We were waiting for Richard Medhurst to arrive and join our panel at the Beautiful Days festival, when he was arrested and imprisoned for 23.5 hours. Obviously we were all worried sick about him.
I was arrested at Heathrow Airport under the Terrorism Act, Sec 12 because of my reporting.
6 police officers were waiting for me at the entrance of the aircraft.
I was held for almost 24 hours and questioned.
I believe I'm the first journalist to be arrested under this… pic.twitter.com/pbf6q5dXIf
— Richard Medhurst (@richimedhurst) August 19, 2024
It is now becoming easier to list the truly dissident UK journalists who have not been arrested for terrorism than those who have! This fascist ploy of labelling journalists as terrorists is incredible.
Richard’s case is slightly different to that of other journalists including myself, John Laughland, Vanessa Beeley, Johanna Ross, Kit Klarenberg and many more to suffer the same treatment, in that Richard was specifically held under Section 12 of the Terrorism Act – which outlaws support for a proscribed organisation.
Yes, you are reading that right. You can go to jail for 14 years for expressing an opinion in support of a proscribed organisation.
We now have an extraordinary conflict between UK domestic law and international law.
The International Court of Justice has just last month stated definitively to the UN General Assembly that the Israeli occupation is illegal and it is the duty of states not to support it.
279. Moreover, the Court considers that, in view of the character and importance of the rights and obligations involved, all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It is for all States, while respecting the Charter of the United Nations and international law, to ensure that any impediment resulting from the illegal presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory to the exercise of the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an end. In addition, all the States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention have the obligation, while respecting the Charter of the United Nations and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention.
Yet it is perfectly legal in UK domestic law for zionists to state that they support the Israeli Defence Force and they hope that the IDF kill every Palestinian in Gaza.
Indeed zionists state this all the time, supporting an action that is entirely illegal in international law, and no action is ever taken against these zionists by the UK state.
Members of the IDF who have actually participated in the genocide are able to come and live in the UK unmolested.
In stark contrast to the illegal acts of the occupying power, the Palestinian people do have the right of armed resistance in international law.
This right is founded on the right of self-determination in the UN Charter and is encapsulated in the First Protocol of the Geneva Convention (1977) Article 1 Para 4:
The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
Yet under UK law it is legal to express support for the completely illegal operations of the IDF (illegal even without considering the question of Genocide!) while it is illegal to express support for completely legal acts of resistance by certain Palestinian groups.
Let me spell this out again.
It is legal in UK law to support Israel’s genocidal and illegal acts of colonial occupation, but illegal in UK law to support Palestine’s legal acts of armed resistance to colonial and racist occupation.
The Protocol to the Geneva Convention makes clear that those engaged in armed resistance against occupation are both entitled to the same humanitarian protections, and obliged to respect the same humanitarian law, as other combatants.
There is a fascinating twist here from the days when Robin Cook was Foreign Secretary and I was Deputy Head of the FCO Africa Department. In 1998 the First Protocol of the Geneva Convention was incorporated into UK law, and the United Kingdom made a very telling reservation.
British law stipulates that the First Protocol’s recognition that a person not wearing uniform may still be a lawful combatant, and entitled to the full protections of the Geneva Convention provided he carries his arms openly, applies only in occupied territory or when engaged in fighting colonial or racist occupation.
Let us look at that more closely.
Schedule H of the UK Geneva Conventions Act (First Protocol) Order 1998 states that
ARTICLE 44, paragraph 3
It is the understanding of the United Kingdom that:
the situation in the second sentence of paragraph 3 can only exist in occupied territory or in armed conflicts covered by paragraph 4 of Article 1;
… which means that this provision of the First Protocol:
Recognizing, however, that there are situations in armed conflicts where, owing to the nature of the hostilities an armed combatant cannot so distinguish himself, he shall retain his status as a combatant, provided that, in such situations, he carries his arms openly:
(a) During each military engagement, and
(b) During such time as he is visible to the adversary while he is engaged in a military deployment preceding the launching of an attack in which he is to participate.
Acts which comply with the requirements of this paragraph shall not be considered as perfidious within the meaning of Article 37, paragraph 1 (c).
… only applies in UK law where:
The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
So, and it is absolutely important this is understood, the right to fight against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes is not only an absolute right in international law, it is also a specific right in UK law.
And UK law further specifically recognises that when fighting colonial domination, alien occupation and a racist regime you do not have to wear uniform.
Applying this to 7 October, it means that those armed Palestinian combatants who were not members of a proscribed organisation (see below) were engaged in legal armed struggle in terms of UK law, provided they respected international humanitarian law in so doing.
Which makes the recent clarifications that the majority of civilian casualties were killed by the IDF and that the mass rapes and beheaded babies stories were a total fabrication, still more important.
Every colonial or racist power that has ever faced armed resistance has always characterised the native peoples resisting as “terrorists”, “savages” or similar. Asymmetric warfare is by nature unconventional. The systematic and often legalised atrocities of the coloniser will indeed often spark uncontrolled acts of rage that rightly fall outside what international humanitarian law will condone.
So we now have the situation that Richard Medhurst is arrested for allegedly supporting armed resistance that is not only undeniably legal in international law but is also specifically legal in British law.
The source of this conundrum is the extraordinarily arbitrary power of proscribing an organisation.
