So many of these! When you read about them you might think that Britain must be a wonderfully crime-free society, that the police have time to spend on trivia like these cases. But no. Persecuting opinions they don't like is clearly more important than, for example, bike theft. Regarding which, this article says
Dunn said he had sympathy with the Met Police's response given their financial constraints: "You would honestly struggle to put bike theft quite high up the list when you look at what else happens in society - rapes, murders, assaults. It obviously and probably should be put lower down that pecking order."Apparently this should now read "when you look at what else happens in society - rapes, murders, assaults, placards depicting politicians as coconuts, commentary on Palestine by those opposed to genocide, ..."
A lot of these actions are based on one of the Terrorism Acts, or similar legislation. I've also written an article about this legislation, in particular about the absurd breadth of the definition of "terrorism".
UPDATE (Feb 2025): Some news in an article by Craig Murray: United Nations Censures UK Over Abuse of Terrorism Act Against Journalists and Activists: the letter from the UN says
We note that the examination of each journalist [... was] conducted despite the apparent absence of a credible “terrorist” connection. We are concerned that such powers carry a risk of intimidating, deterring, and disrupting the ability of journalists to report on topics of public importance without self-censorship.There is also an article on the same theme on Skwawkbox.
David Miller has written an article about several of these cases, in Al Mayadeen and in his own substack. He says most of those he mentions have been guests on Palestine Declassified. So there's a Streisand Effect viewing (it has videos) recommendation. There seem to be other links to it, here, here, and here.
Further discussion by Ricky / Council Estate Media: it is all worth quoting, but in particularYou will be pleased to know British police are taking their role as enforcers of the Israeli state so seriously that they’ve arrested a Jewish Israeli academic because he explained Israel is fighting an unwinnable war. Professor Haim Bresheeth pointed out that British police have been arresting people for opposing genocide, leaving police with no choice but to arrest him under the Terrorism Act.
Metropolitan police explained they actually arrested Prof Bresheeth for “expressing support for a proscribed terrorist organisation”. Awkwardly, a recording of his speech shows he said no such thing
This Skwawkbox article contains a video of his speech, and says, accurately,Either an overzealous police officer overreacted, or more likely, this was part of a strategy of silencing opposition to genocide.
The officer might as well have said: "I’m arresting you for being the wrong kind of Jew and having a conscience. We’ll work out the details later."
In fact, as a hearing of his speech immediately reveals, rather than supporting any [proscribed organisation] Bresheeth made the factual observation that Israel has proven unable to defeat Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis ...
And Skwawkbox also links to a video of the arrest in which it is alleged that Prof Bresheeth made a "hate speech", and that this justifies arrest under the Terrorism Act 2000.
As I've come to expect, this event was hardly covered in the UK mainstream media. Who did think it was worth covering?
Finally, my recommendations for reading/viewing what they don't want you to see. Of course there is the video of the speech itself, in the Skwawkbox page linked above. Then, Prof Bresheeth has a website, which seems to be more about events 10 and 15 years ago.
It's interesting, though, as a glance at this part of the site leaves me with the impression that nothing much has changed since then, except that both sides have cooperated in ensuring that it is less easy to ignore the conflict.
The various reports associate Prof Bresheeth and/or the meeting at which he spoke with
He was detained and questioned, for over 5 hours, under Schedule 3 of the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019, "for the purpose [allegedly] of determining whether [he] appears to be a person who is, or has been, engaged in hostile activity". Schedule 3 seems to be mostly very similar to Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 but to do with "hostile activity" rather than "terrorism".
This encounter is described in The Grayzone, and also The Cradle and Skwawkbox
Of the many publications I wrote for, Kit says, "their overwhelming, if not exclusive, interest was in The Grayzone." This makes the Streisand Effect reading recommendation easy, doesn't it? Do read The Grayzone.
UPDATE: I've just seen that Kit has a substack site called Global Delinquents
This website is about encouraging you to read, and providing links to, writing which have been censored, or the writers punished, etc. So by rights I should be providing a link to Tommy Robinson's film, "Silenced", and suggesting you view it. But I'm not doing so. Not primarily because he is so "right-wing" that he is not welcome in even Nigel Farage's Reform party.
