all, there are also the statements made by his predecessor, Bensouda, about how pressure was exerted on her to make the ‘right’ decisions.) Since, unfortunately, two-thirds of the member states are sufficiently subservient to the US and the Zionists to bow to these machinations, I see the only way out as the election of a female successor to Khan – a person with sufficient self-confidence and integrity to carry out her job in the manner originally intended.
Delcy is not to be criticised; she has the difficult task of steering the country through the Trump-Rubio era without war, death and destruction. However, one red line would be any attempt to bring the fascist-leaning opposition to power – something the Europeans have long been hoping for.
I’ve tried to give Delcy Rodriguez the benefit of the doubt, however I can no longer do so. The number of act of fealty to the Trump/Zionist regime now seem too numerous and telling to be explained away by anything other than the fact that she’s a Quisling, or an abject coward.
The latest, meeting with representatives of the genocidal Zionist regime is inexplicable. If one takes Craig’s position that you seeking help from wherever to rescue people in the immediate aftermath is morally defensible, then fine. But there is absolutely no justification for having a meeting and photo op with them. This only serves to legitimise a regime which is right now engaged in an ongoing genocide. It cannot be justified.
She followed this up by hosting Randy Fine and Brian Mast, two of the most rabid, zionist genocide supporters. These people are monsters who exult in glee over the slaughter of Palestinian children. There is no possible justification for this.
Prior to this she fell over herself joining the the retinue of vassals issuing condemnations of the shooting incident at the Correspondent’s dinner in April. Imagine doing so for a person who kidnapped your President, bombed your country and murdered your citizens.
She is a contemptible, disgusting traitor, and I hope she gets what’s coming to her eventually.
Judge her by her policy actions rather than what is probably a public relations image she’s projecting too appease the USA. Venezuela is extremely vulnerable right now; she may well be acting under the duress of the people she’s attempting to serve.
“She is a contemptible, disgusting traitor, and I hope she gets what’s coming to her eventually.”
A perfectionist writes. Just because she isn’t perfect, doesn’t mean she is evil. John 8:7 and Matthew 7:5 apply.
I agree. I have great respect for Craig Murray and his writings, and I am proud to continue my paid subscription to this blog. But I simply do not agree with this argument re Delcy Rodriguez. The decision by Venezuela to leave the ICC has been welcomed by the US. That says a lot. Of course, the ICC is rather useless, but they were the only forum available to protest the kidnapping of Maduro. CM points out:
“… reasons given the withdrawal decision was pronounced by new Foreign Minister Felix Plasencia, a man of impeccable left-wing credentials who survived Chávez’s extremely thorough purge of the diplomatic service and earlier served as Foreign Minister under Maduro. The reasons Plasencia gave were impeccably left-wing and entirely valid, relating to the ICC’s Western bias and disproportionate action against leaders from the Global South.”
The reasons given are the least important thing – this is merely rhetoric. Venezuela is a weak position, I do understand that. They would face the Libya treatment if they offered any effective resistance to the US. What a world we live in …
Venezuela has restored diplomatic relations with the genocidal, apartheid State of Israel, which were ended by Chavez in 2009. That should tell us how sincere the Israelis were about their humanitarian work.
Excellent thought provoking article. I do not think it is binary thinking to conclude that the heavy hand of the USA is the root cause of both situations described and the main link between the two sets of events.
The USA has been attacking the ICC for a long time through first, non – membership, non – recognition and non engagement, its American Service members’ Protection Act and its sanctioning of Karib Khan, his Deputies and other Court officials, basically the Court’s investigative arm, though it has stopped short of sanctioning the judges at least for now. His removal – not suspension pending investigation as might be expected from an allegation though perhaps it has the same effect – puts the handbrake on the Court process and no doubt will sabotage it completely.
The USA kidnapped Maduro, has subjected him also to a trumped up charge, more so than that laid against Karib Khan considering the dubious judicial processes involved, has shackled Venezuela – no stigma on Rodrigues – and what is just as morally reprehensible used the humanitarian crisis following the earthquakes to fortify their military hold on the country. The international effort too seems to have been tame as if the wealthier countries do not consider Venezuelans worth helping or are scared to do so.
There are no moral conflicts regarding either Rodrigues or Karib Khan. Both are victims of the USA mafia state.
Hi Craig,
Thanks, another great article.
I remember a recent astonishing example of omitting inconvenient truths during the Makerfield by-election. The Canary would report on who made Islamophobic comments but completely failed to even mention that Andy Burnham is a war criminal, jointly responsible for the death of a million Iraqi civilians. The sheer number of deaths caused by Andy Burnham dwarf Putin and Netanyahu put together.
David Anderson
The Canary has reported Burnham’s votes for the Iraq war, and against the investigation of it, in other articles.
The Canary posted no new articles for a week, and since then has posted only sport. They’ve changed the “Skwawkbox” section to “Skwawkbox’s opinion”. It looks like The Canary is under extreme pressure, probably related to having their money frozen by Lloyd’s, so I’m wondering why you’re kicking them while they’re down.
I wrote: “The Canary posted no new articles for a week, and since then has posted only sport. They’ve changed the “Skwawkbox” section to “Skwawkbox’s opinion”. It looks like The Canary is under extreme pressure”
I had failed to notice that they were having a summer break (though I expect they’re still under extreme pressure):
https://xcancel.com/TheCanaryUK/status/2078179379641790738
For anyone who is interested, a couple of weeks or so ago Kit Klarenberg wrote an article on the presence of the Syrian White Helmets “humanitarian aid group” in Venezuela. The article is available at KK’s own Substack blog and Scheerpost has picked it up as well.
It seems odd that Syria of all places would send the White Helmets to Venezuela when one would think there are places much closer to Syria where the White Helmets guys can happily spend their free time (when not engaging in their usual terrorist activities) running past ambulances (going the opposite way) to pluck children under the age of 11 years (and the same 9-year-old girl wearing her favourite colour, green) out of building rubble and race about madly with the kids for photo and video PR ops without checking them first for internal injuries and broken bones, and covering them with blankets.
Let no disaster go to waste. A giant PR opportunity for some of the most despicable people on the planet.
Thanks Craig, you have shown us a meaningful way.to practise people to people diplomacy in all its nuiances.
Venezuela needs help, and a hint at Trump, that he might be able to improve his electoral polls, from our unelected hopeful smiler might put them both on the same spit and sawdust level might be handy.
Young Andy could follow this up with the perfect six, by suggesting the restitution of of all settlers to their previous countries, most have homes to go to, an end to the cost of living crisis, worldwide, by having face to face talks with all anreiner. Countries in the Persian gulf, the straights of Hormuz, as well as Yemen, access to the red sea and Suez canal being of a vital economic interest to the UK, NI and the Republic of Ireland.
Finally Andy, alleviate dear Donalds brain to tell Bibi to take a hike, no more bangs, bombs and or anything else unless all war in Gaza, the westbank, Golan, southern Lebanon, and Syria STOPS!!!
The fraudster will fail at the election, but not much will change.
Palestine is a country, a culture with excellent science,the arts dance and literature, they all thrived.
Why are Europes leaders asking for more of the same carnage?
The ICC ex prosecutor general has got my support for his apt and moral decision to prosecute Bibi and his henchman.
Shame on those who support this ongoing genocide in Europes parliaments and their collaborating ministers and MEPs.
Truly excellent article. The capacity to apply ethical judgements to messy, complex, reality is a measure of one’s fully developed humanity.
Radically different from reflexive application of an ideological “position” – left, right, centre or otherwise.
Thank you again for stating clealy why social media are prone to narratives with ‘goodies’ and ‘baddies’ . Talking of ‘baddies’ may I urge everyone to read the London Review of Books article on just how Palantir are milking the UK government for all they can get, and funding misinformation about their activities. Clearly HMG has signed contracts with Palantir and Fujitsu which entitle those companies to be paid no matter how corrupt and inept they are. No doubt Elbit has comparable arrangements with the Ministry of Defence, (or the Department for War, as Potus with unexpected honesty calls his targeted assassination office.)