Now to proscribe an organisation the government does not have to prove its actions were illegal, either under international law or UK law. An organisation is proscribed simply on the basis that the government says so.
If the government proscribed the Girl Guides, you could get up to 14 years in jail for expressing support for the Girl Guides, and no amount of argument in court that the Girl Guides is not in fact a terrorist organisation would help you.
Hamas and Hezbollah are acting legally in UK law in terms of the Geneva Convention First Protocol Order of 1998, but expressing support for them is nevertheless illegal because the proscription of an organisation is an entirely arbitrary power of the executive.
When I ran the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s South Africa (Political) Desk in 1985, it was the firm position of the Thatcher Government that the ANC was a terrorist organisation and that Nelson Mandela was rightly and correctly imprisoned as a terrorist.
The notion that governments can fairly and impartially designate “terrorists” is very obviously nuts.
It is important to add that this analysis of the legal position in no way implies that I do, or do not, approve of Hamas or Hezbollah. In general I am not in favour of mixing the state and religion, so I come from a very different place and have my criticisms.
But it is also important not to be scared to state that the proscription of Hamas as a terrorist organisation does not align with the UK legal position in the First Protocol Order that specifically recognises the right of an occupied people to armed resistance.
It also causes great confusion. It is, for example, only the military wing of Hamas that is a proscribed organisation. So far as I can tell, it would not be illegal to state that Hamas did a very good job of running Gaza’s schools and hospitals.
But it is very difficult to be sure – the law and its application are arbitrary and not foreseeable.
When I stood for election in Blackburn, I had the specific endorsement of the Palestinian Foreign Ministry which had been engaged with the South African delegation in the ICJ Genocide case against Israel at the Hague.
I was then also (unsolicited) offered the endorsement of Hamas. This caused some head-scratching and I consulted an eminent lawyer. He advised that while it would be illegal for me to endorse Hamas, it would not be illegal for Hamas to endorse me.
Particularly so if it came from the political and not the military wing.
I thought this sounded great fun, but perhaps not great enough fun for me to spend several years of my life fighting the case from inside a prison cell. So I did not take up the offer.
Any law which states you can be jailed for fourteen years simply for expressing an opinion is a very bad law, no matter what that opinion may be.
To use such arbitrary power to seek to silence those who are opposing a most dreadful genocide, is the action of an over-mighty state led by evil people.
I think it is most important that we are not silenced. Hence this article. Most of my friends are advising me I should travel abroad for a while once again, and I am trying to make up my mind about this. I should be grateful for your views.
The UK is plainly not a safe place for political dissidents.
The reason for this galloping authoritarianism is of course panic by the political class that they have lost popular consent, particularly for zionism in view of the appalling genocide in plain view by the terrorist settler state.
To conclude on an optimistic note, here is a photo of the gathering that Richard was prevented from joining. It brought together at Beautiful Days a few of the wonderful people who will not be silenced, and who will be remembered as being on the right side of history.
The blog is in something of a financial crisis. Over half of subscriptions are now “suspended” by PayPal, which normally happens when your registered credit or debit card expires. The large majority of those whose accounts are “suspended” seem to have no idea it has happened. This is different from “cancellation” which is deliberate.
Please check if your subscription is still active. There is in fact no way to reactivate – you have to make a new subscription with a new card if your card expired.
The bank standing order method works very well for those who do not want to use PayPal.
————————————————
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
I did not know what “support for a proscribed organisation” meant. I can understand proscribing material support but nuanced discussion should always be allowed. Your example of the ANC & Nelson Mandela is the perfect illustration of why. I have heard Richard Medhurst speak and found him compassionate for all people suffering. Might should not define right.
“To use such arbitrary power to seek to silence those who are opposing a most dreadful genocide, is the action of an over-mighty state led by evil people.”
For “over-mighty” read criminal.
As I understand it, the UN does not regard Hamas as a terrorist organisation.
You could (if you were of a mind) describe Austerity as a ‘Hate Crime’.
Worldwide: as an attack on the Working Class/poor.
The bombing and a oblivion of the Gazans (very poor indeed) is a result of Neo – liberal economic application. Hatred of the Poor.
One for Sir Kier. Apparently – he’s a lawyer.
This sort of discrimination extends even to Parliaments. Australian Senator Fatima Payman was forced from the Labor caucus, and eventually the Labor Party, for supporting a claim for Palestinian statehood, a claim supported by international law. The PM even insisted that the Senator should resign from Parliament. The Israeli government’s assertion that it has full legal claim to all land in Palestine is based on their oft repeated public assertion that the land had been gifted to them 3,000 years ago by their God and recorded in their scriptures. The Australian government has chosen not to dispute this legally baseless religious claim. In punishing Senator Payman for exercising her rights as a Parliamentarian Albanese and the Labor government are directly breaching Section 116 of the Australian Constitution which bans the imposition of any religious test for holders of public office. They have insisted that Senator Payman subscribe to the political views of the Israeli government in regard to Palestine, Hamas and their conduct of war crimes, political views based specifically by Israeli leadership on a Jewish religious belief system. Senator Payman was never required to hold or support those religious views while acting as a Senator. The Labor government actions were a blatant breach of the Constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_116_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia
Did she stand her ground or fold like a liberal?
