‘The People Have Spoken. Bastards’

JVL Introduction

Media Lens looks at the leaked Labour Party report and exposes the rottenness it reveals, as have many other reports.

But this article then focuses on how “‘mainstream’ media has been immediately twisted and deceptively presented as a desperate ‘smear campaign’ against ‘antisemitism whistleblowers’ by Corbyn allies.”

The Times, the Telegraph, the evening Standard all took this line.

And pundits like Laura Kuenssberg, Robert Peston, Emily Maitlis and others who tweeted relentlessly about Labour’s so-called antisemitism crisis all seem to have gone to ground…

The article concludes: “Is ‘democracy’ so unimportant – or so repellent – that the UK’s most highly-rewarded and prominent news media, editors and journalists can dismiss the revelations behind the 2017 general election with such superficial reporting or, worse, a disdainful silence? “

 

This article was originally published by Media Lens on Thu 16 Apr 2020. Read the original here.

‘The People Have Spoken. Bastards’: Leaked Labour Report Shows Party’s Own Senior Staff Acted To Keep Corbyn Out Of Power

In the June 2017 UK general election, Labour under Jeremy Corbyn came within a whisker of power. If just 2,227 votes had gone the other way, seven Tory knife-edge constituencies would have been won by Labour, putting Corbyn in a strong position to lead a coalition government.

Labour achieved 40 per cent in the election, increasing its share of the vote by more than any other of the party’s election leaders since 1945. As we noted at the time, it was one of the most astonishing results in UK political history.

A leaked internal Labour report now reveals that senior Labour figures were actively trying to stop Labour winning the general election in order to oust Corbyn as party leader. The 860-page document, ‘The work of the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit in relation to antisemitism, 2014 – 2019’, first leaked to Sky News, was the product of an extensive internal investigation into the way Labour handled antisemitism complaints.

The report includes copious damning examples of email and WhatsApp exchanges among Labour officials expressing contempt for Jeremy Corbyn and anyone who supported him, including other Labour staff, Labour MPs and even the public.

The document includes:

  • Conversations on election night about the need to hide internal Labour disappointment that Corbyn had done better than expected and would be unlikely to resign
  • Regular sneering references to Corbyn-supporting party staff as ‘trots’
  • Conversations between senior staff in Labour general secretary Iain McNicol’s office in which they refer to former director of communications Seamus Milne as ‘dracula’, and saying he was ‘spiteful and evil and we should make sure he is never allowed in our Party if it’s last thing we do’
  • Conversations in which the same group refers to Corbyn’s former chief of staff Karie Murphy as ‘medusa’, a ‘crazy woman’ and a ‘bitch face cow’ that would ‘make a good dartboard’
  • A discussion in which one of the group members expresses their ‘hope’ that a young pro-Corbyn Labour activist, whom they acknowledge had mental health problems, ‘dies in a fire’

The investigation was completed in the last month of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. According to Tom Rayner, Sky News political correspondent, the report found:

‘“no evidence” of antisemitism complaints being treated differently to other forms of complaint, or of current or former staff being “motivated by antisemitic intent”.’

However, the report did conclude that:

‘factional hostility towards Jeremy Corbyn amongst former senior officials contributed to “a litany of mistakes” that hindered the effective handling of the issue [of antisemitism].’

Emilie Oldknow, a senior Labour staffer, boasted that she had orchestrated that deputy leader Tom Watson delay the expulsion of Ken Livingstone. This was with the deliberate intention of embarrassing Corbyn, despite the Labour leader demanding a speedy resolution of a controversy surrounding comments made by Livingstone about Hitler and Israel.

An unnamed pro-Corbyn ‘senior source’ who worked in Corbyn’s leadership office said:

‘This report completely blows open everything that went on.’

Referring to then Labour party general secretary Iain McNicol, the source added:

‘We were being sabotaged and set up left right and centre by McNicol’s team and we didn’t even know. It’s so important that the truth comes out.’

This is part of the bigger picture that we have repeatedly highlighted of the weaponisation of antisemitism to prevent Corbyn gaining power. The fact that senior figures within the Labour Party itself were actively working to prevent Corbyn’s victory is grim indeed.

The report says that:

‘The party’s resources – paid for by party members – were often utilised to further the interests of one faction and in some cases were used to undermine the party’s objectives.’

In particular, anti-Corbyn party officials conspired to divert funds to Labour candidates critical of Corbyn. Senior management agreed to ‘throw cash’ at the seat of Tom Watson, then deputy leader and a persistent Corbyn critic.

