How is information made legitimate, and when is it appropriate for journalists to introduce skepticism? What happens when only one side of a conflict is given the legitimate voice, always repeated and rarely questioned, even when those sources have proven many times to have promulgated lies?
Military studies scholars and analysts understand that there is always a long genesis of historical, political and economic factors that can eventually erupt into conflict. In many ways, US establishment media seemed unwilling or unable (but likely both) to narrate a more complex, historically accurate account of the war on Gaza.
The Intercept (4/15/24) reported that editorial directives at the New York Times and CNN, two of the most important news sources in the US, advised reporters to avoid certain “taboo” words, such as “genocide” and “massacre.” Yet between October 7 and November 24, 2023, the Times used the word “massacre” 53 times—referring to Israelis killed by Palestinians, but only once to refer to a Palestinian killed by Israel (Intercept, 1/9/24).
From November onward, as deaths in Gaza piled up, the Times habitually avoided using emotionally fraught terms for Palestinians. Another term, “ethnic cleansing,” was also barred from use, along with “refugee camps” and “occupied territories.”
As the Times source who leaked the directives said, “You are basically taking the occupation out of the coverage, which is the actual core of the conflict.”
US news outlets were crippled by these verbal restrictions, incapable of offering an accurate explanation of what was happening in Gaza by imposing such constraints on humanitarian language, and international principles and laws.
Media frames are based on underlying assumptions, articulated through familiar tropes that appear unquestioned in language and representation. Some stories are recognizable as reflections of beliefs and myths, and others are accurate renderings when accompanied by on-the-ground documentation.
Seasoned journalists entrusted to cover such a monumental conflict seemed not to be schooled in the differences. They failed to identify the history and uses of atrocity stories as propaganda, and showed no awareness of the use of Islamophobic tropes such as the “brutish knife-wielding Arab terrorist,” or the West’s long history of Orientalism and the hypersexualized Arab male, as identified by Edward Said.
Establishment media applied a “lawlessness” trope, identified by Rebecca Solnit (A Paradise Built in Hell, 2009) as a dictate of convention to blame the victims of humanitarian disasters, when in fact in such crises, she argued, communities come together to help one another. The lawlessness frame was used to direct the causes of starvation away from Israel’s engineered famine, and point the finger of blame at starving Palestinians, who were being shot by IDF snipers as they looked for food.
By April 2024, when police were called to break up student encampments, media relied on another powerful framing device, complete with its attendant language, to condone police violence against students at colleges and universities, first at Columbia, then at other campuses around the country. Campuses, they said, had been infiltrated by “outside agitators” (FAIR.org, 5/9/24).
Yet the critical debate articulated by student protests was part of American public discourse at the time. Though they were violently attacked by pro-Israel protesters and US law enforcement, students helped move American sentiment about the genocide to the center of cultural and political debate. By the fall of 2024, students would be hit by a wave of repression and attacks on their civil liberties and rights to freedom of expression.
Were these stereotypes taken into consideration when deciding which stories would be told, which talking points would be followed, and which perspectives would be ignored? Many of the narratives we are left with, used to explain this so-called “Israel/Palestine conflict,” are familiar media constructs and simply cannot explain a genocide.
In so many ways, big media failed to provide accurate information about Israel’s bombing attacks and their consequences on the people in Gaza. They improvised a language of confusion, denial and justification.
A combination of media tropes and frames, together with verbal inventions, downplayed Israel’s increasingly brutal genocidal violence, along with the hollow echoes that explained away every military act of violence, as the media served as “stenographers to power.” These strategies facilitated the continuation of a genocide. The failure to accurately cover the destruction of Gaza was inimical to the basic professional canons of journalism.
Genocide does not happen without a language to incite it. From collective punishment to ethnic cleansing, and the destruction of infrastructure to the withholding of food, water and medical care, Israel continually committed war crimes on a much greater scale than the initial Hamas attacks. Such acts depended on the demonization of an entire people, and the undervaluing of Palestinian life was a major feature of US reporting.
