UK – Red Baroness Rants For Renegades’ Rights


In January, Theresa May, the Home Secretary, introduced a last-minute measure in the Immigration Bill that would enable her to remove the citizenship of certain terror suspects even if it made them stateless – something that is currently illegal.


TheresaMay_1685363c Theresa May MP


So she was doing the right thing.

It was madness to have ever made  such a sensible option illegal!

Nor should it be deployed only against ‘terror suspects,’ in the narrow legalistic definition – all those enemies within, like Anjem Chpudary, should be denied all rights and privileges that pertain to loyal British subjects of HM.


Muslims DisruptSilence in London, Armistice Day 2010 These treacherous scum don’t belong in Britain


But then the House of Lords interdicted this common-sense step,whining about how harsh it was to poor terrorists, all the difficulties that might accrue to them.

For pity’s sakes, who gives a sh#t!

 Well, the United Nations does!

The special rapporteur on terrorism working for that outfit (a body which elevates monstrous tyrannies to positions of power and glory, albeit they violate the rights designated as basic to its own charter) described May’s move as a very significant concern.and the Joint Committee on Human Rights was scathing in its assessment

Oh, right, in that case how dare she!?

She dares because, though I often criticise her, she sees that it’s the defence of the realm, not the sensitivities of pinko creeps, that should come first.  

And if we needed good reason to support her, just look who’s against the plan to add more effective powers to the anti-subversive arsenal!

Baroness Kennedy QC,  labelled them ‘repugnant’ during the debate.

That would be the notorious old leftist bat Helena Kennedy?

And the Baroness is still ranting, according to yesterday’s

Leading barrister Helena Kennedy said the plans were “a source of shame” to the UK.

 Red Baroness Kennedy


Campaigners fear the ability to strip Brits of their passport has already been used to rid the UK of legal responsibility for citizens before allowing the US to target them in drone strikes. Bilal al Berjawi and Mohamed Sakr, two British citizens, had their nationality revoked last year just before they were killed in drone strikes in Somalia.

Nothing but good news so far! Better before than after!

And better stillanother man, Mahdi Hashi, was sent to the US where he is stil in solitary confinement.

So these are the poor wee souls Kennedy’s blathering on about? What motivates her or any Brit to bemoan their fates?

I am aware that one can be a socialist and still believe in what goes by the term human rights. 

One cannot, however, be a Communist and do so. Nor can one have a record of serving Communist front organisations and expect to be taken seriously as a defender of rights.

Yet let’s look at Helena Kennedy’s record.

From a speech by Julian Lewis MP, Hansard (House of Commons Record)

Baroness Kennedy actively participated in a leading Soviet-front organisation, the International Association of Democratic Lawyers… If hon. Members do not want me to criticise the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, they should take issue with the Labour Party, which banned it as a proscribed organisation and a communist front from 1952 until 1973. 

 Julian Lewis MP

For three years in the 1980s, Baroness Kennedy chaired the Haldane Society of so-called Socialist Lawyers, which is in fact the British arm of the Soviet front, the International Association of Democratic Lawyers….the relevance is simple: if we appoint someone to head an organisation promoting abroad the values of democracy, reform and the free market, as is alleged to be the case in some of the British Council’s literature, past membership of communist front organisations and involvement with the British Communist party are relevant considerations. No one mentions these things, because these days such people reinvent themselves.


I invite Baroness Kennedy to say to the community at large whether she now repudiates the affiliations that she had through those years of the cold war and recognises the fact that she should have had nothing to do with organisations such as the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, or whether she thinks that it is satisfactory to change her opinions and her political clothes with the fashions of the day….

communism tyranny


It is right that she should disavow her disgraceful political record of support for communist organisations that supported regimes whose murderous activities left a blot on the history of the 20th century.

Kennedy has not, so far as I know, said a word of repentance. An eager participant in an evil organisation promoting freedom’s  communist enemies, she was clearly a lousy choice for the job in question, just as she is clearly unfit to speak about anyone’s human rights. 


BTW, next time you hear anyone from the British Council wittering about human rights, remember who was appointed as chairman of that organisation in July 1998.