Political violence in the UK

I have been clear on many occasions that political violence in the UK is wrong.  Nigel Farage and Reform UK Ltd have shown appalling double standards when it comes to this.  Violence to any politician is wrong, that includes throwing a milk shake over Farage. But that also includes violence to a heckler.  I do not think that the Right to Protest should interfere with the Right to Free Speech, even when it is funny, but violence to solve it is wrong. Unless it is when John Prescott is punching someone who started it, that being because it was his right to retaliate when faced with a physical attack. 

The follow-up question all those who have interviewed Reform UK Ltd politicians have missed is what their views would be if someone hit Nigel Farage over the head with a crutch, or attacked him in the same way the heckler was attacked. 

Lucy Connolly, Zack Polanski and hurty words

Double standards and Reform UK Ltd are something that happens quite often.  Lucy Connolly was (rightly) arrested and admitted her guilt about a tweet inciting racial hatred during the Farage riots of 2024. Nigel Farage has stated that Lucy Connolly is "living proof of what can go wrong" with free speech restrictions.  Despite this, Nigel Farage said about a repost by Zack Polanski "If I was to post anything as inciteful then I would expect to be arrested, and so should Polanski." Polanski, rightly, has taken down the post. Those in Reform UK Ltd should call for the same action to be taken against the leader of The Green Party that they took when one of their elected representatives reposted a message about shooting a Labour MP. From what I recall, an apology was enough then and should be enough now.  If anything, less action is needed, the T-shirt (which was on the 18th of 20 images) being a song lyric as opposed to the message about actually shooting a politician.

I abhor violence against ALL politicians.  While I did find the egging of Nick Griffin (then leader of the racist BNP) to be funny, it was wrong. That includes the milkshake episode with Farage.  I found it funny, but still was wrong to happen.  

I have commented on Reform UK Ltd and their attitudes to free speech before. I suspect it will happen again when they, again, show double standards. 

Donald Trump his age and Jimmy Kimmel

For those who are unaware, someone tried to kill Donald Trump on the weekend during the White House Correspondents Dinner.  Jimmy Kimmel is in trouble (again) for a roast of him on a fake dinner speech, which Trump, the narcissist, did not want to face.  After all, he was not too happy when he was roasted in the past.

I believe Jimmy Kimmel when he says that his comments referred to Trump dying of natural causes.  His age and physical health has been the subject of frequent speculation.  

The right to protest vs intimidation

I have just seen atrocious behaviour by protestors intimidating an MP.  I have posted before about the right to protest, then about how freedom of expression should not be inhibited by protest.  But this is a different matter. 

As many of you know, I am considered a transphobe by many as I do not consider a transman to be a man, or a transwoman to be a woman. But I would never support the action in the video.  Such toxicity and intimidation should face punishment by the law just as it has in the past.  

Censorship, CBS, Stephen Colbert and James Talarico

I try not to post too much about politics in the USA under Trump as there is so much that is taking place there.  I hope that we in the UK learn from what is happening over there, as otherwise, we will be voting in Nigel Farage as Prime Minister.  If he comes in, I suspect that the same censorship that is starting to take place in the USA, will take place here.  

Basically, Stephen Colbert wanted to interview a politician, and was told he could not.  The View is to be be investigated for featuring the same politician, James Talarico.  Issues with free speech in the USA have been raised on many occasions and I suspect this will continue.

So when people in the UK complain about us not having free speech, they are, to put it simply, nuts.  

Should Palestine Action be allowed to protest in ways that the Far Right should not?

Palestine Action are in the news again.  Many consider their actions to be just, and I have discussed how I disagree with this before.  They have engaged in direct action to vandalise companies which have been helping Israel murder Palestinian civilians.  But they have also engaged in direct action which has done nothing to aid those being murdered in Gaza, and may have helped Russia instead. 

We would be wrong to compare the actions of Palestine Action to the Farage Riots.  But we can compare their actions to those who want to prevent refugees seeking asylum in our great nation.  

Palestine Action have engaged in acts of vandalism, one of many examples being where it smashed windows and sprayed red paint at the Milton Keynes premises of the German insurance firm Allianz, claiming alleged links to an Israel-based defence company. Does this mean that acts of vandalism against services helping refugees such as in Peterborough and Merseyside are equally justified? Should the masked men who were found in a hotel housing asylum seekers have been allowed to engage in peaceful direct action? 

Allegations have been made that Palestine Action have engaged in harassment of staff, just like allegations have been made about the harassment of those helping asylum seekers. Comparison’s have been made with The Suffragette Movement, but while I celebrate and treasure many of their actions and achievements, some of their actions were unacceptable. 

