Category: Protest

  • Jason Alpert-Wisnia, a student photojournalist, was briefly detained by New York City police officers while covering a pro-Palestinian protest on the Manhattan Bridge on May 11, 2024.

    Alpert-Wisnia, who works for New York University’s student newspaper and also freelances, told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker that he was documenting a protest that began in downtown Brooklyn. When a group of about 100 people split off and began heading over the bridge toward Manhattan, he followed alongside a fellow photojournalist who is an NYU alum.

    “We got in front of them — myself, him and a couple other journalists — and after we got past what is the first tower, I could see at least two dozen officers down the bridge. I took some photos of them from a distance and then I turned around to get some photos of the protesters,” Alpert-Wisnia said. “At some point, an officer came up behind me and said, ‘Put your arms behind your back.’ So I did. I complied.”

    He told the Tracker he identified himself as a journalist repeatedly and was wearing credentials issued by the mayor’s office and by the New York Press Photographers Association when he was zip-tied.

    Several minutes later, Alpert-Wisnia said, a community affairs officer approached him and asked for his press card: “He looked at me and said, ‘He’s press, let him go.’ And so they released me.” Alpert-Wisnia said he continued to document the arrests, but couldn’t get very close, as officers were ordering everyone to get off the bridge.

    “I knew, obviously, by going on that bridge that there was a risk, but it still caught me off guard regardless,” Alpert-Wisnia said. “Definitely, as a student journalist, this has been a learning experience.”

    At least two other journalists were detained while reporting on the bridge that day; both were released without charges.

    The New York City Police Department did not respond to a request for comment.


    This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • On 21 May, EachOther and LUSH activists took action over the Tories increasing toxic rhetoric on human rights.

    Toxic Tory rhetoric on human rights

    Over the past four years, government ministers have increasingly ramped up rhetoric demonising human rights campaigners. For instance, former prime minister Boris Johnson coined the phrase ‘‘lefty lawyer’ to malign law firms fighting the government’s corruption. Meanwhile, Suella Braverman referred to human rights campaigners as ‘tofu-eating wokerati”. There have been other cases of government ministers accusing lawyers of being ‘un-british’ and an enemy of the people.

    Now as some politicians try to make human rights a dirty word, activists have gathered at Parliament Square to wash away the stigma.

    The activists were from award-winning human rights charity EachOther, as well as high street cosmetics brand LUSH.  Protesters took a shower outside the Houses of Parliament, next to giant boxes of shower powder labelled Human Rights.

    LUSH and EachOther activists stage a shower protest in parliament square. Two activists stand having a shower in their swimming costume and trunks, while others hold a shower head over them and big box mock ups of LUSH's 'human rights' product that reads: "human rights for everyone"

    LUSH and EachOther countering dangerous disinformation

    Their action is part of a new campaign to educate the public and counter disinformation on human rights ahead of the next general election.

    As the Canary previously reported, EachOther and LUSH launched the campaign in light of the fact that:

    In the last five years, the UK has witnessed an increase in threats to minimise, remove or replace human rights laws in the UK – by the government. These are laws that currently protect all of our day-to-day lives and are there as a safety net should we ever need them.

    Over the last decade, the UK government has proposed withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – which is now a genuine threat.

    Moreover, as EachOther and LUSH have pointed out, Sunak hasn’t ruled out of the UK leaving the ECHR. Of course, this would be an unprecedented move. Specifically, it would spell the first time a nation party to the ECHR has jumped ship on rules it helped to create.

    Now, this alarming rhetoric is on the rise as the general election creeps ever closer.

    Since Sunak stated that he won’t allow ‘foreign courts’ – referring to the ECHR – to block the controversial Rwanda migration partnership, there has been growing misinformation about the European Court of Human Rights. The European Convention protects over 800 million people, and the European Court has considered over 800,000 cases since it was formed.

    EachOther and LUSH have teamed up to set the record straight.

    Protecting rights for future generations

    Notably, their campaign highlights that the ECHR isn’t in fact, a “foreign court”. In reality, it was a British Conservative politician and future Lord High Chancellor called Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, who was central to drafting the Convention. Winston Churchill was one of its biggest cheerleaders. Importantly, every member has its own judge, including the UK.

    Alongside their action in parliament square, the pair have created a product, shower-powder (showder), called ‘Human rights’, which will be available in UK LUSH stores between 16 May to 2 June. ‘Human rights’ sold out in Oxford street in the first two days of launching. LUSH is donating the total sales revenue (minus VAT) from the product to the campaign.

    Additionally, EachOther has published a briefing paper, which outlines the damaging rhetoric used in recent years surrounding human rights.

    Editor in chief of EachOther Emma Guy stated:

    The majority of the public (two-thirds) say they have little or no confidence that they have a say on the decisions made by the government – this is a growing concern for decision making on human rights issues in the UK. Over the past four years, human rights have increasingly been presented in a negative light.

    Guy continued:

    The way we talk about certain issues is important because it can be used for political gain, to fuel misinformation or to misrepresent something or someone. Today is the start of reminding ourselves that collectively, we can recognise our rights, invoke them and continue to educate each other about them – to protect them for future generations.

    Feature image and in-text image via Anna Fuchs/EachOther

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Georgia’s sweeping and political application of conspiracy law echoes a tactic that shattered the left roughly a hundred years ago, when the U.S. government targeted socialist parties and militant unions with laws against criminal syndicalism, espionage, and sedition.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • The following article is a comment piece from Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC).

    On Tuesday 21 May, John Woodcock (Lord Walney) – inaccurately described by the government as an ‘Independent Adviser on Political Violence and Disruption’ – published his much-trailed report calling for a crackdown on democratic protests. Michael Gove chose the same day to deliver a speech falsely accusing those who have marched for Palestinian rights of antisemitism.

    This comes just a day after International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor, Karim A.A. Khan KC, applied for a series of arrest warrants for war crimes, including for the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Yoav Gallant, Israel’s minister of defence.

    Woodcock: a paid lobbyist who should be ignored

    John Woodcock is a paid lobbyist for weapons manufacturers and fossil fuel companies and a former chair of Labour Friends of Israel. Several of his recommendations are transparent attempts to use the law to further his political disagreement with the recent marches in support of Palestinian rights. Others are extraordinarily draconian – including an effective ban on any protests outside council chambers.

    Using police resources to suppress political protests might serve the interests of Woodcock’s corporate paymasters but would seriously undermine long-held democratic principles. This comes on the very day that Liberty has won a court case to prevent an unlawful attempt by the government to overturn the will of parliament and restrict the right to demonstrate.

    Everyone who truly cares about preserving democratic freedoms will utterly reject these proposals. This thoroughly compromised report should be allowed to gather dust in the obscurity it deserves.

    Palestine protests are not antisemitic

    Unlike Michael Gove, the organisers of the recent demonstrations against Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza have a proud track-record of challenging all forms of racism.

    Every single one of the fourteen London demonstrations for Palestinian rights that we have organised in the past seven months has been attended by thousands of Jewish people, including an organised and highly visible Jewish bloc and Jewish speakers on every platform.

    At our demonstration in Hyde Park last month, Jewish Holocaust survivor, Stephen Kapos, spoke to a crowd of 200,000 – probably the largest audience ever addressed by a Holocaust survivor in Britain.

    Anyone who was genuinely motivated by a desire to combat antisemitism, as opposed to cynically shield the state of Israel from legitimate accountability, would celebrate rather than attempt to dismiss these facts.

    Those who continue to demonstrate against Israel’s genocide in Gaza, calling for a ceasefire, and for Palestinian human rights and international law to be upheld, are driven by consistent anti-racism. They are exercising precious democratic rights and represent the views of the vast majority of British people who, unlike the government, support these noble goals.

    Woodcock: trying to distract from Israel’s horrors

    These latest smears cannot be allowed to distract from the horrors that Israel continues to inflict on the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip. The British government must end its complicity with Israel’s criminal violence by halting the arms trade with Israel and give full support to both the ICC and the ongoing work of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), where Israel is currently on trial for genocide.

    Ben Jamal, PSC director, said:

    The resumption of these baseless attacks by Michael Gove and John Woodcock amount to an admission: apologists for Israel’s genocidal violence and system of apartheid have lost the democratic and legal arguments, but continue to attempt to delegitimise Palestinian solidarity. They will not succeed.

    At a moment when Israel is on trial in the world’s highest court for the crime of genocide and the day after its Prime Minister has been threatened with ICC arrest warrants for war crimes, it is grotesque that these smears continue.

    The real issues are that the UK government continues to arm Israel, refuses to resume funding to UNRWA, and is attempting to protect Israel from legal accountability. Far from stopping the genocide in Gaza as required under international law, the UK is complicit and actors such as Gove and Woodcock attempt to deflect from that fact.

    They discredit themselves, not the Palestinian solidarity movement.

    Featured image via

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Ministers should think again after judges ruled the authoritarian move to constrain demonstrations was unlawful

    Judges in the high court have found that the former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protest. That is a very good thing for society and democracy. The rights of non-violent assembly are among our fundamental freedoms, providing a touchstone to distinguish between a free society and a totalitarian one. Liberty, the civil rights campaigners who took the government to court, ought to be congratulated for standing up for all our rights. At the heart of this case was whether a minister could, without primary legislation, decide what words meant in law. The court, thankfully, thought that such matters were best left to the dictionary.

    During protests by environmental groups in the summer of 2023, Ms Braverman had decided to rule by diktat. Consulting only the police, and not the protesters who would have been affected, she used so-called Henry VIII powers that the government had conferred upon itself a year earlier. These allowed her to lower the threshold at which the police would intervene to impose conditions on public protest, defining “serious disruption” as anything “more than minor”. There’s an ocean of difference between the two. But Ms Braverman was unconcerned that she was shamefully pursuing a nakedly authoritarian move to constrain the right of peaceful protest by stripping words of their meaning.

    Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • The Conservative government sidestepped parliament in order to increase anti-protest police powers. Now, on 21 May, the High Court ruled that the government acted unlawfully.

    High Court: Tory executive overreach

    The government used secondary legislation to change the law so that police can crackdown on protests that are considered ‘more than a minor’ disruption. This lowered the threshold from anything causing a ‘serious disruption’.

    The High Court said the government ignored the will of parliament in doing so. The House of Lords had already rejected the provision.

    Secondary legislation, known as Henry VIII powers, shifts power to the executive because the law changes face less parliamentary scrutiny and cannot be amended.

    Under the June 2023 overreach measures, police have arrested hundreds of protestors including climate activist Greta Thunberg.

    Indeed, the Home Office estimated that its lowering of the threshold would increase police intervention in protests by 50%.

    The government says it will appeal the High Court decision.

    “Victory for democracy”

    Campaign group Liberty brought the successful court challenge where the High Court also found the government acted unlawfully by only consulting police groups about the legislation. The government did not consult protest groups.

