@Feargal_Sharkey She is a cynical scammer who weaponised false allegations of antisemitism against the left for factional gain, damaging the real fight against antisemtism and any hope of progressive change in our culture.
Do some basic research ffs.
#itWasScam
The moral vacuum at the heart of UK media: @Channel4News follows a heart-rending interview with Dr James Smith about conditions in Gaza with an interview with Israel propagandist Amit Segal who is allowed to repeat *without challenge* from @mattfrei the completely discredited story of Hamas beheading babies. @krishgm
We’re an island nation where it rains all fucking year, yet we’re in drought. Water companies are going bust. No new reservoir since 1992. Rivers and seas are full of shit.
If @AndyBurnham won’t use this moment to bring full renationalisation, then it really tells us who he is.
BREAKING: Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive public health advocate, has won the Democratic nomination for the US Senate, overcoming more than $60m in campaign spending, mostly from pro-Israel groups, NBC has projected.
🔗: https://t.co/uINtHkg48d
The argument made by the copper here – that police don't get to choose which laws to enforce and which ones not to – is complete nonsense.
Police make an active decision not to storm Glastonbury and arrest everyone in possession of cannabis, as they know it would be a disproportionate use of their time and resources.
They choose not to throw all their resources at tracking down bike thieves in London, as they know there are more serious crimes they should prioritise.
They choose not to throw all their resources into enforcing the hosepipe ban, as they know it would be disproportionate and ineffective.
They could also make a decision not to have 50+ officers forcibly arresting old age pensioners for holding up signs.
We need to talk about @BBCNewsnight.
It seems the majority of last night's episode centred on the re-admission of Diane Abbott to the Labour Party, presented in a heavily-slanted and biased tone. The questioning and comments put words into Abbott's mouth and adopted the most negative interpretation of her version of events.
Yet Newsnight has repeatedly refused to report on stories about abuse and misconduct towards Diane Abbott.
In August last year I approached Newsnight with copies of messages exchanged on Labour's internal Party messaging system by Paul Ovenden in 2015. At the time I approached Newsnight, Ovenden was the Head of Strategy at Starmer's Number 10.
Only a few months before, Starmer had delivered his racist "Islands of Strangers" speech after losing the Runcorn by-election to Reform. Abbott had also been recently re-suspended following comments she made on the BBC (that the BBC then clipped for socials devoid of key context, and again appeared to misrepresent last night).
The messages I presented to Newsnight were damning of Ovenden. They show him making deeply unpleasant, offensive and sexualised jokes about Diane Abbott.
Yet Newsnight refused to cover the messages. After I was told they had interested Newsnight, I was then told for weeks that they were embroiled in interminable editorial discussions. After six weeks I took the hint: the BBC, without saying it explicitly, weren't going to touch them.
It was plainly in the public interest for them to be reported. Indeed, I took the same messages to the great @ShehabKhan at ITV and they leapt on them after I proved their legal provenance and authenticity. ITV's reporting led Ovenden to resign and helped expose the rot in Starmer's "boys club" that would help catalyse his downfall.
There was simply no good reason for Newsnight not to report the Ovenden messages, not least because they had previously given extensive coverage to Abbott's suspension and the despicable comments made by Frank Hester. I believe that they chose not to do so because they didn't want to be seen to be attacking the government; or perhaps, it's because too many BBC people had had shared drinks with Ovenden (who had so be in Labour comms) over the years and thought he was a "lad" with protecting?
It was because of this background that I was astonished by Newsnight's interview with Zack Polanski this week - another episode where Newsnight was aggressively tone-policing comments made by left-wing figures in odd terms. During a segment in which Polanski was asked to comment on a collaboration on Instagram, Nick Watts interrupted Polanski to read him rebuttal messages sent by an unnamed Reform source live on air.
This was astonishing for all sorts of reasons. There was simply no good reason why the Reform (source) was unnamed. But I was genuinely amazed at how rapidly and without any seeming editorial discussion, Newsnight was airing texts in the moment when it sat for weeks twiddling it's thumbs over the Ovenden material.
I've seen how the BBC exercises its editorial judgment, how cautious it's many diligent reporters are about due process, fact-checking and impartiality. Yet when it comes to Newsnight, it's all over the place.
This past week has been further evidence that Newsnight is a pale shadow of what it once was.
🚨 Rep. Sarah Jacobs just left Pete Hegseth STUNNED in this hearing.
With 2,500 Marines from her district off the coast of Iran and military families calling her office in panic, she asked the question no one else would : “Do you believe the president is mentally stable enough to be Commander-in-Chief?”
Hegseth deflected hard. She didn’t flinch.
Then she dropped this : “If you think this is what winning looks like… maybe we should be questioning your mental stability.”
Pure accountability.
No notes.
It takes a woman to say what needs to be said when lives and billions of dollars are on the line.
This clip is everything.
The Metropolitan Police is arresting people today for opposing the proscription of Palestine Action.
The High Court specifically stated campaigning for deproscription is not illegal. I don't think the Court of Appeal addressed that point.
They had me fired. Arrested 4 times. Suspended my medical licence. Smeared me in every paper.
Now the British zionist jewish lobby is attacking my fundraiser!
It cost me £90,000 to defend my licence. I live on what remains of my life savings.
I set up a Chuffed fundraiser to tackle police harassment and keep me on my feet. Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) is now threatening Chuffed with police action.
They want to destroy me.
I am a Palestinian and a British citizen. I have never had a patient complaint. Never broken the law. Worked for 7 years in the NHS. Cared for my fellow British citizens. Paid my taxes.
My crime?
I opposed genocide and jewish supremacy. Exposed their grip on Britain.
That's it.
My response:
{فَٱقْضِ مَآ أَنتَ قَاضٍ ۖ إِنَّمَا تَقْضِى هَٰذِهِ ٱلْحَيَوٰةَ ٱلدُّنْيَآ}
So do whatever you want! Your authority only covers the ˹fleeting˺ life of this world. Qur'an 20:72
-
I would do it all over again. Everything I did was to save the lives of the Palestinian people being murdered by the jewish occupation. And to stop the British government from using my taxes to arm them.
May justice and truth prevail.
We fear God only.
Free Palestine and Britain from jewish supremacy 🇵🇸🇬🇧
https://t.co/RfTeCevmV6
Here is what I actually cannot explain:
The year is 2003.
The United States invades Iraq on the basis of "weapons of mass destruction" that do not exist.
This is not a matter of interpretation. It is documented.
The intelligence was manipulated.
The case was fabricated.
The people who fabricated it knew it was fabricated.
Some of them have said so, on record, in memoirs that were reviewed positively in the same newspapers that helped sell the war.
One million people died.
The country was destroyed. The infrastructure, the institutions, the social fabric.
ISIS emerged from the power vacuum.
The region destabilized in ways still producing casualties today.
Not one person went to prison.
The architects of the decision became senior fellows at think tanks.
They wrote books.
They appeared on television as "serious foreign policy voices."
Some of them are now presented as "voices of reason" in the anti-Trump discourse.
And the next time the same government, with many of the same institutional actors, said there was a foreign threat that required military response, a significant portion of the population believed them.
That is what I cannot explain.
Not the lie.
Governments lie.
The bottomless, renewable, apparently inexhaustible willingness to be lied to again.
@CraigMurrayOrg What's the point of this institution anyway?
In fact All of them?
What's the point of International Law, when we can see how it is being disregarded?
What's the point of UN as well?