Google+ Followers

Tuesday, 17 July 2018

Meet Jessica Elgot - the Guardian & former Jewish Chronicle 'Journalist' Whose Articles are Regurgitated Press Releases

It's a sad commentary on the Guardian which once boasted journalists like Michael Adams and David Hirst that it employs a Zionist Presstitute  

When I read anything by Jessica Elgot I am reminded of that old saying:

You cannot hope
to bribe or twist,
thank God! the
British journalist.

But, seeing what
the man will do
unbribed, there's
no occasion to
You cannot expect every journalist to have the talents of a John Pilger or Jonathan Cook.  However you do expect a certain ethical integrity, to say nothing of intelligence.  Unfortunately Jessica Elgot possesses neither.
What used to distinguish ‘journalists’ on the tabloids from the quality press was the ability to separate fact and opinion. The latter were confined to the Editorial or Comment pages. Jessica Elgot wouldn't even understand this proposition. She is a propagandist. Every piece she writes is biased against understanding. She mistakes cliches for prose from the latest press release.
Today Labour’s National Executive Committee discussed a new Anti-Semitism Code of Conduct. Apparently it has stuck to its guns and rejected the Zionist attacks. Labour NEC defies Chief Rabbi to adopt new anti-Semitism code.
I have already made it clear, as has Labour Against the Witchhunt, which picketed the meeting today, that the new Anti-Semitism Code is weak, based as it is on the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism.
Elgot's pathetic propaganda masquerading as journalism
The Zionist movement in this country has been waging a campaign against the Code.  After crying about 'antisemitism' for the past 3 years it is afraid that Labour might take it seriously and forget to confuse it with anti-Zionism.

Their complaint is that Labour hasn't adopted the complete IHRA misdefinition of anti-Semitism. Instead the most egregious examples of the conflation of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism have been either omitted or toned down.  The Zionists therefore demand that Labour adopts the whole of this Liar's Charter.
For Elgot and her Zionist compatriots this is unacceptable.  In the words of the Jewish Chronicle’s far-Right editor, Stephen Pollard, the problem with the new Code is that 
instead of adopting the definition as agreed by all these bodies, Labour has excised the parts which relate to Israel and how criticism of Israel can be antisemitic.’
Lord Bracadale's Recommendation - anti-Zionism is not a hate crime
Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are two completely different things.  Don’t take my word for it. Retired Senior Scottish Judge Lord Bracadale has just completed an Independent Review of Hate Crime Legislation in Scotland.  In his review Lord Bracadale, an Establishment Judge par excellence, no radical he, concludes that you can’t make criticism of Israel and Zionism into a a Protected Characteristic and therefore a hate crime.  You hate people not states.  To make it a criminal offence to criticise Israel would be an outrageous attack on freedom of speech and contrary to Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. 
In the words of Hugh Tomlinson QC this would have ‘a potential chilling effect’ on free speech.  Of course Zionists and Elgot aren’t in the slightest bit interested in free speech.  All they are bothered about is protecting their bastard offspring, the apartheid State of Israel.
One of the illustrations of ‘anti-Semitism’ in the IHRA is describing Israel as a 'racist endeavour'.  As Ahmed  Tibi, an Arab member of Israel’s Knesset asks in Middle East Eye,  how else do you describe a state where nearly 1,000 towns and communities are Jewish only, where a Bill is before the Knesset to legalise the segregation of communities and where attempts by Arabs to buy houses in ‘Jewish towns’ are met with demonstrations by the residents wanting to keep their towns all White Jewish.  A situation where 93% of the land is national, i.e. Jewish national land.

