Two of the UK’s most principled party leaders—Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage—have performed screeching U-turns on their support for the Iran war after noticing it was costing them votes.
The West has changed their tune after the initial triumphant celebrations from last week. They didn't expect Iran to learn from the 12 day war and wage an impressive campaign.
The UK is such a mess. Taking away jury trials, no free speech or the right to protest, digital ID cards, panoctipon surveillance....what a disaster.
Just a note... Iran didn't learn from the 12 day war. Iran learned from decades of US/Israeli corruption, lies, propaganda and crimes. The question every single person in the west should be asking themselves - why are we continuously committing war in the middle east ? Hint, not to bring democracy...
Forgot to comment on surveillance. The US is proposing that all visitors should allow 5 years of back access to their all web activities. That’s phones, tablets, computers, accounts, mail orograms, blogs, community boards and so on. God help you if you mistakenly signed up to something, realised your mistake, unsubscribed immediately and years later have completely forgotten it and don’t declare it. I have no idea what I’ve signed up to and then never reengaged.
They also resist other countries controlling the use made of data collected in their countries by US companies. The US however reserves the right to access all such data held on by US companies or on US servers.
As compared with say the US where citizens just taking pictures of unidentified masked men seizing US citizens to ship them hundreds of miles away are routinely vilified as “domestic terrorists” and occasionally shot dead.
Free speech in the US can cost $ millions, whereas in the UK it won’t if you can back up your case. But you can’t whip up racial or sexual hatred.
You can trace this philosophy back to pre-Norman times when the basic idea of principle was that you kept the King’s peace and played nicely together.
If you think that’s woke you should check out their principles for financial settlements on marriage break up. An impotent husband with bad breath could lose every thing.
Defaming someone in the UK will cost a max of £100,000 + costs unless the defamed can prove actual financial loss. Which Trump can’t.
Whereas Trump can claim $10 billion because using his actual words didn’t contain a sufficient gap, although the broadcast was never available legally outside the UK, and the totally destroyed reputation Trump is complaining about had already, according to him in his €5bn claim against Pulitzer, been totally destroyed a few years earlier. He’s also got another €10bn claim against someone else for totally destroying his reputation during roughly the same period.
He’s in the wrong job. He could earn far more selling reputation building and management services.
I didn't mean to offend you but the lack of freedom of speech and now jury trials being taken away is insane to me. America is a pretty bad place but at least you can exercise your free speech without ending in prison. You say “globalize the intifada” and end up locked away.
Both countries are on the decline in different ways.
Keir Starmer spends much of his time being castigated by the right as a “lefty lawyer”, formerly specialising in civil and human rights cases. Yet he was a very effective head of the English and Welsh prosecution service (Scotland & N Ireland run their own) and was knighted by them for to honour that. However he comes across in public he’s obviously good on details and assessing arguments. And he is principled.
So it’s ironic he’s being criticised for not protecting the accused’s rights.
But his government of under 2 years is having to deal with a massive backlog of cases resulting in defendants possibly being remanded in custody for years, only to be found not guilty. That is an unacceptable injustice. And how good are witness memories so long after an event?
Why are we in this position?
It’s no secret that the previous administration inflicted massive austerity on all state mechanisms over 14 years, and Starmer is politically unable to turn on a spending tap. Lawyers will point to underinvestment in legal services over decades. And responsibility for that lies with the politicians now criticising this proposal and who permitted the backlog build up. Many courts have been closed with defendants in rural areas with poor public transport having to travel 30 or more miles for hearings.
They will also point to poor remuneration levels for criminal legal aid work such that lawyers have on occasions simply refused en bloc to accept the work. Fees for preparation are flat rate with limited flexibility for complications.
From the judges’ point of view unrepresented defendants lengthen trials substantially. They have to spend extra time ensuring defendants unfamiliar with legal nuances are having their case fairly expressed.
Something has to be done. Waving a magic wand isn’t an option. And a solution is urgently needed.
Despite all the opposition & press frothing, both Tory and Labour have been steadily restricting the right to jury trials for many decades. Indeed they’ve effectively abolished it in civil cases.
So the current proposal is another step. It isn’t proposing total abolition. I personally don’t really believe a non-injury road traffic accident really justifies forcing 12 citizens to spend several days on it. But it’s more difficult when you’re looking at a complicated fraud trial lasting several months of listening to highly technical legal points.
Omelettes and broken eggs. Whether we’ll ever be able to afford to reverse this I’m not sure. But I suspect voters will go for the party not planning to spend the money.
As far as I’m concerned the US 1st Amendment ought to be renamed “the right to lie through your teeth with no comeback”. I much prefer the EU & ECHR right to free expression. The lies being told in the States have consequences. Politicians & spouses get murdered or attacked with hammers. I’m sure it contributes to the toxic nature of your politics. Lies are told deliberately. In Wales they are discussing making politician’ lies a criminal offence. Most people here would support it. American politicians with few exceptions would go mute.
I and most Europeans don’t have a problem with people who make false statements causing strong feelings based on race facing consequences, especially when they lead to similar bigots going round and trying to burn down buildings with people in it. At times it’s effectively incitement to murder.
Equally I don’t have a problem with action against people who make statements prejudicing a person’s ability to get a fair court hearing. It’s something we take much more seriously than the US with its disgraceful perp walks and dressing accuseds in orange uniforms before conviction. Building the impression of guilt without presenting any evidence.
Yea right? Starmer is nothing more than a dumb politico. Hes hemorrhaging support for a reason, and he supports horrific policies like national ID cards. He wants to crush quintessential British liberties.
When defendants return verdicts we’ll really be in trouble. “Obviously” just weasel word to suggest an unarguable fact which you can’t support with evidence. Don’t waste my time with puerile comments.
I dunno, you recall the verdict against Palestine Action? The Government wasn't too happy about that, were they?
Starmer's position to allow the Americans to use british bases for "defensive strikes" further demonstrates his utter lack of principle.
EDIT: also, I do not think you understand what a weasel word is. A weasel word is a statement which is intentionally ambiguous or misleading. "Obviously" is many things, but it is the opposite of ambiguous.
Now, I suppose one could say that I cannot read Keir Starmer's mind, which is true, but at the same time, I find his excuse for ending free speech and jury trials to be most unconvincing. A much simpler explanation, one that fits his utterly unprincipled character, is available.
Are you seriously defending the destruction of jury trials? They are an integral component of the UK and they have been around for centuries. Starmer and his cronies lack support amongst the vast majority of the population.
The green victory in the by-election proved that. Again, this isn't some sort of competition about what country is worse.
Badenoch’s comments are revealing - ‘we are in the war whether Starmer/they/we like it or not’ - maybe the British people could introduce this lady to the concept of democracy. Sounds like it actually might be happening.
Thanks, Laura🌟. I need the education. US media is just a little bit self-obsessed. 😏
What are the alternatives for all of us in the modern political spectrum of the United Kingdom?
Voting for Conservatives… Big and loud - Neeeh.
Doing that for Reform … Gracious Good - Noooo.
What about Labour …. Not a brainer - Pass.
Then it is Green ….. A bit cautiously - Yes.
Remarkably, there is a new player in the field too - Yourparty (or really I’m not sure, should one who is member say 🤭 Myparty) - despite my progressive socialist inclination ….. A bit more cautiously - Yes.
Btw, this sort of generic political party name, maybe without proper justification, always paints the picture of 2 kids on the playground quarrelling: ‘it is Yourmistake’….No,no , It is Yourmistake’ - and no-one accepts responsibility. Sincerely hope it is not going to happen with this one.
At least someone is listening to the polls. Pity Starmer thinks only of how he can show the Americans who's the most loyallest little bitch, all in hope that the Americans can be prevailed upon to go to war with Russia for him.
Nothing says iron-clad principle quite like Farage and Badenoch frothing for war, then shitting themselves the second voters realise it might mean recession, stupid fuel prices, and actual coffins. Amazing how all that Churchill cosplay turns into nervous throat-clearing once the public stops clapping and starts doing the maths.