Basically, I want to ask supporters of Palestine Action, should The Far Right have the same restrictions and freedom when it comes to to protest as Palestine Action? 

Protesting for Gaza in Colchester

Today, our dog and I joined the weekly protest in favour of Gaza in Colchester. When there, different people spoke about matters. I have to disagree with how they view certain events, an example being how they said JD Vance was in favour of the Israeli Knesset voting in favour of the annexation of The West Bank, when he actually spoke out against it. Other issues of contention include Trump having a plan. The the mercurial Trump is best viewed as a pigeon playing chess. He struts around, knocks pieces over, and thanks to the economic and military might of the US, wins. While he has some ideas about the world that he sticks to, this including his insane views on tariffs, immigration, people have tried, and succeeded about changing his view that Gaza should be ethnically cleansed.  The last bit was that Israel just does the will of the USA. There is no doubt the two aid each other a lot, but that forgets how Netanyahu attacked Qatar and we can see that about how he was forced to apologise for it.  But there was a lot to learn from it.  One lady in a wheelchair pointed out how that many of the population in Gaza will be disabled now, something I have to admit, I had forgotten.

I am amazed that the US has forced Israel to slow down the murder of those in Gaza and allow aid in after the release of the living hostages. We saw what happened to the ceasefire deal earlier this year when Israel got what they wanted. I am tempted to attend the demonstration while the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in The West Bank is continuing. 

As for family, our daughter has returned for a few days. She had been to Cheltenham yesterday and this week is meant to be spent reading, so like many at university, she has decided to return to Colchester. It was nice to have the family together around the dinner table. We will be sad when she returns to Bristol on Friday.

When should direct action be limited?

Direct action has been part of protests in the UK for some time. The Suffragettes took part in direct action, some of which was more violent than others. This matter is in the news again because many have been arrested for protesting while supporting Palestine Action. My views on them and how they have “accidentally” supported Russia n the invasion of Ukraine have been posted before. 

This post is about if direct action is okay depending on the group engaging in it.

In August there was a story about how demonstrators had tried to enter a hotel housing asylum seekers to take part in direct action. Other actions have been taken since then, not just in Scotland, not counting the criminal damage that happened during the Farage Riots last year. Charities who have been trying to help refugees have reported abuse and intimidation by those who care about what they stand for. 

Palestine Action have also taken part in criminal damage, breaking windows of offices in Milton Keynes, but also targeting Jewish businesses in Stamford Hill. And of course there are the actions which have accidentally hindered Ukrainian efforts to defend against the invasion Russia. While there will be those who will say I am wrong to compare Kristallnacht to what is happening now, but many of those who are considered to be Jewish were concerned about history repeating itself, that being before the appalling murder of Jews in Manchester. 

I will finish on two points. Loads of organisations are protesting the brutal ethnic cleansing of Gaza and are staying within the law to do so. The other point is if it is acceptable for one group to engage in intimidation and criminal damage to bring about change, is it also acceptable for others to do so? 

Free speech and Nigel Farage

Nigel Farage has been over to the USA to complain about free speech in the UK.  I thought he was charming and composed himself well, but he lied and distorted the truth when there. 

Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, which has banned Nottinghamshire Live from speaking to them, has complained about free speech in Britain. 

Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK which has threatened The Independent with a ban, has complained about free speech in the UK. 

Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, which banned Byline Times from its 2024 conference, has complained about free speech in Great Britain. 

Nigel Farage who has called for the police to investigate a comedian over a joke, has complained about free speech in UK. 

This last part is important as Graham Linehan has been arrested over a tweet made in April and this may have been because of incitement to violence. The difference between him and Lucy Connolly is the length of time that passed before the tweet and the arrest, and also, one called for arson during a time of civil disobedience when arson was taking place. Needless to say, he had mentioned both as infringement of free speech, but remember, Lucy Connolly admitted her guilt even though she had planned an excuse to get away with her incitement to arson. 

Lucy Connolly and Ricky Jones

Lucy Connolly has been released from prison and people are making comparisons between her and the case of a Labour councillor who had called for the throats of the far right to be cut. Personally, based on what little I know of both cases, I would have found both guilty, but only one of them said they would use mental health issues as an excuse for their actions. 

I know there will be many who argue that she was exercising her rights to free speech, but all nations have limits on free speech, and even Nigel Farage agrees that limits should be in place. 

Palestine Action and Ukraine

Palestine Action is a topic I have posted about before. It is a group that have been banned under terrorism laws, a ban I agree with.  I will first address how Ukraine has noted that a lot of its sabotage appears to be targeting them, before moving onto its other actions.

