Analysis comment

Legal study says IHRA ‘definition’ enables false antisemitism accusations. Well duh

Establishment still clinging to smear campaign, but now legal investigation added to inquiries and documentaries exposing weaponisation of antisemitism and smear scam

Hardline pro-Israel activists are a lovely bunch

An independent study by the European Legal Support Center (ELSC) and the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES) has found the so-called ‘IHRA definition’ is unfit for purpose and leads to ‘unreasonable’ and false accusations of antisemitism.

This will come as no surprise to Professor David Miller, the academic sacked by the craven Bristol University despite two lawyer-led university investigations finding that he had done and said nothing antisemitic after a mass, coordinated pressure campaign from pro-Israel groups determined to portray criticism of Israel as hatred of Jewish people, even though many Jews are not zionists.

The ‘definition’ – referred to as such by its weaponisers even though the document itself admits it is not a definition and has no legal force – has been forced on universities by the government under threat of funding cuts if they fail to adopt it, leading to a slew of accusations against university staff and students or student groups, of which none have so far been found to be justified. Of the complaints lodged, two are still being investigated and all the rest have been dismissed.

Unsurprisingly, this has led to enormous hissy-fits from those who want to use it – and outright denialism from the government, which claims it is a ‘vital tool in tackling antisemitism’. The Labour party has also adopted it and the Starmer regime penalises any members or local parties who even try to discuss whether it is valid – yet legal, human rights and free speech experts, including Jewish retired judge Stephen Sedley, Jewish expert human rights lawyer Sir Geoffrey Bindman and many others, have warned of its unfitness for years before this latest study.

The IHRA ‘definition’ is frequently described by those pushing it as ‘the’ ‘international’ definition – but more than a hundred Israeli and international groups have asked the United Nations to reject it, while its author Kenneth Stern has written of its dangers and the way it is abused to chill free speech on Israel.

Naturally, supporters of the unfit non-definition – the ‘friends of apartheid’ who either want to deter criticism of Israel’s racism and violence, or to weaponise antisemitism against the left, or both – are squealing with outrage at the report’s findings or else ignoring it completely and pretending it hasn’t happened.

The new study is welcome, but it only confirms what has been obvious from the beginning – the so-called ‘IHRA definition’ is a tool used by those who are weaponising accusations of antisemitism as a scam to intimidate and mislead. But Skwawkbox, other left outlets and groups, and then legal experts, many of them Jewish, of impeccable credentials have been pointing out its massive flaws and the dishonest narrative of its touts for years now.

So ‘duh’.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. Wasn’t Len McCluskey one of those on ‘the left’ who supported and encouraged the Labour Party to adopt the IHRA and its examples.

      1. goldbach – I don’t think that it is the right approach but unfortunately Jeremy and his team handled the whole thing atrociously and we are where we are.

      2. I am taking it that you don’t think that the IHRA “definition” is the “right approach”.
        Do you think that it accurately defines antisemitism?
        If so, why?
        If not. what do you think an accurate definition would be?

    1. What if he was?

      Wasn’t it YOU, wee steve who was one of those – well actually, the ONLY one – on here – making all sorts of excuses for keef ORDERING the lords to ABSTAIN on a bill which essentially meant allowing kids to go without free school meals?

      Weren’t YOU the ONLY one that thought it ok for keef to support the toerag measure of keeping the two-child cap on child benefit, meaning more kids & families go without?

      YES – But that’s off-topic.

      Is Corbyn antisemitic, paedophobe?


      Jo Bird?

      Am I?

      Is Israel NOT an apartheid state?

      Who are these misguided souls that post on here, who voted toerag in ’19?

      Just answer the questions or shut your cave. .

      1. Toffee – A lot of assertions and accusations but nothing to back them up.
        Can you provide some credible evidence to support each one of them?
        😘sweet dreams

      2. Let me get this right…

        You’re now denying that you’ve consistently been the sole voice defending smarmer’s shithouse child-starving noncery?

        …And you’re hoping I can’t provide credible evidence?? Fuck me, but you need (vivi)sectioning.

        Oh, I’m not gonna do your work for you, but suffice to say there’s a reason you’re generally considered a filthy nonce enabler.

