Freedom of Speech is not Terrorism - Opposition to Genocide is not Terrorism - Supplying Weapons to Enable a Genocide & Ethnic Cleansing is a War Crime

 My Trial at Kingston Crown Court Begins on 5 January 2026 – My Charge? Supporting the Right of the Palestinians to Resist The Occupation

Please Register for the Webinar on December 11^th 6 pm 

'Freedom of Speech and Protests Against Genocide are not Terrorism

https://tinyurl.com/2s3py925

Background to My Arrest

Nearly two years ago I was arrested in a dawn raid by a dozen police officers. My ‘crime’ was posting a tweet a month before. A Zionist had asked me to say 3 words ‘I support Hamas’.  I responded and said ‘I support the Palestinians, that is enough. And I support Hamas against the Israeli army.’

If anyone should have been charged with inviting support for Hamas it is James!

The Prosecution will say that it is a crime to support the resistance of Palestinians to the genocidal Israeli army because Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Using this ‘logic’ it would have been a crime to support the French Resistance, whom the Nazis also termed terrorists. My response at 6.30 a.m. was just 3 words ‘this is Orwellian’.  Perhaps rape and burglary had gone out of fashion? The Police were therefore left with no choice but to go into the business of thought crime.

In fact rape has effectively been decriminalised because the police say they don’t have the resources to deal with it. However they do have dozens of police available at a moment’s notice to go arresting supporters of the Palestinians as ‘terrorists’. Indeed the Metropolitan Police seem to do nothing else these days.

But perhaps, given the Met have a rape and misgyny problem, with officers such as Wayne Couzens, the murderer of Sarah Everard and David Carrick, it is safer to concentrate on ‘terrorism’.

Earlier today we were made aware of plans for a pro-Palestine protest outside St John’s Wood Synagogue this afternoon.

We understand why the group's decision to protest at this location will cause concern to some communities.

There is no legal mechanism to ban the protest from… pic.twitter.com/sg58LqLna9

— Metropolitan Police (@metpoliceuk) November 23, 2025

This begs the question - why would the Met want to ban a demonstration?  The Police have now become the judges of what is an acceptable protest

What the Met are doing is supporting British foreign policy which is giving support to the genocide in Gaza. Having received no less than 9 complaints from Zionists like @Heidi Bachram, they decided to spare no expense in arresting me. Ms Bachram was operating in the best traditions of Jews who had betrayed fellow Jews to the Nazis.

I was arrested initially under s.12(1A) of the Terrorism Act 2000 which makes it an offence to ‘express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed (i.e. terrorist) organisation.’

My Police interviewers did not understand when I told them that I would have supported the Devil himself against the IDF.  I gave them the example of how, in 1944, over 200 Jews deserted from the Polish Home Army (AK) because they had been told by their officers that they would be shot in the back when they went into action.

A saying common in AK was that ‘‘Every Pole has two bullets—the first for a Jew and the second for a German,'” It caused a major scandal when Tom Driberg MP raised it in the House of Commons, against the wishes of the Board of Deputies. Anti-Semitism was rife in AK so it is unlikely that I would have supported it.

However when AK led the Warsaw Uprising in 1944 against the Nazis then of course I would have supported it. The same with Hamas. I support it against a genocidal army but not against its own people.

Hamas was elected by the Palestinians in free elections in 2006.  What proscription effectively is is a racist definition of all Palestinians as terrorists. Britain has no business defining a group fighting the occupation of their own country as ‘terrorist’ whereas the Israeli state, which is illegally occupying that land and committing genocide is certainly a terrorist state but one acceptable to the British state. 

What is being embedded in British law is its foreign policy. It is political opinion which is cemented into the law, which is a complete abuse of the law which is there to regulate behaviour not opinion.

As John Stuart Mill argued in ‘On Liberty’ [Chapter 1, 2003 ed.] that

The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.

In the eyes of the law and prosecution Hamas are ‘terrorists’ when it is abundantly clear that it is the Israeli state which is a terrorist state. By comparison Hamas are akin to virginal choir boys.

As Lord Carrington, Thatcher’s first Foreign Secretary said, ‘one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist.’ All resistance organisations are termed ‘terrorists’ by those they oppose. The Czech and Yugoslav resistance were called ‘terrorists’ by the Nazis.

We live in authoritarian times when protest and opposition to Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza is equated with terrorism and dissent is equated with subversion. The latest outrage is a senior government lawyer declaring, at the trial of Natalie Strecker on charges of ‘terrorism’ in Jersey, that international law should be disregarded.

