The EHRC Report – critical evaluations / 2
Published
by
Richard Kuper
JVL Introduction
Many interesting analyses of the EHRC Report are being produced and we will be reposting a selection.
Doing so does not imply that we endorse all the points made in these analyses but, in our view, all add important insights.
The second reposting is of Chris Nineham’s analysis in the online journal Counterfire
This article was originally published by Counterfire on Thu 29 Oct 2020. Read the original here.
The EHRC report does not uphold claims that Labour under Corbyn was institutionally antisemitic and does not justify the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn, argues Chris Nineham
The attack on Jeremy Corbyn is baseless – there is nothing to support it in the EHRC report
Loading article text…
Starmers action will ensure there will be an increase in anti Semitism. Those on the Far Right will regard this as proof of the power and influence of the Jewish lobby .
Thankyou for writing this critical evaluation of the EHRC report it is good to read your analysis and read some of the points that have I have not heard highlighted by the mainstream media.It is so important to support Mr.Corbyn who has every right to speak the truth when asked for his opinion just as anyone in a democracy should.
I may sound barbaric but perhaps this is not the time for rational discussion or debate! To argue the pros and cons of a situation, the rights and wrongs of it is rather pointless when one`s enemy has just launched a nuclear strike!
Why point out what Mr Starmer should or should not have done? Mr Starmer does not appear to have the slightest interest in accepted civilized behavior so why try to analyse his procedures in the light of what the rest of us consider civilized.
Constantly going over what Starmer or Corbyn said, what the EHRC said is not really relevant. Starmer was going to blast Corbyn no matter what! He needed no excuses or reasons!!
Jay Henderson. You are absolutely right. The establishment are determined to destroy Corbyn and the policies he stood for. The flawed report of the EHRC stuffed with lightweight establishment figures was always going to be portrayed as a vindication of the right wing saboteurs and the Israeli Lobby.
Aaaargh the old ‘fake it till you make it’ strategy
In America they had ‘snake oil’ salesmen
So its only a matter of time before we run them out of time
Stay and vote
The half baked report by the misnamed EHRC failed to produce the evidence required to substantiate the claim that the Labour Party has been overrun by antisemitism. So Starmer’s claim that Jeremy Corbyn’s statement amounts to “denial” is false. The suspension of Jeremy Corbyn was clearly preplanned. When Starmer talks about the “Jewish community” or”Jewish stakeholders”he is being highly selective. He is consciously choosing to side with the BOD, JLM, LFI and CAA, all of which are part of the Israeli lobby in the UK. These organisations want to see pro Palestinians and critics of Israel expelled from the Labour Party. This includes Jewish members. In fact the Israeli lobby actually hate Jewish critics of Israeli. This makes Stamer’s claim to make the Labour Party a safe place for the “Jewish community” hollow. You only have to look at the number of Jewish members targeted by this witch hunt.
The legal argument on the basis of which the Labour Party is held vicariously liable for Livingstone’s defence of Naz Shah and the statements of a councillor in Rossendale is sketchy in the extreme. The report gives the impression that the EHRC strove mightily to find Labour to be institutionally antisemitic but couldn’t manage it. The best that could be done was to tie Livingstone and the councillor in as “agents”. Would this stand up to detailed forensic examination? I wonder.