Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

How UK counter-terror police colluded with Zionists to detain me after Beirut trip

By David Miller – Press TV – February 27, 2025

At 21.32 local time on the evening of Monday, 24 February, I stepped off a plane from Istanbul to Heathrow and into the terminal building.

In front of me were a wide circle of people evidently waiting for someone, perhaps for a number of passengers. I knew right away one of them was me.

One of the SO15 (formerly special Branch) plain clothes officers of the Counter Terrorism Command, for it was them, asked for my passport and whether I had started my journey in Istanbul.

Of course I knew that they knew this was not the case. In any case, I had done nothing wrong in – as I said to them – visiting Beirut to cover the funeral of Hezbollah leaders Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and Sayyed Hashem Safieddine.

This was my first taste of Schedule 7. They started to explain what Schedule 7 was and I said yes, I know about it. From being stopped before? No, because I am a researcher who studies terrorism legislation.

About then, on the moving walkway, I realised that the circle of people had only been waiting for me. I looked round and counted them out loud. I know I’m a big lad, I said, (I am over 6 foot) but did you really need eight officers to detain me?

So, we got to the interrogation room, which is, as past detainees will know, immediately behind passport control. Anyone coming out of that door is SO15 or a detainee.

For those who may face this experience in the future, it is worth explaining how the process goes.  It’s a bureaucratic procedure.

There is a guidance hand book dictating how the process should be handled. First they have to read out the relevant extract from the Terrorism Act. It’s a whole page (see below) and they give you a copy, which they ask you to sign.

The essential bit is that you are being ‘detained’ as opposed to arrested in order that the ’Examining Officer’ can determine if you ‘appear’ to be a person ‘concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism’.

A couple of other details are of relevance. They can’t hold you for more than 6 hours after the time they first apprehend you. You are not under criminal investigation or under arrest and as a result ‘you do not have the right to remain silent’. If they do change their minds and arrest you, you do at that point have the right to remain silent and you should do so.

You have to participate in the process, answer questions and to accept being searched. You don’t have to answer questions that you think they are asking and only need to answer what they actually ask.  There is no need to be unduly long winded!

The other point to note is that nothing you say can be used ‘in evidence in criminal proceedings’. (The only exceptions are that if you do not comply, that can be used in evidence and if you later rely on something in court which is ‘inconsistent’ with what you say, then the contents of your interview can be used).

You have the right to contact a next of kin/friend and a lawyer and you should exercise that right. The rules state that if you ask for a solicitor you cannot be questioned until your solicitor has consulted you.

And your solicitor can participate in the questioning either on the phone or in person, if you can get them out of bed to come to wherever you are detained!

Once in the room both I and my luggage were searched. They found little of interest. No devices. The only thing that they brightened at was a very small USB drive, which I had forgotten was in there.

I confirmed that I thought it had no security protection and they took it away. Later it was returned, much to my surprise.  What was on it I asked?  Only some teaching notes they said in disappointment.

Later, at home I checked. Hilariously there was only one file on the drive: a Powerpoint presentation on the ‘Zionist movement’.

And so we got to the actual interrogation. I estimate that mine started about 23.00, so there was a long period of silence while we waited for the solicitor to call back.

This was partly due to the police deciding that they could not call my first nominated solicitor because he wasn’t on their list, though he should not have needed to be.

Anyway, after I talked to my solicitor, we were off.

What followed was around two hours of questioning about my trip to Beirut. Why did I go, what did I do when I was there, did I support Hezbollah, and many other similar questions.

There is not space to tell it all blow by blow but here are some highlights which might be of use to others who like me are manifestly not involved in the commission of acts of terrorism, as everybody knows.

First, they wanted to know why I went. As I had already intimated when they first stopped me, I was there to cover the funeral as a journalist. As is public knowledge, I work as a journalist on a freelance basis.

I produce a TV show called Palestine Declassified for Press TV, and write for a variety of other publications such as Electronic Intifada, Mintpress, TRT World and Mayadeen English. I mentioned this as well as mentioning that I used to work at the university of Bristol until I was sacked.

They asked about that. I summarised the story including the four occasions on which I was exonerated of ‘antisemitism’ at Bristol (internal enquiry, two external QC reports and the internal appeal), followed by the ‘landmark’ victory at the Employment Tribunal in February 2024.

We went on to discuss my trip to Lebanon. What did I do there? I recounted that I had visited the southern village of Maroun El Ras which is within a mile of the border of occupied Palestine, high on a hill overlooking the colonial settlements of Avivim and Yir’on.

I went with a number of other foreign guests including from Ireland, Yemen, Brazil and various other countries. What was there I was asked? I replied (truthfully) that there was nothing in the village since almost all 600 houses had been destroyed.

The officer seemed confused: why would I want to visit then? Precisely because it had been destroyed by the Zionists, obviously.

We got fairly quickly to the question of whether I supported Hezollah as a proscribed organisation. I referred back to my Employment Tribunal at which similar questions had been asked somewhat ineffectually by the University of Bristol’s counsel Chris Milsom.

There I had said the same thing as I now stated: I ‘support’ the right as given in international law for the Palestinians (and indeed others under occupation) to resist including by armed force.

In case officers in SO15 or other actors need reminding of this, the relevant text is from the UN General Assembly resolution 38/17 of 1983, which states that it

“Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for their independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial domination, apartheid and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle”.

They went on to see if they could entice me into saying I specifically supported proscribed organisations like Hamas and Hezbollah. So, I obviously went on to say that it was not only a question of Hezbollah and Hamas, but also Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the PFLP-GC, which is of course not the same as the PFLP itself, which is not proscribed. It was instructive that my interrogator appeared not to know about PIJ and the PFLP-GC, asking me to repeat each name.

We also visited the topic of deproscription. The officer wanted to know why I thought that all of the four, groups should be de-proscribed.

It seemed like he thought this was a valuable concession from me. But, as he is, presumably, aware, the Terrorism Act (year) specifically notes that it is not illegal to call for de-proscription.

I include a table from the Home Office website which gives a list of the charges that can relate to proscribed organisations.

And then we were on to the question of terrorism. Did that mean that I thought they were not terrorist. At which point I am afraid I referred back to my decades long record of research on the question of terrorism and its role in propaganda including my early work on the struggle to decolonise the north of Ireland.