    Liberty’s director Akiko Hart said:

    This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the Government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants.

    We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the Government respects that. These dangerous powers were rejected by Parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the Government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too.

    This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights

    CEO of Public Law Project Shameem Ahmad said:

    We welcome the Court’s ruling, which recognises that our rights and constitution cannot be unilaterally and arbitrarily undermined by the executive and that ministers must not act outside of the powers granted to them by Parliament.

    Attempts to further restrict the right to protest

    Suella Braverman, who was home secretary at the time the government enacted the measures, has also called for ministers to gain the power to outright ban protests.

    She accused anti-genocide marches in solidarity with Palestine of “mass extremism” and of ‘antisemitic chants’.

    Both Labour and Tory leadership are engaged in the smearing of those protesting Israel’s conduct. In Oct 2023, Labour leader Keir Starmer suspended Andy McDonald MP for comments he made at a pro-Palestine march.

    The apparently “deeply offensive” words were:

    We won’t rest until we have justice, until all people, Israelis and Palestinians, between the river and the sea can live in peaceful liberty. Free, free Palestine!

    Starmer also enabled the arrest and charging of three pro-Palestine Youth Demand activists for protesting outside his house.

    Establishment managers in both Labour and Tory are seeking to restrict our rights to freedom of expression and assembly. Fortunately, the High Court ruling has quashed the government using executive power to do so.

    Featured image via Liberty – X

    By James Wright

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The following article is a comment piece from Palestine Action

    On Tuesday 21 May, secretary of state James Cleverly will present former Labour MP John Woodcock (otherwise known as Lord Walney)’s 240-page review on disruptive protest to the House of Commons. The report’s release, initially set to be on Wednesday 15 May (Nakba Day) was delayed, after Palestine Action’s lawyers pointed out Woodcock’s failure to meet his legal obligations as an independent advisor to the government.

    Namely, he did not consult Palestine Action and the other groups mentioned in his report on its contents, nor provided the opportunity to ask for clarifications or a right to reply.  

    Woodcock: avoiding accountability via parliament

    Cleverly will now lay the document before MPs following the ‘Motion for Unopposed Return’ procedure, under the pretext that it was written by an independent advisor.

    This enables the report to be published as a House of Commons paper, which means it comes with the protection of parliamentary privilege — a form of legal immunity that prevents any group named in the report from claiming defamation.

    By publishing the review in this manner, Cleverly and Woodcock are using procedure in a deliberate attempt to avoid accountability – described by Shami Chakrabarti in a recent news article published by the Guardian as an ‘abuse of parliamentary privilege.’  

    John Woodcock, the so-called independent advisor responsible for writing the report, claimed to apply an “objective standard” throughout — though it was only in October 2023 that he referred to Palestine Action in a tweet as “Hamas’s little helpers.”

    Far from impartial

    This assertion of impartiality seems even more dubious, when one considers his ties to the arms industry and long-standing connections with the Israel lobby group “Labour Friends of Israel” — where he acted as chair of the organisation from July 2011 to January 2013. He also makes frequent visits to Israel, with his most recent trip taking place between 2-7 January 2024. Described as a “solidarity visit,” Woodcock’s flights and accommodation were paid for by the European Leadership Network (ElNet UK) – all amidst the ongoing genocide in Gaza. 

    Currently, Woodcock is advisor to the “Purpose Business Coalition”.

    One of its clients is Leonardo UK, which has worked with the Purpose Coalition since March 2022. Palestine Action identifies Leonardo UK as an arms company that is facilitating Israel’s genocide against the Palestinian people.

    The weapons manufacturer has been a key focus of the group’s direct-action campaign to shut Elbit down and all its affiliates, with sites across the country repeatedly targeted — from activists occupying one of Leonardo’s factories in Edinburgh, to spray painting the London HQ 

    Shilling for arms manufacturers and the West

    Whilst Woodcock registered his interest as chair of the Purpose Business Coalition, he excluded his role as chair for the Purpose of Defence Coalition (PDC) – a distinct entity from the Purpose Business Coalition.

    The PDC website was promptly removed, alongside a page on Leonardo and the Purpose Coalition, over the weekend after Woodcock was questioned on it. At the PDC’s launch event on 18 July 2023 in Parliament, which was “powered by Leonardo UK”, Woodcock said the following [emphasis added]:

    Russia’s war on Ukraine has caused a seismic shift in the world. It has highlighted the crucial nature of defence in upholding our values and the need for a vibrant, well-regulated defence industry. The best defence companies have always acted with high ethical standards but their central role in helping the Ukrainian people to defend their sovereignty, and the significant investment they make in the communities where they operate, is rightly prompting ESG investors to look again at the sector. 

    That is why I am proud to launch the Purpose Defence Coalition, part of the wider Purpose Coalition, to bring together the defence sector’s most innovative leaders and businesses to share best practice and develop policy solutions.

    Featured image via Palestine Action and Wikimedia

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Tories have quietly changed the law to allow arms factories to call themselves “prohibited places”. This is under the guise of national security. It means companies such as Elbit can get protesters like Palestine Action arrested for simply protesting over Israel – and don’t think Elbit is already taking full advantage of this.

    Arms factories: National Security Act protection

    Campaigners say they will not be intimidated and will continue taking action against the arms trade despite a clause in the National Security Act that potentially outlaws protests at hundreds of arms companies across the country. This includes some of the UK’s biggest arms companies and others who are complicit in arming Israel’s genocide in Gaza, including BAE Systems and Elbit Systems.

    The act, which received Royal Assent in July 2023, was highlighted as a draconian threat by the Network for Police Monitoring (Netpol) in 2022 in relation to protests outside military bases.

    However, campaigners in Bristol noticed on 25 April that Elbit Systems is now displaying notices advising people that its premises is now a “prohibited place” under the act. A notice to defence contractors issued in April 2024 further reveals that its provisions have been extended to all arms companies that have contracts to supply UK defence.  The document also advises companies to display signage to show they are “prohibited places”:

    According to the notice, under the act, the factories and offices of these companies are now designated as “prohibited places” with a raft of offences attached to them.

    Banged up for protesting

    This includes an offence, with a maximum penalty of 14 years, if a person “accesses, enters, inspects, passes over or under, approaches or is in the vicinity of a prohibited place” and they “know or ought reasonably to know” their actions are “prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom.”

    There is also a lesser offence, with a maximum penalty of six months imprisonment for accessing, entering or inspecting without prejudicing the interests of the UK.

    The act also gives the police new authoritarian powers to compel anyone in, or adjacent to, a prohibited place to leave the area if an officer “reasonably believe[s] that exercising the power is necessary to protect the safety or interests of the United Kingdom.” Failure to comply with an order carries a maximum sentence of three months imprisonment.

    However, a briefing published by Netpol highlights that while the use of signs and the threat of this legislation is designed to scare and deter people, protest against arms companies is still legal.

    The briefing also points out that while there is potential for repression and abuse of this legislation, there will be a very high threshold for a successful prosecution that shows anti-arms trade protesters are acting against the UK’s safety and interest.

    Repressing protest at arms factories

    Campaign Against Arms Trade’s media coordinator Emily Apple said:

    This is clearly an attempt to repress and deter protests against arms companies – but this is an attempt that will fail. These companies are complicit in the horrific war crimes Israel is committing in Gaza. They are profiting from genocide, and ordinary people across the country are taking action on an almost daily basis against these merchants of death.

    We will not be intimidated and we will not be deterred. Our government is refusing to impose an arms embargo despite overwhelming evidence Israel is breaking International Humanitarian Law so it is down to all of us to take action. It is not in the UK’s interest, and it does not make the UK safe, to break international law and arm a genocide, and we will challenge any attempt to use this act against campaigners.

    Network for Police Monitoring’s campaigns coordinator Kevin Blowe said:

    The wave of recent new anti-protest laws over the last few years have left many in the movements we work with uncertain about their rights and the limits of police powers. We feel this confusion is exactly what government wanted and the intention behind new signs threatening arrest on the grounds of “national security”.

    This is why it is so important for campaigners to know their rights and stand their ground when confronted by police efforts to try and move them. In Netpol’s experience, the prospect of arbitrary misuse of the stated aims of this legislation, simply because it is convenient in the moment for the police when facing demonstrators, is far greater than the likelihood of successful prosecutions.

    This is one of the reasons why we call on the Home Office to publish – sooner rather than later – its promised guidelines on how prohibited places are “policed appropriately”. We need to know what to expect – or else to expect the worst.

    Featured image via Netpol

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A news crew with KOMO-TV was harassed and its camera vandalized while reporting on student protests at the University of Washington in Seattle on May 7, 2024.

    Students erected an encampment on the Liberal Arts Quadrangle, the main gathering place on campus, on April 29, The Seattle Times reported, calling for a cease-fire in the Israel-Gaza war, divestment from Israeli companies and for the university to sever any ties with Boeing, which is a supplier for the Israeli Air Force.

    KOMO-TV reported that the demonstration grew to its largest size on May 7, with more than 200 pro-Palestinian protesters. Conservative commentator and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk appeared on campus that day for a speaking event and set up his own tent near the encampment.

    Amid heightened tensions, KOMO-TV reported that its news crew witnessed at least one fight, and that individuals sprayed the crew’s camera with spray paint twice.

    KOMO-TV News Director Philip Bruce did not respond to a request for additional information.


    This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Climate and pro-Palestine activists joined forces to interrupt the Lloyds Annual General Meeting (AGM) to demand the bank stop financing in fossil fuel companies and companies profiting from Israel’s occupation and genocide.

    Lloyds AGM: disrupted over its complicity

    Several shareholders interrupted the chair of the meeting, demanding Lloyds rule out investments in coal, oil and gas, and arms companies – and companies operating on Occupied Palestinian territory:

    Despite a partnership with the Woodland Trust and claims that they will reduce the carbon emissions they finance by over 50% by 2030, Lloyds invested $1.8bn into the fossil fuel industry in 2023 alone. Between 2016-2022, Lloyds provided $15bn of financing for the fossil fuel companies. This includes financing of $720m in oil giant Shell.

    In addition to this, research by PAX conducted in 2022 showed that Lloyds Banking Group provided almost €4.5bn in financial services to arms companies, and was the 8th largest financier for arms companies in Europe. This includes €273.9m of financing for BAE Systems and €455.5m to Lockheed Martin.

    Protestors condemned Lloyds’ investments – but predictably security removed them:

    It must act now

    Cath Dyer from Christian Climate Action, said:

    Lloyd’s could be the first major bank in the world to be completely fossil-free. At this moment, there are countless organisations around the UK that are looking for ethical banking options. You are telling us that you are maximising the returns for your investors and at the same time, you are turning business away.

    22 universities and colleges are looking for a fossil-free bank right now. But they won’t switch their accounts to Lloyds as long as Lloyds keeps its ties with oil giants like Shell that are destroying our planet and are accused of human rights abuses.

