Is there a less clearly biased source for this? I struggle to take articles seriously when they use emotive language and hyperbole in seemingly every sentence.
This article also straight up accuses NATO of waging a proxy war against Russia and says they're using Ukraine as their battleground.
It repeatedly calls Russia's invasion "NATO's war" ffs
Calling this person a journalist is also a bit of a joke. From what I can see, he mostly just peddles tankie content and conspiracies on his YouTube channel. If that's what passes as being a journalist these days we're in real trouble lol
The first page and a half of my Google news search brings up just a whole host of partisan sources, from The Times of Israel to the Tehran Times. I can genuinely find nothing from a UK paper or broadcaster. That's a bit weird.
It was really clever how NATO convinced Russia to attack Ukraine, but then get their asses handed to them, so that NATO could come in with weapons to support Ukraine and so engage in this proxy war. That was some pretty sophisticated 3D chess that was.
What did he actually say? Plenty of high-profile people have denounced what's happening in Gaza. Either he said something 'extra' or he's been singled out for some reason...
He claims he's the first person to be arrested under this law, that was introduced in 2000, so he must have said something pretty "extra" if what he claims is true.
posted a video on social media explaining the situation. He said that on Thursday 15 August he was escorted off a plane by six cops. They explained that he was being arrested under Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 – for, quote:
expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation
Presumably, in Medhurst’s case this is either Hamas or Hezbollah.
They also explain that he's not the first "journalist" to be arrested under this law.
He says he was arrested under section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 which makes it illegal to stay anything even remotely non critical about a "proscribed organisation" like Hamas. It is extraordinarily repressive.
To clarify this is part of what section 12 says:
Proscription makes it a criminal offence to:
express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.
The only men on this planet willing to do something about children being murdered in Gaza are to be found in Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Resistance Axis. So obviously the Western Zionist media have no answer but to frame these Resistance fighters as "terrorists"
Do you also denounce the French resistance when you condemn the Nazis?
I'm so bored of Westerners comparing the only armed front that Palestinians/Arabs have to their oppressors, and acting like this is some kind of nuanced comment
They hate Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. because they fight back. Because they refuse to roll over when the Israelis and Americans snap their fingers.
Good, for months now he's openly expressed his support and encouragement for a proscribed terrorist organisation, i.e. Hamas. He's not ambiguous about this: he thinks October 7th was great and that Hamas should do it again. He literally travelled to Iran and posted photos next to IRGC rockets and missiles with the caption "Long live the resistance".
He's not a journalist. He's a vicious antisemite who takes pleasure in attacking Jews and is a proud and unrepentant promoter and supporter of terrorism.
Throw away the key. I don't know why he's allowed into the country at all.
Yeah but he broke the law. He was arrested because he broke the law, not for some political reason.
Why would he be arrested for some political reason when he's been left alone all this time? The war started 2 years ago so if they wanted to arrest him on trumped up charges they've had plenty of time to do so.