As MSM ignores ‘7’ racism fiasco, SKWAWKBOX gets a word in for left on C4

SKWAWKBOX on Channel 4 News on Monday evening

The mainstream media disgraced itself today, giving blanket coverage to the smears of disgruntled ‘quitter’ MPs yet almost completely ignoring the racism scandal engulfing the new centrist ‘group’.

But on Channel 4 at least, the left was able to get a word in via a SKWAWKBOX headline featured on Channel 4 News’ 7pm bulletin:

Scandalously, on a day in which the quitters disgraced themselves by perpetrating and then excusing outright racism, there was almost no other mention of their transparent hypocrisy and cynicism.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

18 responses to “As MSM ignores ‘7’ racism fiasco, SKWAWKBOX gets a word in for left on C4

  1. Neither the MSM nor Skwarwkbox have mentioned THE major factor that binds the defectors, which is that they are all Zionists. This important fact highlights just how terrified the LP and the media are of even making any attempt to discuss a serious problem within all our political parties.- Zionism.

    • You are probably right Jack, but do you actually know that for a fact and, if so, HOW do you know?

      One thing is for certain….. they are all complicit in a Gargantuan Falsehood and Deception, along with quite a few other Blairite Tory MPs, including Tom Watson of course, and ALL aided and abetted by the MSM.

      http://www.mediareform.org.uk/blog/new-mrc-research-finds-inaccuracies-and-distortions-in-media-coverage-of-antisemitism-and-the-labour-party

    • Allan, if it walks like a duck etc. Every one of them has criticised Corbyn for being anti-semitic when they know it is a deliberate lie. This is quite apart from their ties to Israel, ergo – Zionists.

      • The only disagreement I have is that I’m not sure that there is a coherent philosophy behind this – which the term ‘zionist’ suggests.

        The LFoI has disproportionate influence, and a large number of MPs sign up because they are afraid not to – such is the pressure of the pro-Israel lobby. It is the way in which the Lobby also operates on the media – creating an atmosphere where even good journalists run a mile rather than be called ‘antisemitic’.

        Let’s face it, the whole scam isn’t new – it has just taken on legs as Israeli interests do everything to prevent a UK government that might take a balanced view of Israel.and expose its fictions.

        Clearly, the LFoI should not be associated with the Labour Party, since its avowed aim – support for the depredatins of the apartheid regime are contrary to basic Labour policy and principles, and it also acts as a pressure group for outside interests.

        But I doubt that any move will be made against it, such is the culture of omerta on the actuality of Palestine.

      • ‘Allan, if it walks like a duck etc. Every one of them has criticised Corbyn for being anti-semitic when they know it is a deliberate lie…..’.

        Yes, I am of course aware of that Jack, but you didn’t actually answer my question. So I’ll assume the answer was ‘No’.

    • Dodgy nutter alert ! You disgrace yourself here, again, Jack T. And in using that slippery word ” Zionists” , with so many deeply embedded anti-Semitic dog whistle meanings quite apart from its meaning of the 19th century originating political philosophy of Jewish separatist nationalism, which is the leading ideology of the Israeli state, you reveal your bigoted agenda. The Splitters are indeed all supporters of not only the existence of the state of Israel (which is of course also Labour Party POLICY, Jeremy’s position, and that of the PLO) , but UNCRITICAL supporters of all of the criminal actions of the current Israeli state and government, from illegal settlements onwards. But the Splitters are not centrally ,or bound together, or defined by their pro Israeli stance at all. That is your obsessive delusion. The Splitters are in fact defined by their much broader neoliberal pro capitalist POLITICS, of which uncritical support for the wider pro US/pro NATO imperialism agenda is a vital subset(and by inclusion , but a second tier down from being totally pro US imperialism, are uncritically pro Israel)

      Jack T constantly exposes himself as, either an “anti Zionism” obsessive – ie, someone with crap simplistic politics , or as a troll trying to draw other posters on this site into crude “anti Zionist” comments, which will merely serve to confirm the claims of the Labour Right and media that the Left are obsessed with Jews and Israel. Beware of people constantly harping on about “Zionists” , when less controversial terms such as “uncritical apologists for the Israeli State” would suffice

      • jpenny. Are you saying that the word ‘Zionists’ – along with the words ‘Zionist’ and ‘Zionism’ – is ALWAYS a derogatory term and, as such, the Zionist Federations should change their names to something else, or is it only a derogatory term when somebody criticises them?