Farage getting blanked in the US is still deeply funny. The bloke has spent years licking Trump’s arse with the commitment of a man polishing a company car, only to fly over there and get treated like some needy gobshite hanging round backstage after a shit tribute show.
And Kemi barking about missile strikes before realising wars involve money, logistics, and consequences was beautiful as well. Turns out foreign policy is a touch more complicated than sounding hard in Parliament like someone three wines deep at a racist garden party.
Brilliant piece, as always. A cracking portrait of two flag-shagging opportunists discovering that their principles are about as sturdy as piss-soaked cardboard.
On the nose. Labour have literal Tories in their ranks like Christian Wakeford. The Tories - well, they continue to degenerate. And Reform have been showing off the batshit Tories added to their ranks (in fact all of their 8 MPs are former Tories). Can someone dig up the rotting legacy of Thatcher and drive a stake through its heart?
Tories can still go back to the "country of long shadows on county cricket grounds, warm beer, green suburbs, dog lovers, and old maids cycling to holy communion through the morning mist." Where's John Major when we need him?
100% but we must also remember US and Israel have cunned out of this by arming local militia, placing CIA ranked militia, false flags, friendly fire, etc to provoke a war and deaths
I was being sarcastic - people who follow the PM Starmer will know that he invented the term "defensive strikes" to semantically squirm around his actual involvement in the war.
Like all those 'defensive' sp[y planes telling Israel where bombing would yeild the greatest casualties (all the while searching for/ bringing back the sausages?)
Following his employer Israel, which back in the eighties invented the astonishing term “anticipatory retaliation”. And the media repeated it. Without comment.
Still would'nt vote for any of these f@ckers!!
The West has changed their tune after the initial triumphant celebrations from last week. They didn't expect Iran to learn from the 12 day war and wage an impressive campaign.
The UK is such a mess. Taking away jury trials, no free speech or the right to protest, digital ID cards, panoctipon surveillance....what a disaster.
Just a note... Iran didn't learn from the 12 day war. Iran learned from decades of US/Israeli corruption, lies, propaganda and crimes. The question every single person in the west should be asking themselves - why are we continuously committing war in the middle east ? Hint, not to bring democracy...
I was saying that the Iranian military and leadership did an excellent job learning from the 12 day war.
Forgot to comment on surveillance. The US is proposing that all visitors should allow 5 years of back access to their all web activities. That’s phones, tablets, computers, accounts, mail orograms, blogs, community boards and so on. God help you if you mistakenly signed up to something, realised your mistake, unsubscribed immediately and years later have completely forgotten it and don’t declare it. I have no idea what I’ve signed up to and then never reengaged.
They also resist other countries controlling the use made of data collected in their countries by US companies. The US however reserves the right to access all such data held on by US companies or on US servers.
As compared with say the US where citizens just taking pictures of unidentified masked men seizing US citizens to ship them hundreds of miles away are routinely vilified as “domestic terrorists” and occasionally shot dead.
Free speech in the US can cost $ millions, whereas in the UK it won’t if you can back up your case. But you can’t whip up racial or sexual hatred.
You can trace this philosophy back to pre-Norman times when the basic idea of principle was that you kept the King’s peace and played nicely together.
If you think that’s woke you should check out their principles for financial settlements on marriage break up. An impotent husband with bad breath could lose every thing.
Defaming someone in the UK will cost a max of £100,000 + costs unless the defamed can prove actual financial loss. Which Trump can’t.
Whereas Trump can claim $10 billion because using his actual words didn’t contain a sufficient gap, although the broadcast was never available legally outside the UK, and the totally destroyed reputation Trump is complaining about had already, according to him in his €5bn claim against Pulitzer, been totally destroyed a few years earlier. He’s also got another €10bn claim against someone else for totally destroying his reputation during roughly the same period.
He’s in the wrong job. He could earn far more selling reputation building and management services.
I didn't mean to offend you but the lack of freedom of speech and now jury trials being taken away is insane to me. America is a pretty bad place but at least you can exercise your free speech without ending in prison. You say “globalize the intifada” and end up locked away.
