I found this post on X particularly telling regarding the biases within the UK government.
As is noted, the government has put the entire Iranian state on the enhanced tier of its Foreign Influence Registration Scheme, while at the same time one third of the MPs in the cabinet and one quarter of MP's altogether receive funding from organisations sympathetic to Israel.
There is a massive problem with the purchase of influence within the UK government, but it does not come from Iran. The problem is with Israel, which can now be quite reasonably described as the biggest rogue state on earth, and is undoubtedly a greater threat to UK security given the current consequences of its actions in the Middle East.
Why isn't funding from the pro-Israel lobby being treated in the same way as that from Iran? Both are neofascist, theocratic states undertaking actions deeply repugnant to those committed to human rights, democracy and justice. That one is apparently favoured, despite that fact is profoundly worrying.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Funding of MPs by any person or organisation implies buying influence. It is simply unacceptable.
Agreed
I have many concerns about the Islamic Republic of Iran, but the threat that they have any covert or overt influence on UK institutions including government, and law enforcement, has never worried me. Propaganda? Certainly. Cyber threats? Maybe. Influence within government? No.
The state of Israel however, have the ability to influence many areas of UK life, and do so, to great (and malign) effect, with lobbying, Hasbara, advanced cyberwarfare and surveillance, penetrating Downing St., all political parties, universities, schools, museums, publishers, broadcasters, esp. the BBC, the press, they can topple senior police officers, influence the policing of protest, and laws controlling the expression of political dissent, and the intimidation, arrest and incarceration of those who report on it, and of course, influence the removal and appointment of party leaders.
Please note – I am NOT referring to a “Jewish” lobby, not to the influence of those an ethnic or religious identity, but the influence of a foreign governent, that of the state of Israel. So please don’t waste time trolling me for “antisemitism”. I know that Israel is doing great harm to diaspora Jews by trying to conflate Judaism and the Jewish identity of diaspora Jews with its own criminal interests. I want to see Jews protected from antisemitism, not subjected to it.
That latest “Foreign influence” move by our government is a hypocritical farce. Follow the money.
Much to agree with
Agreed, Robert.
I take the view that Iran is of little threat to Europe- at least until now with the threat to the Gulf oil production. The House of Commons website tells us:
Those targeted by Iran in the UK include dissidents, journalists, regime opponents, Israelis, Jews, and sectors including government, travel and universities. BBC Persian and the UK-based news agency Iran International are among those who have long reported Iranian state threats.”
While this is wrong and shouldn’t be tolerated it is not aimed at our societies like the Wahabi terrorists financed by individuals in Arabia and the Gulf. The Israelis have conducted similar operations with Mossad.
Terrorism is a method, not an ideology as such. It is a convenient word to shut down any debate about why a state or non-state actor like Hezbollah are engaged in conflict.
Iran supports Hamas, Houthis, (both existed before Iranian support) and Hezbollah because they are seen as a resistance movement to Israel and its slow annexation of the rest of Palestine.
I also think it is likely that if the US had pressured Israel to accept the Arab League offer of 2002 with the recognition of Israel on 1967 borders, the ending of settlements and either some right of return or compensation, we probably wouldn’t be in this situation.
The Arab states wouldn’t want irregular armed groups and with American and European support for a settlement which supported the security of both communities, Iran would, by all accounts, have accepted it. Also less incentive to join Hamas etc
The Israelis have only ever offered a sort of County Council status and the US have always just gone along. So have we really.
The BBC Persia service is probably the least objective part of the BBC. It exists to deliver propaganda, and does.
Much to agree with, go well richard..
cringe city