Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

British-Palestinian surgeon vindicated after medical council rejects Israel lobby complaint

MEMO | August 29, 2024

British-Palestinian surgeon Dr Ghassan Abu-Sittah was vindicated this week after a complaint by a notorious pro-Israel lobby group was rejected by the General Medical Council. UK Lawyers for Israel sought to have the distinguished plastic and reconstructive surgeon suspended and banned from practising medicine.

The so-called “lawfare” organisation is widely known for filing vexatious complaints and litigation to silence critics of Israel and its apartheid policies. The lobby group was behind a complaint to remove art work by children from Gaza which was on display at a London hospital. In another case, UKLFI was slapped down by the chairman of an English football club for allegedly threatening behaviour.

UKLFI claimed that alleged social media posts by Abu-Sittah impaired his fitness to practise medicine and sought for his medical licence to be suspended. This smear is said to have been designed to bring Abu-Sittah’s distinguished reputation into disrepute, and undermine his prominent profile as a public figure in the British Palestinian community. It also sought to undermine Abu-Sittah’s rights to freedom of expression.

Dr Abu-Sittah is known for his humanitarian work in conflict zones, particularly Gaza. He argued that the complaint was politically motivated. He clarified that he was not the author of several posts in question, while others had been translated inaccurately. The tribunal expressed concern over UKLFI’s inability to provide verified translations of the Arabic language posts.

The tribunal also dismissed UKLFI’s arguments that Abu-Sittah’s alleged social media activity posed a risk to patients or the public. No evidence was found to suggest any compromise to patient safety. On the contrary, several compelling testimonies, including one from a British-Israeli colleague, attested to Abu-Sittah’s fair and professional treatment of all patients.

The move by one of the key arms of Israel’s lobby in the UK was seen widely as a smear campaign designed to tarnish Abu-Sittah’s reputation. Nevertheless, in April, he was elected as rector of the University of Glasgow, winning an overwhelming 80 per cent of the vote following a campaign that resonated deeply with students.

Abu Sittah’s successful legal team was comprised of experts from Bindmans LLP, 11KBW and Furnival Chambers. The team included Tayab Ali, who is also the Director of the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP); Axel Landin, Zac Sammour and Soraya Bauwens.

The surgeon’s humanitarian efforts in Gaza have been praised widely. He volunteered his medical services for forty-three days from 9 October 2023, when Israel launched what the International Court of Justice has called a plausible genocidal campaign in the besieged enclave.

Upon his return to London, Abu-Sittah spoke at an ICJP press conference, recounting the harrowing experience in Gaza, including performing multiple amputations on children and working with severely limited medical supplies.

The vindication of Abu-Sittah is the second legal victory for the British Palestinian doctor since his return from Gaza. In May, he successfully overturned a Schengen-wide travel ban imposed on him by the German government, in what appeared to be yet another vexatious legal campaign to silence the 55-year-old.

This vindication is seen as a major victory not only for Dr Ghassan Abu-Sittah, but also for all medical professionals engaged in humanitarian work in conflict zones.

August 29, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

UK backs Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles inside Russia – media

RT | August 28, 2024

The UK is in favor of allowing Ukraine to use its Storm Shadow missiles for strikes deep inside Russia but is keeping its support out of the public eye so as not to cause a rift with the US, The Telegraph reported on Tuesday, citing sources.

Ukraine already has the greenlight from Britain to use Storm Shadows to strike Crimea and other areas claimed by Kiev, but not to target internationally recognized Russian territory. Amid Kiev’s ongoing incursion into Kursk Region, Vladimir Zelensky has stepped up his calls for the country’s Western backers to lift the restrictions on the use of their weapons for strikes in Russia. This is particularly the case for the British missiles, which can avoid enemy radar and hit targets up to 305km (190 miles) away.

However, according to The Telegraph, the decision on how Ukraine can use the missiles is not just up to London, as they are produced in close cooperation with France and the US, and are generally used alongside classified American systems.

While French President Emmanuel Macron previously said that Ukraine can use the missiles to strike sites in Russia from which the latter launches its own attacks, US officials have been reluctant to grant similar authorization. A White House source told the news outlet that the US administration is concerned that the use of long-range missiles, even without Washington’s outward approval, could escalate matters and lead to US troops being drawn into the conflict.

The UK has so far not made a formal request to Washington about Ukraine’s use of the missiles inside Russia, the news outlet claimed. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is reportedly reluctant to provoke a dispute over the issue, despite his own earlier claim that Kiev was free to use UK-supplied weapons as it saw fit.

Starmer, who refused to comment on the missile issue at a briefing on Tuesday, now wants to try a “consultative approach” and discuss the matter with allies before he makes any decisions, sources told the news outlet.

“The US fear escalation more than we do because they have to deal with it. We don’t… They, after all, would have to pick up the pieces. Little Britain cannot fight Russia,” a senior military source told The Telegraph.

Moscow has long criticized the West for providing military aid to Ukraine, and warned against allowing it to strike targets deep inside Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin previously said that such attacks would amount to direct Western participation in the conflict.

At a press conference on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov slammed discussions on the use of long-range missiles against Russia as “a ruse” to create the impression that the West wants to avoid excessive escalation, whereas the opposite is true.

August 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Durov’s arrest represents a new level of desperation from western elites

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 26, 2024

The arrest of Pavel Durov marks a new low point on the scumline of the side of the bath – the tub being western democracies and the line being their desperation to stay in power at the costs of controlling social media. Durov, who owns Telegram and lives in Dubai, could be in jail for months and possibly years on the trumped-up charges which the French state has conjured up simply because he refuses to allow any government to have a back door into Telegram. He has fought this tooth and nail for years with the west, in particular the U.S., playing every dirty trick in the book to get access to the platform for its own nefarious purposes – to destroy opposition figures, their strategies etc. – rather than what it is dressed up to be, identifying terrorists and international criminals.

As the UK ponders how its own state has sunk to a new totalitarian level in recent days with the arrest of its citizens who merely like a posting on a social media platform, the West has arrested this French Russian dual national genius who is charged with the crimes of those criminals active on Telegram. And so charges of terrorism and trafficking in minors, drugs and whatever else they can find on the platform will be made against him as someone abetting in the crimes. Of course, the same rules will not be levelled against Elon Musk who surely has criminals on his platform or for that matter any of the other social media platforms.