Significant resources were also channelled to a ‘secret key seats team’ in May 2017, without the knowledge of Corbyn or his office. This secret team worked to support MPs, including Watson, who were on the right wing of the party, diverting funds away from marginal seats.

Novara Media’s Aaron Bastani, who has examined the leaked report, gives examples of remarkable exchanges that took place among senior staff conspiring against Corbyn’s leadership. These include Labour managers expressing hope during the election campaign that the most pessimistic polls were correct. Greg Cook, Labour head of political strategy, said on June 4 – four days before the general election – that he hoped the ‘sheer hypocrisy’ of a Corbyn speech would make his views ‘a legitimate topic’ for attack, even referring to the Labour leader as ‘a lying little toerag’.

When a YouGov poll showed Labour’s rating going up during the campaign, Francis Grove-White, the party’s international policy officer, said:

‘I actually felt quite sick when I saw that YouGov poll last night.’

On election night, after the exit poll revealed that Labour had overturned the Conservative majority, Tracey Allen, the general secretary’s office manager, said that the result was the:

‘opposite to what I had been working towards for the last couple of years.’

She described herself and her anti-Corybn allies as ‘silent and grey-faced’ and in need of counselling.

McNicol – recall that he was the party general secretary – reacted with dismay as the pro-Corbyn results came in:

‘It’s going to be a long night.’

The following morning, Allen bemoaned:

‘We will have to suck this up. The people have spoken. Bastards.’

Emilie Oldknow, a senior Labour staffer mentioned above, was scathing about Labour MPs expressing support for Corbyn following Labour’s surprisingly good election results, describing one MP as ‘grovelling’ and ‘embarrassing’.

As Bastani summarises, the leaked report:

‘depict[s] a disloyal, dysfunctional culture at the top of the party – one which held Labour’s twice elected leadership, party members, and any MPs they disagreed with, in contempt. Far from a few “bad apples” the messages expose systematic and sustained efforts to undermine the leadership by multiple figures in director-level positions.’

Bastani concludes:

‘These revelations should end any debate around whether Labour’s senior management team, including McNicol, were serious about a Labour government in 2017. To the contrary what this stunning cache of documents reveals is how McNicol – and a tight, unelected circle around him – made every effort to undermine and denigrate that year’s election campaign, frequently stating how they hoped it would fail while simultaneously planning to replace Jeremy Corbyn from as early as January [2017].’

Although long suspected, it is still breathtaking to see that senior Labour figures essentially conspired to prevent a Corbyn-led government, and that they would have actually preferred the re-election of an extreme-right Tory government.

Film director Ken Loach told the Morning Star that the leaked report was ‘dynamite’. He added:

‘If the evidence – all the emails and the secretive, abusive messages – is accurate, there has to be a reckoning, there must be consequences for this behaviour.’

David Rosenberg of the Jewish Socialists’ Group said:

‘Many left-wing Jewish Labour members had criticised the Labour right wing for cynically using allegations of anti-semitism as a factional weapon. We believed that the leadership was genuine and principled in its efforts to address any such problem. Perhaps this report will validate us.’

It surely does.

Historian Louise Raw responded to the leaked report via Twitter:

‘It’s sickening to read, even though we all *knew*. Destroying Corbyn was a malicious game. The zest of the wreckers, and their hatred for those us who supported him, hits you like a punch to the gut.’

‘Mainstream’ Media Decree What The Story Should Be

But the utterly damning evidence in the leaked Labour report that Corbyn was undermined by his own party’s senior figures – that they were actually complicit in weaponising antisemitism to keep him out of Downing Street –  is not the ‘correct’ story to tell from the perspective of power. Instead, the focus for ‘mainstream’ media has been immediately twisted and deceptively presented as a desperate ‘smear campaign’ against ‘antisemitism whistleblowers’ by Corbyn allies.

Thus, for the staunchly right-wing establishment Times, the required takeaway from the Labour report is this cynical diversion:

‘Jeremy Corbyn’s allies have been accused of a last-minute bid to “smear whistleblowers” and “discredit allegations” of antisemitism in the Labour Party during his tenure.’

