Revealed: King Charles secretly profiting from the assets of dead citizens

Exclusive: Assets of thousands of people in north-west England used to upgrade king’s property empire via archaic custom‘

The diversion of bona vacantia funds has proven a financial boon to the king’s estate. 

Composite: Guardian Design/Francis Dias/Newspix International

Cost of the crown King Charles III

Maeve McClenaghan, Rob Evans and Henry Dyer

Guardian 

Thu 23 Nov 2023

The king is profiting from the deaths of thousands of people in the north-west of England whose assets are secretly being used to upgrade a commercial property empire managed by his hereditary estate, the Guardian can reveal.

The Duchy of Lancaster, a controversial land and property estate that generates huge profits for King Charles III, has collected tens of millions of pounds in recent years under an antiquated system that dates back to feudal times.

Financial assets known as bona vacantia, owned by people who died without a will or known next of kin, are collected by the duchy. Over the last 10 years, it has collected more than £60m in the funds. It has long claimed that, after deducting costs, bona vacantia revenues are donated to charities.

However, only a small percentage of these revenues is being given to charity. Internal duchy documents seen by the Guardian reveal how funds are secretly being used to finance the renovation of properties that are owned by the king and rented out for profit.

The duchy essentially inherits bona vacantia funds from people whose last known address was in a territory that in the middle ages was known as Lancashire county palatine and ruled by a duke. Today, the area comprises Lancashire and parts of Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Cheshire and Cumbria.

A leaked internal duchy policy from 2020 gave officials at the king’s estate licence to use bona vacantia funds on a broad array of its profit-generating portfolio. Codenamed “SA9”, the policy acknowledges spending the money in this way could result in an “incidental” benefit to the privy purse, the king’s personal income.

Properties identified in other leaked documents as eligible for use of the funds include town houses, holiday lets, rural cottages, agricultural buildings, a former petrol station and barns, including one used to facilitate pheasant and partridge shoots in Yorkshire.

Upgrades include new roofs, double-glazing windows, boiler installations and replacements of doors and lintels. One document references the renovation of an old farmhouse in Yorkshire, helping transform it into a high-end residential let. Another upgrade is helping turn a farm building into commercial offices.

Three sources familiar with the duchy’s expenditure confirmed the estate was using revenues collected from dead citizens to refurbish its profitable property portfolio, making considerable savings for the estate. One said duchy insiders regarded the bona vacantia expenditure, which has until now not been publicly disclosed, as akin to “free money” and a “slush fund”.

The diversion of bona vacantia funds in this way has proven a financial boon to the king’s estate. The practice is helping make rental properties more profitable, which indirectly benefits the king, who receives tens of millions in duchy profits each year – income that Buckingham Palace says is “private”. Earlier this year, in his first annual payout since inheriting the estate from his mother, Charles received £26m from the Duchy of Lancaster.

Lancaster Castle. The Duchy of Lancaster came under Charles’s ownership after the death of his mother, Queen Elizabeth II. Photograph: Andrew Hopkins/Alamy

The Guardian identified dozens of people whose money has been transferred to the king’s hereditary estate after they died in the north-west in places such as Preston, Manchester, Burnley, Blackburn, Liverpool, Ulverston and Oldham. Several had been living in rundown properties or social housing that contrast with the high-end duchy properties being transformed with the money they left behind.

Some of their surviving friends were aghast to learn their assets were being used to renovate the king’s properties, calling the practice “disgusting”, “shocking” and “not ethical”.

Buckingham Palace declined to comment. A Duchy of Lancaster spokesperson indicated that, following his mother’s death, the king endorsed the continuation of a policy of using bona vacantia money on “the restoration and repair of qualifying buildings in order to protect and preserve them for future generations”.

He would turn in his grave’: the dead whose assets went to King Charles’s estate

Bona vacantia in practice

In most of England and Wales, the assets of people who die without making a will and have no identifiable relatives are transferred to the Treasury, which then spends them on public services. The system is known by the Latin name bona vacantia, meaning “vacant goods”, or assets that have no owner.

However, under a custom that has its roots in the medieval period, two hereditary estates, or duchies, belonging to the royal family can collect bona vacantia from people who die in two regions in England. They also collect leftover assets owned by companies at the point they are dissolved.

One is the Duchy of Cornwall, which generates profits for whoever is the heir to the throne. Charles used to closely manage the duchy, but last year it passed to his son, Prince William. It collects bona vacantia funds from deceased Cornish residents.