Both countries are on the decline in different ways.
Keir Starmer spends much of his time being castigated by the right as a “lefty lawyer”, formerly specialising in civil and human rights cases. Yet he was a very effective head of the English and Welsh prosecution service (Scotland & N Ireland run their own) and was knighted by them for to honour that. However he comes across in public he’s obviously good on details and assessing arguments. And he is principled.
So it’s ironic he’s being criticised for not protecting the accused’s rights.
But his government of under 2 years is having to deal with a massive backlog of cases resulting in defendants possibly being remanded in custody for years, only to be found not guilty. That is an unacceptable injustice. And how good are witness memories so long after an event?
Why are we in this position?
It’s no secret that the previous administration inflicted massive austerity on all state mechanisms over 14 years, and Starmer is politically unable to turn on a spending tap. Lawyers will point to underinvestment in legal services over decades. And responsibility for that lies with the politicians now criticising this proposal and who permitted the backlog build up. Many courts have been closed with defendants in rural areas with poor public transport having to travel 30 or more miles for hearings.
They will also point to poor remuneration levels for criminal legal aid work such that lawyers have on occasions simply refused en bloc to accept the work. Fees for preparation are flat rate with limited flexibility for complications.
From the judges’ point of view unrepresented defendants lengthen trials substantially. They have to spend extra time ensuring defendants unfamiliar with legal nuances are having their case fairly expressed.
Something has to be done. Waving a magic wand isn’t an option. And a solution is urgently needed.
Despite all the opposition & press frothing, both Tory and Labour have been steadily restricting the right to jury trials for many decades. Indeed they’ve effectively abolished it in civil cases.
So the current proposal is another step. It isn’t proposing total abolition. I personally don’t really believe a non-injury road traffic accident really justifies forcing 12 citizens to spend several days on it. But it’s more difficult when you’re looking at a complicated fraud trial lasting several months of listening to highly technical legal points.
Omelettes and broken eggs. Whether we’ll ever be able to afford to reverse this I’m not sure. But I suspect voters will go for the party not planning to spend the money.
As far as I’m concerned the US 1st Amendment ought to be renamed “the right to lie through your teeth with no comeback”. I much prefer the EU & ECHR right to free expression. The lies being told in the States have consequences. Politicians & spouses get murdered or attacked with hammers. I’m sure it contributes to the toxic nature of your politics. Lies are told deliberately. In Wales they are discussing making politician’ lies a criminal offence. Most people here would support it. American politicians with few exceptions would go mute.
I and most Europeans don’t have a problem with people who make false statements causing strong feelings based on race facing consequences, especially when they lead to similar bigots going round and trying to burn down buildings with people in it. At times it’s effectively incitement to murder.
Equally I don’t have a problem with action against people who make statements prejudicing a person’s ability to get a fair court hearing. It’s something we take much more seriously than the US with its disgraceful perp walks and dressing accuseds in orange uniforms before conviction. Building the impression of guilt without presenting any evidence.
Keir Starmer *principled*? Are you smoking crack?
He wants to end jury trials out of fear that defendants will not hand down the right rulings. Anything else is just crocodile tears.
Yea right? Starmer is nothing more than a dumb politico. Hes hemorrhaging support for a reason, and he supports horrific policies like national ID cards. He wants to crush quintessential British liberties.
When defendants return verdicts we’ll really be in trouble. “Obviously” just weasel word to suggest an unarguable fact which you can’t support with evidence. Don’t waste my time with puerile comments.
I dunno, you recall the verdict against Palestine Action? The Government wasn't too happy about that, were they?
Starmer's position to allow the Americans to use british bases for "defensive strikes" further demonstrates his utter lack of principle.
EDIT: also, I do not think you understand what a weasel word is. A weasel word is a statement which is intentionally ambiguous or misleading. "Obviously" is many things, but it is the opposite of ambiguous.
Now, I suppose one could say that I cannot read Keir Starmer's mind, which is true, but at the same time, I find his excuse for ending free speech and jury trials to be most unconvincing. A much simpler explanation, one that fits his utterly unprincipled character, is available.