Under the headline, ‘Antisemitism “smear campaign” by Corbyn allies’, reporter Eleni Courea features quotes from Gideon Falter, chief executive of the lobby group Campaign Against Antisemitism which played a major role in the relentless attacks on Corbyn:

‘In the dying days of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, the Labour Party appears to have invested in a desperate last-ditch attempt to deflect and discredit allegations of antisemitism. Rather than properly dealing with cases of antisemitism and the culture of anti-Jewish racism that prevailed [sic] during Mr Corbyn’s tenure, the party has instead busied itself trawling through 10,000 of its own officials’ emails and Whatsapp messages in an attempt to imagine a vast anti-Corbyn conspiracy and to continue its effort to smear whistleblowers.’

The Telegraph gave its reporting a similar spin, ignoring the mountain of evidence of internal Labour hostility towards Corbyn, acting to prevent a general election victory. Instead, it led with the trumped-up accusation that ‘supporters of Jeremy Corbyn’ had released ‘unredacted details of anti-Semitism whistleblowers into the public domain’. The Telegraph report, like The Times article, gave prominent space to comments from the Campaign Against Antisemitism.

Clearly singing from the same hymn sheet, the Evening Standard, edited by former Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, told its readers:

‘Jeremy Corbyn’s allies have been accused of using a report to “smear whistleblowers” and “discredit allegations” of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party during his tenure.’

Once again, rather than include any of the many damning quotes by senior Labour staff smearing or disparaging Corbyn, the newspaper gave space to the Campaign Against Antisemitism with its chief executive Gideon Falter once again to the fore. It is worth adding here that Joe Glasman, who heads the political investigations team at the Campaign Against Antisemitism, boasted after the 2019 UK general election that ‘the beast is slain’ and that Corbyn had been ‘slaughtered’.

Evening Standard columnist Anne McElvoy was scathing about the leaked report, denouncing it as:

‘a Stasi-like trawl of internal mails and messages in search of disloyalty.’

She continued:

‘As conspiracy theories go, this one is up there with 5G equipment spreading Covid-19.’

By contrast, the Independent took the leaked Labour report more seriously and quoted from a statement by the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs:

‘We understand the disappointment and frustration that many Labour members will feel with the details revealed in this report.

‘It contains revelation of senior officials undermining the 2017 general election campaign and suggests there are cases to answer on bullying, harassment, sexism and racism.’

To its credit, the Independent later published an extensive follow-up piece with a headline that summed up the incredible revelations of the 860-page Labour report:

‘Anti-Corbyn Labour officials worked to lose general election to oust leader, leaked dossier finds’

But, true to form, BBC News struck its usual pro-establishment ‘impartial’ stance by featuring the omnipresent Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Antisemitism. However, it did at least permit a tiny hint at the essential awkward truth in a brief line:

‘…some [senior Labour figures] seemed to have “taken a view that the worse things got for Labour, the happier they would be since this might expedite Jeremy Corbyn’s departure from office”.’

A later piece, clearly meant as a more extensive account but buried deep in the ‘Politics’ section of the BBC News website, had all of seven sentences of ‘analysis’ by BBC Political Correspondent Helen Catt; the crucial one being:

‘it’s the allegation that Labour staff worked against a win for Mr Corbyn in the 2017 election that is likely to be most incendiary, if proven.’ [emphasis added]

‘If proven’. Once again, copious examples of senior Labour staff working against a Corbyn win are excluded from a ‘mainstream’ media report.

And where is BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg? Has she gone into hiding? This is a major BBC figure who, month after month, channelled a one-sided account of Labour’s supposed antisemitism crisis, including an infamous BBC Panorama programme demolished as a ‘catalogue of reporting failures’ by the Media Reform Coalition.

Her silence now on the leaked Labour report is shameful and a kick in the teeth to the TV licence fee-paying public which she supposedly serves. Where are all her tweets decrying the betrayal of so many British voters, and the betrayal of democracy itself? Why is there nothing about it on her BBC blog?

And yet, Kuenssberg was happy to use her influential Twitter platform to amplify a message from Iain McNicol on April 4, less than two weeks ago:

‘Labour’s former General Sec now Labour Peer, Iain McNichol [sic] – “The sad fact that Labour has the lowest number of MPs since the WW2 tells you everything you need to know about the Corbyn experiment. I like, thousands in the Labour party, am thankful that chapter is now closed.”’

Her silence now on the revelations concerning McNicol’s despicable role in thwarting a Labour victory in 2017 is telling indeed.

Likewise, where is Robert Peston, the ITV political editor? Why does his blog have nothing on this scandal? Where are all his Twitter remarks on the shocking truth of the subversion by senior Labour figures of Corbyn’s attempt to win the 2017 general election? According to Michael Walker of Novara Media, reporting via Double Down News on 15 April, Kuenssberg and Peston, along with Paul Brand of ITV and Tom Newton Dunn of the Sun, have not tweeted at all about the report.

The harsh truth is that these journalists have been selectively filtered upwards into their highly influential positions, having demonstrated that they would be safe choices at each stage of their respective careers.  In other words, there would never be a serious risk that they would pursue real journalism that truly holds power to account.

And will BBC Newsnight’s ‘lead presenter’, Emily Maitlis, be commenting? On April 1, she retweeted a thread from someone called Dave Rich. The first tweet in the thread all but described Corbyn as a Nazi:

‘Goodbye Jeremy Corbyn. They said you don’t have an antisemitic bone in your body. That may be true, but your brain is full of it. Can we remember all the examples? Probably not but I’ll have a go /1’

This was retweeted by this senior BBC journalist to her quarter of a million followers. Maitlis has interviewed and discussed Corbyn innumerable times over the last five years. Can anyone believe, after reading this, that she was impartial, objective and neutral in so doing?

Perhaps the state-corporate media’s elitist and arrogant attitude to the leaked report can be summed up by the disdainful dismissal from Times columnist Iain Martin:

‘shut up, no-one cares right now.’

True enough: ‘no one cares’ about the subversion of the 2017 general election…if you are a beneficiary of the inequitable system of what passes for ‘democracy’.

As for the relentlessly anti-Corbyn Guardian, a lead player in the propaganda blitz to keep even a moderate socialist out of power, its report by deputy political editor Rowena Mason led with a mild headline merely suggestive of the underlying reality:

‘“Hostility to Corbyn” curbed Labour efforts to tackle antisemitism, says leaked report’

How about ‘Hostility to Corbyn curbed Labour efforts to win the 2017 general election’? That would be more of a fitting headline.

Mason gave no details of the copious examples of anti-Corbyn plotting and loathing we cited earlier in this media alert. But she did somehow find space for a tweet from Ian Austin, a former Labour MP who had left the party because of its supposed endemic antisemitism. Austin called the leaked report ‘unreliable’, adding:

‘In last days of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, Labour trawled through 10,000 emails and messages to produce a report into antisemitism that attempts to shield him and his supporters from any blame, and instead pin responsibility on whistleblowers and former members of staff.’

Unmentioned in the Guardian piece is that Austin is now the UK trade envoy to Israel, a reward for his pro-Israel services.

Compare Mason’s bland piece of ‘balanced journalism’ with the succinct summary offered by former Guardian journalist Jonathan Cook:

‘The Labour party inquiry now being suppressed has a trove of emails – some cited in this article – *proving* that Labour’s top officials plotted to bring down Corbyn and sought to engineer a Tory election win. Their actions probably cost Labour the 2017 election.

‘Don’t forget that the gang of Labour officials quoted here – boasting to each other about how much they wanted Corbyn gone, even if it meant letting in the Tories – were *extremely* close to the gang at the Guardian who led the media’s efforts to sabotage his leadership.’

Adding to the shame of the Guardian’s role in stopping Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, the anthropologist and social commentator David Graeber observed via Twitter on April 12:

‘in Aug 2019 I tried repeatedly to get a piece in the Guardian suggesting anti-Corbyn saboteurs in the LP [Labour Party] were fanning the flames & doing so was itself #antisemitism. Editor told me explicitly I would NOT be allowed to criticise Corbyn’s critics motives’

Graeber shared the relevant text of what a Guardian editor had told him:

‘I understand what you’re saying but we can’t carry an article which reads like an ad hominem attack on people who most prominent Jewish people call allies. It’s too much of a leap from most people’s understanding of this issue (not to say libellous) to declare people such as Tom Watson antisemites – or, at best, manipulative.’

This ‘argument’ from a Guardian editor – whom Graber declined to name – is nonsensical. As one Twitter user said, replying to Graeber:

‘Readers’ understanding of the issue having of course been formed by the articles The Guardian did chose to print. It is a chilling admission by the paper that it is no longer prepared to print articles that dissent from its editorial line.’

Graeber agreed:

‘yes exactly – this is the circularity that’s amazing. “No one will believe this because it departs from the conventional understandings which we’ve been hammering into them for two years now so you can’t say it.”’

In fact, far from it being ‘too much of a leap from most people’s understanding’, Graeber sets out his case very clearly and compellingly in this new clip titled ‘The Weaponisation of Antisemitism’ from Double Down News (April 12, 2020). In particular, Graeber points to the insidious roles played by such Labour figures as Ian Austin, Margaret Hodge, Tom Watson, John Woodcock, Joan Ryan, Jess Phillips and Tony Blair in promoting a supposed crisis of antisemitism in Labour:

‘What actually happened [was] a group of people, most of whom were not Jewish, going to the media and screaming their heads off, trying to create hysteria, trying to terrify the Jewish population, trying to create an atmosphere of fear, of potential purges within a political party. Because then people are going to think, well maybe there is some kind of conspiracy going on. I mean, it wasn’t as it turned out largely a Jewish conspiracy going on because most of the people doing it weren’t Jewish. And most of the people who were Jewish were hardly representative of the Jewish community at large.’

Graeber has set out this theme at greater length in an article he wrote last year for openDemocracy, titled: ‘For the first time in my life, I’m frightened to be Jewish’.

Closing Remarks

The newly leaked Labour internal document reveals the fear and disgust amongst many figures in senior Labour Party management towards socialism in the UK. So many Labour figures at the top simply could not bear the prospect of the mildly progressive Jeremy Corbyn reaching Number 10 Downing Street.

Where are the media headlines, interviews and extensive analyses of how senior insiders colluded for Labour to lose a general election? What about the betrayal of all those Labour MPs, staff and volunteers who worked to overturn a destructive right-wing Tory government? What about all those millions of British people who voted for a shift to a more just and compassionate society? A society in which the NHS is truly valued, the welfare and benefits system really does act as a safety net for all, radical carbon cuts in emissions are implemented immediately, and in which foreign policy is no longer guided by outdated and discredited brutal imperialism and the supposed need for a profitable ‘defence’ industry.

Is ‘democracy’ so unimportant – or so repellent – that the UK’s most highly-rewarded and prominent news media, editors and journalists can dismiss the revelations behind the 2017 general election with such superficial reporting or, worse, a disdainful silence? Especially given the present coronavirus pandemic, and the ever-looming climate catastrophe that threatens to overwhelm us all, the implications of stifling a rational leftward shift in British society, and the wilful refusal to examine what happened, are almost too horrendous to imagine.

DC & DE

Comments (10)

  • Doug says:

    So start campaigning on reforming MSM and toilet papers
    What does that look like and how can it be set in stone
    Put Hugh Grant and Prince Harry in charge
    Change ownership rules
    Support independent media groups
    3 strikes and you are out- of business

  • dave says:

    This is a fine, measured piece from the two Davids, who are often vilified by the right. The media reaction and spin – and lack of it – is a damning indicator of the quality of our democracy. So much depends on Starmer now, but I’m not hopeful.

  • Elizabeth Morley says:

    To its, and his, credit, Today’s Nick Robinson asked Keir Starmer about this leaked report on 15th April. Here is my transcript of the last part of that interview:

    @ 2:20:58 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000h7ww

    NR: A quick word if we could. You have been in the job less than two weeks and already there’s a fierce factional row broken out in your party about a leaked internal report which alleges that party officials in the Labour Party tried to sabotage Jeremy Corbyn in the 2017 election. Now, you’ve set up an inquiry and you’ll no doubt want to wait for its findings. I just want to ask you, when you read what was in that, what did you feel about whether your party can ever turn outwards rather than in on itself.

    KS: Well, this is a leaked report into, hm, what was apparently happening before I became leader. I was shocked by what I saw and the circumstances in which it all came about. That’s why I’ve ordered an independent inquiry, which I want to be professionally done, independently done and quickly done, because our party needs to unite and face the future and get back to our historic purpose, which is getting a Labour government in so that we can actually change lives for millions of people for the better, so that’s why……

    NR: You want to turn your back on factionalism, don’t you?

    KS: We absolutely have to turn our back on factionalism, and that was the whole basis of my leadership campaign, turning our back on that and getting Labour back to its historic purpose and I’m determined to do that. My focus at the moment is on how we rise up to the challenge, the national and international challenge, of Coronavirus.

    NR: Sir Keir Starmer, Leader of the Opposition, thank you for joining us.

    KS: Thank you.

  • Philip Ward says:

    VW has just lost a class action because owner of their cars were sold something under false pretences. I would like to suggest that LP members should try the same thing. They may have to take it out against the LP, rather than the individuals concerned, but that might spur the leadership to take this issue seriously.

  • Ruth Sharratt says:

    The BBC report on the leaked document (found under Politics which is a sub tab under News – you have to search for it) is about the GMB motion against Jennie Formby. There is very little comment about the report itself. The General Secretary Tim Roache is quoted as saying;”Leaking an un-redacted report, containing names and personal messages of employees and the names of people who made complaints about racism on the understanding of anonymity, is unacceptable.” As far as I can see from the report the complainants aren’t named although the people who had accusations of anti-semitism made against them are named with some details of the evidence.
    I could be wrong, but even so it is appalling that this is seen as hardly worth reporting by the BBC and even worse that Tim Roache didn’t appear to think there was much wrong with the behaviour. He certainly didn’t acknowledge that those accused had the greatest right to anonymity. The staff don’t, and I don’t understand why the accusers should have anonymity. Partic as so many of the accusations were false and as such vexatious.

  • RC says:

    Is not ‘one Dave Rich’ a senior officer of the Community Security Trust, which piggybacks on a valid though unsupervised (and highly secretive) role as defender of synagogues and Jewish homes, to issue libellous scaremongering against, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, whose record as a defender of British Jews is second to none – witnessed by the Zionist Conservative Geoffrey Alderman. The same partisan CST officer was invoked by the BBC as an ‘expert’ in the notoriously distorted Panorama programme alleging widespread antisemitism throughout the LP.

  • Ben says:

    As the unnamed pro- Corbyn “Senior Source” quoted in the above article says “This report blows open everything that went on”. Well yes there’s more , much more …….as this statement implies!
    This report must continue to be seen in the context of “the Labour Right’s” well coordinated campaign to undermine and demonise Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership , from the early days of the Election campaign . Not only that but to divide and demoralise a movement working together to realise a vision of a more equitable and democratic Britain.
    In an attempt at “damage control” and with “the keen desire” to move on from these “revelations” Keir Starmer and others seek to frame the discourse in terms of “factionalism” and “unity”. He and his supporters want to place the emphasis of an “independent enquiry on who leaked the report, rather than its content !
    The argument that follows from that, is the prioritisation of the suppression of anything deemed to be “factional “ and Labour members “uniting” under the current leadership, towards winning Government.
    That is the substance of the transcript from the BBC interview quoted above

    Keir Starmer has described himself as “soft left” in his politics .
    Members of the Labour Party need to be establishing the detail of what he means by that .
    Also wasn’t Keir Starmer one of those mps who voted to remove Jeremy Corbyn from the leadership of the Labour Party in the first Coup?
    Angela Rayner has been consistently vocal in her attacks on Jeremy Corbyn and moving towards democratising the party.
    How can two politicians, or any other politicians identified with this kind of politicking, be trusted to sponsor an “independent investigation” of this Labour Leaks Crisis
    Have those Labour members who voted in good faith for the Current Leadership of the Labour Party been duped …?
    Should members of the UK Labour Party and others be conducting a more wide-ranging enquiry into the activities of those politicians who sought to undermine “the will of the people” up to , including and after the 2017 election?

  • David Stretton says:

    And yet those defenders of free speech aka the British press & the BBC managed to miss it all…or perhaps they weren’t looking…

  • Mervyn Hyde says:

    Firstly thank you for this thorough report : Not wanting to duplicate what “Ben” said above, I do believe he hits the right note in calling for the membership of the Labour Party to call for a full and thorough investigation of the conduct of MPs and administrators surrounding the last 5 years. That the membership itself should call for the release in full of all documentation and information related to this report.

    As with expulsion in the past it was noted that those expelled were not allowed to know who their accusers were and names were redacted whilst the party itself was aware of both party’s involved. So that accusations made were difficult to rebut whilst the accusers could make all sorts of claims without any fear of redress.

    We need to take democratic control of our Party and can’t rely on Labour MPs to do that on our behalf.

  • Abe Hayeem says:

    Brilliant analysis and exposure! What is forgotten is the other bit of damning evidence of collusion by Labour Friends of Israel, the Jewish Labour Movement and MPs associated with these organisations, with the Israeli Embassy clearly shown in the Al Jazeera documentary on the Israel Lobby. Mark Regev the Israeli ambassador was seen saying that they should use antisemitism to help bring down Labour. https://www.aljazeera.com/investigations/thelobby/
    Now it seems that the Labour Party members of the Compliance unit are suing Labour for revealing their names. Keir Starmer is calling for an investigation not on how the officials planned to make Corbyn lose the election, but on who leaked the damning report. Jenny Formby has damned anyone discussing the report or revealing its contents as possibly being criminally prosecuted. Can you imagine a crazier scenario?

Comments are now closed.