Showing posts with label McDonell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McDonell. Show all posts

17 February 2023

It's not Corbyn but Starmer’s Cynical Use of Jews to Attack the Left that is Anti-Semitic

The Labour Left Will Never Recover Until It Understands That ‘Anti-Semitism’ Was a Lie Designed by Racists to Defeat Anti-Racists

Keir Starmer’s ‘patriotism’ is the last refuge of a scoundrel – Corbyn must declare his candidacy now

Kendall Savages Jeremy Corbyn

Last Tuesday in that good socialist newspaper The Times Keir Starmer declared war on what’s left of the Labour Left, declaring that Jeremy Corbyn would not stand as a Labour Candidate in Islington North. I think everyone bar Corbyn himself knew that.

Like the charlatan he is Starmer wrapped himself in the flag declaring that ‘my Labour’, because to all intents and purposes, the ruling class, whose puppet he is, owns the party, would follow his dictats.

Not for nothing did Samuel Johnson declare that ‘patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel’. For if there is one thing that Starmer is, without a doubt, it is a political scoundrel.


  • Ø Starmer promised to support public ownership and end outsourcing in the NHS and now he supports further privatisation.
  • Ø Starmer promised to defend migrant rights and now criticises the Tories for not deporting more people.
  • Ø Starmer promised to reverse the Tory cuts in corporation tax and when they did reverse them he opposed them!
  • Ø Starmer promised to put human rights at the heart of foreign policyand ended up supporting the Spycops Bill which grants immunity to state agents who torture people.
  • Ø Starmer promised to ‘Promote peace and human rights’ and ended up as the advocate of NATO and more arms to Ukraine.
  • Ø Starmer even broke the promise to provide ‘Effective opposition to the Tories’ as he pledged allegiance to Boris Johnson’s Covid strategy and supported the attack on the right to protest.

But it is on the issue of ‘anti-Semitism’ that Starmer has proven that the one quality he does have, lying, he has in spades. You might think that if Starmer was genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism then the last people he would suspend and expel would be Jewish members.

But you would be wrong. If you are Jewish in the Labour Party then you are 5+ times more likely to be expelled. Take 82 year old Diana Neslen, a former anti-Apartheid activist from South Africa. Labour’s witchhunters accused Diana of antisemitism over a single tweet from 2017, which said that “the existence of the state of Israel is a racist endeavour and I am an antiracist Jew”. It was only when Diana threatened legal action that the investigation was dropped.

Diana Neslen wasn’t the only Jewish anti-Apartheid activist from South Africa who was targeted. Riva Joffe, who died soon afterwards, was expelled outright. Of course this is understandable. Being a ‘Zionist without qualification’ Starmer has a fondness for apartheid.

You might think that even Starmer would think twice about persecuting a Jewish holocaust survivor. Think again. When Stephen Kapos, a child survivor of the Nazi occupation of Budapest, agreed to speak on Holocaust Memorial Day for the Socialist Labour Network he was threatened with expulsion leading him to resign.

It should be blindingly obvious that when Starmer talks about ‘anti-Semitism’ what he really means is anti-Zionism and opposition to the persecution of the Palestinians.  A persecution that involves house demolitions, torture, the burning of Palestinian crops and even the tear gassing of young children. All of this and more Starmer is quite happy to support as part of Britain’s alliance with the United States.

Starmer gives a clue as to his thinking when he describes anti-Semitism as a form of racism that

spreads like an infection. … those who call themselves “anti-racist” who are most blind to it.

 

 

If anti-racists are blind to it that might be because what Starmer describes as ‘anti-Semitism’ is opposition to racism. That is why Starmer pinned all this hopes on an adverse verdict by the EHRC. So eager was Starmer for an adverse verdict that he bought off former staff members who brought a libel action against the Labour Party, despite legal advice to the contrary. In the end a shoddy report by a far-right commissioner Alisdair Henderson, found just two instances of ‘anti-Semitism’ and both related to political criticism of false allegations of anti-Semitism.

It is no surprise that Starmer says

‘I knew we were getting it right… when Louise Ellman, a Jewish former Labour MP who under the previous leadership had suffered appalling abuse, came to Labour Party conference in 2021.

I met Ellman on a BBC Big Questions programme. A more unimpressive Dalek it is hard to imagine. She speaks in staccato and repeats like a mantra all the usual Zionist phrases. When the House of Commons debated Israel’s abuse of Palestinian children as young as 12, such as being woken and arrested in the middle of the night, blindfolded, beaten, denied food and access to a lawyer – Ellman got on her hind legs and justified their treatment. She spoke of:

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?

Ellman repeated the lie that Palestinian children are ‘incited’ to resist Israel’s occupation.  Nothing about a Military Government that has ruled the Palestinians for over half a century. A situation where their homes are demolished, land stolen, checkpoints and settler attacks.  To Ellman the Palestinians should be grateful for the Occupation!

When I said that Louise Ellman was a supporter of Israeli child abuse I was accused at my disciplinary hearing of having ‘shamed’ her.  My response, that she was shameless.  But it’s no accident that Starmer has wooed this vile woman.

When Starmer says that ‘the Labour Party I lead is patriotic’ what he really means is that it is now a party which is subservient to the rich and powerful. Patriotism is for the poor. The rich owe no allegiance to anything but their own pockets.

Unsurprisingly Starmer declared that Corbyn wouldn’t be standing at the next election as a Labour candidate. No doubt Corbyn feels betrayed by someone who once declared that he was a friend as well as a colleague but if so he brought it on himself.