As if the sentiments encoded in the proscribed list or the Western use of the term ‘terrorism’ itself are necessarily subscribed to even by most British citizens, never mind the rest of the world. Let’s not forget that the way in which we use the term ‘terrorism’ in the west – in particular ‘Islamic terrorism’, has it origin in Zionist propaganda operations as has been shown by, for example, Remi Brulin.

At one point, apparently out of the blue I was asked: Are you a practising Muslim? I expressed some surprise at this question. In his defence my interrogator said that I had earlier noticed and asked about whether the small pile of folded prayer mats in the cupboard was in fact a small pile of folded prayer mats.

I had noted them earlier and wanted to check that’s what they were. Only the best for the predominantly Muslim ‘guests’ of the room! As the Guardian reports only 20% of Schedule 7 detentions are of white people (that’s including ‘white Irish’, and others stopped, like me for their solidarity activities, so it’s likely that the proportion of white ‘far right’ suspects stopped is lower than 20%)

The officer seemed mystified about my attendance at an event in which everyone must have been a supporter of Hezbollah. As if reporting on events and supporting those events is the same thing. He asked if everyone there supported Hezbollah.

I replied that I didn’t feel able to report any great knowledge on the consciousness of perhaps the million people there. But it is certainly the case that there were very many Hezbollah flags.

I did also note that there was a largish contingent from the Syrian Social Nationalist Party and made the point that the sheer numbers present suggested that Nasrallah has something of a larger reputation than just among party members and core supporters.

As we talked the officer started asking about Press TV, for which I work on a freelance basis. He evidently had not known what Press TV was as it took a long time for him to understand – after I told him that it was the English Language TV channel of the Iranian government – the equivalent of the BBC world Service.

Then he wanted to know about whether the people I work with at Press TV are extremists or have extreme opinions. Obviously I had to press him to explain what he meant by extremism. Given the British government abandoned its efforts to define the term in any legally robust way, he fared no better.

So he asked something about how many were opposed to western society. I was not impressed by this, since, as I said, most people in the world are opposed to the West, and many of them are British citizens.

And then; does Press TV support the recent ‘terrorism’ in this country?! Which terrorism, I enquired. And do you know what he said? He only said the Southport attack. That was not terrorism I said. Even his colleague butted in and agreed with me!

So we were back to finding specific examples and – put on the spot – he came up with the stabbing and car at Parliament in 2017. That, of course, was carried out by an individual who had made multiple trips to Saudi Arabia and appeared to have been inspired by an ISIS related ideology.

Before we got any further I was asked if Press TV covered incidents like this. The implication, of course, being that covering such activities might be tantamount to ‘supporting’ them.

Obviously, being a news service Press TV does cover political violence of many types, as does every other news organisation in the world.

But moving on I replied that in fact Press TV is opposed to those kind of attacks. I was on the verge of going on to say that this of course was different to the position of their colleagues in MI6 and in the government and indeed the BBC who are only too happy to collaborate in supporting ISIS/Al Qaeda in Syria if it suits their perception of British foreign interests. But I let that lie.

By now we were winding down and it was pretty clear they were about to release me, even if I had taken their claim that it would be over soon with the requisite heap of salt. At the end they asked if I had anything to ask, like we were coming to the end of a job interview.

I made one statement which was that it was abundantly clear to everyone in the room that I was not a person who was concerned in the ‘commission, preparation or instigation’ of acts of terrorism.

By way of defence of the detention the officer attempted to justify it in term of a British citizens attendance at the funeral of a terrorism leader, a defence which of course worked to deny that they had effectively been instructed by others to stop me. With that we were done and I was released at 1am too late to get home except via a prohibitively expensive taxi.

It appeared abundantly clear that SO15 did not have any real idea of who I was and had not prepared any case against me. It was just a normal Schedule 7 stop.

Except of course, it wasn’t. I had openly announced on X that I was in Lebanon for the funeral and had reported from my visit to Maroun El Ras and the Iran garden, on its outskirts both of which had been totally destroyed by Zionist bombardment.

I also posted a clip of my visit to Kfar Kila showing mass destruction of civilian infrastructure wreaked by the Zionists and my discovery of a US arms firm manufactured detonation wire used in blowing up civilian houses.

I also posted on the funeral itself, including while I was stuck in traffic on the way, as I arrived in the ‘nick of time’ and as the ceremony started.

Of course all of this was very triggering for the genocidal Zionists who track any deviation for the authorised position of pretending that the genocide is not happening and that those that resist are simply ‘terrorists’.

A wide range of anonymous trolls and Zionist regime assets started mass reporting the Met Police calling for me to be arrested and jailed. I know they say that the Zionists don’t have much power, but bouncing the Met into detaining a journalist on assignment seems like power of some sort.

Here is a select list of Zionist agents and assets who called for me to be arrested:

All of the above were involved in one way or another in the campaign to have me sacked at Bristol, a decision that the Employment Tribunal found was flawed and unjustified, in its ‘landmark’ decision.

This was all topped off by reports on Monday in the Mail (published at 5 to one in the morning just as Monday 24th began) and later (at 5.25 pm) in the Telegraph. This latter report cited the fanatical Zionist Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, who was reported as saying: “David Miller isn’t even bothering to hide his anti-Semitism any more.

He’s now openly boasting of his support for a proscribed terrorist group. It’s shocking that for so long he held a senior position at Bristol University.” Of course no actual ‘antisemitism’ was on display, and I said no words capable of being construed as ‘openly boasting’ of ‘support’ for Hezbollah.

Jenrick has form a far as I am concerned in that he has in the past spent a not inconsequential amount of time trying to have me sacked from my post at Bristol. For example, when he was Housing minister he directly bullied the University of Bristol over my case.

The report ended by saying that the paper had (like the Mail claimed too) contacted me for comment. The facts are that I have had no such query from the Telegraph or from the Mail.

I must say that I did enjoy the column the next day by Stephen Pollard who presided over a significant number of libel defeats in his role as editor of the Jewish Chronicle.  ‘Opening a communication from’ me back then he says was like ‘ingesting poison’. My parents would be proud.

What, self-evidently, happened in this instance was that the Zionist pressure worked its way through and an order to detain was issued. As to whether it came from the top of the counter Terrorism Command, the Home Office or elsewhere, we don’t know as yet.