But how many of these platforms are also taking the same stand as Durov? We are led to believe that most of them aren’t but in light of his arrest we should assume that many of them have already allowed some sort of access to them for the deep state. Elon Musk likes to brag about his refusal to comply with the EU’s demands that he “moderates” who he allows onto X, adding that other social media platforms accepted the deal offered to him by Brussels: comply with our requests and we grant you some leniency on future antitrust fines. This offer, which he claims was happily accepted by other platforms is as close as you can get to the EU offering a brown envelope stuffed full of cash to a man in a pub. It’s a bribe and gives a clue as to how anti-democratic the EU is and how it operates in the shadows.

The French arrest however goes deeper in that we can assume that it was not France operating alone to nab Durov. We can assume that the FBI and CIA had probably pushed Macron to do this appalling dirty work but perhaps also Israel had a hand in it. Just recently, Netanyahu complained that data which was stolen from the government was being exchanged on Telegram and asked Durov to step in and retrieve it. He got no reply. Did Mossad have a hand in the arrest of Telegram’s boss? It seems credible given that it is hard to believe that Durov would fly into French airspace eyes wide open. Was it a kidnapping operation to get his plane and his pilot to land in Paris? French TV channel TF1 said Dubai-based Durov had been travelling from Azerbaijan and was arrested at around 8 p.m. (1800 GMT) on Saturday 24th of August but did not state whether the plane’s ultimate destination had been France.

The details around the arrest are very sketchy, but according to Reuters, Durov, whose fortune was estimated by Forbes at $15.5 billion, said some governments had sought to pressure him but the app should remain a “neutral platform” and not a “player in geopolitics”.

Another question which arises from the arrest is whether it is an international effort by western countries led by the U.S. – with Israel very much part of it – to test the waters for other arrests. Pundits have been dismissed as conspiracy theorists for weeks now suggesting Elon Musk will be arrested at some point, or charged in his absence, by UK authorities for some of the more controversial posts he has made about the political situation in the UK, or even by the EU which appears to have started a legal battle with him after he refused to respond to two letters sent to him by a French European Commissioner. Perhaps even the Democrats in the U.S. might play the same card given that Musk has lost all credibility as a neutral player in U.S. politics after he has so openly supported Trump who has promised him a position in a new government if he were to enter the Oval Office. There is no such thing really as free speech. It comes at a very high price for those who want to protect and cherish it and now France will test the political landscape to see how the arrest of Durov will affect Macron’s ratings. The French president has used outstandingly poor judgment in the past in calling for parliamentary elections immediately after EU ones which gave so much power to far-right groups, so he seems to be good at falling on his own sword. He may well have factored that Durov does not have the popularity of say Assange who didn’t stir so much political anger when he was banged up for years in a filthy, dank cell in the UK on trumped up charges from the U.S.

What is especially worrying is that locking up powerful people who have huge followings on the internet is becoming a trend which people are getting used to. The war between those who want to control the perceived truth and those who hold the actual one is hotting up. Scott Ritter, Andrew Tate, Richard Medhurst all arrested within days of one another, while Musk himself shuts down Egyptian comedian Bassem Youseff who had 10m followers on X. What we are witnessing is a new level of desperation that western elites are more afraid than ever after wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in Ukraine and starting a world war in the Middle East that voters have no confidence any more in their decision-making, as they, the public, struggle more and more to pay for groceries or even heat their houses. It’s a new milestone in the blind dogma of elites to resort to tactics which we would have scorned China or North Korea for using just a few years ago. It’s a new level of panic which we haven’t seen before.

August 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Debate: Is A Demonstration Project Really Necessary?

By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | August 17, 2024

My repeated calls for a Demonstration Project of a zero-emissions electrical grid have led to a spirited debate among knowledgeable commenters. While most back my position, some say that a Demonstration Project is really not necessary and would be a waste of effort.

The gist of the argument of those disputing the necessity of a Demonstration Project is that it is so obvious that a zero-emissions grid powered predominantly by wind and solar generation cannot be achieved that the expense and effort of building an actual physical facility cannot be justified. Before the building of a physical demonstration project there would inevitably be an engineering feasibility study, and such a feasibility study would not get through its first day before everybody involved realized that this could never work. All it would take would be a few back-of-the-envelope calculations using basic arithmetic and the whole endeavor would be sunk.

Regular commenter Richard Greene leads the forces arguing against a demonstration project. From a comment by Richard on my August 10 post:

A good demonstration project that included manufacturing and farming is very likely not needed. A real local utility Nut Zero grid engineering plan on paper would have grid engineers laughing hysterically. The money allocated for backup batteries would be nowhere close to paying for the battery GWh capacity needed. Backup natural gas power plants could do the job, but gas backup is not wanted. . . . 100% wind and solar can never work due to compound energy droughts, wind drought and solar droughts (batteries are far too expensive).

Representative of the pro-demonstration project side is a comment from “dm” on the August 13 post. Excerpt:

Because many people doubt paper analyses, lived experience is a necessary teacher. Thus, demonstration projects are NEEDED to prove the folly of “sustainable” electricity grids. Furthermore, the demonstration projects MUST be in regions heavily populated with nut zero enthusiasts, and ALL costs MUST be paid SOLELY by households, businesses, institutions … located within the demonstration areas.

My natural sympathies here would lie with Richard’s side of this debate. How can spending what would likely be billions of dollars of public money be justified when calculations that I have made or verified myself show that the project will never come close to success?

But then we must look at what is happening in large states and countries that are proceeding toward the stated goal of a zero-emissions grid without ever having had a working demonstration project. In some of these cases (Germany, UK) the wasted resources are now into the trillions, not billions. And at some point the whole effort will inevitably be ended with some kind of hard-to-predict catastrophe (long blackouts? multiplication of consumer costs by a factor of ten or more?). By then, many of the working resources that have made the grid function will have been destroyed and will have to be re-created, at a cost of further trillions.

