Baroness Royall Inquiry into ‘Anti-Semitism’ Gives Carte-Blanche to Labour’s Witch-hunters
|Baroness Royal - a Zionist chosen who had reached her conclusions before she even set foot in Oxford|
The ‘findings’ from Baroness Royall’s ‘investigation’ into anti-Semitism at Oxford University Labour Club were written before she even entered the hallowed portals of Oxford. It is fitting that they weren’t accompanied by anything as grand as evidence. Indeed that was the whole purpose of the report. It is evidence free.
As Asa Winstanley demonstrated in his article How Israel lobby manufactured UK Labour Party’s anti-Semitism crisis the whole issue of ‘anti-Semitism’ was contrived and manufactured from the start by those whose main target is Corbyn. The means to bring him down is ‘anti-Semitism’. They have already tried to associate him with ‘terrorists’ and holocaust deniers. Now those who are running this campaign – the media, the Israel lobby and Progress – are alleging, on the basis of years old tweets, that there is an endemic problem of ‘anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party.
|It wasn't anti-Semitism but Israel Apartheid week that was the problem|
|Alex Chalmers was a Zionist activist had been an intern at BICOM - the British Israel propaganda group|
It began in March when the co-Chair of Oxford University Labour Club Alex Chalmers resigned claiming that his fellow students had a problem with Jews. As Chalmers made it clear on his Facebook page, the reason for resigning was that the Labour Club had voted to support the Israel Apartheid week. In other words it opposed the systematic and institutionalised racism that exists in Israel. Far from being the innocent abroad, Chalmers had been, according to his Linked-in profile, an intern at BICOM, the British-Israel propaganda outfit.
|When the Israeli Labour Government held power Apartheid South Africa was its closest ally|
If Oxford University were situated in Tel Aviv then its Jewish students would have the opportunity to choose whether or not they wished to share accommodation with Arab students or not. Imagine if the same happened in reverse at Oxford and non-Jewish students were given the option not to share with Jewish students. There would, rightly, be uproar at what would be anti-Semitism. Arab and Jewish students live in separate housing at the Technion
Royall herself, a former Kinnock adviser, went on a Labour Friends of Israel trip in 2007 Fresh Row Over Labour Anti-Semitism Inquiry As Unite Official Raises Links To Labour Friends Of Israel
|The Jewish Labour Movement is an appendance of Israel's Apartheid Labour Party|
Of one thing there was no doubt, Janet Royall was determined to find anti-Semitism. The only problem is that even she couldn’t conjure ‘institutional anti-Semitism’ out of thin air. The mere fact that she could even entertain the idea that Jews in Britain might suffer from institutional anti-Semitism demonstrates what planet she is living on. As William Rubinstein, the former President of the Jewish Historical Society, wrote: ‘the rise of Western Jewry to unparalleled affluence and high status’ which ‘has led to the near-disappearance of a Jewish proletariat of any size; indeed, the Jews may become the first ethnic group in history without a working-class of any size.’ W.D. Rubinstein, ‘The Left, the Right and the Jews’, p.51, Croom Helm, London 1982
In short British Jews are privileged and prosperous. The days are long gone since they lived in the East End, worked in the tailoring trade and voted Labour as naturally as the sun going down at night. The idea that Jewish students at Oxford University Labour Club suffer from ‘institutional racism’ or that Jews in Britain suffer from it is risible. Jews are one group who do not suffer from police violence, disproportionate stop and search, immigration controls and deportation.
|As soon as her Report was released, Royall blogged on the site of the racist Jewish Labour Movement|
In another indication of where Royall was coming from, no sooner had she reported than she blogged on the web site of the Jewish Labour Movement. [Blog: Baroness Royall on her report: "There is too often a culture of intolerance where Jews are concerned and there are clear incidents ofantisemitism"]
|The Jewish Labour Movement is the British wing of the Israeli Labour Party - a party which since 1930 has been devoted to Zionist Apartheid - see this quotation from one of its earliest pioneers, David HaCohen|
The Jewish Labour Movement is affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation via the World Labour Zionist Movement, which in essence is what remains of the Israeli Labour Party. The WZO actively funds settlement and colonisation in the West Bank. The Israeli Labour Party was the initiator of the first settlements in the West Bank as well as having presided over the Nakba, when ¾ million Palestinians were expelled and thousands massacred. The Israeli Labour Party supports some form of bantustan and segregation. It doesn’t support a 2 state solution. The possibility of a 2 state solution is in any case non-existent yet JLM pretend that they are supporters of this fantasy solution.
The fact that Royall saw fit to blog on a pro-Israel site is indicative of the fact that she was hopelessly compromised from the beginning. From the outset she assumed that which she was supposed to be proving, or not as the case may be..
As a Jews
Royall remarked on the JLM blog that ‘Many students reported that should a Jewish student preface a remark “as a Jew …” they are likely to face ridicule’. This is indeed a disgraceful thing to happen if it’s true. It’s a problem I’ve faced quite a number of times, but as an anti-Zionism Jew. Let’s take one take one such example of this form of racism.
|David Aaronovitch's 'As a Jews' column - anti-Semitic?|
In an article entitled ‘Have I got Jews for you!’ (I trust you appreciate the pun) in the Jewish Chronicle of 5th May 2016, David Aaronovitch waxed lyrical about Jews who spoke up as Jews against the practices of Israel:
Of course there will be no remonstrance about Aaronovitch’s article because it is deployed in support of Israel and against its opponents.
As the Press Release from the group Free Speech on Israel says what we have here is a modern version of Orwell’s Thought Police. Royall advocates ‘training’ to eliminate anti-Semitism. And who should provide it? But the defenders of Israel’s Apartheid society. The Jewish Labour Movement.
Royall talks in her recommendations about ‘a safe space in order to discuss and debate without discrimination’ What she really means is for a protected space for supporters of Israel to peddle their racist nonsense. Those who justify and support the bombing and siege of Gaza should be able to do so with impunity.
Royall also recommends that ‘The Labour Party should consider whether adopting the Macpherson Principle that an antisemitic incident that may require investigation is any incident that is perceived to be antisemitic by the victim or any other person is appropriate.’ In other words if someone who defines their identity with reference to Israel then anti-Zionism is automatically perceived as anti-Semitic. This is what Jonathan Freedland was arguing for when he contended wrongly that ‘A recent survey found that 93% of British Jews said Israel formed some part of their identity.’ Labour and the left have an antisemitism problem In other words it is a backdoor way of saying that anti-Zionism is equal to anti-Semitism.
MacPherson didn’t say, nor does the law say, that a racial incident is defined by someone who claims to be a victim. Whether something is a racial incident or crime is determined by the objective evidence. Otherwise everyone could claim to be a victim. What MacPherson was saying was that because the Police had historically dismissed allegations of racist crimes they must treat an allegation as being a racial incident before it could be investigated. This was specifically to be applied to the police. It had no wider implication.
One of the most insidious of Royall’s recommmendations is that ‘There should be no statute of limitation on antisemitic behaviour. any incident of antisemitism, even when not in Party membership, may be considered by Labour’s disciplinary procedures in respect of current members.’
In other words this is an open invitation to trawl through past tweets and FB posts to nail anyone you don’t like. It is a witch hunter’s charter. It is also a charter for the perpetuation of the present crisis as an until Corbyn is removed. Racism isn’t a few words exchanged five years ago, racism is a system of oppression. It is a power structure. It is discrimination at work, it is police harassment, violence and spying, it is a constant barrage of Daily Mail and Sun headlines making Muslims a scapegoat. The kind of headlines that Jews had to put with once. It is not dead tweets. Nor is it a challenge to an identity of the oppressor, which is what Zionism is.
Perhaps the most dangerous of all the proposals and it is the thin end of the wedge in many ways for the Right in Parliament who seek to preserve their monopoly, Royall recommended that ‘That new procedures for the selection of local government and national candidates must include more rigorous vetting procedures. It is noted that volunteers manage many selections and the procedures must be appropriate for the task in hand.’ In other words the party bureaucracy and those who know what they are doing will determine who is selected. Out will go left-wing trouble makers and in will come clones of John Mann and Wes Streeting.
This ‘Report’ should be rejected in totality. Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn having appeased the Right for the last 8 months is likely to go along with anything until the knife is slipped between his shoulder blades.
Baroness Royall Inquiry
Oxford University Labour Club
Executive Summary and Recommendations
I was asked by the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party to examine the allegations of antisemitism that arose surrounding Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) after the resignation of a former co-Chair.
This was followed by a number of allegations of incidents of antisemitism against members of the Labour Party, including against one Member of Parliament and a member of the National Executive Committee.
I was also made aware that there was at least one case of serious false allegations of antisemitism which was reported to the police.
The context of the wider allegations means that I had to consider the matters of Oxford University Labour Club in that broader landscape. My recommendations will have a positive impact, not only on OULC, but on Labour clubs and the Labour Party more generally.
I do not believe that that there is institutional antisemitism within OULC. Difficulties however, face OULC which must be addressed to ensure a safe space for all Labour students to debate and campaign around the great ideas of our movement.
It is not possible to simply make recommendations about the OULC without considering how our Party itself responds to these events. I am therefore, today making recommendations about how Labour tackles antisemitism to minimise the chance of any repetition of incidents such as those described at OULC. I am making eleven recommendations for immediate and sustained action. In addition, I am advising the second, wider inquiry led by Shami Chakrabarti of a further seven issues which she may wish to consider.
Many of my recommendations may be implemented such that they have a positive impact in other areas where Labour will want to demonstrate in a practical and sustained way that our Party “promotes a just society, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong, provides security against fear, and justice at work; which nurtures families, promotes equality of opportunity, and delivers people from the tyranny of poverty, prejudice and the abuse of power”.
· OULC should consider procedures that allow for greater continuity of leadership than is provided by electing new leadership each term
· The Executive of the OULC, and other Labour Clubs, should examine the culture of their Club and take action to ensure that all those who wish to participate in meetings feel that there is a safe space in order to discuss and debate without discrimination. -
· Training should be organised by Labour Students together with the .Jewish Labour Movement for officers of all Labour Clubs in dealing with antisemitism.
· The Executive of the OULC, and all Labour Clubs, should have a clear line of reporting for incidents of antisemitism and other forms of racism, discrimination and harassment. (his should include the ability of individual students to report incidents directly to the Executive Director of Governance of the Labour Party
· Where documented evidence of incidents which are alleged to show antisemitic behaviour has been presented in respect of members of OULC who are members of the Labour Party, I will be recommending to the General Secretary that these allegations are investigated in line with normal procedures.
· There should be no requirement for the Labour Party to determine its own investigation into antisemitic behaviour on the outcome of any criminal investigation or other third party inquiry.
· The Labour Party and the NEC should provide the leadership and training in equalities issues including antisemitism and ensure that post-holders throughout the Party have access to materials and guidance which will help them identify and deal appropriately with any incidents.
· That the national complaints procedure is properly resourced so that it may deal effectively with complaints of antisemitism.
· There should be no statute of limitation on antisemitic behaviour. any incident of antisemitism, even when not in Party membership, may be considered by Labour’s disciplinary procedures in respect of current members.
· That there is a standing report to each meeting of the NEC Equalities Committee, and the NEC Disputes Panel, of any complaints and the action taken.
· It is not recommended that where a person is excluded from membership for antisemitism this should automatically be a life ban. I recognise that people may change their views and that where that is demonstrable a person may be allowed to seek NEC approval for any future application to join the Labour Party.
Other issues submitted to the Chakrabarti Inquiry for consideration
· The Labour Party should consider whether adopting the Macpherson Principle that an antisemitic incident that may require investigation is any incident that is perceived to be antisemitic by the victim or any other person is appropriate.
· The Review should consider whether it would be useful for the Labour Party to adopt a definition of antisemitic discourse
· Labour should consider adopting rule changes that will allow swifter action to deal with antisemitism. This could include empowering the NEC, through an appointed, authoritative and independent panel, to exclude members where there is credible evidence of antisemitism with a right of appeal to the National Constitutional Committee (NCC). The panel must be able to both speak with authority on these issues and seek advice from experts in the field where necessary. No doubt such a procedure could be considered for wider use.
· That the membership procedures be adjusted such that, should evidence of antisemitic behaviour be discovered within the first year of membership, it should be treated as though it were discovered during the eight-week probationary period.
· That new procedures for the selection of local government and national candidates must include more rigorous vetting procedures. It is noted that volunteers manage many selections and the procedures must be appropriate for the task in hand.
· Consultations should take place with the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Party in respect principles of how we conduct on-line debate in a way which is both welcoming and productive. No form of antisemitism or racism is acceptable, including being used as a factional political tool.
Baroness Royall Inquiry
Young Labour Conference Recommendations