        All you need do is search for threads about smarmer’s record on children a d read your own posts on those threads.

        Oh there are other threads where your nonce apologism and defending is all too evident, but for best reference start off with searching the threads I referred to.


      3. Toffee – I’m simply asking you to provide some evidence to back up each of your numerous accusations. The fact that you are unable to do so is telling.

      4. It always happens – when somebody makes points that Steve H can’t answer, somebody else changes the topic

  2. Off topic:

    I don’t follow events in Ukraine but did come across this interview yesterday which caught my attention:

    American Journalist Reveals Shocking TRUTH About Ukraine War

    1. Are you referring to this self proclaimed ‘independent journalist’?

      “Patrick Lancaster
      is an American YouTuber, influencer, and former US Navy sailor. Lancaster attempts to position himself as an ‘independent crowdfunded journalist’. Lancaster has been widely described as a pro-Kremlin propagandist, and his videos have often been cited by western media, and used by western agencies, due to their inadvertently exposing secret, and compromising Russian military information.

      1. Still in denial that you’ve consistently batted for the nonce enabling policies of keef smarmer, nonsense case?

        Take your pick of the majority of these threads.

        Take a look at who’s posts are consistently designed to obfuscate and evade the issue.

        Ain’t anyone else’s BUT yours nonce.

        And generally, you’ve tried to make it all about Corbyn, as per usual.

        But Corbyn doesn’t support nonce policies. And you never mention that, do you??

        Still to answer why you persist in your nonce-friendly methods. Perhaps it’s because you harbour nonce-friendly issues yourself.

        Yours is the typical behaviour of the nonce; denying they’ve done anything wrong even when fronted with the irrefutable and CREDIBLE evidence.

        Not only that, but when fronted with the FACTS about your despicable behaviour, you avoid that, too. Any normal person would defend themselves vigourously.

        What’s the reason for you never once having done so?

        Face it, you’re almost universally regarded as a paedophobe, and you lack the self-awareness and savvy to understand it.

        You sad. degenerate deviant.

      2. Information request:

        Who is it who has/is describing Patrick Lancaster in these terms?

        What evidence, other than unsubstantiated opinion designed to smear in the same way as the AS allegation actually exists to back up this claim?

        You are convincing no one steveH because everyone with a working brain can see through your bullshit attempt to attack and smear anyone deviating from The Official Narrative.

        Meanwhile, there are some videos in this piece showing your Nazi chums in the Ukraine:

        We look forward to seeing you attempt to portray people like Larry Johnson in the same way.

        Good luck with that forlorn endevour.

      3. My understanding is that Mr Lancaster did, indeed, serve in the US forces and that he subsequently met and married an Ukrainian woman, and was in eastern Ukraine at the time of the Maidan coup and the start of the Ukraine Civil War and has been trying to earn income from reporting on the conflict since then. He is clearly not an experienced journalist but more of an enthusiastic amateur who makes videos, mostly in Donetsk, and comments as he does so but with little preparation regarding what he is going to say. Nevertheless, some of his pre-2022 output gave a good idea of the constant bombardment that the people of Donetsk city experienced between 2014 and 2021. I haven’t seen any of his more recent stuff. There are more informative sources available.
        Incidentally, it would be useful if, when quotes such as the one above are reproduced, the source is cited. My suspicion is that it’s from Wikipedia. If not, I’d like to know the source because, as we all know, anyone can put anything on Wikipedia.

      4. Goldbach “He is clearly not an experienced journalist but more of an enthusiastic amateur”.

        Do a bit of basic research! You too, SteveH.

        Patrick Lawrence has been a journalist since the early ’70s, starting at the New York Daily Post. Since then he has spent many years as a freelance foreign correspondent, ending up at the International Herald Tribune. (He took up video journalism when the Special Military Operation started in the Donbass in 2022 and he found himself handily-placed to do some on-the-spot reporting, one of the first to do so, unlike the MSM who kept a safe distance, generally reporting from Kiev).

      5. timfrom – You are right about Patrick Lawrence. He is always worth a read, and I have posted links to some of his work occasionally on this site.
        The person we’re talking about here is Patrick Lancaster though.

      6. Oh God, I need a holiday! Apologies to all concerned. Never heard of this Lancaster geezer. I just lazily read the “Patrick La” bit and autopilot did the rest!