Senator Payman did hold her ground but had few enforceable rights. Labor caucus and the Labor Party are not public offices but member groups who can exercise their own membership rules. Senator Payman would have no action against them. However, had the Parliament sought to eject her from her Senate office for her views and her votes then that is a matter that is protected under Section 116 of the Australian Constitution and would be unlawful. She would have a strong case in my view before the High Court. It’s telling that the PM called for her resignation from Parliament, a grubby bullying exercise from a man completely compromised by his abject submission to Israeli and US propaganda.
Thank you, good for her. I noticed in Craig’s photo that there was the former leader of the Liarbour Partei, Jeremy (origami) Corbyn.
I’ve banged on about this before but the zionist antisemites aren’t a lobby, they work for American Caesar. These pretend Jews do the same thing to Congress that the Sturmabteilung did to the Reichstag when it convened at the Kroll Opera House in March 1933. Caesar has been using the same wheeze in Britain so I’m not surprised that he’s doing it elsewhere.
The laws of America are written by lobbyists for the most part
That means “American Caesar” is directed by private interests in finance, oil, weapons etc.
Do I recall correctly that in spring during one of the early campaign videos on this site Medhurst had reminded that – was it ISIS? – had not carried out a single terrorist act in GB or was it even all of Europe? (Which would give away who their real masters are.)
Insight of this kind naturally is disliked especially by law enforcement. The smearing then is willingly done by legacy papers.
Medhurst might be member of the privileged class but he talks like one of those Untermenschen from Third World countries who can easily be disposed of. It´s more complicated with white traitors…
That´s what these laws are for: Punishing traitors of the elite.
p.s. I was surprised Richard Medhurst was not arrested earlier. But maybe that was just caused by election-induced caution. And as German native I always expect the worst.
I believe it is also the case that ISIS has never attacked Israel?
I also believe it was Priti Patel who visited ISIS (?) fighters being treated in Israeli hospitals in the Golan heights.
It’s also acknowledged that Israel actually helped set up and supported Hamas, to undermine the PLO.
So why isn’t Israel proscribed?
A question for solicitor two-tier Keir?
Yes, it is odd how the knowledge about Israel creating Hamas – which has been written about even in German MSM – has totally been buried since Oct.
And as you say no conclusions drawn.
p.s. During Covid the German parliament voted AGAINST vaccine mandate for the population which for me was a pleasant surprise.
They seem to be incapable of coming up with the same level of critical thinking regarding Israel´s crimes.
And the evidence is so much more overwhelming than in the case of Covid in 2021, especially the cost of life. What would have to happen for those same MPs to act now?
And here we go:
Germany today (reported by junge Welt)
“Federal Prosecutor’s Office charges suspected IS members”
Let me quote from the piece simply for the vocabulary and the assumptions everywhere. Apparently they have almost no hard evidence/proof.
“(…)
Karlsruhe. The Federal Prosecutor’s Office has filed charges against two suspected IS supporters who are said to have planned an attack on the Swedish parliament. The highest prosecution authority announced this on Wednesday in Karlsruhe. The two Afghan citizens were arrested in mid-March in the Gera area of Thuringia. They are said to have adhered to the jihadist ideology of the “Islamic State” (IS) since 2023 at the latest.
One of the accused is said to have joined the IS offshoot “Islamic State – Khorasan Province” (ISPK) from Germany in August 2023. In response to Koran burnings in Sweden and other Scandinavian countries, the ISPK is said to have commissioned him to carry out an attack in Europe. He is then said to have planned, together with the other accused, to shoot police officers and other people at the parliament in Stockholm.
(…)”
ISIS groups have attacked Israel and Saudi Arabia but infrequently, though it is impossible to define a decentralised organisation like ISIS, were they the “real” ISIS. Certainly ISIS groups seem more interested in places like Syria, Iraq and other non Western areas.
> I think it is most important that we are not silenced. Hence this article. Most of my friends are advising me I should travel abroad for a while once again, and I am trying to make up my mind about this. I should be grateful for your views.
Good day Mr Murray,
Perhaps you might give serious consideration to establishing a second residence in Malaysia, which achieved independence from the British some 70 years ago. English is widely spoken, and the religious views of your wife and children would be respected in this Islamic state. Malaysia is also a member of the Non Aligned Movement and has no formal relations with the state of Israel.
I do wonder if the time has come for those who are strongly against the actions of the British state to cease residing and paying taxes there. If you were in a position to affect change through public office then different considerations would apply, but it seems you are able to pursue your journalism elsewhere. Why should you (and your subscribers) keep funding the British war machine?
Kind Regards,
I think this is an excellent suggestion. Though I guess there are numerous other countries about which could equally well be recommended, which I happen to know less of
It is a good thought and Malaysia had occurred to me too. But I am severely constrained at the moment by not having any money!
Might I suggest that the proceeds from selling your house in Edinburgh would fund both the moving and immigration expenses (including bank deposit) with enough remaining to purchase an equivalent home in Malaysia?
I wish you well and hope you are able to find a way out. I have followed your work for 20 years and would contribute a little towards a relocation fund if you choose to raise one.
Definitely Not 4BwD
Was it not, a Malaysian court – that convicted both Bush and Blair, of war crimes in Iraq – in absentia, so yes Craig might get a fair shake – as they say, in Malaysia.
You could ask Brian Berletic what he thinks about Far Eastern exile….