But it is very much of a piece with the general picture post October 7 2023, which is that there is intense Zionist pressure on the counter terrorism and policing apparatus to weaponise both hate crime laws and terrorism legislation.

It is perfectly plain, as I have shown elsewhere that this pressure from Zionist lobby and intimidation groups and pressure from Zionist aligned politicians like Michael Gove, Suella Braverman, Stuart Polak, Robert Halton and the aforementioned Robert Jenrick, more than adequately explains all of the alleged rise in ‘antisemitism’ as well as almost all of the uses of the many Terrorism Acts on the statute books to oppress and repress those who will stand with the Palestinians in virtually any way.

And in recent months the attacks have widened to journalists, who’s historically recognised craft implies that they can report on all events without being attacked directly by the state.

But now, after Richard Medhurst, Sarah Wilkinson, Asa Winstanley and most recently Ali Abunimah, it is clear that journalists too are direct targets of the Zionists operating as they do via the allegedly sovereign justice apparatus of Western states.

David Miller is the producer and co-host of Press TV’s weekly Palestine Declassified show. He was sacked from Bristol University in October 2021 over his Palestine advocacy.

February 27, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

US official vows to imprison pro-Palestine protesters for years

Press TV – February 27, 2025

An official with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) says student protesters who took part in pro-Palestine protests could face years in prison.

Leo Terrell, head of the DOJ task force on anti-Semitism, announced his plans for lengthy prison punishments for those who protested against Israel during its genocide in Gaza.

“We are going to put these people in jail—not for 24 hours, but for years,” Terrell told Israeli broadcaster Channel 12.

Terrell also vowed to “financially attack” the universities where such demonstrations took place.

The announcement came as students at Columbia University began fresh pro-Palestinian protests after two students were expelled for their anti-genocide activism.

The decision to imprison anti-Israel students comes despite the fact that US President Donald Trump declared his intention to “stop all government censorship” and “bring back free speech to America” during his inauguration speech.

One X user responded to the announcement by calling it the “death of the 1st amendment for a foreign nation of Israel.”

“The 1st Amendment in this country ends where Israel begins” stated another.

In the past years, numerous laws have been passed in America that punish criticism of Israel and Zionism.

These include numerous state laws that punish public workers for refusing to buy Israeli products, or the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act which has faced criticism for chilling free speech.

During the previous academic year, US universities and colleges emerged as a focal point for student-led pro-Palestinian protests, igniting a significant wave of demonstrations at universities throughout the world, where hundreds of students called on their universities to divest from companies that have ties to the Israeli regime.

In the spring, after pro-Palestinian students set up tents at Columbia University and school officials brought in city police to clear the demonstration, similar encampments began to emerge at colleges nationwide.

Protests erupted at prominent universities such as Harvard, Yale, MIT, and the University of California, frequently intensifying into clashes between opposing groups’ factions and increasing tensions within the campus environment.

The US police arrested more than 3000 students, professors, and faculty members after accusing the involved activists of “anti-Semitism” and “terrorism” and school administrators threatened some protest leaders with suspension and academic probation.

February 27, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Jim Jordan Subpoenas FBI: Unraveling Biden Admin’s Big Tech Collusion

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 26, 2025

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan subpoenaed the FBI on Monday for seven categories of information, including on the Biden Administration’s collusion with Big Tech.

In a letter to the new FBI director, Kash Patel, Jordan states that during the mandate of his predecessor Christopher Wray and the former administration, the agency “departed from its core public safety mission” and was able to do this while avoiding “any real transparency or accountability for its actions.”

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

According to Jordan, this resulted in deep distrust in the FBI, which can be remedied by shedding light on the agency’s involvement in these activities.

Regarding the government-Big Tech collusion, Jordan recalled that during the previous Congress as well, the Committee that he heads undertook to investigate how this was happening, and to what extent.

The results of this oversight so far, as well as discovery in the Missouri v. Biden case (that continues to be litigated in a federal court), have revealed the FBI’s involvement.

In order to determine what the agency’s exact role was and make sure it doesn’t deviate from its mission in a similar way going forward, the Committee is now requesting the documents that Christopher Wray, for the most part, had not produced.

Jordan notes that a subpoena issued in August 2023 sought access to all of the FBI’s internal documents, communications, and notes about any meetings between its representatives and those of Big Tech, and also records related to the censorship of reports about the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.

What the investigations have revealed to date is that the FBI was falsely presenting the story as “Russian disinformation” while in effect pressuring social media companies to censor it.

Yet another, earlier subpoena, from February 2023, sent to Meta and Google, “revealed that the FBI, on behalf of a compromised Ukrainian intelligence entity, requested – and, in some cases, directed – the world’s largest social media platforms to censor Americans engaging in constitutionally protected speech online,” Jordan writes.

To understand the full extent of the FBI’s role in any unconstitutional activities that also involve “coordination” with social media companies, the Committee wants Kash Patel to now provide all the relevant communications.

The ultimate goal of the investigation is to establish if legislative changes are necessary to prevent the agency from acting in a similar way in the future.

February 27, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Through a Child’s Eyes: Genocide of the Palestinian People in Gaza

Defense for Children Palestine

Through a Child’s Eyes, produced by Defense for Children International – Palestine, premiered on February 25, 2025.

Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCIP) is an independent, local Palestinian child rights organization dedicated to defending and promoting the rights of children living in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Since 1991, we have investigated, documented, and exposed grave human rights violations against children; provided legal services to children in urgent need; held Israeli and Palestinian authorities accountable to universal human rights principles; and advocated at the international and national levels to advance access to justice and protection for children.

February 27, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

EU Contributes €4M to UNESCO’s Expanding Online Content Regulation and Digital ID Goals

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 26, 2025

The EU is spending another €4 million (just under $4.2 million) on a project it runs together with the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), known as Social Media 4 Peace (SM4P).

Those targeted by this latest contribution from Brussels are Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, and South Africa as newly included countries, whereas what’s already been achieved in Indonesia and Kenya will be “reinforced,” the UN said.

Others that have been a part of the scheme, which critics consider a censorship initiative, are Bosnia and Herzegovina and Colombia. The EU has already given €4 million to SM4P in 2021, when it launched.

According to the EU’s SM4P page, the project’s purpose is to deal with “potentially harmful online content – in particular hate speech.” Now UNESCO announced the latest contribution saying that will help SM4P’s mission to address harmful content in “conflict-prone and polarized” societies.

And the UN agency promises to protect free speech and rights – “of the most vulnerable and marginalized communities.”

Other than the dystopian-sounding declaration of being there to counter “potentially harmful content,” SM4P raises eyebrows for activities such as contributing to the “shaping” of the Global Forum of Networks.

The burgeoning EU-UN partnership to tackle “disinformation and hate speech globally” has also contributed to what is referred to as global policy discussions on digital platform governance.

In the UN’s system of “nesting dolls of censorship projects,” the Global Forum of Networks is set up to allow international regulators to collaborate and implement UNESCO’s Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms – the result of the said “discussions” – and what SM4P will be focused on until 2027.

The Guidelines’ About page states that this initiative’s aim is to “deal with the problems of dis- and misinformation and hate speech online.”

Then there’s the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 goals – including Sustainable Development Goal Target 16.9 (“legal identity for all, including birth registration, by 2030”), which pushes for digital ID as a way to participate in the digital economy.

That is another goal that SM4P will contribute to, according to the EU page about the project.

In announcing EU’s latest €4 million contribution, UNESCO said that SM4P already has more than 80 partners in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Indonesia, and Kenya – but that its influence in “fostering multistakeholder collaboration and strengthening resilience against online harm” extends “beyond target countries.”

February 26, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Florida Judge Rules Brazilian Censorship Orders Unenforceable Against Rumble and Trump Media

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 25, 2025

A federal judge in Florida has denied a request from Trump Media and video platform Rumble to block enforcement of orders issued by Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, ruling that the case is not yet ripe for judicial review.

We obtained a copy of the order for you here.

However – that’s not because Rumble and Trump Media  have no grounds – it’s because both companies “were not served upon Plaintiffs in compliance with the Hague Convention, to which the United States and Brazil are both signatories nor were they served pursuant to the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between the United States and Brazil.”

The two platforms have been at the forefront in the fight against censorship. In a win for free speech, the court ruled that the direct demands of Rumble and Truth are not through “established protocols” and so Plaintiffs [Rumble and Truth] are not obligated to comply with the directives and pronouncements, and no one is authorized or obligated to assist in their enforcement against Plaintiffs or their interests here in the United States.”

The immediate dispute revolves around a conservative Brazilian commentator living in the US, referred to in the lawsuit as Political Dissident A. This commentator, a vocal critic of the Brazilian Supreme Court, has been accused of “anti-democratic” speech—a charge that US courts would almost certainly dismiss as constitutionally protected under the First Amendment.

US District Judge Mary S. Scriven effectively stated that the two platforms do not need a temporary restraining order against Moraes because Morae’s orders to Rumble have no grounds.

In a statement, a Rumble spokesperson stated: “The court explicitly ruled that Moraes’s directives were never properly served under US or international law…” and that “The court further made clear that if anyone attempts to enforce these illegal orders on US soil, it stands ready to intervene to protect American companies and free speech. The ruling sends a strong message to foreign governments that they cannot bypass US law to impose censorship on American platforms.”

“This is a major victory for free speech and free expression online,” said Trump Media CEO Devin Nunes. “The ruling confirms that would-be dictators in any country can’t force Trump Media or Rumble to censor their opponents. We congratulate our partner Rumble on its principled stand for freedom.”

February 26, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Erasing 1,700-year history: Israel’s property grab threatens Armenian Christians in al-Quds

By Ivan Kesic | Press TV | February 26, 2025

Armenian Christians, the smallest recognized community in occupied al-Quds, are reeling under pressure from Israeli settler-colonial policies aimed at imposing exorbitant taxes, seizing their properties, displacing them, and ultimately Judaizing the historic city center.

On February 18, the Armenian Patriarchate in the holy city issued an urgent communiqué, warning that the local Zionist municipality is attempting to confiscate and auction off properties it owns there.

The Patriarchate is situated in the Armenian Quarter, one of the four sections of the walled Old City, alongside the Christian, Muslim, and Jewish Quarters.

This small Armenian community, located in the southwestern corner of the 12.6-hectare Old City, numbers only a few hundred people. As the oldest Armenian diaspora, it has maintained a presence in the neighborhood for nearly 1,700 years, as per historical accounts.

For years, the Armenian community has resisted the expansion of Jewish-only settlements in occupied Jerusalem al-Quds. However, their enduring heritage is now at risk of being erased.

The Israeli regime claims that the Patriarchate has unpaid taxes dating back to 1994—an accusation the Patriarchate denounces as unjust, crippling, and only recently imposed.

It warns that this move could set a dangerous precedent for all Christian communities in the city.

In an effort to halt the foreclosure process on its centuries-old properties, the Patriarchate has filed a petition. The hearing was initially scheduled for February 24 but has since been postponed.

Unjustified tax apartheid 

After issuing a desperate appeal and urging supporters to share it on social media platforms, the Armenian Patriarchate came under vicious attack from Zionist hate-mongers, who falsely accused it of evading taxes for 31 years.

In reality, as a Press TV website investigation revealed, Christian church-owned properties were exempt from property taxes for two centuries until a 2018 decision by the Zionist municipality, approved by Benjamin Netanyahu’s regime, overturned this longstanding policy.

Armenian Quarter in al-Quds, the place of 1,700 years of Armenian history

The Zionist settler-colonial authorities then imposed the so-called Arnona, an annual municipal property tax levied on local residents in the occupied al-Quds.

Without any legal basis, the municipality arbitrarily ruled that the historic 200-year exemption applied only to places of worship, while all other church-owned properties would be subject to retroactive taxation from 1994.

This date was chosen because it marked the signing of an agreement between the Zionist regime and Jordan, recognizing Amman’s custodianship over Muslim holy sites in the Old City—while Tel Aviv remained the occupying power.

Overnight, the municipality’s decision saddled the small Armenian community with a 24-year debt. Under Zionist regime laws, properties weighed down with such heavy debts can be seized and auctioned to cover the outstanding amount.

This aggressive campaign was spearheaded by Nir Barkat, a Likud politician, and then-mayor, who sought to tax so-called “non-religious” church properties for a total of $200 million, even ordering the freezing of their bank accounts.

The Armenian Patriarchate was not alone in its resistance. Other Christian leaders also vehemently opposed the move, going so far as to close the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in protest.

The dispute further strained relations between the Israeli regime and the Holy See, which cited local tax disputes as a key reason for delaying ongoing bilateral negotiations on property and economic matters.

Armenian Christians as the primary target

As the smallest and most vulnerable Christian community in the city, Armenians have been the primary target of the Zionist regime’s apartheid policies. The Armenian Patriarchate emphasizes that no other Christian community has faced such unprecedented and irreversible measures.

Following the municipality’s issuance of a seizure order, the Armenian Patriarch sent a letter to Netanyahu, urging him to intervene and halt the municipality’s actions regarding the tax dispute.

The Patriarchate has challenged the legality of these measures, asserting that no judicial ruling has ever subjected it to such obligations.

The petition asserted that the municipality disregarded the statute of limitations for the period between 1994 and 2018, demanding an exorbitant sum without clearly defining the presumed tax base.

The municipality’s actions have been described as aggressive and particularly unjustified; given that it itself owes the Patriarchate millions of shekels in overdue rental fees.

Armenian Quarter numbers only a few hundred people due to Zionist apartheid policies

Despite this, the Patriarchate has refrained from legal action to recover the debt, instead opting for prolonged negotiations to reach an amicable resolution.

In its statement, the Patriarchate also noted that it has repeatedly attempted to present these arguments to municipal authorities, who have refused to reassess the validity of the debt, despite clear violations of legal deadlines and procedures.

The official responsible for rejecting the review of the debt—because the deadline for objections had passed—is the same individual who originally determined the astronomical debt.

“In other words, the municipal employee is acting as the claimant, judge, and executor of the administrative order, serving the interests of his employer—the municipality,” the statement declared.

The petition is therefore directed against both the municipality and the official in question. A hearing was scheduled for February 24; however, just four days before the date, it was announced that the session had been postponed indefinitely due to weather conditions.

If the petition is rejected, the municipality will be authorized to immediately resume the seizure of properties in order to erase the long history of Armenian Christians in the occupied holy city.

Christian communities’ condemnation

Church representatives in the occupied al-Quds, along with the World Council of Churches (WCC), have expressed their solidarity with the Armenian Patriarchate through an official statement.

On February 21, the Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in Jerusalem issued a declaration condemning the municipality’s “unjust foreclosure order” and calling for “immediate intervention.”

Christian leaders in occupied al-Quds voiced their “great concern” and “steadfast solidarity” with the Orthodox Armenian Patriarchate in its fight for justice against what they described as an “unverified and exorbitant” tax debt, denouncing it as “dubious and morally unacceptable.”

“It is inconceivable that Christian institutions, which for centuries have safeguarded the faith, served communities, and preserved the sacred heritage of the Holy Land, should now face the threat of property seizure under Israeli administrative measures that disregard due process,” they stated.

Particularly alarming, they noted, is the municipality’s attempt to enforce the debt determination without judicial review, in open defiance of the committee formed to handle such negotiations.

This “reckless move,” they warned, threatens the Orthodox Armenian Patriarchate, sets a dangerous precedent for other Christian institutions, and undermines religious freedom.

They further explained that seizing these assets would strip both the Armenian Patriarchate and its community of essential economic resources, jeopardizing their ability to sustain their presence and fulfill their pastoral mission.

The statement concluded with a powerful declaration: “The targeting of one Church is an assault on all.” The leaders urged Israeli occupation to immediately intervene, halt all foreclosure proceedings, and ensure the resumption of negotiations.

The WCC, a global Christian inter-church organization representing 352 member churches, echoed this condemnation in a separate statement, denouncing the Israeli actions as “a blatant attack on religious freedom” and “an alarming violation of the historic status quo” governing the Holy Sites of al-Quds.

Other hostile moves against Christians 

The imposition of a fictitious tax debt is just one example of Zionist attempts to appropriate Armenian property and intimidate the Armenian community.

Another significant case is the ongoing multi-year effort to seize the Cows’ Garden, an undeveloped one-hectare section of the Armenian Quarter.

The controversy erupted in 2020 when the Armenian Patriarchate signed a ten-year contract with the local municipality to convert the vacant land into a parking lot for Jewish settlers in the Old City and pilgrims visiting the Western Wall.

Both Armenians and Palestinians staged protests against the lease agreement, voicing concerns over Armenian land ownership. The Patriarchate maintained that the deal was strictly a financial arrangement, not a sale deed.

The following year, the parking lot was opened, and the Patriarchate signed a new contract with Israeli investors from the Dubai-registered Xana Gardens company to lease the land for 99 years and construct a luxury hotel.

This sparked even fiercer protests and led to the uncovering of an internal corruption scandal. By the end of 2023, the Patriarchate canceled the contract, stating that the investors had misled them regarding financial commitments and final development plans.

In response, the Israeli company escalated its efforts to forcibly acquire the land, resorting to lawsuits, threats, and physical intimidation of Armenians.

Since then, the Armenian Christian community has erected temporary guard stations and has been physically safeguarding the disputed land around the clock for months.

Jewish mobs have been recorded attacking Armenians on multiple occasions. Under the protection of Israeli occupation police, the company sent bulldozers to the site, and at one point, the owner arrived in person, openly calling for the expulsion of Armenians.

Zionist extremists frequently vandalize the Armenian Quarter with hate graffiti, including slogans such as “Death to Arabs and their Armenian Friends.” They have also targeted Armenian families with harassment and violence.

Meanwhile, investigations have revealed the company’s ties to the far-right settler movement, which aids Israeli settlers in seizing Muslim and Christian properties across occupied al-Quds.

Armenians and Palestinians fear the long-term consequences of these policies, warning that they will disrupt the demographic balance and further the ongoing Judaization of the Old City.

February 26, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Zelensky now with only the dictatorship in London to support him

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 26, 2025

What is the definition of a ‘dictator’? In the days that followed Trump’s social media post calling President Zelensky one, British media seized upon the subject and ran with it for days. Various public figures were asked whether Trump was right to use the word and whether they believed Zelensky was actually one. Two figures from the right, Nigel Farage and Liz Truss both said they thought Trump was both wrong to call him one and that in fact he wasn’t one.

This remarkable endearment for Zelensky is really the core of the problem in the west in particular the UK, where its leader Sir Keir Starmer declared that he would be ready to send British troops to Ukraine – a suggestion which was quickly shot down by the elites of Germany and France as preposterous.

It’s rare that the giants of the EU put the British government in its place on world affairs but we are living in unprecedented times of sensational stupidity and perhaps ignorance from politicians which we have never seen before.

Farage’s views on the Middle East tell us he is both ignorant of what is happening there and doesn’t have any advisors covering the region. But his views on Ukraine are even more shockingly deranged. Zelensky is a leader who has shut down anything which resembles an ‘opposition’ both politically and media, he has conglomerated all TV stations into one state-owned entity so as to shut down even the slightest criticism or accountability of his own actions, he has had the few dissident voices arrested and thrown into prison, with some predicting that there are thousands of journalists and media workers. Add to that it is rapidly emerging that the level of corruption and embezzlement linked directly to Zelensky is on a scale that even hard line critics in the West could not have even imagined.

In my own investigation in October 2023, where a very angry Ben Wallace insulted me in a WhatsApp interview before blocking me, I outline how the original, more sensational claim that only about a third of all military equipment sent to Ukraine was actually making it to the battlefield was in fact realistic. This analogy was bandied about for some time and was dismissed by Wallace and others like Alecia Kearns MP as nonsense and yet turned out to be more than just realistic but likely. That is to say that 66 percent of what was being sent to Ukraine was being sold on the black market in Libya making Zelensky and his close circle billionaires.

In recent weeks now mainstream journalists and politicians are talking about the arms scandal and it is only a matter of time before we shall see the realities of this. The British government have always turned a blind eye to it, both in Ukraine and further afield. It would cost them nothing to do a study in the Sahel to evaluate how much of the equipment there funding terrorism is coming from the arms bazaars of Tripoli where all of this kit is ending up. I suggested to Wallace that his own government at the time should send some investigators there (Libya) to look at what’s available. I was more or less told to go there myself and do the job for them.

But Zelenksy support structure for so long has been that of a dictator, in particular media. The hundreds of media outlets in Ukraine which were receiving USAID funding is extensive, not to mention the hundreds of civil servants which support him being on the same payroll. If that doesn’t shock Farage and Truss, then consider the same slush fund which paid out around a 100 million dollars to movie stars to go and visit him and fake their adulation, all for the purposes of cheating the humble U.S. taxpayer by raising his profile.

Who could forget Sean Penn giving him his own Oscar, or Ben Stiller chilling with the Ukrainian leader and making small talk? Angelina Jolie is even reported to have been paid 20 million dollars to meet with him but didn’t even manage that and simply mooched about a bit in the country before jetting back to the U.S. Of course, the celebrities all dismiss these claims, through the same left-wing woke press which is part of their extended political family. But the question we should be asking ourselves is simply this: if they were not paid, then why won’t they show up now and show support at the precise moment when Zelensky needs it the most? Given that these celebrities supported Biden and are Democrats, this would be the most logical thing for them to do. In reality, the wall of silence is what we see.

Dictators don’t stand over their hired killers and watch their victims in their final moments like Idi Amin did. In reality, they only indicate and hint to the thugs on their payroll what she should do to fix problems. Do Farage and Truss actually believe that dissidents are not rounded up and thrown into jail where they are tortured and in some cases murdered? Now that the vultures are circling over Zelensky and many are wondering how many days in office he has left, more reports are emerging with details of such cases. The story of Gonzalo Lira, the American Chilean blogger whose vlogs were often well-informed and threw a very poor spotlight on Zelensky is a very sad one as he was brutally tortured while in prison and finally died. If the Zelensky cabal can do this to an American citizen, perhaps Farage and Truss will not be too surprised when in the coming weeks we will have the same Damascus prison media moment where it transpires that there are certainly hundreds, possibly thousands of journalists, commentators and political rivals in Ukraine’s prisons.

The debate, if we can call it that in the UK, over whether Zelensky is a dictator or not is a remedial one at best as it misses the point. In Britain, during the same period a man was imprisoned for posting a social media comment about a Labour official while a granny was visited by two plain clothes cops about her mere criticism of a Labour councilor’s conduct. Plain clothed detectives!

Britain has descended rapidly into a police state with Starmer as its dictator. The high ground we once had where we scolded China for arresting protestors has now been kicked away from under our feet. We have become China. Britain’s police now cannot deal with crime but prefer being the ‘Thought Police’ and threatening old biddies.

And so the talk about what is a dictator is rather fatuous if not incongruent given that those doing it are part of an elite which only claim to cherish free speech but in fact loath it. Farage cannot be taken seriously on Ukraine but his comments do steer the bumble hack towards darker questions. Who is funding him? And is his own dream of being a PM in the UK going to merely continue the present dictatorship which silences anyone who questions him? His reputation of being thin-skinned and kicking out of his party anyone who questions his ideas is already established. His own repugnance of British media also is well known. Previously in Brussels, his decision led to the closure of the only free speech, anti corruption magazine going, which he was always fearful of exposing his own infidelity while an MEP. And as for Truss, the most inept prime minister Britain has ever had in its long history, whose dictator-like style while in office crashed the economy? How should we interpret her support for Zelenksy? Do both Farage and Truss admire this dictator? The problem is not with the word ‘dictator’, it is more about the people who use it for their own purposes. It is not important whether Zelensky is one or not, rather than he is not a dictator who is servile to Trump and his cabal. Unlike Farage, Zelensky is not our kind of dictator.

February 26, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

Utah Set to Become First State to End Water Fluoridation for All Residents

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | February 24, 2025

Utah lawmakers last week voted to pass the first U.S. statewide ban on adding fluoride to public water systems. The Utah Senate voted 18-8 in favor of the measure after it passed in the House.

If Gov. Spencer Cox signs the bill into law, it will end community water fluoridation. The new law also will give pharmacists new authority to prescribe fluoride supplement pills. Typically, such pills can be prescribed only by a dentist or physician.

Rep. Stephanie Gricius, who sponsored the bill, told The Defender she was thrilled the legislature voted to pass the bill. “Utah leads the nation in so many things and this is just one more example.”

Gricius emphasized that the law allows people to make their own decisions about whether and how to take supplemental fluoride.

“I am a firm believer that the proper role of government is to provide safe, clean drinking water, not medicate the public on a mass scale,” Gricius said. “Because I also believe in medical freedom, I wanted fluoride to remain available to anyone who wanted it for either themselves or their children — which is why we made the prescription easier to obtain through a pharmacy.”

The bill’s Senate sponsor, Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore, said during his presentation on the Senate floor that the bill is “about protecting our water, reducing unnecessary costs, and ensuring people have the right to decide what they consume.”

Rick North, board member of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), one of the plaintiffs who last year won a landmark lawsuit over water fluoridation against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said, “Utah’s fluoridation ban bill enjoyed wide support in both the House and Senate, reflecting both concerns over health risks and the firm opposition to adding any drug to drinking water, taking away people’s right to informed consent.”

North added, “If the governor signs the bill, it would be historic, and could be a catalyst for other states and cities doing the same.”

Opposition to water fluoridation has been growing across the country, particularly since a California federal judge ruled in the case brought by FAN, Mothers Against Fluoridation and others against the EPA that water fluoridation at current U.S. levels poses an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health and that the agency must regulate it.

Judge Edward Chen’s 80-page decision outlined the overwhelming scientific evidence that exposure to fluoride is linked to reduced IQ in children. The EPA recently announced it plans to appeal the ruling.

Chen’s ruling followed the publication in August of a key report by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ National Toxicology Program (NTP) that concluded higher levels of fluoride exposure in drinking water are consistently linked to lower IQ in kids.

Other studies making similar findings have also been published in major scientific journals this year.

Fluoride a byproduct of phosphate fertilizer production

Gricius started working on the issue last year after a resident approached her about “having individual choice when it comes to what prescriptions she and her children took.”

Local water conservancy districts also reached out to Cullimore to ask the state to ban water fluoridation citing claims of employee safety and the decision in the landmark case against the EPA, Gricius said.

Proponents of water fluoridation argue it protects children’s oral health. However, in October, an updated Cochrane Review concluded that adding fluoride to drinking water provides very limited, if any, dental benefits, especially compared with 50 years ago.

Proponents also underscore that fluoride is a naturally occurring chemical in water, earth and rocks. It can occur naturally in drinking water supplies, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions.

But most surface water contains very low levels of fluoride and roughly three-quarters of Americans have fluoride added to their drinking water. The fluoride added to water systems, typically in the form of fluorosilicic acid, is a byproduct of phosphate fertilizer production — as documents from the fluoride lawsuit confirmed.

Cullimore also emphasized that many Utah citizens don’t want the chemical added to their water. “This bill does not prohibit anybody from taking fluoride in whatever fashion they want,” he said. It just disallows people who do not want fluoride from having to consume fluoride in their water.”

Cullimore’s district includes the city of Sandy, where a malfunctioning pump in the water fluoridation system released undiluted hydrofluorosilicic acid into the water in 2019, affecting 1,500 households, institutions and businesses and sickening over 200 people.

An investigation revealed that officials failed to notify the public for 10 days and that fluoride was detected in the drinking water at 40 times the recommended levels.

The 18-8 vote to pass the bill in the Republican-dominated Utah Senate on Friday was largely along party lines, with two Republican senators voting against it and one Democratic senator voting for it.

If signed, the bill is set to take effect on May 7. The governor’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether Cox plans to sign it.

‘We’re watching water fluoridation unravel globally in real time’

Since the September court ruling, many U.S. cities and towns have moved to pause or stop fluoridating their water, signaling that the long-term and largely unquestioned practice in the U.S. is facing heightened scrutiny by the public.

FAN Executive Director Stuart Cooper said the Utah vote is a marker of how significantly public opinion is shifting.

Cooper said:

“This is another significant victory for the public, who didn’t sign up to have a developmental neurotoxin and endocrine disruptor to their drinking water. The NIH-funded science showing neurotoxicity, the NTP report confirming that neurotoxicity and the federal ruling that fluoridation poses an unreasonable risk to human health have all pushed this topic over the tipping point. We’re watching water fluoridation unravel globally in real time.”

Cooper pointed out that 95% of the world and 98% of Europe do not fluoridate, and many countries passed resolutions banning the practice decades ago.

He said states and towns that continue to add fluoridation chemicals to the public water supply “are the extreme outliers and radicals in this situation.”

Florida Surgeon General Joseph A. Ladapo in December advised governments across the state to stop adding fluoride to their water. Ladapo cited the neuropsychiatric risks — particularly for pregnant women and children — associated with the practice.

Lawmakers in at least three other states have also introduced legislation that would outlaw adding fluoride to community water systems, and four other states are considering bills to make fluoride optional or limit its concentration.

In addition to Utah, lawmakers in North Dakota, New Hampshire and Tennessee are seeking a ban on the practice. Bills in Arkansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nebraska, and South Dakota would either repeal statewide fluoridation programs or set limits on the amount of fluoride added to water, Bloomberg Law reported.

Last week, Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller also called on Gov. Greg Abbott and the state lawmakers to institute a statewide ban on water fluoridation.

Hawaii is the only state that does not offer water fluoridation for most residents. However, the military bases there are mandated by the federal government to fluoridate their water.

Bucking national trends, Democratic senators in Connecticut are introducing legislation to make the current levels of 0.7 milligrams of fluoride per liter, recommended by the public health agencies, state law. They are drafting a bill, Senate Bill No. 7, that would continue water fluoridation at current levels in the state even if federal policy were to change.

The state senate democratic webpage reports they are drafting the bill out of concerns that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., recently confirmed as secretary of Health and Human Services, suggested on social media that the Trump administration would advise all American water systems to remove it from drinking water.

Related stories in The Defender

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

February 25, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

Wales Becomes First UK Testbed for Citywide AI-Powered Facial Recognition Surveillance

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 22, 2025

Wales is that part of the UK the authorities have picked as the testbed for the first citywide deployment of what some consider to currently be the most radical form of mass biometric surveillance in public places – “AI”-powered live facial recognition.

What is likely to be the reason behind the “trial,” privacy campaigners are warning, is the eventual permanent deployment of this type of biometric surveillance throughout the country.

South Wales Police said that Cardiff will be covered by a network of CCTV cameras with facial recognition tech embedded in them, while the excuse is providing security during the international Six Nations rugby event. But the police also characterized the move as “semi-permanent.”

This appears to be a distinction between what the police in the UK have used thus far to carry out surveillance based on live facial recognition: vans with one camera.

The decision to move to position a host of cameras in the central zone of Cardiff makes this a significant expansion of the technique.

And while the police are reassuring citizens that expanding live facial recognition “really enhances” law enforcement’s ability to do their job –  the Big Brother Watch privacy group slammed the move as a “shocking” development and the creation of an “Orwellian biometric surveillance zone.”

And while capturing everyone’s biometric data, and in that way, according to Big Brother Watch’s Senior Advocacy Officer Madeleine Stone, turning Brits into “walking barcodes” and “a nation of suspects” – in terms of solving crime, this is proving to be a waste of public money.

“This network of facial recognition cameras will make it impossible for Cardiff residents and visitors to opt out of a biometric police identity check,” Stone underlined.

And yet, over the three years that live facial recognition has been in use at sporting venues (only) – the use of the technology has not led to any arrests.

“No other democracy in the world spies on its population with live facial recognition in this cavalier and chilling way,” Stone warned, adding, “South Wales Police must immediately stop this dystopian trial.”

The technology works by capturing the faces of every person passing through an area covered, in real time, to then compare them to a database of those described in reports as “wanted criminals.”

However, when South Wales Police spoke about who is on their “watchlist,” it also included people “banned from the area” and those “who pose a risk to the public.”

More: UK Government Fast-Tracking Bill to Monitor Bank Accounts, Revoke Licenses, and Search Homes

February 23, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

Israel says army to stay ‘for next year’ in Palestinian refugee camp in occupied West Bank

MEMO | February 23, 2025

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Sunday that the army will remain in Palestinian refugee camps in the northern West Bank for the next year to prevent Palestinian residents from returning, Anadolu reports.

The Israeli army deployed tanks in the northern West Bank early Sunday, marking the first time since 2002 amid military escalation in the occupied territory.

“The Israeli army is expanding its operations in the northern West Bank, and starting tonight, it will also operate in the town of Qabatiya,” Katz said in a statement.

The defense minister said 40,000 Palestinians have been evacuated from Jenin, Tulkarem, and Nur Shams refugee camps.

“UNRWA activity in the camps has also been stopped,” he said. “I instructed the IDF (army) to prepare for a long stay in the camps that were cleared, for the coming year, and not allow residents to return.”

The army has been conducting military operations in the northern West Bank since last month, killing at least 60 people and displacing thousands.

The raids were the latest in Israel’s ongoing military escalation in the West Bank where at least 923 Palestinians have been killed and nearly 7,000 injured in attacks by the Israeli army and illegal settlers since the start of the onslaught against the Gaza Strip on Oct. 7, 2023, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.

The International Court of Justice declared in July that Israel’s long-standing occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal, demanding the evacuation of all settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

February 23, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Britain’s working class will never fight Starmer’s war for Ukraine

By Dr Lisa McKenzie | RT | February 23, 2025

Following the Munich Security Conference last week, European Union leaders appeared shell-shocked by US Vice President J.D. Vance’s scathing attack on Europe.

He criticized the continent for multiple reasons, including the lack of free speech, arrests of European citizens for inflammatory social media posts, insufficient commitment to security, and destabilization due to both legal and illegal migration. Although Vance seemed to address Western European politicians and officials, it is likely he was speaking over their heads, directly to the public. His words resonated with widespread discontent about politics and politicians across the region, aligning with the prevailing sense of unfairness felt by many ordinary citizens.

Western European leaders, including British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, appeared agitated and uncomfortable with Washington’s tone. Perhaps the hard truths Vance presented have forced them to reconsider their consistently underfunded armed forces. Vance’s warnings made it clear that they cannot indefinitely rely on the US for military power and financial aid, particularly regarding the Russia-Ukraine war. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky also heard that signal and immediately called for a ‘European Armed Force’. Western European leaders arranged an emergency meeting in Paris hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron and, astonishingly, Starmer indicated British soldiers could be sent to the Ukraine to enforce any peace deal.

The British public and Parliament were caught off guard by what many see as a reckless proposal from their PM. He announced the possibility of “British boots on the ground” just hours after the Munich meeting ended. This decision, or threat, appears to be a unilateral move by Starmer. It is unlikely to gain widespread support across the country and is already sparking outrage, particularly in the “Red Wall” – Britain’s former industrial heartlands. A poll in The Times just last week showed that only 11% of young people in the UK would consider fighting for their country, showing what we all know: that the UK is deeply divided over class, race, and region.

This is a problem for Starmer and the British liberals who have yet again found their war drums that were put away following the disastrous follies in Iraq and Afghanistan. What was once the Labour heartlands, the de-industrialized parts of the country, have also been the typical recruiting fields for the British Soldier – the white working class. These communities have been badly let down by all politicians have become deeply resentful and detached from what is happening within the politics, media and chattering classes of London.

It is no coincidence that those beating the war drums in London are the same individuals who supported the Iraq invasion and opposed the outcome of the EU referendum that led to Brexit. There has been a distinct division throughout the country since Brexit and I suspect Starmer’s reckless offering up of our military to “peacekeep” for the EU is a signal that he wants a closer relationship with the bloc. Unfortunately for Starmer, his brand of Labour – middle-class metropolitan liberals – will never offer up their own children for military service and will look north towards the very people they have spent the nine years since the Brexit referendum accusing of being racists, bigots, and xenophobes.

Starmer and Macron are deeply unpopular in their own countries. Perhaps they think they can paint over the damage done in their countries by successive neo-liberal governments by pulling the patriotic chord through the threat of war. But Starmer must realise that this will never be his Falklands War moment – when an unpopular Margaret Thatcher and her Tory government turned around their unpopularity by going to war with Argentina in 1982. Working-class populations outside the big metropolitan cities, in places like Blyth, Sunderland, Mansfield and Stoke-on-Trent, have traditionally been patriotic and supported the British military, but they will not follow Starmer and the failed EU leaders into a battle they see as ‘not theirs’.

The lesson here for the Western European political leaders is that ignoring sections of the population, allowing deep divisions and inequalities to fester, and then banging the war drums and expecting the working class to go and fight a war for you is not going to work. They can see right through this, and Vance’s words spoke to them more directly than a despised European elite class ever could.

Dr Lisa McKenzie is a working-class academic. She grew up in a coal-mining town in Nottinghamshire and became politicized through the 1984 miners’ strike with her family. At 31, she went to the University of Nottingham and did an undergraduate degree in sociology. Dr McKenzie is the author of ‘Getting By: Estates, Class and Culture in Austerity Britain.’ She’s a political activist, writer and thinker.

February 23, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »