The EHRC
Report Should Be Rejected along with the Myth of Labour Anti-Semitism
To Register Click Here
Jeremy Corbyn was absolutely right in the
comments that got him suspended: "One antisemite is one too many, but the
scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by
our opponents".
It is a real shame that he did not say so when
he could have made a real difference to the civil war in the Labour Party.
Unfortunately, it was the Corbyn leadership’s silence and complicity in the
witch-hunt that made his suspension possible in the first place. Hundreds of
socialists and Corbyn supporters have been suspended and expelled for comments
that often do not amount to much more than what Corbyn said.
We need to understand that the campaign by the
right inside and outside the party was never about fighting antisemitism. It
was always a campaign designed to get rid of Corbyn and make sure that the
Labour Party becomes once again a safe “second eleven” that could run Britain
on behalf of capitalism, and follow the US into any new military adventure.
Sadly, it appears as if Corbyn and his allies
still do not understand this basic reality. The six candidates supported by the
Centre-Left Grassroots Alliance in the current NEC elections have made sure not
to mention the word ‘witch-hunt’, or propose any actions on how to stop it.
In a tweet following his suspension, Corbyn writes that, “I’ve made absolutely clear those who deny
there has been an antisemitism problem in the Labour Party are wrong. I will
continue to support a zero tolerance policy towards all forms of racism.”
Corbyn himself has now become a victim of this “zero tolerance” approach he champions. The fight for socialism is intrinsically linked to a culture of free speech and open debate on all issues – including, importantly, the question of Israel/Palestine.
Please click here to sign and share the excellent petition/open
letter by the LLA
Anyone
who believes that Jeremy Corbyn was suspended on the basis of what he actually
said today needs their head examining. It was planned long ago. Back in
July there were rumours emanating from Starmer’s office that Corbyn would be
suspended when the EHRC
Report was released.
The Canary reported
on 22nd July that
‘According to a
few Labour sources this morning, it's "very possible" and
"highly likely" that Jeremy Corbyn will have the whip removed very
soon, as a result of some of the recommendations in the EHRC report.’ #LabourAntisemitism.
Starmer is using the recommendations of the EHRC in order to purge the Left by removing
the presence of a former leader. The question is whether or not the Left
responds by declaring war on Sturmer or, like Momentum makes a pathetic plea for unity with those trying to destroy it. Some of thought that when Lansman's cronies were defeated earlier this year by Momentum Forward that its politics might change.
Unfortunately Momentum Forward has continued where Lansman left off. Yesterday they put out an appalling statement in
reaction to Corbyn’s suspension in which they protested that “This suspension risks politicising
Labour's response to antisemitism.” Perhaps someone should tell
Scatterbrain that anti-Semitism has been weaponised for over 5
years now. Sturmer wants to destroy the left not unite with it!
 |
| McDonnell symbolises the political weakness of the Labour Left and Momentum - he defends Corbyn in the name of the fight against 'antisemitism' - the very thing used to get rid of Corbyn |
Who
do Momentum think Margaret Hodge, Tom Watson, Lucian Berger et al represent? The anti-racist left? Momentum pathetically plead that the
suspension ‘should be immediately lifted
in the interests of party unity.’
Where have these
dunderheads been living? Starmer isn’t
interested in party unity. He’s
interested in driving out the left from
the Labour Party. If Momentum don’t recognise this it’s because they are wedded to the same reformist illusions as Lansman.
Momentum’s co-chairs then
go on to describe the EHRC
Report in completely uncritical terms. Scatterbrain says that:
for many it will make for difficult reading. It
concludes that the Labour Party complaints process for antisemitism is
inadequate, and expresses concern that the current process does not ensure fair
and transparent sanctioning of antisemitism complaints. It also finds unlawful
acts to have been committed by former Labour Party agents.
It is clear that whatever
this year’s Momentum elections were about they were not about politics. The
EHRC is not an anti-racist body. Its
Commissioners are taken from the corporate and banking world with the odd
lawyer thrown in. It is an organisation of the liberal Establishment that has been mobilised to drive a wedge into the Labour Party using identity politics to disguise its purpose.
 |
| David Isaac - the EHRC's Zionist Chair |
It is a body that has said
next to nothing about the Windrush scandal, done nothing about the ‘hostile
environment’ policy of the Tories, it has said nothing about stop
and search, refugees or institutional racism. Why?
Because it is itself an institutionally
racist body.
As Simon Woolley, a former
Commissioner wrote
the EHRC doesn’t have one single Black or Muslim Commissioner. It is stuffed with liberal and corporate do
gooders. Woolley wrote
‘I’ve been particularly stuck by the huge gulf
between the EHRC and the new generation of young Black Lives Matter activists’.
The EHRC is
utterly irrelevant to the victims of racism in Britain today. It is a body whose sole purpose is in incorporating and blunting the anti-racist message. It is as much our enemy as Boris Johnson.
Whilst we must oppose Corbyn’s
suspension he is the author of his own misfortune. When the EHRC first
proposed its investigation it should have been vigorously opposed as an
intrusion by a State body into a democratic political party. What has happened is the kind of tactic used in police states. The State has effectively sought to neutralise a radical political party.
 |
| Boris Johnson - a genuine racist whom the EHRC is dependent on for its funding |
According to a Yougov
poll for Hope not Hate, nearly half of Tory Party members oppose having a
Muslim Prime Minister and more
than two-thirds of Tory members believe the myth that parts of the UK are under
Sharia law. 45% think some areas are not safe for non-Muslims. And if that
is not enough nearly
two-thirds of Tory members believe that Islam is a threat to western
civilisation. Yet the EHRC has fought shy of doing anything about an openly racist party led by someone who believes that Black people are 'picanninies' with 'water melon smiles.'
Unlike ‘anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party Islamaphobia in the Tory Party is part of its DNA. Yet this useless body has kept its mouth shut for fear of losing what’s left of its grant. Corbyn, whose stupidity is beyond doubt, said nothing when what he should have done was to refuse all co-operation.
When 2 openly Zionist
organisations, both of which are effectively extensions of the Israeli state –
the Jewish Labour Movement and the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism – made
their complaints to the EHRC, Corbyn should have launched legal action to stop
it in its tracks. This is state interference in a legal party and a breach of Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights on
freedom of association.
 |
| Jon Lansman, the former owner of Momentum and his replacement, Andrew Scattergood and Gaya Sriskanthan |
Realising that its previous statement was hopelessly inadequate Momentum issued another statement after a meeting tonight. The statement was equally useless. It read:
‘The suspension of
Jeremy Corbyn by the Labour Party leadership is a factional attack on the left that inevitably undermines the fight
against anti-semitism and makes a mockery of Keir Starmer’s pledge to unite
the Party. Tonight our Party is more divided than ever.’
 |
| This perfectly reasonable meme was part of the Notice of Investigation which led to the expulsion of Simon Hindmarsh - it made a political point that all the world's worst atrocities were legal - in the eyes of Labour's witchhunters it was 'antisemitic' - go figure |
When will the Scatterbrain and Sriskanthan get it into their heads that there has never been a fight against ‘anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party? It has always been an attack on anti-Zionism and the Palestinians. Every Letter of Investigation I have seen accuses people of anti-Semitism based on their comments about Israel, the world’s only apartheid state.
 |
| Phil Woolas, Labour MP for Oldham & Saddleworth ran a nakedly anti-Muslim campaign trying to stir up the racist White vote - and Tom Watson 'lost sleep' over the injustice of the High Court removing this racist |
Does Scatterbrain really think that Tom Watson, Hodge and co. were really interested in fighting anti-Semitism? The same Hodge who was praised by the BNP for her housing policies? Or the same Tom Watson who ‘lost sleep’ thinking about the injustice of the High Court removing racist Labour MP Phil Woolas from the Parliament after running a campaign that aimed to 'make the White folk angry'?
The
‘anti-Semitism’ campaign waged for the past 5 years was not about anti-Semitism. If
it was then isn’t it strange that so many Jewish members have been expelled or
suspended. And why should Labour MPs who voted
to legalise torture be concerned about anti-Semitism anyway?
We know Starmer’s attitude to racism. Black Lives Matter is just a moment whose
time has gone. He believes in more funding for the racist Metropolitan Police.
At a time of Black Lives Matter, stop and search, Windrush etc. the
only form of racism that matters is 'antisemitism'. Jews in Britain are a
privileged White community. To
prioritise ‘anti-Semitism’ over racism against Black and Muslim people is itself racist.
Sure there is some antisemitic prejudice if you
look hard enough but as the EHRC Report concedes most of it is in social
media. No one has ever died from a tweet
but plenty of Black youth have died in Police custody yet Starmer has nothing
but praise for the Police.
Growing up as a Jewish person in non-Jewish communities I never had to fear being attacked in the street. I didn't have to hide from the deportation squads. My father wasn't stopped when driving for being Jewish and handcuffed. Jews in Britain are not oppressed. They are, for the most part, a prosperous middle class community. The days of working class Jewish communities are gone. The Jews of the East End have moved to London's suburbs. My favourite restaurant, Blooms in Whitechapel closed years ago. In short Jews do not experience state racism. They are the kept pets of Britain’s ruling class for whom it is a safe form of anti-racism.
The 'antisemitism' campaign
was always about attacking Corbyn. Yet Momentum’s Scattergood/Sriskanthan believes
that a campaign which only arose when Corbyn became leader is somehow being
jeopardized by Corbyn’s suspension! Momentum Forward and Lansman’s Momentum Renewal
are peas in a pod.
If you want to read a decent statement on the
suspension of Jeremy Corbyn then you can do worse than read the Morning Star’s
Jeremy
Corbyn's suspension is a declaration of war. And you don't win a war by asking someone trying to kill you to hold your hand!
What Can We Do?
This Saturday Labour
Against the Witchhunt is organising a public meeting with Ken Livingstone,
Chris Williamson, Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and Tony Greenstein speaking.
The following Saturday
there is a similar line-up being organised with Asa Winstanley, Chris Williamson and Tony Greenstein speaking, chaired by Miko Peled, the ‘wrong sort of Israeli Jew’ chairing.
On Friday Brighton &
Hove LLA will be organising a local anti-witchhunt meeting. Starmer’s
suspension of his predecessor is unprecedented. We should be clear about why we
oppose it and where it came from.
Corbyn himself laid the basis
for what has happened. His
opposition to Open Selection at the 2018 Labour Party Conference and then his decision at the 2019 Party Conference to support ‘fast track’ expulsions which we
were assured were only for ‘egregious’ cases but which have since been used in EVERY
‘anti-Semitism’ case laid the basis for his own suspension. Corbyn has literally fashioned his own noose. However just because someone is an idiot or a coward doesn’t mean one should not support them!
The Labour Left Alliance
have launched an Open
Letter: Reinstate Jeremy Corbyn please sign it.
Labour Against the Witchhunt has also issued a
statement
‘Reinstate Jeremy Corbyn’ as well as
a model motion Reinstate
Jeremy Corbyn! Stop the witch-hunt!
The gloves are off and anyone who thinks that by conceding to the lie that there was an ‘anti-Semitism’ problem in Labour that they are then going to gain a tactical advantage is seriously mistaken. ‘Anti-Semitism’ was the Right's chosen weapon. It was never about anti-Jewish racism, hence why the IHRA misdefinition of anti-Semitism was foisted upon the Labour Party.