The other is the Duchy of Lancaster, inherited by Charles from his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, when she died last year. Both duchies are professionally run real estate empires that manage swaths of farmland, hotels, castles, offices, warehouses, shops and urban property, including some of London’s prime luxury real estate.

Neither duchy pays corporation tax or capital gains tax, giving them a significant commercial advantage. They have become huge cash cows for the royals, generating the equivalent of more than £1.2bn in profits over the last 60 years.

Both duchies have long claimed that once costs are deducted, the money is distributed to charities. The Duchy of Lancaster’s website states that “proceeds” of bona vacantia go to three registered charities after costs are deducted. However, its accounts suggest only 15% of the £61m it has collected in bona vacantia over the last decade has been donated to charities.

Queen Elizabeth II with Nathan Thompson, the chief executive of the Duchy of Lancaster estate, in 2017. 

Photograph: Richard Stonehouse/Getty Images

According to multiple sources familiar with duchy expenditures, a large and growing portion of bona vacantia funds have for several years been directed toward renovating properties that the duchy lets out on a commercial basis.

The practice accelerated from May 2020, the sources said, when policy SA9 was introduced to provide duchy staff with guidance on what bona vacantia could be spent on. The term bona vacantia was not used in the policy; instead, it contains a vague reference to “special costs”.

How royal estates use bona vacantia to collect money from dead people

The policy states that such funds can be used for the “public good” to repair, restore, preserve and protect the fabric of duchy properties when they are categorised as a “heritage asset”. However, the definition goes well beyond listed buildings that are on the National Heritage List for England.

Using a much broader definition, duchy-owned properties qualify for the funds if they fit within a further seven categories, including buildings located in a conservation area, a site of special scientific interest or area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB), which cover large swaths of rural England.

Duchy properties are also eligible for the funding if they are deemed by officials to be of “local historical importance”. A Guardian analysis suggests the 2020 policy gave the duchy licence to spend bona vacantia on roughly half of its property portfolio.

The policy imposes some restrictions on how the money can be spent – prohibiting, for example, its use on kitchen fittings, floor coverings and minor electrical works. But the funds can be spent renovating walls, foundations, floors and chimneys, as well as replacing doors, conducting rewiring or damp-proofing, or installing thermal insulation.

In some instances, the money has been spent buying log burners for properties owned by the king and rented out by his estate, or to pay surveyor, planning or architecture fees. A garden wall on a farm in Lancashire has been identified as eligible for an upgrade using bona vacantia.

The 2020 document outlining policy SA9 appears to acknowledge an indirect financial benefit to the monarch, but states that the funds should not be used in a way that “directly” benefits the king. It adds: “The primary intention of the expenditure must be the preservation and protection of the fabric of the property and any benefit to the privy purse [the king’s private income] is incidental to that purpose.”

The document also indicates who ultimately approved of the use of dead people’s money in this way. It states: “The authority for the use of special costs in this connection is found in a royal sign manual dated February 1987 as supplemented by a further [royal sign manual] dated October 2019.”

Royal sign manuals are understood to be references to the personal signature of the monarch – in this case Queen Elizabeth II. The Duchy of Lancaster spokesperson indicated that on accession to the throne, the king rubber-stamped his late mother’s approval.

“The king reaffirmed that money from bona vacantia should not benefit the privy purse, but should be used primarily to support local communities, protect the sustainability and biodiversity of the land and preserve public and historic properties across the Duchy of Lancaster estates,” the spokesperson said. “This includes the restoration and repair of qualifying buildings in order to protect and preserve them for future generations.”

The spokesperson added that before distributing bona vacantia to charities, the duchy allocated money to a late claims fund in case any surviving relatives make future claims to their inheritance. “The cost of administering bona vacantia and any costs associated with the upkeep of public buildings and those of architectural importance, is also deducted.”

Additional reporting by Marjan Kalanaki and Zeke Hunter-Green

 

Athens MUST admit that UK owns Elgin Marbles before any loan deal, Sunak tells Greeks


By Christopher Hope

Published: 01/12/2023 - 

George Osborne claimed Sunak had had a ‘hissy fit’ over the marbles

Greece needs to admit that the UK owns the Elgin marbles before any loan deal can be agreed, Rishi Sunak has said, as he risks reopening the row with Athens over the ancient treasures.