      7. No problem, timfrom.
        Whitley Bay is very bracing at this time of year.

      8. Oh dear. Is that it? Is that the best you can come up with steveH?

        A self styled Ukrainian based ‘intelligence’ group Molfar hit piece republished on Vice, Zabarona and no doubt other similar Western created and funded ‘NGO’ outlets…

        ….where every single so called “independent” piece published is rabidly pro-Ukrainian and Russiaphobic. Demonstrating that they are little more than propaganda outlets with an Official Narrative to sell.

        One story on Zabarona even poses the question of what to do with collaborators and how the anti-Russian language law will work when they – the Ukrainians – go into Crimea.

        There is no way such organs can be classed as a credible independent source on anything. Like the Jewish Chronicle and Zionist portrayal of Corbyn and the LP being a hotbed of anti-Semitism – against all available evidence to the contrary – they are simply hit pieces to lull the terminally gullible and bad faith shills and trolls such as yourself.

        Our cat could come up with a better response than this.

      9. Dave – You’re the one who is desperately trying to defend a f’wit PutinBot and his fake news. I’m quite happy for people to read the information and make up their own minds.

      10. This, by the way……

        represents just one of many recorded examples of a regular scene of what happens to those who your Ukrainian nazi friends don’t like in Ukraine.

        Quite what they will do to those they conveniently define as “collaborators” is not difficult to surmise.

        We’ve already seen documentary video evidence from Odessa in 2015 of those considered Untermenschen being chased into a building; the building being set alight; and the thugs and cowards you are cheerleading for, steveH, beating them immediately after they hit the ground after jumping from upper story windows to escape the flames.

      11. steveH,

        And what credible substantive evidence, other than obvious propaganda smear pieces originating from within the corrupt nazi infested Ukrainian regime, can you actually provide to back up this assertion?

        Be honest with yourself – if not the rest of us – you are simply desperately seeking any and all disreputable and unreliable sources to reach a conclusion you have already arrived at in order to sell a narrative.

        What you have offered so far does not meet recognised and credible standards.

        But, lets humour you for a moment. Seeing as you like to hang your hat on polls lets have one of our own right here.

        Open BTL poll:

        1. How many people here are convinced with steveH’s assertion on this matter?

        2. How many people are not convinced with steveh’s assertion on this matter?

        Voting closes midnight on Sunday 17th GMT.

        Go for it.

      12. Dave – Or more to the point is anything contained within the article that I posted a link to above untrue❓🤔

        ” Seeing as you like to hang your hat on polls lets have one of our own right here.”

        Oh dear😧, should I feel honoured or mildly amused?😟
        I really hadn’t appreciated that you felt so threatened by me.😲

      13. The words are words the words steveH.

        You are the one who has made the statement that people can make their own minds up.

        I’m merely being of assistance in helping you to determine how credible you think you are.

      14. Your opening assertion steveH is more applicable to yourself. i suggest you therefore apply your own projection back to where it is clearly most needed.

        Meanwhile, in regards to your secondary, and, once again deeply logically flawed assertion, I refer you to this earlier response below:

        Come back when you’ve assimilated some basic British Values.

  3. Oh…The caveat.

    Having even bothered to have checked those threads (not that you will have done, as they provide the “credible evidence” you’ll avoid) you’ll no doubt point to the “accusation” regarding the labour peers’ abstention shithousery.

    Of which further examples of your shithouse nonce enabling methods are credibly evidenced here

    Still gonna protest innocence? Still gonna evade, obfuscate and deny in the face of the overwhelming evidence?


    Again, and for the record.

    I would rather vote toerag than enable or excuse smarmerist nonsenseism. By FAR the lesser of two evils.

    1. Toffee, why do you think he had to go and live on a remote tropical island?

      Where he snipes and posts lies for the Establishment, where his paedo protector games are hatched?

      1. He lives on a Caribbean island idyll only in his head, Baz.

        Like a lot of other things exist only in his head.

        Who else do you know would spend their retirement on a Caribbean idyll in the same way the paedophobe allegedly does?

