My MP, Will Forster of the Liberal Democrats, sent me an email today as I had ‘previously been in touch with me about Palestine Action.’ He informed me of the High Court decision that the proscription of the activist group had been ruled unlawful, of which I was already aware, and went on to warn me that ‘this ruling does not place anyone above the law. Any individual members of Palestine Action who are accused of serious offences such as vandalism and violent disorder should be investigated, prosecuted, and, if convicted, sentenced accordingly.’
Well, thanks Will for that absolutely crucial bit of legal and moral advice! I certainly wouldn’t want to be associated with anyone who would break the law! No sir! Not me. I’m a fine upstanding citizen. Thanks for educating me you supercilious, establishment lackey.
Forster has never heard of the ‘lawful excuse’ defence apparently, whereby those accused of criminal damage assert that their actions were taken to prevent a far greater crime. Indeed, there is precedent for this as activists in previous trials have been found not guilty by a jury on the basis of this very defence.
I had contacted Forster in the first place to encourage him to vote against the proscription of Palestine Action at the crucial vote in Parliament, and I had hope because research had revealed a positive record regarding Palestine in terms of his appearance at mainstream events. But when I followed up afterwards he admitted he’d abstained on the vote, despite other pro-Palestine members having the courage of their convictions and voting against.
Yvette Cooper had cynically lumped in a couple of genuinely extreme groups with PA precisely to put off the more lilly-livered in the House from voting against her egregious effort to proscribe a non-violent group at the behest of her Israeli masters.
Will Forster was one such weak character. My reply:
Dear Will
Yes, I know about the High Court’s decision to overturn the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.
But let’s remember, you abstained on that vote. You, therefore, effectively aided the Labour government’s disgraceful ban on a group of brave, principled people acting to stop a genocide by your, frankly, cowardly decision to sit on the fence at that crucial historical moment. You were called upon to act in line with your conscience, yet you chose political expediency and your own career advancement over integrity and the moral right. And however you wish to spin it (please don’t bother) that is exactly what happened. Other MP’s voted against the proscription did they not? They chose to treat Yvette Cooper’s Machiavellian scheming with the contempt it deserved. If only you’d had the backbone to do the same.
Your party leader, Ed Davey, stated that Palestine Action are a ‘very worrying organisation’. Really? Why? Would he like to expand on that? And your own email passes sneering moral judgement on those who have committed ‘serious offences such as vandalism and violent disorder’. Vandalism? Of equipment being used to mass slaughter children and babies? Is that the vandalism you’re referring to by any chance? Violent disorder? You don’t recognise more nefarious machinations by the state to paint these commendable citizens as mere thugs in order to fit their corrupt narrative?
I suggest you take a good long look at the report of former British Ambassador Craig Murray, who actually sat through the trial of the Filton Six:
Throughout the trial anything that referred to the crimes of Elbit (Systems, weapons manufacturers) their role in the mass killing and mutilation of women and children, and their cosy relationship with the British government, was excluded from the jury. The judge continually stopped the defence lawyers from asking or saying anything about who Elbit are or why their property was being attacked.
The defendants were not permitted therefore to explain to the jury why they did what they did – which you might have believed was a pretty fundamental right. The jury were additionally, in effect, instructed by Judge Johnson to convict on the least serious charge, that of criminal damage. But despite the state taking every possible precaution to ensure that the state got its convictions in this show trial, the jury refused to find that trying to stop Genocide is a crime.
And an article by renowned independent journalist, Jonathan Cook:
In the months before the trial, the home secretary of the time, Yvette Cooper, explicitly said her decision to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation was, in part, based on the events that had unfolded at the Filton factory. We were told the logic behind her decision – the first time a non-violent direct-action group has been proscribed in British history – would become clear through the trial.
In the midst of the proceedings, the police released a highly edited – and extremely prejudicial – video clip to present the defendants as bent on violence against the weapons factory’s security guards and police officers who later attended the scene. Meanwhile, the judge overseeing the trial, Mr Justice Johnson, refused the admission of any testimony relating to the crimes committed by Elbit Systems. He also directed the jury to convict the Filton Six on the charge of criminal damage.
The British establishment wanted one outcome and one outcome only – and it did everything in its power to make sure it got its way. Yet after eight days of clearly intense deliberation, the jury refused to convict the Filton Six of any of the charges against them……Given the highly inflamed and politicised climate surrounding the trial, that decision required extraordinary bravery – a courage some of the jurors presumably found in the inspiring speech delivered by one of the defence barristers, Rajiv Menon. He reminded them of the 350-year-old right established in British law for juries to ignore judicial interference of the kind exercised by Mr Justice Johnson. You can read part of that astonishing speech in the link here.
The government’s fallback position was the violent disorder charge, which still suggested violent intent from the activists. The problem once again, however, was that the charge clearly did not fit the events the jury watched for themselves from the much longer video footage…
On the least significant charge, criminal damage, the judge had made clear he expected a conviction – and he tried to rig the trial to get that conviction by stripping the defendants of the only defence that was available, of “lawful excuse”. The defendants’ argument was that, yes, they had caused criminal damage but it was justified in stopping a far graver crime, that of genocide. Despite the huge pressure on them to submit to the judge’s demand, enough of the jury clearly thought that, in this case, criminal damage – in the form of smashing up killer drones – was a reasonable action. It is quite extraordinary that the hill politicians like Braverman and Philp, and sections of the British public, want to die on is defending Israel’s right to make killer-drones on British soil. Thank God, we had people with a moral core, not these ghouls, on the jury.
So forgive me Will if I don’t treat you like the flawless campaigner you present yourself as (or indeed, believe yourself to be if you’re very much deluded) in celebrating this momentous High Court decision. Martin Luther King you are not. You have never put anything on the line when it really mattered. Instead, you have cowered within the confines of your own political prison.
Of course, my most furious disdain is saved for Yvette Cooper who, it now having been proven that her statements on Palestine Action were brazen lies, should be prosecuted herself. Perhaps the co-founder of Palestine Action, Huda Ammori, put it best:
(Yvette Cooper) lied through her teeth and now we have the proof of it. She claimed there was secret intel, there were disturbing plans, there were links to Iranian funding, and all sorts of nonsense to try and manufacture consent for this proscription and to justify the ban. Jonathan Hall, the independent reviewer of terrorist legislation recently admitted that those were, in fact, lies. She lied to the British public in order to push through an unjust and unlawful ban that led to the arrests of thousands of people simply for holding signs. How is she still in government at this moment in time? There has to be accountability…
And let’s not forget Keir Starmer, David Lammy, Lisa Nardy, Shabana Mahmood, Angela Raynor and the entire Zionist cabal in government that has been abetting Israel’s sickening atrocities in Gaza. They serve not the British people but a foreign power! It’s simply unconscionable. Democracy is meaningless while this state of affairs continues.
I will end with the voice of a father in Gaza quoted by distinguished journalist Eva Bartlett:
‘I haven’t been able to get my daughter out after 25 days under the rubble. My daughter is just over seven months old, seven months! And I’m working with my bare hands, fingernails to dig her out!’
Eva: ‘For 25 days her father hasn’t been able to get her out, he’s trying to pull his daughter out in pieces, her head and hands severed. 28 bodies here.’ We can multiply these horrific scenes by the tens of thousands. One day those responsible will be held to account.
Sincerely
Alison