The story, briefly, is that Robinson, whose real name is Yaxley-Lennon, had made some very nasty statements about a schoolboy, who sued him for defamation. See Hijazi v Yaxley-Lennon [2021] EWHC 2008 (QB). The judge found (para 163)
... the Defendant has failed to demonstrate the truth of his allegations. The Defendant took on the burden of proving his allegations to be true. He has failed. In reality, and for the reasons I have explained, his evidence fell woefully short.The judge also issued an injunction against Yaxley-Lennon prohibiting him from repeating the allegations. In October 2024 he was found to have breached the injunction, for which he was committed to prison for 18 months (which would get reduced by half). See HM Solicitor General v Yaxley-Lennon [2024] EWHC 2732 (KB): para 6 (terms of the injunction), paras 10 and 16 (detail of breaches). It appears in particular that in the film "Silenced" Yaxley-Lennon complains about being silenced (by the injunction) and also repeats the defamatory allegations.
So, rather than recommend you watch the film, I recommend you read the first judgment linked above. Or the writeup by Logically Facts, here. As a matter of fact, it may be that to recommend you watch the film (as, reportedly, Elon Musk has done) would itself be a contempt of court, see Attorney General v Punch Ltd [2002] UKHL 50 - comments from legal experts welcome!
Another comment: the police seem to have got me to agree with Tommy Robinson about something (quite an achievement), namely misuse of terrorism legislation. See an interview he did with Jordan Peterson, from 11:33. Apparently he was detained under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000. According to him, the police gave him a notice saying they believed [he was involved in - sound unclear] the instigation and preparation of acts of terrorism, but then they told him they didn't actually believe that. That's odd, since the legislation doesn't require the police to believe it, but it does require them to be questioning him for the purpose of determining whether it is so. What I've read about him is mostly adverse, but nothing suggestive of a connection with terrorism.
She was detained and interrogated for six hours under Schedule 3 of the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019. This permits questioning
a person for the purpose of determining whether the person appears to be a person who is, or has been, engaged in hostile activityShe says
I was (I believe) the first in what would be a series of detentions of UK citizens - journalists or individuals with views that challenge UK foreign policy.In her excellent article she describes and comments on her experience, and also discusses and quotes from John Laughland who had a similar experience.
She has a Youtube video: My interview with Slow News Day covering my recent detention for 6 hours at Heathrow - courtesy of UK Anti Terrorism Police.
She operates a substack site.
She was arrested under Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (support for a proscribed organisation). The grounds for this are discussed in detail by Jonathan Cook (also here).
She is described as a "roving reporter" for MENA Uncensored, which is variously described as a Lebanon-based news site, and as a social media account. All I can find is a Youtube channel: some of the videos there are reports by Sarah.
Possibly because
The police came to her house just before 7.30am. 12 of them in total, some of them in plain clothes from the counter terrorism police. They said she was under arrest for "content that she has posted online." Her house is being raided & they have seized all her electronic devices.this was widely reported, including by The Cradle, CommonDreams, Middle East Monitor, Palestine Chronicle, TruthOut, ScheerPost, SkwawkBox, World Socialist Web Site and SCNR.
As reported by Skwawkbox (link below),
The Starmer government, which has refused to condemn Israel’s actions and has said it considers the use of the word ‘genocide’ unhelpful, is engaged in an escalating campaign of abusing anti-terror legislation to raid and arrest journalists and activists – many of them, like Ms Kahn and Prof Bresheet, Jewish – who expose Israel’s war crimes.Sometimes in these situations it is hard to find what the person victimised actually wrote or said, which is frustrating because it is the purpose of this website to publicise just that. But in this case Skwawkbox is publishing the uncompromising speech she gave before her arrest. Thanks Skwawkbox!
I also found a shorter video on Middle East Eye, 'Not in my name': The story of a Jewish Israeli dissident. The write-up there about her says
Yael Kahn has been campaigning for Palestine for 51 years. A Jewish Israeli woman, she's been advocating for a free Palestine since 1972 and believes it's her obligation to advocate for Palestinians everywhere, saying: "I lived on the land stolen from them, so I have no excuse."
He was arrested in August 2024 under Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (re support for a proscribed organisation).
Here is the World Socialist Web Site's take on it
In Medhurst’s case, it appears that commentary defending the right of Palestinians under international law to resist foreign military occupation and genocide is being defined as support for terrorism.
The Jewish News has reported on the arrest, also quoting some of the things he has said (can we assume that these are the worst they can find?).
As I've come to expect, the MSM (main-stream media) has hardly covered this at all.
For the Streisand Effect reading/viewing recommendation, Richard has a substack (which doesn't seem to have anything on it since the article describing his arrest), and a website with lots of interviews and videos about Julian Assange and about Palestine.
Extraordinarily, Medhurst was also (in February 2025) detained and interrogated by Austrian police, who accused him of being a member of Hamas, see articles in Skwawkbox and Consortium News.