In fact I am incorrect. It was Corbyn himself at the end of 2016 who unilaterally adopted the 38 word IHRA. Having spent his whole political life supporting the Palestinians, having been called an 'antisemite' countless times, he voluntarily adopted a definition whose only purpose was to conflate anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism and define him as an anti-Semite.
Anti-Semitism was chosen as the method of attack precisely because it was not a form of racism
but a means of denigrating opposition to the Israeli state and giving the Right
some moral stature. It fitted in well to the Left's addiction to Identity Politics rather than Class Politics. Those like Momentum’s
Scatterbrain and the rest of the NCG who think they can gain Corbyn’s
reinstatement on the basis of adhering to the EHRC Report are fooling
themselves and no one else.
 |
| Free Speech has been Abolished By Sturmer's New General Secretary David Evans |
As part of the new
democratic order David Evans, Labour's General Secretary has issued another
warning to local parties not to discuss the EHRC Report. It is clear that
far from being a democratic party, the Labour Party has now become a
tyranny. It is of prime importance to
democrats in the party that Evans is defied and told where to go.
It is crucial that local parties defy Evans and go ahead and condemn the report and Sturmer with it. That is what Momentum should be calling for not unity with the devil.
The
EHRC Report – A Brief Summation
I spent two weeks compiling
a 2 part summary of the 851 page Leaked Labour Report. The EHRC Report is an
insubstantial tract. At 130 pages is remarkable for the fact that it is shallow and superficial,
lacking in substance. Its main focus is the alleged failure of Labour’s
disciplinary and complaints processes. Whereas it took me 3 days to read Labour’s Leaked Report on Anti-Semitism the
EHRC Report was a breeze. There is nothing in it apart from procedure. The EHRC
has produced a mouse and yet Starmer willed it on as a means of attacking the
Left. Its failures are manifest to anyone who isn’t cerebrally
challenged. Below are some points:
1.
Quite amazingly for a
report on anti-Semitism it doesn’t once try to define what it means by
anti-Semitism. The EHRC know better than to define anti-Semitism concretely as hostility to or prejudice or discrimination against Jews. Instead they rely on things that are 'offensive' to Jews, regardless of whether they are true. It is an old trick.
 |
| Avi Gabbay, former leader of the almost extinct racist Israeli Labour Party of which the JLM is the British wing |
2.
There is no attempt to
ask who the 2 complainants, the Jewish Labour Movement and the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism actually are. The fact that the JLM describes itself as the ‘sister party’ of the almost extinct
Israeli Labour Party is not even mentioned. Ha'aretz, Israel’s liberal
daily describes
its former leader Avi Gabbay as a Likudnik. It is a party that supported Netanyahu's attempt to deport Israel's 40,000 Black African refugees because, in Netanyahu's words, they threatened Israel's racial 'Jewish identity.'
 |
| This delightful figure illustrated the CAA's 'Muslims and Antisemitism' Report |
3.
The CAA is a
virulently Islamaphobic organisation, racist to its root, which works with
Zionist supporters of Tommy Robinson. In other words the complainants to the
EHRC are themselves deeply racist. It published a coloured graphic of the
typical Muslim male as part of an attack on Muslims. If
a similar graphic on Jews had been produced we would have never heard the end of
it.
 |
| The Jewish Labour Movement's 'sister party' in Israel supported Netanyahu's racist policy of deporting Black refugees because they are neither Jewish nor White - the JLM has never once condemned their racist sisters |
4. Not once did the EHRC entertain the idea that accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ have been the staple of Zionist attacks on critics of Israel for decades. No less than the French President Macron has declared that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are one and the same. So if one opposes the Jewish nature of the Israeli state then that is anti-Semitic. Today Ha'aretz published an article about how Israel is seeking to expand the boundaries of the Jewish town of Harish because Arabs, at 44% are already nearly a majority. It wants to expand it to dilute the Arab presence. Yet to call this what it is is ‘anti-Semitism'. Since when was it anti-Semitic to oppose racism?
5.