Palestine action have attacked firms that they claim are aiding Israel, but are in fact aiding Ukraine.  The Leonardo site in Edinburgh has donated equipment to Ukraine and that site was targeted by Palestine Action.  Another company that they have targeted is aiding Ukraine, though the site they attacked may not be doing so.  Also they have attacked RAF Brize Norton, which trains Ukrainian pilots to defend their country, damaging planes not involved in the aid our nation (sadly) offers Israel. and also had plans to target other airfields training Ukrainian pilots.  

Other attacks across Europe have damaged the supply efforts to aid Ukraine, again, this being Palestinian supporters who have accidentally harmed this.

But Palestine action have attacked Jewish businesses.  While they say that this has been linked to supporting Israel, and many consider such action acceptable, most will condemn similar action by the far right to attack hotels where asylum seekers are being held.

I think that Israel is in the wrong with how it treats Palestinians.  I think our government should not be aiding Israel as much as it is.  I think it is right to protest against the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and The West Bank.  I do not think it is right to stand with Palestine Action, especially when there are loads of other groups protesting in support of the people of Palestine.  

The Online Safety Act

The Online Safety Act 2023 is something I have mentioned before. In our household, it may have caused a dispute. My daughter had complained to her younger brother had not liked some of her pictures on Instagram. It turned out that he was not able to see them, and while we do not know, it may be that it is because he is under the age of 18 and some of her mages have been screened by AI as being adult. Just for the record, none of her pictures are adult in nature.

I have discussed this with my daughter on a dog walk earlier today. We both agreed that action should be taken to protect minors from harm on the internet, but we disagree on the method. She brought up issues of people not being able to access information on periods or sexual health, and we agree that teenagers do need to be able to get that information. But while she thinks it should be perfected before rolling it out, I am off the opposite view. Roll it out and make the necessary modifications to allow teenagers to get health advice after it is put into place. The previous method of asking the user to confirm their age just did not work. 

Age verification is coming in abroad and there has been pushback about this in France. Australia plans to go further and ban social media for those under the age of sixteen, something which is not here, yet. 

Nigel Farage, internet censorship and free speech

Nigel Farage claims to be on the side of free speech, but it appears that this is only if it favours him. He has made insinuations before the Farage Riots, some have argued that he has campaigned for the rights of those like Jimmy Savile when it comes to his opposition to protect children on line. But in a discussion about free speech, he allegedly shut free speech down his opponent. Farage reportedly called Democrat Congressman Jamie Raskin 'pig-headed' after Raskin voiced concerns about free speech threats.

There are always going to be two sides to a story, but the facts are that under Reform UK, censorship has taken place, this being reported as a Reform lead council saying it has removed all transgender-related books from the children's sections of its libraries. 

For the record, I am in favour of the new online checks, but I do want to know if this does limit freedom of speech as its implementation may need to be modified, or it may need to be withdrawn.

Palestine Action (again) and a comparison to The Far Right

What level of criminal damage is acceptable when it comes to protests? Does the level change depending on what cause is being protested? 

Palestine Action has been in the news again. There are many who have justified their actions which include criminal damage. I am going to just mention the issue of how their actions have aided Russia in the invasion of Ukraine as that is not my main concern.

In Epping, there have been protests against asylum seekers due to the allegations made against one. The protests have been tarnished by violence and we know what has happened to those encouraging such acts last year.

My question to the supporters of Palestine Action relates to The Far Right. I would argue that people engaged in lawful protests do not throw smoke bombs and fire pyrotechnics around innocent members of the public. If it is acceptable for Palestine Action to do so, is it acceptable for the same to happen with the anti-refugee protests in Epping? If it is acceptable for protesters to damage our military hardware, would it be acceptable to damage places where asylum seekers are housed? Should those in Epping who have damaged police vehicles have their right to civil disobedience allow them to escape prosecution? My view is that the same standards should apply to all. 

Trump posts about the Late Show cancellation: “I absolutely love that Colbert’ got fired,”

While I was in France, Stephen Colbert returned to the Late Show. It was more interesting than his return from other breaks because of his take on how Paramount reached a settlement with Trump over an interview with Kamala Harris before the election which we all know he won. The company made a business decision as it wanted to go ahead with a sale which it knew would probably get blocked it if fought the allegations of Trump, mainly because they would have beaten him. But the business decision is viewed by a few people as a bribe and Colbert is one of them. I remember thinking at the time that while it was a brave decision by him to comment on the matter, the ratings and advertising his show brings in would probably protect him. (Fast forward to two minutes if you want to hear the dirt.)