One wonders what Elgot and the Board of Deputies would say if, in Britain, there was a Christian National Fund which owned and controlled 93% of land and refused, on principle, to sell or lease its property to Jews or non-Christians.  Ant-semitic or merely defending Christian identity?
Israel is a state where mobs chant ‘Death to the Arabs’ without any penalty whatsoever, whereas an Arab poet, Dareen Tatour is facing a lengthy prison sentence for talking about ‘resistance’ in a poem.  Racist?  You judge. 
But to the despicable Elgot, who masquerades as a journalist, none of this matters. She like her editors is devoted to one thing only – selling Israeli Apartheid as a Western Democracy.
For reasons unknown Jessica decided to block me
It is no surprise, that in the course of researching this article, I found that Ms Elgot had blocked me on Twitter even though we have never exchanged a single word.  I can’t imagine why should want to block me but I’ll take it as a compliment that I have been blocked by a racist.
The moral of the story?  As long as the Guardian employs people like Elgot no self-respecting anti-racist or socialist should buy The Guardian.
Below is a letter I have sent to the Guardian on Elgot’s latest piece.  I don’t expect it to be published!
Letter I have sent to the Guardian concerning Elgot's fake news article

Longstanding Knesset member Ahmad Tibi urges Labour not to change its definition of anti-Semitism at its meeting on Tuesday

The British Labour Party’s recent efforts to define anti-Semitism, and to put clear water between a racist act (which is a criminal offence) and legitimate criticism of Israel, is deeply appreciated by those who strive for truth and justice.

Conversely, the push by supporters of Israel to bully and browbeat the Labour Party into adopting a distorted definition of anti-Semitism is sad and disheartening.
It is impossible to understand why Labour refuses to align itself with this universal definition,” complained the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the UK’s Jewish Leadership Council.

The definition’s controversial examples are not even accepted as such by the man who wrote it

The second half of this sentence is patently false. These groups’ desired definition, through politically slanted examples, is most definitely not a universally accepted test to decide which statements should be struck from the political discourse – and for good reason.

Five years ago, the Fundamental Rights Agency – the European Union body dedicated to combatting racism and discrimination – dropped the definition from its website.

In fact, the definition’s controversial examples are not even accepted as such by the man who wrote it.

As Kenneth Stern, the lawyer and lead author of the document explained in a 2016 op-ed in the New York Times, the text was only ever “intended for data collectors writing reports about anti-Semitism in Europe. It was never supposed to curtail speech”.

The fog of 'whataboutery'

Now on to the first claim, that it is “impossible to understand” why the UK Labour Party, or any body dedicated to human rights and opposed to racial hatred, would reject the definition or associated examples championed by pro-Israel groups.

Allow me, a Palestinian citizen of Israel and member of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, to explain why this definition of anti-Semitism is problematic in the extreme, and why it amounts to an attempt to muzzle public discourse on the rights of Palestinian people.

Anger at the Labour Party stems not from its decision to accept the broad definition of anti-Semitism written by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), but its refusal to accept four examples of anti-Semitism which relate explicitly to Israel. These are:
  • “Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation”
  • "Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations”
  • “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, eg, by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour”
  • "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis”
The first of these examples is just an eloquent ”whataboutery". Responding to reports about state racism, Israel’s defenders cry out: "What about Syria? What about Saudi Arabia? What about Iran?"

Of course, these aren’t honest appeals to discuss the alleged crimes of those other countries, but rather, efforts to derail discussion of Israel’s. No victim of racism should ever be required to compile lists of other equally reprehensible acts of racism, just to earn the right to describe their own suffering.

If other countries are guilty of similar or worse crimes, they should also be called out for those crimes. The responsibility to do so, however, falls on every single citizen, every political actor.

Any effort to burden those who would advocate Palestinian rights with the demand that they first lobby for the rights of every other aggrieved group in the world is nothing more than a strategy to silence them, and to ensure Israeli impunity.

Where are rights for Palestinians?

Another way Palestinians are being silenced is with the assertion that those who accuse the State of Israel of inherent racism, of being a “racist endeavour“, are really inciting hatred of Jews in general and wherever they happen to live. Founding the state was the common wish of Jewish people, say supporters of Israel: denying that wish amounts to anti-Semitism.

In fact, creating a state that would give preferential treatment to Jews over others, including over the indigenous Palestinian people, was a minority opinion among Jews around the world before Israel was established.

Since the state’s founding in 1948, admittedly, Jews who support a territory of their own in Palestine have grown in number and proportion.

Still, no right of self-determination could ever supercede the right to equal treatment of every other person living on the land. Why should support for Israel – even if such support was unanimous among Jewry around the world – absolve Israel of racism at its core? 