I don’t think he sees it as exile Squeeth.
I heard that on Zeddonnikikik on the other side of the Milky Way Galaxy there’s a new movie breaking box-office records about the Earth entitled Planet Of The Psychopaths.
As for terrorists, it is of course the biggest mass-murdering terrorists on the planet who designate others as terrorists. I just checked and it appears that the vast majority of countries do not regard Hamas as a terrorist organisation… And in 2018 a motion at the UN to condemn Hamas was rejected. Presumably all these countries are antisemitic countries (facetiousness alert, just in case anyone takes that seriously).
If you appear on Galloway’s MOATS then you will be harassed at your UK airport of arrival.
If you appear on GB News you will be helped through customs on a VIP basis.
The UK is a self-styled and self contradictory ‘democratic monarchy.’ So I cannot understand the bewilderment when the state flexes its muscles to muzzle discontent. The State is, as a Russian who grasped the nature of political power once said, ‘Bodies of armed men.’ The role of the state is not to eliminate violence but to regulate it. The same as the role of the police is not to eliminate crime but to regulate it, as laid down in law by the ruling elite. (Thus arms dealing to fund a genocide is legal, drug dealing on a housing scheme by oiks is illegal etc.)
Dissent comes into a similar category. One role of the state is to regulate dissent which has been done since time immemorial. The notion that Britain was in any way different is a fetish that was widely accepted post war in the UK and is now, under the Starmer regime, clearly anachronistic.
Richard Medhurst appeared on MOATS today. Unfortunately, he was somewhat limited in what he felt able to say.
I was unaware, until it was stated by Galloway at that appearance, that Medhurst’s parents were both recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize.
western politicians and journalists can only dream of being able to condemn Hamas or Hezbollah for bombing schools and hospitals, snipering toddlers, medics and journalists, killing Down’s people with attack dogs, letting babies rot in ICUs, gang raping prisoners, etc, etc.
in the face of what is actually happening, it is essential to cow and discredit the few dissident journalists in the west who are not prepared to justify the unjustifiable. the Nato states will not be constrained by what is written in law as that is irrelevant to the upholders of the rules based order.
This appalling government seems to regard the British people, by and large, as its enemy; there is ample proof – if proof were needed – in the sort of action described in your excellent article. Obergruppenführer Reeves’ petty attack on Britain’s 11m pensioners is the Labour Party just getting warmed up – soon we will be forbidden outright to hold contrarian views about anything this government sees fit to inflict upon us.
It’s not just this appalling government it’s all of them, the uni-party. They hate the people, they hate the country.
They are happy to spend our money, on wars, support to fascists and corrupt international entities, but they don’t want to spend a penny on bettering the lot of the people. They are the enemy.
Is “majority of civilians were killed by IDF” on oct7 factual? It certainly seems many were, but interested on the source
“admitting that the IDF order the Hannibal directive on October 7th
4:04 and they were killing Israelis in order to not being captured by Hamas
. . . Hamas closed with and destroyed the Israeli Defense Force Through Firepower
4:43 maneuver and slaughtered them killing hundreds um and that the civilians that died didn’t die by Hamas terrorism um
4:51 they died because of irresponsible Israeli action the vast majority of civilians killed on October 7th were
4:58 killed by the Israeli milit milary the Israelis denied it of course because they had to create a counternarrative
5:04 they can’t they can’t accept that Hamas defeated them militarily they have to
5:09 say Hamas is a terrorist organization “ ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I5aurCrITs
The biggest flaw in UK “democracy” is the lack of a written constitution. “Rule of law” is meaningless when there is a body of people – Parliament – which can change the law as it pleases, by simple majority vote. Any law which appears to constrain what Parliament may do can be changed by Parliament; so in effect, the “rule of law” does not apply to Parliament.
If Keir Starmer wants to prevent anyone from giving money to Mr Murray, he can do that. All that is necessary is to place Mr Murray on the list of “sanctioned” individuals. Parliament can do that to anyone, indeed it has done it under the Tories (link).
In the USA, whose politicians are at least as unpleasant as ours, it is much more difficult to punish people without a trial, or to prohibit freedom of speech when the politicians don’t like what you say.
The biggest flaw in British democracy is that there isn’t any. Contrast the rules laid down by the boss class and the democratic vote on EU membership when the public was given a once-in-a-lifetime democratic choice about something. I’m still laughing.
As above, so below.
The “Rules based international order”, which lacks any rules.
The “Constitutional monarchy”, which lacks any constitution.*
I fled the British Reich thirty years ago, a victim of Jeffrey and Mary Archer and their crimes at Anglia Television. I had no money either.
Go for it!
* No doubt some old bore will come along to tell me that there is, in fact, a British constitution: it’s just that it is an unwritten constitution.
That is just one more example of the British and their “Big Lie” technique.
“ it is an unwritten constitution.”
So that puts it in the same category as NATO promising Gorby that it would not expand.
Not worth the paper it isn’t printed on
Where was the Constitution when Assange was sent to Belmarsh? Where is it with members of Palestinian Action being jailed for years for disrupting the flow of arms to Israel? According to a commentator here domestic undercover British security assets can now kill anyone who threatens their mission!?
I don’t see any “Constituition” at all
Were the Stern Gang not a terrorist organisation ?
Terrorists who became a government.