It is of course true that Starmer’s decision is a “flagrant attack” on democracy and that the attempt to block his candidacy is “a denial of due process” however the precedent was set by Corbyn himself when he and Jennie Formby barred Chris Williamson, his most loyal MP, from standing at the last election in 2019.

The question is whether Corbyn will stand and if so when he will declare his hand. According to the Guardian’s Deputy political editor and former Jewish Chronicle hack, Jessica Elgot this ‘would pose an existential dilemma for Momentum’ and what’s left of the Socialist Campaign Group [SCG]. If so then the sooner that Corbyn makes up his mind the better. There is no point in waiting for the inevitable.

Having led the left to defeat by trying to appease the right Corbyn owes it to his supporters to break free of Starmer’s neo-liberal Tory Party  Mk. II and create a new working class socialist party.

Of course this would pose a dilemma for the SCG but one thing is abundantly clear.  Either the SCG abandons what remains of their politics or Starmer will be rid of them. Indeed breaking from the Labour Party, if Corbyn played his cards right, could result in the downfall of Starmer who remains personally unpopular in the country not least because he oozes insincerity and is seen to stand for nothing.

But it is incumbent on Corbyn to come to terms with what happened during his 4 years leadership. It is time to face up to the fact that what Labour experienced was not anti-Semitism but an orchestrated campaign by the right, led by the Daily Mail and the Jewish Chronicle, to paint opposition to the Israeli state as ‘anti-Semitism’.

The problem with Corbyn, as his confrontation with Liz Kendall demonstrated, is that he is still wedded to the idea that the Labour Party had a problem with anti-Semitism when it didn’t. The very fact that Starmer has been expelling so many Jewish people testifies to that fact. When asked if he would apologise by Peston the obvious answer was ‘apologise for what?’.

It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to work out that if anti-Semitism had been a problem in the Labour Party then it is hardly likely that the Mail, Sun and Express, to say nothing of the Guardian, would have been so concerned about it. Corbyn could have made all these points and more but instead he tried to explain the difference between exaggerating the numbers of those expelled for anti-Semitism and exaggerating anti-Semitism.  A wholly futile exercise.

Similarly Justin Schlosberg’s points about Labour under Formby being better at expelling people for ‘anti-Semitism’ than Iain McNicol conceded the fact that ‘anti-Semitism’ was a problem when it wasn’t. It is irrelevant whether or not Corbyn interfered with the disciplinary process. If he didn’t he should have!

Corbyn above all should have known that when people support the Palestinians they are, as a matter of course, accused of anti-Semitism. He has been around the Palestine solidarity movement for 40 years yet instead of rebutting the accusation he took it personally. He never took the time to understand Zionism.

Instead from the very start Corbyn began appeasing the Right and the Jewish Labour Movement in particular. Yet they were unappeasable.  The only thing they were interested in was being rid of him.

So we had the absurdity on pages 306, 333, 346 of the Leaked Report  which stated that:

Jeremy Corbyn himself and members of his staff team requested to GLU that particular antisemitism cases be dealt with. In 2017 LOTO staff chased for action on high-profile antisemitism cases Ken Livingstone, Tony Greenstein, Jackie Walker and Marc Wadsworth, stressing that these cases were of great concern to Jewish stakeholders and that resolving them was essential to “rebuilding trust between the Labour Party and the Jewish community”.

Well we were all expelled or forced out and all that happened was that the Zionists came for more victims like Chris Williamson, Pete Willsman and Christine Shawcroft – all of whom were duly delivered up. And yet, far from saving Corbyn it merely ensured his defeat, not least because he apologised so much that he lost all credibility. You never apologise to your enemies you take the fight to them.

Anyone hoping that the SCG, which has split in two, would rise to the challenge is going to be disappointed. Diane Abbot has declared her support for NATO and Starmer. McDonnell has become a war hawk on Ukraine and there is disarray all round. The cowards are running for cover faster than greased lightening.

If Corbyn is going to salvage anything from the present situation he needs to break from Labour now and take steps to form a new socialist party.  This would allow trade unionist to pressure their unions to do likewise. The Labour Party is dead to the left.

Will Corbyn do it?  I wouldn’t advise you to hold your breath!

Tony Greenstein


30 March 2022

Open Letter to John McDonnell - What Purpose Do You Serve When Hauling Up The White Flag Is Your Only Strategy?

 As Miners' Leader Mick McGahey Once Said, ‘They’ll Stop Chasing You When You Stop Running’


John McDonell in Surrender Mode with Andrew Marr – He Totally Accepted the fake ‘Anti-Semitism’ Narrative Whose Purpose was to Destroy Corbyn

Dear John,

On 24th February, the day Russia invaded Ukraine, Stop the War Coalition issued a statement calling for an end to the war, whilst addressing the underlying causes of the war, namely NATO’s expansion into Eastern Europe. NATO expansion had been contrary to repeated assurances that Bush, Baker, Genscher and others had given to Gorbachev at the time of German unification in 1991.

It was pretty mild stuff and yet 11 members of the Campaign Group who signed the statement, including yourself, were threatened by Starmer with loss of the Whip. Instead of standing up to him you all meekly complied. Not one of you had the courage to defy him.

On March 2 Starmer threatened you and Diane Abbot with the loss of the Whip if you spoke at a Stop the War rally. Again Starmer threatened you with loss of the Whip. Again you complied. Under Starmer’s Stalinist regime free speech has been abolished.

StWC described NATO as an offensive not a defensive alliance referring to ‘its record in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia and Libya over the last generation, not to mention the US-British attack on Iraq.’

These are incontestable facts but you didn’t even mount a protest at what had happened. What is the point of your gestures of opposition if at the end of the day you always back down?

The reaction of Starmer was predictable. He was elected as leader on the basis of 10 pledges, number 4 of which promised to ‘promote peace and human rights’.

No more illegal wars. Introduce a Prevention of Military Intervention Act and put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales and make us a force for international peace and justice.

This was of course a lie. In a contest between Johnson and Starmer one would be hard pressed to decide who is the bigger liar. Yet you didn’t see fit to point these, simple facts, out.

NATO’s willingness to fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian was an ideal issue on which to make a stand but once again you bottled it. You could for example have pointed out that the United States and Britain have openly armed neo-Nazi militias in Ukraine. You could have asked how this squared with his commitment to rooting out anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. You did none of these things.

The obvious response to someone who makes a Dalek seem an empathetic human being was to tell Starmer to go take a swim in the River Thames. Preferably without a life jacket. But you did none of these things.

You and the Cowardly 10 chose to place a premium on your seats in parliament even though Starmer has made it clear that you are unlikely to be allowed to stand for Labour again.

To put your behaviour in context it is worth looking at what happened during previous witchhunts by the Right and how the Left responded.

In 1939 Sir Stafford Cripps and Aneurin Bevan refused to back down when they supported an anti-fascist united front with the Communist  Party. As a result they were expelled.

Bevan first and then Cripps were readmitted to the Labour Party.  Bevan went on to found the NHS and Cripps, who at one time rivalled Churchill in war-time popularity, became a member of the War Cabinet and in 1947, Chancellor of the Exchequer. As George Orwell wrote:

The outstanding thing about Sir Stafford Cripps, however, has always been his utter unwillingness to compromise his political principles.

I doubt if even your best friend could say that about you John. If there is one thing that marks you out it is your willingness to surrender. No principle is so precious that you won’t give it up.

Do you remember that toe curlingly embarrassing interview with Andrew Marr on Labour ‘anti-Semitism’? Not once did you challenge the assumption that Labour was overrun by anti-Semitism. You simply took as gospel what the supporters of Israeli Apartheid said.

Today we face not only NATO inspired carnage in the Ukraine but the possibility of nuclear conflagration if the US continues find pretexts for war in order to retain military and economic hegemony. That is why it has created the Aukus Pact as part of its pivot to Asia and undeclared war against China. Always of course in the name of ‘human rights’!

Graham Bash, who was recently expelled after 53 years membership, described you as the best Labour MP he had known, which makes me shudder as to the rest of them. You are 71. After 25 years in parliament you will have a good parliamentary pension.  You and Dianne Abbot will not suffer if you are deselected.  Who knows you could even win against Starmer Labour.

However bad Blair was Starmer is even worse. What is it that prevents you and what’s left of the Socialist Campaign Group mounting a political attack on Starmer, who is the Tory enemy from within, and his shadowy backers like Mandelson and Labour Friends of Israel?

Starmer himself is insignificant. A political nonentity. He has less charisma than the average mannequin. There is no lie that he is not willing to tell, nor any promise that he is not prepared to break.

He was a fervent Remainer but now he supports Brexit. He promised to ‘root out’ Labour ‘anti-Semitism’ and then he expelled record numbers of Jews! So much so that if you are a Jew in Labour then you are 5 times more likely to be expelled than non-Jews.

Luke Stanger, a vile anti-Roma racist was welcomed back to the Labour Party by David Evans, Starmer and local MP Peter Kyle

The only true thing Starmer has said since becoming leader is that he is a Zionist ‘without qualification’, i.e. a racist for whom Black Lives Matter was a ‘moment’. Starmer has readmitted to Labour racists like Trevor Philips, for whom Muslims are a nation within a nation and Luke Stanger for whom Roma and Gypsies are ‘a nasty blight on society.’ Through all of this you have kept silent.

If there is any one individual, bar Jon Lansman, who bears responsibility for the defeat of the Corbyn project, it is you. It wasn’t long ago when you were ‘tearing your hair out’ about anti-Semitism. You apologised for non-existent anti-Semitism. You told us that we should take the advice of the Zionist Board of Deputies on anti-Semitism even though the BOD has a proven record of attacking Palestinian supporters and anti-Zionists as ‘anti-Semitic’.

Even worse you and Lansman supported the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism which was designed precisely in order to conflate anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.

It was as if you had loaned out your brain. I was the first Jewish person to be expelled from Labour as a consequence of the ‘anti-Semitism’ allegations. The first person to welcome my expulsion was Starmer. It was clear then that the concern of the Tory press and the Labour Right about ‘anti-Semitism’ was contrived. Yet you and the Campaign Group remained silent.

When Ken Livingstone was suspended instead of defending him you told him that the Jews were a forgiving people!  Perhaps, but Zionists aren’t that forgiving.

Did you ever ask why should those who demonised asylum seekers and Muslims should be so concerned about anti-Semitism? It was New Labour, with Alan Johnson as Home Secretary, who first created the ‘hostile environment’ policy that Theresa May ran with. If Jews were genuinely suffering from anti-Semitism, then the Tories and Labour Right would be the last people to complain.

Did you never ask yourself why The Times, whose editor Geoffrey Dawson forbade all criticism of Hitler’s anti-Semitism in the 1930s, was so concerned about ‘anti-Semitism’?  Or the Daily Mail which led with ‘Hurrah for the Blackshirts’ and employed a neo-Nazi, Katie Hopkins as a columnist, was a cheerleader for Hitler in the 30s?

Lord Rothermere, owner of the Daily Mail with friend

When Hitler ‘won’ the unfree elections in March 1933, the Mail wrote that if Hitler used his majority “prudently and peacefully, no one here will shed any tears for the disappearance of German democracy”. Yet we are supposed to believe that the Mail has now repented and it too is now concerned about Labour ‘anti-Semitism’.

What possessed you to praise the Board of Deputies, a body that has never organised a demonstration against genuine anti-Semitism? In October 1936, it advised Jews to stay away from the anti-fascist mobilisation against Moseley’s British Union of Fascists in the East End of London. The Jewish working class, which today does not exist, ignored the BOD. Did it not strike you as strange that their first demonstration against ‘anti-Semitism’ in March 2018 was against Corbyn?  A demonstration which those well known anti-racists Ian Paisley and Norman Tebbit attended?

It was obvious in 2016 that the British Establishment and the US and Israeli states had resolved that someone opposed to NATO and its wars could not be allowed to be the leader of the second major party in their closest European ally. Anti-Semitism was their chosen weapon.

Instead of standing up to the Right and its false anti-Semitism narrative you betrayed the Left and appeased the Right. When Margaret Hodge, whose call for a Whites only housing policy had been praised by the BNP, called Jeremy ‘a fucking anti-Semite’ it was you who opposed any disciplinary action.

This was the same Hodge that demanded that Starmer remove the Whip from Corbyn or she would resign. Is it any wonder, according to Owen Jones and Pogrund/ MacGuire that Corbyn refused to talk to you for many months as a result?

This is the same Hodge who covered up a child abuse scandal in Islington Council when she was leader and who libelled one of the victims. As Matthew Norman wrote With a past like hers, Margaret Hodge might show a bit more humility. Hodge’s reward was being made Children’s Minister by Blair, an act that defied irony yet nonetheless you sought to appease this despicable creature who is now the Jewish Labour Movement’s parliamentary representative.

A different path was always available to you. You could have supported Open Selection of MPs and got rid of Hodge and her detritus. The PLP could have been transformed. Instead you thought you could win over the Ian Austins and John Manns of this world!

It is no surprise therefore that as soon as Starmer barked you and the SCG jumped. The SCG has 35 MPs yet only 11 were even prepared to sign StWC’s statement. As Dylan wrote, you threw it all away.

Today it would be difficult to put a piece of paper between Starmer and Johnson. They are both liars and they are both ‘patriots’ who wrap themselves in the flag.  As Samuel Johnson observed, patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

If you had an ounce of courage or principle you would challenge Starmer for the Tory he is. You would appeal over his head to Labour’s membership and start a campaign against this reactionary representative of the Deep State with his persecution of Assange, his protection of Jimmy Saville and his support for extraordinary rendition.

Instead you retreat in sullen silence. Indeed you even attempted to flatter him. ‘Keir’s got this exactly right’ was your response to Starmer’s Covid strategy. But what was Starmer’s strategy? He promised to support Johnson ‘in the national interest’.

By delaying the first lockdown Johnson killed 20,000 people. By decanting the infected into care homes he killed at least 30,000. Yet you praised him.

If you are not going to fight Starmer inside the Labour Party, the principled thing to do would be for you and the SCG to accept that Labour has abandoned even the pretence of socialism. Your one service to socialism would be to help in the formation of a new, socialist party.

 The Labour Right is determined that there will never be a return to the Corbyn era and you seem determined to help them in that.

The only thing that puzzles me is why the Labour Representation Committee still keeps you on as their President. Perhaps its a case of misplaced nostalgia or just wishful thinking.

Fraternally,

Tony Greenstein

26 September 2021

Book Review – Labour, The Anti-Semitism Crisis and the Destroying of an MP

 It was the Betrayal of Chris Williamson by Corbyn, Formby and Lansman That Paved the Way to Starmer's Stasi

Lee Garratt, Thinkwell Books, 2021



The suspension and forcing out of Chris Williamson from the Labour Party was a watershed moment in the death of the Corbyn Project. Alone amongst Labour MPs, Chris understood that the Zionist 'anti-Semitism' campaign was not about anti-Semitism but the removal of Jeremy Corbyn from the leadership of the Labour Party. For anyone interested in how a popular Labour leader went from near victory in 2017 to humiliating defeat in 2019 this book is essential reading.

The book opens with a quote from Nietzsche, that ‘there are no facts, only interpretations.’ Why Lee Garratt opened with this post-modernist nonsense is unclear but the Nakba of 1948 when ¾ million Palestinians were expelled is a fact, regardless of the Zionist interpretation that they ran away. Likewise the holocaust is a fact. I can only assume that it was included as a reference to the fake evidence that was used to 'prove' that the Labour Party was overrun by anti-Semitism.

Tommy Sheridan, the former Scottish Socialist Party MSP, provides a foreword and makes the point that the ‘creation of a narrative during the last decade that casts (Corbyn, Livingstone and Williamson) as anti-Semites underlines the preposterous and perverse power of the billionaire-owned mainstream media.’ This is the basic political lesson that Formby, Corbyn and McDonnell forgot.