The Genocide Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights, both passed in the wake of the Nazi holocaust, are effectively dead in the water, murdered by the new imperialism of which Trump and Starmer are such excellent representatives.

Starmer's hypocrisy over genocide - he argued there was genocide in Vukovar but no genocide in Gaza

Starmer, the ‘human rights lawyer’ argued that the massacre in Vukovar in November 1991, when 1,200 civilians were murdered, was a genocide but the possibly hundreds of thousands killed in Gaza are not a genocide despite the clear statements of Israeli government ministers of their desire to ethnically cleanse Gaza.

We caught up with former Labour MP Chris Williamson at the Your Party conference

Last week we had the spectacle of the Government’s ‘Justice’ Ministry blatantly trying to fix the outcome of Palestine Action’s Judicial Review by having the judge hearing it, Martin Chamberlain, removed and 3 pro-Israeli, security judges replace him.

The new judges are Dame Victoria Sharp, Dame Karen Steyn and Sir Jonathan Swift.  All right-wing and all pro-Israel. There is an excellent article on Electronic Intifada giving the background to these stooge judges. All are paid up members of the British Establishment.

As part of his authoritarian agenda Starmer is now trying to introduce ID cards, an essential part of the surveillance society that reduces us to mere numbers. And in order that juries don’t continue to acquit defendants whom the Establishment believe are guilty, Starmer and Lammy are proposing to abolish juries for all but the most serious cases of murder and manslaughter.

My Trial On 5 January 2026

The Crown Prosecution Service [CPS] then changed tack and charged me under s.12 of the TA with ‘inviting support for a proscribed organisation’ on the basis of a blog, Full Support for the Gaza Ghetto Uprising and four tweets. Of course I did no such thing and indeed I have long been a critic of Hamas’ conservative politics, see e.g. my condemnation of their use of torture, however I’m not prepared to demonise them either. In resisting genocide I have no hesitation in supporting them against the mass murderers of the IDF.

The CPS had to get the Attorney General, Richard Hermer’s approval for the prosecution to go ahead. Given that Hermer has “dear family members currently serving in the IDF” that was not too difficult.

The police have not once arrested supporters of Israel’s genocide despite aiding and supporting genocide being a criminal offence under the International Criminal Court Act 2001.  The CPS and Attorney General Hermer are selective about which laws they implement.

Although the issue of Palestine-Israel is always posed in the mainstream media in terms of Israel’s ‘right of self-defence’ it is the Palestinians’ rights of self defence which is at the heart of the issue of whether they were entitled to break out of Gaza on October 7.

Palestinians in Gaza had been under siege for 17 years They were subject to the Israeli policy of ‘mowing the lawn’, i.e. periodic massacres and bombing aimed at keeping the population quiet and submissive whilst they got on with their project of ethnically cleansing the West Bank before turning their attention to Gaza.

This was in conjunction with another policy of putting Palestinians in Israel ‘on a diet’. As Dov Weissglass, the lawyer and adviser to then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon explained: ‘The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.’ The figure arrived at was 2279 calories a day, 8% less than previously calculated. It is reminiscent of Nazi calculations as to how much food they would allow into the ghettos. They too made calorific calculations.

How Israel is replicating Nazi starvation tactics | Soumaya Ghannoushi | MEE Opinion

The project Israel is embarked upon is that of a Greater Israel. This involves the occupation of land in all the neighbouring countries, the biblical Greater Israel or Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) which has always been the Zionist goal. That is why Israel is the only state in the world not to define its borders.

At the present moment Israel is in occupation of parts of Lebanon and Syria, without a squeak of protest from the ‘international community’ or the ‘rules based order.’

October 7 forced changes in the plan.  Gaza became the primary target although violence has increased massively in the West Bank where whole villages have had to be abandoned as a result of violence from settlers and the army. Over one thousand Palestinian civilians in the West Bank have been killed by the Israeli military or settlers since October 7.

October 7 was intended by the Palestinian resistance to be a short operation aimed at capturing Israeli hostages and exchanging them for the thousands of Palestinian hostages who had been convicted of the ‘crime’ of opposing an illegal occupation.  Israel’s military courts have a 99.74% rate of conviction and one-third of Palestinian prisoners, hundreds of whom are children aged 12 and upwards.  They are held in Administrative Detention without any trial. Palestinian prisoners are as much hostages as the Israeli hostages were.

oh my god. One of the three authors of the New York Times' "mass rape" atrocity propaganda hoax is Anat Schwartz. She liked posts calling for Gaza to be turned into a "slaughterhouse". This the person the NYT hired to write about Palestinians and frame them as sub-human monsters pic.twitter.com/vlaKLVxwil

— ☀️👀 (@zei_squirrel) February 24, 2024

Israel used October 7 to create a genocidal narrative. Instead of a well planned military operation it was alleged to be an orgy of atrocities – mass rapes and the wanton killing of babies. The original story of ‘40 beheaded babies’ has been completely discredited but almost a dozen British newspapers — including The Times, Metro, The i, Daily Express, The Scotsman, and Financial Times ran stories on their front pages citing Israel’s i24 claims. None have retracted.

In fact only one baby, Mila Cohen, died on October 7 and that accidentally. This is confirmed by Israel’s own social security statistics.

‘Rape atrocities’ were a well worn racist, colonial narrative in which the indigenous population and Black people were portrayed as savages with the men being portrayed as having uncontrolled sexual appetites and urges. This was not dissimilar to how Jewish men were portrayed in Nazi Germany.

The Israeli government constructed a similar narrative. Israel’s October 7 rape atrocity narrative was given legs by the New York Times in Screams Without Words. Anat Schwartz, an Israeli, was assigned to cover the allegations that Hamas systematically used sexual assault as a weapon of war during the October 7 attack.

The NYT article has long since been discredited. Schwartz was soon discovered to have liked a tweet supporting turning Gaza into a slaughterhouse. The Intercept demolished the NYT’s propaganda piece in “Between the Hammer and the Anvil” The Story Behind the New York Times October 7 Exposé.

The article’s prime example of a woman who had been raped and killed, Gail Abdush, was contradicted by her own family.  Even the NYT’s Daily podcast refused to run the story. Schwartz was dropped but the NYT refuses to admit that Screams Without Words was fiction rather than a serious piece of investigative journalism.

The final nail in the coffin of the rape atrocity story was the admission by Moran Gaz, who was in charge of Israel’s Southern Prosecutor's Office, that she had no rapes to investigate or people to charge. In December 2024 Ynet, the widest circulation Israeli newspaper, published an interview with Gaz, saying that

In the end, we have no complainants. What was presented in the media compared to what will ultimately emerge will be completely different.

But the damage had been done. As the old saying goes, by the time the truth gets its boots on a lie has travelled half-way round the world.

The atrocity propaganda was carried by the mainstream media but when it was proven to be untrue, there was no admission of fault. This is how BBC style propaganda works.

The British first invented atrocity propaganda against the Germans in the first world war. Israel has perfected it to a fine art. The depiction of Hamas as ‘terrorists’ is of a piece with this atrocity propaganda.

The definition of ‘terrorism’ in the Terrorism Act 2000 is wide enough to allow the government to demonise anyone they want to. It gives the government of the day an arbitrary power to classify anyone they dislike as ‘terrorists’ regardless of who they are. Hamas military wing was proscribed in 2001 and Priti Patel, a crook who became Home Secretary, proscribed its political wing in 2021.

This decision was a warrant for genocide. Hamas was the elected government in Gaza and formed an administration. Civilians who were members of its political wing included doctors, teachers, nurses and academics. By branding the political wing a terrorist organisation this gave the green light to Israel to attack hospitals, schools and universities because ‘terrorists’ were working there.

 The ban on commenting on Hamas is a clear breach of Article 10 of the ECHR on freedom of speech, which our judges have done their best to negate.

Hamas is a resistance organisation, which Netanyahu did more than most to create and support in his effort to combat a Palestinian state.

Because my trial is imminent I am organising a webinar around not only my case but the attack on Palestine solidarity activists. Natalie Strecker is awaiting a verdict in a similar trial in Jersey and her charges are similar to those facing me. The trial of the first six of the Filton 24 has already begun. Richard Medhurst who is speaking also faces the prospect of being charged.  Despite being a journalist he is the ‘wrong type’ of journalist.

Please register and join us and also get involved in the campaign against the persecution of Palestine solidarity activists. I am calling for a demonstration outside Kingston Crown Court on January 5^th at 9.30 and for people to attend the trial which is estimated to last a week. It is important that the movement makes its presence felt.

Tony Greenstein

Please donate to my Crowdfunder

Stopping the Police Persecuting Palestine Solidarity Activists