Whose crimes were whitewashed by endorsing the Zionist statehood.
The Zionists,and by proxy the US will never grant statehood to Palestinians.
For them it would be like voting for national collective suicide.
A circumstance brought about by themselves and their proxy the US.
A fair fight would be Palestinian Statehood,they can then form an army.
This thought terrifies the Zionists and the US.
But perpertating this status quo shows the world who the US and Israel is.
Bullies with zero respect.
As far as I’m aware the Stern Gang and Irgun were not actually designated terrorist organisations by any country or countries, but ‘viewed’ as terrorist organisations by whoever (probably just the Briitish government). I just did a search re >jewish terrorism< and came across the following wikipedia entry entitled 'Jewish extremism terrorism', which I very quickly skimmed through, and doesn't appear to mention either of them:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_extremist_terrorism
I then did a search re Irgun and found this wikipedia entry (which I haven't yet read):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_extremist_terrorism
And then ditto for the Stern Gang:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)
I haven't read that either, but I happened to notice a couple of things highlighted in the second paragraph – ie Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, so just read that bit, and this is what it says:
Lehi split from the Irgun militant group in 1940 in order to continue fighting the British during World War II. It initially sought an alliance with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany.[22] Believing that Nazi Germany was a lesser enemy of the Jews than Britain, Lehi twice attempted to form an alliance with the Nazis, proposing a Jewish state based on "nationalist and totalitarian principles, and linked to the German Reich by an alliance".
Re: ‘So far as I can tell, it would not be illegal to state that Hamas did a very good job of running Gaza’s schools and hospitals.’
I’m afraid it would, Boss. The entirety of Hamas has been a proscribed organisation in the UK since November 2021. (Previously, it was only its Izz-ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades military wing that was proscribed.) The same goes for Hezbollah.
Re: ‘Most of my friends are advising me I should travel abroad for a while once again, and I am trying to make up my mind about this. I should be grateful for your views.’
I know you very rarely take my advice but, if I were you, I would leave these fair shores fairly sharpish. The rozzers probably don’t have anything they can pin on Richard Medhurst and were just trying to scare him a bit, but your Hamas/Hezbollah tweet (which literally goads the authorities to jail you, and which I note you’ve still yet to delete) could still easily land you with a sentence of eight years or thereabouts. This might only mean four years in a prison/bail hostel, but would also likely mean that you wouldn’t be allowed to blog, tweet or speak in public for the remaining four or risk going back to jail – and, no, a jury wouldn’t save you unless they were willing to exercise their right to jury nullification, which will probably soon be abolished anyway.
As I’ve mentioned before, a few years ago, Anjem Choudary and his mate got five-and-a-half years each under the Terrorism Act for pledging allegiance to ISIS to some guy in Indonesia, after being goaded by others, a mere two months after it had been proscribed. More recently, he was sentenced to life imprisonment in the UK with a minimum tariff of 28 years (very probably an effective whole-life tariff seeing as he’s now 57) for relating his interpretation of the Quran to some people in America.
It appears that there is not so much as a foreskin between the genocidal policies of UK, Israel, and US governments. Have we been conquered? Are we an Occupied nation? Government by consent implies we know who is governing us. Who is governing us? Friends of Israel and Shai Masot? Did we vote for this?
Antisemitism is a terrible thing, as is racism which disadvantages any group of citizens. The law is fair on this. Democracy elects our representatives to make decisions to benefit us. But who pays the piper? Who calls the tune? We know right from wrong, and algorithms keep this understanding from being too widely disseminated.
This has all been a long time in the planning. Gaza’s gas, dollar hegemony, and Russia’s oil and gas, are all in the bag. The old rules-based order is behind the curve and may not have the welly to catch up or ever overtake the war criminals. Managing dissent? Discouraging retaliation by other countries? Some can be crushed. Others can be bought. Many can be misled by lies and false promises. And Iran was always the ultimate prize which Bush sang ‘Barbara Ann’ to, with changed lyrics. Not sure if that is still on YouTube, though it might be.
Grief is the other side of love and so respect to all the gentle mothers facing monsters beyond imagining. Sad
Why not prepare a series of lectures lasting many hours on the theme of this article and allow an extra 24 hours when returning from abroad so that, when the UK Mukhabarat detain you, you can harangue them with a long lecture which they are duty bound to faithfully record, and if they haven’t had enough, you can go on to the next one, or even repeat it for revision. I suspect they will not hold you too often after that. 🙂
Hamas most certainly does violate international humanitarian law by targeting civilians. First, it has abducted and is currently keeping random Israeli civilians as hostages. Second, during the Second Intifada, it organised and claimed responsibility for numerous suicide bombings conducted in crowded public places in order to kill as many random Israeli civilians as possible. Both of these facts are recognised by everyone, including Hamas itself. And an organisation that targets civilians like this is precisely, by definition, a terrorist organisation.
As for those killed on 7 October, even considering both cases of ‘collateral damage’ and the Hannibal directive, I still find it highly implausible that all or even most of the very numerous Israeli civilian casualties on 7 October should have been killed by the IDF; many witnesses have reported mass shooting or slaughtering by Hamas and I haven’t seen those reports debunked.
Yes, armed resistance to Israel’s occupation is legitimate, Israel must immediately stop its occupation, colonisation and ethnic cleansing of Palestine (let alone the currently ongoing mass murders) and proceed to implement either the two- or the one-state solution. However, terrorist tactics such as targeting random Israeli civilians are not legitimate and Palestine solidarity activists should not fall into the trap of excusing such targeting or those who engage in it by conflating it with armed resistance in general. (Hezbollah seems like a different case to me – while it has been accused by its adversaries of a couple of attacks on civilians, it has never claimed responsibility for any, as far as I know.)
“an organisation that targets civilians like this is precisely, by definition, a terrorist organisation.”
How do you classify the Israeli Army then – and the UK government that supplies it, knowing full well that it’s targeting civilians (mostly women and children)?
Parliament, the BBC and co have “fallen into the trap of excusing such targeting” as Israel “defending itself”. Does this get-out only apply to the colonisers and oppressers, not to those they are colonising and oppressing?
A very late reply, but I think the comparison between Israel on the one hand and Hamas, PIJ and the others is worth addressing. I would agree that the Israeli state is, in practice, using terrorist methods, but it makes no sense to declare its armed forces or security services to be terrorist organisations and to ban them, because the right to have such institutions is inherent in being a sovereign state. Second, I do have to point out that Israel, horrendous as its actions have been, has not used terrorist methods as overtly and blatantly as Hamas and the others have been doing so. To this day, it does not *openly* treat random Palestinian civilians as a primary target for killing or hostage taking. When it kills Palestinian civilians, it at least *claims* that it is trying to hit an actual military opponent that is allegedly located among them or close to them. When it imprisons Palestinian civilians, it at least *claims* to suspect them of participating in actual violent activity and it never declares that it is taking them as hostages just on account of their being Palestinian. It takes more detailed investigations to prove that its claims of military justification are actually bogus or that the collateral damage is excessive (unfortunately, international law seems to be rather vague and lax on that point). Hamas and the other best-known Palestinian groups, unfortunately, leave absolutely no room for doubt – they openly and deliberately kill random Israelis as targets in and of themselves and take random Israelis hostage, and thereby provide Israel with an apparent moral high ground of sorts in the fog of the propaganda war. This is similar to the difference between the Syrian state and ISIS or Al-Nusra in the Syrian civil war: there was serious evidence of war crimes by both sides, but the Syrian state could always at least claim that its bombers had hit the civilians by mistake or as ‘collateral damage’, while the rebels quite openly blew up random groups of civilians or executed them as hostages as an end in itself, officially took responsibility for such acts and proudly posted videos of them online. This *is* a difference in the level of savagery and it does matter.
“many witnesses have reported mass shooting or slaughtering by Hamas and I haven’t seen those reports debunked.”
You’re being far, far too kind, to what are essentially a bunch of liars. The babies and the rapes have been debunked. But you’re still willing to believe unproven claims for which there is no evidence. After all the lies Netanyahu has told, some higher degree of evidence is necessary before anybody believes the claims.
Hamas’ killing of civilians is minimal, as far as can be proven, in comparison to Israel’s killing, and don’t forget the French Resistance were described as terrorists too – a precisely parallel case.
It isn’t only Israeli spokes-liars who claim that Hamas deliberately killed unarmed civilians on 7 October. If my memory isn’t at fault, the Al Jazeera documentary on the subject accepts that some (but by no means all) of the killings at the music festival were by Hamas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0atzea-mPY
October 7 | Al Jazeera Investigations – YouTube [59m58s] [Wed 20 Mar 2024]
Indeed, I don’t think I’ve seen any serious attempt to deny this.
Unfortunately, for that very reason, I haven’t been bothering to save references on the topic. Do you, on the other hand, have any references to support your claim that these are “unproven claims for which there is no evidence”?
(I realise that we could go around in circles forever like this! In view of the sheer quantity of lies that issues forth daily from Israel, the burden of proof probably does lie with people like me who believe that Hamas did commit some terrorist acts on that day. But there must surely be some written and possibly filmed accounts that aren’t mere propaganda?)
The babies and the rapes, yes those were disproven. There was one dead baby, not 40, and none beheaded, and no actual woman complained of being raped. But no I didn’t keep the links. I have no personal action in the Gaza affair, and I’m supposed to be working, not commenting on blogs.
As I said above, Hamas is as terrorist as the French Resistance, who were extensively accused of being terrorists. Some Israeli civilians died, but the word you use – “killings” – implicitly means you agree with the Israeli lying narrative; Palestinians only “die” in their narrative, from some unknown means apparently.
I didn’t say anything about babies or rapes; nor do I agree (“implicitly” or otherwise) with the Israeli lying narrative in general.
I shouldn’t have had to write that, because what I wrote before was in plain unambiguous English.
If you’re too busy to comment on blogs, then don’t comment on blogs.
Babies or rapes are some of the “killings” you’re talking about, as the point topics of what the Israelis are complaining about. If you’re going to accept the Israeli narrative, as you show some evidence of, that’s your business, but don’t be surprised or offended if you’re criticised.
Twirlip only said that “It isn’t only Israeli spokes-liars who claim that Hamas deliberately killed unarmed civilians on 7 October.” and “the Al Jazeera documentary on the subject accepts that some (but by no means all) of the killings at the music festival were by Hamas”. (How many babies do you think attended the music festival?)