There is a preface on the origins of the word ‘anti-Semitism’ and the question of whether to hyphenate it. Garratt argues, in my view correctly, that to hyphenate ‘anti-Semitism’ is to forget the hidden intersections between Jews and Moslems and the history of the term ‘semite’. It also reminds us of how anti-Jewish racism became racialised in the latter part of the 19th Century.

There follows an interesting discourse on the definition of ‘anti-Semitism’ and the Zionists’ IHRA definition. Lee points to one of the illustrations of ‘anti-Semitism’

accusing Jewish people of being more loyal to Israel than the country they live in’.

arguing it is a fact that many Jews proudly declare that their first loyalty is to Israel. Indeed fundamental to Zionism is the belief that Israel is the nation state of the Jews which therefore demands their allegiance. This is a good example of how the Zionism and anti-Semitism coincide.

Unfortunately the book has a potted history of anti-Semitism that accepts the Zionist myth of an eternal 2,000 years of Jewish suffering. In fact Jews were both oppressors and the oppressed. As Abram Leon wrote in The Jewish Question: A Marxist Interpretation:

 ‘Zionism transposes modern anti-Semitism to all of history and saves itself the trouble of studying the various forms of anti-Semitism and their evolution.[i]

Lee Garratt also argues that the Israeli state itself has changed since 1948 when it was ‘leavened with left, egalitarian views e.g. the kibbutz movement.’ In fact the Kibbutzim were the pioneers of Zionist apartheid. Arabs could not be members of a kibbutz. They were Jewish only stockade and watchtower settlements.

When Chris Williamson was suspended, after his speech to Sheffield Momentum had been twisted and distorted to mean its exact opposite, I wrote that ‘The Suspension of Chris Williamson MP is Shameful – This May Be the End of the Corbyn Project.’

The suspension of Williamson and the refusal to support him when under attack by Tom Watson and the Right was perhaps the most shameful aspect of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. More shameful even than the suspension and expulsion of Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth, Ken Livingstone and myself.

It is to the discredit of John McDonnell, Richard Burgon, Laura Pidcock, Dianne Abbot and the other members of the Socialist Campaign Group that not only did they fail to offer any solidarity with Chris but Pidcock told him not to come to SCG meetings anymore. Richard Burgon’s excuse was ‘What can 10 MPs do against 100?’ It was an attitude of utter defeatism.

Ian Lavery as a former President of the NUM knew better than anyone what the meaning of solidarity is yet he too failed to utter a single word of support to Chris Williamson. The sole exception to this scabbing by the SCG being Laura Smith, the MP for Crewe and Nantwich, who unfortunately lost her seat at the last election.  And ironically Fabian Hamilton, the Leeds NE MP who is also a Zionist! (p. 67)

When Corbyn was suspended the SCG ‘released a few ambiguous, wishy-washy faux solidarity statements to the media.’ They expressed regret at Corbyn’s suspension whilst at the same time wanting him to issue another apology. Garratt is right when he says that:

‘it has been these erstwhile supporters that have done the most damage to the left. It is much easier to deal with one’s enemy when he or she is out in the open. Right-wing bully boys such as Ian Austen can easily be seen for who they are and their comments are taken as such. But when people like John McDonnell express support, yet saddle it with further conditions, one would be better off without that support in the first place; their crocodile tears and misplaced concern serving only to give further credence to the lies and calumnies.’

Garratt gives as an example of the complicity of the SCG in the witch-hunt, the attack by Alliance for Workers’ Liberty supporter Nadia Whittome MP on Nottingham East CLP for having the temerity to discuss the EHRC report. One Jewish Zionist left the meeting after having made false allegations against another member. Other Jewish members supported the motion. The Chair, Louise Regan, quite rightly refused to rule the motion on the EHRC out of order. Instead of supporting the democratic rights of CLPs, Whittome condemned them for not obeying David Evan’s dictat. Ms Regan was suspended almost immediately. Unfortunately the SCG has no procedure for suspending or expelling scab members.

In the Kafkaesque atmosphere of the Labour Party, merely challenging accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ ‘denialism’ is deemed proof of anti-Semitism. Just as in 17th century Salem, denying that you were a witch was proof of being one.

What were the ‘crimes’ that Williamson was suspended for? There were two major offences:

1.           Chris’s speech to Sheffield Momentum of 23 February 2019.

2.           Booking a House of Commons committee room for a showing of Jackie Walker’s film ‘The Witchhunt’.

The first offence was a classic example of how the words of people were twisted and mangled to serve the Zionist agenda. It is proof of the poisonous nature of the British press and British politics. It was an example of Orwellian Doublethink. War is Peace or in this case Anti-racism = Racism and opposition to anti-Semitism = anti-Semitism.

After being suspended Chris was asked by Labour’s Thought Police about what he had said in Sheffield:

During this meeting did you say “The Party... is being demonised as a racist, bigoted party... I think the Party’s response has been partly responsible... we’ve backed off on too much, we’ve given too much ground, we’ve been too apologetic?” (p.149)

If so please explain what you meant when you said this.

Chris’s response was that this 

‘selective and highly misleading quote above is without context and appears to have been provided maliciously and vexatiously... with the deliberate intention of my words being misconstrued.’

What then were the actual words which Chris had said?

We are not a racist party, are we? We’re not an anti-Semitic party. We are the party that stood up to racism throughout our entire history... It was Labour that was the backbone of the Anti-Nazi League in the 1970s when we confronted the anti-Semites, the racists, the Islamaphobes on the streets and we defeated those fascists, didn’t we? And now we – Jeremy, me and others – are being accused of being bigots, of being anti-Semites. And it’s almost as we’re living within the pages of Orwell’s 1984. You know the Party that’s done more to stand up to racism is now being demonised as a racist, bigoted party.