Anyway, soon after this, and probably unrelated to his speech (cough), Colbert announced the end of his show next year. 

I am sad as he is my favourite of the US late night show hosts. He and Seth Myers posted during the pandemic and their humour was much appreciated by me. I rated them with Colbert and The Daily Show being top, then Samantha Bee, Taylor Tomlinson, Seth Meyers, Jimmy Kimmel and finally Jimmy Fallon, Bill Maher and John Oliver being last but still very funny. 

Unless there is a change of heart, or unless Colbert is snapped up by another company, I hope that he will continue on YouTube, his shows must being revenue to the site.  But I do hope that none of the other late night shows are dropped due to political pressure. 

Banning Palestine Action

Banning Palestine Action sounds terrible. However I suspect few of their supporters are aware of how they destroyed equipment destined for Ukraine in Tournai, aiding Russia in the process. The direct action which had been carried out did not help Iran or Gaza. If the UK was happy with the USA breaking international law by attacking Iran, Diego Garcia would have been used to launch the attack. Instead, the US had to fly its bombers from the US to launch the attacks. 

Do I agree with banning a group that has helped Russia in its invasion of Ukraine? No. But they had a chance to present their side of the argument that they are not a terrorist organisation, and lost. 

While some will decry the limits on free speech, we can still protest our opposition to the continued murder of civilians in Gaza. And many, quite rightly, will continue to do so. 

Keir Starmer, Palestine Action and terrorism

The past record of Starmer as a lawyer is being used against him.  This time, by the left.  He has had his past work used by those on the right in the past, those on the right pointing out that he had represented Abu Qatada but forgetting that he did so due to the 'cab rank rule' before he started to prosecute terrorists.  Now the left are doing the same when it comes to the actions of Palestine Action.  

While there is debate as to if the actions of Palestine Action should be considered terrorism, an overlooked issue is how much force should be used to defend bases.  It is thought that Russia is launching attacks on logistic centres across Europe.  While some on the left and the right will deny this, the simple fact that a lot of arson has taken place.  

So while I think that it is wrong to consider Palestine Action to be terrorists, I do think that those who carry out such actions should also face the risk of being shot when on a base.  While it was protestors this week, looking at what has already taken place in the UK and more recently, Germany, it can be Russian agents next time. 

Free speech, the White House correspondents' dinner, Amber Ruffin and deportations

Free speech was going to be the topic of one of my posts, but today I found out that Amber Ruffin, a comedian, I like listening to (who I prefer to Seth Meyers) has been dropped from hosting White House correspondents' dinner.  She is hilarious and despite what those who support Trump may say, would have been a great choice to present it. This is an interesting (or alarming) development in a nation where people are being deported for having improper views.  

While free speech is being discouraged in the USA, we, in the UK are under increased scrutiny and it is rumoured that any free trade deal will be dependent on the UK implementing free speech in a manner deemed suitable to Trump and his supporters.  

At this rate, it will be interesting to see if late night shows which are critical of Trump will be allowed to continue to be so. 

Rapid prosecutions worked with the Farage Riots, just as they did in 2011

Those on the right are in outrage over the conviction of Lucy Connolly. Connolly posted a call for hotels housing migrants to be set on fire which is what she was jailed for. Not for "mass deportation now" or adding, "If that makes me racist, so be it," which is a view that many on the right appear to agree with. In court, the prosecutor stated "She then goes on to say that if she were to get arrested she would 'play the mental health card'." Sadly, she lost a child before, and there are those on the right referring to the mental health card which she played.  This is despite how the wife of a Conservative councillor admitted stirring up racial hatred. Of course, those journalists and politicians who argue for her case on social media ‘forget’ these issues so that they can encourage outrage. 

Those in favour of the Farage Riots have complained about the speed of prosecutions, this being something that helped (Keir Starmer) to stop the riots in 2011.  There have also been complaints that people have been prosecuted for posts on social media, again, this happening in 2011, people being jailed back then even when no disorder arose. 

Others have complained about human rights, but the UK is part of the European Court of Human Rights and that protects us, including the rioters, from having our human rights abused. 

The bottom line is that the methods used to end the riots in 2011 worked this year. The only people I will listen to about this are those who raised concerns back then. 

Will the European Court of Human Rights protect Far Right rioters?

Twitter has been a nightmare recently. There has been a lot of far right hatred on it, much spread by its owner. What is interesting are the “concerns” of those on the Far Right that Starmer will crack down on our civil rights.

From what I understand, that is not possible, unless we withdraw from the European Court of Human Rights. 

As for the powers being used. They were taken up by the government by the darling of the right of British politics, Suella Braverman.