        You’d be out lazing in your hammock, stretched betwixt a couple of palm trees, watching the beach cricket and having your ice-cold drinks poured for you by some (extremely) busty maiden wearing coconut shells for a brassiere and a grass skirt.

        You would barely give a flying one about UK politics except for how the family you’ve left behind are getting on. (if applicable, wee nonce is THE classic example of an only [unloved] child)

        Instead, the wrong’un posts on here each and every day, having expressed his intention is to entertain himself by going out of his way to deliberately annoy people.

        Nobody with the infantile attitude of his could ever hope to gain the sort of employment that would allow them to retire to where he thinks he is. Unless he was fortunate enough to have had some aristocratic, inbred, eccentric benefactor pay him vast sums of pater’s inheritance in ’employing’the weirdo to count the the amount of trees on the moon. (And he’d lie about that, too)

        He’s a Walter Mitty. And a shit one at that.

      2. Toffee – What is your problem, have you run out of anything sensible to say again?.
        Why are you making stuff up and obsessing again about where I live when you already know that we moved back to the beautiful Caribbean island where my wife was born and brought up?
        Given the opportunity, where would you choose to live out your years?

      3. “except for how the family you’ve left behind are getting on.”

        In this specific context, making the claim of being unfaithful to themselves is one serious accusation toffee.

    2. Toffee – Could you detail precisely what you are accusing me of and link to the comment which you claim evidences this?

      1. Absolutely not.

        It’s there for all & sundry to see. I suggest you learn basic comprehension, especially before persistently making accusations against others and then refusing to provide any corroboration when required to.

        So how’s about this?

        it’s not MY fault you’re too thick to understand.

      2. *awaits the usual modus answer*

        Oh, then I mustn’t know what the accusation is, because you’ll claim ignorance or a lack of understanding.

        And because I refuse to do your legwork for you, you’ll pathetically attempt to weasel out by saying I can’t prove anything.

        You are a nonce-enabling gobshite trying to feign ignorance when the facts have been established.

        ^^^^Defend THAT ^^^^ for starters if you’re still stuck.

      3. Toffee – What facts would they be? The only one that appears to be obfuscating here is you.

      4. I’M obfuscating

        Dear Christ, it never ends, does it? I’ll leave it to everyone else to make their own minds up as to who’s doing/done what.

        Meanwhile, you’ll always be known as a fantasist nonce-enabling weirdo.

      5. Toffee – “Dear Christ, it never ends, does it? I’ll leave it to everyone else to make their own minds up as to who’s doing/done what. “

        I am quite content for people to do that.

      6. You’re content to be regarded as a cowardly, nonce enabling fantasist who can’t even answer a straight question?

        Whatever floats your boat, nonsense.

  4. In other news – WOW – I’ve just found out that there is a piece by Davis Ignatius in the WP, saying that Biden shouldn’t run in 2024. Ignatius has distinguished himself as a conduit for the US security state’s views, so this is big. Add to that the fact that Kevin McCarthy has changed his mind and authorised an impeachment investigation, and it looks like there is serious maneuvering going on.

    1. Kevin McCarthy has changed his mind and authorised an impeachment investigation

      Off-hand I can’t remember which clip it was on but it seems he may not have the right to unilaterally authorise it due to changes made previously — something to do with Nancy Pelosi, I think, and instigated at the time by the Republicans. IIRC it now has to go to the floor of the house before any authorisation can take place.

      1. This is the quote from the NYT that I have been sent:
        “Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday directed top congressional Republicans to open an impeachment inquiry into President Biden, reversing his previous stance that such an investigation should be initiated only with a vote of the House.
        In doing so, Mr. McCarthy levelled a series of accusations against Mr. Biden that he said amounted to a “picture of a culture of corruption” and warranted the House using its most potent investigative tool to try to make the case for removing the president.”
        I have been told that McCarthy originally declined to direct an impeachment, saying that he would only do so if the House voted for it, but now he has changed his mind.

  5. Going back on the thread topic:

    Here’s that well known [***sarcasm alert***] anti-Semite Brian Klugg on the matter from 2013:

    1. The only problem is that I have read and studied Brian Klugg’s words over the years and I find his mode of address patronising and invariably I have problems accepting any basic premise he suggests I must accept before continuing his observations about the definitions and use of language. He appears to believe that the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism is not without merit and the Oxford English Dictionary definition ‘hate towards or unfair treatment of Jewish people’ too simplistic. Paragraph 1 of IHRA Definition is never addressed.
      Will MSM’s continued usage of the word anti-Semitism to mean ‘any criticism of Israel’ change its meaning?