At the time of Israel’s creation, its founding fathers drove out hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, and did not permit them to return when hostilities had ended. They refuse a right of return to this day. In the seven decades that followed, there was only a single year in which Israel did not control the Palestinian masses that remained by military occupation.

Palestinians now make up a majority of the population in all the territories Israel controls, but only a quarter of those people are accorded citizenship, and even they are subject to discrimination by at least 66 state laws.

Almost 1,000 villages and towns in Israel – more than three-quarters of the total – do not permit non-Jews to live within them.

To ensure that Israel’s High Court cannot quash any of these laws that discriminate against non-Jews, the Netanyahu government is now advancing new legislation which would sanctify the superior status of Jews in Israel.
These and many more travesties of justice are not bugs of the Jewish state; they are features of it. Where then are the rights of the Palestinians to self-determination, after the State of Israel has systematically eliminated them?

The hatred against Palestinians and others

In recent years, though, the elected and appointed leaders of Israeli Jews have incited hatred against Palestinians, African refugees, non-Jews in general, even against Israeli Jews who are not sufficiently nationalist in their eyes.
It gives me no pleasure to write this, but it must be clearly stated for the record: of late, top Israeli political and religious leaders have even incited genocide against the Palestinian people. Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef ruled in March that non-Jewish people, including Palestinians, have no right to live in the country.

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked said in May 2015 that all Palestinian people, including mothers and babies, are enemies who must be destroyed.

Most worrisome, this racist rhetoric is increasingly influencing the Israeli public, shifting it further and further to the far right. What human rights horrors could this lead to, if left unchecked?

In May 2014, Israel’s most highly respected author, Amos Oz, used a variation on the N-word to describe the country’s Jewish supremacists. “We also have Hebrew neo-Nazi groups,” Oz said. “There is nothing the modern-day neo-Nazis in Europe do that those groups don’t do here.”
Baby  Ali Dawabsheh was burnt alive with his parents and his surviving brother when his home was firebombed by neo-Nazi settlers - at the trial this month of the perpetrators, his supporters turned up to taunt his grandfather 'Ali is dead, Ali is on the grill' - the Police chose not to intervene
Just weeks later, some of those neo-Nazis kidnapped Mohammad Abu Khdeir, a Palestinian teenager in Jerusalem, beat him, forced gasoline down his throat, and burned him to death from the inside out. In July 2015, another group of Hebrew neo-Nazis firebombed a Palestinian home in the West Bank, murdering the Dawabsheh family’s father, mother and one-year-old baby.

In recent weeks, I accompanied the baby’s grandfather to court to support him in his quest for justice. Meanwhile, my fellow deputy speaker of the Knesset, Bezalel Smotrich, accompanied to court the young Israeli men on trial for committing the murders.
Khan al Ahmar where Israeli soldiers are grapping with residents whose homes they are intending to demolish

Two years ago on Yom HaShoah – Holocaust Remembrance Day itself – the Israeli army’s deputy chief of staff, Major General Yair Golan, told a group of assembled soldiers: “If there's something that frightens me about Holocaust remembrance, it's the recognition of the revolting processes that occurred in Europe in general, and particularly in Germany, back then – 70, 80 and 90 years ago – and finding signs of them here among us today in 2016.”

Golan’s harsh observations were not divorced from reality, but rather, reflected it accurately. A Pew poll published just two months earlier found that four-fifths of Israeli Jews want the state to accord them more legal rights than Palestinian citizens of Israel, and half – half! – of Israeli Jews want to strip non-Jews of their citizenship, and to outright deport them.

Stifling free speech ensures racism continues

This state of affairs is nothing to be happy about; like other public figures, I regret to inform you of it. But I am left with no choice: unless you are made aware of these frightening facts, there is no chance that these trends can be curbed, and reversed, so that ultimately, everyone living in the land can enjoy the equal rights they are entitled to, Jew and Gentile, Israeli and Palestinian.

The Labour Party’s new statement, which slams anti-Semitism but defends criticism of Israel, is a huge improvement over the anti-Palestinian policy that preceded it, and should be praised as such.

Attempts by the Labour Party or any other body to stifle free speech about Israeli racism will only ensure that the racism continues and increases unabated.

Ahmad Tibi is the most senior Arab MK, having served since 1999. He is one of the founders of the Arab Movement for Renewal (Hatenua Ha'Aravit le Hithadshut, or Ta’al) and a member of the Joint List (Hadash, Ra'am, Balad, Ta'al). In 1993, after the signing of the Oslo Accords, Yasser Arafat, then-chairman of the Palestinian Authority, appointed Tibi as his special adviser. Since his election to the Knesset, Ahmad Tibi has managed to pass 12 laws, most of which focus on social, economic and consumer issues. In 2010, Tibi gave a speech about the Holocaust, which then-Speaker Reuven Rivlin called “the finest speech ever given in the history of the Knesset”.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Reinstate All Those Expelled - End McNicol's Regime - No IHRA Definition of Antisemitism

Picket Labour Party National Executive Committee Meeting - 11.00-1.00 pm 17 July 2018 Southside

Picket Labour Party National Executive Committee Meeting - 17 July 2018

Monday, 16 July 2018

Support the Lobby for Stan Keable

Reinstate Stan Keable 

Free Speech on Palestine & Israel

Support the Lobby for Stan Keable

Reinstate Stan Keable 

Free Speech on Palestine & Israel

London Anti-Fascist Demonstration Against Tommy Robinson 14th July 2018

Large Anti-Fascist Mobilisation in Response to Football Lads Alliance Demonstration June 9th
On June 9th the Football Lads Alliance held a demonstration in London demanding the release of anti-Muslim racist Tommy Robinson.  It is estimated that up to 15,000 attended. 

The following day hundreds of FLA supporters joined Zionists at the annual Al Quds demonstration in London joining with far-Right Zionists in an attempt to stop the march.  The pretext was 'anti-terrorism'.
Steve Hedley who was attacked by fascists
In the past few days there have been dozens of anti-Trump demonstrations all over Britain, culminating in an estimated 200,000 demonstration in London on Friday.  On Saturday the FLA held a pro-Trump, release Tommy Robinson demonstration.  I estimate there were a few thousand fascists and a similar number of anti-fascists.

There were two separate mobilisations - the anarchists at the South Bank Centre and Stand up to Racism at the old Scotland Yard HQ in Victoria Street.  Both met up at around 2pm in Whitehall.

June 9th fascist march
Below are some pictures of the demonstration and the fascists.
The Zionist Campaign for Truth describes the attack on Steve Hedley as a 'scuffle'

Reports came in later that Steve Hedley, Assistant General Secretary of the RMT trade union had been glassed by these fascist thugs and other members of the RMT attacked in the Westminster Arms pub.

Police surround a number of fascists near Portcullis House - man in green is Neil Horan, a defrocked priest and Christian Zionist and fascist

People at the rallying point at the South Bank Centre

Police seal off  Trafalgar Square

Sunday, 15 July 2018

Zionist False Victimhood, The Hypocrisy of Adam Langleben and his silence over Israeli Child Abuse

Its fine 4 JLM President Louise Ellman MP to Defend the Abuse of Palestinian Children but Criticism of Young Zionists is a Child Protection Issue!

My question to Adam Langleben - why is the JLM silent about abuse of Palestinian children but concerned about publicising the names of JLM's young activists?  Racism? 
These two children were murdered yesterday by Israeli bombers in Gaza

I seem to have stirred up a veritable Zionist hornet's nest! 

