Proof that antisemitism was weaponised against Corbyn
JVL Introduction
In a pair of articles in Middle East Eye, Jonathan Cook takes up the story about Labour’s Code of Conduct on Antisemitism – reviled when it was introduced under Jeremy Corbyn but used, in secret, under Keir Starmer.
We repost the first article here in which he looks especially at some of the Labour Activists for Justice cases (for background see An appeal for funds for justice in the Labour Party)
The disclosure of this Code confirms the view so many of us held that leading Jewish organisations intentionally politicised the meaning of antisemitism to entrap left-wing critics of Israel and undermine Labour’s former leader, Jeremy Corbyn.
In the second article (here) Cook wonders why the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council, the Chief Rabbis’ office, the Jewish Labour Movement – all those who accused Corbyn and his team of the vilest racism for daring to interpret the IHRA definition of antisemitism – are not up in arms now.
Not even a whimper…
This article was originally published by Middle East Eye on Fri 16 Apr 2021. Read the original here.
Labour disclosure ‘shows antisemitism was weaponised against Corbyn’, activists say
Former leader’s disciplinary code, which was criticised by pro-Israel groups, is still being used under Starmer, party officials admit after court hearing
Loading article text…
I must say I’m not clear what the issue is here. It has always been about weaponising antisemitism, and while there was a fuss made about Labour and the IHRA, which is still insisted on by the right, the code used has proved to be effective in drumming out socialists.
No society is completely free of racists and racism.
One of the many reasons I was furious about the weaponising of antisemitism to bring down Corbyn was because that campaign fired up existing anti-Jewish, anti-Israeli and antisemitic feelings.
It’s very easy to stoke up prejudice, it’s extremely hard to reduce it. It may take years of sustained effort to get back the ground lost.
Shame on a zionist establishment for being hypocritical and disingenuous, as many knew for a long time. Shame on the establishment archbishop who naively and also slyly backed a media pushed false version. Shame on the shameless establishment media, though telling whoppers is its trade. This bad lot never had loyalty to the Labour Party or to ordinary people – and it really shows. The Jewish Labour Movement is fraudulent in its use of the name Labour, to which it is ultra-hypocritically hostile. It is past time for the Jewish Labour Movement to be disassociated from or expelled. The JLM should have the honesty to have Zion in its title and to argue straight. And shame on Starmer for his dishonest politicing against the Labour Party.
Victims of Starmers witch hunt against non -Zionist JEWS should use the EHRC against Starmer just as he used it against Corbyn. But this time Starmer is much more guilty because of what the EHRC said in its report. He directly contravenes their conclusions and instructions.
Non -Zionist Jews should also sue Starmerto get back the LP money that Starmer illegally used to buy the silence the traiors within the party exposed by the leaked report. And what about Forde?
There is plenty here that would stand up in court. Years ago the courts vindicated Chris Williamson.
Sue Starmer to get back our money the complainants can always give it back to the LP when it has cleaned up its act
I wonder why the BoD and JLM and the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council didn’t respond when approached by Middle East Eye for comment. Or why the CAA and the LAA and the Jewish newspapers haven’t said anything about the situation – ie the revelation.
Anyway, no doubt the MSM have brought this ‘contrast’ to the attention of their readers and viewers and listeners…… Or perhaps NOT!
When Starmer first became leader of the Labour Party, I got an email announcing the fact. I responded, saying that he had a chance now to clean up the Party and put in a new set of officials that was loyal to its members.
That has not happened and so much has been done since then to alienate members and pervert its democratic processes, that many, like myself who, incidentally, had been suspended shortly after Starmer’s arrival as leader, have left the Party. We can’t be bothered with this rubbish, which is incapable of remediation. No way can I renew my sub., even if the party were to take it, under these circumstances.
One ought not to be sentimental about a political party and we now need a new one that puts its members’ interests first. This also means getting out of the market fundamentalist (neo-liberal) rut. People are under too much pressure in their lives to spend much of their time politicking and need to be able to trust their political party. The Labour Party has, demonstrably failed in its duty to its members and it is time for it to be put in the dustbin.