    Gordon Keenan from Scottish Friends of Palestine said:

    We call on Lloyds to stop financing arms companies BAE systems and Lockheed Martin, which both supply the Israeli military. We are simply calling on the bank to comply with international law. As the ICJ has ruled, Palestinians must be protected from genocide.

    Lloyds must stop financing arms companies now if it does not want to be held responsible for genocide and human rights abuses linked to occupation.

    Josie, a climate justice campaigner, said:

    The climate crisis and Israeli occupation, apartheid and genocide are intrinsically linked issues. Both have their roots in settler colonialism and both rely on financial institutions like Lloyds to operate. On top of this, Israeli occupation of Palestine has long relied on the contamination of water supplies and the destruction of nature.

    The movement for climate justice and for a free Palestine are united and Lloyds must listen.

    Nat Gorodnitski from Breaking the Bank and SOS-UK said:

    Lloyds prides itself on its reputation as a high street bank that everyday people can rely on, but its financing strategy is unreliable and destructive. Most of us in Scotland do not want the Rosebank oil field to go ahead. We don’t want to prop up oil giants like Shell that are destroying our planet and are accused of human rights abuses. Lloyds must stop financing arms and fossil fuels now.

    Featured image via Tipping Point UK

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The 11 to 17 May 2024 is myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) Awareness Week. This year, two major conferences are taking place throughout the week. One is the inaugural ‘Unite To Fight’ conference – a first of its kind community-driven, free long Covid and ME event. The other is the British Association of Clinicians in ME/CFS’s (BACME) annual gathering. And unlike ‘Unite To Fight’, BACME’s conference affairs are taking place behind closed doors. Given this, alongside a raft of other concerns, members of the ME community, coordinated by campaign group the Chronic Collaboration, have written to the group’s chair.

    Notably, the letter sets out a damning litany of BACME’s historic and current harms towards people living with the devastating disease.

    Behind the scenes of BACME

    Since 2021, BACME has been registered as a charity for medical professionals moving in ME research, treatment, and care. However, the organisation – of 200 paying members – has a longer and considerably controversial history. As the Canary has previously explained:

    BACME boasts that its charitable objective is the “relief of sickness for the public benefit”.

    However, its laudable-sounding aims obfuscate a contentious history in upholding a harmful status quo. For one, the organisation was the machination of notorious members of a lobby of medical professionals hell-bent on psychologising the chronic systemic disease. Members of the ME community sometimes refer to them as the “biopsychosocial” or “psych” lobby.

    Specifically, at its outset, professor Esther Crawley chaired the group. Crawley has a prolific record of endorsing treatments geared towards a psychosomatic basis for the disease.

    On top of this, the Chronic Collaboration dug into some of the speakers participating at this year’s conference. Alarmingly, BACME is platforming a prominent proponent of the flawed DWP part-funded PACE trial – Jessica Bavinton. You can read more on the PACE trial here, but essentially the study promulgated junk science to promote treatments actively harmful to ME patients.

    So of course, Bavinton is taking what is ostensibly a repackaged form of one of these damaging treatments – graded exercise therapy (GET) – to the conference.

    BACME “actively harming patients right now”

    As a result, members of the ME community, facilitated by campaign group the Chronic Collaboration have laid out a number of these issues in an open letter. It starts by stating:

    As individuals living with, or affected by, myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME, also referred to as chronic fatigue syndrome, CFS), we are growing increasingly concerned by the direction of travel of BACME, and the media reports around what we consider to be harmful and damaging approaches to caring for with people with ME.

    We are aware BACME has what many consider to be a controversial history. We are also aware that BACME has taken what it considers steps to rectify its previous conduct. However, as patients we feel none of that has been sufficient and that BACME is still actively harming patients right now.

    Following this, it articulated a number of the issues that the Canary, the Chronic Collaboration, and many members of the ME community have been highlighting. Perhaps most significantly, the letter expressed the Canary’s findings that healthcare teams are using BACME guidance documents to inform their treatment of patients with ME.

    In particular, the letter references the appalling abuse, gaslighting, and neglect that hospital staff have been putting severe ME patients through. The Canary has comprehensively documented the situation for three such women with severe ME – Millie, Carla, and Karen – that NHS hospitals are failing right now.

    As a result, the letter set out a number of key demands. These included:

    1. Make a public statement acknowledging that graded exercise therapy (GET) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) harmed patients, that PACE trail was flawed, and you support the NICE guidelines. So far to patient’s knowledge, you only issued a statement in October 2020 withdrawing support for the deconditioning model of ME.

    The ME community raises its collective voice

    Letter signees emphasised many of these concerns. One highlighted how BACME’s documents have directly harmed Millie, Carla, and their families:

    Patients are being mistreated, sectioned and deprivation of liberty in hospital right now. If your information does not align with the current NICE Guidelines, you are causing confusion. A hospital quoted using your info, instead of NICE. Patients will end up harmed by the wrong support, please rectify your materials and website.

    One member of the ME community wasn’t pulling any punches:

    People who are perpetuating harm to those with ME/CFS should be struck off and locked up, there is absolutely ZERO excuse for doing what you are doing. In no other disease do people have to use legal advice from a Barrister to safeguard themselves with a Limitation of Consent before they dare see a doctor because of the horrifyingly harmful effects of seeing someone ignorant of the current ME science.

    We are singled out for a level of physical and psychological abuse like no other group of patients through the denial of the biological reality of ME which you are promoting. You should be ashamed, and know that generations of abused patients may have passed before us and may still pass before the low lives doing us harm are stopped, but one day we as a patient group will see justice on this.

    Of course, it shouldn’t take a group of severely unwell patients to draw attention to all this. However, BACME’s persistent decision to give prominence to pillars of the “psych” lobby continues to undermine people living with ME at every turn. Given years of valid distrust, you’d think BACME would open its conference to the patient community. After all, what does it have to hide?

    Responding to the ME community letter would be a start. However, both the letter and comments make clear that BACME has a lot to do to prove it’s on the side of patients living with this devastating chronic illness. Evidently to date, people with ME have little reason to believe this is the case.

    Support the ME community and sign the open letter to BACME here.

    Feature image via the Chronic Collaboration/Organise

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Recently, extracts have been released to the media from the report of the government’s so-called ‘independent adviser on domestic violence and disruption’, former Labour Party MP John Woodcock – now known as Lord Walney. It reportedly calls for campaign groups such as Palestine Action and Just Stop Oil to be banned, despite the groups themselves being denied access to the report. However, Woodcock’s associations with Big Oil and Israel show he is far from independent.

    John Woodcock: we must STOP all this protest

    As BBC News reported:

    An upcoming report from Lord Walney, which BBC News has seen extracts of, will recommend a new category for proscribing “extreme protest groups”.

    It defines these as those which routinely use criminal tactics to try to achieve their aims.

    The sanctions could restrict a group’s ability to fundraise and its right to assembly in the UK.

    The Home Office said ministers would consider the recommendations.

    “Militant groups like Palestine Action and Just Stop Oil are using criminal tactics to create mayhem and hold the public and workers to ransom without fear of consequence,” Lord Walney said.

    “Banning terror groups has made it harder for their activists to plan crimes – that approach should be extended to extreme protest groups too.”

    Of course, many people would not consider Just Stop Oil and Palestine Action “extreme” – given they are taking action over the extinction-threatening climate crisis and Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.

    However, clearly Woodcock disagrees – and his links to certain companies and groups show why.

    Far from ‘independent’

    Woodcock serves vested corporate interests in the arms and fossil fuel industries, whose profits are being threatened by precisely the groups he’s proposing to ban.

    Amongst other roles, Woodcock:

    Woodcock also visited Israel in January of this year, funded by Elnet, an NGO promoting cooperation between Europe and Israel.

    The revelations echo a previous attempt by the so-called ‘think-tank’, Policy Exchange to brand climate activists as ‘extremists’ in 2019. It later emerged that Policy Exchange was also being funded by Big Oil.

    Woodcock: he’s a sham

    Tim Crosland, director of the climate justice charity Plan B, said:

    Lord Walney’s report is being presented as ‘independent’. But that’s not true. That’s dishonest. Lord Walney failed to disclose he is in fact the Chair of Defence Purpose Coalition, a group which represents the interests of arms companies, such as Leonardo, which Palestine Action are exposing for facilitating mass loss of life in Gaza.

    He is also a paid adviser to the Purpose Business Coalition, which includes BP, whose vast profits are threatened by Just Stop Oil. So his recommendations are not surprising, since they serve the vested corporate interests he represents. But it would be a shocking deception on the public for anyone to present those recommendations as ‘independent’.

    Huda Ammori, co-founder of Palestine Action, said:

    Whilst our government remains complicit in the ongoing Gaza genocide, it is our duty to take direct action to halt the production of weapons in Britain which is being used against the Palestinian people.

    It is a sham for the government to try and claim Lord Walney is an ‘independent’ advisor, who only a few months ago travelled to Israel, whilst families were being massacred a couple of hours away. By writing this report, he is working to protect the interests of Israel’s military supply chain, over the will of the British people, who overwhelmingly support an arms embargo on Israel.

    Unelected politicians with vested interests in arms companies and genocidal entities should not be given airtime to dictate British policy.

    Woodcock was originally supposed to release his full report on Wednesday 15 May. It is understood that legal issues may now cause a short delay to publication.

    Featured image via Parliament TV

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • YouTube has blocked access to dozens of videos containing the banned protest anthem “Glory to Hong Kong” for viewers in the territory following a court injunction last week that said it could be used as a “weapon” to bring down the government.

    The company, which is owned by Google’s parent Alphabet, said 32 videos featuring the banned song have been geoblocked and are now unavailable in the city, which is in the throes of an ongoing clampdown on public dissent.

    “We are disappointed by the Court’s decision but are complying with its removal order by blocking access to the listed videos for viewers in Hong Kong,” a YouTube spokesperson said in a statement sent to multiple media organizations. 

    “We’ll continue to consider our options for an appeal, to promote access to information,” the statement said, adding that Google search results for the song would also be invisible to users in the city.

    Public performances of the song are already banned in Hong Kong, as its lyrics are deemed illegal under stringent national security legislation.

    But the Court of Appeal on May 8 granted the government a temporary injunction to address its continued availability online, calling it a “weapon” that could be used to bring down the government, and an “insult” to China’s national anthem.

    “Glory to Hong Kong,” which sparked a police investigation after organizers played it in error at recent overseas sporting fixtures, was regularly sung by crowds of unarmed protesters during the 2019 protests, which ranged from peaceful mass demonstrations for full democracy to intermittent, pitched battles between “front-line” protesters and armed riot police.