And I’ve got to say I think our Party’s response has been partly responsible for that. Because in my opinion...– we’ve backed off far too much, we’ve given too much ground, we’ve been too apologetic. What have we got to apologise for?  For being an anti-racist party? And we’ve done more to actually address the scourge of anti-Semitism than any other political party. And yet we are being traduced. And grassroots members are being traduced.

Chris can certainly be criticised for giving too rosy a picture of Labour’s record when it came to fighting racism and fascism. It’s not true that the Labour Party mobilised for the Battle of Cable Street. On the contrary members were dissuaded from going just as Jews were urged by the Board of Deputies not to confront the fascists. It was the Communist Party and the Independent Labour Party and Jewish workers themselves who took the lead.

The record of the Labour Party from the Kenya Asians Act in 1968 to the Blair government’s hostile environment policy (Home Secretary Alan Johnson coined the phrase) was anything but anti-racist. Labour’s record on support for imperialism, from India to Africa to Palestine, is a shocking one.

There is nothing in what Chris Williamson said in his speech that was remotely racist or anti-Semitic nor did it criticise the Labour Party for fighting racism and anti-Semitism. What he was saying was that the Labour Party should have been done more to reject and rebut the false allegations of anti-Semitism. 


Yet what was the reaction to Chris’s speech? The Independent led the mob: ‘Chris Williamson: Labour MP filmed telling activists party is too 'apologetic' about antisemitism’. Matt Greene, also of the Independent chimed in with a particularly disgusting opinion piece: ‘Chris Williamson has given Labour the perfect opportunity to show it is serious about tackling antisemitism’ which compared Chris’s failure to apologise for Labour ‘anti-Semitism’ to the failure of the US Congress to apologise for its ‘maltreatment’, in fact extermination  of the native Indians or the failure of David Cameron to apologise for the Amritsar massacre when he visited India in 2013.

There were no depths to which the press wouldn’t sink in order to demonise Williamson. Labour’s ‘anti-Semitism’ was a contested allegation. 70% of Labour members believed it had been weaponised by the Zionists.[ii] A belief that has been thoroughly vindicated by Keir Starmer who in his mission to ‘root out the poison’ of anti-Semitism has expelled and suspended 5 times as many Jews as non-Jews.

Greene’s comparison of Williamson’s speech to the massacre of thousands of native Indians or the machine gunning of a peaceful crowd, of whom at least 400 died, to  Labour ‘anti-Semitism’ where not one single ‘victim’ was identified, was obscene. But it was no more obscene than Nazia Parveen’s article in the Guardian: ‘Chris Williamson: 'no place' in Labour for MP embroiled in antisemitism row’.

Lapsley, a member of the Zionist Jewish Labour Movement, was quoted as saying that 'There is no place for Chris Williamson in my Labour party’ despite the article pointing out that while he was leader of Derby Council ‘Williamson was instrumental in setting up Holocaust Memorial Day events in the city, and he also rescinded the medieval proscription of Jews living in Derby.

MI5’s asset at the Guardian, Jonathan Freedland, joined in: ‘Labour doesn’t have zero tolerance of antisemitism if Chris Williamson is an MP.’ In one continuous litany of lies Freedland, knowing that his assertions on Labour ‘anti-Semitism’ lacked merit, began his contribution with a sarcastic

‘Credit to Chris Williamson for originality. Not many have suggested that Labour’s chief problem with antisemitism within its ranks is that it has been too apologetic to the Jewish community, that it has shown an excess of concern and contrition.’

Freedland quoted that well-known anti-racist Tom Watson ‘who wasted no time in branding Williamson’s apology “long-winded” and “not good enough”, adding that if it were up to him, he’d have removed the whip from Williamson already.

This is the same Tom Watson whose reaction to the decision of the High Court to remove racist MP Phil Woolas from the House of Commons, after having fought an election designed to ‘make the white folks angry’ was that ‘I’ve lost sleep thinking about poor old Phil Woolas and his leaflets.’ And if anyone is under any doubt that this was a one-off, Watson was the campaign manager in the by election in 2004 in Birmingham Hodshrove when Labour issued a leaflet with the slogan ‘Labour is on your side, the Lib Dems are on the side of failed asylum seekers.'

Garratt documents the onslaught of the media, especially the Guardian. On 9 July 2019 a letter from over 100 Jewish people to the Guardian protesting Williamson’s suspension was published. Immediately the Board of Deputies and Hope not Hate protested because two of the signatories, although individual members of the Jewish Labour Movement and HnH were not writing on their behalf. The letter was ‘disappeared’ by the Guardian from the Internet. But even in the age of the Internet you can’t ‘disappear’ the printed word!

Owen Jones played a particularly disgusting role in the attack on Williamson. He was the Guardian’s faux left columnist who, lacking all arguments, resorted to insults describing Chris as ‘king of the cranks’ for having something Jones lacks – principles. Jones joined the clamour against Corbyn writing that Jeremy Corbyn says he’s staying. That’s not good enough a month before the 2017 General Election.

Garratt says that Jones had a ‘blind spot’ on the question of Labour anti-Semitism. I disagree. It is part and parcel of his noxious identity politics which promotes the most powerful and reactionary identities, Zionist Jews against their victims, Palestinians. (p. 114)

Every racist and reactionary, inside and outside the Labour Party, was clamouring for the expulsion of Chris Williamson.