Perhaps Linda should explain how the necessary criticism of the daily actions of Israel in contravention of both the UN Charter of Human Rights and the Geneva Convention which brought so many of us into the shadows of Labours secret disciplinary process can be thought to be actions which ‘stoke up prejudice’.
Perhaps she has never been in the Kafkaesque position of being accused by an ‘unknown person’ of something that was obviously not anti-semitic by any assessment other than that of the unjustifiably conflationary clauses of the IHRA Definition extension.
The process of being ‘tried’ at a distance, whether found guilty or not, has to revised and those against whom the charges were based on those extension clauses should now receive apologies from the Party.
Given the £600,000 payment to people who were behind the attempts to derail the Party’s success in the 2017 GE it may also be just that a Committee should be set up with the purpose of agreeing compensatory payments to those charged in respect to the damage done to their sense of self worth and to their characters in public life.
If this seems flippant they could ask my wife just what damage was caused to my life when I received my letter and had to fight to save my membership of the Party.
The organisation ‘Campaign Against Antisemitism’ (CAA) happens to be to the best of my knowledge – a registered charity. Given the above, should the CAA keep its charitable status?.
I wonder what Hodge Mann Berger Smeeth Austin Woodcock Streeting Freedland et al, and indeed Starmer himself are Thinking. Or maybe avoiding is more correct .Like the Forde Report that Starmer is sitting on. They appear to hope it will go away..
It is a sad commentary on the state of Labour party when we are suffering from one of the most currupt Governments in history running or more correctly ruining the country.
The whole so called Anti-Semitic crises was about A/S being misused and weaponised for political purposes. The object to get rid of a descent possible PM and descent man. It is totally Obscene.
Having been expelled on April 13 after 5 months of ‘investigation’ when none of my written defences i submitted were even acknowledged as having even been read, i now want these heinious charges (anti- Semitism/advocating Genocide ‘- agaist who, i don’t know) to be heard in a British Court of Law. As a Registered Nurse of 34 years, my Professional Body, the Police etc need to be informed; afterall, who wants an apparent “advocate of Genocide” in any sort of caring role in their community ?
Do not leave the party, in fact redouble your efforts and recruit new members in good time for a leadership challenge
They want you to leave
Bankrupting the party is certainly a strategy but only if it is aimed at those individuals responsible for the fraud
Are there other legal challenges, can Forde be challenged and forced to publish
MSM and toilet papers are a regulatory challenge, bleed them dry and put them out of business
Bring BBC back in house, they should be the beacon for standard’s in media and journalism
Celebrate what was achieved under JC and build on it
But above all else, never ever give in
@Anthony Baldwin
Hi Anthony, You’ve misinterpreted me – perhaps I didn’t express myself clearly.
“Don’t leave the Party, Doug” – they are expelling us.
This whole thing is beyond satire. The “new” guidelines are presented in the
“new” documents which are supposed to increase our confidence in the complaints procedures (see https://labourlist.org/2021/03/labour-seeks-to-boost-confidence-in-complaints-process-via-new-documents/).
The Complaint Handling Handbook is dated March 2021 but nowhere acknowledges the Corbyn administration for the “new” code. Perhaps Corbyn and those who contributed to the code should sue for plagiarism?
We are told that existing cases will be handled using “the current system” – I wonder what that is!
Incidentally Ive tried the URL I quoted above but got “Not Found 404” as a response ..
Curioser and curioser ..
[JVL adds: We’ve tried the url and it does work. Give it another go…]
Sorry to confuse – the Labour List url is ok – the problem is
the url referenced by Labour List and which contains the “incendiary” code:
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Labour-Party-Complaint-Handling-Handbook.pdf..
but the other 2 documents with links on the Labour List DO work – viz:
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Labour-Party-Complaints-Policy.pdf
and
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/March-2021-Disputes-Report.pdf
But they might “sort” the problem with the complaints handling handbook soon after Ive posted this. It will be interesting to see if anything has changed!