Gals and guys, I am finishing writing an illustrated book on all this and far more! You can view a late draft preview here: ( I'm publishing in early October 7 - all 350 pages of it!): Very well done for letting yourself see the real truth and facts! Try reading or listening to my new controversial 'terrorist defending' book here: https://online.flippingbook.com/view/677110057/
Your crystal clear analysis of Starmer's ultra-authoritarian crackdown on anything that smacks of free speech but that he finds objectionable should be widely broadcast and reproduced. Starmer has introduced thought policing into UK culture, backing it with so-called legal backing. I never thought the Stasi would appear as part of a UK government apparatus.
How can you call Israel "fascist"? I guess you don't know anything about what that word means, or its history. Do you not have any sympathy for the Oct 7 massacres that initiated this conflict??
You wonder where ‘the buck stops’ with such decisions. Ultimately with Starmer, as you suggest? Or is there another level of ‘governance’ above the political executive, above even that of national security? The heavy-handedness by the security services in both cases during their arrest in the UK was intended to send an intimidating message to anyone influencing public opinion in favour of the Palestinians. But who would call for that? Not Starmer, at least not on his own, surely? MI5 might execute such a ‘show of force’ but I doubt it would call for it.
No, there’s something supra-national going on here imho and that’s what makes it really worrying. We’re a short step from a new form of authoritarianism, one in which the true ‘masters’ remain out of sight but control the government - indeed much of Parliament - through non-transparent direction.
Walsingham - your time has come round again even if the monarch is no longer called Elizabeth.
Hey Jonathan I tried to notify you on X about this but I think my ghostban prevented it. Have you seen notaxforgenocide.uk website? Katie Halper interviewed Ashish Prashar recently and he argues UK citizens have a legal right to withhold taxes from their goverment until the government stops committing crimes against humanity. Please check it out and try to spread the word! Here's a 1 minute section of the interview: https://x.com/kthalps/status/1829596590367240289
In the comments you may see my attempts at tagging you and some others but X algorithm is good at sneaky censorship. Direct YT link to longer interview: https://t.co/bSUl3GNVbi
The problem with this campaign is that taxes do not directly pay for anything. Tax is a consequence of government spending, not the source. Ask any economist.
Cut the anarchist crap man. This is a means of exerting pressure on the political powers. If you help spread it instead of philosophizing they will have to decide whether to keep funding genocide and risk ending up in jail, or actually listen to their citizens. If nobody pays the taxes they can only keep printing money out of thin air for so long. Worst case scenario the whole economy collapses and the genocide will have to end eventually.
The European Settlers (all white israelis) in Palestine along with their steadfast supporters, the European Settlers in North America, continue to describe the indigenous Palestinian resistance as "terrorists". Whilst those in North America succeeded with their takeover following the extermination of 15 million+ Indians, the situation in the Middle East is proving to be a problem. The "European's" Main Weapon is the use of the term "antisemitic". 98% of Jews are not semites, they are either Ashkenazic, Sephardic or Khazarian. Accusing Palestinian Semites of terrorism is akin to accusing the French resistance (1940-45) of terrorism.
Absolutely agree that the UK PM should be brought to account for his unwavering support for the Israeli governments' terrorising policies and his support for a genocide of Palestinian people in Gaza and as news coming through today-31st August of destruction of a Palestinian village in the Occupied West Bank and people having to leave their homes and land. It is important to emphasis that Gaza is not a separate entity, it is Palestine. By advocating Gaza separately the media is falling into the Colonial trap of divide and rule. Insist on Gaza, Palestine, and/or support of Palestinians in Gaza. You may have also noted that the Israeli targeting of refugee camps in a calculated policy as they, the Palestinians have a right to their homes and land in the present day Israel and have a legal claim to their land.
Jonathan your readers may like to support:
Christian Aid Lecture: Genocide and Other International Crimes: Protecting the Individual and the Group Now and Tomorrow at St. Martin in the Field Autumn Lecture in person or online on:
Monday 14 October 7pmSpeaker: Philippe Sands KC. Thank you for keeping Palestine on the forefront of news as you may have noticed BBC have been compromised by the Israel and the Zionist lobbies.
Jonathan Cook, I can only hope Starmer (human rights lawyer, my ass!) and his Thought Police won't be coming for you! This rapid descent into authoritarian madness is something Orwell, Kafka, Nietzsche or Dostoevsky could not have imagined in their darkest hours!
Have you read the book by Klaus Schwab "Covid 19 - The Great Reset" or "Fismans Fraud" by R N Wateel?
When one starts with a theory (a hunch, a suspicion, a feeling) one must test and re-test the evidence and document the results before reaching a conclusion.
The moment l heard politicians repeat 'the science is settled" and realized actual experts in the field were being suppressed while we, the public were being censored and denied the ability to ask questions about masking, flattening the curve, social distancing, transmission and then the governments need to mandate MRNA "safe & effective" vaccines for every man, woman and child got my spidy senses tingling. LOL
(a)expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, and
(b)in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.
Paragraph 1 of section 12 appears to intend that the section is used against "support" which is neither monetary nor material and at least as I read it as a whole, the section is directed a banning speech and writing or symbolism that in any way could be construed to favour a proscribed organisation, unless the author is careful to ensure that it does not generate such support. So if what you write could be taken to be supportive of them by your audience, it will always be prudent to include a statement condemning them, if you want to stay within the law.
Support might also include wearing a Hamas T shirt.
IMO this is bad law because almost any statement about any political conflict in which one participant is proscribed could be interpreted as tending to favour one "side" or the other. So at its most far reaching, this section could be used to discourage the publication of any objective analysis about any such conflict. In so far as such a piece does not follow the official narrative and says for example, "things here are not quite as they seem and the proscribed side's position may have some justification", it could be a risk not to include a statement condemning them more generally.
Arguably, you are not reckless in publishing a potentially supportive jounalistic statement, if you have taken care to ensure that it is factual and true. So if one holds that the Hamas version of an incident rather than the IDF version is true and sufficient care is taken in reaching that conclusion, you are not reckless. Otherwise that would impede all reporting of the conflict and I doubt that such reporting could be held to be an offence in court as the imposition on free speech would be disproportionate. . But the Richard Medhurst example is worrying as to whether the police see it like that.
Nothing in this comment should be taken as in any way supporting any group or member of a group who is proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Gals and guys, I am finishing writing an illustrated book on all this and far more! You can view a late draft preview here: ( I'm publishing in early October 7 - all 350 pages of it!): Very well done for letting yourself see the real truth and facts! Try reading or listening to my new controversial 'terrorist defending' book here: https://online.flippingbook.com/view/677110057/
Starmer, does not represent the will of the people in UK, is a genocidal political leader, with no principles and no morals. Starmer belong in jail!
Your crystal clear analysis of Starmer's ultra-authoritarian crackdown on anything that smacks of free speech but that he finds objectionable should be widely broadcast and reproduced. Starmer has introduced thought policing into UK culture, backing it with so-called legal backing. I never thought the Stasi would appear as part of a UK government apparatus.
How can you call Israel "fascist"? I guess you don't know anything about what that word means, or its history. Do you not have any sympathy for the Oct 7 massacres that initiated this conflict??
👏👏👏
You wonder where ‘the buck stops’ with such decisions. Ultimately with Starmer, as you suggest? Or is there another level of ‘governance’ above the political executive, above even that of national security? The heavy-handedness by the security services in both cases during their arrest in the UK was intended to send an intimidating message to anyone influencing public opinion in favour of the Palestinians. But who would call for that? Not Starmer, at least not on his own, surely? MI5 might execute such a ‘show of force’ but I doubt it would call for it.
No, there’s something supra-national going on here imho and that’s what makes it really worrying. We’re a short step from a new form of authoritarianism, one in which the true ‘masters’ remain out of sight but control the government - indeed much of Parliament - through non-transparent direction.
Walsingham - your time has come round again even if the monarch is no longer called Elizabeth.
Excellent writing, Jonathan! Many thanks.
The hypocrisy of our ruling elites gets more astounding every day
Except that I find I'm running out of stounds...
With any luck then we’ll see any tools chanting “from the river to the sea” winding up in chokey double quick
You mean Likud members?
Hey Jonathan I tried to notify you on X about this but I think my ghostban prevented it. Have you seen notaxforgenocide.uk website? Katie Halper interviewed Ashish Prashar recently and he argues UK citizens have a legal right to withhold taxes from their goverment until the government stops committing crimes against humanity. Please check it out and try to spread the word! Here's a 1 minute section of the interview: https://x.com/kthalps/status/1829596590367240289
In the comments you may see my attempts at tagging you and some others but X algorithm is good at sneaky censorship. Direct YT link to longer interview: https://t.co/bSUl3GNVbi
The problem with this campaign is that taxes do not directly pay for anything. Tax is a consequence of government spending, not the source. Ask any economist.
Cut the anarchist crap man. This is a means of exerting pressure on the political powers. If you help spread it instead of philosophizing they will have to decide whether to keep funding genocide and risk ending up in jail, or actually listen to their citizens. If nobody pays the taxes they can only keep printing money out of thin air for so long. Worst case scenario the whole economy collapses and the genocide will have to end eventually.
The European Settlers (all white israelis) in Palestine along with their steadfast supporters, the European Settlers in North America, continue to describe the indigenous Palestinian resistance as "terrorists". Whilst those in North America succeeded with their takeover following the extermination of 15 million+ Indians, the situation in the Middle East is proving to be a problem. The "European's" Main Weapon is the use of the term "antisemitic". 98% of Jews are not semites, they are either Ashkenazic, Sephardic or Khazarian. Accusing Palestinian Semites of terrorism is akin to accusing the French resistance (1940-45) of terrorism.
Absolutely agree that the UK PM should be brought to account for his unwavering support for the Israeli governments' terrorising policies and his support for a genocide of Palestinian people in Gaza and as news coming through today-31st August of destruction of a Palestinian village in the Occupied West Bank and people having to leave their homes and land. It is important to emphasis that Gaza is not a separate entity, it is Palestine. By advocating Gaza separately the media is falling into the Colonial trap of divide and rule. Insist on Gaza, Palestine, and/or support of Palestinians in Gaza. You may have also noted that the Israeli targeting of refugee camps in a calculated policy as they, the Palestinians have a right to their homes and land in the present day Israel and have a legal claim to their land.
Jonathan your readers may like to support:
Christian Aid Lecture: Genocide and Other International Crimes: Protecting the Individual and the Group Now and Tomorrow at St. Martin in the Field Autumn Lecture in person or online on:
Monday 14 October 7pmSpeaker: Philippe Sands KC. Thank you for keeping Palestine on the forefront of news as you may have noticed BBC have been compromised by the Israel and the Zionist lobbies.
The opening of the audio clip is too loud.
Jonathan Cook, I can only hope Starmer (human rights lawyer, my ass!) and his Thought Police won't be coming for you! This rapid descent into authoritarian madness is something Orwell, Kafka, Nietzsche or Dostoevsky could not have imagined in their darkest hours!
He was Director of Public Prosecutions
I'm convinced the CoVid pandemic was just a test to see how easily a democratic citizenery can be manipulated into accepting authoritarian rule.
Sorry. Have no time for conspiracy theories. What's your evidence for this conclusion?
Have you read the book by Klaus Schwab "Covid 19 - The Great Reset" or "Fismans Fraud" by R N Wateel?
When one starts with a theory (a hunch, a suspicion, a feeling) one must test and re-test the evidence and document the results before reaching a conclusion.
The moment l heard politicians repeat 'the science is settled" and realized actual experts in the field were being suppressed while we, the public were being censored and denied the ability to ask questions about masking, flattening the curve, social distancing, transmission and then the governments need to mandate MRNA "safe & effective" vaccines for every man, woman and child got my spidy senses tingling. LOL
Section 12 1A of the Terrorism Act 2000 states:
1A)A person commits an offence if the person—
(a)expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, and
(b)in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.
Paragraph 1 of section 12 appears to intend that the section is used against "support" which is neither monetary nor material and at least as I read it as a whole, the section is directed a banning speech and writing or symbolism that in any way could be construed to favour a proscribed organisation, unless the author is careful to ensure that it does not generate such support. So if what you write could be taken to be supportive of them by your audience, it will always be prudent to include a statement condemning them, if you want to stay within the law.
Support might also include wearing a Hamas T shirt.
IMO this is bad law because almost any statement about any political conflict in which one participant is proscribed could be interpreted as tending to favour one "side" or the other. So at its most far reaching, this section could be used to discourage the publication of any objective analysis about any such conflict. In so far as such a piece does not follow the official narrative and says for example, "things here are not quite as they seem and the proscribed side's position may have some justification", it could be a risk not to include a statement condemning them more generally.
Arguably, you are not reckless in publishing a potentially supportive jounalistic statement, if you have taken care to ensure that it is factual and true. So if one holds that the Hamas version of an incident rather than the IDF version is true and sufficient care is taken in reaching that conclusion, you are not reckless. Otherwise that would impede all reporting of the conflict and I doubt that such reporting could be held to be an offence in court as the imposition on free speech would be disproportionate. . But the Richard Medhurst example is worrying as to whether the police see it like that.
Nothing in this comment should be taken as in any way supporting any group or member of a group who is proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000.
SECTION 12 IS OUTRAGEOUSLY SUBJECTIVE FOR GOVERNMENTS AND POLICE FORCES - WE MUST FIGHT IT ALL THE TIME AND EVERYWHERE, WHATEVER THE COST!!!