Is Labour Anti-Semitic? was the title of the BBC Panorama programme – but the answer was never in doubt
Please Support Paddy French's Fundraiser
https://tinyurl.com/23syu3ps
Dear
Friend
This
is not an appeal on my behalf. I’m
writing to ask you to support an important legal battle between BBC Panorama
reporter John Ware and the retired ITV current affairs producer and investigative
journalist, Paddy French, for criticisms he made of the July 2019 Panorama
programme “Is Labour Anti-Semitic?
Paddy French
Paddy
French is an investigative journalist with more than four decades experience.
He founded and edited the Welsh magazine Rebecca (known for its uncompromising
Corruption Supplement) in the 1970s. He then went on to become an independent
TV producer making programme for Channel 4, the BBC and ITV before joining ITV
Wales as a staff producer.
The
case is John Ware v Paddy French,
QB-2020-002233.
Ware
is suing Paddy for £50,000 over criticisms he made of the July 2019 Panorama
programme “Is Labour Anti-Semitic?”
I am sure you will remember this BBC propaganda programme. You can refresh your memory with the two blog posts I did here and here.
Ware
is a former Sun journalist, a racist and Islamaphobe, who is on the record as saying in the Jewish Chronicle of 26.7.13. (where
else!) that whereas anti-Semitism is ‘entirely irrational’
Islamaphobia, if it exists, is ‘reactive’. It is no wonder
that Ware won
the Islamic Human Rights Commission’s Islamaphobe of the Year award in 2005.
Is Labour Anti-Semitic opened
with an Oscar winning performance by Ella Rose, Director of the Jewish Labour
Movement and former employee at the Israeli Embassy. Of course the programme mentioned none of
this. I don’t know how many takes Rose
took but her performance demonstrated that she has chosen the wrong career. Not mentioned in Ware’s propaganda programme was
the fact that every witness to ‘anti-Semitism’
that appeared just happened to be officers of the Jewish Labour Movement, who
openly describe themselves as the ‘sister
party’ of the racist Israeli Labor Party, that is present in a coalition
with the far-Right in Israel.
After
retiring, Paddy launched Press Gang [press-gang.org], a website which “exposes rogue
journalism”. And there is no bigger rogue that John Ware, a man who makes Keir
Starmer seem like a model of truthfulness.
Paddy
carried out the investigation which proved that News of the World
investigations editor Mazher “Fake Sheik” Mahmood lied to the Leveson Inquiry
about the number of convictions he’d achieved. He also published a long exposé
of Piers Morgan.
Just
before the 2019 general election, Paddy — at the time a Labour Party member and
a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn — published a Press Gang pamphlet called “Is The BBC Anti-Labour?”
This
was a broad critique of Ware’s Panorama programme and how it failed to meet the
standards required by the BBC’s own editorial standards. You can read it here:
The
case, already a year old, is now moving to trial.
Ware v French presents
a unique opportunity to correct the historical record, as well as a risk –
however small – that Ware will be able to bully Paddy’s legal team into
submission. It is imperative that Paddy is not at any point pressured into an
unfavourable settlement solely because his legal team are unable to bear
mounting costs.
Paddy is
determined to defend himself all the way and willing to risk both his property
and livelihood in doing so. But if his legal team were at any point to advise
entering into an unfavourable settlement, it will be difficult for Paddy to
resist on a No Win No Fee arrangement. Such an outcome will then of course be
used as ‘vindication’ by Ware and the BBC, with damaging consequences for wider
efforts to correct the historical record. If, on the other hand, Paddy has the
opportunity to mount his truth defence – or if Ware was to withdraw from the
action – this case could potentially be a powerful check against on-going
attacks on progressive left politics.
The
case will be the only chance we get to have a forensic examination of how John
Ware, Panorama and the BBC came to make a programme that was so outrageously biased.
Although titled ‘Is Labour Anti-Semitic?’
the only concession that the BBC made to me during a lengthy complaint was to
admit that the question mark in the title was unnecessary. The programme had formed
an opinion from the outset and that was that Labour was anti-Semitic.
This
programme was a classic example of how, when a radical leader is under attack,
you can count on the BBC to represent the Britain’s racist establishment. It did this with a reporter who is an open
Islamaphobe.
Paddy
is represented by the experienced solicitors Bindmans and the barristers Hugh
Tomlinson QC and Darryl Hutcheon.
He
needs at least £200,000 to be able to bring the case to trial.
His
crowdfunder has raised nearly £30,000 from more than a thousand supporters.
In
addition, private donors are putting up a further £60-70,000.
So
he’s already half way there.
If
you can, make a donation at the crowdfunder:
Before
turning his attention to Ware, Paddy, together with Professor Brian Cathcart,
one of the founders of Hacked Off , produced a devastating report on the
unscrupulous anti-Muslim reporting of the Times’ journalist Andrew Norfolk. The Times was so stung that it took the highly unusual step of
attacking Paddy and Brian in an editorial.
Paddy
then began a long series of articles about John Ware’s Panorama programme. One
of these articles led to Ware issuing his writ demanding £50,000 damages.
If
you want to find out more, here’s a link to get started:
https://paddyfrench1.wordpress.com/2021/02/28/ware-v-french-goes-to-trial/
Ware
v French is the key legal action in relation to the Panorama programme and
Paddy is determined to take this all the way to trial.
This
is going to be a hugely expensive legal battle.
Please help him succeed.
Many
thanks
Tony
Greenstein
French is using the defence that his reporting was “measured, considered and responsible” and is arguing what he reported was both true and in the public interest.
ReplyDeleteWhen has stating facts that are “true and in the public interest” been accepted as a valid defence against accusations of ‘anti-semitism’?
It didn’t work for any of the people smeared, demonised and/or expelled from the Labour Party who are not only not anti-semitic but are known as lifelong opponents of ALL FORMS of racism: e.g. Jeremy Corbyn, Chris Williams, Marc Wadsworth, Jackie Walker, Jo Bird, Ken Livingstone, yourself, myself.
So I will be interested to see how that as a defence strategy is going to work for the charge of ‘defamation’.
MBW I think you are being far too pessimistic. Whilst I agree there is an establishment bias, the body of evidence has increased significantly since the labour party paid off Ware. Also more individuals and organisations, like CAMPAIN, have taken up the fight.
ReplyDelete