A diplomatic row broke out this week when Sunak cancelled a meeting with the Greek prime minister after he raised the issue of the marbles in a television minister, sparking a war of words between the two countries.

That led to George Osborne, the former Tory Chancellor and now chairman of the British Museum who has been trying to negotiate a loan deal for the marbles with Athens, saying that Sunak had had a "hissy fit" over the marbles.

However, speaking to reporters en route to the COP28 climate summit in the United Arab Emirates, Sunak said: "When it comes to them our position is very clear as a matter of law the marbles can’t be returned and we’ve been unequivocal about that.

 Rishi cancels meeting with Greek PM amid Elgin Marbles row


"And I think the British Museum’s website itself says that in order for the loans to happen the recipient needs to acknowledge the lawful ownership of the country that’s lending the things.

"The Greeks have not suggested that they are in any way shape or form willing to do that.

"Our view and our position on that is crystal clear: the marbles were acquired legally at the time."

The Prime Minister’s comments come after George Osborne today said he would actively pursue a deal with the Greek PM, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, to allow the Elgin Marbles to be displayed in Athens.

The Greek Prime Minister wants the Elgin Marbles back

George Osborne set to DEFY Rishi in Elgin Marbles row as he pursues deal with Greek PM

Osborne told The Times the negotiations would continue "whether or not Rishi Sunak meets the Greek Prime Minister” after a meeting between the pair was cancelled just hours before it was due to take place.

Mitsotakis snubbed a proposed alternative meeting with Deputy PM Oliver Dowden and said he was "deeply disappointed" by Sunak’s abrupt cancellation.

However, Keir Starmer successfully met with Mitsotakis on Monday, with Osborne claiming an exchange could happen under a Labour Government.

A spokesperson for Starmer said the Labour leader would "not spend any time legislating on this matter" if he became PM but that he "wouldn’t stand in the way" of a deal between the British Museum and Athens.

A diplomatic row broke out this week when Sunak cancelled a meeting with the Greek prime minister after he raised the issue of the marbles in a television minister

Speaking on his podcast Political Currency with co-host Ed Balls, Osborne said his deal with Greece would allow the sculptures to spend time in both London and Athens with the intention of allowing "Greek treasures coming our way in return".

"And that is, I think, something worth exploring," Osborne said, "and we can go on doing it whether or not Rishi Sunak meets the Greek prime minister or not.

"In fact, if anything, things have been rather clarified by this week. We obviously know we’re not going to get any particular support from the Conservative government.

"But in fact the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, also said that while he supported the British Museum’s efforts, he wasn’t planning to change the law.

"And if you don’t change the law, then there is no prospect anytime soon of them just being restituted to Greece, returned with nothing, simply handed back, which anyway wouldn’t be a decision for the museum.

"And so to my mind, as chair of the British Museum, it is all the more reason to press on with our efforts to try and reach an agreement with the Greeks."

Rishi Sunak is making it increasingly obvious that he is a terrible Prime Minister – Joyce McMillan

Elgin Marbles culture war, the disastrous Eat Out to Help Out scheme, record immigration figures, and the grim state of the economy all point to one conclusion: Rishi Sunak is almost as bad as Liz Truss

By Joyce McMillan

DEC 1,2023

THE SCOTSMAN

In the litany of terrible Prime Ministers Britain has endured since 2010, the best that can be said for Rishi Sunak is that he is probably not the worst. That honour is likely to be held, for some decades at least, by the inimitable Liz Truss, whose 46-day premiership last autumn was notoriously met by the new monarch, King Charles – when she turned up for a weekly audience – with the deathless greeting: “Back again? Dear oh dear.”

Yet if Sunak is performing better than Truss, it is still sometimes difficult to resist the feeling that he is doing his best to equal her in both incompetence and unpopularity. The latest debacle to engulf him – and one entirely of his own making – is the affair of what his Education Secretary Gillian Keegan calls the El-jin Marbles, otherwise known as the Parthenon sculptures, or part of them.

These massive sculptures were removed from the Acropolis in Athens between 1801 and 1812, under the supervision of Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin, who claimed – somewhat debatably – to have official permission for their removal from the Ottoman authorities. They were transported to Britain, and eventually sold by Lord Elgin to the British Museum; but in 1983, the Greek government made a formal request for their return, which has been strenuously debated ever since.

The problem, though, is that the fate of artefacts such as the Parthenon marbles has lately become a hot topic among those on the right who enjoy whipping up culture wars, not least around nostalgia for imperial times, when Britain had the power and wealth to raid or buy up the world’s riches at will. That these conditions no longer prevail in the 21st century is obvious; but it is also a source of grief to the empire nostalgists who currently exert a disproportionate influence over the Tory party, not least through the shrieking “patriotic” press.

So although Sunak has shown little sign of interest in culture and the arts in his public life, and is defended by an Education Secretary who knows so little of these sculptures that she cannot even pronounce their traditional British name, we are now treated to the spectacle of a politically inept Prime Minister trying to win “anti-woke” brownie points by cancelling a planned meeting with the Greek Prime Minister, and provoking a severe and damaging diplomatic row with a major European ally – a row over the fact that the Greek PM, in a pre-summit interview, reiterated the well-worn argument for the return of the sculptures which has been Greek government policy for over 40 years.

If the Parthenon debacle offers a graphic insight into Sunak’s capacity for poor judgment, though, it is only the tip of a very large iceberg of woes now assailing him. The UK Covid Inquiry is not going well for the Prime Minister, whose Eat Out To Help Out scheme, implemented in the summer of 2020 when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, has become something of a byword for the Johnson government’s failure, in the first year of the pandemic, to strike the right balance between Covid reduction measures and the promotion of economic activity.

Rishi Sunak appears to be politically inept as his attempt to win 'anti-woke' brownie points over the Elgin Marbles demonstrated (Picture: Justin Tallis/WPA pool/Getty Images)

Contrast with David Cameron’s authority

This week’s sky-high annual net immigration figure, running at almost 750,000, was also exceptionally bad news for a Prime Minister who has, perhaps unwisely, never hesitated to collude with the idea that “stopping the boats”, and achieving general reductions in migration, should be an overwhelming priority for the UK Government; too quick to reappoint Suella Braverman to government, he was also too slow to sack her for her irresponsible conduct in office.

If Sunak hoped, what is more, that his initial strong pro-Israel stance in the current Gaza crisis would help shore up electoral support at home, then it seems he will be disappointed. His new Foreign Secretary David Cameron – an authoritative figure compared with Sunak – is already rowing back rapidly towards a position that recognises some of the obvious demands of international law; and meanwhile in Scotland, the latest independence poll, published by Ipsos Mori, hints that the stance on Gaza shared by government and opposition at Westminster may have created an opportunity for the SNP to rebuild support, just as Alex Salmond’s opposition to the Iraq War did 20 years ago.

And finally, there is the grim state of the British economy, now haunted by levels of poverty and financial stress not seen in this country for decades. Sunak’s babbling support for Jeremy Hunt’s abysmal autumn statement, delivered last week, marks him out for posterity as just another Tory advocate of the tired 1980s’ economic orthodoxy that is now failing ordinary British citizens, leaving our public realm in squalor, and helping promote the devastation of the planet through climate change; and as such, he will doubtless, at the coming general election, be given short shrift by a nation tired of Tories.

Meanwhile, though, we are all condemned to wait until Sunak decides – some time before January 2025 – to exercise his Prime Ministerial prerogative by calling a general election. We can mischievously hope, 75 per cent of us, that he will exercise his usual quality of judgment in making that decision.

We should never forget, though, that while politics may often seem like a game to those who are well insulated from the consequences of policy, it is not a game to those suffering in cold homes this winter, struggling to put food on the table, or unable to find any affordable home at all; all of whom can hope for little relief so long as Sunak sits in Downing Street, fearing no one but the right-wing press, and exercising his power like a rich man from another planet, briefly made responsible for the reality of ordinary British lives, but baffled by the task – and privately, all too ready to move on.

‘This is what ‘climate leadership’ looks like’: Sunak and Cameron blasted for taking private jets to COP28

THEY COULD HAVE SHARED ONE

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead 

Today

‘Members of a super-rich elite who are super-heating the planet.'

As the 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) got underway in Dubai on November 30, the Prime Minister is facing fresh outrage from climate campaigners over his choice of transport to the meeting – private jet.

Downing Street confirmed that as well as Sunak, the new foreign secretary, David Cameron, and the King, were all taking separate private jets to a conference aimed at tackling climate change and cutting global emissions.

Defending the decision, the PM’s official spokesperson claimed there was nothing wrong with the UK’s leading representatives travelling to the crucial climate summit this way, as the government is ‘not anti-flying.’