  6. The IHRA definition of anti-Semitism is an insult to anyone who believes in ‘Truth; Justice and Integrity’. It is simply a list of reasons why Zionism is conflated with Israel and religion with ethnicity, but thou shalt not……….
    Look no further than the 1st paragraph to understand that the State of Israel must be a rascist endeavour by any definition because although it does not have a written constitution its legal system has adopted the ‘Nation State Laws’ that clearly states that anyone who is not Jewish and lives in Israel is a second class citizen. A perverse version of HUAC, but Israeli. Could anyone imagine similar laws being adopted in any other country? Israel, that beacon of democracy,

  7. Good afternoon SteveH – I repost ths comment because I think that you may have missed it.
    “goldbach14/09/2023 AT 9:53 AM
    I am taking it that you don’t think that the IHRA “definition” is the “right approach”.
    Do you think that it accurately defines antisemitism?
    If so, why?
    If not. what do you think an accurate definition would be?”

    1. goldbach – Antisemitism is the prejudice against and/or the hatred of Jews because they are Jewish. What is your definition, do you have one?

      1. I see you did goldie the courtesy of half-answering a question…So I might as well chance me arm and ask again while you’re showing a modicum of common decency.

        Does your definition make Corbyn antisemitic?



        Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi?


      2. Spot on. You have, almost word for word, The Jerusalem Declaration.

      3. And there in a nutshell, out of the mouth of steveH, is the problem right there.

        You really need to go away and listen to that talk by Brian Klugg provided in the link above young man.

        Because once again, steveH, you are selling a definition based on a false narrative.

        One wonders why? (Well, not really as everyone who reads this site has recognised you as a bad faith third rate actor trying desperately to push a failing not fit for purpose narrative).

        The problem is neatly summed up in this definition provided on the britannica site:

        “Semite, name given in the 19th century to a member of any people who speak one of the Semitic languages, a family of languages spoken primarily in parts of western Asia and Africa. The term therefore came to include Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, Hebrews, some Ethiopians (including the Amhara and the Tigrayans), and Aramaean tribes. Although Mesopotamia, the western coast of the Mediterranean, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Horn of Africa have all been proposed as possible sites for the prehistoric origins of Semitic-speaking populations, there remains no archaeological or scientific evidence of a common Semitic people. Because Semitic-speaking peoples do not share any traits aside from language, use of the term “Semite” to refer to the broad range of Semitic-speaking peoples has fallen out of favour. For this reason, some critics even encourage the removal of the hyphen in the term anti-Semitism to help dispel any pseudoscientific notions of a “Semitic race.” They advocate instead for the use of antisemitism to describe the hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group.”

        Note the term “advocate…for the use of” a definition which, whilst made in the context of a claim that any definition of Semite which refers to a single race is ‘pseudo-scientific;

        a) Nevertheless defines the terms Semite and anti-Semite in terms of a single race

        b) Puts an enclosure around the definition which gives an effective monopoly of both terms to one specific racial group.

        In terms of the issue the problem with this – which has been specifically highlighted from within the Jewish community, in regards the specific unnamed dot Klug refers to in his talk – can arguably be summerised in the following terms:

        The Party, or significant power actors within it, supported by outside agencies such as corporate media and groups, organisations and institutions with vested interests subjectively claiming and seizing:

        – Monopoly rights to define all terms in the language and the narrative as incontestable. In this case what is anti-Semitism and how it is and should be defined.

        – Monopoly rights to determine what is and is not acceptable ways to think, talk and act enforced with punitive measures.

        – Monopoly rights to speak on behalf of an entire community on the basis not of the reality of diversity of views and experience but as a single homogeneous and undifferentiated group. To the extent that any member of that community not conforming to the imposed narrative is denied their identity as part of that community.

        – Monopoly rights to make claims and allegations and determine sanctions based on the above seizure of those monopoly rights to define, determine and enforce all aspects of the claimed subjective ‘reality’ and its narrative without the need for due process or objective testable evidence to substantiate either claim or allegation.