Consider the case of Germany. Germany is a very substantial country (80+ million people, making it twice the size of California and four times the size of New York), with the world’s fourth largest GDP at over $4 trillion annually. Germany was one of the first to start down the road to a zero-emissions grid back in the 1990s, and formally adopted its “Energiewende” fourteen years ago in 2010. Germany has proceeded farther than any other large country in converting its electricity generation to wind and solar.

And yet, as I look around for information on Germany’s progress toward zero-emissions electricity, I can’t find any concern or recognition that this might not be doable in the end. Perhaps that exists in German language sources that I can’t read. But from anything I can find, it looks like Germany is forging ahead in the blind faith that if only they build enough wind turbines and solar panels at some point they will have the zero-emissions electricity that they crave.

Go to the website of the Umweltbundesamt (Federal Environmental Agency) for the latest information. At least on the electricity front, you will not find any indication that there may be problems in achieving the zero-emissions utopian future:

The “Energiewende” – Germany’s transition towards a secure, environmentally friendly, and economically successful energy future – includes a large-scale restructuring of the energy supply system towards the use of renewable energy in all sectors. . . . [T]he switch towards renewables in the electricity sector has been very successful so far. . . . While in the year 2000 renewables accounted for 6.3 percent of electricity demand only, its [sic] share has been growing significantly over the past years, exceeding 10 percent in the year 2005 and 25 per cent in the year 2013. In 2023 renewable energy sources provided 272 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity and account for 51.8 percent of German electricity demand. With wind power being by far the most important energy source in the German electricity mix.

Some 30+ years into this process, and they’re only up to barely over 50% of their electricity from “renewables.” And while they may claim that “wind power [is] by far the most important source in the German electricity mix,” in fact when you get a breakdown you find that wind and solar together provided well less than 50%. According to solar advocates Fraunhofer Institute here, in 2023 “biomass” provided some 42.3 TWh of Germany’s electricity (about 8%), hydro provided 19.5 TWh (about 4%), and “waste non-renewable” (I think that means burning garbage) provided 4.5 TWh (about 1%). That leaves under 40% for wind and solar.

If they keep building solar and wind facilities, and expect batteries to be the backup, has anybody calculated how much battery storage they will need? Not that I can find. Here is a website of a company called Fluence, which is an affiliate of German industrial giant Siemens. They excitedly predict a rapid expansion of grid storage in Germany:

Storage capacity will grow 40-fold to 57 GWh by 2030.

Wow, a 40-fold increase! It may sound like a lot. But Germany’s average electricity demand is about 50 GW, so the 57 GWh of battery storage in 2030 will come to about 1 hour’s worth. Competent calculations of the amount of energy storage needed to back up a predominantly wind/solar grid run in the range of around 500 to 1000 hours.

Here from another website is a chart of the growth of energy storage in Germany up to this year.

Look at that acceleration! But the 10 GWh of storage that they currently have will last no more than about 10 minutes when the wind and sun quit producing on a calm night.

In short, this large and seemingly sophisticated country is completely delusional, with no sane voices anywhere to be heard. A demonstration project that fails spectacularly is the only thing with any hope of saving them.

August 25, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Western sanctions have backfired — Russian tycoon

RT | August 24, 2024

Western sanctions against Russia have yielded results that are the opposite of their stated goal, metals tycoon Alisher Usmanov has said.

In an interview with the Italian newspaper Corriere Della Sera on Thursday, the Russian billionaire argued that the sanctions regime has so far done more harm to the European Union countries than to Russia.

“They wanted to harm the Russian economy, and here it is growing. They wanted to punish the business elite, and the Russians brought the money back home. The Russian economy is adapting to the sanctions, while neighboring markets are suffering. Europe rejects Russian energy resources and is forced to buy them at a much higher price,” Usmanov told the publication.

Russia’s economy expanded 3.6% in 2023 despite the economic sanctions imposed by the EU, the US and their allies since the start of the special operation in Ukraine in 2022. The EU’s economic powerhouse Germany went through a recession last year, while the bloc’s other large economies, France and Italy, posted growth of under 1%.

Following the sanctions and the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline in September 2022 that led to a dramatic drop in Russia’s gas supplies to the EU, the bloc started buying liquified natural gas (LNG) from the US. According to estimates published by Russia’s Energy Ministry, American LNG is 30-40% more expensive than Russian pipeline gas.

Usmanov also condemned the EU sanctions policy that targets individuals deemed close to the Russian leadership.

The West has made “a colossal mistake” by persecuting Russian businessmen for political reasons, because “they do not influence decision-making,” argued the tycoon.

The Uzbekistan-born businessman was added to the UK, EU, and US sanction lists shortly after the launch of Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine, along with several other prominent business figures.

The restrictions have made Russian investments abroad impossible, the billionaire lamented, adding that the businessmen from the sanctions-hit country now invest mainly at home.

Usmanov was awarded the title of Commander of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic in 2017 for financing the restoration of a massive architectural complex – the Trajan’s Forum in Rome, which dates to the early 2nd century AD.

“Sanctions are a sign of impotence,” stated the businessman, adding that the peace in Ukraine can only be achieved through compromise and negotiations.

Usmanov holds a stake in the iron ore and steel giant Metalloinvest, as well as in the telecommunications company MegaFon. Usmanov’s net worth totals $13.8 billion, making him among the world’s 100 wealthiest people, according to Forbes.

August 24, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

Britain’s Kursk Invasion Backfires?

By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | August 21, 2024

British Challenger 2 tanks reached Ukraine with enormous fanfare, ahead of Kiev’s long-delayed, ultimately catastrophic 2023 “counteroffensive”. On top of encouraging other proxy war sponsors to provide Ukraine with armoured fighting vehicles, Western audiences were widely told the tank – hitherto marketed to international buyers as “indestructible” – made Kiev’s ultimate victory a fait accompli. As it was, Challenger 2 tanks deployed to Robotnye in September were almost instantly incinerated by Russian fire, then very quietly withdrawn from combat altogether.