The Report singles out
two people in particular, Ken Livingstone, who pioneered anti-racism in local
government and Pam Bromley, a councillor in Rossendale. The attack on
Livingstone is particularly egregious but what the Report doesn’t mention is
that it also singled out Chris Williamson.
However Chris immediately instructed solicitors and the EHRC backed
off. You won’t read that in the Report!
6.
There was no mention
of the fact, and it is a fact, that the anti-Semitism campaign began as a completely
confected campaign led by that well known opponent of racism, the Daily Mail,
which alleged
that Corbyn had links with Holocaust deniers Paul Eisen. Not once does it ask
why the racist tabloids suddenly became so concerned with ‘anti-Semitism’. In short the Report completely
decontextualises the allegations whilst insinuating that anyone denying that
there was an anti-Semitism problem was themselves anti-Semitic! This is called ‘denialism’ which is the logic
of the Salem Witchhunt when
women and men were hanged for witchcraft in Massachusetts. As Elizabeth
Purdy wrote:
Those who publicly questioned the guilt of a
defendant were likely to be accused of witchcraft themselves.
7.
The logic of
‘denialism’ is the ‘logic’ of the 17th Century witch-hunters yet Corbyn in his idiocy gave his backing to this nonsense. The idea that denying a crime is to admit it is the stuff of Kafka.
8.
The Report talks of ‘zero
tolerance’ of anti-Semitism yet the EHRC has indulged the racism of the Tory
Party without even the slightest comment. It has done nothing about the hostile
environment policy or Windrush where Black British citizens were illegally
deported. The idea that the EHRC is an anti-racist body is for the birds.
9.
Strangely enough for a
report concerned with procedural irregularities it has nothing to say about
Labour’s fast track expulsions where the accused are denied a hearing.
10.
There is repeated talk
of ‘Jewish community stakeholders’. It never once explains who these might be
but we can assume it means the Trump Tory supporting Board of Deputies. A body which cheered on the
Israeli army as they mowed down unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza. They
blamed the death of medics and children on the victims and they then profess to
be concerned about anti-Semitism.
11.
Nearly all their
examples of ‘anti-Semitism’ consist of social media posts. This simply
trivializes anti-Semitism. Racism is about what people do not what they post on
Twitter. Noone has ever died from a tweet but plenty have died from Israeli
bullets.
12.
Despite saying that
they took evidence from Jewish Voices for Labour there is no evidence of
this. The EHRC comprehensively
disregarded the voice of anti-Zionist and non-Zionist Jews.
13.
I wrote to the EHRC’s
Investigation repeatedly offering to give evidence. They were not interested. When I pointed out their disinterest in
Conservative Party racism they responded.
With reference to your submission of 13 July 2019 and your specific observation relating to the Conservative Party, we can confirm that we are actively considering what, if any, action we may take in relation to the handling of Islamophobia and other discrimination within the Conservative Party. Further, we have made the following statement in relation to Windrush and the Government’s hostile environment policies.
14.
And that was it.
After having ‘actively considered’ my submissions they decided to do absolutely nothing!
15.
Clearly there were
some Jews who were more important than others.
I told them that as the first Jewish person to be expelled I might have
a different perspective on the fake anti-Semitism affair. They made it clear that they weren’t
interested.
15.
The EHRC said they
launched their ‘investigation’ because of ‘serious public concern about
allegations of anti-Semitism’. It is strange that serious public concern about
Police stop and search, the Windrush deportations and other acts of state
racism merited no such concern. In fact there was no public concern about
Labour anti-Semitism. It was a narrative
of the Tory press and the Labour right-wing.
16.
Its main obsession was
‘political interference in the handling
of anti-Semitism complaints.’ (p.7) Perhaps that was because the complaints
themselves were politically motivated.
17.
It talks of ‘anti-Semitic conduct’ but never mentions
what that conduct is. Everything is
inferred.
18.
