←

Diary of a (Maybe) Retired Pastor

Category: Uncategorized

  • A New Prime Minister

    mayberetiredpastor

    A New Prime Minister

    Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

    Winston Churchill 1947 (1)

    … there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God.

    Letter to the Romans 13:1 New Testament, The Bible

    The UK has a new Prime Minister. The appointment of Andy Burnham as Prime Minister has been unusual for recent parliaments because he did not enter office as the result of a General Election or, indeed, by an election of Labour Party (the party holding the majority in Parliament) members. He was elected unopposed as leader of the Labour Party by Labour MPs only. There has been considerable comment that he should submit himself to a General Election to obtain a mandate so that his premiership can be legitimised. Such arguments have been put by opposition parties, members of the public and, even, by seasoned political commentators. Whilst it is a viewpoint that could be held it is, to my mind, a mistaken understanding of our constitutional procedures.

    When I was taught basic constitutional theory at school, it was made very clear that we do not have a presidential system of democracy where supreme executive power is conferred via direct popular vote. We have a representative form of parliamentary democracy. We elect individual members of parliament who are our representatives and, crucially, not our delegates. They do not arrive in Parliament bound by a set of instructions given to them by the people who voted for them. Instead, as our representatives, they are expected to exercise their individual judgement on the various matters presented to them as members of parliament. One of those matters is the appointment of the government including the Prime Minister. Sir Keir Starmer had to step down as Prime Minister precisely because  he had lost the support of the Labour MP’s. Andy Burnham is Prime Minister because he has the overwhelming support of the Labour MP’s. His personal mandate is the same as every MP and every minister in government, it is from the parliamentary constituency which he represents. In his case, he was given a remarkable overall majority in a by-election turnout that was higher than in the last two general elections (2). Andy Burnham’s mandate is, indeed, stronger than many of his colleagues.  

    Democracy comes in many forms. It is unfortunate, that, for many people, the American form of presidential democracy is considered the norm. This has resulted in the steady transformation of UK governance from a collective, where the Prime Minister is merely the “first amongst equals”, to a presidency where the Prime Minister controls and dictates to the other members of the government. Charisma (or the lack of it) and power have come to replace collective wisdom. Winston Churchill’s 1947 quote above is a reminder that democracy is merely the best of a bad bunch and is subject to many weaknesses. The present American administration is the clearest example of one democratic system’s weaknesses.

    1. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1947/nov/11/parliament-bill PARLIAMENT BILL HC Deb 11 November 1947 vol 444 cc203-321 acc. 21.07.2026 13:00
    2. https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/what-turnout-makerfield-election-34145624 acc. 21.07.2026 14:51

  • Where’s The Outrage?

    mayberetiredpastor

    Where’s The Outrage? – Reform’s Accidental Recruiter!

    To make an apt answer is a joy to anyone,
        and a word in season, how good it is!

    The Book of Proverbs 15:23, Old Testament, The Bible.

    The appalling performance of the Labour Party in the recent local elections in England  has resulted in a serious challenge to the Prime Minister’s leadership (1). The overwhelming message from voters during the local elections was that the Labour Party had been given a huge majority in the general election in order to bring about radical change. But, instead of radical change, what the country saw was just more of the same. And the blame was pinned clearly and solely on the Prime Minister. Consequently, there is now a leadership contest in progress (albeit with glacial slowness but soon to gather speed).

    Amidst all the commentary and analysis, one aspect of Keir Starmer’s (the Prime Minister) leadership since taking over the party leadership that has not received much comment is his clear bias (I believe unintentional) in favour of the Jewish community. His outrage and anger against any antisemitic activity is clear and public. But when it comes to other communities he is strangely subdued if not silent. Most conspicuously, of course, during the war against Gaza the very cautious criticism of Israel’s actions seemed ludicrously out-of-step with the enormity of the suffering being inflicted at will by Israel. One felt that, David Lammy, as the Foreign Secretary, was chafing at the bit in parliament, longing to go much further in his criticism yet constrained by his office and the Prime Minister.

    Because he is the Prime Minister, this bias has significant consequential  effects in the country. The running political story of this parliament has been the rise of Reform. Reform follows an ancient  path to achieving political success. By focussing on dissatisfaction and anxiety in the country and offering a simple scapegoat it draws large numbers of people. Fundamentally, Reform divides the country into “them” and “us”. Inevitably, this provides a forum for racist tinged thinking, and, sometimes, explicit racist comment.  What one looks for from the government of the day, is a counter-narrative that unites rather than divides. Unfortunately, Keir Starmer’s bias serves only to divide the nation further, not only through his personal comments but through the policy actions taken by his government.

    Strong condemnation of antisemitism is right and appropriate, but so is condemnation of Islamophobia. Keir Starmer’s consistent failure to condemn rising Islamophobia with the same vigour and outrage as he does antisemitism divides the nation as corrosively as Reform’s “them” and “us” populism.  The proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation by the Home Secretary at the time when Israel was visibly intent on destroying all Gaza will only be read in one way by those who watch with horror the destruction of Muslim lives. One journalist (2) has written of Keir Starmer’s “tin ear”. The terrible irony is that his tin ear can lead only to more acts of antisemitism and greater division within society. He is Reform’s great, accidental recruiter!

    1. English Local Council elections are similar to US mid-terms in so far as they provide an opportunity for the electorate to express their evaluation of the current government’s performance.

    2. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/13/keir-starmer-uk-china-menu-prime-minister-beijing?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

  • God’s Grief

    mayberetiredpastor

    God’s Grief

    Then Jesus went with them to a place called Gethsemane; and he said to his disciples, ‘Sit here while I go over there and pray.’ 37 He took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be grieved and agitated. 38 Then he said to them, ‘I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and stay awake with me.’

    Gospel of Matthew 26:36-38. New Testament, The Bible

    Recently, a young friend wept when their grandparent-in-law died. They wept because the grandparent did not know Christ and so died without knowing salvation. This is a harsh truth that’s often held against Christianity but it is merely the outworking of the deeper truth that human beings are able to choose. It is Good Friday as I write and Good Friday reminds us that God has given us opportunity to choose salvation without condition for as long as we are able to choose. But many opt not to choose and so reject salvation. They are not rejected, they simply choose to open a different door (of course, there are complex questions regarding those who don’t have the opportunity to hear the offer of salvation). I feel that my young friend’s weeping reflects the deep heart of God. He has gone to such lengths to open a simple path to salvation it is surely inconceivable that He would not grieve when people reject the offer of salvation.

    But where is this grief held? Salvation leads to eternal life and we are taught that eternal life is a place where every tear is wiped away and suffering ceases to exist (1). How is God’s grief held without colouring eternal life?  Reflecting on the work of the Cross, it seems to me that this is an unappreciated aspect of the Cross. What does the gospel record that the heavens darkened as Christ hung dying on the Cross mean if not the outpouring of divine grief (2)? Not only does the Son express His despair at the sudden abandonment by His Father, but,  through the failing of light, the Father expresses His grief at the suffering of the Son. But divine grief for the loss of all those who will reject the salvation won by the sacrifice of the Son is also present. Jesus’ raw confession of deep grief in the Garden of Gethsemane quoted above is not simply about His anticipation of the Cross but also about those who, despite His sacrifice, will still refuse to choose salvation. We know this weighed on His mind and heart because he is recorded by the gospel writers as weeping for Jerusalem precisely for this reason before He enters in triumphant procession on Palm Sunday (3). If the Son wept because of this, then we know the Father also wept as the Son perfectly reflects the heart of the Father (4).

    At Jesus’ presentation in the Temple when He was born, Mary his mother, is told by Simeon that her heart would be pierced by a sword, a clear reference to the Cross (5).  This too, it seems to me, points to the grief that forms part of the essential aspect of the work of the Cross. Mary is not God, of course, but it does not seem far-fetched to suggest that her grief as a mother also expresses God’s grief at the Cross.  

    Without the Cross, there is no Christian faith. Viewing it as only about the suffering of Christ as He bears the sin of humanity is, perhaps, to miss the grief of the Father for the loss of His Son and to miss the grief of God for all those who will, despite everything, still reject the offer of salvation and life eternal. If we don’t see the grief of God then we will not see that the only ones judging are human beings themselves. We are not helpless victims of an implacable, divine justice but free agents who choose our own fates.

    1. Book of Revelation 21:4 New Testament, The Bible.
    2. Gospel of Matthew 27:45-46 New Testament, The Bible.
    3. Gospel of Luke 19:41-42 New Testament, The Bible.
    4. Gospel of John 5:19 New Testament, The Bible.
    5. Gospel of Luke 2:34-35 New Testament, The Bible.

  • A New World Order

    mayberetiredpastor

    A New World Order

    … for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.

    Matthew 26:52 New Testament, The Bible

    On the last day of February, President Trump unceremoniously demonstrated the existence of a new world order. The previous rules-based order of international law which he had been progressively undermining was comprehensively shredded by his unannounced war on Iran. The frequently noted vagueness and shifting explanations given by Trump and senior members of his administration give the lie away that  there is any ethical or legal justification for the attacks on Iran. There is none. The only thing that mattered was that he could do it and what others may have thought or what some abstract notion of law might declare were of no consequence. Trump has driven the world into a place where the only thing that matters is, do I have the power to do it? If I do, then why not? The only thing that matters now is might.  

    It is not only in the sphere of international politics that he has radically undermined law and rule, he has demonstrated the same attitude domestically. The operation of ICE and the ethos underpinning it shows the same willingness to ignore the law and tear-up the rule book. Court rulings are treated with disdain and Congress is simply ignored. Lip-service is paid to the carefully constructed checks and balances of the American constitution.

    The rewriting of world order in this way opens up the way for other powerful actors to act as they wish with little or no restraint. The present government of Israel clearly feels it is now free to exercise its own military strength to achieve long held objectives of the Zionist far right. It seems almost certain that Israel will annexe the West Bank, and greatly expand its borders both to the north and to the west. Taiwan must be regarding the new order with nervousness as it wonders if China will similarly decide to “re-unite” China.  We should not be surprised if, in the next few years, we see radically redrawn borders across the world.

    Jesus famously rebuked the disciples when one used his sword to cut-off the High Priest’s servant’s ear during Jesus’ arrest that fateful night before Good Friday. He warned them that to choose to live by the sword is to choose to die by it. The world has been thrust into a new order where the only rule is might. Rather than greater security there will be less. Israel has become adept at assassination with little regard for the cost in innocent human lives. The US has given its imprimatur to Putin’s strong-man world view and nations are racing to arm themselves with independent nuclear weapons. Nation will eye nation with armed suspicion. The poor and weak will suffer and orphans of war will multiply across the nations and the number of displaced persons will continue to escalate.

    Is there any hope for future generations? Holy Week reassures us that this state of affairs will not last forever, that it is temporary, and that God will bring about a new order where might is not right but justice will flow like rolling waters. Every knee will bow before Christ and every tear will be wiped away (1). The times of disorder will not be allowed to continue and rulers will be brought to account. Meanwhile, the ambassadors of Christ must continue to work to protect the weak and the poor.

    1. Philippians 2:10,11, Revelation 21:4, New Testament, The Bible.

  • Smile

    mayberetiredpastor

    Smile

    God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

    Genesis 1:31, Old Testament, The Bible

    Shortly after the New Year, we went to a concert featuring a guitar and cello duo (1). An unusual pairing and an unusual choice for us (we usually choose orchestral concerts). We did not really know what to expect but what we experienced was a scintillating evening in which the two musicians demonstrated genuinely virtuosic levels of musicianship. The guitarist managed to make his guitar sound like a whole orchestra filling the room with depth and power and colour of every shade while the cellist made her cello sing and weep and dance and clap with extraordinary feats of bowmanship. As the two musicians got into their stride, I could not help but smile throughout the programme. The concert ended to deserved rapturous applause.

    Like hot baths, concert going is a luxury – not the most outrageous of luxuries, but in the context of the hardship and poverty millions experience it is very much the experience of privilege. Some may wish to argue that such things should not be indulged out of sympathy and solidarity with those whose circumstances do not permit such things, or, that it is shameful to enjoy such things with the world in its current state. Such positions do not find a great deal of favour with most and a cynical person might see this as evidence of the irredeemable self-centredness of people in general.

    The Westminster Catechism states that Man’s chief and highest end is to glorify God, and fully to enjoy him for ever. (2). Countless sermons have been preached across the world on how this should be practised in everyday life, but one that I do not recall having ever heard preached (and one that I myself have not preached (yet!)) is one where the enjoyment of what God has created is, perhaps, the greatest way to glorify God of which we are capable. The Creation account repeatedly reminds us that God looked at what He had done and was pleased. He liked what He had done – including, and especially after, His creation of humankind.  There are indeed, despite the many horrendous instances of ugliness we have imposed upon the world, countless instances in which the sheer beauty and grandeur and wonder of the material universe just causes our hearts to stop in awe, or our eyes to open wide or, indeed, our faces to smile. When we do that are we not, in fact, smiling in unison with God as He surveys His handiwork and smiles? Is this not the true essence of giving Him glory and enjoying Him? And, amongst those instances of wonder and beauty, are the artistic creations of human beings, the most amazing work of all the works of God.

    There is much in our world over which we should mourn and grieve; much that we should feel guilt and shame about, but let us not ignore all that which bears the true stamp of the Creator and smile with Him as we behold His handiwork.

    1. https://events.humanitix.com/mediterranean-strings-manchester acc. 11/2/26 17:34
    2. https://thewestminsterstandard.org/westminster-larger-catechism/ acc. 11/2/26 17:37

  • The Night Is Far Gone

    mayberetiredpastor

    The Night Is Far Gone

    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called “Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and for evermore.

    Isaiah 9:6-7, Old Testament, The Bible

    One morning in Advent, my devotional reading for the day coincided with a broadcast on the radio of Handel’s aria of the same passage from the Messiah – For unto us a child is born, a son is given …  seeing the text on the page and hearing it sung at the same time to the music of Handel of course made a great impression on me that day.

    2025 has been a year in which a great upheaval of the pre-existing world order has taken place. In a matter of months, conventions and understandings which had underpinned our world since the second World War were unceremoniously overturned. Might has been given a freedom and authority which we thought we had done away with, and truth has become merely a matter of who can shout loudest and longest with the result the poor and the weak are simply inconveniences to be swept away by the rich and the powerful. Most troubling has been the emergence of a form of Christianity which seems to preach a gospel that dresses itself in ideologies not seen since 1930’s Europe. It is unrecognisable from that preached by Jesus yet loudly proclaimed as the true gospel by, again, the rich and the powerful. 2025 is leaving behind, for me at any rate, a bitter sense of foreboding.

    That day, when text coincided with song, a candle was, for me, lit in the dark. Christmas is, of course, the celebration of the birth of a king – a king like no other, a king who brings the dawning of an age of justice, righteousness, peace – the dawning of hope. Text and song reminded me of that. The Son of God had been born amongst us, and His life, death and resurrection are a matter of record. It is the promise that the lion will lie down with the lamb, that every tear will be truly wiped away. The birth of the Son ushered in the dawn of a new age, an age which will never end. It was the herald of a new kingdom that will not be denied. The shedding of His blood was the payment of all debt, the cleansing of all corruption. His resurrection was and is the triumphant defeat of all enemies. His return is certain.

    This present darkness is temporary. It may seem long, it may be bitter, but it will not last. The King will return. So, despite this year, and even if there are similar years to come, with text and song aligning together that day, Christmas was once again a celebration of joy. The King has come and we cry with all the saints, “Maranatha, come Lord Jesus” (1).

    1. 1 Corinthians 16:22 & Revelation 22:20, New Testament, The Bible.

  • Adolescence – A Warning To The Church

    mayberetiredpastor

    Adolescence – A Warning To The Church

    So God created humankindin his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

    Genesis 1:27, Old Testament, The Bible

    Last week, the youngest male actor to ever win an Emmy was named. He was awarded the accolade for his part in the Netflix drama Adolescence, a drama about a young teenage boy who murders a  female classmate. It was of particular interest because it sought to portray the reactions of the boy’s family from the moment of the police bursting into their house to the realisation that what was alleged about their son was not some ghastly error but the horrifying truth.  As the story unfolded through its various episodes we learned that the family was a perfectly ordinary, decent family, nothing anyone would say could lead to the misogynistic rage exhibited by the boy. It was his exposure to misogynistic incel culture on social media that led to his violent attitudes towards women that we saw disturbingly exposed in the harrowing third episode.

    The warning for the church is not that we need to be careful about what our young people might be exposed to on social media, although that might indeed be a concern, but the holding on to teaching that, however tangentially, provides justification for the misogynistic narrative propagated by various online influencers. That teaching is complementarianism.

    Complementarianism is held by some (not all) conservative evangelical churches across the world. It holds that men and women are not interchangeable but complement each other. By itself, this notion seems unexceptionable and, indeed, a positive way of thinking about relationships between men and women. But complementarianism goes further to teach that headship and authority belong to men and not to women. There are various flavours of this but the most common, at least in UK churches, is that this applies to marriage and order in the church.  Regardless, complementarianism has at its core the belief that women are by nature subordinate to men. This is openly taught in complementarian churches and while modern complementarians go to great lengths to extol the value and competence of women (in their proper roles) it is not hard to see how young minds could easily take hold of the core idea that women are subordinate and lesser than men, and how that could be exported into the wider culture thus affirming and justifying extreme misogyny.

    The biblical basis of this teaching rests principally on three passages (1) found in the letters of the New Testament. Each of these passages carry significant interpretive problems that, ordinarily, would mean they would not be used to formulate teaching. However, these three passages are an exception. They are used as the interpretive prism that shapes and controls the interpretation of the rest of scripture in the matter of the relationship between men and women.  Leaving out these passages when developing teaching about men and women results in the exact opposite of complementarianism: women in the Bible exercise leadership and authority in society and church in  the same way that men do and it is never questioned or qualified. It is this overwhelming weight of scriptural witness that ought to control the interpretation of the three passages (1) and not the other way around.

    The weakness of the complementarian case is amply demonstrated by the desperate theological attempts to buttress the teaching by reaching for the central doctrine of the Trinity (the being of God) only to end-up perverting the doctrine of the Trinity by resurrecting a teaching that was condemned as heretical in the 4th and 5th centuries AD (2). That attempt has been roundly repudiated and complementarians have retreated from that position (3).

    Complementarianism is a pernicious teaching that distorts our understanding of the relationship between men and women. It gives affirmation and justification for the widespread abuse and exploitation of women that still pervades our societies. Complementarian churches may strive to gloss and mitigate the notion that women are innately subordinate but it does not eliminate it. The subordination of women is the foundation of all exploitation and abuse of women. There ought not to be any room in any church for this unscriptural doctrine.

    1. 1 Corinthians 11:2-16; 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36; 1 Timothy 2:8-15
    2. https://diaryofamayberetiredpastor.blog/2024/09/03/i-didnt-know-this/
    3. Kevin Giles, The Rise and Fall of the Complementarian Doctrine of the Trintiy, 2017 Cascade Books.

  • A New Age Has Dawned

    mayberetiredpastor

    A New Age Has Dawned

    7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore.

    Revelation 20:7-8 New Testament, The Bible.

    The Millennium  is the period of the 1000 year reign of Jesus Christ on earth in the book of Revelation of the Bible. It comes prior to a final explosion of Satan’s rule before the New Creation is inaugurated. Exactly how this is to be understood in actual historical time is much debated. In the New Testament, time has two forms: chronos time which corresponds to measured, chronological time, and kairos time which measures teleological significance. The Millennium seems to be this second kind of time (although the church holds a variety of understandings of it) in which there is a period of time (not necessarily 1000 chronological years)  in which the rule of Christ can be seen to be hold sway which then gives way to a period when Satan is allowed to exercise power. We seem to have entered just such a transition from the Millennial rule of Christ to the rule of Satan.

    The invasion of Ukraine by Russia and the savage war against the Palestinians by Israel are remarkable not only because of the suffering they inflict on ordinary people but because of the unashamed lying by the Russian and Israeli authorities. Even as the world can see with its own eyes through nightly news reports the unjust suffering inflicted by the Israelis and Russians so they categorically deny and lie without shame as they propagate their “truth” to the world. This leaves many open-mouthed and astonished at their sheer brazenness. The world wonders how they can get away with it.  

    The two world wars of the 20th century led to the establishment of an international framework of conventions and laws whose aim was to prevent not only war but the kinds of atrocities that were perpetrated by evil men in the name of national interest.   Institutions such as the United Nations, the International Court of Justice were established so that law in the widest sense (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Conventions) would govern the affairs of the world and not the whims of megalomaniacs. National leaders were no longer immune from accountability but were subject to international law. But, as with all law and convention, these are only as effective as the enforcement that is applied and in the present time those with the power to enforce have no interest in doing so and, in fact, seek to undermine that international order at every turn.

    The United States is the one power in the world capable of enforcing the international order of the 20th. century but, with the election of President Trump in 2016 and then his re-election in 2024 the United States chose to turn away from that international order and usher in a new age. President Trump governs through lies and falsehood and has no interest in the international order of the preceding century. His rise to power has ushered in a new age where the truth is irrelevant and falsehood is unashamedly lauded and enables Putin and Netanyahu. It is the age when the Father of Lies – Satan himself – rules (1).

    A significant part of President Trump’s support has come from conservative Christians in the American church. It is this very part of the church that would most avidly affirm that they seek the rule of Christ and the Millennium in history, and yet it is their actions that have brought an end to the, arguably, Millennial rule of Christ of the 20th century and the freeing of Satan from his chains in the 21st. century.  The Bible is, of course, a book of hope and promise, and while Revelation predicts the resurgence of Satan it also promises the end of his power. It also promises judgment when all will be judged according to their deeds and justice will be enacted. The irony that it is conservative Christians that have enabled the unleashing of Satan’s rule is not lost in the Bible. All will be judged (2).

    1. John 8:44, New Testament, The Bible
    2. Revelation 20:7-15, New Testament, The Bible

  • Is The UK State Biased Against Palestine?

    mayberetiredpastor

    Is The UK State Biased Against Palestine?

    You shall not render an unjust judgement; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great: with justice you shall judge your neighbour.

    Leviticus 19:15. Old Testament, The Bible

    The reactions of the Home Secretary (Yvette Cooper), the Prime Minister and the BBC Governors to the Gaza-related protests by Palestine Action and Bob Vylan give cause for concern. Palestine Action made the headlines by successfully breaking into an RAF Airbase and spray-painting  an Hercules aircraft engine. Yvette Cooper’s reaction was to immediately proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation (1). Shortly after, Bob Vylan, during his set at Glastonbury Festival, led the audience in chants denouncing the Israel Defence Force, an act that the Prime Minister then denounced publicly as “appalling hate speech” (2) and which led to furore in the BBC with the result that the video was removed from the BBC iPlayer and a number of senior staff suspended (3).

    As a protest group, Palestine Action appears to have conducted several high profile acts of vandalism against a number of companies and establishments whose activities they feel support the Israeli war in Gaza. Their purpose appears to be to push the UK government into reducing support of Israel’s military. They have apparently cost some companies large amounts of money to repair the damage done.   On this last occasion they have succeeded in seriously embarrassing the government and the RAF. But does this warrant their proscription as a terrorist organisation? Surely the criminal law is sufficient to address serious damage without proscribing it as terrorist activity? It does seem that their activities as a protest group have been just too effective for the government (and perhaps the targets) to stomach and so the Home Secretary has chosen to define them as a terrorist group to silence them.

    As many have pointed out (see e.g. 4), Bob Vylan’s words must be set alongside the actual deeds of the IDF  in Gaza where appalling acts, if not actual war crimes, have clearly been committed and continue to be committed on a daily basis and yet the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary remain questionably muted about the latter while full of righteous indignation concerning the former and Palestine Action. Where is the impartiality and balance?

    It is difficult to escape the suspicion that our government institutions are infected by an entrenched bias towards Israel and against Gaza and Palestine. One wishes, as many do I’m sure, for a more genuinely even-handed, and courageous government, unafraid of the power of others – whether great or small. The Prime Minister, self-confessedly is not a person of religious faith, but I assure him that he does and will stand before a Judge who will hold great and small to account.    

    1. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-06-23/debates/25062337000014/PalestineActionProscription   acc. 13.7.25 14:18
    2. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c33514nryy1o   acc. 13.7.25 14:35
    3. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czjkmlj1348o   acc. 13.7.25 14:53
    4. https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1BA75C8hAu/