“We are not anti-flying. We do not seek to restrict the public from doing so and it’s important the UK has strong attendance at COP28, given we continue to be a world leader in tackling climate change,” said the spokesperson.

No 10. also insisted that the plane Rishi Sunak was using operates on 30 percent sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), and carbon offsetting will be used to minimise its impact on the environment.

The announcement was not received well among climate campaigners and opposition parties.

Carla Denyer, co-leader of the Green Party, described Sunak and Cameron as members of a “super-rich elite who are super-heating the planet.”

“A short trip on a private jet will produce more carbon than the average person emits all year,” she continued.

Caroline Lucas said the “excessive climate-wrecking private flights amount to pumping jet fumes in the face of those on the frontline of this crisis.” The Green MP is also in support of a new levy on private jets to “make them think twice before hopping on the next one.”

Wera Hobhouse, climate spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats, also criticised the move, saying the use of separate private jets “is not just a waste of taxpayers’ cash, it sends all the wrong signals about the UK’s climate commitments.”

“The UK should be playing a leading role at COP28 … instead, this government is slashing net zero targets at home while taking polluting private flights abroad,” Hobhouse added.

Todd Smith, a spokesperson at Extinction Rebellion (XR), said that the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary are “protecting the interests of their rich mates, and “setting an awful example.”

Doug Parr, Greenpeace UK’s chief scientist, voiced his disproval, stating: “It’s important for our leaders to show respect for the amount of carbon dioxide they emit. Is it really beyond the capability of them and their offices to ensure that they fly by chartered or even just coordinate their own efforts?”

Many took to X to share their disbelief.

“Sunak, Cameron and King Charles each take own private jets to travel to COP28. Tories spaffing taxpayer money is why the UK is in debt,” wrote one incensed X user.

“Sunak, Cameron and King Charles each take a private jet to travel to COP28 – proof (if it were really needed) that this government don’t give a flying frog about either the environment, or wasting British taxpayers’ money,” posted another.

This is not the first time Rishi Sunak has come under fire for using taxpayer-funded private jets and helicopters to travel to events.

In October, it emerged that the PM spent £43,000 of taxpayers’ money of VIP aircraft, including 20 domestic flights on RAF plans and helicopters in his first 11 months in office.

In January, Sunak defended his decision to visit a hospital in Leeds on a RAF jet, instead of travelling there by train.

And he tries to portray himself as the man of the people.

 

Sunak’s £1.6 billion pledge aims to regain climate narrative

The prime minister in Dubai for COP28 Leaders’ Day, will try to restore Britain’s reputation as a leader in tackling climate change

 
• 01 December, 2023

“The world made ambitious pledges at previous COP summits to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. But the time for pledges is now over – this is the era for action,” Sunak said in a statement – Image Credit: Leon Neal/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

By: Kimberly Rodrigues

Prime minister Rishi Sunak is set to announce a funding pledge of £1.6 billion ($2 billion) during the UN climate summit on Friday (1), as an effort to enhance his green credentials, following the alterations made to Britain’s measures aimed at achieving net zero, targets.

Sunak, in Dubai for COP28 Leaders’ Day, will try to restore Britain’s reputation as a leader in tackling climate change by committing to spend the most new money on projects in Africa and Asia to tackle deforestation and energy innovation.

But he will also underline Britain’s “pragmatic” approach to climate change, a description he has stuck with since he was criticised by environmental campaigners for delaying a ban on sales of new petrol cars, easing the transition to heat pumps and granting new North Sea drilling licences.

Running way behind the opposition Labour Party in the polls before a national election expected next year, Sunak’s team believes voters will only support measures to tackle climate change when, or if, they are affordable.

“The world made ambitious pledges at previous COP summits to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. But the time for pledges is now over – this is the era for action,” Sunak said in a statement.

“The transition to net zero should make us all safer and better off. It must benefit, not burden ordinary families. The UK has led the way in taking pragmatic, long-term decisions at home.”

The funding, which will be announced during the two-week summit, includes up to £500 million  to tackle the causes of deforestation, 316 million for energy innovation projects around the world and up to 60 million for loss and damage.

King Charles, a long-time environmental campaigner, will give the opening address to the summit, calling on world leaders to acknowledge the repeated warning signs of the impact of climate change and take “genuine transformational action.”

(Reuters)

RIP
Pogues frontman Shane MacGowan dies aged 65

Shane MacGowan’s wife shares recent hospital memory in tribute to husband

Clarke had been by Pogues singer’s bedside during his stay in a Dublin hospital

The Pogues frontman Shane MacGowan ‘s wife has shared a touching tribute to the singer, who has died aged 65.

Irish journalist and author Victoria Mary Clarke confirmed news of MacGowan’s death, which occurred in the early hours of Thursday (30 November). The news broke just one week after he was discharged from hospital.

At the time, Clarke wrote in a statement: “Shane will always be the light that I hold before me and the measure of my dreams and the love of my life.

She continued: “[He] has gone to be with Jesus and Mary and his beautiful mother Therese. I am blessed beyond words to have met him and to have loved him and to have been so endlessly and unconditionally loved by him and to have had so many years of life and love and joy and fun and laughter and so many adventures.

“There’s no way to describe the loss that I am feeling and the longing for just one more of his smiles that lit up my world. Thank you... for your presence in this world, you made it so very bright and you gave so much joy to so many people with your heart and soul and your music. You will live in my heart forever. Rave on in the garden all wet with rain that you loved so much. You meant the world to me.”

Hours later, Clarke shared a recent memory of MacGowan in another moving tribute to her husband. The journalist and author had been by MacGowan’s bedside during his recent stay in St Vincent’s Hospital in Dublin and, in a social media post, she recalled how the nurses had “kept asking why he was covered in lipstick”.

She added: “If you get to meet your soulmate please do let love in even if you have to suffer loss.”

Clarke has also been sharing her thanks for the many tributes that have been flooding in, two of which came from Irish band U2 and singer Imelda May, who was a friend of MacGowan’s.


U2 wrote on their social media pages: "Shane MacGowan’s songs were perfect so her or we his fans didn't have to be..." Clarke shared the post, writing: “I love this thank you @U2.” Meanwhile, in a lengthy Instagram post, May wrote: “Thank you Shane. Thank you for opening your heart and sharing with us your glorious talents.

Enjoy unlimited access to 70 million ad-free songs and podcasts with Amazon Music

Sign up now for a 30-day free trialSIGN UP

“Your genius songwriting and poetry weaved of words and wisdom that made mortals feel seen, heard and moved to tears. You always lived your truth.”

Victoria Mary Clarke shares moving tribute to husband Shane MacGowan
(Twitter)

Last week, it was announced that MacGowan was being discharged from hospital. Clarke tweeted an image of him wearing a scarf and bobble hat, thanking the nursing staff for their support.

McGowan would have turned 66 on Christmas Day. He recently celebrated his fifth wedding anniversary with Clarke.

Condemn Hamas? It’s Time We Flipped the Script

DECEMBER 1, 2023

JOSHUA FRANK

Facebook

TwitterRedditEmail

Image by Mohammed Ibrahim.

Over 15,000 Palestinians killed by Israel in Gaza.

5,000 children.

1 in 200 dead.

1.8 million displaced.

Churches targeted.

Hospitals.

Schools.

Shelters.

No water.

No food.

No electricity.

No fuel.

Families destroyed.

Cities flattened.

Yet, I am supposed to first condemn the Hamas attacks before voicing my opposition to this slaughter.

Western media won’t address the asymmetry of the conflict.

They won’t give us a historical analysis of 75 years of death on stolen lands, uprooted olive groves, and poisoned wells.

But before I mention Israel is an apartheid state, I must voice my objection to Hamas.

Two million Gazans have lived under violent occupation and surveillance in an open-air prison for 16 years, in poverty and without dignity or freedom.

Checkpoints.

Beatings.

Punished for peacefully protesting.

Punished for being born Palestinian.

Yet, I can’t criticize Israel’s brutality without first condemning Hamas’ terror.

It’s time we flipped the script.

How about before one mentions Hamas, they must first oppose Israeli terror and the murder of children?

They must call for an immediate ceasefire and an end to the occupation?

They must first voice disgust for Israel’s ongoing war crimes?

Only after this can we address how Hamas rose to power, how Israel propped them up, and the dehumanizing conditions that led to those horrific, indiscriminate murders on October 7th.

The analysis of Israel and Palestine must change.

The narrative of victimhood must change.

The conversations, too, must evolve, and so must our hearts toward the Palestinians if this cycle of horror is to ever end.

JOSHUA FRANK is the managing editor of CounterPunch. He is the author of the new book, Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in America, published by Haymarket Books. He can be reached at joshua@counterpunch.org. You can troll him on Twitter @joshua__frank.