Surely the whole point is that it isn’t only “the Israeli narrative” that makes such claims, because other sources like Al Jazeera reported Hamas murders and rapes too.
“Al Jazeera’s Investigative Unit (I-Unit) has carried out a forensic analysis of the events of October 7, when Hamas fighters launched an incursion into Israel that has transformed the politics of the Middle East.
October 7 reveals widespread human rights abuses by Hamas fighters and others who followed them through the fence from the Gaza Strip and draws up a comprehensive list of those killed.”
On the subject of rape:
“The I-Unit also examined claims that widespread sexual violence had occurred on October 7. It concluded that while isolated rapes may have taken place, there was insufficient evidence to support allegations that rape had been “widespread and systematic”.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/21/october-7-forensic-analysis-shows-hamas-abuses-many-false-israeli-claims
The UN investigators concurred (as reported by Al Jazeera):
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/4/reasonable-grounds-to-believe-hamas-committed-sexual-violence-un
Twirlip – sorry, I mean Justin – difficult to distinguish – bizarrely the AlJazeera evidence you cite actually confirms what I said, not what you’re claiming. Of course there were deaths, but not a lot, at least half were done by Israel on its own people (far worse a thing to do than what Hamas is accused of doing). That’s what happens when you resist a military occupation, nothing to complain about as a horror. Much the same as what the French Resistance did. The horror is what Israel does.
” no actual woman complained of being raped.”
Not quite true, this article mentions five and one man. Also several more who were shot dead afterwards and evidence from Hamas body-cams, CCTV etc., some of which made its way online.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/18/evidence-points-to-systematic-use-of-rape-by-hamas-in-7-october-attacks
I know this won’t convince the die-hard “Israel is evil so anybody and everybody who opposes Israel must be faultless” but there it is.
In case it’s not clear: I consider more discussion with Laguerre on this topic (or, I guess, any other topic) to be a waste of time. Anyone who has seen the Al Jazeera documentary (which I hope is everyone) can draw their own conclusions.
Re: ‘but there it is”
Can I ask exactly where this Hamas bodycam/CCTV evidence of rape is, Pears?
Pears Morgaine willing to appear the most credulous fool on the planet because he can’t stand seeing zionists called liars.
No point in providing links as I think the Mods would remove them but try ‘Hamas rape’ in the search engine of your choice.
Zoot:- Only people with no counter arguments have to resort to personal insults.
is there any point in spelling out the counterargument 10 months on for somebody who’ll just go on pretending they’re not aware of it?
very well .. one more time
to this date neither the Israeli nor western governments nor their media and security agencies have not come up with one single documented case of rape on October 7th.
not one.
no first-hand accounts.
no credible eyewitnesses.
no forensic evidence.
no identified victim, living or dead.
anybody still trying to pretend otherwise at this point is very obviously an unscrupulous, lying apologist for genocide. (and I don’t mean that as a compliment, as I am not a British politician or journalist).
Thanks for your reply, Pears. I typed the words ‘Hamas rape’ into the following search engines:
https://www.google.co.uk/
https://duckduckgo.com/
Unfortunately, I couldn’t seem to find any bodycam/CCTV footage on the first 10 pages of results from either – it’s mostly just links to MSM articles. I don’t really have time to search any further as my dad’s currently in hospital and I need to visit him shortly. Could you by any chance give me more specific directions? For example, something along the lines of ‘you can find links to footage on page 113 of a Google search’ – or if that’s too specific for the mods, ‘you can find links somewhere in pages 100-120 inclusive’.
Thank you very much.
Since Pears hasn’t replied, I had a look at the report from the UN’s Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict, Pramila Patten, on the October 7th attacks.
https://www.un.org/sexualviolenceinconflict/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/report/mission-report-official-visit-of-the-office-of-the-srsg-svc-to-israel-and-the-occupied-west-bank-29-january-14-february-2024/20240304-Israel-oWB-CRSV-report.pdf
It appears that her team of nine people were unable to find any direct evidence of sexual violence on the internet:
‘While the mission team reviewed extensive digital material depicting a range of egregious violations, no digital evidence specifically depicting acts of sexual violence was found in open sources.’ (from paragraph 77)
If anyone knows any better, perhaps they would be so good as to let Ms Patten know.
The French resistance did not generally target random German civilians. As for Hamas’ killing of civilians being ‘minimal’ in comparison with Israel’s killing – two wrongs do not make a right. Also, while Israel’s actions are unconscionable and de facto constitute terrorism, ethnic cleansing and possibly genocide, the fact remains Hamas’ terrorism is much more overt and unabashed than even that of Israel. Israel at least *pretends* – with less and less plausibility – that it is targeting armed militants and that the deaths of Palestinian civilians are just a side effect; Hamas’ targeting of Israeli civilians is quite open and self-confessed. There are no ‘goodies’ among the main armed forces in this conflict, sadly.
@Foundling, you make a good case but your descriptions fit the zionist occupation better than the Palestinian resistance.
Shocking! Welcome to 2TK’s 1984 utopia.
“It is — only the military wing of Hamas that is a proscribed organisation. So far as I can tell, it would not be illegal to state that Hamas did a very good job of running Gaza’s schools and hospitals”.