        This latter aspect includes the enforcement of guilt by association. Anyone defending or standing alongside someone subject to this process or challenging the acceptable imposed definitions being classed as ipso facto also automatically guilty of the same ‘offence.’

        A narrative deemed incontestable in any way with no tolerance for deviation. Any such deviation being met with instant sanctions from the Parish Guardians of the narrative.

        A process where the outcomes for those affected are not only being smeared and subject to character assassination but also cancelled, de-platformed, and expelled from the Party en masse for not agreeing to or being critical of particular narratives with no effective and transparent due process.

        Your definition is not fit for purpose steveH. But then you being a bad faith troll on this site who supports pedophiles and nazis it is hardly surprising.

      4. Dave – “Your definition is not fit for purpose steveH.”

        Really…….and your long winded diatribe is?😏

  8. Off topic…

    Keef on BBC news just now, replying to sunak’s claim that allowing 100k migrants into the UK per annum wont stop the boats…

    “Nonsense….embarrassing nonsense” (spoken without any trace of irony or recognition of his own pitiful record).

    Right answer, wrong question, keef**

    That’s the reply you give with when the question is: “What do you see when you look in the mirror?” keef.

    Or: “Have you read wee steve h’s sickeningly ultra-sycophantic panegyrics about you on SKWAWKBOX; and what do you think is wrong with him?”

    **It’ll make a cracking clip to use in a *parody* video montage.

  9. Anti semitism was never the issue, it was stop JC at all costs and we don’t care how you do it
    You end up with the biggest threat to the Jewish Community is the Jewish State
    Ken Livingstone was absolutely correct

  10. “SteveH14/09/2023 AT 2:25 PM”
    Linking to a Ukrainian propaganda website now, eh?
    I prefer the tedious repetition of old polling data

      1. I think that this is a “me too” moment. No 2.
        Will it be Myrotvorets next?

      2. If you accept what is mostly a load of unreferenced opinion trotted out by a Ukrainian government cut out, there is no hope for you. The truth is the first casualty of war. Possibly it is understandable that agencies of a state at war may spin things, but this isn’t just spin (like the great success in “capturing” the abandoned gas drilling platforms). This is just b******s, and you appear to be one of the Banderites’ useful idiots.

      3. More to the real point steveH is can you prove that any of the claims from this propaganda smear piece are true and accurate?

        In case you forgot – you having been (allegedly) out of the UK for some time – the standard practice – in line with British Values – is that those making the allegations/claims are the ones who have to prove the case rather than those subject to the allegations/claims having to prove their innocence.

        Its known as the standards and principles of due process. We have all witnessed the very public disdain that the Starmer Junta has for such well established and claimed British Values.

        We take it that you, steveH, also hold such values, standards and principles in utter contempt in the same way as those you are desperately trying to troll for.

        But what else can we expect from someone who openly supports kiddy fiddlers and neo-nazis.

    1. FFS grow up, I don’t have to prove anything. You are the joke getting your knickers in a twist but can’t point to anything that is untrue in the post that I have linked to.

      1. So we will take that as confirmation of your contempt for the Basic British Values of due process then stevie boy.

        Thanks for the open admission. Keep digging kid.

      2. I think that what is required from you is to show some evidence that could support the allegations trotted out by Evidence-free assertions are just that – evidence-free. Even you, with your intense partiality, must be able to recognise that this is what they are.

      3. ……… or even point to one allegation that is true, and illustrate the evidence supporting it.

      4. goldbach – Thanks for so diligently drawing attention to my posts

      5. One always need tom draw attention to disinformation, and I am pleased to do so in the case of the website to which you have linked.
        My attempts to disabuse you have clearly failed, so I will have to wait for you to disabuse yourself at some point in the future.

      6. goldbach – Precisely what disinformation would that be? I’ve repeatedly asked you and your fellow numpty to identify anything that is untrue within the posting that I have linked to and so far the pair of you have been unable to do so.

      7. Nowhere near as dark as it is down that bloody great hole you keep digging yourself into steveH.

        You’ll be claiming next that Myrotvorets* is a credible source of information on the individuals contained it:

        * A CIA run site which even lists Henry Kissinger as a dangerous ‘Putin propagandist” (copyright everyone with an IQ in negative numbers).