    The song calls for freedom and democracy rather than independence, but was nonetheless deemed in breach of the law due to its “separatist” intent, officials and police officers said at the start of an ongoing citywide crackdown on public dissent and peaceful political activism.

    Government injunction

    Last week’s ban came after the Court of First Instance rejected the government’s application for an injunction on July 28, 2023 citing a “chilling effect” on freedom of expression.

    The injunction bans anyone in Hong Kong from “broadcasting, performing, printing, publishing, selling, offering for sale, distributing, disseminating, displaying or reproducing” the song with seditious intent, including online.

    The Hong Kong government had earlier asked Google to alter its search results, to no avail.

    While Hong Kong isn’t yet subject to China’s Great Firewall of blanket internet censorship, some websites linked to the protest movement including HKChronicles are blocked by internet service providers in the city. The website of the London-based rights group Hong Kong Watch is also blocked.

    A Wikipedia entry for the song appeared at the top of Google search results for the phrase “Hong Kong national anthem” outside the city on Wednesday. 

    The song’s labeling as “Hong Kong’s national anthem” on YouTube has been “highly embarrassing and hurtful to many people of Hong Kong, not to mention its serious damage to national interests,” the Court of Appeal judges said when they granted the injunction last week.

    Hong Kong passed a law in 2020 making it illegal to insult China’s national anthem on pain of up to three years’ imprisonment, following a series of incidents in which Hong Kong soccer fans booed their own anthem in the stadium.

    “The song has also been sung and promoted by prominent anti-China destabilizing forces and national security offenses fugitives in events provoking hatred towards the People’s Republic of China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government,” the judges wrote.

    Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Joshua Lipes.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Lee Heung Yeung for RFA Cantonese.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Wednesday 15 May marked 76 years since Israel militia, backed by the UK, committed the Nakba against the Palestinian people. It’s arguable it never actually ended. So, to mark the day and send a clear message to warmongering arms manufacturers propping up Israel’s genocidal regime, Palestine Action has hit several targets across the country.

    Palestine Action: marking the Nakba with action

    First, at UAV Engines Ltd (UEL) factory in Shenstone, Palestine Action activists locked on outside:

    Whilst at Teledyne Defence and Space (TDS) in Shipley, activists occupied and dismantled the roof of the factory to bring operations to a halt:

    At the Elbit subsidiary UEL, seven activists from Palestine Action locked down the entrance to the weapons factory, using both vehicles and lock-on boxes to prevent any shipments or workers from entering and continuing their complicity in genocide:

    Palestine Action Nakba

    The factory is a crucial part of Israel’s war machine because it is owned by Israel’s largest weapons firm, Elbit Systems — who provide 85% of Israel’s military drone fleet. Specifically, UEL designs and produces engines to power Elbit’s drones, which are used for both the surveillance and bombing of targets during the ongoing genocide.

    At Teledyne, Palestine Action activists occupied the factory’s roof and began taking it apart to render the factory inoperable:

    Palestine Action Nakba

    Through the occupation, Palestine Action activists halted the production of key components for missile systems – specifically missile filters – exported from the site to Israel.

    The US arms maker has often boasted of its involvement with missile products procured by Israel, including the AGM-HarpoonAIM-120 AMRAAM, and AGM-114 Hellfire missiles – the latter reportedly being used by Israel to strike Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza. The site also produces parts fitted in F-35 Fighter jets, such as the Phobos ESM System used in the AN/APG-81 AESA radar (listed as ‘radar warning receiver’ on their radar components page).

    All actions were taken to mark 76 years since the Nakba.

    The Nakba has never ended

    The Nakba, (‘The Catastrophe’ in English) saw Zionist militias, armed and trained by the British Armed Forces, expel over 750,000 Palestinians from their homeland. These militias destroyed over 500 towns and villages, and massacred over 13,000 people – including entire families.

    This started an ongoing process of disposession and ethnic cleansing, which culminated in the ongoing genocide being waged by the Zionist entity since 7 October 2023.

    Since that date, over 35,000 Palestinians have been killed by the settler colonial state, with almost half of that number being children. Not only that, but the survivors are repeatedly being forced to flee on dangerous death marches to “safe places” where Israel’s military will inevitably bombard them again.

    A Palestine Action spokesperson said:

    It is a common phrase by Palestinians to say: the Nakba is not an event but a process. And just like the actions of Israel today were set in motion by the Nakba, so too was Britain’s complicity.

    The Zionist militias which perpetrated the catastrophe were trained by British soldiers, and today we see history repeat when Britain allows the companies we have targeted today to continue with their business backing brutality whilst Israel butchers Palestinians en mass. This is a crime, and one we fully intend to stop. As we have always said: we won’t stop till the Nakba does.

    Featured image via Neil Terry Photography and additional images via Neil Terry Photography and Palestine Action

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Students are upping their game when it comes to anti-genocide encampments on UK universities. Protests and activism over Israel’s continued war crimes in Gaza have been spreading across the country. However, much like their US counterparts, UK students are now facing attacks from Zionists – but so far, cops have remained quite… for now.

    From the US to the UK via Greece and the Netherlands, students take action

    As the Canary has documented, there have already been violent crackdowns around the student protests in the US. Meanwhile, protests have been erupting in Greece, too:

    In the Netherlands, cops are cracking down in a similar fashion to the US:

    Now, as the Canary previously reported these protests are now spreading to UK universities. Encampments have been set up in both Manchester and Sheffield – as well as Edinburgh, Bristol, Leeds, Newcastle, Goldsmiths in London, and Warwick.

    For example, in Sheffield students are protesting over their university’s complicity in Israel genocide. The university’s involvement in F-35 production supplying Israel is part of a pattern of close ties with the arms industry. In 2022, a freedom of information request (FOI) revealed that Sheffield took at least £72m in investment from the arms trade over the preceding decade.

    Now, these protests are spreading further.

    UK universities’ encampments: spreading like wildfire

    Falmouth and Exeter Students have begun their solidarity encampment – calling on students, faculty, and staff to resist the University of Exeter’s complicity in genocide:

    The new group “Fal Exe Solidarity Camp” has been established on Penryn Campus, just outside the exchange.

    A spokesperson for the group said:

    Both universities have investments in companies which are profiting from genocide – we as students reject the use of our money being used to fund war crimes. We are calling on people to come down, join us, support us and get involved in the conversation whilst we work together to formulate our list of demands”.

    Many groups at Universities across the UK have followed suit from America in taking to their campuses and joining in protest camps. As we watch a genocide continue to unfold on our screens, and the Israeli state’s aggression towards Rafah brings death and misery to Palestinian families, the call for academic institutions to cut ties with companies complicit in war crimes grows louder every day.

    We will remain in our encampment until our demands our met, and continue to pressure the universities to divest from genocide.

    King’s College London also saw students set up an encampment:

    Queen Mary University saw similar:

    Over at SOAS, campaign group Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) helped make student’s encampment accessible – as the university clearly wasn’t going to do it:

    Far-right and Zionists come out to play

    However, in other places the far right has been on the move. Racist, far-right Turning Point claimed that locals had ‘had enough’ of the Oxford Uni encampment. However, it’s more likely the group or a similar one shipped its goons in to disrupt it:

    This is because locals don’t all turn up in a taxi:

    Moreover, someone identified two of the goons:

    Similar has happened at University College London:

    Cops defending Israel’s genocide

    This came after cops arrested four activists on Saturday 4 May outside the student encampment at UCL. Police nicked them under terrorism laws – for holding a banner with a peace dove and bright blue sky on it:

    As the Canary previously wrote of the situation in the US:

    Student protests across America and around the rest of the world are not antisemitic – they’re a response to the interminable siege of Palestine.

    What else are students supposed to? Sit back and watch as universities in Palestine are razed to the ground? Do nothing while the US arms Israel? Twiddle their fingers while experts predict that 10,000 Palestinians are buried in rubble that will take years to clear?

    What are the police supposed to do then, you may ask?

    Stay the hell away.

    With UK university encampments spreading like wildfire, cops over here would do well to take that advice.

    Featured image via X screengrab

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.


  • This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Independent journalist Alissa Azar was shoved to the ground and later arrested by law enforcement while covering a pro-Palestinian protest at Portland State University in downtown Portland, Oregon, on May 2, 2024.

    Students first erected an encampment on April 25, The Oregonian reported, calling for a cease-fire in the Israel-Gaza war and for the university to sever any ties with Boeing, which is a supplier for the Israeli Air Force. Students then occupied the university’s main library, barricading one of the entrances.

    Azar told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker that she had been covering the student protests since they began. In the early morning of May 2, she said she received multiple calls informing her that Portland Police Bureau and Oregon State Police officers were on campus preparing to raid the encampment.

    After initially clearing demonstrators out of the library, law enforcement engaged in standoffs with the students and other protesters, at times retreating before returning in what Azar characterized as violent pushes. She said it was during one of the latter instances that an officer shoved her to the ground while she was filming in front of the police line.

    “I kept getting pushed with the baton and they were telling me to get back even though at that point it was physically impossible,” Azar told the Tracker. “I ended up getting pushed to the ground and immediately after the cops rushed the group and started hitting and shoving everyone.”

    Following another period of retreat in which officers pulled back to a nearby campus building, Azar said, the demonstrators returned to the area around the library.

    “I was standing next to a bunch of other journalists, reporters and photographers,” Azar told the Tracker, noting that the group included those from local outlets and a reporter from The New York Times. She said the journalists were standing in a city park across from the library.

    She said that after some time the officers suddenly emerged from the other side of the building and began making arrests.

    “I was standing there recording because they immediately went after random people. It was a really intense situation: Almost everyone I saw that was arrested had already been detained and had more than four cops on them,” Azar said.

    In Azar’s footage of the incident, groups of police can be seen arresting each protester, and one officer waves at the journalist as he jogs past her. Seconds later, a Portland police officer approaches Azar and, in quick succession, says, “Leave. You’re under arrest.” He then pulls Azar’s arms behind her back and tells her that if she resists, force will be used against her.

    Azar said she was detained at approximately 7 p.m. She added that she was wearing press credentials issued by the National Press Photographers Association and believes the police targeted her for arrest.

    “Exactly one minute before my video of my arrest started, I took photos of two of the cops, one whispering to the other and just staring at me,” Azar said, sharing the photo with the Tracker. “After I was arrested they made a handful of comments about me and ‘our time together in 2020,’ because I was out there reporting almost every night at that time.” Azar extensively covered Portland protests against police brutality following the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, that year.

    Azar told the Tracker she was transported to the Multnomah County Justice Center, where she was processed and placed in a cell.

    She noted that when she was able to make a phone call to the National Lawyers Guild’s Mass Defense Hotline, officers played an alert that said “no third-party caller” every 10 to 15 seconds. “The person on the other end of the line said they sometimes do that to certain callers to mess with them,” Azar said.

    Azar told the Tracker she was released at around 1:30 a.m. the following day, charged with one count of criminal trespass. Her initial appearance hearing is scheduled for June 7.


    This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Two Just Stop Oil supporters were found guilty of damaging a snooker table, while another three are currently on trial for marching for 20 minutes. If you thought the law was an ass before – well, be prepared to be shocked.

    GUILTY… of throwing powder on a snooker table

    First, and two Just Stop Oil supporters have been found guilty of causing criminal damage/attempting to cause criminal damage. It was over their disruption of the World Snooker Championship at Sheffield’s Crucible Theatre last April.

    They interrupted the championship to call on the government to stop all new UK fossil fuel projects and to encourage UK sporting institutions to join the fight against the government’s genocidal fossil fuel policies.

    On 17 April 2023, during a first-round match at the World Snooker Championship at Sheffield’s Crucible Theatre, Eddie climbed onto a snooker table and threw orange powder paint, disrupting the match. Margaret also attempted to carry out the action on another table but was intercepted by referee Olivier Marteel before she could begin.

    The pair, who earlier entered pleas of not guilty, were granted unconditional bail by District Judge Daniel Curtis in January.

    Just Stop Oil: this is a ‘fucking catastrophe’

    Before the trial, Eddie Whittingham and Margaret Reid shared their thoughts.

    Whittingham, found guilty of causing criminal damage, said:

    It doesn’t matter what they do to us. They can arrest us, they can stick us in prison. But the world’s leading scientists have just said that we’re almost certainly going over 2.5C of global warming. This is a fucking catastrophe. Get on the streets and join us this summer as we take action at airports.

    Margaret Reid, found guilty of attempting to cause criminal damage, expressed her unwavering resolve, stating:

    I find it really daunting to face up to these massive institutions of power, but I will not be intimidated by whatever the justice system throws at me. Whatever the sentence is does not matter to me. What matters to me is stopping new oil and gas so we can prevent millions of deaths, the collapse of society, and the loss of everything we love.

    If we don’t stop the exploitation of new fossil fuels, then billions of people will face starvation, disease, and death. Earlier this week, a newspaper article quoted many of the world’s most respected climate scientists who were in utter despair over what more they could possibly do to provoke climate action from governments. I have far less power and influence than those scientists, but I won’t give up.

    A judge will sentence them on 10 July.

    On trial for marching

    Meanwhile, three Just Stop Oil supporters are still trial in a landmark case. They are the first to be prosecuted under Section 7 of the controversial new Public Order Act. The three took part in a twenty minute march, demanding the UK government commit to ending all licences and consents for new oil, gas and coal projects.

    Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall have appeared from 8 May before Judge Hehir at Southwark Crown Court, in a trial that is expected to last five days.

    The trial is the first ever for breach of Section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which covers acts “which prevent or significantly delay the operation of key infrastructure, including airports, railways, printing presses, and oil and gas infrastructure”. This offence carries a maximum penalty of 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine, or both.

    The three took action on 15 November 2023, marching for less than twenty minutes along Cromwell Road in London. Following their arrest for peacefully marching, Phoebe Plummer was imprisoned, without trial, for 18 days, whilst Chiara Sarti was imprisoned for 19 days, without trial.

    Just Stop Oil: the law is an ass

    Speaking before the proceedings, Phoebe said:

    I can’t really believe this trial is even happening. I was on a march for less than 20 minutes, which I have already spent 2 1/2 weeks in prison for, and now over a week of judges, lawyers and a jury’s time has to be wasted to decide if that’s a crime.

    Under Draconian new protest laws I stand on trial after spending under 20 minutes on a march. I’m terrified about the rapid erosion of our right to speak out about what is happening and what measures the government will take to silence people sounding the alarm bells on the climate crisis in order to protect corporate profits.

    Chiara Sarti, a PhD student from Cambridge, also spoke before trial:

    We are on trial for daring to walk down a road for less than 20 minutes. They have already put us in prison over this for two weeks, using laws written by the Policy Exchange and bought for by big oil. We got to watch the lives of our friends in Uganda being sacrificed for the profits of oil barons at COP28 from the prison TV.

    Featured image via Just Stop Oil

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The following article is a comment piece from Palestine Action

    Former chair of Labour Friends of Israel, John Woodcock AKA ‘Lord’ Walney, plans to issue a report recommending the government implement new measures to deter Palestine Action’s direct action campaign against Israel’s largest weapons firm, Elbit Systems.

    Whilst acknowledging the “enormous damage” our campaign has had on the arms industry, he suggests a “proscription-light” label for us which aims to restrict our ability to meet and fundraise. He also wants “buffer zones” around weapons manufacturers like Elbit to protect the company from protests against them.

    John Woodcock: independent our arse

    Despite posing as an ‘independent’ government advisor, John Woodcock is deeply affiliated with the Israel lobby and the arms industry. He is the chairman of the Defence Purpose Coalition, which brings together senior figures within the arms industry to promote the deadly industry.

    Since 2011, he’s travelled to Israel numerous times on all paid for trips by the Israeli government and other pro-Israel lobby groups.

    During our nearly four year direct action campaign, we’ve faced arrests, raids, imprisonment, beatings, convictions, and more by a state desperate to protect the Zionist war machine, over the freedom of their own citizens.

    Despite this, our movement’s determination and resilience has resulted in Elbit permanently closing two weapons factories, being dropped by several partners and losing 100’s of £millions in contracts with the Ministry of Defence.

    We are seven months into the Gaza genocide, and Woodcock thinks this scare tactic is going to make us surrender? He couldn’t be more wrong.

    Palestine Action: no surrender

    When Palestine Action began we were under no illusion that the route to victory would be an easy ride.

    As a movement, we understand that every obstacle we face and overcome is a step closer to ending Israel’s weapons trade in Britain. For years the political class repressed us behind closed doors but refused to show their frustration at our growing campaign publicly. Now, they’re showing their hand which means we are winning.

    Rather than deter us, John Woodcock’s rampage to the press three days after we dissed him on Twitter exposes his own motivations: to save face:

    He’s more concerned with protecting the military interests of a foreign genocidal entity over the will of the British people, who overwhelmingly support imposing an arms embargo on Israel.

    His alliance is with Elbit Systems, who use Gaza as a laboratory to develop their “battle-tested” weaponry and are crucial to arming the ongoing genocide. Our alliance will always be with the Palestinian people.

    Collectively we must refuse to surrender. No matter what, we will #ShutElbitDown!

    Featured image via Palestine Action and the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Independent videographer Sean Beckner-Carmitchel was arrested while documenting the detainments of more than 40 individuals early on May 6, 2024, when officers intercepted a group of protesters on the University of California, Los Angeles, campus.

    The Los Angeles Times reported that UCLA police officers detained the students, who had gathered in a parking garage set as the 6 a.m. rendezvous point ahead of a peaceful sit-in at a campus building.

    Beckner-Carmitchel told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker that he had received a tip the night before that there would be some sort of protest action, but hadn’t received details. He said he went to the UCLA campus on a hunch and walked around until he noticed two people running out of a parking garage, chased by police.

    Before he was able to enter the garage, Beckner-Carmitchel said, an officer ordered him to stop and provide his identification. When he asked if he was being detained, the officer responded that he was, on suspicion of violating a campus curfew order that was in place from midnight to 6 a.m. Beckner-Carmitchel said he was detained at 5:58 a.m. and was released five minutes later after he said he would call an attorney if he was delayed any longer.

    Once in the garage, Beckner-Carmitchel said that 30 to 40 UCLA students had also been detained on suspicion of violating curfew.

    “I stayed back at all times to document and watched them get flex cuffed for a little while,” he told the Tracker. “Then, quite suddenly, a University of California police officer just ran up to me, put my hands behind my back and flex-tied me. Quite ironically, he did it poorly, and I was able to live tweet for a while.”

    Shortly before 7 a.m., Beckner-Carmitchel posted that he had been arrested. In the clip Beckner-Carmitchel posted, an officer can be heard saying, “This guy right here,” and pointing at the journalist. Seconds later, another officer tells him to put his hands behind his back and to give the officer his phone.

    Beckner-Carmitchel can clearly be seen wearing a press credential as officers place him in zip cuffs, in a livestream captured by prominent police critic William Gude. Gude was also arrested at the scene.

    In a clip Beckner-Carmitchel posted a few minutes later, a woman who identifies herself as the person authorized to speak on behalf of the students says that she attempted to speak to a sergeant about why they were under arrest.

    “As we’re standing and asking those questions, press — who’s holding the phone now — was detained. The legal observers have been detained. Other students who were trying to film what was happening have been detained,” the woman says.

    Beckner-Carmitchel told the Tracker that he asked to speak to a supervisor or public information officer dozens of times, and was always rudely shut down.

    “At one point I said, ‘Hey, this is probably a First Amendment issue. You should really send that supervisor or PIO over,’” he said. “I’m thinking to myself, ‘There’s no way they’re actually going to go through with this, they’re not that dumb.’ Little did I know.”

    Freelance journalist Cerise Castle reported that Beckner-Carmitchel was taken to the LAPD’s Van Nuys Community Police Station and that he was released from police custody at approximately 3 p.m., nearly eight hours after his arrest.

    Beckner-Carmitchel said that he was told that the charge against him — conspiracy to commit burglary — would be dropped, and he was issued a certificate of detention, indicating that the police were not documenting it as an arrest. He added that the certificate specifically states that they can choose to file the charges in the future, and he is weighing his legal options.

    The Society of Professional Journalists condemned his arrest in a statement and demanded that authorities drop any charges against him. “This unwarranted arrest flagrantly violates Sean’s First Amendment right to film police and protesters on public property,” SPJ National President Ashanti Blaize-Hopkins said.

    The UCLA Police Department did not respond to a request for comment.


    This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Leading wildlife charity Butterfly Conservation is calling on nature enthusiasts across the UK to design a brilliant banner which will have pride of place at the upcoming Restore Nature Now march.

    Restore Nature Now: marching in June

    Extinction RebellionBBC wildlife legend Chris Packham, Butterfly Conservation, and tens of thousands of members of the public will ‘unite for nature’ by joining a legal and family-friendly demonstration on the streets of central London on Saturday 22 June 2024. They will have a simple demand of all political parties: ‘Restore Nature Now‘.

    As the Canary previously reported, this demonstration aims to be the biggest gathering of people for nature and climate that the UK has seen. It will be both a celebration of UK nature and a protest for urgent political action on the biodiversity crisis and climate crisis.

    Chris Packham said:

    As conservationists and environmental groups we have to accept that the dire state of nature – both in the UK and globally – has happened on our watch. So now’s the time for bolder action, stronger demands, braver tactics and a new way of working… together.

    Ticking a box, signing a petition, sharing a post-  it’s simply not enough when we are facing the collapse of our living systems. It’s time for all of us to take to the streets, shoulder to shoulder, whoever we are and demand our leaders Restore Nature Now.

    Now, Butterfly Conservation has got a way that people can get directly involved before the event:

    Stopping the decline of butterflies and moths

    The winning design will be printed and held aloft at the head of the wildlife charity’s party as they, along with thousands of others, march to Westminster in London on Saturday 22 June calling for urgent action to ensure nature’s recovery.

    The competition, which runs from 3 May – 3 June, is open to anyone still in education and encourages budding creatives and campaigners to create a standout design which shows their support for butterflies and moths and the vital need to protect them.

    Crayons, paints, computers – all mediums are welcome, and the winning banner will be chosen by Butterfly Conservation’s brand-new Youth Panel who will be looking out for fun, bold, emotive, and creative designs.

    As well as taking pride of place at the head of the Butterfly Conservation team at the march, the winner will also receive a Butterfly Conservation t-shirt to proudly show their support for wildlife.

    Julie Williams, Butterfly Conservation’s CEO said:

    Our butterflies and moths are under threat. 80% of butterflies have declined since the 1970s. Moth numbers have fallen by at least 33% in that same time. We know what is needed to reverse these declines. It’s time to act.

    With sufficient resources we have shown that conservation action works at both local and national level. But current government funding and policies are falling short, and our butterflies and moths can’t wait. We will be marching to make our voice and the voices of our supporters heard.

    To enter the competition, send a photograph or scan of your design in a landscape format to socialbutterfly@butterfly-conservation.org along with your name, age and a contact email address or telephone number, by 8pm on Monday 3 June 2024.

    More details are here.

    Featured image via Iain H Leach – Butterfly Conservation

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Two Just Stop Oil supporters have broken the glass around the Magna Carta. They are demanding the UK government commit to an emergency plan to end the extraction and burning of fossil fuels by 2030. Predictably, the right wing has gone ballistic – so, Just Stop Oil must be doing something right.

    Just Stop Oil: a symbolic smashing of the Magna Carta

    At around 10:40am on Friday 10 May, Reverend Dr Sue Parfitt, 82, an active Anglican priest, author, and retired psychotherapist from Bristol, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher from Swansea, entered the British Library and smashed the glass enclosure that surrounds the Magna Carta- the ‘Great Charter’ that is an essential foundation for the contemporary powers of Parliament:

    The pair then glued themselves to the enclosure holding a sign which read ‘The government is breaking the law’, and could be heard saying:

    Is the government above the law? The government has been found guilty of breaking its own climate laws! What do we value more? The lives of our children? Or new oil licences? It’s time to choose!

    Judy Bruce said:

    This week 400 respected scientists- contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre industrial levels.

    Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing- pretend we’ve got 25 years’.. We haven’t! We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.

    Reverend Dr Sue Parfitt said:

    The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened.

    We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.

    A Just Stop Oil Spokesperson said:

    Clause 39 of the Magna Carta is one of four clauses still enshrined in UK common law, a so-called ‘golden passage’, that states: ‘No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or in any other way ruined, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land.”

    Contrast that with civil law as it stands in 2024, where corporations are buying private laws in the form of injunctions that circumvent the people’s rights to a trial by jury for speaking out against the crimes of oil companies.

    So, following Just Stop Oil’s latest action – cue the right wing and climate deniers have tantrums:

    Failed politician, self-exiled Londoner. and mindless grifter Laurence Fox piped up with a mental health slur:

    Much like rabid colonialists saying anti-genocide protests are far worse than actual genocide, one X user thought smashing glass around an old bit of paper was SHAMEFUL:

    UK government wrecking the climate

    This action comes just a the government’s climate policy has been ruled unlawful for the second time by the UK high court.

    The court found there is not enough evidence that there are sufficient policies in place to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to meet its legally binding carbon budgets and its pledge to cut emissions by more than two-thirds by 2030, both of which the government is off track to meet.

    Also, the North Sea Transition Authority, has just announced the offer of 31 new oil and gas licences under the 33rd oil and gas licensing round.

    Meanwhile, a poll of hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists have expressed their ‘despair’ at the current trajectory, with 77% of respondents believing global temperatures will reach at least 2.5C above pre-industrial levels- a devastating degree of heating. Almost half (42%) think it will be more than 3C.

    When asked what individual action would be effective, Stephen Humphreys at the London School of Economics said:

    Civil disobedience.

    Featured image and additional images via Just Stop Oil

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  •  

    During the summer of protests that followed the Minneapolis police murder of George Floyd in May 2020, journalists and readers alike began taking a hard look at how much news reporting relied on police sources. In particular, the standard use of “police said” articles—where the main or only source of information came from law enforcement—was leading the media to publish information that was outright wrong.

    WaPo: Journalists are reexamining their reliance on a longtime source: The police

    Journalists learned some lessons from the Black Lives Matter protests (Washington Post, 6/30/20)—and promptly forgot them.

    In their first media statement on Floyd’s death, Minneapolis police claimed that officers had observed Floyd “suffering medical distress and called for an ambulance”; it was only when cellphone video emerged that it was reported that police were in fact kneeling on Floyd’s neck at the time (NBC News, 5/26/20).  To many, it was all too familiar a pattern: Five years earlier, the Baltimore Sun (4/24/15) had based its reporting on the police killing of Freddie Gray almost entirely on official police statements, downplaying eyewitness reports that officers had thrown Gray headfirst into a van shortly before he died of neck injuries.

    “What the police tell you initially is a rumor,” Mel Reeves, an editor at the then-86-year-old African-American newspaper the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder told the Washington Post (6/30/20). “And a lot of the times it’s not accurate.” CNN (6/6/20), in a report on how camera footage often ended up disproving police claims, went further: “Videos from several recent incidents, and countless others from over the years, have shown what many Black Americans have long maintained: that police officers lie.”

    Yet four years later, when protests broke out on college campuses calling for universities to divest from companies that support the Israeli government’s campaign of killing civilians in Gaza, US media forgot those lessons—and ended up repeatedly misinforming readers as a result.

    ‘Trying to radicalize our children’

    NY Post: Wife of convicted terrorist was hanging out at Columbia encampment before dramatic raid

    Nahla Al-Arian could more accurately described as a retired elementary teacher visiting the campus that her journalist daughter graduated from.

    The morning after the New York Police Department arrested 282 people at Columbia University and the City College of New York during protests against Israel’s war in Gaza, MSNBC’s Morning Joe (5/1/24) welcomed New York City Mayor Eric Adams and NYPD deputy commissioner of public information Tarik Sheppard as its sole guests. “At what point was it known to you that this was something more [than students] and that there were people who maybe had plans for worse than what some of the students were up to?” MSNBC anchor Willie Geist asked Adams. The mayor replied:

    We were able to actually confirm that with our intelligence division and one of the individual’s husband was arrested for and convicted for terrorism on a federal level…. These were professionals that were here. I just want to send a clear message out that there are people who are harmful and are trying to radicalize our children.

    Co-anchor Mika Brzezinski nodded in approval. When Adams added, “I don’t know if they’re international, we need to look into that as well,” Brzezinski softly said, “Yes.”

    The story of the terrorist’s wife had first been put forward by city officials the previous evening, when CBS New York reporter Ali Bauman posted on Twitter, now rebranded as X (4/30/24; since deleted, but widely screenshotted), that “City Hall sources tell @CBSNewYork evidence that the wife of a known terrorist is with protestors on Columbia University campus.” At 1:47 am, CNN (5/1/24) issued a “breaking news” alert identifying the couple, Nahla and Sami Al-Arian, and showing a photo of Nahla on campus that Sami had posted to Twitter.

    The next morning, Jake Offenhartz of the Associated Press (5/1/24) tracked down this “professional” agitator: Nahla Al-Arian was a retired elementary school teacher, and Sami a former computer engineering professor at the University of South Florida. He had been arrested in 2003 at the behest of then–US Attorney General John Ashcroft and charged with supporting the group Palestinian Islamic Jihad. After spending two years in jail awaiting trial, he was acquitted on all but one charge (a jury was deadlocked on the remaining count), and eventually agreed to a plea deal in which he and his wife moved to Turkey.

    Nahla Al-Arian had visited the protests a week earlier with her daughters, both TV journalists, one a Columbia Journalism School graduate. Nahla stayed for about an hour, she told the Intercept’s Jeremy Scahill (5/3/24), listening to part of a teach-in and sharing some hummus with students, then returned to Virginia, where she was visiting her grandchildren, when Columbia students occupied a university building and police moved in to make arrests.

    ‘Look at the tents’

    Fox 5: Protests Grow on Columbia University Campus

    “Look at the tents,” NYPD official Kaz Daughtry told Fox 5 (4/23/24).  “They all were the same color, the same ones that we saw at NYU, the same ones that we see at Columbia.”

    This wasn’t the first time the NYPD had alleged that outsiders were behind the campus protests. A week earlier, after the Columbia encampment had resulted in an earlier round of arrests at the behest of university president Minouche Shafik, Fox 5 Good Day New York (4/23/24) brought on Sheppard and NYPD Commissioner of Operations Kaz Daughtry as its guests. “The mayor is describing some of the people there as professional agitators,” said anchor Rosanna Scotto. “Are these just students?”

    “Look at the tents,” replied Daughtry. “They all were the same color, the same ones that we saw at NYU, the same ones that we see at Columbia. To me, I think someone is funding this.”

    After an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal (4/24/24) asserted that “Rockefeller and Soros grants are subsidizing those who disrupt college campuses”— actually, one protestor at Yale and one at the University of California, Berkeley, were former fellows at a nonprofit funded by Soros’ Open Society Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund—the New York Post (4/26/24) wrote that “copycat tent cities have been set up at colleges including Harvard, Yale, Berkeley in California, the Ohio State University and Emory in Georgia—all of them organized by branches of the Soros-funded Students for Justice in Palestine.”

    At the same time, as Wired (4/25/24) reported, dozens of Facebook and Twitter accounts had posted identical messages about the tents, saying: “Almost all the tents are identical—same design, same size, same fresh-out-of-the-box appearance. I know that college students are not that rich or coordinated.”

    Snopes (4/29/24) later investigated the Post’s claims, and found no evidence that Soros had funded Students for Justice in Palestine. Meanwhile, Hell Gate (4/24/24) had checked Daughtry’s theory of a secret tent-funder through advanced data gathering: They googled it. As it turned out, there was a simpler explanation for why students across the city were using similar tents—they were the cheapest ones available online, for as little as $15. “My God,” reported the news site, “looks like what we’ve got on our hands is a classic case of college students buying something cheap and disposable.”

    ‘This is what professionals bring’

    NYPD's Tarik Sheppard with Kryptonite bike lock (photo: Christopher Robbins/Hell Gate)

    NYPD’s Tarik Sheppard presented as evidence of “outside agitators” a bike lock with the same Kryptonite logo as the locks sold by Columbia (photo: Christopher Robbins/Hell Gate).

    The same Morning Joe appearance by Adams and Sheppard introduced another household item that, police claimed, was a clear sign of outsiders being behind the protests. “You brought in a pretty staggering visual,” Brzezinski said to Sheppard. After he spoke about how “outside agitators” wanted to “create discord,” she prodded him, “Tell us about this chain.”

    Sheppard lifted up a heavy metal chain, which clattered noisily against his desk. “This is not what students bring to school,” he declared. (“Don’t think so!” replied Brzezinski.) “This is what professionals bring to campuses and universities…. And this is what we encountered on every door inside of Hamilton Hall.”

    That night, Fox News (5/1/24) ran the clip of Sheppard brandishing the chain, with anchor Sean Hannity calling the situation “a recipe for disaster.” The New York Daily News (5/1/24) quoted Sheppard’s “not what students bring to school” statement as well, without any attempt to check its accuracy.

    Almost immediately, the “professional” chain story began to unravel. Less than 20 minutes after the Morning Joe segment, New York Times visual investigations reporter Aric Toler (5/1/24) tweeted that the exact same chain was not only used by Columbia students, it was in fact sold by the university’s own public safety department, under its “Crime Prevention Discount Bike, Locker and Laptop Lock Program.” At an NYPD press conference later that morning, The City reporter Katie Honan then showed the school’s listing to Sheppard, who insisted, “This is not the chain.”

    Toler later tweeted a photo comparing the two, which appeared almost identical. Hell Gate editor Christopher Robbins, who was at the press conference, provided FAIR with a still frame from a video showing that the chain presented by Sheppard was attached to a lock with the same Kryptonite logo as is advertised on the Columbia site.

    ‘Mastermind behind the scenes’

    Newsmax: Terrorism, a Short Introduction

    The NYPD’s Daughtry went on Newsmax (5/3/24) to hold up a copy of an Oxford University Press book as evidence that an unspecified “they” is “radicalizing our students.” Daughtry’s copy appears to be a facsimile; the actual book is four inches by six inches (Screengrab: Independent, 5/4/24).

    Two days after Adams and Sheppard appeared on Morning Joe, Daughtry tweeted photos of items he said were found inside Hamilton Hall after the arrests, writing:

    Gas masks, ear plugs, helmets, goggles, tape, hammers, knives, ropes and a book on TERRORISM. These are not the tools of students protesting, these are the tools of agitators, of people who were working on something nefarious.

    That same day, Daughtry went on Newsmax (5/3/24; Independent, 5/4/24) and held up the cover of the book in question, Terrorism: A Very Short Introduction. “There is somebody—whether it’s paid or not paid—but they are radicalizing our students,” he declared. Police, he said, were investigating the “mastermind behind the scenes.” Right-wing news organizations like the National Desk (5/3/24) and the Center Square (5/6/24)  immediately picked up on the report of the “disturbing” items, without speaking to either protestors or university officials.

    The Terrorism book, it turned out, was part of an Oxford University Press series of short books—think “For Dummies,” but with a more academic bent—that was carried by Columbia itself at its libraries (Daily News, 5/4/24). Its author, leading British historian Charles Townshend, told the Daily News that he was disappointed the NYPD was implying that “people should not write about the subject at all.” The Independent (5/4/24) quoted a tweet from Timothy Kaldes, the deputy director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy: “How do you think we train professionals to work on these issues? No one at NYPD has books on terrorism? You all just study Die Hard?”

    Media covering campus protests in the rest of the US similarly relied heavily on “police said” reporting, especially in the wake of the arrests of student protestors. CNN was an especially frequent perpetrator: Its report on mass arrests of protestors at Indiana University (4/25/24) ran online with the headline “At Least 33 People Detained on Indiana University’s Campus During Protests, Police Say,” and led with a police statement that students had been warned “numerous times” to leave their encampment, with the network stating blandly that “individuals who refused were detained and removed from the area.” Students later told reporters that they had been hit, kicked and placed in chokeholds by police during their arrests, and an Indiana State Police official confirmed that one officer had been placed on a rooftop with a sniper rifle (WFIU, 4/29/24).

    The following week, CNN (5/1/24) reported on “violent clashes ongoing at UCLA” by citing a tweet from the Los Angeles Police Department that “due to multiple acts of violence,” police were responding “to restore order.” In fact, the incident turned out to be an attack by a violent pro-Israel mob on the student encampment (LA Times, 5/1/24). News outlets have a history of using terms like “clashes” to blur who instigated violence, whether by right-wingers or by the police themselves.

    ‘”Police said” not shorthand for truth’

    Focus: The NYPD Descent on Columbia, Told by Student Journalists

    Student journalists have largely been able to cover the encampments without relying on police forces to tell them what reality is (New York Focus, 5/2/24).

    Law enforcement agencies, it’s been clear for decades, are unreliable narrators: It’s why journalism groups like Harvard University’s Nieman Foundation (10/27/22) have called for news outlets to stop treating police statements as “neutral sources of information.”

    Following the murder of George Floyd, the Washington Post (6/30/20) wrote that “with fewer reporters handling more stories, the reliance on official sourcing may be increasing.” It quoted Marshall Project editor-in-chief Susan Chira as saying that police should be treated with “the same degree of skepticism as you treat any other source…. ‘Police said’ is not a shorthand for truth.”

    There are, in fact, plenty of ways to report on the arrests of protestors without relying on the word of police officials: The Columbia Spectator (5/4/24), the Columbia radio station WKCR-FM and Columbia Journalism School students (New York Focus, 5/2/24) all contributed reporting that ran rings around the officially sourced segments that dominated the professional news media, despite a campus lockdown that at times left them unable to leave classroom buildings to witness events firsthand.

    They found that Columbia protestors who occupied Hamilton Hall—described by Fox News (4/30/24) as a “mob of anarchists” — had in fact been organized and nonviolent: “It was very intentional and purposeful, and even what was damaged, like the windows, was all out of functionality,” one photographer eyewitness told the Spectator, describing students telling facilities workers, “Please, we need you to leave. You don’t get paid enough to deal with this.’

    Sueda Polat, a Columbia graduate student, told the Spectator:

    One officer had the nerve to say, “We’re here to keep you safe.” Moments later, they threw our friends down the stairs. I have images of our friends bleeding. I’ve talked to friends who couldn’t breathe, who were body-slammed, people who were unconscious. That’s keeping us safe?

    It was a stark contrast with what cable TV viewers saw on MSNBC, where, as Adams and Sheppard wrapped up their Morning Joe segment, Brzezinski thanked them for joining the program, adding, “We really appreciate everything you’re doing.”

    That’s no wonder: If you only talk to one side in a dispute, you’re more likely to end up concluding that they’re the heroes.

    The post On Campus Gaza Protests, Media Let Police Tell the Story—Even When They’re Wrong appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  •  

    During the summer of protests that followed the Minneapolis police murder of George Floyd in May 2020, journalists and readers alike began taking a hard look at how much news reporting relied on police sources. In particular, the standard use of “police said” articles—where the main or only source of information came from law enforcement—was leading the media to publish information that was outright wrong.

    WaPo: Journalists are reexamining their reliance on a longtime source: The police

    Journalists learned some lessons from the Black Lives Matter protests (Washington Post, 6/30/20)—and promptly forgot them.

    In their first media statement on Floyd’s death, Minneapolis police claimed that officers had observed Floyd “suffering medical distress and called for an ambulance”; it was only when cellphone video emerged that it was reported that police were in fact kneeling on Floyd’s neck at the time (NBC News, 5/26/20).  To many, it was all too familiar a pattern: Five years earlier, the Baltimore Sun (4/24/15) had based its reporting on the police killing of Freddie Gray almost entirely on official police statements, downplaying eyewitness reports that officers had thrown Gray headfirst into a van shortly before he died of neck injuries.

    “What the police tell you initially is a rumor,” Mel Reeves, an editor at the then-86-year-old African-American newspaper the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder told the Washington Post (6/30/20). “And a lot of the times it’s not accurate.” CNN (6/6/20), in a report on how camera footage often ended up disproving police claims, went further: “Videos from several recent incidents, and countless others from over the years, have shown what many Black Americans have long maintained: that police officers lie.”

    Yet four years later, when protests broke out on college campuses calling for universities to divest from companies that support the Israeli government’s campaign of killing civilians in Gaza, US media forgot those lessons—and ended up repeatedly misinforming readers as a result.

    ‘Trying to radicalize our children’

    NY Post: Wife of convicted terrorist was hanging out at Columbia encampment before dramatic raid

    Nahla Al-Arian could more accurately described as a retired elementary teacher visiting the campus that her journalist daughter graduated from.

    The morning after the New York Police Department arrested 282 people at Columbia University and the City College of New York during protests against Israel’s war in Gaza, MSNBC’s Morning Joe (5/1/24) welcomed New York City Mayor Eric Adams and NYPD deputy commissioner of public information Tarik Sheppard as its sole guests. “At what point was it known to you that this was something more [than students] and that there were people who maybe had plans for worse than what some of the students were up to?” MSNBC anchor Willie Geist asked Adams. The mayor replied:

    We were able to actually confirm that with our intelligence division and one of the individual’s husband was arrested for and convicted for terrorism on a federal level…. These were professionals that were here. I just want to send a clear message out that there are people who are harmful and are trying to radicalize our children.

    Co-anchor Mika Brzezinski nodded in approval. When Adams added, “I don’t know if they’re international, we need to look into that as well,” Brzezinski softly said, “Yes.”

    The story of the terrorist’s wife had first been put forward by city officials the previous evening, when CBS New York reporter Ali Bauman posted on Twitter, now rebranded as X (4/30/24; since deleted, but widely screenshotted), that “City Hall sources tell @CBSNewYork evidence that the wife of a known terrorist is with protestors on Columbia University campus.” At 1:47 am, CNN (5/1/24) issued a “breaking news” alert identifying the couple, Nahla and Sami Al-Arian, and showing a photo of Nahla on campus that Sami had posted to Twitter.

    The next morning, Jake Offenhartz of the Associated Press (5/1/24) tracked down this “professional” agitator: Nahla Al-Arian was a retired elementary school teacher, and Sami a former computer engineering professor at the University of South Florida. He had been arrested in 2003 at the behest of then–US Attorney General John Ashcroft and charged with supporting the group Palestinian Islamic Jihad. After spending two years in jail awaiting trial, he was acquitted on all but one charge (a jury was deadlocked on the remaining count), and eventually agreed to a plea deal in which he and his wife moved to Turkey.

    Nahla Al-Arian had visited the protests a week earlier with her daughters, both TV journalists, one a Columbia Journalism School graduate. Nahla stayed for about an hour, she told the Intercept’s Jeremy Scahill (5/3/24), listening to part of a teach-in and sharing some hummus with students, then returned to Virginia, where she was visiting her grandchildren, when Columbia students occupied a university building and police moved in to make arrests.

    ‘Look at the tents’

    Fox 5: Protests Grow on Columbia University Campus

    “Look at the tents,” NYPD official Kaz Daughtry told Fox 5 (4/23/24).  “They all were the same color, the same ones that we saw at NYU, the same ones that we see at Columbia.”

    This wasn’t the first time the NYPD had alleged that outsiders were behind the campus protests. A week earlier, after the Columbia encampment had resulted in an earlier round of arrests at the behest of university president Minouche Shafik, Fox 5 Good Day New York (4/23/24) brought on Sheppard and NYPD Commissioner of Operations Kaz Daughtry as its guests. “The mayor is describing some of the people there as professional agitators,” said anchor Rosanna Scotto. “Are these just students?”

    “Look at the tents,” replied Daughtry. “They all were the same color, the same ones that we saw at NYU, the same ones that we see at Columbia. To me, I think someone is funding this.”

    After an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal (4/24/24) asserted that “Rockefeller and Soros grants are subsidizing those who disrupt college campuses”— actually, one protestor at Yale and one at the University of California, Berkeley, were former fellows at a nonprofit funded by Soros’ Open Society Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund—the New York Post (4/26/24) wrote that “copycat tent cities have been set up at colleges including Harvard, Yale, Berkeley in California, the Ohio State University and Emory in Georgia—all of them organized by branches of the Soros-funded Students for Justice in Palestine.”

    At the same time, as Wired (4/25/24) reported, dozens of Facebook and Twitter accounts had posted identical messages about the tents, saying: “Almost all the tents are identical—same design, same size, same fresh-out-of-the-box appearance. I know that college students are not that rich or coordinated.”

    Snopes (4/29/24) later investigated the Post’s claims, and found no evidence that Soros had funded Students for Justice in Palestine. Meanwhile, Hell Gate (4/24/24) had checked Daughtry’s theory of a secret tent-funder through advanced data gathering: They googled it. As it turned out, there was a simpler explanation for why students across the city were using similar tents—they were the cheapest ones available online, for as little as $15. “My God,” reported the news site, “looks like what we’ve got on our hands is a classic case of college students buying something cheap and disposable.”

    ‘This is what professionals bring’

    NYPD's Tarik Sheppard with Kryptonite bike lock (photo: Christopher Robbins/Hell Gate)

    NYPD’s Tarik Sheppard presented as evidence of “outside agitators” a bike lock with the same Kryptonite logo as the locks sold by Columbia (photo: Christopher Robbins/Hell Gate).

    The same Morning Joe appearance by Adams and Sheppard introduced another household item that, police claimed, was a clear sign of outsiders being behind the protests. “You brought in a pretty staggering visual,” Brzezinski said to Sheppard. After he spoke about how “outside agitators” wanted to “create discord,” she prodded him, “Tell us about this chain.”

    Sheppard lifted up a heavy metal chain, which clattered noisily against his desk. “This is not what students bring to school,” he declared. (“Don’t think so!” replied Brzezinski.) “This is what professionals bring to campuses and universities…. And this is what we encountered on every door inside of Hamilton Hall.”

    That night, Fox News (5/1/24) ran the clip of Sheppard brandishing the chain, with anchor Sean Hannity calling the situation “a recipe for disaster.” The New York Daily News (5/1/24) quoted Sheppard’s “not what students bring to school” statement as well, without any attempt to check its accuracy.

    Almost immediately, the “professional” chain story began to unravel. Less than 20 minutes after the Morning Joe segment, New York Times visual investigations reporter Aric Toler (5/1/24) tweeted that the exact same chain was not only used by Columbia students, it was in fact sold by the university’s own public safety department, under its “Crime Prevention Discount Bike, Locker and Laptop Lock Program.” At an NYPD press conference later that morning, The City reporter Katie Honan then showed the school’s listing to Sheppard, who insisted, “This is not the chain.”

    Toler later tweeted a photo comparing the two, which appeared almost identical. Hell Gate editor Christopher Robbins, who was at the press conference, provided FAIR with a still frame from a video showing that the chain presented by Sheppard was attached to a lock with the same Kryptonite logo as is advertised on the Columbia site.

    ‘Mastermind behind the scenes’

    Newsmax: Terrorism, a Short Introduction

    The NYPD’s Daughtry went on Newsmax (5/3/24) to hold up a copy of an Oxford University Press book as evidence that an unspecified “they” is “radicalizing our students.” Daughtry’s copy appears to be a facsimile; the actual book is four inches by six inches (Screengrab: Independent, 5/4/24).

    Two days after Adams and Sheppard appeared on Morning Joe, Daughtry tweeted photos of items he said were found inside Hamilton Hall after the arrests, writing:

    Gas masks, ear plugs, helmets, goggles, tape, hammers, knives, ropes and a book on TERRORISM. These are not the tools of students protesting, these are the tools of agitators, of people who were working on something nefarious.

    That same day, Daughtry went on Newsmax (5/3/24; Independent, 5/4/24) and held up the cover of the book in question, Terrorism: A Very Short Introduction. “There is somebody—whether it’s paid or not paid—but they are radicalizing our students,” he declared. Police, he said, were investigating the “mastermind behind the scenes.” Right-wing news organizations like the National Desk (5/3/24) and the Center Square (5/6/24)  immediately picked up on the report of the “disturbing” items, without speaking to either protestors or university officials.

    The Terrorism book, it turned out, was part of an Oxford University Press series of short books—think “For Dummies,” but with a more academic bent—that was carried by Columbia itself at its libraries (Daily News, 5/4/24). Its author, leading British historian Charles Townshend, told the Daily News that he was disappointed the NYPD was implying that “people should not write about the subject at all.” The Independent (5/4/24) quoted a tweet from Timothy Kaldes, the deputy director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy: “How do you think we train professionals to work on these issues? No one at NYPD has books on terrorism? You all just study Die Hard?”

    Media covering campus protests in the rest of the US similarly relied heavily on “police said” reporting, especially in the wake of the arrests of student protestors. CNN was an especially frequent perpetrator: Its report on mass arrests of protestors at Indiana University (4/25/24) ran online with the headline “At Least 33 People Detained on Indiana University’s Campus During Protests, Police Say,” and led with a police statement that students had been warned “numerous times” to leave their encampment, with the network stating blandly that “individuals who refused were detained and removed from the area.” Students later told reporters that they had been hit, kicked and placed in chokeholds by police during their arrests, and an Indiana State Police official confirmed that one officer had been placed on a rooftop with a sniper rifle (WFIU, 4/29/24).

    The following week, CNN (5/1/24) reported on “violent clashes ongoing at UCLA” by citing a tweet from the Los Angeles Police Department that “due to multiple acts of violence,” police were responding “to restore order.” In fact, the incident turned out to be an attack by a violent pro-Israel mob on the student encampment (LA Times, 5/1/24). News outlets have a history of using terms like “clashes” to blur who instigated violence, whether by right-wingers or by the police themselves.

    ‘”Police said” not shorthand for truth’

    Focus: The NYPD Descent on Columbia, Told by Student Journalists

    Student journalists have largely been able to cover the encampments without relying on police forces to tell them what reality is (New York Focus, 5/2/24).

    Law enforcement agencies, it’s been clear for decades, are unreliable narrators: It’s why journalism groups like Harvard University’s Nieman Foundation (10/27/22) have called for news outlets to stop treating police statements as “neutral sources of information.”

    Following the murder of George Floyd, the Washington Post (6/30/20) wrote that “with fewer reporters handling more stories, the reliance on official sourcing may be increasing.” It quoted Marshall Project editor-in-chief Susan Chira as saying that police should be treated with “the same degree of skepticism as you treat any other source…. ‘Police said’ is not a shorthand for truth.”

    There are, in fact, plenty of ways to report on the arrests of protestors without relying on the word of police officials: The Columbia Spectator (5/4/24), the Columbia radio station WKCR-FM and Columbia Journalism School students (New York Focus, 5/2/24) all contributed reporting that ran rings around the officially sourced segments that dominated the professional news media, despite a campus lockdown that at times left them unable to leave classroom buildings to witness events firsthand.

    They found that Columbia protestors who occupied Hamilton Hall—described by Fox News (4/30/24) as a “mob of anarchists” — had in fact been organized and nonviolent: “It was very intentional and purposeful, and even what was damaged, like the windows, was all out of functionality,” one photographer eyewitness told the Spectator, describing students telling facilities workers, “Please, we need you to leave. You don’t get paid enough to deal with this.’

    Sueda Polat, a Columbia graduate student, told the Spectator:

    One officer had the nerve to say, “We’re here to keep you safe.” Moments later, they threw our friends down the stairs. I have images of our friends bleeding. I’ve talked to friends who couldn’t breathe, who were body-slammed, people who were unconscious. That’s keeping us safe?

    It was a stark contrast with what cable TV viewers saw on MSNBC, where, as Adams and Sheppard wrapped up their Morning Joe segment, Brzezinski thanked them for joining the program, adding, “We really appreciate everything you’re doing.”

    That’s no wonder: If you only talk to one side in a dispute, you’re more likely to end up concluding that they’re the heroes.

    The post On Campus Gaza Protests, Media Let Police Tell the Story—Even When They’re Wrong appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • TV reporter Blake Hanson injured a finger while covering a protest at the University of Texas at Dallas on May 1, 2024, when his camera was hit with bolt cutters by a Collin County Sheriff’s Office deputy.

    Hanson, a reporter and weekend evening news anchor at KDFW in Richardson, said in a post on the social network X that he was reporting on law enforcement’s dismantling of a pro-Palestinian encampment and the arrests of protesters.

    The posted video of the incident shows a man wearing a uniform with a “Sheriff” label on his chest, who smacks Hanson’s camera with bolt cutters. Hanson shouts, “Fox 4 media! Media!” The man responds, “Get back!” Hanson repeats, “Media! You’ve got to warn me first!” The man orders him a second time to get back.

    The station reported that law enforcement had shown up in riot gear to dismantle the encampment, and that some were using bolt cutters to remove objects chained to trees.

    Hanson wrote on X that he was filming the arrest of a protester at the time of the attack. “I realized I was standing in the man’s walking path, so I started backing up. That’s when he struck me and then told me to back up after,” adding, “I had a microphone in my hand, phone recording, clearly media.”

    Hanson suffered a swollen finger but said he was otherwise fine. “But all law enforcement needs to respect the media’s right to operate in that highly-charged environment — obviously while respecting their area to work and do their duties.”

    Neither Hanson nor KDFW responded to requests for comment from the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker.

    A spokesperson for the Collin County Sheriff’s Office told the Tracker via email that the incident had been referred to their Internal Affairs Section for investigation. “As of now, we have no comment, nor do we have any further information to share,” she wrote.


    This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.