        And as I’m sure you know, you don’t have to be Jewish to be a Zionist…….. it’s a movement, it’s NOT a religion.

        Anyway, so according to you, when Jack said – in relation to the Seven – that they are all Zionists, what he was REALLY saying in fact is that they are all Jews. Yes? THAT would indeed call for a ‘dodgy nutter alert’!

    • And just one last point Jack, and THAT is that if the Seven (or eight as it now is) WERE actually Zionists, you don’t seriously believe for one millisecond that the MSM would report it, as such. Of course they wouldn’t, as I’m sure you know. Whereas I have little doubt that SB – and other Left-wing news outlets/blogs – WOULD, as long as they could prove it.

  2. To be fair, the Independent did cover Smith’s apology – albeit in terms remarkably favourable to the racist – but the article has suspiciously few comments given the level of interest in the story.

    • The Independent probably only mentioned it in case any confused readers thought the paper was connected to the party!

  3. RT uUK news covered the “funny tinge comment and even had the Professor of Politics from Univ. of Westminster on, who talked about the Gang of 7 who are more likely to cause a problem amongst the plethora of right-wing parties with the Tories, UKIP, & Lib-Dems – all clearly Neoliberal. Interesting take.

  4. Kirsty Wark on BBC Newsnight, briefly mentioned it (raciist comment) to Chris Leslie who she interviewed at length in favourable terms, and he just said “she apologised” and that was the end of Wark’s keen journalistic probing (NOT)

    • Yes, it couldn’t have been briefer. But it’s interesting to note how when one of THEIR number makes a racist comment and then apologises, THAT’S the end of it. But when JC apologises (in relation to trumped-up falsehoods) – as he has done on a number of occasions – the smearers keep finding spurious and mendacious ways to attack and smear and vilify him and the left again and again, the PLP meetings of last week and the week before being perfect examples.

    • And it’s more than a little interesting how Kirsty Wark phrased the question to Chris Leslie regarding the racist comment by his colleague Angela Smith – ie she manages to ask the question withought mentioning what Angela Smith actually said. And there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that THAT was thought through and worked out prior to the program.

      I’m only vaguely familiar with Chris Leslie, and even less so with Siobhain McDonagh, but they both came across as insincere and superficial. Anyway, the bit in question is at around 18 mins 25 secs, and take note of how quickly Chris Leslie moves away from saying anything more about it, and Kirsty Wark makes no attempt to bring him back to it. Now if it had been a Corbynista who had said such a thing AND apologised…….

      It’s all so totally corupt it’s hard to imagine that the vast majority of regular Newsnight viewers can’t see right through it:

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0002p6m/newsnight-18022019

  5. When I heard the racist remark made by Angela Smith I was just so relieved she was no longer a Labour member though how a person of this caliber ever received a nomination as a Labour PPC is beyond me. I also noticed that during a TV discussion when she was questioned by one of the guests about her links to the privatised water industry she did not answer but was allowed to immediately raise the issue of anti semetism.

    • And needless to say, if it had been one of Jeremy Corbyn’s circle who said such a thing, it would have been headline news all over the MSM, along with copious amounts of outrage and condemnation.

  6. As I’ve said time and again…

    To these people there is only ONE form of racism. That’s antisemitism.

    One ‘Labour’ MP again is conspicuous by her apparent absence and silence when it comes to non jewish racism…jess phillips.

    Alright at telling Diane Abbott to ‘f**koff’ and alright ‘marching in solidarity’ with ruth smeeth over unfounded – and frankly, fabricated – allegations of antisemitism against a black man.

    However, not a peep from phillips when an independent MP makes a (freudian slip of an observation) ‘unfortunate comment’ or ‘mistake’ like smith did.

    Jus’ sayin’…

Leave a Reply