In Gaza, in addition to dismantling civilian infrastructure such as hospitals, Israel also carried out the destruction of cultural heritage sites, universities, schools and mosques, acts of destruction understood to deliberately eliminate an entire group of people defined by their ethnicity, religion, culture and identity. These are the crimes of genocide. Yet the words associated with these crimes were rarely if ever used in establishment media reporting on Israel’s attacks on Gaza.
FAIR’s work is sustained by our generous contributors, who allow us to remain independent. Donate today to be a part of this important mission.
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Keir Starmer explains that UK is actively supporting Israel’s genocidal expansion and repeats his previous quotation that he supports Zionism “without qualification”. Keir Starmer said “I said it loud and clear – and meant it – that I support Zionism without qualification.” here: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/keir-starmer-interview-i-will-work-to-eradicate-antisemitism-from-day-one/Donald Trump sings and dances, says that it’s fun to kill everyone …
In the wake of the temporary US/Iran ceasefire, hawkish commentary in leading American newspapers advanced the premise that the US can dictate terms to Iran in negotiations, with a faith in the power of Washington’s military might that was hard to justify by the previous course of the war.
Despite the massive damage inflicted upon the country by the US in recent weeks, the regime acts like it holds the cards. Its leaders are demanding the US pull all troops out of the Middle East and accept Iran’s right to pursue nuclear weapons. The question is why Trump would bend over backward to keep obviously unserious talks on track.
Whether the Post likes it or not, Iran has a decent hand to play. For instance, Iranian drones cost just $20,000 to produce, and the US uses missiles that cost $4 million each to try and destroy them (Bloomberg, 3/2/26). Less than three weeks into the war, the US was already estimated to have spent more than $18 billion attacking Iran (Guardian, 3/19/26). The longer Iran can hold out, the more it financially bleeds the US.
The majority of Americans already consistently oppose the war (NBC News, 4/1/26) and, as costs spiral, domestic opposition to the US’s assault is likely to grow. In this context, the paper may need to revise its definition of seriousness to include accepting that Iran has the power to resist US bullying and bluster.
‘More work to degrade’
An intelligence source tells CNN (4/2/26) that Iran is “still very much poised to wreak absolute havoc throughout the entire region.”
The WashingtonPost editorial also said that there “is still more work to be done to degrade Iran’s offensive capabilities and its capacity to rebuild them.” “Offensive” here is a propaganda term, as Iran has not launched an aggressive war in nearly two centuries—unlike the United States and Israel, which have attacked Iran twice in the last year.
By reversing victim and offender, the Post was transparently calling for the US to resume bombing Iran; after all, it’s through war that one country “degrades” another’s military capacity. But it’s not that the US and Israel didn’t try to destroy Iranian capabilities; rather, they tried and have not succeeded.
Less than a week before the ceasefire, a CNN report (4/2/26) said US intelligence had assessed that
roughly half of Iran’s missile launchers are still intact and thousands of one-way attack drones remain in Iran’s arsenal, despite the daily pounding by US and Israeli strikes against military targets over the past five weeks….
The intelligence, compiled in recent days, also showed a large percentage of Iran’s coastal defense cruise missiles were intact, the sources said, consistent with the US not focusing its air campaign on coastal military assets, though they have been hitting ships. Those missiles serve as a key capability allowing Iran to threaten shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran retained that capacity despite the US hitting more than 12,300 targets in Iran, according to US Central Command. Israel, for its part, said it had dropped 15,000 bombs on Iran since February 28 (Jerusalem Post, 3/25/26).
The Post offered no insight into why it believes the US/Israeli assault will suddenly become more effective.
‘Finish the job’
“If the [Iranian] regime behaves as it always has, it will claim to want to reach a deal but never will,” the Wall Street Journal (4/8/26) writes—stuffing the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement down the memory hole.A Wall StreetJournal editorial (4/8/26) echoed the Post, writing that “the Iranian regime remains a threat in the Strait of Hormuz and the job is far from finished.” The Journal insisted that the US should restart the war if it doesn’t get its way:
The next test for Mr. Trump will be whether he takes his two-week ceasefire deadline seriously. If he does, and Iran plays its usual games, then he really will have to “finish the job.”
