This month four English court cases have struck blows at Zionism. We speak to David Miller whose right to criticize Zionism was upheld by a tribunal in London. Watch the replay!
Guest: Dr. David Miller. Host: Joe Lauria. Producer: Cathy Vogan.
On Aug. 19, a jury failed to convict seven members of Palestine Action just for being associated with a break-in of an Israeli weapons plant during the height of Israel’s Gaza genocide.
Then on Aug. 21, five activists who broke windows and threw red paint at aBarclays Bank branch in protest over Israel’s genocide in Gaza found out they will not be sentenced as terrorists.
Judge Robert Altham told a packed room at Preston Crown Court the damage the activists caused with their August 2024 direct-action protest in Burnley was “significant.” But Altham said he was “not satisfied” the damage met the statutory measures of “serious damage” required under the Terrorism Act.
The 2000 Terrorism Act has been used to detain and interrogate journalists and commentators at British airports and to arrest protestors who simply show support for Palestine Action, a group proscribed as a terrorist organization.
Also on Aug. 21, anti-Zionist activist Tony Greenstein was acquitted by a jury of ‘Terrorism’ Charges at Kingston Crown Court.
On August 4 a tribunal in London ruled that antI-Zionism was a legitimate and protected position to take in a democratic society. There will be a remedial hearing to determine how Prof. David Miller will be compensated for his wrongful dismissal by Bristol University, including by his re-employment in good standing, lest this wrong have career-ending consequence.
Please Donate to
CN’s Summer
Fund Drive Today!
What a can of worms Dr. Miller revealed in that excellent interview. The anti-semitic trope dashed out every time anyone criticises israel is like a broken record now. However that appears to have been remedied, by the “victory” won in the case of wrongful dismissal.
Was James Jesus Angleton a Jew?
He was one evil dude, responsible for a lot of murder and mayhem for no justification.
What made him so loyal to Israel, over the US?
He was not Jewish. According to Grok AI:
Angleton’s close alignment with Israel was not ethnic or religious—he was a non-Jewish, secular anti-communist—but grew from a mix of personal experience, ideology, and perceived strategic payoff during the Cold War.
mondoweiss.net
He first encountered Zionist networks in Italy after World War II while working for the OSS. There he monitored Jewish refugees heading to Palestine and developed contacts with figures such as Teddy Kollek. Exposure to Holocaust evidence at Nuremberg shifted his earlier, Pound-influenced disdain for Jews toward sympathy for their suffering and for the idea of Jewish national revival.
israellobbyandamericanpolicy.org
The relationship became operationally central in 1951 when he was given exclusive CIA liaison with Israeli intelligence (Mossad and Shin Bet). Allen Dulles assigned him the “Israel account” precisely because he was neither an Arabist nor Jewish, which Dulles thought would avoid institutional bias. The deal, as Angleton later described it, was straightforward: the United States would not collaborate against Arab states but would cooperate fully on Soviet-bloc intelligence and communism.
azradale.substack.com
The payoff arrived quickly. In 1956 Israel delivered Nikita Khrushchev’s secret speech denouncing Stalin—an intelligence coup that Angleton regarded as one of the most valuable of the era. He credited Jewish émigrés from the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe with producing tens of thousands of reports and unique access that Western services lacked. He came to see Israel as an indispensable, ideologically motivated partner rather than a potential security risk.
jns.org
Personal ties reinforced the professional ones. He maintained close, sometimes weekly, contact with successive Israeli intelligence chiefs (Reuven Shiloah, Isser Harel, Meir Amit, Amos Manor) and with Yitzhak Rabin. He admired their competence, operational boldness, and willingness to act on ideology rather than money. Over time he internalized a Zionist view of Israel as a model of uncompromising resistance to Soviet influence.
azradale.substack.com
This combination—post-Holocaust sympathy, a high-value intelligence partnership against the USSR, and personal rapport—produced a loyalty that lasted until he lost control of the Israel account in 1973–74. Critics later argued that it sometimes led him to subordinate U.S. non-proliferation policy and other official positions to the relationship. Israelis, for their part, honored him after his death with a discreet memorial in Jerusalem.
israellobbyandamericanpolicy.org
28 web pages
Seeing the light of actual international reality as it factually is, it’s very sickening to have to say: A Victory Over Ultranationalist Israeli Zionism is NOT Victory, until it no longer dominates, not only the Levant and Southwestern Asia, but the entire global mind.
“A” Victory, not “The” Victory.
A “victory”? Being affirmed by a tribunal somewhere the right to criticise a political ideology is a “victory”? No, this is merely a small, overdue sanity-check.
Given the force being spent by Israel and its minions in the West this is indeed a victory, and a significant one.
As I ponder the extraordinatly extent to which those who have become ardent Zionists are convinced of the ‘rightness’ the ‘rightousness’ of their cause: the creation and sustaining of Israel as it was originally formed and, most likely, as its expansion is envisioned.
I ask myself, what other groups exist who hold particular perspectives, beliefs unique to their group.? I think of Catholics and abortion, divorce. I think of Republicans who see Democrats as ‘the enemy.’ Democrats who see Republicans as ‘the enemy.’ the list goes on. We have, in the main, societies that enculturate their citizens to accept beliefs that are held without question. Those who dare to question these beliefs are traitors, apostates, despised, denigrated.
I am inclined to recall the historic abusive treatment of the Jewish people, people who followed the Jewish faith. The ghettos. The overt denial of the purposeful diminishment of any who followed the Jewish faith. This creation of ‘the other’ – those who do not conform to what the powerful have decreed to be sacrosanct. The Catholic church of Rome, the Church of England. This list is long. The attitudes similar. The justification of the horrific treatment of those deemed to be ‘other.’
Given the depth of belief, the depth and breadth to which ardent Zionists have gained power economically and politically – given the willingness, the eagerness with which we witness the ongoing genocide, the aggressive/abusive settlers, all of the horrors we witness daily – I find this prospect frightening, coupled with the years of abuse committed world wide by the US (long before as well as during Trump), the exceptionalism that pervades the thinking of so many in and out of power in the US.
The question: given the entrenchment of opinions, given a culture that is totally unaccustomed to the serious exchange and consideration of a variety of perspectives, is there any possibility of bringing about the shifts, the changes in perspective and understanding at the very least, thoughout a broad segment of the population, that might lead toward a peaceful, humane future?
A daunting set of tasks before us.
Right On! Congratulations and much apprieation to all the brave anti-Zionist activists mentioned above.
We must never be afraid to express our FREE SPEECH. We should use it at every opportunity to repudiate the Zionist argument of why the world should tolerate their intolerant behavior.
FREE SPEECH!! USE IT OR LOSE IT! FREE PALISTINE!…to the Zionists…we are ALL Palestinians.
A small victory against the powerful .Good to see the UK courts to finally do what the courts of justice should be doing .