      8. Dave – goldbach tried that one about 23hrs before you. 🥱

      9. And?

        Getting lonely down there in that hole you’ve dug lad?

      10. Dave – What hole would that be? Given its contents and that you are unable to identify anything at all that is untrue within the article that I linked to why are you are still desperately trying to defend this despicable Putin propagandist.

      11. So silly of you, SH, the great majority of it is simply assertion. If there was any supporting “evidence” in the opinion piece you would have cited it long ago.
        Why are you so fond of these far right lunatics in Ukraine.
        It is perfectly possible to have great sympathy for all those who have been affected by this war since it started in 2014, without associating oneself with the Bandera-lovers.
        Some of us have friends who lost relatives at Babi Yar

      12. goldbach – Why would I bother when you and your cohort have yet to identify anything that is untrue.?😕

      13. Had you noticed that Victor Weedn, who is quoted in the article, was what we would call chief coroner for Maryland, but resigned. Apparently there were over 200 corpses awaiting autopsy and some of them were being stored in a garage, or at least that is what I’m told.
        Another source quoted in the article is, you’ve guessed it, Bellingcat.
        We know enough of the history of Bellingcat to have good reason for suspecting that everything it says is fake, and we know the sources of its funding. Some on this site have speculated that the same source funds SH, though I have my doubts about that.

      14. Its already been explained to you steveH.

        We don’t have to prove anything. You are the one making the assertions using material published in dubious unreliable sources which can be traced all the way back to Langley.

        Its so simple that even a simpleton such as yourself should understand it:

        The Western evidence based system places the onus of proof on the party making the assertion or allegation.

        You can either publicly get on with providing credible proof for your bullshit claims from fascist sources or, failing that, demonstrate that you hold the Western Values of due process you purport to be defending in total contempt.

        Which is it kid?

      15. Here’s that well known raving left wing lunatic and Putinbot Peter Hitchins writing in that equally far left organ the Daily Mail on the Security Services owned and financed organisation Bellingcat:

        “Bellingcat (according to its own website) currently receives grants from the following organisations:

        – The National Endowment for Democracy (see below)

        – Open Society Foundations

        – Porticus

        – Adessium

        – Pax for Peace

        ….the National Endowment for Democracy is a largely state-sponsored arm of the United States government. It says (on its own website) that its continued funding ‘is dependent on the continued support of the White House and Congress’.

        Whatever one might think of the organisations listed above, it is hard under these circumstances to view Bellingcat as being wholly independent of parties interested in the outcome [in this the alleged and contested incident at Douma in Syria]…..”

      16. ……Moreover, as noted here…..

        … Bellingcat’ staff include:

        “Senior Investigator Nick Waters, for example, spent three years as an officer in the British Army, including a tour in Afghanistan, where he furthered the British state’s objectives in the region. Shortly after leaving the service, he was hired by Bellingcat to provide supposedly bias-free investigations into the Middle East.

        Former contributor Cameron Colquhoun’s past is even more suspect. Colquhoun spent a decade in a senior position in GCHQ (Britain’s version of the NSA), where he ran cyber and Middle Eastern terror operations. The Scot specializes in Middle Eastern security and also holds a qualification from the U.S. State Department. None of this, however, is disclosed by Bellingcat, which merely describes him as the managing director of a private intelligence company that “conduct[s] ethical investigations” for clients around the world–thus depriving readers of key information they need to make informed judgments on what they are reading….

        ….Chris Biggers, who penned more than 60 articles for the site between 2014 and 2017, previously worked for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency–a combat support unit that works under the Department of Defense and the broader Intelligence Community. Biggers is now the director of an intelligence company headquartered in Virginia, on the outskirts of Washington (close to other semi-private contractor groups like Booz Allen Hamilton), that boasts of having retired Army and Air Force generals on its board. Again, none of this is disclosed by Bellingcat, where Biggers’s bio states only that he is a “public and private sector consultant based in Washington, D.C.”

        For six years, Dan Kaszeta was a U.S. Secret Service agent specializing in chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and for six more he worked as program manager for the White House Military Office. At Bellingcat, he would provide some of the intellectual ammunition for Western accusations about chemical weapons use in Syria and Russia’s alleged poisoning of Sergei Skripal.