It mentions (p.17)
that ‘over 20 elected representatives
(including MPs, peers and councillors) resigned from the Party in 2018 and 2019
citing a failure to tackle anti-Semitism in their reasons.’ It was of
course no coincidence that these people were all on the anti-Corbyn wing of the
Labour Party and people who had never objected to for example New Labour’s
hostile environment policy towards ‘illegal’ immigrants i.e. refugees.
19.
The Report quotes
uncritically the Community Security Trust reports on anti-Semitic incidents but
these are not value free. The CST is another pro-Zionist organisation.
20.
The legal basis of its
inquiry, that the Labour Party was an association under the Equality Act 2010
omits the fact that it is a political party and allegations of ‘anti-Semitism’ were
weaponised, e.g. the allegations at Oxford University which had been made by
Alex Chalmers, a former intern of the Israel Lobby organisation BICOM. See How
Israel lobby manufactured UK Labour Party’s anti-Semitism crisis. By
definition a political party is not a sports club or other voluntary
association. The EHRC is an organ of the state. It had no right to interfere
and in essence take sides in a political dispute inside the Labour Party. It
was Corbyn and Formby’s stupidity which prevented them telling the EHRC to mind
their own business. Corbyn has literally dug his own grave.
21. The
Report suggests as an example of indirect discrimination that a party that
holds its meetings on the Sabbath is discriminating against Jewish
members. Bollocks. The Labour Party is a secular not a religious
body. It is under no obligation to take into account superstitious religious beliefs. The
only time that this could possibly be relevant is if the Labour Party held meetings on
Saturday but had a rule stipulating that it should not hold meetings on Fridays
or Sundays. Secularism is perfectly
legal. (p.22)
22. The
Report hangs its argument on the basis that councillors, MPs and NEC members
are ‘agents’ of the party. This is
extremely dubious. They are elected
representatives not agents. A political party is a free association of its members based on shared beliefs. It is no business of the State to interfere in its running as long as it abides by its own constitution.
23. Quite
outrageously the Report describes ‘allegations
that complaints of anti-Semitism are fake or smears.’ as themselves anti-Semitic (p. 28) yet this is a
regular practice of Zionists who even call Jews who are not Zionists ‘self
haters’ ‘traitors’ ‘kapos’ etc. It is a fact that Zionists, Jewish or other do,
as a regular practice allege anti-Semitism where there is none. The CAA, one of the complainants is a regular
practitioner in making false allegations of anti-Semitism. It particularly
targets Jews. Even the person who drafted the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism,
Kenneth Stern gave testimony
to the US Congress about the ‘egregious’ behaviour of the CAA in targeting a
University Professor Rachel Gould as anti-Semitic for having written an article
on the use of the holocaust to protect Israel. He also wrote
an article ‘I drafted the definition of
antisemitism. Rightwing Jews are weaponizing it’. The Report deliberately ignored
the context which is that racist regimes allege racism against their opponents
as a matter of course.
24. To
give but one example in Israel there are hundreds of Jewish only
communities. In one city Afula, when houses under construction were due to be sold to Arabs hundreds
of Jews took to the streets in protest. But if you allege Israel is a racist
state then this is anti-Semitic. This Report
is a racist report and it is a disgrace that Momentum refuses to call it out
for what it is.
25. The Report makes the insinuation that Ken Livingstone’s defence of Naz Shah MP’s meme
about relocating Israel inside the United States was anti-Semitic and that his
references to the Israel Lobby were anti-Semitic. Perhaps these dishonest
scribes would care to look at Wikipedia’s entry Israel
lobby in the United States. (p.29) AIPAC, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee openly proclaims it is a lobby group. What the EHRC is saying is that the
truth is now anti-Semitic. This is anti-Semitic.
26. Absurdly
it described Pam Bromley’s comment ‘looks
like fake accusations of anti-Semitism to undermine Labour aren’t working, so
let’s have Chris Williamson reinstated.’ That is a statement of fact but
even facts can be anti-Semitic apparently!