While you might get away with the last sentence, I think you would run foul of the proscription law if it implied support for political Hamas. UK government amended the scope of Hamas’s proscription in 2021 to include this:
“Hamas IDQ was proscribed by the UK in March 2001. At the time it was HM government’s assessment that there was a sufficient distinction between the so called political and military wings of Hamas, such that they should be treated as different organisations, and that only the military wing was concerned in terrorism. The government now assess that the approach of distinguishing between the various parts of Hamas is artificial. Hamas is a complex but single terrorist organisation”.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror-groups-or-organisations–2/proscribed-terrorist-groups-or-organisations-accessible-version#deproscription
The implication seems to be that given the amount of popular support for Hamas, Gaza itself can be seen as a terrorist entity. Support for Palestine is support for terrorism. I suspect Israeli pressure on the UK government for the 2021 extension.
More positively, barristers are warning that senior UK ministers and civil servants could be held criminally liable for Israeli war crimes.
New legal analysis, commissioned by Global Justice UK, follows the resignation of British diplomat Mark Smith last week over the UK’s refusal to ban arms exports to Israel.
https://inews.co.uk/news/world/uk-officials-prosecuted-israel-arms-sales-3234766?ito=copy-link_share_article-top
If you are going abroad again, do try to pick somewhere less freezing,then I’ll come and visit.
So the British government could shut up a large number of its population for fourteen years for supporting Gaza and by implication and more Hamas. A bad law indeed. Thanks for the analysis, it is very good and I’m sorry if my first sentence got it wrong. As for going abroad, that must be getting very tiring as well as expensive. Unlike the Israeli, the British government doesn’t seem to be in any danger of collapse, it is too well protected by its conventions. I’m hoping for the collapse of Israel. Its economy is in poor shape, and it isn’t winning against Gaza. it is dependent on US and zionist aid which must be getting more and more unprofitable for those two entities.
Craig – could do with you in Brechin one of the last Tuesday’s in October for a round table discussion on the constitution – will I have to smuggle you into the country?
Perhaps the Republic of Ireland would suit you as an alternative English-speaking residence to the UK? No need for a visa, and cost of travel there is minimal. No idea if it would be feasible for you, though.
“Resistance is futile” so I am drinking myself to death.
(I suffer from chronic depression, so ignore me)
This article shows that you may be right about doing yourself in with alcohol:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/aug/20/red-wine-drinking-alcohol-health-risks
So I suggest you try tea with lemon instead. Good quality black tea like Lipton Red Label. Non-sugar sweeteners will protect your teeth.
As for chronic depression, I’m no medic, so see your GP, but that Oracle of Truth called the internet suggests a _combination_ of things might help – not just pills alone, but counselling and even a programme of exercise as well. Someone long ago suggested seafood like sardines or crab and Omega-3 oil (not cod liver oil) as well. Good luck!
Seeing the GP (if you still can) is a good idea, you can ask for a mental health assessment which might do some good. All the best.
Brilliant piece Craig. Impeccable logic. Way to challenge these bastards. Bravo.
Has the case of Richard D Hall been discussed on this blog? He investigated the Manchester Arena bombing and found strong evidence that the mainstream explanation was highly unlikely to be true and in fact points to it being a hoax. It sounds like Marianna Spring encouraged a family member of a young person who was injured in the alleged blast to take a civil case against Richard – accusing him of harrassing the family as part of his investigations. The judge is delaying the judgement until October. Iain Davis who was present in court suspects the case is being used to justify relooking at a certain section of the European Human Rights Act in order to restrict the remit of journalists. Richard D Hall (richplanet.net) and Iain Davis have both got websites with more information.
As someone who actually was at the arena, heard the bomb go off from outside, and then ventured into the foyer to search for members of my family (who thankfully weren’t there), I can tell you it was not a hoax and you and Richard D Hall can fuck right off.
Solidarity with Richard Medhurst, who is an outstanding journalist.
Thanks Craig for platforming Richard’s case and unravelling the legal niceties behind the latest clampdown on free speech and general ramping up of draconian police state powers. (Incidentally, did you see that Judge Napolitano’s show was banished from YT for the whole of last week? Internet censorship is being ratcheted ever tighter.)
Here is United Nations resolution 3246 November 29th [1974]
Affirms the legitimacy of armed resistance by oppressed peoples in pursuit of the right to self determination, and condemns governments which do not support that right.
Nobody should let anyone trap you into saying you support Hamas or Hezbollah, how about saying you support any non proscribed group taking up armed resistance against Israeli aggression against Palestinians as allowed for in UN resolution 3246.
The US government had to change its Law before Nelson Mandela was allowed to visit the US, since he was still considered a terrorist in legislation and would be liable to arrest.
Let it be known. I support giving gas masks to anyone sheltering underground from Israeli/USA bombs. This because the IDF is in violation of international law in using gas as a lethal weapon through Gaza tunnels.
Israelis – Jews – using lethal gas to kill their undesirables. Huh.
Good thing their infallible ‘intelligence’ knows for sure there are no hostages being subjected to whatever their equivalent of Zyclon-B is these days.
The IDF brought home 6 bodies of hostages last week and much is being made of this being Hamas’s fault. The last hostage released alive said he had been kept in a family’s safe room (most Israelis and Palestinians have a protected room to hide in when the neighbourhood is at risk of shelling) and although he had not been comfortable or well fed he lived as well as the family who were holding him.
So – no witnesses I guess….