        Kaszeta is also a fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a think tank funded by a host of Western governments as well as weapons contractors such as Airbus, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. Its president is a British field marshal (the highest attainable military rank) and its senior vice president is retired American General David Petraeus. Its chairman is Lord Hague, the U.K.’s secretary of state between 2010 and 2015.”

        He who pays the piper calls the tune:

        “All of this matters if a group is presenting itself as independent when, in reality, their views align almost perfectly with the governments funding them. But yet again, Bellingcat fails to follow basic journalism ethics and inform readers of these glaring conflict of interests, describing Kaszeta as merely the managing director of a security company and someone with 27 years of experience in security and antiterrorism. This means that unless readers are willing to do a research project they will be none the wiser.

        Other Bellingcat contributors have similar pasts. Nour Bakr previously worked for the British government’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office while Karl Morand proudly served two separate tours in Iraq with the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division.

        Government and intelligence officials are the opposite of journalists. The former exist to promote the interests of power (often against those of the public) while the latter are supposed to hold the powerful to account on behalf of the people. That is why it is so inappropriate that Bellingcat has had so many former spooks on their books. It could be said that ex-officials who have renounced their past or blown the whistle, such as Daniel Ellsberg or John Kiriakou, have utility as journalists. But those who have simply made the transition into media without any change in positions usually serve only the powerful.”

        And Elliot Higgins himself…..

        “was a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, NATO’s quasi-official think tank, from 2016 to 2019. The Atlantic Council’s board of directors is a who’s who of state power, from war planners like Henry Kissinger, Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell to retired generals such as James “Mad Dog” Mattis and H.R. McMaster. It also features no fewer than seven former CIA directors. How Higgins could possibly see taking a paid position at an organization like this while he was still the face of a supposedly open and independent intelligence collective as being at all consistent is unclear.”

        Question: On what planet does that represent “hearsay” steveH?

      17. Dave – He celebrates those who revere the architect of Babi Yar, and ignores it completely when I draw his attention to it. That tells us much about his politics, I suspect.

      18. Dave – and the actual evidence presented by Bellingcat and others in this case?
        What is it about a corrupt wannabe imperialist like Putin and his mouth pieces that attracts you and how do you reconcile your self professed left wing views with supporting Putin and his regime who maintain themselves in power by fear, imprisonment, torture and murder so that they can continue to enrich themselves by by stealing from the Russian people

      19. “maintain themselves in power by fear, imprisonment, torture and murder so that they can continue to enrich themselves by by stealing from the Russian people” – and your evidence to support this speculation?

      20. goldbach – Are you having a laugh? 🤣
        .FFS…..are you really that gullible?

      21. What is it about a corrupt shyster like Zelensky and his mouth pieces that attracts you and how do you reconcile your self professed left wing views with supporting him and his regime who maintain themselves in power by fear, imprisonment, torture and murder so that they can continue to enrich themselves by by stealing from the Ukrainian people – and the people of the US, UK and EU.

      22. goldbach – That’s easy, I don’t believe that is the case.

        In 2019 when Volodymyr Zelenskyy came into office Ukraine was 126th in the world corruption index it has now improved to 116 under his leadership, whilst Russia continues to languish at 137.

      23. SteveH is Sarah Ashton-Cirillo and I claim my £5!

      24. NVLA – Really???😲
        Sarah Ashton-Cirillo is a very interesting women, what was it that led you to reach this erroneous conclusion?

      25. Cryptid’s are not women.

        I suspect from your reply that you support queer theory. Want to confirm this?

  11. Congratulations to Pam Bromley and Ken Livingstone
    Did I read Ken has had poor health, congratulations to both parties on their success

  12. Ah well. We’ll just have to accept that the fact that many in the government of Ukraine, and in its armed forces, revere Bandera, who was responsible for the extermination of Jews in Ukraine (including many of the aunts, uncles and great aunts and uncles of my closest friend, and that this is of no consequence to SH. He loves them and has a visceral hatred of Russia.
    Still, it’ll all come out in the wash, though it’s taking a heck of a long time for Biden to see what needs to be done.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: