Starmer Prosecuted Julian Assange,
Above is the video of Ian Tomlinson, a man
going about his job selling newspapers, who was viciously attacked by the
Police riot squad. Starmer is personally responsible for the killers getting
off scot free. He is a Red (or Pink) Tory.
Unity candidate?
Starmer has made great play in the election
for Leader that he is the ‘unity candidate’ – only he can bridge the gap
between left and right.
Starmer is the candidate of MI5 and the
Political Police – he is Establishment down to his manicured fingers. ‘Sir’
Keir has pointed to his role in providing legal advice to striking miners and
print workers. This is true but it was a
long time ago when he was a socialist. Today he is the darling of the Right.
As Director of Public Prosecutions he was, as
the Canary
states, ‘responsible for prosecuting all those lovely people he
previously defended.’
Activists
in his Holborn and St. Pancras constituency have spoken out in a
letter to the Camden New Journal. Over
30 Labour Party members, including Stephen Kapos, a child survivor of the Hungarian
Holocaust and the Budapest Ghetto and anti-racist campaigners Amanda Sebestyen
and Jewish Socialist Group member Ruth Appleton wrote that:
Time and time again, as
left-leaning members we have been subjected to hostility and abuse... Those
that are close to Keir Starmer, rather than welcome involvement from the left,
have actively prevented it....
Keir Starmer presides over a
constituency Labour Party which contains only officers with a history of
outright opposition to Jeremy Corbyn. As left-leaning party members we have
been completely marginalised by the right in the local party who support Keir
Starmer.
Claiming to be the unity
candidate should be more than a catchy campaign slogan. We are gravely
concerned that under a Keir Starmer leadership all socialists in the party will
be treated as we have been.
Therefore any socialist thinking
about supporting Keir Starmer should think again and instead support a
candidate that welcomes and supports socialist policies and encourages the
active involvement of socialist members!
Attacking
Benefit Claimants
One
of the particularly ugly features of New Labour was the repeated attacks it
made on benefit claimants. It began in 1997 with the removal of single parents
allowance and they never looked back. New Labour ran ads on ‘benefit thieves’
but never about tax dodgers even though far more benefit is left
unclaimed than lost through false claims.
The scale of multi national and other tax
dodging is huge yet ‘Sir’ Keir was unconcerned about prosecuting his
establishment buddies. The Independent of 16th September 2013
reported that ‘Benefit
cheats face 10 years in prison as Keir Starmer sets out 'tough' new Crown
Prosecution Service guidelines.’
People on benefit, by definition, live in
poverty. The level of JSA, £75 per week, makes it impossible to live on it for
any prolonged period of time. It is probably
what ‘Sir’ Keir pays for a good bottle of wine when he sits down to have a meal in a fancy restaurant.
At a time when New Labour gave out corporate
tax breaks, handed lucrative contracts to PFI companies like Carillon to privatise
the NHS and paid farmers 'set aside grants' not to grow food, the attack on benefit claimants was
one of the most disgusting features Blair's period in office. Starmer was more than happy to contribute to New Labour's attack on civil liberties.
Someone trying to put clothes on their
children and feed their empty stomachs by earning a few pounds a week over
and above their poverty allowance from the state was branded a criminal whereas
the real criminals who hid billions away in offshore islands got off scot free. ‘Sir Keir’ said nothing
about them and recommended no prison time for his rich friends.
The Murder of Jean Charles
de Menenzes
In the wake of 7/7 Jean Charles Menenzes was
murdered by the Metropolitan Police. He was shot at point blank range. The Daily Record
(14.2.09.) wrote about how the family of Jean Charles de Menezes
dropped their legal battle for justice last night after prosecutors refused to
bring charges over his death.
They said
almost four years of relentless campaigning had brought them little closer to
holding any individual to account for the innocent Brazilian's death.
Keir Starmer
QC, Director of Public Prosecutions, approved a decision not to prosecute any
police over the shooting.
Starmer Explains His Refusal to Prosecute a Police Killer
Police
Murder of Ian Tomlinson
As George Monbiot wrote in Ian
Tomlinson ruling: we must all fight this whitewash ‘First
Blair Peach. Then Jean Charles de Menezes. Now Ian Tomlinson. It is our duty to
raise Cain this time.’
Perhaps the most outrageous decision of all was Starmer’s
decision not to prosecute the Police over the murder of Ian Tomlinson, who was
viciously attacked by the Police in central London.
‘Hundreds of thousands of us have now seen the footage of the
newspaper-seller shambling peacefully home from work. We've seen how, without
warning or provocation, PC Simon Harwood attacked him
from behind, hitting him with a baton then shoving him to the ground. We
know that the officer had unlawfully removed his badge, and that his face was
obscured by a balaclava. We know that, a few minutes afterwards, Ian Tomlinson
collapsed and died. We also know that the Metropolitan police lied about his
death to the media and to Tomlinson's family.
Fifteen months later the director of public
prosecutions, Keir Starmer, decides that "there is no realistic prospect of a conviction against [Harwood] for
any offence arising from the matter investigated and that no charges should be
brought against him". The evidence for his role in Tomlinson's death,
Starmer says, is contradictory, and the time limit for pressing lesser charges
has sadly expired. Starmer provides no convincing explanation of why it has
taken him so long to make his decision, or of why a jury should not be allowed
to make its own assessment of the evidence.
Now picture the opposite case: a
civilian launching an unprovoked attack on a policeman, captured on film, which
is immediately followed by the policeman's death. The Crown Prosecution Service
ponders and dithers before deciding that the assailant should get away scot
free. Implausible? You have just understood that in the United Kingdom equality
before the law exists only in textbooks.
 |
| Looking Shifty - would you vote for this man? |
Starmer
Covered Up for the Metropolitan’s Spy Cops and their wrongful convictions
Equally appalling was
that Starmer was DPP when revelations were published about the
first known ‘spycop’, Mark Kennedy. Kennedy infiltrated
environmental and anticapitalist groups between 2003 and 2009. In 2011, a trial
of environmental activists accused
of plotting to break into Ratcliffe power station collapsed after it emerged
that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had covered up vital evidence. This consisted
of recordings Kennedy had made of planning meetings. Starmer was present in court the
day the case was thrown out.
20 people already prosecuted
from the same action had their convictions overturned. And a further 29 people convicted
of blocking a train carrying coal to Drax power station also had convictions
quashed due to Kennedy’s involvement.
The CPS ordered an investigation
into what had happened. Interviewed about the ensuing report in 2011, Starmer said:
If Sir Christopher Rose had found
systemic problems, then I would quite accept perhaps a retrospective look at
all the cases. But he didn’t, he found individual failings.
But it was systemic. In
2015, the Guardian reported
that 83 people could have been wrongfully convicted after evidence of spycop
involvement was withheld. On 6 January, the Guardian published
details of the case of an 81-year-old man trying to get a conviction overturned
for an anti-apartheid protest in 1972. Following revelations from the Undercover
Policing Inquiry, he discovered that the person he was convicted alongside
was actually an undercover police officer.
The Campaign Opposing Police
Surveillance claims:
If the other 150
or so officers have similar tallies [as Kennedy], it means about 7,000
wrongful convictions are being left to stand. It may well be that spycops are
responsible for the biggest nobbling of the judicial system in English history.
So Starmer’s suggestion that Kennedy’s actions were not systematic is bullshit.
Released papers showed the Crown
Prosecution Service had been deeply involved – they knew about the plan before
the arrests, they worked with the police to withhold evidence from the defence
and the courts.
 |
| Starmer's one word endorsement of the expulsion of a Jewish anti-Zionist should make it clear where his sympathies lie on Israel and Palestine |
Fake Anti-Semitism Campaign
I have a personal interest in
this. I was the first Jewish person to
be expelled under the fake anti-Semitism campaign. After all if you want to
fight ‘anti-Semitism’ it’s a good idea to expel a few Jews! But this was not
about Jews or anti-Semitism but Israel. When I was expelled on February 18th
2018 who was first out of the stalls to
support the expulsion? Arise Sir
Keir with this tweet from
the 'unity' candidate.
As the Telegraph wrote in
Keir Starmer: the high-flying
law man desperate to stress his working class credentials
Sir Keir has
spent his life “fighting for justice, standing
up for the powerless”, but cringes if anyone brings up his knighthood, let
alone his £1.8 million house.
And
Politics
Home, run by Kevin Schofield, an ex Sun ‘journalist’ reported that Keir
Starmer – top prosecutor lurches left to cement favourite status.
Anyone
who is fooled by this ‘lurch to the
left’ is truly pathetic. Starmer is the candidate for the
Police, MI5 and the British State that eviscerated Corbyn. It was just one of Corbyn’s idiocies that
when Starmer resigned in the chicken coup that he was let back in to wreak more
havoc.
In
his resignation letter Starmer wrote
that
‘In the last few days I have maintained my
support for you notwithstanding my reservations. However. the resignations
across the Shadow Cabinet and the Shadow Frontbench … materially change this.
It is simply untenable now to suggest that we can offer an effective opposition
without a change of leader.’
Starmer was also criticised
for the decision not to prosecute the black cab rapist John Warboys on further
charges which allowed him to apply for parole and very nearly get it.
It
is quite clear that ‘Sir’ Keir’s claims to left-wing credentials, based on his
youth, are fake and phoney. He long ago abandoned all of that. His revolutionary days are behind him.
Starmer demonstrated during his time as DPP that he
was deeply hostile to civil liberties. The decision over Ian Tomlinson’s death was
particularly shocking. A bent Home Office pathologist, who was contradicted by
2 other pathologists and who was the subject of disciplinary proceedings by his
own professional association was used by Starmer as an excuse to allow a killer
Policeman to go free.
This
decision, on its own, makes Starmer unfit to be Labour leader. He is literally
an accessory after the fact to Police murder.
And those 'feminists' supporting Starmer should be aware that Women Against Rape, based in Camden, pressed Starmer, as head of the CPS to end the policy of prosecuting rape survivors disbelieved by the police, similar to the recent case in Cyprus.
Starmer refused to change the policy, undermining women’s ability to report rape and landing some in prison for years.
See Oliver Eagleton's The case against Keir Starmer
Tony
Greenstein
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please submit your comments below