27. Ken
Livingstone’s comments about Nazi support for the Zionists in Germany, which is
a fact documented by Zionist historians such as David Cesarani and Francis
Nicosia ‘caused shock and anger among
Jewish Labour Party members.’ Well
it didn’t shock Steven Kapos, a survivor of the Hungarian holocaust who I met
because he understood the treacherous role of the Zionist organisation in
Hungary. Even the Jerusalem District
Court in 1955 found that Kasztner had collaborated with the Nazis. No doubt this would cause great shock too for
these naïve racist Zionists. So
what? The truth often offends. (p.30)
28. Even
more ludicrously ‘Pam Bromley’s conduct…
contributed to a hostile environment in the Labour Party for Jewish and non
Jewish members.’ Well in that case everyone on the Right was offended. How is that anti-Semitic? (p.30)
29. Among
the examples of ‘anti-Semitism’ were people who:
· Compared
Israelis to Hitler or the Nazis
· Described
a ‘witchhunt’ in the Labour Party or said that complaints had been manufactured
by the ‘Israel lobby’. (why the scare quotes?)
· Blamed
Jewish people for the ‘anti-Semitism crisis in the Labour Party’ (clearly the
Report couldn’t distinguish between Jews and Zionists, which is itself
anti-Semitic)
· Blamed
Jewish people generally for the actions of the State of Israel. (where could
people have got this idea? Could it be
that Israel describes itself as a Jewish state?)
· Used
‘zio’ as an anti-Semitic term. ‘zio’ is short for ‘Zionist’. If you think all
Zionists are Jews then you are anti-Semitic.
· Accused
British Jews of greater loyalty to Israel than Britain. I have been called a
traitor many times by Zionists who demand that Jews are loyal to Israel first
and foremost. The Israeli Absorption
Ministry even conducted
a poll in the United States to find out what Jews would do if there was a
crisis in relations between the USA and Israel!
Now why would that be?! (p.31)
30. The
Report makes great play of ‘interference’ by the Leader of the Opposition’s
office in disciplinary matters. Why
should it not have interfered given the racist bias of the Disputes Team under
John Stolliday and Sam Matthews? (p.45)
31. Because
of legal action the Report was forced to concede that the only unlawful
interference in disciplinary processes was
Tom Watson’s petition calling for Chris Williamson’s resuspension. Jennie Formby and Corbyn disgracefully
acceded to this pressure. Corbyn has been hoist by his own petard.
32. Even
if LOTO should not have interfered in the disciplinary process what business is
it of the EHRC?
33. A
good example of the circular logic of the geniuses who wrote the report was the
statement that ‘Jewish members are
proportionately more likely than non-Jewish members to make a complaint about
anti-Semitism.’ Err yes!! Consequently the practice of interference in
anti-Semitism complaints put Jewish members at a particular disadvantage
compared to non-Jewish members. This is
absolute nonsense. Obviously more Jews
than non-Jews make complaints about anti-Semitism. It is an absurd comparison. How can it put Jews at a particular disadvantage when non-Jews don't complain of anti-Semitism? (p.55) There is no comparator. The authors of the report don't even understand the concept of indirect discrimination!
34. The
Report also mentions that I was suspended yet given no details of the allegations
against me, despite requesting information on several occasions. It reports
that I successfully obtained an injunction. However what the report does not do
is mention that I am Jewish (it didn’t mention me by name).
35. Even
more relevant is the fact that the Labour Party expelled and suspended Jewish
members regularly. What has this to do
with anti-Semitism? The Report doesn’t
mention this because it would have been inconvenient to its narrative. (p.63)
36. Some
of the Report’s observations such as that the NEC and NCC do not give reasons
for their decisions are true, but what business is it of the EHRC?
37. The
Report says that Jennie Formby suggests that ‘these systemic issues affected
all complaints of all kinds, not just anti-Semitism complaints’ and it then
comments that ‘If correct, this means
that an even wider pool of members was treated very poorly by their political
party.’ Possibly true but what business is it of the EHRC? Have they investigated how the Tories treat
their members? (p. 73)
38. The Report notes that the Labour Party ‘has recently introduced reforms that improve the ability of the National Executive Committee (NEC) and the NCC to decide cases and to expel members when appropriate.’ What they fail to mention is the inherent unfairness of people being expelled on the whim of a staff member without even a hearing.
39. The
Report refers to the ‘outcry from CAA,
Board of Deputies and Labour MPs and peers’ when Chris Williamson was reinstated.
Yet strangely there is no censure by the EHRC for this interference with
the disciplinary process. Strange that!
40. Another
example of ‘anti-Semitism’ was that ‘a member shared a meme in March 2018,
which expressed that ‘an anti-Semite is
now someone Jews hate.’ Here you have stupidity mixed with malevolence. The
person who coined this meme was Hajo
Meyer, an anti-Zionist survivor of the Auschwitz death camp. His actual
quote was that ‘it used to be the case
that an anti-Semite was someone who hated Jews, now it’s someone who the Jews
hate’. An amusing observation. Jeremy Corbyn chaired a meeting at the House
of Commons with Hajo in 2010 and when
the Zionists publicised it the idiot apologised.
Is it any wonder that Corbyn lost credibility? The more you apologise the more they go for
you. Why the hell did Corbyn apologise
for chairing a meeting addressed by a holocaust survivor? The BBC reported that Labour's Jeremy Corbyn apologised for appearing
on platforms with people whose views he "completely rejects". (p.86)
41. There
are repeated complaints that ‘anti-Semitism’ was not given the same priority
that sexual harassment allegations were. (p.93) Perhaps that was because sexual
harassment claims tend to be genuine!
42.
Apparently the Labour
Party committed unlawful harassment because its conduct ‘included suggesting that complaints of anti-Semitism were fake or
smears’. But I was accused of
anti-Semitism and I’m Jewish. Who am I
harassing by denying this nonsense?
Utterly absurd.
43.
It was suggested that
Ken Livingstone’s comments that Zionist Jews were acting on behalf of a foreign
power were ‘clearly anti-Semitic’. But
the definition of a Zionist is that their loyalty is to Israel. How is that anti-Semitic? (p. 106)
44.
The moron(s) who wrote
this Report therefore find ‘agent Ken Livingstone’ caused the Labour Party to
indulge in harassment. It is no wonder that Keir Sturmer bought off Labour’s
racist former staff.
45. The Report found that the comments by Naz Shah ‘went beyond legitimate criticism of the Israeli government’ and that Ken Livingstone’s support for these comments and his suggestion that scrutiny of them was part of a smear campaign are not protected by Article 10 of the ECHR. Absolute rubbish and unsurprisingly the Report doesn’t explain why this is so. ( p. 108) The EHRC is simply wrong on this. Of course Ken's comments are protected, despite the Zionists wishing to clamp down on free speech as they do in Israel.
46.
Likewise Pam Bromley’s
comment that a ‘huge sigh of
relief’ went up when an Israeli spacecraft crashed on the moon. This is garbage. If someone shouted ‘hurray’ when the Chinese spacecraft crashed
would that also be racist?
47.
The fools who wrote
this hatchet job concluded that ‘Pam
Bromley’s comments were unwanted conduct related to Jewish ethnicity.’
Except that she didn’t mention Jews!
That was the anti-Semitic inference of the authors of this report. (110)
48.
The Report finds that
the unwanted conduct it identified was contrary to the Equality Act but equally
breached the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. Again that proves that its
conclusions are junk.
The only fitting place for this shoddy report is in a
wastepaper basket. Indeed that would be
a good place to deposit Labour’s racist leader, Sir Keir Sturmer.
Tony Greenstein