Such calls overlook the limits to US war-making capacity. Analysts at Colorado’s Payne Institute for Public Policy, cited by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (4/1/26), “assessed that the US had lost nearly 46% of its Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS),” one of the US’s main tactical ballistic weapons. Likewise, they estimated that
supplies of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile systems, used by the US and its partners in the region to defend against Iranian missiles, were also dropping significantly. Projections showed the THAAD interceptors could run out by mid-April.
The US also burned through 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles in the war’s first four weeks, “a rate that has alarmed some Pentagon officials” (Washington Post, 3/27/26). Meanwhile, the Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 interceptors that Israel used against Iran’s longer-range missiles “were also projected to be exhausted by the end of March” (Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 4/1/26). Unlike the Journal’s lust for violence, the US/Israeli arsenal is finite.
‘Circle of death’
Marc Thiessen (Washington Post, 4/8/26) asserts that Trump can “bring the war to a final and decisive conclusion…in a matter of weeks”—disregarding the fact that nearly six weeks of all-out war were far from decisive.
Nor did these constraints prevent the Washington Post‘s Marc A. Thiessen (4/8/26) from calling on Trump to create a “circle of death” around any former nuclear sites in Iran, and enforce it by “killing any Iranian who enters that circle.” He also suggested another round of assassinations, “eliminating the Iranian officials who had been spared for the purpose of negotiations,” so that the country’s leaders understand that if they fail to reach “a negotiated settlement to Trump’s liking…they will be killed.”
Murderous fantasies about the US imposing total domination over Iran are perhaps a symptom of the US being unable to do so in reality. As Thiessen’s own paper (4/3/26) reported, despite the US/Israeli assassinations of high-ranking Iranian officials,
Iran has continued to launch retaliatory attacks, often hitting high-value targets, demonstrating sustained command and control beyond the conflict’s initial days when units largely operated on autopilot under Iran’s “mosaic” defense strategy, which emphasizes decentralized autonomy. In recent weeks, Iranian attacks have struck critical energy infrastructure in the Persian Gulf, industrial and energy sites in Israel, and key US military installations, including a direct strike on an advanced US spy plane.
In other words, decapitating the Iranian government hasn’t caused it to capitulate or prevented it from responding to US/Israeli attacks, but Thiessen—for reasons he did not explain—thinks that doing the same thing again will produce a different result.
Thiessen also said that the US should
develop and implement a covert action plan to support the Iranian opposition…. Such a plan could involve supplying the Iranian opposition with weapons, much as the US once provided arms to anti-Communist “freedom fighters” across the world.
The overriding goal should be to help the Iranian people, over time, bring down this murderous regime.
Set aside that this plan would violate the UN Charter’s principle of nonintervention and that the US has zero right to shape who governs Iran. In reality, multiple US intelligence reports conclude that Iran’s government “is not in danger” of falling (Reuters, 3/11/26). Israeli officials also think that Iran’s government “isn’t likely to fall soon” (Wall Street Journal, 3/12/26).
While there’s little reason to believe that Thiessen’s proposal would produce regime change in Iran, we can be fairly confident that flooding Iran with weapons will have the same outcome that flooding countries with arms generally has—namely, a devastating bloodbath for its inhabitants (Electronic Intifada, 3/16/17; Jacobin, 9/11/21).
‘The easiest method’
Bret Stephens (New YorkTimes, 4/14/26) advises Trump to “keep turning the screws on the regime’s leaders”—a torture metaphor from an advocate of actual torture.
Bret Stephens of the New YorkTimes (4/14/26) likewise wrote from an alternate reality where the war showed that the US can impose its will on Iran. Stephens opened by quoting his own piece (4/7/26) from the previous week :
“The easiest method for the United States to reopen Hormuz,” I wrote last Tuesday, “is to start seizing tankers carrying Iranian crude once they reach the Arabian Sea.”
It’s not clear why Stephens thought seizing Iranian ships would cause Iran to back down. After all, assassinating many of the country’s leaders, attacking Iranian health facilities (Al Jazeera, 4/3/26) and vital civilian infrastructure (BBC, 3/19/26), and mass-murdering Iranian school girls (Guardian, 3/3/26) did not compel the country to stop defending itself.
Stephens went on to contend:
Trump should put Iran’s regime to a fundamental choice: It can have an economy. Or the regime can attempt to have a nuclear program while trying to control the Strait of Hormuz. But it can’t have both.
This quote suggests Stephens was unwilling to seriously grapple with Iran’s retaliatory power. For example, Iran has consistently responded to US aggression by attacking the empire’s regional nodes, killing Israelis (BBC, 3/1/26; Reuters, 4/6/26) and badly damaging Israeli infrastructure (Al Jazeera, 3/21/26).
Iranian countermeasures have likewise hit energy infrastructure in the US’s client states in the Gulf, leading—for example—to fires at Kuwaiti oil and petrochemical facilities, at a petrochemical plant in the UAE and at a storage tank in Bahrain (AFP, 4/5/26). In other words, Iran has illustrated that it has a multitude of options for raising the costs of US violence, indicating it would likely continue exercising these in the scenario Stephens advocates.
‘Broke the petrodollar’
Aaron Brown (Bloomberg, 4/6/26) notes that while investment generally flows into the US Treasury in times of crisis, “the calculus changes when the US itself is the belligerent.”
None of these commentators acknowledge what is likely the strongest blow that Iran has landed against the US. The Islamic Republic has undermined what’s called the petrodollar regime, a system in which the US promises to militarily protect the Gulf monarchies in exchange for these states putting money they earn from oil sales into US assets—most notably Treasury bonds. The arrangement, which has been in place since 1974, subsidizes US borrowing costs and keeps the US dollar as the de facto global reserve currency.
Bloomberg (4/6/26) reports that the war on Iran “broke the petrodollar,” because the conflict is “categorically different” from other political, military and economic crises of the post-1974 period:
Gulf producers can’t get their oil out. The Strait of Hormuz closure has stranded their barrels along with everyone else’s.
Gulf states including Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the UAE collectively cut production by at least 10 million barrels per day in March. Saudi Arabia and the UAE can export reduced volumes through alternative pipelines. But those routes handle only about a quarter of normal Strait throughput at full capacity, and they are under active Iranian drone and missile threat. Qatar declared force majeure on exports of liquified natural gas after strikes on its Ras Laffan facility.
Thus, Iran has shown that it can hinder, and possibly destroy, a central plank in the architecture of the US empire. Stephens, Thiessen and the editorial boards of the Journal and the Post appear to be deluding themselves about the gravity of this development. Iran has successfully resisted subjugation, largely by jeopardizing a key instrument of US global hegemony, but these authors have gone on writing as if Washington were in a position to force Iran to surrender to its diktats.
These observers traffic in illusions about a virtually omnipotent US that can indefinitely control the world through force of arms, consequence-free. Op-ed writing is supposed to be persuasive. In that regard, these authors have failed spectacularly.
FAIR’s work is sustained by our generous contributors, who allow us to remain independent. Donate today to be a part of this important mission.
Donald Trump sings and dances, says that it’s fun to kill everyone …Keir Starmer explains that UK is actively supporting Israel’s genocidal expansion and repeats his previous quotation that he supports Zionism “without qualification”. Keir Starmer said “I said it loud and clear – and meant it – that I support Zionism without qualification.” here: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/keir-starmer-interview-i-will-work-to-eradicate-antisemitism-from-day-one/
An activist with People Against Genocide kicks down a ceiling inside the UAV Tactical Systems, owned by Elbit, in the city of Leicester, England on Friday April 24, 2026.(Photo: via social media / screengrab)
“We are fucking sick and tired of our government’s collaboration in this genocide,” said one activist who participated in the direct action.
In the early hours of Friday morning, members of the anti-war group People Against Genocide in the United Kingdom gained access to the roof of a drone manufacturing facility in the city of Leicester and began sabotaging a so-called “clean room” to hamper the building of weapons used in the ongoing Israeli military assault on Gaza that experts from around the world characterize as genocide and a crime against humanity.
The UAV Tactical Systems facility, owned by the Israeli weapons company Elbit Systems Ltd., has been the target of protest in recent years for its role in providing the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) with unmanned aerial drones, combat vehicles, surveillance equipment, and other military hardware.
“We are fucking sick and tired of our government’s collaboration in this genocide that Israel is committing against the Palestinian people,” said one unnamed activist, sitting on the facility’s roof early Friday. “We are tired of waiting for them to uphold international law.”
Activists from ‘People Against Genocide’ have occupied a Leicester factory owned by Elbit Systems UK this morning, drilling a hole through its roof in order to abseil into the building.
The team of activists evaded security and used ladders to climb over razor-wire fencing at… pic.twitter.com/uWJ0r6s2av
Footage posted online by The Aftershock, a media outlet focused on the pro-Palestinian movement, showed members of the People Against Genocide on the roof of the facility in Leicester and then making their way down toward the manufacturing rooms inside.
“They’re breaking the ceiling of the clean room used to make key parts for Israeli military drones,” the outlet noted. “Contaminating the clean room can knock it out of use for several months.”
BREAKING: 'People Against Genocide' have abseiled through the roof of Elbit's arms factory in Leicester.
They're breaking the ceiling of the clean room used to make key parts for Israeli military drones.
At approximately 10am, an action taker from the group occupying the roof abseiled into the factory through a hole made with power tools. Whilst abseiling into the weapons factory, the action taker proceeded to damage the ceiling and air supply to the clean room.
The clean room is used to make essential components for Israeli military drones and, once contaminated, it could be out of use for several months.
The action involved four people from direct action group People Against Genocide. They successfully evaded recently-increased security patrols at the plant, and used 10m extension ladders to ascend over razor-wire fencing, gaining access to the factory roof. The team next began to use high-grade power tools to cut their way through the roof, to damage weaponry inside.
“We cannot stand idly by while Elbit continues to manufacture death and destruction here in Leicester,” a spokesperson for People Against Genocide said in a statement.
“Petitions, protests and lobbying decision makers who are actively involved in the Gaza genocide, has unsurprisingly, failed to create necessary change,” the spokesperson explained. “Therefore, rather than appeal to politicians or the government, we’re bypassing the complicit decision makers and are taking direct action to shut Elbit down and disrupt the murderous Israeli war machine ourselves.”
“Genocide,” said the unnamed activist on the roof of the facility, “has no place in this world. That’s why we’re here today—to shut Elbit down.”
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Keir Starmer explains that UK is actively supporting Israel’s genocidal expansion and repeats his previous quotation that he supports Zionism “without qualification”. Keir Starmer said “I said it loud and clear – and meant it – that I support Zionism without qualification.” here: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/keir-starmer-interview-i-will-work-to-eradicate-antisemitism-from-day-one/
US President Donald Trump receives the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize from FIFA President Gianni Infantino on December 5, 2025 in Washington, DC.(Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)
The coalition cited the Trump administration’s “racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest.”
A coalition of more than 120 US-based civil society groups on Thursday issued a travel advisory ahead of the upcoming FIFA Men’s World Cup over what the ACLU called the “deteriorating human rights situation” in the United States amid the Trump administration’s deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, suppression of free speech, and more.
Citing the “absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA”—world soccer’s governing body—“host cities, or the US government,” the coalition published a warning urging “fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States” for the tournament to “have an emergency contingency plan.”
The US, Canada, and Mexico are jointly hosting the tournament, which is set to kick off with group stage matches in Mexico City and Guadalajara on June 11 and Los Angeles and Toronto the following day.
“World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown,” the coalition wrote.
BREAKING: We're joining over 120 organizations issuing a travel advisory to warn anyone visiting the U.S. for the 2026 FIFA World Cup of possible civil and human rights violations.FIFA must pressure the Trump administration to protect the people traveling to and working at the games.
“While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all,” the advisory continues, “those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm.”
According to the groups, those harms potentially include:
Arbitrary denial of entry and risk of arrest, detention, and/or deportation of non-US nationals—even those with prior authorization from the US government;
Expanded restrictions and limitations on travel and entry into the United States, given the Trump administration’s ban or severe restriction on entry of people from 19 Global South nations;
Invasive social media screening and searches of electronic devices as part of admission to the United States;
Violent and unconstitutional immigration enforcement, including racial profiling and other discrimination by law enforcement;
Suppression of speech and protest and increased surveillance; and
Serious risk of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and in some cases, death, while in immigration detention facilities or custody.
The coalition—which includes groups like the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, Center for Constitutional Rights, Committee to Protect Journalists, Haitian Bridge Alliance, Human Rights First, Legal Defense Fund, Mijente Support Committee, NAACP, National Lawyers Guild, and Southern Poverty Law Center—is urging prospective World Cup attendees to take steps to protect themselves. These include knowing their rights, securing their electronic devices, and informing trusted people about travel plans.
Visitors are also advised to download Human Rights First’s ReadyNow! mobile app “to notify trusted contacts in case of possible detention.”
Daniel Noroña, Americas advocacy director at Amnesty International USA, said in a statement Thursday that “fans, journalists, and others traveling to the United States for the 2026 FIFA World Cup risk encountering a deeply troubling human rights landscape, shaped by the Trump administration’s racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest.”
ACLU human rights program director Jamil Dakwar said that “FIFA has been paying lip service to human rights while cozying up with the Trump administration, putting millions of people at risk of being harmed and their basic rights violated.”
“The Trump administration’s abusive actions continue to threaten our communities, tourists, and fans alike—and it’s past time that FIFA use its leverage to push for meaningful policy changes and binding assurances that will make people feel safe to travel and enjoy the games,” Dakwar added.
FIFA faced worldwide ridicule for awarding President Donald Trump its first-ever Peace Prize last December amid his administration’s illegal high-seas boat-bombing spree, and just ahead of his bombing of Nigeria, kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, launch of the US-Israeli war of choice against Iran, and threats to attack several other countries.
Despite US bombing that’s killed thousands of its people—including hundreds of children—and FIFA’s refusal to relocate its matches outside the United States, Iran, which easily qualified, is planning to take part in the tournament.
On Thursday, Iran’s embassy in Italy decried what it called a “morally bankrupt” effort by US Special Envoy for Global Partnerships Paolo Zampolli to ban it from the tournament and replace its bracket slot with Italy, which is reeling from missing its third consecutive World Cup final.
Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.Donald Trump sings and dances, says that it’s fun to kill everyone …
Protesters sit with handwritten signs outside Woolwich Crown Court, 24 April 2026. Credit: Defend Our Juries
‘An absolute right to acquit according to conscience.’
Nine people have been arrested for breaching a Section 14 order while holding signs communicating the principle of jury equity outside a court where Palestine Action activists are being retried.
Their signs read: “Jurors have an absolute right to acquit according to their conscience” and “Jurors deserve to hear the whole truth”. The latter sign appears to reference a court order, which prohibits British media outlets from reporting on certain aspects of some proceedings.
The nine people arrested were holding handwritten signs outside Woolwich crown court on Friday 24 April, where six Filton24 defendants are currently being retried on charges of criminal damage in connection with a Palestine Action raid on an Elbit Systems factory in Filton, South Gloucestershire, in August 2024.
A Section 14 order was implemented on both Thursday and Friday to prevent any demonstrations near the court outside of a designated area. A DOJ spokesperson told Novara Media that the area where protest was permitted by the Metropolitan police is a mile away from the court, which defeats the purpose of the protest.
…
The principle of jury equity is the common law principle that juries have the power to acquit according to their conscience. Its origins can be found in Bushell’s Case of 1670, which established the right of a jury to find facts and apply the law to those facts according to its conscience – without fear of judicial reprisal.
A plaque in the Old Bailey, visible to any serving juror or court user passing through the Grand Hall, includes a reference to this same principle.
DOJ has called today’s arrests on the basis of the Public Order Act a “cynical attempt” to bypass the high court judge’s 2024 ruling on the Warner case.