Chris’s second offence was to book the House of Commons to show Jackie Walker’s film Witchhunt which is a sustained polemic against the anti-Semitism narrative.


The Witchhunt was due to be shown by Jewish Voices for Labour at the 2018 Labour Party conference. However this was prevented because of a bomb threat. Instead of calling out this political terrorism by the Zionists Jennie Formby did their work for them.

Instead of defending the democratic right of an MP to organise the showing of a film that offended the Zionists or simply defending the right of free speech, Formby sent an email to Williamson demanding that he cancel the showing of the film ‘with a heavy hint that if he didn’t, she would suspended him’

The Witchhunt was a film produced by Jon Pullman, himself Jewish. It offered a different perspective to that of the Board of Deputies, the Daily Mail, Jonathan Freedland and John Mann. It would have been easy for Formby to defend the right to show the film as a basic democratic right. Instead Formby, acting on behalf of Corbyn and the Leader of Opposition Office, became the emissary of Apartheid Israel and its apologists.  In Israel they administratively detain dissidents. In Britain they rely on ‘socialists’ to do their dirty work. (pp. 61-62)

In this one incident we see exactly where the Corbyn Project went wrong. Instead of defending their supporters against the attacks of Zionists and Israel apologists, Formby went out of her way to appease them.  And a fat lot of good it did because when the 2019 General Election came they wheeled out the Chief Rabbi, the Board of Deputies and all the rest of the Zionist cabal to damn Corbyn as the worst thing since Adolf Hitler.

It is regrettable that Chris initially apologised and even more regrettable that once he was suspended he didn’t rebook the film, however he was under immense pressure.

In Appendix 5 there is reprinted a copy of the questions sent by the witchhunters to Chris. There were 4 questions about the film:

i.                   Did you book a room in Parliament for 4th March 2019 to screen a film entitled ‘Witch Hunt’?

ii.                Please explain your understanding of the film

iii.             Please explain why you booked a room in Parliament to screen this film.

iv.             Do you have anything else you think the Party should know about this screening.

If I had been sent these questions my answers would have been short and to the point. I would have asked Formby and the witchhunters why they had a problem with the screening of a film? What did they fear? Do they not believe any longer in democratic debate? Is the Labour Party a replica of the Israeli state? Did they never consider that the Zionists had something to hide?


The shrill and raucous Ruth Smeeth MP, who lost Stoke on Trent North at the 2019 General Election, whined that ‘Giving these people and Jackie Walker a platform at the home of British democracy is a complete and utter disgrace.’ (p.62)

Smeeth, who was previously Director of Public Affairs and Campaigns at the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM) in November 2005 became CEO of Index on Censorship in June 2020 after having lost her seat at the General Election. IoC should be called Index for Censorship. The fact that Formby and Corbyn backed up Smeeth, an utterly reactionary MP, who was an informer for the US Embassy demonstrates the cowardice and lack of any political perspective of these spineless reformists.

Smeeth was defending an Israeli state that has ruled over 5 million Palestinians for over half a century. There are two systems of law in the Occupied Territories – one for Palestinians and another for Jewish settlers. That is the definition of apartheid and that is what Corbyn and Formby were defending. We should bear this in mind next time Corbyn speaks at a Palestine solidarity event or pushes his Peace and Justice campaign.

There follows an amusing chapter on the main Zionist ‘victim’ of anti-Semitism, Luciana Berger, the Blairite parachuted into Liverpool Wavertree constituency in 2010 who didn’t even know the name of the famous Liverpool football manager, Bill Shankly. Despite the false allegations by Tom Watson et al that Berger was driven by anti-Semitism out of the Labour Party, Garratt is right that

‘to this day, there remains no evidence of any anti-Semitism directed at Berger from within the Liverpool Wavertree constituency or from anyone with any serious connections to the party.’ (p.37)

In a trenchant defence of Williamson Garratt points to the stench of hypocrisy emanating from Margaret Hodge, who knowingly presided over the child abuse scandal at Islington Council. Hodge, a tax-dodging millionairess who broke the Boycott of Apartheid South Africa, compared herself to a victim of the Nazis declaring that she knew ‘what it felt like to be a Jew in Germany in the 30s.’

If anyone else had compared themselves to the Jewish victims of the Nazis they would have been labelled as anti-Semitic.

The section on Gilad Atzmon, the anti-Semitic jazz player, is badly researched. Despite quoting Atzmon as saying that ‘(We) must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously’ Garratt says that he merely ‘overreached’ himself and that this was ‘merely clumsy writing’ ,arguing that his subsequent substitution of ‘Zionists’ for ‘Jews’ worked in his favour (in fact Atzmon was covering his tracks). Garratt argues that ‘whether this makes him an ‘anti-Semite’ is another matter. Well it does matter and Atzmon is an anti-Semite.

The use of scare quotes suggests that Garratt disagrees. He is simply wrong and if anyone is in any doubt then I refer them to my blog A Guide to the Sayings of Gilad Atzmon, the anti-Semitic jazzman where we learn that Jewish anti-Zionists are a fifth column

‘who will convert (to Zionism) in the next anti-Semitic wave… who makes Zionism into an eternal struggle for ‘Jewish salvation’.’[iii]

Atzmon has an interesting backstory, having become alienated by what Israel was doing when he fought in the 1982 Lebanon war. However Atzmon didn’t reject Zionism, rather he internalised Zionism’s Jewish self-hatred and turned it into anti-Semitism.

This arose because Islington Council had rejected a booking by Atzmon and the Blockheads on the grounds of his anti-Semitism. Chris Williamson not knowing who Atzmon was tweeted in support of a petition against the ban before deleting his tweet minutes later. The Zionists made hay out of the affair.

The Zionists harassed 3 venues into cancelling a meeting with Chris Williamson in Brighton - however People Power defied the attempts of the racists to close down free speech and we held the meeting, with 200 people in Regency Square

However Chris could have taken my position. I led the campaign against Atzmon with articles in Weekly Worker such as Anti-Semitism in anti-Zionist garb [iv] and for the Guardian’s Comment is Free, The Seamy Side of Solidarity [v] At all times we stressed that we were opposed to Atzmon’s anti-Semitism not his jazz playing. He is a world renowned jazz player. I therefore took the decision to sign the petition and I personally attended one of Atzmon’s gigs in Brighton!

Chris’s one regret was being pressurised into apologising for his speech at the Sheffield meeting. It is understandable that he did so in order to avoid disciplinary action but he made the situation worse:

‘Typically, later that evening, despite the assurances he felt he had received regarding his apology and despite the agreement he had regarding cancelling the film, Williamson was suspended anyway.’

When Len McLuskey and Corbyn claim that Starmer ratted out on promises he made, that if Corbyn retracted his initial statement responding to the EHRC report, he would be reinstated we should remember that Corbyn showed the way.

The reaction to Chris Williamson’s suspension from the grassroots of the Labour Party was overwhelmingly supportive. What was Formby’s reaction? To declare that motions supporting Williamson were ‘not competent’. When it came to Corbyn’s suspension the same device was used by David Evans but who paved the way if not Jennie Formby? Even worse, when Chris was reinstated Formby bowed to a petition from Tom Watson and 100 MPs to resuspend him. The cowardice of Formby and LOTO knew no bounds.

When Chris went to the High Court to obtain an injunction against the Labour Party he was successful. Anticipating the High Court decision the party issued another suspension a few days before the hearing and it was this which the judge refused to overturn.

Garratt shows how the press and the BBC unanimously declared that ‘MP Chris Williamson loses anti-Semitism appeal.’ The judge had ruled that the Labour Party’s excuse for resuspending Chris was unlawful. This was confirmed this when he awarded Chris 100% of his costs despite the Labour Party arguing that it should recover 60%.

When Chris ran into Corbyn in parliament he promised him that he would remain the Derby North MP. However this was a lie. There was no such agreement.

It is no surprise, given Chris’s prominence in the Labour anti-Semitism campaign that the EHRC was preparing to name him as one of 6 individuals guilty of harassing Jewish members of the Labour Party.[vi] In fact a ‘swift and comprehensive legal challenge’ ensured that Chris’s name was entirely expunged from the report. In the end they scapegoated just 2 people – Ken Livingstone and Pam Bromley.

Garratt concludes his book  by quoting from Norman Finkelstein:

‘Corbyn, he did not only present a threat to Israel and Israel’s supporters, he posed a threat to the whole British elite. Across the board, from The Guardian to the Daily Mail they all joined in the new anti-Semitism campaign. Now that’s unprecedented – the entire British elite, during this whole completely contrived, fabricated, absurd and obscene assault on this alleged Labour anti-Semitism, of which there is exactly zero evidence, zero.’ (p. 117)

This was, as Garratt says, a fabricated smear campaign comparable to the McCarthyite witch-hunts in 1950s America. Chris’s real ‘crime’ was in his own words being Corbyn’s

most outspoken supporter in the House of Commons, which made me a target for disgruntled Labour MPs, mischief-making bureaucrats and Zionists. Consequently, I expected trouble, but I never anticipated how serious that trouble would turn out to be. I certainly did not expect to be forced out of the party to which I had devoted my entire adult life.’ (p. 126)

Chris is clearly right that

‘there was never any recognition that the capitulation strategy was making matters worse. Jeremy’s advisers seemed to have the collective memory of a goldfish rather than drawing a line in the sand.’ (129)

The conclusion that Chris has drawn from this is the ‘impossibility of turning the Labour Party into a vehicle for socialism and anti-imperialism’ is one that is currently being fiercely argued over.

This book, despite its flaws, is a welcome and long overdue exercise in setting the record straight. Chris Williamson was not a Jew baiter or an anti-Semite as the Zionists alleged. Jon Lansman and Owen Jones, who propagated the ‘anti-Semitism’ slurs were in fact the grave diggers of the Corbyn Project.

Chris Williamson will long be remembered as a brave and principled Labour MP who was let down and betrayed by those who are only in politics for what they can personally get out of it. All those SCG MPs, such as Russell Lloyd-Moyle who lied to me about Chris Williamson, aren’t fit to walk in his shadow.

Tony Greenstein


[1]               Abram Leon, The Jewish Question - A Marxist Interpretation, p. 245 . Pathfinder, NY,.p. 247.

[2]               Jewish Chronicle 30.3.21. https://tinyurl.com/4ncmkk9u

[3]               https://azvsas.blogspot.com/2011/03/guide-to-sayings-of-gilad-atzmon-anti.html

[4]               https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/894/anti-semitism-in-anti-zionist-garb/

[5]               https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/feb/19/greenstein

[6]              https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/29/key-findings-of-the-ehrc-inquiry-into-labour-antisemitism