Hence, many online commentators were surprised when footage of the Challenger 2 in action in Kursk began to circulate widely on August 13th. Furthermore, numerous mainstream outlets dramatically drew attention to the tank’s deployment. Several were explicitly briefed by British military sources that it marked the first time in history London’s tanks “have been used in combat on Russian territory.” Disquietingly, The Times now reveals this was a deliberate propaganda and lobbying strategy, spearheaded by Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Prior to the Challenger 2’s presence in Kursk breaking, Starmer and Defence Secretary John Healey had reportedly “been in talks about how far to go to confirm growing British involvement in the incursion towards Kursk.” Ultimately, they decided “to be more open about Britain’s role in a bid to persuade key allies to do more to help – and convince the public that Britain’s security and economic prosperity is affected by events on the fields of Ukraine.” A “senior Whitehall source” added:

“There won’t be shying away from the idea of British weapons being used in Russia as part of Ukraine’s defence. We don’t want any uncertainty or nervousness over Britain’s support at this critical moment and a half-hearted or uncertain response might have indicated that.”

In other words, London is taking the lead in marking itself out as a formal belligerent in the proxy war, in the hope other Western countries – particularly the US – will follow suit. What’s more The Times strongly hints that Kursk is to all intents and purposes a British invasion. The outlet records:

“Unseen by the world, British equipment, including drones, have played a central role in Ukraine’s new offensive and British personnel have been closely advising the Ukrainian military… on a scale matched by no other country.”

Britain’s grand plans don’t stop there. Healey and Foreign Secretary David Lammy “have set up a joint Ukraine unit,” divided between the Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence. The pair “held a joint briefing, with officials, for a cross-party group of 60 MPs on Ukraine,” while “Starmer has also asked the National Security Council to draw up plans to provide Ukraine with a broader range of support.” On top of military assistance, “industrial, economic, and diplomatic support” are also being explored.

The Times adds that in coming weeks, “Healey will attend a new meeting of the Ukraine Defence Coordination Group,” an international alliance of 57 countries overseeing the Western weaponry flooding into Kiev. There, “Britain will press European allies to send more equipment and give Kyiv more leeway to use them in Russia.” The British Defence Ministry also reportedly “spoke last week to Lloyd Austin, the US defence secretary, and has been wooing Boris Pistorius, his German opposite number.”

Evidently, the new Labour government has an ambitious vision for the proxy war’s continuation. Yet, if the “counterinvasion” is anything to go by, it’s already dead in the water. As The Times notes, the imbroglio is primarily “designed to boost morale at home and shore up Zelensky’s position,” while relieving pressure on the collapsing Donbass frontline by forcing Russia to redirect forces to Kursk. Instead, Moscow “has capitalised on the absence of four crack Ukrainian regiments to press their attacks around Pokrovsk and Chasiv Yar.”

Similarly, commenting on Starmer’s wideranging efforts to compel overt Western action against Russia, a “defence expert” told The Times: “if it looks as if the Brits [are] too far ahead of their NATO allies, it might be counterproductive.” This analysis is prescient, for there are ample indications London’s latest attempt to ratchet tensions and drag the US and Europe ever-deeper into the proxy war quagmire has already been highly “counterproductive”, and boomeranged quite spectacularly. Indeed, it appears Washington has finally had enough of London’s escalatory connivances.

In repeated press conferences and media briefings since August 6th, US officials have firmly distanced themselves from the Kursk incursion, denying any involvement in its planning or execution, or even being forewarned by Kiev. Empire house journal Foreign Policy has reported that Ukraine’s swoop caught the Pentagon, State Department, and White House off-guard. The Biden administration is purportedly not only enormously unhappy “to have been kept out of the loop,” but “skeptical of the military logic” behind the “counterinvasion”.

On top being a clear suicide mission, the eagerly advertised presence of Western weapons and vehicles on Russian soil “has put the Biden administration in an extremely awkward position.” Washington has since the proxy war erupted been wary of provoking retaliations against Western countries and their overseas assets, and the conflict spilling outside Ukraine’s borders. Adding to US irritations, the British-directed Kursk misadventure also torpedoed ongoing efforts to secure an agreement to halt “strikes on energy and power infrastructure on both sides.”

This comes as Kiev prepares for a harrowing winter without heat or light, due to devastating Russian attacks on its national energy grid. Putin has moreover made clear that Ukrainian actions in Kursk mean there is no longer scope for a wider negotiated settlement at all. Which is to say Moscow will now only accept unconditional surrender. The US has also seemingly changed course as a result of the “counterinvasion”.

On August 16th, it was reported that Washington had prohibited Ukraine’s use of British-made, long-range Storm Shadow missiles against Russian territory. Given securing wider Western acquiescence to such strikes is, per The Times, a core objective for Starmer, this can only be considered a harsh rebuke, before the Labour government’s escalatory lobbying efforts have even properly taken off. The Biden administration had in May granted permission for Kiev to conduct limited strikes in Russia, using guided munitions up to a 40-mile range.

Even that mild authorisation may be rescinded in due course. Berlin, which like Britain had initially proudly promoted the presence of its tanks in Kursk, is now decisively shifting away from the proxy war. On August 17th, German Finance Minister Christian Lindner announced a halt to any and all new military aid to Ukraine as part of a wider bid to slash federal government spending. The Wall Street Journal reporting three days earlier that Kiev was responsible for Nord Stream II’s destruction may be no coincidence.

The narrative of the Russo-German pipeline’s bombing detailed by the outlet was absurd in the extreme. Conveniently too, the WSJ acknowledged that admissions of “Ukrainian officials who participated in or are familiar with the plot” aside, “all arrangements” to strike Nord Stream “were made verbally, leaving no paper trail.” As such, the paper’s sources “believe it would be impossible to put any of the commanding officers on trial, because no evidence exists beyond conversations among top officials.”

Such an evidentiary deficit provides Berlin with an ideal pretext to step away from the proxy war, while insulating Kiev from any legal repercussions. The narrative of Ukraine’s unilateral culpability for the Nord Stream bombings also helpfully distracts from the attack’s most likely perpetrators. This journalist has exposed how a shadowy cabal of British intelligence operatives were the masterminds, and potential executors, of the October 2022 Kerch Bridge bombing.