Are you seriously defending the destruction of jury trials? They are an integral component of the UK and they have been around for centuries. Starmer and his cronies lack support amongst the vast majority of the population.
The green victory in the by-election proved that. Again, this isn't some sort of competition about what country is worse.
Badenoch’s comments are revealing - ‘we are in the war whether Starmer/they/we like it or not’ - maybe the British people could introduce this lady to the concept of democracy. Sounds like it actually might be happening.
Thanks, Laura🌟. I need the education. US media is just a little bit self-obsessed. 😏
What are the alternatives for all of us in the modern political spectrum of the United Kingdom?
Voting for Conservatives… Big and loud - Neeeh.
Doing that for Reform … Gracious Good - Noooo.
What about Labour …. Not a brainer - Pass.
Then it is Green ….. A bit cautiously - Yes.
Remarkably, there is a new player in the field too - Yourparty (or really I’m not sure, should one who is member say 🤭 Myparty) - despite my progressive socialist inclination ….. A bit more cautiously - Yes.
Btw, this sort of generic political party name, maybe without proper justification, always paints the picture of 2 kids on the playground quarrelling: ‘it is Yourmistake’….No,no , It is Yourmistake’ - and no-one accepts responsibility. Sincerely hope it is not going to happen with this one.
At least someone is listening to the polls. Pity Starmer thinks only of how he can show the Americans who's the most loyallest little bitch, all in hope that the Americans can be prevailed upon to go to war with Russia for him.
If it "destroys" Israel, I am all in... regretfully.
Thanks Laura, this is fucking excellent.
Nothing says iron-clad principle quite like Farage and Badenoch frothing for war, then shitting themselves the second voters realise it might mean recession, stupid fuel prices, and actual coffins. Amazing how all that Churchill cosplay turns into nervous throat-clearing once the public stops clapping and starts doing the maths.
Farage getting blanked in the US is still deeply funny. The bloke has spent years licking Trump’s arse with the commitment of a man polishing a company car, only to fly over there and get treated like some needy gobshite hanging round backstage after a shit tribute show.
And Kemi barking about missile strikes before realising wars involve money, logistics, and consequences was beautiful as well. Turns out foreign policy is a touch more complicated than sounding hard in Parliament like someone three wines deep at a racist garden party.
Brilliant piece, as always. A cracking portrait of two flag-shagging opportunists discovering that their principles are about as sturdy as piss-soaked cardboard.
On the nose. Labour have literal Tories in their ranks like Christian Wakeford. The Tories - well, they continue to degenerate. And Reform have been showing off the batshit Tories added to their ranks (in fact all of their 8 MPs are former Tories). Can someone dig up the rotting legacy of Thatcher and drive a stake through its heart?
The UK establishment are just disciples of the Epstein Pedo class. The Devil IsRael, the Antichrist.
Tories can still go back to the "country of long shadows on county cricket grounds, warm beer, green suburbs, dog lovers, and old maids cycling to holy communion through the morning mist." Where's John Major when we need him?
I couldn’t think of a comment pithy enough to sum up this clusterfuck of a political shitshow, so this’ll have to do.
Clearly the correct course of action is to not allow offensive strikes but only allow defensive strikes.
100% but we must also remember US and Israel have cunned out of this by arming local militia, placing CIA ranked militia, false flags, friendly fire, etc to provoke a war and deaths
I was being sarcastic - people who follow the PM Starmer will know that he invented the term "defensive strikes" to semantically squirm around his actual involvement in the war.
Like all those 'defensive' sp[y planes telling Israel where bombing would yeild the greatest casualties (all the while searching for/ bringing back the sausages?)
Following his employer Israel, which back in the eighties invented the astonishing term “anticipatory retaliation”. And the media repeated it. Without comment.
That phrase by itself blows up the idea that Starmer is in any way principled.
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."
Only Facebook Microsoft Google Amazon would have you thinking anyone would support a UN-violating war or genocide
Hmmmm who should we vote for 😀it's a tough one 😉
Fancy that! Overnight change of opinion! Amazing what a vote could do.........when it affects you personally.