2023-11-16 England: James Costello - 5 Years Prison for Advertising Creativity

[Rev.Cambeul]

Dear British Government, you may have killed the Messenger, but you have woken a Monster. Creativity will not lie down for this. ~ @Cailen.


Cause for a RETRIAL!

In a Nutshell - James Costello's Defence and a Case for the Legislated Legalisation of Creativity in the UK

(... And in every so-called democratic nation on Earth!)

Note: Creativity has already been acknowledged to be a lawful religion  in numerous United States Federal and State courts of law. See: https://creativityalliance.com/forum/creativity-religion/legal-issues-is-creativity-a-legal-religion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVu9l6N5ogQ

PETER HITCHENS: Liberty fought tyranny in a barely noticed court hearing last week, in what I believe is one of the most important cases of our time

Peter Hitchens | Daily Mail (UK) | 19 November 2023

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-12765795/PETER-HITCHENS-Liberty-fought-tyranny-barely-noticed-court-hearing-week-believe-one-important-cases-time.html

Liberty fought tyranny in the High Court in London last week, in what I believe is one of the most important court cases of our time. The issues were simple. Is it permissible to disagree publicly with the British Government's foreign policy?

If not, how much do you have to disagree with it to be in trouble? And can you then be severely punished without a proper trial?

I have a strong personal interest in this, since I often (in fact, almost always) disagree with British foreign policy. This frequently seems to have been made by bomb-happy teenagers who have never looked at a map, opened a history book or done any proper travel.

These are surely huge issues for any country. Apart from anything else, if foreign policy cannot be criticised, how long before domestic policy is protected in the same way?

Yet this titanic and principled struggle has been taking place all but unnoticed in one of the smaller courtrooms at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Pictured: Shaven-headed Graham Phillips is a UK
citizen living in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine

The case dates back to July 2022 when the Foreign Office imposed sanctions on a video blogger called Graham Phillips, a UK citizen and former civil servant living in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine.

Described in Parliament as a 'pro-Russian propagandist', Mr Phillips was made the subject of an 'asset freeze' and is challenging the sanctions decision.

Although most people would find his views repellent and believe he has behaved badly in other ways, as the great US Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter once said: 'The safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people.'

The High Court heard how sanctions mean Mr Phillips is 'experiencing hardship'. He cannot be paid for work, pay bills or his mortgage on a London house or even his Council Tax. Although he can apply for licences to be allowed to do so, he refuses on principle to live by Government permission.

Unable to afford a lawyer, a young barrister, Joshua Hitchens (no relation to me) believes the principles behind the case are so important he has taken it on without a fee.

During last week's two-day hearing before Mr Justice Swift, lawyers for the Foreign Office argued that some material produced by Mr Phillips, which has been widely shared on social media, was created in collaboration with Russia. They also pointed to an interview with Aiden Aslin, a UK national captured by Russians after travelling to Ukraine to join the fight against Russia.

Joshua Hitchens told the court that the UK Government's action was an unlawful encroachment on the right to free speech.

He argued it is an unprecedented power with serious implications for free speech

... and that the sanctions could not fulfil their stated aim, which is 'to prevent Russian attempts to destabilise Ukraine and undermine its territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence'.Lawyers for the Foreign Secretary argued that the 2019 Russia (Sanctions) Regulations specified a broad range of activities. This could include speech or communication, such as propaganda or disinformation, that supported Russia's war aims.

Joshua Hitchens was arguing for liberty, with a solitary solicitor to help him. On the other side, a large and costly Foreign Office team was headed by a distinguished KC, Maya Lester. Behind her sat three other barristers, supported by about half a dozen assorted aides and assistants.

Graham Phillips (at one point accompanied by a black and white cat) watched via video link from his home somewhere in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine.

His lawyer had a simple but big point. Does the UK Government have the power it has used to punish Mr Phillips? And, if it does, is that power lawful, or does it breach the fundamental rights to free expression? The sanctions against him are a punishment, a 'draconian measure which prevents a person from living his life'.

They are penalising Mr Phillips, it was argued, for exercising his freedom of speech and they discourage him and others from exercising that right in future. It is impossible to know, Mr Phillips' barrister argued, if such rules will, in future, be applied to others. There is also no telling when they might end if they are applied. They are not like a fine or a prison sentence which, once paid or served, are over and done with.

Ms Lester had lots of small points. She argued that the expression of support for ('glorifying') the Russian invasion, of which Mr Phillips is accused, was itself some sort of material help to Russia or did damage to Ukraine.

She did not accept Mr Phillips's lawyer's point that the expression of an individual view was utterly different from the paid-for pushing of propaganda out of an official broadcasting station or pro-government newspaper. This was linked to Mr Phillips' opinions on Ukrainian military action in its eastern districts, and his attacks on neo-Nazis in Ukraine.

Mr Phillips is also accused of having been present at battles, observing them from the Russian side.

Well, this is certainly unusual. But, during the 1930s Spanish Civil War, in which Britain also did not take a direct part, British journalists covered it from both the government and rebel sides.

The BBC has reported on neo-Nazis in Ukraine, who very much exist. And Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens have suffered at the hands of Ukrainian troops.

Ms Lester is plainly a fine lawyer with a brilliant mind, but does she know much about the history of Ukraine? Does anyone in the FO? What did they think they were doing when they sanctioned Mr Phillips, who is probably unknown to anyone important in Moscow?

Ms Lester argued that he had received payments from the Russian state broadcaster RT, (which very few people watch) but did not mention anything very recent.

The real point of the case, in which the judgment has been reserved until a later date, is this: If a British subject chooses to say things which could be said to be 'destabilising' or otherwise upsetting the Republic of Ukraine, so exactly what?

If Britain was at war with Russia in alliance with Ukraine, then no doubt such statements might be deemed some sort of treason.

But the UK, for whatever reason, has not declared war on Russia. The British Government supports Ukraine and even I, who think this policy is mad, deplore the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

But Graham Phillips is entitled to disagree with the British Government and with me.

We may not like this, or like him. But if the British Government has the power to ruin people's lives merely for disagreeing with their opinions, or for sympathising with a country it does not like, then we are not free and our own cause is polluted.

We should all be hugely grateful to barrister Joshua Hitchens for taking on this unpopular case.

In the long run, our liberty depends on people like him.

More: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/london-ukraine-british-high-court-lawyers-b2448657.html

Joshua Hitchens Contact Details
https://www.outertemple.com/barrister/joshua-hitchens

[Br.IanVonTurpie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apQQAYJZKLc&t=58s

[E.S.White]

Rev. James Costello is a great person who is very peaceful, charismatic, funny and completely dedicated to the white race. He accepted his sentence with stoic dignity, but five years is an absurdly draconian sentence for a victimless "crime" by someone who has had no previous interaction with the "law".  A man who was convicted of nothing more than transcribing religious texts. A crime against one is a crime against all—and Creators should all be supporting each other. This case was a devastating blow to religious liberty in the UK.  Let's hope James is able to appeal. This is a case for the history books.   

[Fortem]

A Credo a Day...

[Rev.Cambeul]

My comment left at the article source
The source article will make more sense after you read my comment:

Matt Hale is in prison on a forty year stretch. Even we CREATORS believe him to be a psychopath, but forty years? Five years would have been the correct sentence. Also, the US government anti-terrorism laws did not come in until after Hale was initially arrested. His charges were enhanced after the creation of those laws. Even Jewish lawyers at the time questioned Hale's treatment.

Another point, Hale has not had any responsibility for any part of Creativity in more than twenty years. His Creativity Movement no longer exists, and we in the Creativity Alliance - Church of Creativity certainly want nothing at all to do with Hale.

As for James Costello, he attempted to do the right and lawful thing by straightening out Hale's thugs. And he more or less succeeded. James does not deserve to spend a single day behind bars, never mind five years. James' conviction was a travesty of justice. The police and courts have better things they should be doing.

And I seriously doubt that Patriotic Alternative or anyone is running scared. You antis do tend to run off at the mouth quite a lot with your lies.

Reverend Cailen Cambeul - Church of Creativity

* * * *

Patriotic Alternative running scared after trial reveals terrorist link

Searchlight (Anti-White) Magazine (UK) | 22 November 2023

https://www.searchlightmagazine.com/2023/11/patriotic-alternative-running-scared-after-trial-reveals-terrorist-link

Mark Collett and Patriotic Alternative are running scared following the jailing last week of James Costello for multiple offences of inciting racial hatred. Costello, whom they are describing merely as "a member of our community" despite being a leading member of the organisation, was sentenced to 5 years for eighteen race hate charges and one of perverting the course of justice. But evidence was produced by the prosecution showing his links with a jailed nazi terrorist.

Costello was arrested after members of the public in Liverpool reporting to the police stickers bearing the name 'Creativity.com' and saying, "Proud to be white?" which appeared on lamp posts in 2021. When police investigated the website it led them to Costello, and when they raided his home, they discovered large quantities of race hate material.

Costello professes to be a "reverend" in the so-called Creativity Movement, originally named the Church of the Creator, a notorious US-based white nationalist, antisemitic group established in 1973 by white supremacist Ben Klassen, who originated the idea of "racial holy war". Its current leader Matt Hale is serving 40 years for attempting to incite the murder of a US federal judge.

Trying to distance themselves from Costello, PA are now whining that his offending predated him joining the organisation and had nothing to do with them. Though strictly speaking true, this skates over the fact that when he joined PA last year, he was already charged with eighteen race hate charges; they knew full well what he had been up to but were nevertheless quite happy to welcome him on board – and straight into the group's leadership.

Costello (r) with PA leader Mark Collett at PA annual conference, October 2023

In fact, so highly regarded was he by PA's leaders that he was allowed to address numerous public activities and in October was made chair (or 'master of ceremonies' as they put it) at their annual conference.

What is making them nervous now is evidence produced at his trial showing recent connections with National Action terrorist Jack Renshaw, currently serving life for plotting to murder Labour MP Rosie Cooper, and threatening to kill a police officer.  Costello is known to have been involved with NA before it was banned, and to have trained with former members of the group at a "survival camp" in 2017, after the ban, but when he was raided by police they found more recent letters and postcards exchanged between him and Renshaw.  This has upset PA leaders like Collett as it brings with it the prospect of further attention from the police and security services.

Mark Collett and other leading PA members were linked to NA before it was banned in 2016 under the Terrorism Act 2000. These former links have been a source of ongoing difficulty for PA, and anything which causes them to resurface makes the group very twitchy.

Only last June, Kris Kearns, also from Merseyside, a prominent PA and former National Action activist was jailed was to almost five years for terrorism offences. Kearns organised PA fitness clubs and online forums and contributed to Mark Collett's many video streams and broadcasts.

In March, he admitted posting terrorist documents on his social media account, including the manifestos of mass murderers Anders Breivik and Brenton Tarrant.

When James Allchurch, another PA activist, was jailed earlier this year for inciting race hatred on his Radio Aryan podcast station, the prosecution pointed to the fact that one of the people he had interviewed was Mark Davies, a co-founder of National Action who got eight years in 2022 for secretly belonging to the group after it had been banned.

Cases like these continue to underscore just what kind of organisation PA is: a natural home for violent white supremacists.

[E.S.White]

It appears Patriotic Alternative are standing with James.

https://www.patrioticalternative.org.uk/jailed_for_speech_crimes

I have also seen posts from members of the National Justice Party in the US speaking up for James.  This is such an obscene overreach and affront to liberty that a person of any political inclination or worldview should take notice. I just hope he is able to appeal—-or that someone with some funds and some influence will see this case for what it is and take it up. 

Many thanks to Rev. Cailen for posting the updates on this case.