That escalatory incident, like Nord Stream’s destruction, was known about in advance, and apparently opposed, by the CIA. Chris Donnelly, the British military intelligence veteran who orchestrated the Kerch Bridge attack, has privately condemned Washington’s reluctance to embroil itself further in the proxy war, declaring “this US position must be challenged, firmly and at once.” In December that year, the BBC confirmed that British officials were worried about the Biden administration’s “innate caution”, and had “stiffened the US resolve at all levels”, via “pressure.”

The determination of Washington’s self-appointed “junior partner” to escalate the proxy conflict into all-out hot war between Russia and the West has only intensified under Starmer’s new Labour government. Yet, the Empire gives every appearance of refusing to take the bait, while seeking to curb London’s belligerent fantasies. This may be an encouraging sign that the proxy war is at last reaching its end. But we must remain vigilant. British intelligence is unlikely to allow the US to withdraw without a fight.

August 21, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

A strategic shift: Will Palestinian groups return to ‘martyrdom attacks’ inside Israel?

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | August 20, 2024

Yesterday, the Palestinian Resistance Movement Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad warned Israel that they plan to return to ‘martyrdom attacks’ inside Israel.

“The Brigades affirm that martyrdom operations within the occupied territories will return to the forefront as long as the massacres by the occupation, the displacement of civilians and the assassination policy continue,” a joint statement by Al-Qassam Brigades and Al-Quds Brigades said.

Palestinian groups have refrained from using martyrdom attacks, or suicide bombings, as it is often called by mainstream media, as a central piece of their ongoing resistance against Israel.

The warning followed an explosion that rocked Tel Aviv on the evening of Sunday.

Initially, Israeli media conveyed a degree of confusion regarding what had transpired in the Israeli capital, before an Israeli police commander announced that there was a 99 per cent chance that the operation was “an attempted terror attack”.

Later, Israel said that the attacker may have originated from the Nablus area of the southern West Bank.

The attack and the announcement of responsibility by Hamas and the Islamic Jihad the following day are significant and could become the beginning of a strategic shift by Palestinians in their ongoing war against the Israeli occupation.

But why would Palestinians return to such operations?

Since 7 October, the Israeli war on Gaza has expanded to reach other domains, thus complicating the mission of the Israeli army, which has been overstretched to fight on several fronts.

While the war in Gaza itself remains the main battlefield, other war fronts began escalating with time, mainly the border war between the Lebanese Resistance Movement, Hezbollah, and the Israeli occupation army.

To prevent the West Bank from turning into a major front for the resistance, the Israeli army began carrying out bloody, but focused, attacks on Palestinian resistance brigades, which operate mostly in the northern West Bank.

Geographically isolated and operating mostly in small groups, Palestinian fighters underwent a bloody, disproportionate war against the Israeli army.

The Israeli occupation army’s confidence was buoyed by the fact that security forces and intelligence belonging to the Palestinian Authority openly cooperated with the Israeli military in their attempt to crush the resistance.

The degree of cooperation reached its zenith on 26 July, when PA security forces besieged the 26-year-old leader of the Tulkarm Brigades, and other fighters, in the Thabet Thabet Hospital in Tulkarm.

If it were not for hundreds of ordinary Palestinians who rushed to the hospital to rescue their youth, the fighters would have been apprehended, if not even worse.

But Israel’s military campaign to crush the resistance in the West Bank was hardly a success. According to Al Jazeera, 100 Palestinian operations were carried out in the last month alone.

Meanwhile, the resistance in Gaza has proved its durability, moving from the stage of defence to that of counter-attacks on more than one occasion. The operation by Hamas’s Al-Qassam fighters targeting Israeli forces inside the fortified Netzarim area in central Gaza, on Sunday, was a case in point.

These developments have been taking place in the larger context of the widening confrontation between Hezbollah and Israel, with the former extending its pinpointed operations to reach Nahariya, among other areas, in northern Israel.

Despite all the setbacks, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has managed to reverse his dwindling numbers among potential voters. According to a poll conducted by the Israeli newspaper Maariv on 9 August, the Likud Party, led by Netanyahu, would be the largest party in the Knesset if elections were held today. This is the first time such results have been seen since 7 October.

A combination of factors led to the resurgence of Netanyahu in opinion polls.

First, the Israeli leader’s main rival, Benny Gantz has failed to galvanize on the anti-Netanyahu and anti-government popular sentiments starting on 7 October.

Second, Netanyahu’s ability to guarantee US support for his aggressive regional policies helped reassure the Israeli public.

Third, the direct involvement of the US-British and other western navies in confronting Yemen’s Ansarallah – Houthis – in the Red Sea has partly downgraded the geopolitical threat of the Yemeni solidarity with the Palestinians.

Fourth, the daring assassination of top Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on 31 July, and the assassination of leading Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr the day before, allowed Netanyahu to sell the idea, however temporary, that Israel has regained its so-called ‘deterrence’.

And, finally, despite the interception of occasional missiles beyond the Gaza Envelope or Israel’s northmost regions, Israeli society in the central areas of the country has learned to adapt to the new reality of the war.

While the Israeli army is losing an unprecedented number of soldiers and equipment on multiple fronts, not all Israelis are experiencing that loss in their everyday lives.

The opposite is true for Palestinians and Lebanese.

For the former, the genocide in Gaza has turned into a daily reality, and the Israeli occupation forces’s war on the West Bank has proved to be the most violent since the Second Intifada or Uprising of 2002.

Meanwhile, in Lebanon, Israel continues to target civilian areas as a matter of course, thus constantly challenging the rules of engagement that have governed the relationship between the Israeli army and the Lebanese resistance for years.

The new status quo may have assured Netanyahu that he might be able to carry on with his war in Gaza, reject any reasonable ceasefire proposal and maintain low-intensity warfare with Lebanon.

Netanyahu would also like to see the US-British war on Yemen escalate into an all-out war against Iran.

The Palestinian warning of their intention to return to striking deep inside Israel is meant to disturb Netanyahu’s calculations.

By denying Israelis any sense of security in major cities inside Israel, the Israeli public could, once more, turn against Netanyahu for failing to deliver on any of his lofty promises.

It remains unclear whether Sunday’s truck bombing was the exception or the start of a new norm. Either way, Netanyahu and his security apparatus must be aware of how such a move could prove equally costly to all of Israel’s losing wars, on all fronts.

