On Friday we have our appeal against the suspension of the Palestine Action judicial review in Scotland. Our legal crowdfunder has been closed down by the card processors following Trump’s designation of Palestine Action as a global terrorist organisation.
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/scottish-challenge-to-proscription/dashboard/
If you can, please come to the Court of Session in Edinburgh for 10am. If you cannot come, you can watch the livestream here
For the first time I was not involved with the legal team in drafting the Note of Argument, because I was too sick in the three day window after the last hearing we had to prepare it.
It turns out that our lawyers are much more radical when freed from me exhorting them to be more radical!
NOTE OF ARGUMENT FOR THE RECLAIMER
PETITION
of
CRAIG MURRAY, residing at EH10
RECLAIMER
For judicial review of the Terrorism Act 2000
(Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2025
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The reclaimer moves the Court to:
a. allow the reclaiming motion;
b. recall the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary dated 25 August 2026;
c. remit the cause to the Lord Ordinary:
i. with a direction that he report the whole cause to the Inner House in terms of rule 34.1(1);
ii. failing which, with a direction for urgent disposal of the petition in the Outer House.
2. SUMMARY
2.1 For the reasons outlined in this Note, the reclaimer submits that:
a. The decision to sist the proceedings was incompetent, failing which, plainly wrong in all of the circumstances.
b. The decision not to report the whole cause to the Inner House, while also declining to dispose of the petition in the Outer House, was plainly wrong in all of the circumstances.
3. THE PETITION
3.1 The petition contends that the Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2025 (“the Order”) is unlawful because
(i) it was passed in circumstances which are procedurally unfair, et separatim
(ii) it gives rise to a disproportionate interference with the reclaimer’s Convention Rights under Art.10 ECHR; et separatim
(iii) it gives rise to a disproportionate interference with the reclaimer’s Convention Rights under Art.11 ECHR. The petition as adjusted raises, among other matters, Scotland-specific issues around (lack of) prior consultation with relevant Scottish actors, and the relevance of events occurring in Scotland and founded upon by the Home Secretary in support of the Order. The petition seeks orders of declarator and reduction directed against the Order.
4. CHRONOLOGY/PROCEDURAL HISTORY
4.1 In order for the court properly to understand the grounds of appeal, it is necessary to contextualise them within the procedural history of this petition to date, which is as follows:
4 Jul 2025 The Home Secretary makes the Order which, effective from 5 July 2025,
lists and proscribes across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland as “organisations concerned in terrorism”:
– “the organisation using the name Palestine Action that is based in the United Kingdom”
– Maniacs Murder Cult (MMC) (MKU) (MKY) and – Russian Imperial Movement (RIM) (RID), including Russian Imperial Legion (RIL).
3 Oct 2025 Within 3 months of its publication, the reclaimer lodges the petition in which he seeks to challenge the lawfulness of the Order.
6 Oct 2025 The Lord Ordinary, Lady Poole, grants first orders in the petition.
11 Dec 2025 The UK Government having lodged Answers and intimated that it opposed the grant of permission, the Lord Ordinary, Lord Young, advises that he wishes to be addressed by parties in relation to two issues raised in the Answers lodged by the respondent, namely: (i) whether the petitioner had a sufficient interest to give him standing to proceed with this petition, and(ii) whether it was appropriate or necessary for these proceedings to proceed given the existence of what the Lord Ordinary referred to as “identical proceedings in England” which had been brought by Huda Ammori.
12 Jan 2026 At an oral permission hearing, the Lord Ordinary, Lord Young, hears submissions from the UK Government (as respondent to the petition) to the effect that, given the existence of the English proceedings, the Lord Ordinary should suspend or stop the Scottish petition proceedings pending the determination of the English proceedings, whether by:
– refusing the petitioner permission to proceed; or alternatively;
– reserving the issue of permission and sisting the Scottish JR until a decision was available in the English proceedings; or
– granting permission but then immediately sisting the proceedings until the decision in the English proceedings was available and had been digested.
The Court, having heard submissions from counsel both for the petitioner and the respondent at the oral hearing, makes avizandum.
26 Jan 2026 The Lord Ordinary, Lord Young, grants permission for the petition noting that:
“As a matter of principle, a petitioner who has standing and whose petition sets out arguments of sufficient merit to satisfy section 27B(2)(b) of the Court of Session Act 1988 should not be refused permission because of the existence of parallel proceedings in another UK jurisdiction. The petitioner claims that his legal rights have been illegally circumscribed by the 2025 Order. He is entitled to look to the courts of his place of residence for a determination of that complaint. … There is no suggestion that these proceedings are being advanced for an improper or abusive purpose such as a campaign to swamp the respondent with a multitude of proceedings. The possibility that any substantive hearing in this petition will require the adoption of closed material procedure is not a factor of any weight to the issue of permission. The necessary arrangements will be put in place if the closed material procedure is required” [pleadings bundle p.36].
The Lord Ordinary accordingly fixes a substantive hearing for 17–18 March 2026 for the judicial review petition to be considered and determined.
11 Feb 2026 The Lord Ordinary, Lord Young, on the respondent’s motion discharges the timetable set out in the interlocutor dated 26 January 2026 and allocates 23 February 2026 to allow parties to address the court (anew) on the matter of timetabling.
26 Feb 2026 The Lord Ordinary, Lord Young, discharges the substantive hearing fixed for 17–18 March 2026. In lieu he thereof assigns a substantive hearing to take place before him on 24–25 June 2026. He orders the respondent to appoint a special advocate within 7 days of the petitioner intimating a suitable name to the Special Advocate Support Office (SASO). He orders the special advocate to intimate to the court by 20 March 2026 whether there is any opposition from him to an application for a declarator (under section 6 of the Justice and Security Act 2013) that a closed material application may be made to the court in these proceedings. He allocates an initial diet for his consideration of the section 6 application on 26 March 2026.
17 Mar 2026 The Lord Ordinary grants the UK Government’s motion
– made under reference to sections 8 and 11(4) of the Justice and Security Act 2013
– for the court’s permission for the UK Government to withhold sensitive material otherwise than to the Court and the Special Advocate, for the purpose of its section 6 application.
26 Mar 2026 The Lord Ordinary grants the UK Government its requested Section 6 declaration that the proceedings are proceedings in which a closed material application may be made to the court. He refuses (in hoc statu) a renewed motion from the UK Government for the proceedings to be sisted. He makes detailed procedural orders concerning the Closed Procedure in which the petitioner cannot participate in any way. In respect of open procedure, he assigns 10 June 2026 for a further continued procedural hearing. He allows parties to adjust their pleadings and to lodge final versions by 2 June 2026. He appoints notes of argument, statements of issues, productions and affidavits to be lodged no later than 9 June 2026. He appoints parties to lodge a list and duly marked-up bundle of authorities no later than 10 days prior to an OPEN substantive hearing fixed for 24-25 June 2026. A CLOSED substantive hearing is fixed for 26 June 2026.
27–28 May 2026 The Lord Ordinary, Lord Young, makes a number of orders including: refusing the petitioner’s motion “for suspension ad interim of the Order in so far as it extends to Scotland” and allowing the UK Government to withhold sensitive material otherwise than to the Court and the Special Advocate, for the purpose of its application under Section 8 of the 2013 Act. In the face of opposition from the petitioner, the Lord Ordinary grants the respondent’s motion to sist the cause for the earlier of 4 months, or “the Court of Appeal giving its judgment in Ammori v SSHD (Appeal No. CA-2026-000583) and the question of onward appeal to the UK Supreme Court being resolved”, noting:
“9. … Where the identical matter extending to Scotland has been argued and determined by a competent court in the UK, it is contrary to the principle of comity for this court to seek to relitigate that issue. …. ”
14. A sist of proceedings, whether on an agreed or opposed basis, is a regular feature of litigation. It is commonly applied where there is a test case which will determine common issues found in other cases. Those other cases will be sisted behind the test case. Sists may be imposed by the court against the wishes of one or both parties. Scottish cases are often sisted pending determination of parallel proceedings in England, and vice versa. Ultimately, the aim is to ensure that common issues are determined as expeditiously as possible, and with the avoidance of unnecessary legal costs. Such a course also minimises the risk of conflicting judicial decisions, so it enhances legal certainty. …
15. … We know that a decision of the Court of Appeal will have been issued prior to the substantive hearing [fixed for 24–25 June 2026]. While that judgment may, or may not, be the final word on this issue, the judgments handed down by the Court of Appeal will be highly significant. It is almost inevitable that the final decision on the legality of the 2025 Order will be made either by the English Court of Appeal, or by the Supreme Court on a further appeal in Ammori. The petitioner’s challenge to the 2025 Order in these proceedings is likely to be resolved, one way or the other, by the final decision in Ammori. …. The most expeditious route for the petitioner and the respondent, and the one which minimises costs for all parties including the public purse, is to sist the present proceedings” [pleadings bundle pp.50–52].
14 Jul 2026 The Lord Ordinary refuses a motion made by the reclaimer to recall the sist previously granted and, under and in terms of rule 34.1(1) of the Rules of the Court, to report the whole cause to the Inner House. The Lord Ordinary considers that the motion is premature, given the question of whether Ms Ammori is to seek – and, if so, obtain – from the UK Supreme Court its permission to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal is yet to be resolved.
30 Jul 2026 The UK Supreme Court grants its permission for the claimant in the English proceedings to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in her Judicial Review, Ammori v SSHD [2026] EWCA Civ 721. The UK Supreme Court fixes a two day diet (4 and 5 November 2026) for the hearing of this appeal.
20 Aug 2026 A By Order hearing is fixed by the Lord Ordinary to consider further procedure in the Scottish proceedings. Given that the conditions imposed in the sist pronounced on 28 May 2026 have been purified the petitioner moves the court to allow previously intimated adjustments to the petition and thereupon to report the whole cause to the Inner House; which failing for the court to fix an expedited timetable for a substantive hearing to be heard before the Lord Ordinary as soon as possible, so that the matter may then be taken to the Inner House within the month. The UK Government seek instead a further sist. The Lord Ordinary makes avizandum.
25 Aug 2026 The Lord Ordinary, Lord Young, refuse the petitioner’s motion to report the whole cause to the Inner House and instead grants the UK Government’s motion to sist the cause pending the outcome of the Supreme Court decision in Ammori v SSHD on the basis that “ultimately, this will secure the speediest final determination of the issues which the petitioner raises” [pleadings bundle p.59]. He makes no order in respect of the adjustments to the petition intimated by the petitioner.
5. THE PROCEEDINGS IN AMMORI
5.1 Ms Ammori is the claimant in an application for judicial review in England and Wales. She succeeded before a bench of three in the Divisional Court on the basis of a challenge to the Home Secretary’s application of her policy (which challenge does not feature in this petition), and on ECHR grounds: R (Ammori) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWHC 292 (Admin), [2026] HRLR 9.
5.2 The Home Secretary was successful on appeal before a bench of five in the Court of Appeal (Lady Carr CJ, Sir Geoffrey Vos MR, Edis LJ Vice President of the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal, Lewis LJ and Whipple LJ): Secretary of State for the Home Department v Ammori [2026] EWCA Civ 721.
5.3 The UKSC has granted Ms Ammori permission to appeal in relation to her case based in ECHR rights and fixed, on an expedited basis, a two-day hearing to determine her appeal on 4–5 November 2026.
6. GROUND OF APPEAL 1 – NOT COMPETENT TO SIST THESE JR PROCEEDINGS
6.1 The reclaimer’s first ground of appeal is that the Lord Ordinary erred in holding as a matter of law that it is competent to sist judicial review proceedings because:
(1) there is no Rule of Court applicable to judicial review procedure under reference to which a sist might properly be pronounced in the circumstances of this post-permission application for judicial review.
(2) given that the Rules of Court applicable to judicial review procedure make specific provisions as to when sist might be pronounced by the Lord Ordinary (none of which were applied in the circumstances in which the sists at issue were pronounced in these proceedings) the inherent power or procedural jurisdiction of the court could not competently be prayed in aid by the Lord Ordinary to supply a power which had been excluded by implication (on the basis of the brocard expressio unius est exclusio alterius) by the express terms of the Rules of Court.
(3) in any event pronouncing the sists as the Lord Ordinary did was wholly incompatible with the overall requirement for “speedy determination” which necessarily characterises and applied to procedural decisions in judicial review proceedings.
6.2 Despite having been fully addressed on these points by the petitioner at both the hearings on 14 July 2026 and on 20 August 2026, the Lord Ordinary does not directly address the issue of competency in the reasons provided alongside his interlocutor of 25 August 2026. He does not indicate which Rule of Court he founds upon in sisting the proceedings. But, since he did sist the proceedings in the face of submissions on competency, it can be taken that he considered a sist was a competent order available to him. This was an error of law.
6.3 The relevant Rules of Court applicable to judicial review proceedings are set out in Chapter 58. This Chapter contains the principles which the Lord Ordinary was obliged to apply within judicial review procedure, as a distinct form of recourse to the courts in public law matters. It forms a code governing the entirety of the procedure.
6.4 Chapter 58 makes it clear that the principle of “speedy determination” applies to the procedure to be adopted in judicial review petitions, both before (per RCS 58.4(4)) and after permission has been granted (RCS 58.11(2) and 58.12(2)). The aim of judicial review procedure is to “focus the issues so that the court can reach a decision upon them, in the interests of sound administration and in the public interest, as soon as possible”: Somerville v. Scottish Ministers [2007] UKHL 44, 2008 SC (HL) 45 per Lord Hope at para 65, approved and relied upon in Wightman v. Advocate General [2018] CSIH 18, 2018 SC 388 at para 10.
6.5 Chapter 58 is not created in ignorance of the possibility of a sist. A sist for legal aid is expressly provided for (RCS 58.4(5)(h); 58.4(7)) at the pre-permission stage. But even in that context, the Court is bound to have regard to the need for speedy determination and a default duration of two months is applicable.
6.6 In this respect, Chapter 58 – which forms a complete procedural code for judicial review proceedings characterised in particular by the principle of speedy determination – can be distinguished from other provisions of the Rules of Court (see, for example, RCS 22.3(6); RCS 25A.10; RCS 40.8; RCS 40.12; RCS 43.8; RCS 43.20; RCS 49.18A; RCS 49.69; RCS 49.79F; RCS 62.17; RCS 65.4; RCS 82.5).
6.7 Against the general principle of statutory construction that expressio unius est exclusio alterius, the correct legal conclusion given that the possibility of pronouncing a sist is not listed among the particular orders which may be pronounced by the court under Chapter 58, is that such an order is not competent.
6.8 Even if the effect of RCS 58 is not to provide a ‘closed list’ of the orders that may be made in a petition for judicial review, the (in)competency of a sist (other than for reason of legal aid) is put beyond peradventure by the mandatory provision of RCS 58.11(2), under which the Lord Ordinary must make orders which are appropriate for the “speedy determination of the petition”. An order to sist proceedings in which a petition would be determined is, plainly and necessarily, inconsistent with the speedy determination of the petition. A Lord Ordinary has no power to make an order which is inconsistent with his mandatory duty in terms of RCS 58.11(2).
6.9 The respondent claimed that, even in situation where no express provision for this was made in Chapter 58 of the Rules of Court, the Lord Ordinary had power under the court’s inherent jurisdiction to pronounce a sist. This submission led the Lord Ordinary into a further error of law. The Rules of Court are not “guidelines” to be applied or disapplied, under reference to the court’s inherent jurisdiction, as the Lord Ordinary may think expedient. They are rules of law in the form of Scottish Statutory Instrument which have been created by the court formally exercising by Act of Sederunt its own legislative powers – as confirmed by Section 103 of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 – to regulate the procedure and practice to be followed in proceedings in the Court, and any matter incidental or ancillary to such proceedings.
6.10 In the absence of express legislative exclusion or limitation, the courts have an inherent power to do what is necessary to discharge the whole of their responsibilities (Hall vAssociated Newspapers Ltd 1979 JC 1 per Lord Justice General Emslie at 9; see also Erskine, Institute, I,ii,8 [authorities bundle p.39]). The Rules of Court are mainly concerned with prescribing what may, and in some cases what must, be done at various stages in different types of process, and when particular steps must be taken (Tonner v Reiach and Hall 2008 SC 1 at [94] per Lord Abernethy delivering the opinion of the court [authorities bundle p.49]). It has, however, been observed that the fact that a particular power is not mentioned in the Rules of Court does not necessarily mean that it cannot be used in appropriate circumstances (Tonner at [99] [authorities bundle p.49]).
6.11 That said, the Rules of Court assume a relevance to the court’s inherent power where they expressly or implicitly remove or restrict it, or fetter its exercise (McKie v MacRae 2006 SLT 43 (OH) at [49] per Lord Glennie [authorities bundle p.44]). The inherent power ought to be exercised sparingly, otherwise the Rules of Court risk being viewed as simply procedural guidelines (Hepburn v Royal Alexandra Hospital 2011 SC 20 at [54] per Lord Carloway (obiter) [authorities bundle p.79]). Existing rules should not be departed from without express permission (Hepburn at [58] per Lord Carloway (obiter) [authorities bundle pp.80-81]).
6.12 The present proceedings concern a petition for judicial review which is governed by chapter 58 of the Rules of Court. Owing to the need for “speedy determination” of the petition, the court’s inherent power to grant a sist of process has, accordingly, been implicitly removed or at least restricted (i.e. to a sist for legal aid at the pre-permission stage: RCS 58.4(5)(h); 58.4(7)). Whilst the court may grant relief for failure to comply with the Rules of Court (RCS 2.1), such dispensing power is irrelevant to the present issue which does not concern the failure of a party to comply with the Rules. Therefore, a sist of process (other than as mentioned in relation to an application for legal aid) is incompetent.
6.13 For all these reasons, the Lord Ordinary erred in law by sisting the proceedings, because it was not competent for him to do so. His interlocutor to that effect should be recalled.
7. GROUND 2: ESTO IT WAS COMPETENT TO SIST THESE JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS
(WHICH IS DENIED) THE LORD ORDINARY WAS PLAINLY WRONG TO SIST.
7.1 Putting aside questions of competency, whether it is appropriate to sist proceedings is a discretionary decision upon which the Inner House will only interfere if it can be shown the Lord Ordinary was plainly wrong: Depuy International Ltd v Gilchrist [2023 CSIH 47], 2024 SC 229, para. 37. Esto it was competent for the Lord Ordinary to sist the proceedings, to do so in all of the circumstances of the present petition was plainly wrong.
7.2 Judicial Review is a procedure designed to provide a speedy and effective remedy to challenge the decisions of public bodies. In such cases there is a public interest in challenges being made promptly and resolved quickly: Scottish Civil Courts Review, Chapter 12.38; affirmed in O’Neill and Lauchlan v The Scottish Ministers [2021] CSIH 66, 2022 SC 125, para. 18. That is reflected in the relevant Rules of Court, outlined above.
7.3 There are only two reports of sists granted in judicial reviews proceedings, both of which were by agreement of the parties: Craig v Parole Board [2013] CSOH 110, 2013 SLT 953 (in light of a formal undertaking by the respondent and agreement of both sides) and Greenpeace Ltd v Advocate General for Scotland [2025] CSOH 10, 2025 SLT 303 (sist pronounced prior to any permission determination, by agreement). These differ very materially from the circumstances before the Lord Ordinary on 20 August 2026: postpermission judicial review proceedings, previously assigned to a substantive hearing, in which a sist had previously been obtained and was sought to be renewed, all in the face of the strong opposition of the reclaimer, whom the Court had determined had standing and permission to proceed.
7.4 The Court has been seised of this petition for nigh on 11 months without any substantive consideration of its merit. The UK government has been largely successful to date in a litigation strategy which appears to be one of seeking to delay, or stop, any independent consideration of this challenge by the court in Scotland. These delays and procedural manoeuvres on the part of the UK Government also have substantially increased the financial costs to the petitioner of this on-going court challenge, and that too may not be unintentional.
7.5 The Lord Ordinary correctly acknowledged in granting permission on 26 January 2026 that:
“as a matter of principle, a petitioner who has standing and whose petition sets out arguments of sufficient merit to satisfy s27B(2)(b) of the 1988 Act should not be refused permission because of the existence of parallel proceedings in another UK jurisdiction” [pleadings bundle p.36].
7.6 That being the case, it was irrational for the Lord Ordinary to (later) conclude, as a result of the same parallel proceedings, that, at the point at which he was bound by the “speedy determination” obligation, it was appropriate to sist the proceedings. That, in and of itself, is sufficient to conclude that the Lord Ordinary was plainly wrong in granting the sist, and to recall the interlocutor to that effect.
7.7 There are other considerations too which, taken together, demonstrate that the decision to sist was plainly wrong.
7.8 For example, earlier in these proceedings the Lord Ordinary asserted that “where the identical matter extending to Scotland has been argued and determined by a competent court in the UK, it is contrary to the principle of comity for this court to seek to re-litigate that issue” [pleadings bundle p.50]. It is not clear – because no adequate reasons were given in justification for this renewed sist pronounced on 25 August 2026 – whether or not the Lord Ordinary was mistakenly applying this principle to the circumstances of the present case. But courts of one jurisdiction within the United Kingdom are not under any obligation to follow decisions of courts of another jurisdiction within the United Kingdom.
If courts in Scotland conclude differently from courts in England and Wales, “they should explain clearly why they consider the decision to be incorrect, give what they consider to be the correct decision, and grant leave to appeal to this court so that the difference of views can be resolved without undue delay”: R (Jwanczuk) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2025] UKSC 42, [2026] AC 699, para. 101 [authorities bundle p.226]. But that constructive and constitutionally appropriate approach is entirely frustrated if the courts of one jurisdiction sit on the sidelines, assume the courts of the other jurisdiction will get it right, and deprive the UKSC of the opportunity to be fully informed of the reasoned analysis of each jurisdiction, and the opportunity to authoritatively determine matters while sitting as a competent court of both jurisdictions.
7.9 Secondly, the Home Secretary, and later, the Court of Appeal in Ammori founded heavily on events, and court proceedings, in Scotland, which matters are focussed in averments contained in the petition [paragraph 8, pleadings bundle p.7–8]. The Court of Session is in a far better position to understand and situate the relevant actors and proceedings than any other court. The UKSC would be well-served by having the Court of Session’s analysis of those matters. It will not do so if they are left over to be determined by the Lord Ordinary
until after the UKSC has disposed of Ammori.
7.10 Thirdly, in Ammori, the UKSC will sit as a court of England and Wales, with no decision binding on the Inner House: Constitutional Reform Act 2005, section 41 [authorities bundle p.3]; Willers v Joyce and another (No 2) [2016] UKSC 44, [2018] AC 842, para 22. And while the proceedings in Ammori contain some overlap with the petition in relation to ECHR issues, the reclaimer founds upon additional considerations in relation to the proportionality assessment for ECHR purposes, which are not relied upon by Ms Ammori. The proceedings in Ammori do not encompass the issue of failure to consult with relevant Scottish state actors. If the petition proceedings are not reawakened until after the UKSC disposes of Ammori, those issues will fall to be determined alone in Scotland, with vanishingly little prospect of the reclaimer later securing the authoritative determination of the UKSC, on a UK-wide basis, on those matters. That gives rise to a risk of legal uncertainty on a matter which is plainly of general public importance.
7.11 What hearing appeals from Scotland and from England together means is that the UKSC gets the benefit of the views of experienced appellate judges from both sides of the border: see for example: R (Cart) v. Upper Tribunal [2011] UKSC 28/Eba v. Advocate General for Scotland [2011] UKSC 29; and Cherry v. Advocate General for Scotland/Miller v. Prime Minister [2019] UKSC 41. Indeed, standing that a powerfully constituted bench of three in the Divisional Court (including the President of the King’s Bench Division) reached one conclusion on the lawfulness of proscription; and a (very unusual) bench of five in the Court of Appeal reached a different conclusion, the UKSC would perhaps be assisted to an even greater extent than normal by also having the reasoned determination from Scotland available to it, even putting aside Scottish specific aspects and specialities.
7.12 The express purpose of the Lord Ordinary’s decision to sist the proceedings was to ensure that the petition was not determined until after the UKSC has disposed of Ammori. Such an approach is entirely inconsistent with the proper role of a court exercising its public law supervisory jurisdiction. It is contrary to the principle of legal certainty. It deprives the UKSC of any possibility of considering the reasoned and, in material respects, uniquely specialist, view of the Inner House. It was incumbent on the Lord Ordinary to discharge his function of speedy determination in a way which facilitated the possibility of the petition being disposed of with sufficient expedition as to allow, if this Court, or the UKSC so permitted, the UKSC to consider this petition. No reasonable Lord Ordinary, having regard to the above matters, could have reached the conclusion that it was appropriate to sist the petition in the circumstances. The Lord Ordinary’s decision to do so was plainly wrong. His interlocutor to that effect should be recalled.
8. GROUND 3 – IMPROPER EXERCISE OF DISCRETION IN REFUSING, IN ALL THE
CIRCUMSTANCES, TO REPORT THIS MATTER TO THE INNER HOUSE
8.1 The reclaimer accepts that, if he does not succeed on ground 1 or 2, he cannot succeed on ground 3 alone.
8.2 But as set out above, it was incumbent on the Lord Ordinary to discharge his function of speedy determination in a way which facilitated the possibility of the petition being disposed of with sufficient expedition as to allow, if this Court, or the UKSC so permitted, the UKSC to consider this petition. Reporting the whole cause was one route to preserving that possibility.
8.3 The Lord Ordinary appears to have had no principled or practical difficulty with a report (para. 8, 25 August Reasons) [pleadings bundle p.58–59]. He does not appear to have considered the unique characteristics of the present petition, including that many of the relevant issues have already been ventilated and decided upon by a bench of three, and subsequently a bench of five (albeit reaching different conclusions), in Ammori, a factor capable of mitigating any disadvantage the Inner House would be placed in by determining the petition without a reasoned Opinion on the merits of the petition from the Outer House.
8.4 The UK Government originally argued before the Lord Ordinary at the 14 July 2026 hearing that the provision of the Rules of Court 34.1 allowing for the Lord Ordinary, prior to any determination of matters in the Outer House, to report the whole cause to the Inner House had fallen into desuetude and was consequently no longer valid law. When asked by the Lord Ordinary at the hearing on 20 August whether that position was being maintained, counsel for the respondent demurred and said that was no longer the UK Government position. Accordingly, no party argued that a report of whole cause was incompetent. Notwithstanding all of this, the Lord Ordinary considered that he ought not, in effect, to assume a ‘gatekeeping’ role in respect of the Inner House
8.5 This was a misunderstanding by the Lord Ordinary of his own function. RCS 34.1 affords the function of deciding whether or not to report to “the Lord Ordinary”. Exercising a discretion to report the whole cause would have been the discharge of the Lord Ordinary’s function as entrusted to him by Act of Sederunt, rather than any usurpation of the Inner House’s function.
8.6 Separately, at para. 8 of the 25 August Reasons, the Lord Ordinary correctly records that it was not the “primary position of either party that the present proceedings should proceed at this stage to a substantive hearing before me” [pleadings bundle p.58].
8.7 However, the Lord Ordinary does not go onto address (at all) the reclaimer’s alternative position before him which was that, if he was not prepared to report the whole cause to the Inner House, he should, instead, proceed to fix an urgent timetable for disposal in the Outer House, which would preserve the possibility of a reclaiming motion being dealt with, and an application for permission to appeal to the UKSC, in light of the dates fixed in Ammori. In this regard, Senior Counsel for the reclaimer referred to the timetable in Cherry, in which Lord Doherty disposed of a petition for judicial review on 4 September 2019 ([2019] CSOH 70, 2020 SC 13), the Inner House disposed of a reclaiming motion on 11 September 2019 ([2019] CSIH 49, 2020 SC 37), and the UKSC disposed of an appeal (alongside a judicial review brought in England and Wales in which the Divisional Court had reached a contrary view to that of the Inner House) on 24 September 2019 ([2019] UKSC 41, 2020 SC (UKSC) 1, [2020] AC 373).
8.8 The sole factors weighing against that course appear to be those of legal expense and court resources (para. 9 of 25 August Reasons) [pleadings bundle p.59]. To the extent the Lord Ordinary concluded that not taking that course would be speedier (as might be taken from para. 9), that is an untenable conclusion. Put simply: if the UKSC itself might be capable of resolving all of the issues arising in the petition, that is plainly more expeditious than having a substantive hearing of the petition after the UKSC’s decision in Ammori is handed down. Indeed, the Lord Ordinary himself recognised that the UKSC process would only allow “several of the critical issues” to be resolved [pleadings bundle p.59]. That was necessarily a recognition that outstanding matters would need to be determined in the petition process thereafter.
8.9 In any event, and even putting these logical errors aside, for the reasons set out above, the Lord Ordinary was not entitled to decline to report to the Inner House, while also declining to dispose of the petition himself. He was plainly wrong to do so. His interlocutor to that effect should be recalled.
9. DISPOSAL
9.1 For all these reasons, the reclaimer submits that the Lord Ordinary erred in law in sisting the proceedings, because to do so was incompetent.
9.2 Esto a sist was competent, the Lord Ordinary was, in any event, plainly wrong to grant a sist in the circumstances.
9.3 He was also plainly wrong to decline to report the whole cause to the Inner House, while also declining to urgently dispose of the petition himself. The reclaimer accordingly moves the Inner House to recall the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary dated 25 August 2026.
9.4 That would leave the matter at large before the Inner House. Having regard to:
(i) the duty of speedy determination,
(ii) the context of the very proximate listing of Ammori before the UKSC, and
(iii) the necessity, in all of the circumstances, to preserve the possibility of the petition being disposed of with sufficient expedition as to allow, if this Court, or the UKSC so permitted, the UKSC to consider this petition, the reclaimer’s principal motion is to invite the Court to recall the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary dated 25 August 2026 and remit the cause to the Lord Ordinary with a direction that he report the whole cause to the Inner House in terms of rule 34.1(1).
9.5 If the Inner House is not minded to make a formal “direction” to that effect, it is nonetheless invited to express its expectation that such a report would be the appropriate procedure (for an equivalent example of the Inner House expressing a view on what should be the appropriate procedural step pursuant to a decision of the Inner House in a reclaiming motion, see Deputy International Ltd v Gilchrist [2023 CSIH 47], 2024 SC 229, para. 47).
9.6 Alternatively, if the Court considers the petition must be determined first by the Lord Ordinary, the reclaimer moves the Court to remit the cause to the Lord Ordinary with appropriate case management directions for urgent disposal in the Outer House.
In 9 days’ time it will be a year since I submitted the application for judicial review. It is already 9 months since permission for the judicial review was granted. Since then we have been subject to the most pernicious denial of justice by lawfare – continued and pernicious procedural delay by the UK government, abetted by the court, to prevent the case being heard and deliberately to exhaust our funds and resources, while the government can spend unlimited money on it.
Now they have had our remaining legal funds seized.
Other donation methods are currently still available even though the crowdjustice route has been closed.. Obviously we now need funds more than ever to carry on.
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
Craig, your persistence and determination are an inspiration; may the preposterous sist be ended and the judicial review proceed. I wish I could attend on Friday; I’ll have to make do with the livestream.
When it’s confirmed that your appeal has been rejected can you please come back and explain to us why you still play their game?
I’ll tell you. Because morally, it’s the right thing to do. That should be obvious.
Furthermore, if Craig wins it’ll be an international success for justice, and if not, it will expose the complicity of the Scottish judiciary and its subservience to Westminster, advancing the case for Scottish independence.
Clark Wonderful response. Thanks
Clark.
The so called Scottish judiciary has already been exposed – every judge, and lawyer in Scotland has to swear an oath of allegiance to a foreign monarch from a foreign country – and every judge and sheriff in Scotland is recommended by the (JABS) Judiciary Appointments Board Scotland, from there its passed on to the FM – who then gives the judge Sheriff the nod, it then goes to the foreign parliament in England (Westminster) – where English ministers mull over the appointments – and if they are satisfied – the foreign English monarch, gives the judge/sheriff the nod of approval.
Could you picture Spain’s monarch appointing – say Germany’s judges and sheriffs.
RoS, indeed, and I knew of the oath of allegiance etc. from your own contributions. Just after the edit timeout on my comment had expired, I realised that “will further expose the complicity…” would have been a better wording.
The Judiciary in Scotland – fought tool and nail against the setting up of a registry of private interests, it was agreed over 12 years ago that the judges would register their private interests – just incase conflicts of interests arose – we are still waiting for the that registry to be compiled.
https://petercherbi.blogspot.com/2025/10/judicial-register-eleven-years-ago.html
And here’s why the register is important.
https://petercherbi.blogspot.com/2018/01/wolffe-court-lord-advocate-james-wolffe.html
Yes. It is something that Václav Havel wrote about. One maintains hope and engages with political realities not in the expectation of success but because it is the right thing to do. Most people do have a sense of what’s right and what’s wrong (that’s why there is an attempt to get rid of juries). We can bond together on what is right and maybe overturn the tables of the corrupt. Craig is an inspiration, not because he is a Saint but because he is a frail human like most of us, yet he battles on for what is right. An admirable man.
Hear hear! Very eloquently put.
Yip..Well Said Clark..It’s Moral and Very Brave Unlike Some
alanm: When you’ve invested so much time and energy in something (and feel so strongly about it), it’s very difficult to throw in the towel and give up, even though it has become increasingly obvious to you that the PTB are stringing you along. But if Craig fails in the end to achieve what he set out to achieve, it won’t have been completely in vain because he will, indirectly, have shown what a bunch of totally corrupt crooks these people are (to a large number of people who didn’t already know it).
And in the event that that happens, it would be really good if Craig could put the whole episode in an easy-to-read-and-follow article that his followers can use (with an intro about him and his background) for a leaflet to put through peoples’ doors. I for one would definitely print off a thousand or two, depending on it’s length…. between 4 to 6 sides of A4 I would imagine.
Mahmoud Abbas, the longtime president of the Palestinian Authority is delivering his speech via a pre-recorded video for the second year in a row, after the Trump administration refused to grant him a visa. It’s a violation of the whole spirit and purpose of the UN, as a forum to air and resolve international grievances.
This illustrates how overtly discriminatory US policy is. They denounce Hamas, for putting up violent resistance to occupation, but also punish Hamas’s main opponents; the moderate, cooperative leadership in the West Bank. A leadership which agreed to disarm its own population, despite near constant settler attacks. At this point it’d be better to describe the US as simply anti-Palestinian.
Goose.
Abbas is a Zionist puppet – he’s as big a traitor to the utterly oppressed Palestinian people – as Sturgeon and Swinney are to Scots.
Meanwhile.
“The UK government’s new sanctions on Israel have resulted in zero arms export licences being revoked or suspended, it can be revealed.”
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-sanctions-on-israel-result-in-no-extra-arms-export-suspensions/
No doubt loaded aboard the British military planes that Burnham is still sending from Akrotiri to Nevatim Air Base in southern Israel, central node through which the Gaza Genocide has been supplied and enacted.
https://x.com/kennardmatt/status/2102873964959736251
It suits the entire uniparty and their media to connive in the fiction that Burnham and Miliband have ended British participation in the Genocide. They need to kill the challenge from the left by the anti-genocide Greens and ensure the neoliberal Labour Right remain the leftmost wing of mainstream British politics.
RoS
I don’t disagree with that characterisation of him and his wholly ineffective PA.
But that makes the hostile U.S. treatment towards him even more bizarre.
Not bizarre at all. USrael hates Palestinians, full stop. The PA may be a corrupt zionist puppet but that doesn’t mean they don’t hate them or have no respect for them. The only bizarre thing is that some Palestinians support the PA, even without bribes. Hope and despair can really mess you up.
Stevie – indeed Abbas is to the Palestinian people – what Aoun is to the Lebanese people a treacherous b&stard.
The US doesn’t care enough about Palestinians to hate them, or to see any value in them at all.
Rather, it loves its proxy “Jewish” colony supporting its projection of power into the vicinity of the oil fields, a major source of the liquid fossil fuels essential to the military arm of its project of world domination.
What do you think Goose, would Swinney or Sturgeon give orders to shoot Scots who rise up and defend their nation from foreign tyranny as Abbas has done in the past? For me both would give the order in blind of an eye.
https://english.palinfo.com/o_post/QB-wants-Abbas-be-prosecuted-over-shoot-to-kill-orders/
Churchill aparently did, so no reason to think ANY of our ‘leaders’ wouldn’t give orders to shoot protesters.
“But that makes the hostile U.S. treatment towards him even more bizarre.”
Not bizarre, it’s all part of the theatre.
That action by the US government is unlawful. It has no right to control who addresses the UN in person in NYC.
I’m old enough to remember when the US government under Ronald Reagan tried the same with Yasser Arafat in 1988 and the entire UN General Assembly decamped to Geneva to hear him.
Abbas is still a quisling though. Two million Palestinians have had their homes destroyed by the Zionists, and it doesn’t occur to the creep to stop “security cooperation” with the terrorist settler state, let alone to recognise the existence of a state of war. Hamas have got more honour in their little fingernails than he has got in his entire body.
Keep up Brian. The law is whatever Trump says, and applies anywhere on the planet. The USA has a constitution but Trump has used that to wipe his fat orange arse. The UN has compromised and emasculated itself.
Don’t know if you are already aware of this or maybe even discussed this here and I missed it, but here is some interesting stuff about UK involvement in Gaza:
https://ichrgalway.org/2025/04/16/raf-surveillance-flights-over-gaza-make-the-uk-complicit-in-torture/
https://aoav.org.uk/2026/uk-gaza-spy-flights-evidence-civilian-attacks/
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/15/uk-bases-in-cyprus-protests
and so on.
All of that is still going on now. The media suppressed it under Sunak and Starmer and continues to under Burnham.
What is being reported is that Burnham and Miliband have now got ‘tough with Israel’. Not in any way in regard to the on-going genocide in Gaza. They are still facilitating that as much as ever.
No, it is ostensibly in their ‘profound determination’ to achieve a chimerical 2-state solution. Something everyone knows is impossible and which the Israeli Knesset has already voted, overwhelmingly, to make impossible.
So why are Burnham and Miliband not being scorned and asked why they’re still abetting genocide in Gaza?
Because it’s essential to the British uniparty, both its conservative and liberal wings, (and to their Israeli paymasters) that Labour neoliberal zionists remain the leftmost extreme of British electoral politics.
Last night the leader of the Green party Zack Polanski told a Jewish audience in Starmer’s constituency that zionism is a racist ideology and that he is an anti-zionist. It is a major priority of the British ruling-class that he be shut out.
Duping the public with claims Labour has changed under Burnham is their primary means of doing so.
Milliband (the zionist jew) and Burnham (the zionist) are attempting to muddy the waters by spreading the lies about a Russian and Iranian threat. The reality is they are explicitly funding genocide in the middle east and corruption in Ukraine, whilst putting special forces into Iran.
As said, many times, the only threat to the UK is from it’s government.
Yep, I’ve seen no sign whatsoever that this pair intend to rock the boat anymore than Sir Keir did. As long as they continue along these same lines, doing whatever the ruling class wants at home and abroad, they will keep on being framed as a couple of nice guys, high principled and sincere. Same way Starmer was held up by the opinion formers as being fundamentally decent, despite everything, right through to the bitter end.
“Yep, I’ve seen no sign whatsoever that this pair intend to rock the boat anymore than Sir Keir did.”
Who do you think got them where they are today? The People’s Andy was parachuted into power, a PM elected, as they all are, by 0.02% of the electorate. If he was ever going to do anything to rock the boat, none of that would have happened.
Of course. The very same elements that elevated and bankrolled Sir Keir. No different ones I am aware of.
“In his first speech to the UN General Assembly in New York on September 22, Prime Minister Andy Burnham said that a new, National Centre for Information Defence, will be set up on his order.”
“Britain Is Building an Information Defense Center. Orwell Had Another Name for It
A campaign against deepfakes is one thing. A campaign against inconvenient reality is another.”
https://reclaimthenet.org/britain-is-building-an-information-defense-center-orwell-had-another-name-for-it
It is unpleasant to realize how crazy our establishment outside our bubbles such as this are – but it is soberlingly necessary I guess to remain grounded and alert.
Especially concerning the level of incompetence – whether this lack of insight and knowledge is only being sold to us or they truly believe their dangerous nonsense I don´t know. But it doesn´t make any difference, does it.
Lord Young”s chummy assurances that no suggestion of a campaign of improper and abusive proceedings would swamp the respondent was a flat out statement of intent. It immediately churned out reams of legalese gobbledygook fit to keep a papermill working overtime, along with your heroic legal team, I’m glad their help is at hand.
Unfortunately, any semblance of pride in the independence of Scots Law and the protection of it’s unique heritage is being suppressed by it’s own hierarchy but what else can be expected after 300 years of grovelling trough feeding and a Lord Advocate that’s a political appointee.
I know that their days are numbered but only in an independent Scotland that’s galvanized into the project of renewal and reform, and you Craig will have had a lot to do with that.
Cancelling the crowdfunder is so blatant and a chilling example of Lawfare, my modest subscription transfers to you via Mr.Theil’s organization, what could possibly go wrong!
Thanks for all you do Mr. pro bono Ambassador for Scotland, hope your forthcoming travels go well. Bonne Chance!
“Orwell Had Another Name for It”
“1984” really is being treated like a manual. We have thoughtcrime, Thought Police, IngSoc, doublethink and now, The Ministry of Truth. No doubt if a law was passed to make smartphones like telescreens, there would be a bit of a fuss at first, but it would soon die down and become the new normal.
Just checked the google/AI description of an 1984 Telescreen. Sorry to report Bayard but most people’s smartphones are acting precisely as a telescreen. It’s not mandatory but the majority are voluntarily plugged into the matrix. Human batteries giving life to the blob !
I was thinking that the legislation would mandate that smartphones must at all times be connected to the internet and their screens left uncovered.It would be no longer possible to switch them off, only to put them on standby. Carrying a smartphone capable of being switched of and/or disconnected from the internet would be punished by a custodial sentence, as would not carrying a smartphone at all times on the outside of your clothing in a special transparent holder. Not displaying your smartphone would also bring a custodial sentence.A new government department, The Ministry of Communications (MiniComm) would take over all the mobile internet and phone providers, although the names would be kept to provide an illusion of competition. It would, also of course, take over Ofcom, which would continue to “experience a very high level of calls” 24/7 should anyone be so foolish as to try to speak to anyone there. All these things would be introduce gradually, so as to prevent the frog from jumping out of the saucepan.
There has been a little bit of talk, including by e.g. Georgios Terzis, about demanding a right to access certain things – public services, food (if you can pay for it), employment, banking – without being required to have a smartphone. Terms such as “the right to an analogue life” have been used. But it feels very much like pissing into the wind. They prattle on in academic journals about law and ethics.
In China it’s been difficult to buy things in shops without a smartphone for years.
(Re. China – I’m predicting robot guards in the Xinjiang camps by the end of next year. Yesterday some stuff happened that made me think they’re already present on Wikipedia.)
The word “smartphone” is itself a massive piece of Orwellian terminology.
Smartphones are microwave tracking devices. The big question is always who does what to whom.
Richard Stallman, whom nobody talks about nowadays (which is perhaps poetic justice, because his idea that mass computerisation could facilitate greater freedom was totally wrong), was right to refuse to refer to “Facebook users”, preferring the term “Facebook useds”.
Yasha Levine is a good writer on things like the real function of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Tor.
Smartphones are in effect small televisions too. Also they are computers.
Smartphone addicts really hate it when you call their devices “televisions” or “computers”. They are very passive and obedient people. Any kind of independent critical thought makes them feel uneasy.
I came across a computer-head guy who kinda lived in codeland and was interested in why monitor screens for most computers are designed to be used in landscape rather than portrait format. I pointed out that actually for smaller handheld computers portrait format is the standard. It took a while for realisation to sink in. He was like “Oh yeah – I hadn’t thought of that.”
Another point: smartphones are extremely unlikely to be untracked when switched off.
If you do want to carry even a switched-off one from A to B and it’s important not to be tracked, use Faraday cloth shielding, preferably in a double layer.
It was pathetic a few years back when Black Bloc anarcho types were doing things like switching SIM cards in their phones on protest demonstrations. Seriously FFS. That ain’t goint to fool The Man, sorry. (Clue: you don’t even need a SIM card at all for a smartphone to connect to the mobile network.)
And don’t get me going on the total fake security of VPNs or Proton!
“Re. China – I’m predicting robot guards in the Xinjiang camps by the end of next year.”
I am constantly surprised that you think that the same people who continually lie to you about Scotland are nevertheless telling you the truth when it comes to anything about China. Would you buy a used car from Boris Johnson? After all, he’s never been caught telling lies about cars before.
“Smartphone addicts really hate it when you call their devices “televisions” or “computers”.”
A more accurate name for them is “terminals”.
“If you do want to carry even a switched-off one from A to B and it’s important not to be tracked, use Faraday cloth shielding, preferably in a double layer.”
Or a biscuit tin.
“I came across a computer-head guy who kinda lived in codeland and was interested in why monitor screens for most computers are designed to be used in landscape rather than portrait format.”
I have always thought that was because the first monitors were repurposed television screens, whereas handheld computers’ ancestors were mobile telephones and it is easier to hold something in your hand if it is taller than it is wide.
‘ It is unpleasant to realize how crazy our establishment outside our bubbles such as this are …..’. Indeed, and the ‘ crazy establishment ‘ just keeps getting crazier.
‘ whether this lack of insight and knowledge is only being sold to us or they truly believe their dangerous nonsense I don´t know. ‘ That’s really difficult to determine. You think ‘ are these people really THAT deranged, or is this all some kind of psychodrama? ‘. Or both.
We’ve yet to see how far this WAR! WAR! WAR! mania will go, how far * they’ll * take it; whether it’s some kind of, eh…..Russian Roulette/who’ll blink first? brinkmanship: or if they really are that demented – as to precipitate WW3. When you look at how they ( the West Political Class ) behave, what they say, the gob-smacking idiocy and obviously delusional thinking/projecting, you get the very definite sense that they are all reading from a script being written ‘ offstage ‘ but are trying desperately to convince their publics they are in full control: trying to convince THEMSELVES that they are the Lead Actors, when in reality they are Bit Players. The Studio Heads are elsewhere.
You look at what’s going on, not so much around us, as above us, below us, behind us, ie where we can’t really see it: the sheer insane wrongness of it all, the seeming unstoppable intent to cause unimaginable hardship & pain to millions of people for no even remotely justifiable – or believable reasons, and * suddenly * many of the * conspiracy theories * we may have at some point scorned become not just ‘ not impossible ‘, but entirely plausible.
IF there is some kind of ‘ Intelligent Design ‘ informing/manipulating current geopolitical events, we can be sure the ‘ Designers ‘ are not of divine provenance. Closer to ‘ Demonic ‘, I’d say
“‘ whether this lack of insight and knowledge is only being sold to us or they truly believe their dangerous nonsense I don´t know. ‘ That’s really difficult to determine.”
I think it’s Orwell’s “doublethink”. When these people are in “work” mode, they believe all the crap, as believing all the crap is part of their job description. When they are not in “work” mode, they don’t even think about it. It’s not just the propagandists, thousands of people don’t think about work when they are not at work. Nothing wrong with that, why should they? They are not paid to think about work in their own time.
Good points, B: though I’m not sure such a mundane explanation is applicable to those ( at least nominally, apparently ) responsible for such epochal decisions as taking countries to war.
Yes, it’s true most people can switch easily from work mode to leisure mode – rightly, and of necessity. Can the same be said for the aforementioned life or death decision makers: if the latter are mere front men/women – paperboys/girls – for the real decision makers?
I’m sure SOME can, eg worthless narcissists like Coco The Fat Bastard Clown Johnson and louche snob Rees-Mogg – ‘ some of YOU may die; pass the claret and flog the servant for dumb insolence, dear ‘. And even Boneless Burnham seems more focused on reinforcing his ‘ Ordinary Northern guy ‘ schtick than addressing the series of looming crises the UK is facing – being pushed into
‘ even if the latter….’
I think the political war mania is performative. It’s quite easy to shout insults at people you’ll never expect to meet- as Burnham found out when his earlier Trump comments surfaced before his recent visit to United Nations. Threatening Putin with WW3 is not such an easy game sat inside the Kremlin. Ask Ben Wallace, who said next to nothing in that situation before his pluck returned once back in the UK.
The approval ratings of Macron, Merz and soon Burnham are so low they really have little to lose by making bellicose statements. A few ‘incidents’ between NATO and Russian forces might well give their ratings a bit of a boost. And if things spiral out of control they will merely be replaced before being offered Plantair type jobs.
Their problem thus far is that the European public aren’t buying it. Even the usual warmongering suspects are shouting online about defending their borders instead of Ukraine; in the UK the far right is adamant it will not fight behind any banner other than the Union Jack or the George Cross. The tabloid dream of a NEETS army led by Tommy Robinson marching into Europe is not as yet taking off.
Perceptive * take * on the current situation, David. I hope you’re right! And you may well be. It’s the possibility of things escalating uncontrollably via sheer bungling incompetence and stupid threats being misinterpreted that is dangerous.
And how is Russia supposed to interpret the monomaniac bellicosity of the likes of NATO Potato-in-Chief – Rutte, * hysterical * ( in both senses ) dumb blondes – Von der Lithium, Gaga Truss-Kallas and the rest of the EU Psychiatrische Klinik?
I think Russia is forced to pay some heed to statements from the USA but largely sees the European pantomime for what it is. Banshee wailing from Baltic bimbos and macho posturing from confirmed bachelors Rutte and Streeting is unlikely to unsettle the likes of Lavrov. Russia tends to favour long in the tooth foreign ministers like Lavrov and before him Gromyko who are well aware of their counterparts. There’s no Brussels or Plantair option easily available if you screw up in Russia, as Van der Leyen did in Germany and Starmer, presumably bound for NATO, did in the UK.
Stalin once asked of the Pope: ‘How many battalions does he have?’ The combined populations of the Baltics and Finland are actually less than our own Celtic fringe. As previously noted, European NATO is now spending money it does not have, on weapons that are yet to be built. for an army that does not exist. Other than admitting gross incompetence and falling on their (imaginary) sword they have no way out of this.
‘ Banshee wailing from Baltic bimbos and macho posturing from confirmed bachelors Rutte and Streeting ….’. Perfect description of the appallingly low calibre of European * Leadership * manque.
David Warriston
September 25, 2026 at 23:06
“Baltic bimbos” and “Celtic fringe”?
“Confirmed bachelors”?
That’ll show them. eh?
Pesky foreigners, women and queers.
And you probably think of yourself as an internationalist….
““Baltic bimbos” and “Celtic fringe”?”
Do you rate Kaja Kallas highly as an intelligent stateswoman? I am afraid your problems with English have let you down again here: “fringe” is not used in the sense of “way out and wacky”, but in the sense of “along the edge” as the Celtic nations are along the northern and western borders of England.
I used the term ‘Celtic fringe’ since there was a recent meeting when that group affirmed their right to independence from the UK. I wish them well, but note that they did not indulge in military type language to press their case as do the Baltic states amongst others. *
Sugar coating the unpalatable is as old as politics itself and using female politicians and media presenters is a modern form of this. Kallas, who shares her family’s historic dream of dismantling the Russian state, is a good example. In my youth this sugarcoating function was undertaken by blokes with plummy accents, but fashions change.
A more recent trend has been to use confirmed bachelors for this same function. So effete men like Streeting and Rutte- neither of whom look like they have ever been in a fist fight in their life- are making the case for sending our children and grandchildren to war.
* Following the Celtic fringe declaration there has now emerged a flashpoint in Drumcree following a late night sitting by an Appeal Court. We are often told about a backlog in the judicial system but certain things can’t wait.
Why the decision on Drumcree by the Parades Commission and then some judges?
Michelle O’Neill has called on the British government to intervene (although not yet on the Irish government). Anyone in their right mind supports a continued ban, and can understand that continuing the ban doesn’t trigger gang war with lots of deaths whereas lifting it might.
Loyalist thugs will feel emboldened by their participation in anti-immigrant violence, so we can file this under funded hard-right “events” I think.
“* hysterical * ( in both senses ) dumb blondes – Von der Lithium, Gaga Truss-Kallas ”
When future historians disinter the corpse of the EU, they will find “Kallas” engraved on its heart.
DW: Re ” Kallas, who shares her family’s historic dream of dismantling the Russian state, is a good example…”
Maybe her Grandpa, who was in Waffen SS, but not her father, who was a member of Communist Party and a high ranking official in Soviet Union; Minister of Financies of Estonia, if memory serves. I see opportunism in every generation of her family.
“Good points, B: though I’m not sure such a mundane explanation is applicable to those ( at least nominally, apparently ) responsible for such epochal decisions as taking countries to war.”
“The banality of evil” I would be entirely unsurprised if it was true, even for those.
i.e the Scottish legal authorities have spent 9 months charging Scots to use a legal system which has upheld whatever Westminster decides by doing precisely NOTHING.
The message is clear: use pitchforks instead.
Thank Mr Murray.
How can they seize the funds? I donated 100 quid earlier this year, how can they take my money from you? What was the mechanism?
From Wikipedia:
– Debanking (sometimes spelled de-banking, and also known within the banking industry as de-risking) is the closure of people’s or organizations’ bank accounts by banks that perceive the account holders to pose a financial, legal, regulatory, or reputational risk to the bank.
– Examples of this include the enforcement of anti-corruption and anti–money laundering laws, anti-terrorism efforts, and the closing of bank accounts of sex workers, or people violating immigration laws, or those considered to be politically exposed.
– Debanking has been criticized for limited legal clarity and financial exclusion. It can have severe consequences for individuals, as it displaces them from accessing a range of activities within society.
That quote is from the latest revision of the page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Debanking&oldid=1374114187
But look at how much of it has been stripped out since less than a month ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Debanking&oldid=1362652444
The UK has a free speech problem, ie. there is NO free speech in the UK.
“on a conservative estimate, the police are arresting 34 people a day for things they’ve said, the vast majority online, and the true figure is closer to 40 a day. Russia, incidentally, is thought to arrest around 400 people a year for similar offences.
a report produced for Prevent by the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU) set out what it regarded as key texts for white nationalists. They included the complete works of Shakespeare, as well as books by Orwell, Huxley, Tolkien, Conrad and Burke. Other warning signs included DVDs of the Dam Busters, Zulu, the Great Escape and the Bridge on the River Kwai, and box sets of Yes Minister, the Thick of It, the original House of Cards and Michael Portillo’s Great British Railway Journeys.”
https://dailysceptic.org/2026/09/25/does-britain-have-a-free-speech-problem/
In my book, free speech is binary, black and white, you either have it or you don’t. This means truly objectionable people have a voice as well as reasonable people. The key is no-one has to listen to them but they should not be censored, they should be challenged.
Meanwhile, Labour, that bastion of free speech and democracy has banned Declassified journalists from the Labour Party’s annual conference for the third year in a row. Meanwhile, Labour Fans of Israeli genocide will also be returning to the conference with its annual reception, promising “senior cabinet ministers”. See the goyim and shiksa dance …
https://www.declassifieduk.org/declassified-journalists-banned-from-labour-conference-again/
Good points Stevie – Labour copying Trump.
“Declassified journalists have been banned from the Labour Party’s annual conference for the third year in a row.
The event in Liverpool next week is the first under new prime minister Andy Burnham and is traditionally an opportunity for reporters to question politicians.
But three Declassified journalists were denied media passes, with the party claiming that they would only be given to those “with a relevant portfolio”.
The rejection email said: “We reserve the right to reject an application if we cannot find any evidence the applicant is a working journalist or photographer with a political portfolio or working on behalf of a relevant media outlet.”
The ban comes despite all Declassified staff journalists being accredited with the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), while one is also a member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery.”
https://www.declassifieduk.org/declassified-journalists-banned-from-labour-conference-again/
I’m not surprised by this – Uni’s in Scotland have been all but anti-Scottish for years now, especially St Andrews – Edinburgh and the ultimate Scottish – English security services safe house, the University of Glasgow.
“Thirteen UK universities have reportedly worked with Britain’s biggest arms manufacturer, BAE Systems, to contain pro-Palestine protests and tighten security on their campuses, as students have demanded an end to the institutions’ ties with the weapons giant.
Internal memoranda and emails obtained in a joint investigation by Liberty Investigates and Al Jazeera reveal coordination between the universities and BAE Systems over student demonstrations, including efforts to counter campaigns calling for the universities to sever their contractual relationships with the arms manufacturer.
Six of the academic institutions — specifically the universities of Manchester, Nottingham, Southampton, Birmingham, and Strathclyde, along with Cranfield University — have been designated by BAE as “strategic partners” and collectively receive up to $20 million annually from the arms manufacturer through their funding arrangements.
“When public universities take operational cues and security strategies from weapons manufacturers to suppress their own students, the boundary between higher education and corporate defense interests collapses,” said Gina Romero, the UN special rapporteur for peaceful assembly and association.
“This investigation reveals a troubling pattern: universities managing protest not as spaces of free inquiry, but as corporate risk to be mitigated for key financial sponsors,” Romero added.
Student movements throughout the United Kingdom have persistently called upon universities to sever their relationships with BAE Systems, which manufactures components for Israeli combat aircraft, as well as other corporations deemed complicit in the Israeli military’s genocide of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”
https://www.presstv.co.uk/Detail/2026/09/25/777001/British-universities-collaborating-with-Israeli-affiliated-arms-giant-to-suppress-pro-Palestine-rallies–Report
Thanks to the war criminal Tony Blair who decreed that everyone should have a university degree, thus negating the whole rationale of a university education in one fell swoop, and bringing in the corporate vultures to enrich themselves on the aspirations of youth.
If everyone has a degree then in effect it’s worthless. However, now that these fake degree mills can charge £9k per term, it means the whole rationale for a university is about the bottom line, profit. And, it means the corporate sector, including the MIC can control the sector through sponsorship and tax write offs. The corrupt merry-go-round spins it’s web and the education system is just another profit centre and MIC laundry.
Blair’s policy was all about getting young people into decades-long debt at the youngest possible legal age they’re allowed to get into debt, i.e. 18.
“Degree mill” is an accurate enough term.
In recent years British universities have been functioning on a large scale in the same way with foreign students too, or “international” students to use the lingo. In their case, their large fees aren’t paid with money borrowed from British banks, but the students still get very little in return other than visas.
It´s soon Friday midnight – so?
Well, now that the Euro-spun mist is lifting it can be more clearly seen that Denmark did indeed sell Greenland/Greenlanders out to the U.S
All the theatric cosplay about Danish/European *outrage*, kid-on * tension * with the Yanks and determination to resist was all total bollocks: Pabulum for the Plebs.
Yeah, turns out that formidable 5 minute presence of 11 German Toy Soldiers in the new 51st State or threats to unleash the full might of the Lurpak Army was not sufficiently awe-inspiring to deter the Neo-Imperialists of Trumpton – shocker, eh?
All the spin about Trump supposedly hyping-up what was effectively the status quo arrangement vis-a-vis U.S + Denmark/Greenland was/is an attempt to disguise Europe’s complete capitulation to Yankee Diktat. Trump/U.S got EVERYTHING it wanted and Greenland is now under it’s complete control Militarily & Commercially, ie in every way that matters.
This is a product of * Europe’s * utterly deranged obsession with Project Ukraine, and demonstrates the depth of it’s pathology.
They have sold-out the Greenlanders and are absolutely hammering the peoples of Europe with lurid psychotic fearmongering, eg ‘ Russia is the greatest/gravest threat to our security since,,,,,,,’ fck, name the most ludicrous analogy……how about….the Black Death, aye, that’ll do.
Yes, Russia is now – OFFICIALLY – the greatest/gravest threat to Europe since the Black Death; in fact, Russia is an even greater/graver threat, because Medieval Europe didn’t have Mr Evil Incarnate – Vlad P – orchestrating the pestilence; or for that matter Hamas/Iran/Yemen – that Terrifying Triumvirate of Islamic Terrorororororismismismmmmm plotting to impose Sharia Law in, eg Dagenham: not to mention those shifty/shady * Chinks * trying to impose Temu Law all over borderless Eur ‘opeless.
They seem fully prepared to sacrifice the whole of Europe in the service of Project Ukraine, and have already done incalculable damage to the continent, eg by ( attempting ) putting the continent on a * War Footing * when what’s beneath that footing is nothing but thin air & quicksand; funneling vast sums of money from the pockets of it’s * citizens * to the Zelensky Cash Converter Franchise; money that should be going, eg to help people with exorbitant – and constantly rising – domestic energy costs, which they – the Euro Clowns – themselves are responsible for via, yip, their obsession with * beating Putin * and abject surrender to Corporate Energy Corps/Shareholder greed
Greenland was a small and no doubt temporary sacrifice to the U.S of Israel Moloch: but that insatiable monster will not be satisfied until it has swallowed the entire continent. Even then……EVERYTHING is not enough, will never be enough
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-j0hgRAxYA
Nope. It’s permanent.
How can European “leaders” not understand that once you start making unilateral concessions to a bully, the demands will never stop?
People say that Trump is stupid, and some of his decisions don’t seem too bright. But he can obviously outsmart vd Leyen, Rutte, Merz, Macron, Burnham, Frederiksen &c.
Yes, that was a bit misleading, what I meant was ‘ temporary ‘ as a sacrifice to Trump/U.S, ie it will only very temporarily satisfy that beast. Greenland has indeed become a permanent possession of the U.S of Zion
Outsmarting that lot was child’s play
Townsman
Leyen, Rutte, Merz, Macron, Burnham, Frederiksen &c. have not been outsmarted, the people who voted for them have been outsmarted. Leyen, Rutte, Merz, Macron, Burnham, Frederiksen &c. will be well rewarded.
Quite so, J.C. The Globalist Revolving Door is always open for those that have served the Doorkeepers well. Gormless Starmer will no doubt be heading through it before long
A 92 year old amputee with dementia, if they can do that to him, what could they do to us.
“Donald Burgess was a 92 year old amputee suffering from severe dementia, sitting completely unmoving in his wheelchair inside an East Sussex care home.
When he became agitated during a meal and held onto a dull butter knife, two police officers arrived and instantly escalated the situation into pure terror.
An inquest has heard that PC Stephen Smith and PC Rachel Comotto screamed at the elderly man, struck his arm with a metal baton, and emptied a full can of pepper spray directly into his face.
PC Comotto then fired a high voltage taser into the disabled pensioner’s chest as he wept in agony and cried out that he was dying.
The 92 year old was handcuffed, dragged to a police station, rushed to hospital in medical distress, and died shortly afterwards from cardiac complications and trauma.
Medical testimony now confirms that the extreme physiological stress inflicted by those officers directly contributed to his death.
Yet both officers walked away cleared of assault charges, while Sussex Police dismissed the horrific timing of his death as a mere coincidence”
FFS! Tasering a 92yo man! The British police seem increasingly off the leash.
In a recent case after a husband called the cops on his violent psycho wife, they lied to the wife and said her husband had told her to leave the house and that they, the cops, were therefore taking her to somewhere “safe”, and they lied to the husband saying she’d walked out on him. It took the couple four days, during which the wife was being held at an unknown location, to realise they’d both been lied to.
The connection I make with the topic is the creaking and increasingly dysfunctional criminal and civil justice systems operating in Scotland and England – together with creaking and inadequate social care and certainly in England inadequate care regulation.
They really are Zio-Nazi’s.
“A since-deleted blog in The Times of Israel said that Israel needs “lebensraum,” a concept historically associated with the Nazi party, to combat the country’s projected exponential population growth.
The blog post, written by Dan Ehrlich, details how Israel’s population is expected to reach 11.1 million by 2030, 13.2 million by 2040 and 15.2 million by 2048, and cites a lack of land mass needed to sustain populations of this size in Israel.
Stating that the idea of “lebensraum” is why Israel’s desire to control the West Bank is such a “contentious issue,” Ehrlich wrote, “These people need places to live in a nation short of land mass. Compare Israel to its neighbor Jordan, which has a smaller population, yet about five times the land area. If Israel is to maintain its agricultrural industry, its exploding population will [need] to grow up, in high-rise apartment complexes, as well as out, possibly into Judea and Samaria.”
Read More on World
Prince Harry and Meghan’s UK Move Is ‘Kiss of Death’ for TV Careers
5 min read
Prince Harry and Meghan’s UK Move Is ‘Kiss of Death’ for TV Careers
Roger Marshall’s Chances of Losing Kansas Senate Race After Raucous Debate
6 min read
Roger Marshall’s Chances of Losing Kansas Senate Race After Raucous Debate
Police Detain Hayden Panettiere’s Boyfriend After Restaurant Fight
4 min read
Police Detain Hayden Panettiere’s Boyfriend After Restaurant Fight
Crowd in Israel at Protest
Crowd of protesters and relatives of hostages calling on the Israeli government to sign a ceasefire with Hamas in May 2024. A since-deleted blog post …Read More | Ilia Yefimovich/Associated Press/Associated Press
Newsweek reached out to Ehrlich for comment via LinkedIn outside of business hours.
Newsweek has also contacted The Times of Israel for comment via a form on its website.
The total area of the state of Israel is 22,145 sq. km (8,630 sq. miles) and the current population is 9,402,617, according to the CIA.
In the removed blog post, Ehrlich also discusses the growing global population, and migration to the U.S. and the U.K. rather than to countries with lower populations such as Russia, Australia, and Canada. He also discusses how migrants will feel the effects of climate change.
Although the article comes up in Google searches, when the link is clicked it directs users to the homepage for The Times of Israel.
What Does Lebensraum Mean?
According to Merriam-Webster, the word “lebensraum” is a noun that can be defined as “territory believed especially by Nazis to be necessary for national existence or economic self-sufficiency.” The term also can be defined as “space required for life, growth or activity.”
The idea of lebensraum was crucial to making up the Nazi worldview regarding military conquests and racial policy, according to the Holocaust Encyclopedia.
The term was coined in 1901 by German geographer Friedrich Ratzel and was taught to German youth as Nazi propaganda in the 1930s. Lebensraum began as an isolationist concept, with Ratzel and others believing that a country had to be “self-sufficient in terms of resources and territory (a concept known as autarky) to protect itself from external threats.”
The idea of lebensraum also came from Ratzel’s interpretation of Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection and his argument that people’s development and adaptability were dependent on geographic territory.
This focus on geographic territory later expanded as the Nazi party viewed expansion into Eastern Europe as German “manifest destiny,” a 19th-century American concept rooted in expansion into the Western US.
Who is Dan Ehrlich?
Erhlich is an American senior multimedia journalist and editor based in London, currently working as a freelance journalist.
He has a career spanning print, TV, online news and radio, and has previously worked at the New York Daily News, Talk Radio UK, CNN and more.
Ehrlich has written numerous blogs for The Times of Israel about Donald Trump’s reelection in the US, the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and NATO’s World War III fears.”
https://www.newsweek.com/israel-needs-lebensraum-says-blog-major-national-newspaper-1996635
Who is Dan Ehrlich?
Mossad, Unit 8200, IDF …
Have had this up for a while and just got round to checking it out and, as per usual, Finklestein further exposes the evil that is zionism, and yeah, money talks, or, as Bob Dylan said….
Journalist Gives Shocking Proof of Israeli “Blackmail Weapon”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaWETJoxb7E (Tucker Carlson Network 16mins, posted ten days ago)
Here’s another youtube vid that I’ve had up for a while and just now got round to checking out, posted two weeks ago, with Norman Finkelstein being interviewed about his recently published book, in which he makes some excellent and insightful points (about the rape allegations, for example), and I’m not even half way through it yet (the interview that is!). And yep, I just bought a copy of it:
The Architects Of Israel’s Genocide | Norman Finkelstein
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYV-HAjhmA0 (The Majority Report 56mins)
Big false flag/disinformation exercise currently underway at US invaders Airbase in RAF Fairford.
Ammunition for more oppressive measures at upcoming labour/zionist love-in.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqrm99mm9l84o
‘Ashab al-Yamin’ deployed yet again.
I happened upon a short video by yr man Andrew Bridgen yesterday who claims that his ‘ impeccable sources ‘ have told him a lethal False Flag incident is imminent; the degree of which, ie the human injury, will be so awful it will galvanise public outrage/support for……? Well, that’s the thing, he doesn’t actually say want this putative outrage will be directed at. Whatever any one thinks of him politically or otherwise, he has shown considerably more bravery in speaking about things * they * don’t want anyone speaking about than 99.9 of his peers and been ostracised for doing so – obvs.
He did seem very concerned and genuine in the veracity of what he was relating. It is, of course, very difficult to know for sure A) if he is genuine B) even if HE is, whether the info he was given is legit. A case of wait n see, I suppose. But such is the War Hysteria being stoked up by the Political Class/MSM and ( what at least appears to be ) the countervailing public majority sentiment of ‘ Fuck off, if you want a war YOU go and fight it ‘ that we won’t be at all surprised if the lunatics do something desperate to sway public opinion to support war with Russia
‘ doesn’t say what…..’
What … The wish list of the blob, off the top of my head, includes:
– Rejoin the EU;
– Regime change in Iran;
– A proxy war with Russia (Ukraine).
So, any false flag would be attributed to Iran or Russia. We’ve had Skripal, so that’s not an option, so a fake ‘Iranian’ bomb seems the most likely, or a fake ‘Russian’ drone attack on an aircraft or airport.
Need to keep an eye on MI6 and their assets, that’s the real threat !
IMO
Tend to think the first time we’d know about anything carried by a nation state would likely be after the event.
US counterterrorism sting operations frequently manufacture fake terrorist plots using paid informants, raising widespread concerns about entrapment and civil liberties. – Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/nov/16/fbi-entrapment-fake-terror-plots
I’m sure there are people out there open to being recruited by foreign states, like Iran, Russia, and they are likely easy prey for undercover western intel officers who monitor and communicate in the same forums and operate proactively. When something is prevented at the last moment, without any harm being done it’s fair to assume there was likely either an undercover officer or informant involved. Although the UK has tighter rules on entrapment than the U.S., which could explain The Closed Material Procedure (CMP) & Special Advocates and Public Interest Immunity (PII) .The two processes under UK counter-terrorism laws, these are specific legal mechanisms where defence lawyers, solicitors, or barristers representing terror suspects can be withheld or denied certain information.
The media have no idea however about informants or undercover officers, so you get weeks and weeks of propaganda against a state that hasn’t done anything. And by the time it emerges that it was entirely western intel controlling the whole fictitious attack. The reputational damage to that state is done.
Agreed, and you have to wonder who would have such advance information about such a False Flag event, and if they did possess such information – given they would have to very deeply imbedded, or at least have access to, the Deep State operatives involved, why they would be informing anyone. Not to say any of those conditions are so unlikely as to make them implausible. Whistleblowers do exist. Though in the UK anyway they seem to be extremely rare these days. The PTB such now that they have made it very difficult for any such ‘ inside informants ‘ to exist, and the penalties so severe if the do and are caught. Unless of course you’re someone like slimy snake Mandelson: and it’s all went VERY quiet in his case; that Memory ( Black ) Hole more effective than ever at swallowing anything that risks bringing nefarious State actions into the light
Robert Hughes
Typically, authorities running such sting operations allow them to run to a very advanced stage, because the charges become a lot more serious; carrying much heavier sentences, than say, some individual(s) being involved in just the initial planning, or the ‘ideas’ stage.
Very few people would have sympathy for these individuals, even if it is entrapment, because dangerous people are being taken off the streets in their opinion. The problem is, if the media are reporting a nation state is behind it, and the security services know full well that is false, but allow that lie to fester and propagate. The same security services that decry disinformation.
They should be under an obligation to not knowingly allow false information to propagate like that, in the MSM and among politicians. As it leads to an ill-informed, poor decision making.
Aye, there’s no shortage of * things */ countries The Blob are keen to – further – demonise, but, the examples you give will be high on their list
You don’t need to be Nostradamus to predict it’s going to be linked to Iran at some point.
Burnham will then be urged to commit UK naval forces to assisting the US against Iran. Supporting Trump’s senseless ‘war of choice’ was a bridge too far, even for Starmer. Just 30% of Americans support the ongoing war: it’s electorally toxic.
And if Iran wished to attack U.S. forces, of all places around the world, to do so, the UK seems the least probable. Because the UK enforces exceptionally strict regulations on explosives and the importation of their precursors.
Uk naval forces are a joke. They would only be sent into a dangerous situation, by the USA, as an acceptable sacrifice to trigger more kinetic action.
If Iran wished to attack the UK then Cyprus is the logical, easy, target.
Here’s a putative photo of four of the suspects, Stevie.
https://x.com/CharlieGirl4547/status/2104187226246516896
They don’t exactly look like the sort of people who’d be overly concerned with geopolitics to me, or regularly interacting with Russians/Iranians – and of course the bizzies just happened to be waiting for them. Got false flag written all over it.
In any case, attacking a British airforce base used in the US-Zionist aggression against Iran would not by any sensible definition of the term be “terrorism”.
The US attack on the Minab school in Iran that killed more than 100 children – that was terrorism.
As Damon Albarn put it, “never be neutral”.
https://en.irna.ir/news/86275744/Iran-NATO-chief-s-remarks-confirm-Europe-s-indispensable-role
^ Letter from Iran’s ambassador to UN to UN Secretary General and President of the UNSC.
“I am writing to bring your attention, and that of the members of the Security Council, to the deeply disturbing and consequential admission made on 23 September 2026 by the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), concerning the extensive use of European military bases in support of the United States’ act of aggression, in clear breach of international law against the Islamic Republic of Iran. In an interview on 23 September 2026, while speaking at a public event on NATO’s future, the Secretary General of NATO again admitted that “5,000 planes” had taken off from European bases in support of the so-called “Operation Epic Fury” since 28 February 2026. He stated that this figure was calculated only through mid-April, adding that the actual number was “probably much more” thereafter.”
“As previously communicated time and again to the Secretary-General and the Security Council, certain European States have knowingly facilitated the aforementioned unlawful acts by placing their territory, airspace, military facilities, and other logistical and operational capabilities at the disposal of the aggressors for the planning, preparation, and execution of attacks that clearly amount to war crimes. Such conduct, in itself, constitutes a violation of the Charter of the United Nations. Furthermore, such actions constitute participation in and assistance to an act of aggression within the meaning of General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX), entitled “Definition of Aggression”. Accordingly, the States concerned bear international responsibility for their internationally wrongful acts, including their participation in and assistance to acts of aggression, and remain under an obligation to make full reparation for all injury, including material and moral damage, caused to the Islamic Republic of Iran, its nationals, and its civilian and public infrastructure as a consequence of those wrongful acts.
The statement also engages the individual criminal responsibility of not only the Secretary General of NATO, but also of any other European officials and individuals involved in the said acts, including for the crime of aggression and war crimes. These include, in particular, the attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh School in Minab, in which more than 168 individuals, most of them children, were killed; the use of PrSM missiles containing thousands of lethal pellets in Lamerd, which killed several innocent women and children and injured many others; attacks on oil reservoirs resulting in widespread environmental damage; the heinous attack on the Sirik wedding ceremony in August; and the wanton destruction of homes, hospitals, academic, scientific, cultural and historical sites and centres, and civilian infrastructure. As Mr. Rutte expresses in clear terms, the role of European leaders in operations leading to the commission of the said crimes is clearly established.”
Three out of five of the permanent members of the UNSC are also members of NATO.
Could the two grownups among the permanent members please step in.
Thanks for your reply Brian. Under UK law, which charges people with terrorism offences for holding signs, it would be terrorism, and they’ve now been arrested on suspicion of terrorism offences, as well as offences under the Explosives Act.
Apparently, the bizzies received a tip-off from a ‘concerned citizen’ that white vans were being driven towards Gloucestershire by black people on Saturday night, which of course would be highly suspicious and something the police would immediately attend to, because southern England is famously still 99.9% white and virtually no one works past 5pm.
UPDATE: It’s now being reported that it was a resident of Whelford (just outside the base) who dialled 999 in the early hours of Sunday morning to report the three white vans in the village. The story keeps changing.
Probably just an Amazon delivery gone wrong …
“The story keeps changing.”
Now where have I seen before. Of course, even though it changes, it’s always the truth. Who am I to question what my betters tell me?
And not a single political party will draw the obvious conclusion: hosting US bombers and bases, used to illegally attack other nations, carries ‘blowback’ security implications for our own country.
After José María Aznar, then Spain’s PM, dropped Spain’s dovishness to throw his weight behind GW Bush’s ‘war on terror’ and the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq. The following year, in 2004, Spain suffered the horrific 2004 Madrid train bombings, in which 191 died and between 1,800 and 2,500 were injured.
“Around 12.45am today police received a call relating to three suspicious vehicles travelling towards RAF Fairford” -Guardian
Someone reported seeing suspicious white vans driving along a road? Suspicious in what sense? I live near a motorway and at any given moment there’ll be three or four similar white vans.
Tomorrow…
Sarge, we’re averaging 10,000 calls per hour, reporting white van sightings all across the UK.
Who reports white vans? What exactly did the caller say that made the police investigate ‘white van’ sightings? Seems very lucky they did take the call seriously, for some reason.
When I raced them, I once had a motocross bike stolen and it took the police days to come out and see how they’d bent a metal garage door in.
Trump has just said :
“Working with Britain, it was an amazing job. We had them under investigation. They were looking to do big damage to our fort, and working with the British worked out great and we got them”
So not a tip-off at all.
And not a real plot if surveilled throughout. And presumably fake explosive were provided?
“our fort”, you fat orange cunt, you are the invaders, you are the problem. Just fuck off back across the Atlantic to Epstein land.
Suspicious for a white van would be obeying the speed limit and not behaving aggressively towards other road users.
Trump :
“We had them under investigation
We had them in our sights for a long time….”
So was it a sting operation, entirely concocted and controlled at all stages by the security services? That’s what the PM should be asking after Trump’s comments.
The BBC is still sticking with its lucky tip-off narrative. And MI6 whiff about him, James Landale, is suggesting it may be Iran or Russia.
No one will care less if these ‘wrong uns’ are victims of entrapment. But I don’t like the idea of entrapment. There are enough problems in this world without inventing crimes that otherwise wouldn’t happen.
Goose.
Smells awfully like a false flag event – to be blamed on either Russia or Iran – to garner support from the public to allow Westminster to carry out some sort of action – bearing in mind that Europe – has already allowed around 5,000 air sorties from its airports to bomb Iran.
If anything Iran has the right to strike back at them – if and when the chance arises.
https://en.apa.az/europe/nato-chief-says-us-flew-5000-sorties-from-bases-in-europe-during-operation-against-iran-513933
RoS
There’s a fundamental inconsistency here between Trump’s claims, about them being known to authorities and under surveillance for a long time – in our sights for a long time, he said – and the police here acting as it this has come completely out-of-the-blue and an attack was only averted due to a last-minute tip-off? Which is it, because both can’t be true.
They had the bomb disposal robot out and evacuated residents, but if these people were under surveillance for a long time, surely any explosive acquired would be inactive (inert) so was all that just terror theatre?
These are the sort of questions a free press would be asking if we had one. Instead they are pushing the Iran or Russia line.
“No one will care less if these ‘wrong uns’ are victims of entrapment. ”
They should be thanking their lucky stars that they weren’t Venezuelan fishermen in boats rather then Brits in vans.
“photo of four of the suspects”, oh dear, they have mozzie, immigrant written all over it. The right wing zionists will be salivating …
Thanks for your reply Stevie. Not sure whether they’re Muslim. To me, at least three of them appear to be of predominantly African heritage – but, yes, the anti-immigrant right is milking things all the same:
https://x.com/pippaisright/status/2104204002259054631
Anyways, the story seems to have changed again*. It’s now being reported that a woman driving back from a party (hope she was on the non-alcoholic spritzers) drove past at a quarter to one, and saw the vans blocking a road and men in balaclavas getting out, who then ran in different directions across farmland but in the general direction of the base. So she phoned the police, who turned up pronto and arrested them – perhaps because they initially thought the suspects were Patriot Platform.
* It’s good to keep a record of how the story changes early doors; they’ll start deleting things soon enough.
On ‘X’ the BBC and Telegraph have stopped allowing comments under their posts on this topic.
Burnham urged people not to speculate and it might be for legal reasons, I dunno? But both the BBC and Telegraph have articles, and in the BBC’s case, guests and reporters, speculating all day, on whether this is the Iranians or Russia.
Rules for thee, but not for me.
We’ve got a press and TV news media, that think only those who are part of an elite group of pundits in London, have the permission to hold an opinion on anything.
‘There’s a fundamental inconsistency here between Trump’s claims, about them being known to authorities and under surveillance for a long time – in our sights for a long time, he said – and the police here acting as it this has come completely out-of-the-blue and an attack was only averted due to a last-minute tip-off? Which is it, because both can’t be true.’
It’s possible that an explosion was meant to take place – and was known by the authorities- but that the police stumbled in and apprehended the suspects before it could take place.
Apparently, ‘it wos Iran wot did it !’
Let’s see what more nonsense TPTB can come up with before the truth outs.
I wonder if this could be, or what was intended to be the ‘False Flag’ event referred to, above. It all seems a bit ‘ suspect ‘, anyway.
Why do a lot of these supposed/proposed * Islamic Terrorist * plots more often than not appear to involve bungling, delusional amateurs/idiots more like the characters in Chris Morris’ ( brilliant ) Four Lions than the fiendishly cunning fanatics of MSM lore ( construction ) ?
BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner:
“I don’t understand why Donald Trump is saying we had these people under view for a long time. I don’t know where he got that from, because if they did then how on earth were they allowed to wander round Gloucestershire putting on masks and driving vans allegedly with explosives in them?”
Finally, someone asks the correct question.
As Craig mentioned. The vans were parked in plain sight drawing attention, while men in balaclavas were running around, outside a U.S. military base? No expert on these things, but surely terrorists scope out their intended target for days or weeks prior. If they’ve gone to the trouble of acquiring three vehicles, which someone claimed cost £48,000 each, explosives, then what? Turn up and improvise against a heavily defended, fortified military base – makes no sense whatsoever.
I honestly think Wes Streeting(on GMTV today)believes his role is simply to ‘blow smoke up the arses’ of anyone associated with the intelligence services. Are ministers even kept in the loop, or do they deliberately stay clear for plausible deniability? This “I can’t comment on ongoing operational matters” formulation when Susanna Reid asked him if police are looking for others, as more than five men were seen at the scene, could be Wes’s convenient way of saying ‘I’m in the dark myself and haven’t got a clue’.
Donald Trump “does have form” in blowing UK intelligence sources, after he made comments surrounding the arrests near RAF Fairford, says ex-defence secretary Ben Wallace.
“He had made public comment about someone that was very, very important for our intelligence collection.”
Trump’s big mouth, eh?
We’ve got the ongoing SpyCops inquiry revelations; they show those who infiltrated various groups, were often the most radical, extreme members; urging criminal acts such as lab break-ins by animal rights groups. Other members didn’t feel at all comfortable with some of these criminal acts. MI5 recently lied under oath repeatedly, to protect a violent neo-Nazi informant’s identity, probably for similar reasons. It’s considered proactive policing, but many believe it sails too close to entrapment.
Entrapment – where law enforcement induces a person to commit a crime they otherwise would not have committed – is widely considered morally problematic due to the inherent manipulation, coercion, and state-created crime involved.
Why are people speculating online about RAF Fairford against government advice?
Seriously? Are you someone sufficiently dog-like in obedience to feel compelled to follow ‘ government advice ‘? Has no-one told you that ‘ RAF Fairford ‘ is U.S land/property: as Donut Trumpet called it – ‘ our fort ‘. Note that ‘ our ‘.
Is State imposed censorship not quite enough for you, should we dutifully oblige with self-censorship too?
Seriously? You fell for it? M.J. couldn’t find irony tags in the “allowed HTML” notice on the comment field.
Looks like he didn’t need them.
– “Why are people speculating online about RAF Fairford against government advice?”
Classic. Thank you MJ, best laugh I’ve had in a while 😀 If I do want to speculate, any idea which department I apply to for a licence?
Probably the Circumlocution Office. ( https://www.panarchy.org/dickens/circumlocution.html )
Thanks for that M.J I haven’t laughed so much for ages 🙂
It looks like Trump has put UK security services in a difficult place(see comments above by Frank Gardner and Ben Wallace) and possibly burnt an informant or undercover officer.
All Wes Streeting – a boy in a man’s job, if ever there was one – can do, is try to act like a PR spokesman shielding the intel services. Who do ministers work for?
This is what is wrong in the UK; we don’t have representatives, we have people who think they are appointees, there, to close ranks and defend the establishment from press and public scrutiny.
“Who do ministers work for?”
I think the hierarchy is Oligarchs -> Security Services -> Ministers.
“This is what is wrong in the UK; we don’t have representatives, we have people who think they are appointees, there, to close ranks and defend the establishment from press and public scrutiny.”
Probably because they are (appointees, that is). Look at how few people it took to elect the latest PM, about 0.02% of the electorate and they didn’t get a choice of which candidate from the ruling party they were to vote for, either, because there was only one. “Mandate from the masses”, my arse!
Here are a number of good reasons not to speculate on live cases like RAF Fairford. (In sum: in order not to aid adversaries)
1. Adversaries monitor platforms. A single post might seem harmless, but hostile actors use automated tools to harvest thousands of comments. When combined, independent details allow enemies to map out vulnerabilities.
2. Online chatter tells a watching adversary how the authorities handle a crisis. This helps them plan in the future.
3. Speculating on the suspects can cause other accomplices to destroy evidence or flee.
4. Once individuals are arrested, laws under the Contempt of Court Act apply. Speculation can compromise a suspect’s right to a fair trial, or derail a prosecution.
5. Speculation can create panic, false alarms and diverting police away from the actual investigation.
Are you for real? LOL! Who might these ‘ adversaries ‘ be, eg cousins of Putin married to relations of Xi and living in Iranian Communities in Yemen?
There’s a giant penny looming over yr nut, M.J, and, who knows, one day it might just drop on yr bonce – * might *.
When/if it ever does, you may come to understand that the real adversaries are not elsewhere, but in ol’ Londinium, eg Millbank, Whitehall and the Rubber Stamping Office @ 10 Drowning ( sic ) Street
M.J.
Wes Streeting urged people not to speculate this morning on TV, then launched into his own tirade, saying : “I will say this : we know Iran hates our democracy, we know Iran wishes to do us harm…” i.e. virtually accusing them.
I doubt Iran even cares about the state of the UK’s democracy. It’s hardly a model democracy, is it, with so many dissatisfied according to polls: an unelected second chamber and a PM who the country didn’t elect. Brilliant!
Our TikTok PM says Iran will never have nuclear weapons. What right have we to dictate to a much larger country than ourselves; a country the size of western Europe, with 90 million plus population that’s under constant threat from a bullying U.S. and sidekick Israel? Especially when hypocritically busily renewing our nuclear missile stockpiles and building nuclear subs for Australia under AUKUS – a country that will probably acquire nuclear strike capability by stealth, to avoid a backlash from the Australian public over becoming a nuclear-armed power.
How can if be fair, that Israel is the sole undeclared possessor of nuclear weapons in ME? A country that launched an unprovoked attack on Iran killing their leader and harbors barely concealed plans to become a Greater Israel through war and conquer?
Another reason Netanyahu tries to keep Russia onside, is because the Israelis know they could give Iran nuclear weapons through technology transfers or guaranteed protection while advancing their own infrastructure. The US Democrats know this too.
M.J.
By the time these things come to trial everyone has forgotten and reporting restrictions are put in place anyway.
Terror cases have the Closed Material Procedure (CMP) & Special Advocates and Public Interest Immunity (PII) – so there is no pushback against entrapment – if that’s what this is and I don’t know? But Trump saying they were known to authorities and they’ve been monitored for a long time, doesn’t reconcile with the lucky tip-off narrative, does it?
And Ben Wallace said this today on Times radio:
“He[Trump] had made public comment about someone that was very, very important for our intelligence collection.”
Someone ? So an informant or undercover officer? How else can that be interpreted? That’s not us on here saying it, it’s a former defence minister, Ben Wallace.
NEW: Iran says it “categorically rejects” any involvement in the suspected bomb plot at RAF Fairford
“The circulation of such fabricated speculations serve no purpose other than to fuel Iranophobia propaganda in the UK”
It’s reported they were all Londoners, so someone must have recruited them.
Remember the Sun’s “Fake Sheikh” Mazher Mahmood, used in sting operations? It wouldn’t be difficult, if authorities were so inclined, to do something similar.
Hi M.J
Apologies for the comment above [10:46] I obviously misinterpreted your remark. I’ll try not to let it happen again.
That’s OK, JohnnyOh45.
Our government is the enemy.
MJ: “Here are a number of good reasons not to speculate on live cases like RAF Fairford. […]”
Somebody ought to tell the BBC then. Because they’ve been spending a lot of time speculating about this from the moment it hit their own headlines.
“Here are a number of good reasons not to speculate on live cases like RAF Fairford. (In sum: in order not to aid adversaries)”
Yeah right!
1,2. Our adversaries have no intelligence network so can only get information from social media. How, do you think any security service functioned before social media was a thing?
3. The case was on the BBC, FFS. Are you seriously suggesting that “other accomplices” would ignore the MSM and only discover their boys had been caught via a relatively obscure blog?
4. Best to know what the law says before you quote it. Clue, it’s not what you think it is.
5. Then why is the government indulging in it? Anyway, as ever, examples or it didn’t happen.
You could have bowed out there basking in the glory of a brilliant piece of satirical humour, but you blew it.
M.J.
1. Adversaries monitor platforms
So what? We have no special inside knowledge about this case.
2. Online chatter tells a watching adversary how the authorities handle a crisis.
So what? That information is hardly top secret.
3. Speculating on the suspects can cause other accomplices to destroy evidence or flee
They likely to have the brain power to do that anyway.
4. Once individuals are arrested, laws under the Contempt of Court Act apply. Speculation can compromise a suspect’s right to a fair trial, or derail a prosecution.
True. But there are multiple barriers in place to a fair trial already, for those accused of terrorism offences.
5. Speculation can create panic, false alarms and diverting police away from the actual investigation.
Fair point. But if the explosive was in fact inert, and the whole thing was a long-running elaborate sting operation, as Trump suggests, shouldn’t residents be told there is no danger, rather than being evacuated for added dramatic effect?
If it is a U.S.style sting operation. You can wager British intel folks pulling their hair out over Trump’s loose lips: Will someone get him to STFU! they’ll be shouting.
We have laws on entrapment, and the FBI probably couldn't do here, what they've done repeatedly in the United States in so-called sting operations against those open to being recruited as terrorists. They argue they are taking dangerous people off the streets.
Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me, could answer : Is it possible that domestic UK counter-terror police were completely in the dark about what Trump called a long-running, joint UK-US investigation?
Now that more is known how the enablers of Israeli genocide operate perhaps its time to revisit the French Alpine killings of 2012. It’s 100% that the victim would be in Israel/Mossad databases whilst sleeper Mossad cells exist all over Europe. Mossad would know the car Al Hilli was driving. The killings were obviously botched maybe a misunderstanding but the fact that real evidence has not emerged points more to the probability of Mossad. If Israeli was involved there would be a huge cover up.
Al Hilli internet postings the only credible motive.
.A “Shadow Government” Narrative: His posts frequently asserted that a hidden pro-Israel cabal or “shadow government” controlled international banking, media networks, and Western political leaders.Direct Denunciation of Military Operations:
He spent hours in Arabic-language chatrooms writing lengthy, emotionally charged manifestos condemning Israeli military actions in the Palestinian territories
Mossad doesn’t need lots of sleeper cells because they have such a reliable, extensive, well-placed support network of people who will help them without question, at the drop of a hat, and without regard to host country law. Some work as officials, others in apparently legitimate businesses, others in organised crime… There are many overlaps.
At least one of their sayanim (“helpers”) became president of France.
They are way too embedded to even bother about being seen as taking the piss. For example Stella Rimington became a non-executive director of Marks and Spencer after retiring from her job as head of MI5.
Brian Red
I remember the antisemitism protesting flash mobs that used to hound Corbyn; all carrying identical professionally-produced placards, These people , young and old, could be summoned, as if controlled by a hivemind – it was almost creepy. The idea people of the Jewish faith must stick together to survive, so as to ‘never again’ be victims, is understandably alluring, given that awful history in the 20th century. But that loyalty is abused, by the current Israeli govt to carry out what amounts to meddling and interference. And assuming MI6 aren’t knowingly complicit in allowing it, I’d imagine when they talk to ministers about it. Ministers just dismiss it, rather than risk a diplomatic incident and be accused of antisemitism themselves, by Israel and the US. Israel is by far, the most mollycoddled, indulged country in the world today.
“Never again” is used by Zionazis with total, utter, conscious cynicism.
There were some Jewish survivors of the German Nazi camps who rightly couldn’t give a damn about the existence of the Jewish Nazi entity in Palestine, or about the continued existence of the Jewish identity either, being concerned with a genuinely humanitarian “never again” applicable to everyone – not “Jews should never again experience this” but “people should never again experience this”.
In one of Philip Roth’s books – I think it was ‘ Operation Shylock – one of the characters argues that Jews should abandon the idea of Israel as the * natural * homeland and remain or return the European countries they emigrated from. I think this is belief Roth himself held. He was an outstanding author, one of my favourites
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riotous_Assembly..this is a fantastuc farse describing just such an eventuality.
But first they had to burn it all down to remove any wildlife – of course the Zionist have caused wildfires all across Europe and beyond.
“300,000 Israelis are occupying 100,000 hectares of Argentina that was previously Patagonian Nature Reserve before the forests burned down.”
https://lovin.co/palestine/en/news/israeli-settlers-caught-lighting-fires-as-argentinas-patagonia-burns/
https://zambianobserver.com/report-claims-argentina-has-allocated-100000-hectares-of-forest-land-to-israel/
The World as Zionist Lebensraum. Who’s gonna stop them?
It’s Coming Robert…. And Not Too far in the Future.
On current trajectory, it is. What * might * stymie them is the growing disgust at their inhumane actions in Gaza and elsewhere. Gestural as it only have been, the recent walkout by many nations’ reps at the UN. Notably who DIDN’T walk out – all the former USSR labradoodles and, of course the Western U.S Vassal States.
Robert.
The only way to stop the Zionists is by force – that’s all they respect -Iran and Yemen could wipe Israel off the face of the map if they can get past the coming attack on them, mind you the Zio-Monsters, now own large chunks of Cyprus and there are many of them in South America.
You don’t get kicked out of 109 countries for no reason.
Absolutely correct on the 109 point.
The situation in Patagonia is strange and it seems there is a disinfo spend in relation to it. Oil near Malvinas-Falklands may fit in there somewhere. (Odd that Britain with its experience can’t prospect for oil on its own even in disputed territory.)
It’s called the Andina Plan and it’s an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that’s been around since 1963. It first appeared in the house magazine of an Argentine neo-Nazi group led by Adolf Eichmann’s sons Klaus and Horst.
It’s come to attention agin as some sources have blamed the recent wildfires in the region on Jewish arsonists.
Pears Morgaine
The anti-Semites are the ones carrying out and aiding and abetting in a genocide in Palestine – for Palestinians and Arabs are Semites as well, and we know its not them – add in that there are tens of thousands of Jews living in Iran, and Israel and the US have both bombed Iran.
Iran is anti-Zionist not anti-Semite, Zionism is akin to Fascism.
“It’s called the Andina Plan and it’s an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that’s been around since 1963. ”
They started planning that long ago? BTW any theory proposed by more than one person is a conspiracy theory, which takes in anything produced by a meeting or a committee, the entirety of the output of most governments and all think tanks.
Its about time, I say well done to the judge for doing the right thing.
“US District Judge Richard Leon last week granted a preliminary injunction against the sanctions”
WASHINGTON: The United States on Wednesday removed sanctions on Francesca Albanese, a UN expert on the Palestinian territories who has harshly criticized Israel, following a court order.
A notice on the Treasury Department’s website showed that it had removed a sanctions designation on Albanese that had blacklisted her globally, making it impossible for her to use major credit cards or carry out bank transactions.
Albanese is an Italian lawyer who is UN special rapporteur on the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.
In that role, she had recommended the International Criminal Court pursue war-crimes prosecutions against Israeli and American nationals.”
https://www.arabnews.com/middle-east/us-lifts-sanctions-on-francesca-albanese-un-expert-on-palestinians-2644389
+1
Israel at UN Holds up a Wee Device..As Warning to the world ..I can’t Get my My Mind around Why This Evil walks Free
Because America !
Stevie.
And the Epstein Files – Epstein spent decades recording important people kiddie fiddling, and those people won’t stand up to the Zionists – for fear of being outed.
Not just sexual perversions though, money has a similar effect. We know that the Adelson’s essentially put Pedo Trump into power through donations of hundreds of millions of dollars. We also know people like the Wexners, Waltons and the Rothschilds have similarly contributed millions to get their man into power. Obviously, these political donations come with strings attached, so the recipient is immediately compromised.
* The Waltons are republicans, though not Jewish.
Worth recalling that Churchill was aided into power by rich, Jewish businessmen. This resulted in WW2 and the creation of Israel.
@ Stevie Boy September 27, 2026 at 22:43
“Churchill was aided into power by rich, Jewish businessmen.”
Churchill was helped out of bankruptcy by rich folk (some Jewish), but there was no quid pro quo. He gained power because Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement policy had failed, culminating in the disastrous Norway Campaign. Churchill was elected PM because of his long-standing, correct warnings about the German threat.
WW2 had been ongoing for 9 months before Churchill became PM.
Indeed Stevie, for me Miriam Adelson is the REAL POTUS – her now dead husband Sheldon – would visit Trump in the Whitehouse almost every day and give him instructions – on how to advance Israel’s cause and Trump would implement their orders – Trump by all accounts is their bought and paid for puppet.
“He gained power because Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement policy had failed, culminating in the disastrous Norway Campaign. ”
with the result that the British Army then lost 68,000 men in the equally disastrous campaign in northern France, culminating in the glorious victory that was Dunkirk. Of course Churchill had previous in that his Gallipoli campaign got a quarter of a million troops killed. There must have been plenty of people who remembered that disaster and, quite likely, took Churchill’s long-standing, warnings about the “German threat” with a large pinch of salt. What Norway and Dunkirk showed was that Britain was in no condition to fight Germany and the original decision to go to war was a foolish one, something many people realised at the time. WWII was a war of choice and would never have happened if Germany had done what she was supposed to do and go and sort out those pesky commies.
@brianfujisan – What device are you referring to? Link please.
Pager – RTFM.
Got it 🙂 If Netanyahu is boasting about past victories, is he sh*tting himself? Someone should remind him about his brother at Entebbe.
Thank you Brian; I hadn’t seen this highly significant detail elsewhere, drowned out by the meaningless hullabaloo at Fairford. That was an act of terrorism right in the heart of the UN, a direct and immediate threat to everyone present, an attempt to coerce their votes and their debate contributions etc. Whoever did it should have been arrested on the spot.
Anyone gotta link?
Clark
‘Remember The Pagers?’ Netanyahu Holds Up Device At UN As He Recalls Hezbollah Operation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEUMI08ixV8
And not a single one of the pipsqueaks who remained seated uttered a word of condemnation at that horrible bastard blatantly threatening anyone/country that opposes Israeli Genocidal actions. And that piece of human filth had the gall to call those ‘ walkouts ‘ cowards; this scumbag who flees to his bunker or another country when any risk to his worthless self arises; who has bombed 1000s of defenceless civilians – many of the children – and sanctioned his Terrorist Army ( IDF ) using children as target practise – calling anyone ‘ cowards ‘. FFS, what a total monster he is; and the fact he feels sufficiently * protected * he was able to so threaten and bully entire nations speaks to not just his colossal egoism, but the degree to which he has the Trump Admin in his pocket: just as he had the previous several U.S Admins, and, short of a kind of revolution, will have any future U.S Admin
The pager terrorist attack killed and maimed many innocent men, women and children. What world is it that allows the perpetrator to openly boast of this terrorist atrocity with no repercussions ?
Remember also that the west was almost certainly involved in this atrocity.
And despite the hideously indiscriminate nature of those pager blasts – they could easily have killed western tourists – the UK didn’t even condemn them. And may have helped trigger them :
Intelligence analysts noted that an airborne military asset, such as an electronic warfare aircraft, could have been used to broadcast or amplify the signal to guarantee simultaneous detonation.
The Middle East illustrates that for all our ballyhooed values, our leaders are no more civilised than those bloodthirsty monarchs in medieval times, when people were hung, drawn and quartered.
Regarding Fairford.
Mr Kit Klarenberg posted on his x account that the news site World Source News has reported on the suspicious events at Fairford prior to the farmer’s wife calling police. I did a generic enquiry with a search engine and it recorded:
Yes, the news aggregator account World Source News did report a threat prior to the farmer’s emergency call-
The Timeline: The social media account @Worldsource24 (World Source News) posted at 6:18 p.m. EDT on Saturday, 26 September, stating that the Pentagon had obtained reliable intelligence pointing to a threat at RAF Fairford-
The Farmer’s 999 Call: The local farmer stumbled upon the suspects and their vans hours later, calling police at 1:36 a.m. BST on Sunday, 27 September (which is several hours after the World Source News report)-
While the public and online news tracking pages were sharing warnings that the base had been placed on a heightened security status, local police forces confirmed they were not actively intercepting the specific vehicles on the road until the farmer’s 999 call alerted them.
I wonder what the BBC’s Mr Frank Gardiner will make of this apparent anomaly ?
Does that mean the Pentagon did not pass on its “reliable evidence” to the British intelligence services who in turn did not pass it on to the local police or the anti – terrorist police etc etc? Or if the did the police was happy to let the vans line up pending a call from the farmer’s wife? Meanwhile in Liverpool kept police busy in arresting placard holding disabled people and pensioners. Country is just one big theatre of the absurd.
I would imagine threats are made against RAF Fairford on a pretty regular basis.
Its smells to high heaven of false flag material – it reminds me of the patsies in 7/7 event – on another matter which is related to the English security services Abu Hamza – a English asset, his wife, or now ex-wife – is to get a £70k makeover to her council house paid for by the taxpayer.
Apparently, they are all ‘British nationals’, whatever that means nowadays. Five young men, all of obvious overseas heritage, decide to attack a facility that is heavily guarded.
Was it a Welsh choir that got lost, were they looking for some Jewish ambulances, had they come to admire the steeple at RAF Fairford church ? This is a real comedy shitshow, at least no-one has died.
Some nice sarcasm there Stevie.
Hi Pears.
In case you weren’t aware.
Reuters report the US President as saying “We had them under investigation. They were looking to do big damage to our fort and working with the British worked out great … We had them under view for a long time, and we got them,” Trump added.
Hope that helps ?
And you believe him. More fool you.
Quite. I didn’t think anybody believed Trump any more.
Hi Frank:
That and as reported above
“the news aggregator account World Source News did report a threat prior to the farmer’s emergency call-
The Timeline: The social media account @Worldsource24 (World Source News) posted at 6:18 p.m. EDT on Saturday, 26 September, stating that the Pentagon had obtained reliable intelligence pointing to a threat at RAF Fairford-
The Farmer’s 999 Call: The local farmer stumbled upon the suspects and their vans hours later, calling police at 1:36 a.m. BST on Sunday, 27 September (which is several hours after the World Source News report)-
While the public and online news tracking pages were sharing warnings that the base had been placed on a heightened security status, local police forces confirmed they were not actively intercepting the specific vehicles on the road until the farmer’s 999 call alerted them.”.
Hope that helps ?
“The local farmer stumbled upon the suspects and their vans hours later”
Johnny.
Just like a top army nurse stumbling upon the Skripal’s in the park – they don’t realise just how preposterous it all sounds to the public, anyway the so called “Farmer’s Wife” has refused to identify herself in a ITV news article – she asked to remain anonymous – just like security services personnel do.
Hi Republicofscotland:
As per my reply to Pears (above) – Reuters report the US President saying “We had them under investigation. They were looking to do big damage to our fort and working with the British worked out great … We had them under view for a long time, and we got them,” Trump added.
I suspect that there is some division between the US and UK agencies on this and that they are not totally aligned. How does our government make sense of the US President’s statement (above) and the evidence that an incident was reported on a news website hours before the alleged incident at Fairford was called in by a local farmer’s wife ? No doubt we will get clarity once the BBC’s security correspondent Mr Frank Gardiner gets his teeth into it.
Johnny.
Yes its as though Trump knew what was going to happen beforehand – as for Frank Gardner – the MSM always have a so called “expert” to roll out on just about any subject.
Did you know that there are around 200 US military personnel roaming around the UK – and no one knows where they are or what they are up to not even the MPs
Hi Republicofscotland:
Well I’m sure they are just helping to keep us all safe !
The Whelford “farmer” seems like a right one…
“The farmer was aware that RAF Fairford was operating at a high security level so immediately called the Ministry of Defence police, but did not receive an answer. ”
“‘I think they were hyper focused and vigilant about the base itself and had absolutely no regard for our village,’ she said.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p3kgz1w410o
Gotta wonder how long she’s been in farming and who she’s related to, who told her about the base’s security level, and when the level changed.
The Daily Heil is running a “farmer hits back at Streeting” story:
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16166449/Farmers-WhatsApp-message-alerted-locals-RAF-terror-bomb-plot-hits-Wes-Streeting-accusing-not-having-picture.html
“But there were definitely more than five, we think maybe between eight and 10 of them were there at that point,’ she said today.”
Not sure whether this is the royal “we” or who she means.
“She added: ‘I don’t know how he [Streeting] knows what picture I’ve got, I’ve never met him.”
“the farmer claimed she saw more ‘Middle Eastern-looking’ suspects fleeing the scene than the five men later arrested.”
“‘To be honest [Yes – always best to be honest – BR note], that’s why I want to be anonymous. It’s not really about that….I’d like to think, if you’d seen what I saw, would have done exactly the same.’”
“The farmer said she thought the vans were suspicious because a phone number and lettering on the back of the vehicles appeared to be fake.”
Yeah I mean if it had only been a large number of men in masks it could have been the SAS, right, even with their “Middle Eastern” eyes peering out, but … the choice of typeface on the white van must have been a dead giveaway. Anyway, back to the sheep dipping.
But wait…
“It has since been noted that the phone number displayed beneath the company name – 0742 418 2599 – was spaced in a format predominantly used in Iran.”
“Others pointed out how it was odd to use a red logo for a business supplying fuel, when the colour of petrol pumps in the UK is green. In Iran, the colour is red.”
From Urban Moving Systems to Fuel 2You?
““Others pointed out how it was odd to use a red logo for a business supplying fuel, when the colour of petrol pumps in the UK is green. In Iran, the colour is red.”!
Where I live there are two fuel companies supplying heating oil, one has red lorries and the other red and white lorries. Does this mean I’m buying my fuel from Iran? Why is it not cheaper, then? 30 seconds and an internet search later I now know that UK petrol pumps are, indeed, green…. and red, and yellow, and blue, and orange, and black…. Just how stupid is the average Daily Heil reader?
After all the fearmongering by spooks, government and media, it seems UK national security depends on a woman farmer driving around RAF Fairford for some reason at 1 in the morning.
All sounds perfectly legit and normal.
Zoot.
Well put Zoot – when you say like that it all falls into place.
Thanks RoS. Police say they’re releasing the terror suspects back into the community, despite warning they may be proxies of hostile states. So all very normal still. Seems to be closely following the script of the ambulance holocaust of Golders Green
“Residents living near RAF Fairford say they were told to stay indoors hours before police received a call about an alleged foiled bomb plot – with one claiming they were told an attack was about to happen.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/raf-fairford-investigation-residents-attack-latest-b3057550.html
“Curiouser and curiouser, …, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
All five suspects have now apparently been released on police bail, but remain under investigation. Looks like they may just have been red diesel thieves, and the authorities aren’t going to pin any terrorism charges on them. We’ll see.
Re-lapsed Agnostic
It’s so weird, isn’t it.
Something has gone seriously awry here, because genuine terror suspects don’t get bail, because of the perceived danger or threat they pose to the public and flight risk.
Recently, a Google security analyst went undercover to infiltrate the inner circle of a notorious supply-chain hacking gang known as TeamPCP And it made me think, what if an entire hacker group is mainly constituted of undercover operatives in other companies and law enforcement? All doing the same? The same applies to law enforcement infiltration, where agencies run undercover operatives but don’t talk to each other, and each defends their turf.
Maybe there is some embarrassing scandal like that here?
You can be held without charge for up to 14 days if you’re arrested under the Terrorism Act or National Security Act.
Were they not arrested under that Act?
Just bizarre.
The farmer who called 999 over the suspects near RAF Fairford says she is “100% certain” she saw 8-10 men, not just the 5 that were arrested.
She says she is surprised the police haven’t contacted her to ask what she saw.
Sketchier and sketchier. I almost feel sorry for that hapless ‘schoolboy’ Wes Streeting, clearly the adults aren’t keeping him in the loop.
My guess is, what former defence secretary Ben Wallace said earlier to Times radio might offer a clue:
“He[Trump] had made public comment about someone that was very, very important for our intelligence collection.”
This ‘someone’ Wallace refers to, this asset, may have played a key role in other terror-related recruitment cases, and they don’t want his identity revealed and all those other cases reviewed. Look at the spycops anger.
There must be something going on for the police to suddenly back off like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjwvkukvrOg
According to Wallace the person went on to write a book.
Wallace is almost certainly speaking on behalf of the British state here, not the Tory party or himself. Furious with Trump it seems.
Hi Goose.
Thank heavens they were not holding up handwritten signs calling for the de-proscription of a certain proscribed Direct Action group ! Then we can guarentee they would have been detained under Terrorism legislation.
Thanks for your reply Goose. I’m fairly sure they wouldn’t have been released on bail so soon unless the bizzies were absolutely sure they weren’t real terrorists. Evidence for them being fuel thieves comes from the oil drums seen next to one of the vans, and that another van had the fake company name ‘Fuel 2You’ emblazoned on it (not to be confused which the legit company ‘Fuel 2U’ which also transports fuel in white vans*) likely used to create the impression that they were legimately transporting diesel if stopped by the cops on the way back. Not sure what the substance thought to be an explosive was, but perhaps it was kitty litter which is used to remove red dye from diesel.
To my mind, all this has echoes of the Skripal farce, in which the local cops kept doing completely inane, unprofessional stuff that was so batshit I thought that it must all be kabuki theatre and that they were in on the whole thing. It took the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry and quite a bit of thought to convince me otherwise.
* Good to know that, whilst being prepared to steal thousands of litres of diesel from farms, today’s fuel thieves appear to draw the line at trademark infringement.
“And it made me think, what if an entire hacker group is mainly constituted of undercover operatives in other companies and law enforcement? All doing the same? ”
G.K.Chesterton got there first, over a hundred years ago, with his story, “The Man Who Was Thursday”, where exactly that happens: an agent is sent to infiltrate a group of suspected extremists, only to discover that all the other members are also secret agents.
“The five men arrested over the suspected Iranian bomb plot at RAF Fairford have all been released on bail.
The suspects, all British nationals from London
The Mail understands that tests on the material found in the three vans have established that it is not viable explosives.”
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16166889/Five-British-men-London-arrested-RAF-terror-bomb-plot-released-bail-Iran-categorically-rejects-involvement.html
“Andy Burnham will chair an urgent Cobra meeting over the suspected terror plot at RAF Fairford.”
https://www.gbnews.com/politics/raf-fairford-terror-plot-andy-burnham-cobra-meeting
Tw*ts !
Craig and George Galloway have been held and questioned for longer for crimes of journalism.
BBC News at Six, didn’t even bother to mention the fact it is normal practice for individuals to be held without charge for up to 14 days if they’re arrested under the Terrorism Act or National Security Act.
Allegedly trying to blow-up a U.S. base. It doesn’t get any more serious than that.
The ‘explosive’ wasn’t even viable according to reports. Which likely rules out a nation state, as they’d use their own operatives. All a bit like the attempted drone attack at Leipzig in Germany which was incapable of exploding, because key components weren’t connected, although it’s reported the explosives were the real deal .
So was the intention to ram the fence, after which the attackers would all likely be shot dead by security and everyone could then claim how lucky we got? While Iran got the blame? And was it foiled by the 999 caller lady, and the fact the police don’t coordinate with intel services for reasons related to plausible deniability?
Wager that’s not far off.
“All five suspects have now apparently been released on police bail”
!
SAS?
Or…
Out of interest, were they dancing at all like the five dancing Israelis connected with Urban Moving Systems on 11 September 2001?
Brian – from someone on X, sung to the tune of Three Blind Mice.
“5 masked guys, 5 masked guys
See how they run.
They all ran away from the farmer’s wife.
Then hung around til the cops arrived.
Did you ever hear so much crap in your life.
5 masked guys.”
Brilliant!
A former intel analyst on X, stated that the 5 were not detained under s41 of the Terrorism Act. Police held them under PACE, secured a custody extension/conducted extensive interviews/enquiries, then released them on stringent bail.
It makes Trump’s comments today, about knowing all about them, as if on terror watch list, even more curious.
Bizarro stuff..
Re-lapsed Agnostic
The ‘diesel thieves’ theory is sensible, but for the evacuations and bomb disposal robot, and the fact “a major incident’ was declared. Suspected diesel theft doesn’t usually generate all that.
Did the vans at that particular site just have some livery that somebody painted on in a garage somewhere, or was there a bigger business-themed multi-site operation going on, reminiscent of “urban removals” and “art students” in the USA a quarter of a century ago?
That would be a question for a “watch the Zionists” desk at MI5… Oh wait…
Where did the vans come from anyway?
cont…
And let’s face it. If scary anti-terror units were shouting at them and waving guns in their faces, the first thing they’d do is confess to planning to steal farm diesel, were that the truth. Nobody wants to get shot over their share from stolen farm diesel.
Brian Red
The van logo is FUEL 2YOU along with a telephone number : 0742 418 2599
Whether that’s a van rental company or they are theirs, Idk?
On the Fairfield false flag event, this is interesting.
“Yulia Skripal -she filmed her last ever public video on the grounds of an RAF Base, and then was never seen again.
That base was, strangely enough, RAF Fairford”
RoS
The Skripals began new lives in New Zealand (reports didn’t say where exactly). But it was widely reported and that Ardern’s govt didn’t really want to take them in.
Goose.
For me the Skripal’s would’ve been flown out of Fairfield on a US military plane to some blacksite – where they would’ve been murdered. their bodies would’ve been dissolved in acid or chopped up and fed to animals – or burned until only ash remained – they could never be released for they could have exposed the Salisbury false flag event.
What about all the others who must be in the know? The police, NHS, bystanders and so on? Why haven’t they been ‘disappeared’?
“What about all the others who must be in the know? The police, NHS, bystanders and so on? Why haven’t they been ‘disappeared’?”
Probably because they haven’t blown the whistle. Not everyone cares about the Skripal Affair as much as the people on this blog. The vast majority, even of Salisburgians, have probably forgotten all about it by now. Why should they rock the boat and get themselves into possible trouble just to satisfy the curiosity of some commenters on a blog?
The Skripals haven’t ‘blown the whistle’; the claim was they were murdered to prevent them from doing so.
Look at how many were involved in the Covid op – it can be, and has been done – many are also useful idiots parroting the narrative.
“The Skripals haven’t ‘blown the whistle’; the claim was they were murdered to prevent them from doing so.”
What has that got to do with the subject under discussion? I thought we were talking about “The police, NHS, bystanders and so on”, unless by “so on” you mean the world and his wife?
RoS
That assumes they actually have something to blow the whistle about, do they? All they might know, is that they ended up in hospital after being found unconscious. And if provided with a nice home, a car, money, what incentive would they have rock the boat and jeopardise all that by dragging it all up?
I’d imagine, if Yulia somuch as a contacted a journalist, the authorities would know about it. And there aren’t many truly independent journalists left who’d take the story on. She didn’t even reveal anything too damaging in that ‘proof of life’ phone call she made to her cousin Viktoria Skripal in Russia.
You’re putting a lot of faith in the ‘official’ narrative. It’s nonsense.
The Skripals know who poisoned them and why, as does Pablo Miller.
I don’t believe in this day it is possible to dissappear and remain incognito. The Skripals have no reason to want or remain silent, they have family and they were the victims after all. The only logical conclusion is they were murdered. The New Zealand story is patently false.
Stevie Boy
If the reports are accurate about them being provided with new identities in New Zealand, new home, car.. It may all be tied to some sort of NDA-type legal document they’ve signed. Sergei was as spy remember, he’s used to such things. Everything may be void if they even attempt to break cover, what have they got then? And although Russia probably has little interest in them, they likely have protection provided too.
Nah.
They are the victims, so why disappear ?
Russia didn’t attack them, yulia was totally innocent.
Why would they need new identities ?.
It’s another Phantasmagorical MI6 BS story, makes no sense, they’re dead.
Stevie Boy
The New Zealand story is patently false.
It was reported in the New Zealand Herald and multiple other newspapers in the UK
Why would they need new identities ?.
I’d assume because authorities don’t want them talking to journalists and TV reporters, or doing magazine interviews. Yulia’s only public appearance was a single, recorded scripted interview. You can bet multiple channels asked to interview her and were refused permission. Surely, you can guess why. Even if the Skripals believed they were attacked by Russia, they could still slip up and inadvertently hand something to those who are skeptical about the whole ‘novichok’ narrative.
‘The New Zealand story is patently false.’
Almost certainly. It would be an absurdly small country in which to place two Russian speakers albeit they both have both a command of English. Their faces were across world media for many months.
I think the narrative aimed for is that NATO looks after its own and can send people to the far ends of the earth for safety. There is no evidence that Yulia ever worked for the security services of any country but she was working for some time at the American Embassy in Moscow. Why she left I have no idea but prior to traveling to Salisbury- which she had done on a number of occasions- she was working as a humble school secretary here in north west Moscow.
The UK’s Nation Protection Service currently has 3,000 people provided with new identities living incognito. That includes Maxine Carr and Jamie Bulger’s killers (although Venables has rather messed things up for himself).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Protected_Persons_Service
Thousands more disappear voluntarily every year to escape relationship problems, money worries, abuse etc.
It is possible.
“The New Zealand story is patently false.”
Surely not! “Resettlement in the East” has a ring of truth about it, nicht wahr?
Courtesy of Mohamad Safa on X.
“If you are wondering why they kill—and continue to kill—journalists, healthcare workers, aid workers, and UN staff, it’s because they are the people who will testify in court as to what war crimes were committed.
If you are wondering why they are removing the rubble and bodies before UN and ICC inspections, it’s because this constitutes evidence of war crimes.
If you are wondering why they are calling to dismantle the International Criminal Court and sanction ICC judges, it’s because it’s the court that will prosecute them for the war crimes they have committed.
If you are wondering why they are calling to dissolve the United Nations, sanction UN officials, and threatening UN representatives, it’s because we are the ones who documented all the war crimes they committed and demanded accountability.
They are killing the witnesses, the evidence, the observers, and the court”
And, to be clear, ‘They’ are Israel, the USA, the UK and other western states.
Courageous people, many of them having been repeatedly arrested for supporting a terrorist organisation…. a terrorist organisation that was doing the polar opposite of what terrorists do:
Palestine Action: Police arrest protesters throughout the night outside Labour conference
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/i-oppose-genocide-hundreds-risk-arrest-outside-labour-conference-over-palestine-action-ban (MEE, posted today)
And then there’s the comments in this short vid on The London Standard youtube channel, the vast majority of them posted by (one or two) paid shills no doubt:
50 arrested at Palestine Action protest outside Labour conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrHVLG45aUc (1.37 posted today)
One to keep an eye on: Ranulph Fiennes. Could he possibly have something he wants to say about one or more SAS jobs? This is the guy who wrote “The Feather Men”.
Secretary Rubio tells Fox News tonight that the RAF Fairford incident involves “a foreign actor” and that it’s a very serious situation.
Are the US in an alternate reality? If it were a ‘very serious’ incident involving ‘foreign actors’ they would have been arrested under section 41 of the Terrorism Act and not PACE and wouldn’t have been granted bail. The media are still talking about this being a ‘foiled attack’ too. It’s time the security services stopped hiding behind the out-of-date, unaccountable, ‘neither confirm nor deny'(NCND) formulation, and told us whether Trump is simply making this stuff up about them being ‘very dangerous’ individuals, who were known and under long-running investigation.
Reminded of that song by Sting : If You Love Somebody Set Them Free
Breaking News: The ‘foreign actor’ is Tom Cruise. 🙂
Stevie Boy
The lack of political / media curiosity, just shows how utterly servile and moribund Westminster and the press are. National security obsessed Newsnight didn’t even mention it last night. Can guess why.
Trump’s ‘noises off’ claiming ‘foreign actors’ were involved and those arrested were under long-running investigation, is complicating this mess no doubt.
They got bail before local residents had even returned to their homes, and Burnham called a COBRA meeting – over diesel theft?
Quote : A Cabinet Office Briefing Room(COBRA) meeting is an emergency response committee in the United Kingdom convened to coordinate the government’s actions during a national or regional crisis.
“94 year old Jewish human rights barrister, Margaret Owen arrested under the Terrorism Act outside Labour Party conference.”
Courtesy of Defend Our Juries on X.
Ed Miliband looked ashen when he came face-to-face with a member of the great unwashed, complaining about the proscription order and arrests outside conference.
Miliband claims the intention of the proscription order against PA was never to jail grannies and vicars for alleged ‘terrorism’. Then he says let’s watch the Supreme Court process play out. Why not intervene instead? If they think it fundamentally wrong, as he stated to Andrew Marr. They are in govt for heaven’s sake! Crazy town leaving it to the SC to decide for them.
Their conference slogan is HOPE AGAIN – the implication being, there was no hope under Starmer? According to the Guardian, Burnham is set to announce the party will support proportional representation – to avoid the UK becoming a worldwide laughing stock and ‘failed’ democracy if Reform gain a huge HoC majority on 25%. But he says AFTER the next election, so it will be too late. Gordon Brown came up with similar late offers of radical change, before 2010’s GE. They are never implemented. The lesson being: Either do it now or do it never.
Fingers crossed then, just hope things get better, no concrete plans, no analysis of the problems. HOPE LESS.
Goose.
It all corrupt – and to a deep extent, for me only a reset via a revolution by the people will stand any chance of changing things, for those in power will never genuinely hand over the power to the people, no the people will need to take it, from the corrupt judges, politicians and the very wealthy who are all working together hand-in-glove – to push the their agendas – it will be messy and they’ll be casualties along the way, but – there’s really no other way that I can see.
I don’t envy Burnham, he vastly oversold his ability to change anything.
He’s a bit of a tepid Blairite by political inclination and he lacks the anger or passion needed to take on all the vested interests. He’ll do anything to avoid a fight in fact. When he’s quizzed by reporters on anything remotely controversial, be it a Scottish referendum or N.Ireland border poll, he scuttles to a ‘safety first’ establishment position. He’s adopted the Ukraine cause and Zelensky with gusto, and he’s now talking up Cadwalladr-esque nonsense about industrial quantities of Russian disinfo that we’re supposedly drowning in, but that no one can provide any examples of. How do they reconcile this stuff?
Goose
Burnham is part of the problem not the solution – think of Burnham as a like for like swap with Starmer, and you’re almost there.
RoS
Low blow from Burnham in his speech, linking Swinney’s comments on him being the “last UK PM” to his father’s death. I’m sure Swinney was unaware. Burnham fought back tears, as he said he’d prove him wrong. Why English politicians are so keen to keep Scotland locked in the Union as if a colonial trophy, Idk?
Not that I rate John Swinney though – he was meant to be a stopgap leader after Yousaf’s abrupt resignation. Swinney regressed the SNP as leader in his first stint, 2000-2004, with Alex Salmond doing the heavy political lifting to make them Scotland’s dominant party. Swinney and the SNP got incredibly lucky, imho, in 2026’s Holyrood elections in that Starmer had dragged down Labour’s support. Had those elections been held in 2024 the SNP would now be in opposition. The fear is the SNP take all the wrong signals from 2026’s fluke win.
Suppose people should just be thankful his father wasn’t a ‘toolmaker’.
Why don’t these soppy politicians realise we all have to deal with the same problems?
Do we want to see grown adult men taking about their parents, with quivering voices, and the tearful frontbench sat dabbing their eyes?
Goose @16.03pm
Its all a ruse by Burnham and Swinney – Swinney is a Westminster puppet – so really they are just gaming the public – there’s been a independence majority at Holyrood for over a decade now, and nothing has happened, in anycase Holyrood was created by Westminster – as was its overseeing body the (SPCB) Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body to run the colonial outpost.
RoS
To be fair to Burnham, he did actually say Swinney didn’t know about his father’s death. I missed that bit because his speech was on in the background.
Not a fan of politicians using their parents, dead or alive, as emotional props for policies though. It looks like they haven’t got the confidence to make the case and argue for something on its own merits. It never used to happen here, guess it’s another Americanisation.
A revolution of consciousness would be better RoS…. a revolution in which everyone on the planet (who isn’t already aware) is woken up to the lies and deceit and manipulation, the war-mongering fear-mongering and hate-mongering, the mass-murdering planet-destroying demented psychopaths who think they own the goddam universe.
Talking of which, Caitlin Johnstone writes about such matters in her latest post:
AI Won’t Solve Humanity’s Problems Because Our Problems Aren’t Caused By Lack Of Intelligence
https://caityjohnstone.medium.com/ai-wont-solve-humanity-s-problems-because-our-problems-aren-t-caused-by-lack-of-intelligence-2998b7eb24de
Allan.
In an ideal world yes, but we don’t live in an ideal world – we live in a world where a US POTUS can stand at the podium at the UN and say he will wipe out an entire civilisation in Iran – and that he (Trump) is only curtaled by his own morality – and then we have Netanyahu waving pagers at UN delegates – and boasting about them exploding and killing people.
We live in a world where its common for the US and Israel to bomb schools and hospitals – and then deny it – or claim that they were terrorist centres – we live in a world where a Mossad agent Epstein collected huge amounts of blackmail on powerful people – who kiddie fiddled and in some cases murdered the children on Epstein’s island, and then their bodies were dissolved in huge vats of Sulphuric acid on the island to hide it.
RoS: Yes, I completely understand what you say, but the revolution in consciousness would get us to that ideal world, and the only thing standing between us and realising that ideal world would be, potentially, the PTB praetorian guard – ie the military and the police force etc of any given country. I have no doubt whatsoever that 90%-plus of the Earth’s population – if asked – would infinitely prefer to live in a world free from wars and conflicts, a world in which we live together in peace and harmony with each-other and the planet that sustains us and all other life.
Yes, it’s a pipe-dream, but we now have the technology to create a sustainable reality, and transform the world for the better, before the ruling elite so-called destroy the planet, one way or another. Can you imagine the elation of living in such a world and forever leaving behind the totally fucked up insane reality we all live in now, and have done for so long. A history that future generations would look back on with disbelief, and everlasting gratitude to the generation that made it happen, and created a new world for them to live in.
RoS
RAF plot ‘may have been a dry run’ – Telegraph
The Telegraph is usually well-briefed by the security services, The former editor, Charles Moore, was given a guided tour of GCHQ by Sir Iain Lobban, the then DG of gchq.
I wonder if UK authorities are dragging this out and not simply declaring it a false alarm, so as to not offend or embarrass the U.S.? Where from Trump & Rubio down, they have been making all sorts of assertions about possible motives and foreign connections for these men. The simple fact is, if these were foreign-linked terrorists they wouldn’t be out on bail.
The carpet corner will now be raised and the fairford nonsense will be swept under it along with the Jewish Ambulance fiasco. It never happened, forget it. Onto the next distraction …
Allan @16.04pm.
Sounds good Allan – I guess you would class that as hope, hope is a dangerous thing in this day and age – but nonetheless its all that many folk have left.
Goose @16.27pm.
Yes I agree the Telegraph has long since been a security services outlet – in hindsight I rather think the diesel thief story is the real story – but its been altered and capitalised on by Whitehall to portray it as an attempted attack on RAF Fairfield – which suits the narrative on blaming Iran for it – it all about gaining public consent to allow Burnham to deploy English military assets to fight Iran, there’s already a huge build up of US military assets and personnel in the M.E – the illegal war on Iran will take a step up – in the coming weeks
The Times tonight : Suspect foiled RAF Fairford ‘bomb plot’ by ringing police himself
Just gets more and more bizarre.
Sources told the Times they aren’t being investigated for fuel theft either. Unwitting fall guys seems to be the working theory.
“Burnham is set to announce the party will support proportional representation”
It will probably be the same crappy system we have in Wales, with interchangeable candidates wearing the same rosette.
Is it disinformation that liberal governments across the west — the grown-up arbiters of truth — participated in the crime of crimes in Gaza?
That the Burnham government still is?
Do you think BBC Verify and the new Ministry of Truth can put the mask back on these monsters?
Despite the U.K Defence Secretary’s injuction not to speculate about Fairford, the latest contribution by the US Secretary of State Mr Rubio has made this almost impossible since he went on Fox News to advise that Fairford was a serious incident with foreign actors involved. The lack of alignment between the UK and US is noticeable. Just to speculate, if the US administration had sufficient contempt for the UK government then perhaps they [the US] would undertake a false flag operation against their Fort Fairford without letting UK agencies know ? Just a guess. Remember (as cited by me on 28th September- @Worldsource24 (World Source News) posted at 6:18 p.m. EDT on Saturday, 26 September, stating that the Pentagon had obtained reliable intelligence pointing to a threat at RAF Fairford-).
P.S The Burnham move to P.R is to prevent a Corbyn or Farage like figure gaining power through the First Past The Post System we have. However as with the Scottish Parliament you can actually get a majority government this way. Either way its change the rules when they don’t suit you, More genocide I fear.