Last Saturday, before going off to the anti-fascist demonstration in London, I posted a blog concerning an Open Letter by 18 young Zionists, mainly members of the Jewish Labour Movement, criticising Labour’s new Anti-Semitism Code of Conduct.  Their letter repeated the criticism of other Zionist organisations. It is clear that their elders (though not betters) including JLM’s Campaigns Officer Adam Langleben inspired them.
This Open Letter was widely distributed on the net but it is a threat to under the 18s who signed it if I publicise it - 
I have previously posted about Langleben’s political dishonesty in The Chutzpah of Adam Langleben & the Jewish Labour Movement.  Langleben was a Councillor in Barnet and one of the instigators of the false anti-Semitism campaign before the last local elections. So successful was he in convincing his electorate that the Labour Party was anti-Semitic that they decided not to vote for him! Of the 3 Labour candidates Langleben came bottom which may speak volumes about his laziness as a Councillor.
The young Jews who said Kaddish for the victims of Israeli terrorism and mass murder in Gaza were the ones who were subject to intimidation and threats of violence - the JLM of course was not involved in this protest
The 18 young Zionists who signed the Open Letter spoke of the NEC’s incomprehensible decision to abandon the IHRA definition of antisemitism’   The letter urged support for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism. [IHRA] which conflates anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. They falsely alleged that Labour’s Anti-Semitism Code deemed acceptable ‘the antisemitic trope of alleging that Jews, by virtue of their identity, have their loyalties primarily to the State of Israel.’
As I explained in my article the exact reverse is the case. Although one of the IHRA’s 11 illustrations says that ‘Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel’ might be anti-Semitic, another illustration states that ‘Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.’ Leaving aside that claiming Israel is racist has no relevance to the question of self-determination.
The child abuse that the JLM justifies
The latter illustration, which our young Zionists ‘forgot’ to mention, is deeply anti-Semitic. It talks about the right of self-determination of the Jewish people. Only nations have the right to self-determination which is the right to form a state.  Jews live in many different countries, they speak many different languages, they are clearly not a nation.  What this is about is race not nationality. The idea that Jews have anything more in common than their religion is the foundation for the Nazi and anti-Semitic world Jewish conspiracy theory.  According to the latter Jews are not loyal citizens of the countries where they live but form a common international bond in which they are loyal only to themselves.  This is the theme of the famous Czarist forgery the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Works for Andrew Dismore, former Labour MP and GLA member - a collaborator who goes out on a limb to support Israel's apartheid state
What this provision is saying is that the State of Israel is national state of Jews world wide, which it does claim and therefore all Jews owe it loyalty. If this is true then of course it is not anti-Semitic to blame Jews for what Israel does because it is their Jewish, state.  Just as it isn’t racist to blame British people for what the British state does on their behalf, unless they disavow its actions.
It's a strange logic which says you can't quote people who openly post because they are under 18 - Zionist victimhood knows no limits
Langleben's concern about 'under 18s' doesn't extend to Palestinian victims of his favourite state
In other words the IHRA is, according to its own definition, anti-Semitic!  However I wouldn’t expect our young Zionists, who are not known for their critical faculties, to challenge the Zionist nostrums they were reared on.
What is remarkable is that I was immediately subject to a fierce counter attack, not about the content of my blog but because some of the authors of the Open Letter were under 18!  Langleben tweeted at 9.00, although I didn’t see it until I got back in the evening from the anti-fascist  demonstration in London which his friends in the Campaign 4 Truth attended (on the fascist side!).  Langleben wrote:
I strongly recommend you remove all images of these young people from your blog of hate immediately. Many are under 18.
My response was:
all these images r in the public domain - if people choose 2 put them up they cant complain if others use them - ur being your usual dishonest self since you have nothing to say about the message which is stop justifying Israeli apartheid thru false accusations of antisemitism
All the images I used on the blog were taken from the signatories own twitter feeds.  In other words they were all public.  Nonetheless I tweeted Langleben back that I would remove any images. A day later Langleben put out another tweet.
You have written nasty libellous stuff about me and many people but you are too insignificant to pursue. I personally don't care what you say. I do care about under 18s. I have sent you the names.
Ahed Tamimi - Israeli army video of her early morning arrest
Langleben said he was concerned about under- 18s. Which under-18s I wondered?  Was he concerned about Ahed Tamimi, a 16 year old girl who was put in military detention in Israel at the end of last year for slapping a heavily armed soldier who had nearly killed her cousin by shooting him in the head?  Ahed received an 8 month prison sentence, without remission.  An Israeli soldier, Elor Azaria, a Kahanist who murdered an injured Palestinian lying unconscious on the ground, firing directly at him, received served just 9 months.  In other words the penalty for killing a Palestinian was one month more than slapping a soldier.
Ahed was also subject to threats of rape and ‘unspeakable acts’ by Israeli journalist Ben Caspit. Adam Langleben might protest that he is not responsible for what Israel does.  However the organisation of which he is a senior officer, the JLM, is affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation which is responsible for settlement in the West Bank. The JLM is by its own admission the ‘sister’ party of the Israeli Labour Party, which supports the settlements.  But even worse its own President, Louise Ellman MP has gone out on a limb to defend the practice of the Israeli military in raiding homes at night to seize children as young as 12, the practice of blindfolding them, beating, torturing (according to Amnesty International, 60% of children are tortured on arrest), sexually abusing them, shackling them and not allowing them access to parents or lawyers. All small beer compared to publicising peoples’ names.
On the 6th January 2016 the House of Commons held a debate on Child Prisoners and Detainees: Occupied Palestinian Territories. Three times Ellman intervene to support Israel’s abuse of Palestinian children. My criticism of Ellman was held by Labour’s National Constitutional Committee to have ‘shamed’ her and was one of the reasons for my expulsion.  Ellman placed the blame for Israel’s child abuse on the Palestinians.  Not once has the JLM dissociated itself from the words of their President. According to this wretch, Palestinians would love their occupiers but for ‘incitement’.
the context in which these situations occur is an organised campaign conducted by the Palestinian authorities of incitement, to try to provoke young Palestinians to carry out acts of violence towards other civilians, some of which result in death, including the death of young children?’ 
‘I note my hon. Friend’s comments that a child should not be detained, and I assume that she means in any circumstances. Suppose a child was involved in an act of violence that resulted in the deaths of other human beings. That is what has happened with young Palestinians throwing stones—people have been killed. In those circumstances, surely she thinks that there should be detention.’ 
‘Does my hon. Friend really believe that the solution to this horrendous conflict between two peoples—the Israeli and the Palestinian people—can be found by encouraging individual child Palestinians to commit acts of violence against other human beings?’ 
Sara Conway is not above using child protection issues to clamp down on free speech as she appeals to the Metropolitan Police
The best one can say about Conway is that she is an airhead who has nothing to say about anything - full of the usual trite cliches about young people
And where Langleben led, others followed.  Councillor Sara Conway was most concerned at my post but apparently not at the fact that everything in my post was online and public. She even appealed for help to the Metropolitan Police! So was Councillor Arjun Mittra who was anxious to demonstrate how even Black and Asian councillors can stand up for Israeli Apartheid in the best traditions of Raj collaboration.
If you want to find out what Jack looks like you'll have to go to his  Twitter feed
Adam messaged me with just 3 names out of the 18 who were under 18 – Jack Lubner, Sadiyah Akther and Josh Newmark.  My only mention of Sadiya was to reprint the Open Letter to which her name was attached.  Apparently it is a child protection issue if I reprint an Open Letter which she has signed!
I republished the twitter exchanges of Josh Newmark, viz. that Jeremy Corbyn was a ‘dick’.
I also republished the image of Jack Lubner which is available on his Twitter feed. For the sake of argument I blacked out his face, although anyone who is really interested in what he looks like can find it by going to his Twitter feed.
So what is all this about?  It is another exercise in Zionist False Victimhood.  It is about making out that those who support Zionism and Israeli Apartheid are the Victims, whereas the real victims, the Palestinian are the oppressor.  This is the logic of the old Westerns when John Wayne and co. were always under attack, for no obvious reason, by the native Indians.
Despite the RMT Assistant General Secretary Steve Hedley being glassed in the face, according to these fascist Zionists it was 'peaceful'
It is touching to see how the open fascists Campaign for Truth backs up Adam Langleben and the JLM
Support for the JLM from the Zionists' fascist wing - the C4T was there yesterday supporting Tommy Robinson who combines neo-Nazism with ardent support for Israel, not the copy to Katie Hopkins
The C4T just loves Katie Hopkins, who believes refugees are vermin - however they leap in to support Langleben and the JLM - as we've always said the differences between different Zionists are no more than tactical

What is sad is that the Labour Party tolerates those who justify racism like Councillors Conway, Mittra and of course the JLM leadership. What is interesting is that also joining in the attack was none other than the Zionist  Campaign for Truth.  The CfT is an open supporter of Tommy Robinson and his fascist friends.
Whilst Langleben was tweeting yesterday and the CtF was backing him up, I was joining an anti-fascist demonstration in London.  Of one thing you can be sure, those who oppose ‘anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party are not interesting in opposing the real anti-Semites.
Tony Greenstein