August 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Starmer calls for comprehensive assistance to Ukraine despite the decline of Britain

By Ahmed Adel – August 20, 2024

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer asked the country’s National Security Council to consider giving more support to Kiev, the British newspaper The Times reported on August 18. Starmer’s request comes as half of British citizens believe their country is heading in the wrong direction, according to a recently published survey.

“Starmer has also asked the National Security Council to draw up plans to provide Ukraine with a broader range of support,” The Times reported, adding that foreign policy adviser to the last three Tory prime ministers, John Bew, went last week to Kiev as part of this effort.

At the same time, a military source told the outlet that Starmer’s policy of supporting Ukraine would be comprehensive.

“It’s not just about the military support, but it’s about the industrial, economic, and diplomatic support,” the defence source said.

The Times added that a special group was created with the participation of the UK’s defence and foreign ministries to build a unified UK policy towards Ukraine.

This comes as the British newspaper The Independent reported on August 17 that the UK Ministry of Defense did not deny information that the Ukrainian Armed Forces had used British Challenger 2 tanks in the attack on the Kursk region, which Russia described as a terrorist act and called a provocation following the deaths of civilians.

The report quoted a Defense Ministry spokesman as saying that Kiev could use the supplied weapons in the attack on the Kursk region. However, this did not apply to the Storm Shadow cruise missiles, which London allowed to be used only inside “internationally recognised” Ukrainian territory.

In January 2023, the UK also announced the transfer of 14 Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine. At least two of them were destroyed by Russian troops in Kursk. It can be expected that Starmer’s new military package to Ukraine will face the same fate as the Challenger 2 battle tank – Russian forces destroying them.

Yet, despite British military equipment sent to Ukraine being destroyed effortlessly by Russian troops, in addition to the impossibility of Ukraine winning the war, Britain insists on maintaining a policy of trying to prolong the war despite massive domestic issues.

According to a survey by Ipsos published on August 19, 52% of citizens interviewed expressed a negative opinion about the direction the United Kingdom is taking, more than double the number who see the situation improving.

“22% said that they think things in Great Britain are heading in the right direction (-3 from Jul ’24), 52% wrong direction (+3), and 19% neither (N/C). This gives a net right direction of the country rating of -30, which is down from -24 last month,” Ipsos said of the survey results.

The poll found that the number of Britons with a favourable view of Keir Starmer has fallen to 38%, the same proportion as those without sympathy. Although Britons now view him with greater affinity, the article stresses that this is only the “honeymoon” period for the British leader.

Former Conservative Prime Minister Rishi Sunak only garnered the support of 20% of those interviewed, behind Nigel Farage, leader of the right-wing Reform UK party (25%), and Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats (22%). Respondents also ranked the Labour Party first, with 40% giving it a positive rating and 37% a negative rating. The Conservatives received 21% support, the Liberal Democrats 24%, and Reform UK 23%.

Britain’s economy has performed lacklustrely over the past decade. High living costs, elevated interest rates, and faltering productivity gains have particularly affected citizens, causing the British economy to enter recession in the second half of 2023 as households cut back on spending. Although the Bank of England earlier this month raised its growth forecast from 0.5% to 1.25% for 2024, it warned of a weaker medium-term outlook as high interest rates hit activity.

As Simon Pittaway, a senior economist at the Resolution Foundation, explained: “Britain’s medium-term record is far less impressive, and has been driven by a growing population rather than rising productivity. Without a return to productivity growth, living standards will continue to stagnate and Britain will continue to fall behind its peers.”

Yet, despite the grim economic situation, with most citizens believing the country is heading in the wrong direction and Starmer very far from enjoying popular support, the British prime minister has instead prioritised figuring out how to continue assisting Ukraine despite already providing support to the tune of £12 billion, rather than serving the interests of Britons and alleviating the growing poverty in the country.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

August 20, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Zelensky lashes out at West

RT | August 20, 2024

The West should agree to Ukrainian requests for long-range weapons without concern for Russia’s potential reaction, Vladimir Zelensky has said. The Ukrainian leader claimed that Kiev’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region proves that Moscow has no “red lines.”

According to the Defense Ministry in Moscow, Russian forces have killed more than 3,400 Ukrainian troops and destroyed around 400 pieces of military hardware in Kiev’s ongoing cross-border attack. The assault began on August 6 and is the largest of its kind on Russian territory since hostilities erupted between Moscow and Kiev in February 2022.

Russia has alleged that Ukrainian troops have been using Western-supplied weapons in their operation – claims that have seemingly been supported by reports in the Western media. A number of Kiev’s backers have also publicly given it the green light to use weapons they have provided on Russian soil.

In an address to Ukrainian ambassadors on Monday, Zelensky urged them to “continue convincing our partners to support Ukraine – to the maximum” to make sure they are “in sync with us in their determination.”

“If our partners lifted all the current restrictions on the use of weapons on Russian territory, we would not need to physically enter particularly the Kursk region to protect our Ukrainian citizens in the border communities,” the Ukrainian leader insisted.

He went on to lament that “for now, we cannot use all the weapons at our disposal and eliminate Russian terrorists where they are.”

Zelensky also called on Kiev’s Western backers not to fear a potential escalation from Moscow. He cited Russia’s supposed inability to defend its territory after Kiev crossed the “strictest of all the red lines that Russia has.” According to the Ukrainian leader, this proves that all of Moscow’s other “red lines” are also “illusory.”

Last Friday, Zelensky took the UK to task for supposedly failing in its support. According to media reports, London has refused to allow Kiev to use Storm Shadow missiles in its offensive in Kursk.

Speaking the same day, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told journalists that “for the first time, Kursk Region was hit by Western-made rockets, most likely from an American HIMARS.”

On Monday, Moscow’s top diplomat, Sergey Lavrov, claimed that “Zelensky would never have decided [to attack Russian territory] if the United States had not instructed him to do this.”

August 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Independent Journalist Arrested Under Terrorism Act in UK

By Ian DeMartino – Sputnik – 20.08.2024

Independent Journalist Richard Medhurst was arrested in the UK on Thursday under the UK’s Terrorism Act 2000, according to a video he posted Monday on X recounting the experience.

“On Thursday, as I landed in London’s Heathrow airport, I was immediately escorted off the plane by six police officers who were waiting for me at the entrance of the aircraft. They arrested me – not detained – they arrested me under Section 12 of the Terrorism Act of 2000 and accused me of allegedly ‘expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organization’ but wouldn’t explain what this meant,” Medhurst says in the video.

Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 has a clause that was added in 2019 that made it illegal to “expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organization” if “in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organization.”

Medhurst’s reporting has focused heavily on the Israeli-Gaza war and has spoken out against funding Ukraine. He also posted about the very act that he was arrested for.

“The fascist ‘terrorism act’ being used to hold activists without charge or trial because they tried to stop actual terrorism and genocide by the IDF,” Medhurst posted the same day he was arrested. Medhurst was referring to Palestinian activists who have been detained recently under the Terrorism Act.

Medhurst says he was then handcuffed and transferred to a police station where he was searched and his electronic devices seized.

“I was placed in solitary confinement, in a cold cell that smelled like urine. There was barely any light and the bed, if you can even call it a bed, was simply a small concrete ledge with a paper-thin mattress. The cell had no windows, no heating, no toilet paper. I was recorded 24/7 with audio and video, even when going to the toilet. I had to eat food with a piece of cardboard you’re supposed to fold in two in order to scoop up the meal,” Medhurst said, describing the conditions he was held in.

He was then held for nearly 24 hours without being allowed to contact his family and his attempts to speak to a solicitor (UK legal advisor) were hindered and possibly monitored.

“The police said that I have the right to inform someone that I’m locked up. So I said okay, I want to call my family, then they go ‘Well, your calls are withheld due to the nature of the alleged offense’ I tried to ask well, what’s the point of a right if you can just randomly withdraw it? Why tell me that I have this right at all? And one of them said something along the lines of ‘Well, it’s not an absolute right, it can be waived,’” Medhurst described.

“For many hours, no one in the world knew what had happened to me or where I was. Only the police could call a solicitor for me. I had to ask four or five different guards for several hours before I finally received a call. Some of my solicitor’s calls did not get through or were not answered. One of the calls -my solicitor was told- would be monitored, and so they simply refused to take it. I asked to speak to the solicitor afterwards when that happened but I was not allowed to.”

“In total, I spent almost 24 hours in detention. At no point whatsoever was I allowed to speak to a family member or friend. After waiting 15 hours, I was finally interviewed by two detectives,” Medhurst says the interview lasted 60 to 90 minutes.

Medhurst emphasized that he denies all accusations by the police, noting that his parents held Nobel Peace Prizes for their work as UN peacekeepers and he “categorically and unequivocally” condemns terrorism.

“Those like myself, who are speaking up and reporting on the situation in Palestine are being targeted. I had booked my ticket to London on the same day and yet an entire team of police were mobilized to arrest and question me. This is why I felt this was a preplanned, coordinated arrest. Many people have been detained in Great Britain because of their journalism, sometimes under the Terrorism Act, sometimes not. I think of Julian Assange, Craig Murray, Kit Klarenberg, David Miranda, Vanessa Beeley. As far as I am aware, I am the only journalist, however, to have been arrested and held for up to 24 hours under section 12 of the Terrorism Act.”

Medhurst said that he now feels he has a “muzzle” put on him, and does not know if he will be charged with the crime he was arrested for or if he will be put in jail in a few months, something that makes his work more difficult. “I simply do not know if or how I can work at all during the next month.

Former UN weapons inspector and geopolitical analyst Scott Ritter, whose house was raided by the United States FBI earlier this month for alleged violations of the Foreign Agents Registry Act, called the arrest “political persecution” designed to “hamper [Medhurst’s] important work as a journalist.”

“Freedom of the press, freedom of speech really are under attack. The state is cracking down and escalating to try and stop people from speaking out against our government’s complicity in genocide, please do not just stand with me, but with the others who are still inside,” Medhurst concluded.

UK authorities have not commented on Medhurst’s arrest. His website currently displays an error page but it is not clear if Medhurst removed it voluntarily, at the direction of UK authorities, or if the site was taken down by service providers. Sputnik has reached out to Medhurst for clarification and will update this space if he replies.

 

August 20, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Video | , , | Leave a comment

NATO’s War on Russia

From covert war in 2014 to the invasion of Russia in 2024

By Glenn Diesen | August 19, 2024

The use of NATO weapons to attack Russia is a controversial topic due to the ambiguity about the role of NATO. The common argument by the Western political-media elites is that Ukraine was attacked in an unprovoked Russian invasion, and NATO has every right to assist Ukraine with weapons to defend itself. This is an appealing narrative that serves the purpose of manufacturing consent from the public to send weapons worth billions of dollars to fight Russia. If one accepts this narrative, it is even seen to be immoral to put restrictions on Ukraine in terms of where these weapons are used as the country is correctly fighting for its survival. The problem with this narrative is that NATO is not a passive non-participant in this war.

The war began in February 2014 when Western governments backed the coup in Ukraine that removed the democratically elected President of Ukraine and replaced him with a government hand-picked by Washington.[1] On the first day of the new Ukrainian government, a partnership was established between the CIA, MI6 and the intelligence services of the new government in Ukraine installed by the US.[2] This happened before there were any conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, and it resulted in 12 secret CIA bases along the Russian borders. Over the next 8 years, the US instigated tensions with Russia, armed Ukraine, and sabotaged the Minsk peace agreement to extend and weaken Russia.[3]

The US developing Ukraine as a proxy against Russia was the reason for the Russian invasion in 2022. As reported by the New York Times : “Toward the end of 2021, according to a senior European official, Mr. Putin was weighing whether to launch his full-scale invasion when he met with the head of one of Russia’s main spy services, who told him that the C.I.A., together with Britain’s MI6, were controlling Ukraine and turning it into a beachhead for operations against Moscow”.[4]

When Russia invaded in 2022, it contacted Ukraine on the first day after the war to start negotiations to impose a peace agreement that would restore Ukraine’s neutrality.[5] The US and UK sabotaged the Istanbul peace agreement by promising Zelensky all the weapons he would need if he would walk away from the peace talks and fight. Both the Israeli and Turkish mediators confirmed that the US chose war as it saw an opportunity to fight Russia through a proxy and thus weaken a strategic rival. Numerous American leaders have since expressed that this is a great war as they get to weaken Russia without losing any American troops. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has dismissed diplomacy and insists that “Weapons are the way to peace”.

Niall Ferguson wrote in Bloomberg in March 2022 that US and UK officials had confirmed that the only acceptable outcome for the war was the military defeat of Russia and regime change in Moscow. The objective was for “the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime”.[6] The US Helsinki Commission argued in March 2022 that peace must be achieved by “decolonising” Russia, the destruction of Russia by Balkanising it.[7] The President of Poland (Andrzej Duda) and the incoming Foreign Policy Chief of the EU (Kaja Kallas) have also defined victory in Ukraine in terms of breaking Russia into many small nations.

NATO is providing weapons, ammunition, training, war planning, intelligence, target selection, management of complex weapon systems, and mercenaries to fight Russia – all under the guise of “helping Ukraine” to defend itself. NATO has authorised the use of long-range missiles to strike inside Russian territory and provides its support in the invasion of Russian territory. From Britain to Germany, the success of conquering Russian territory is openly used as an argument to send more weapons.

In this context, if we look at the actual objectives of the US and NATO, rather than the childish assertion that the US is merely attempting to protect democracy, then one can only conclude that NATO has gone to war against the world’s largest nuclear power.

Russia’s dilemma: Emboldening NATO or risking nuclear war

The insanity of NATO’s relentless escalations in the Ukraine proxy war rests on the narrative that Russia will not defend its red lines as it is deterred by NATO. This delusion exists because all Russian responses are presented as “unprovoked” and thus occur seemingly in a vacuum. Yet, when the Western government toppled the Ukrainian government in February 2014 and subsequently threatened the Russian naval base in Sevastopol, Russia responded by seizing Crimea. When Western governments sabotaged the Minsk agreement for 7 years and then refused to give Russia any security guarantees in December 2021, Russia responded by invading Ukraine in 2022. When NATO began to send weapons to Ukraine to fight Russia, Russia responded by annexing four oblasts – Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhiya, and Kherson.

How will Russia respond? Russia is faced with a dilemma: It has been restrained as retaliations could easily escalate into a NATO-Russia nuclear exchange, yet the failure to retaliate will only embolden NATO. Western media refers to the failure of Russia to respond as a reason for why NATO can continue to escalate, as Russia is not retaliating. Yet, with every step up the escalation ladder, the pressure mounts on Russia to restore its deterrent.

The retaliation will come, but Russia keeps its head cool to decide when, where and how it best serves Russian interests. The Western media is obsessed with the objective of humiliating Putin without considering the possible consequences. Anyone calling for a return to common sense is denounced as being soft on Russia, and the recognition of Russia’s nuclear deterrent is framed as accepting Russia’s “nuclear blackmail”. Consequently, warmongering is celebrated as morality while advocating for diplomacy is denounced as appeasement. In our narrative-driven media, even arguing that NATO has gone to war against Russia is deemed treasonous as it is depicted as “taking the side of Russia”.

The propaganda prevents us from asking the most important question: How exactly do we think this escalation will end? Irrespective of what narrative we have sold to our own public about defending democracy, from Moscow’s perspective, NATO has now placed itself in the same category as Napoleon and Hitler. Let’s pick up a history book and ask ourselves how Russia will likely respond: capitulation or a powerful response?

I was on the Indian TV channel WION discussing NATO weapons being used to target Russian territory.

[1] Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call – BBC News

[2] The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin – The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[3] Read the RAND report on how to overextend Russia: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html

[4] The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin – The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[5] Address by the President to Ukrainians at the end of the first day of Russia’s attacks — Official website of the President of Ukraine

[6] Niall Ferguson: Putin and Biden Misunderstand History in Ukraine War – Bloomberg

[7] Decolonizing Russia: a Moral and Strategic Imperative – CSCE

August 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

Vast majority of Brits blame immigration for unrest – poll

RT | August 18, 2024

Two-thirds of Brits believe the country’s immigration policy is responsible for the recent wave of right-wing riots, according to a poll published on Sunday. The riots triggered a nationwide crackdown on disorder and online dissent.

Dozens of British towns and cities were rocked by right-wing protests and riots earlier this month after a British teenager of Rwandan descent stabbed three children to death and injured ten others in the town of Southport, near Liverpool. Initially sparked by a false rumor that the knifeman was a Muslim immigrant, the demonstrations spiraled into a wider backlash against Islam and mass immigration, culminating in an arson attack on a hotel housing asylum seekers in the town of Rotherham.

According to a survey of 2,237 people carried out by polling firm Savanta and published by The Telegraph, 82% of Britons believe that the rioters themselves were responsible for the unrest, followed by 75% who pin the blame on far-right groups and influencers.

However, 64% believe that Britain’s immigration policy is ultimately to blame, while 59% say the Southport stabbings triggered the crisis.

British authorities responded to the riots in draconian fashion, with more than 1,000 people arrested, 480 charged, and 99 sentenced for their role in the disorder, according to figures published by the BBC on Friday. Around 30 people have been charged for online offenses, with a 34-year-old man sentenced to three months in jail for sharing what the BBC called a “derogatory meme about migrants,” and a 55-year-old woman arrested for sharing “inaccurate” information about the identity of the Southport killer.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is reportedly considering toughening up hate speech legislation, while London’s Metropolitan Police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, warned last week that foreign “keyboard warriors,” including X owner Elon Musk, could be investigated and charged for allegedly encouraging the riots.

Participants in the Savanta poll were split on this heavy-handed response, with 49% saying the government handled the situation well, and 43% saying that it was handled badly. Meanwhile, 44% blamed the riots on Starmer. In a public address at the height of the unrest, Starmer refused to mention the stabbings, instead accusing all those rioting of being motivated by “far-right hatred.”

Immigration to the UK soared during the premiership of Tony Blair. An adviser to the former prime minister, Andrew Neather, admitted in 2009 that Blair wanted to “open up the UK to mass migration” and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity.” With legal and illegal immigration combined, some 1.2 million people moved to the UK last year, 85% of them from outside the EU.

August 18, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »