A Northumberland independent – but Tory-supporting – councillor has outraged locals with a comment allegedly implying Jewish people are more deserving of abuse
Malcolm Robinson sits as a ‘Bedlington Independent’ councillor in the Northumberland ward of Bedlington West – and in spite of his title, he is regarded as a Tory supporter propping up the Conservative group on a county council in which no one party has overall control.
Robinson has caused a storm of controversy this week in by a comment made in a rant about the Labour Party that locals feel implies Jewish people are more deserving of abuse:
A local anti-Tory group quickly condemned the comment for its implication that he didn’t deserve abuse in the way he feels Jewish people would:
Local individuals also responded strongly:
Robinson’s reference was not made in isolation. At the beginning of the same rant, he made an allusion to a well-known nazi:
Robinson also left antisemitic comments undeleted and unchallenged in the responses to his comment:
Robinson was contacted for comment via different channels but had not responded by the time of publication.
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.
In an article in The Telegraph published/posted yesterday – primarily about the “three amigos” – it says the following:
‘It’s different for Labour rebels: Jeremy Corbyn’s party is a cesspit of disgusting, despicable anti-Semitism…..’
As I’ve pointed out before, if it really WAS such a party, then the SNP and the LibDems and Plaid Cymru and Caroline Lucas (Green Party) would NOT have voted with such a party in the No Confidence motion debate called by Jeremy Corbyn in January AND, as such, the author of the piece – Allister Heath – is dissembling and reiterating a Big Falsehood and, as such, deceiving readers of the The Telegraph. That said, I have little doubt that a significant proportion of the Telegraph’s readership are well aware that it’s all one Big Falsehood/Smear Campaign, and have no problem with that whatsoever.
Anyway, in case you didn’t see it, here’s a link to the letter supporting JC published in The Guardian yesterday (well, the day before, to be precise):
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/20/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-crucial-ally-in-fight-against-antisemitism
And definitely give the following piece by Jonathan Cook a read:
https://www.jonathan-cook.net/2019-02-21/anti-semitism-divide-britain-labour-party/
If our party is a cesspit of disgusting,despicable anti semitism can anyone explain why we nominate, campaign for and elect a disproportionately high number of our Jewish brothers and sisters to parliament often with massive majorities e.g. Louise Ellmam got around 80% of the vote in her constituency in the last election.
We have more Jewish Mps than Muslim Sikh or Hindu MPs. Jewish members are well represented throughout the party – on the NEC and other committees CLPs etc.
We have many Jewish supporters as well as the two hundred prominent Jewish people who signed the letter of support to which have provided a link – remember the support expressed for Jeremy Corbyn by the Orthodox Rabbis representing over 100 congregations, the JVL and other Jewish Socialist groups and individuals.
The comments in the Times are a shameful slur on all members and have no factual base.
Very good points smartboy.
Afterthought: Yes, it’s amazing isn’t it, all these Labour Party anti-semites going out canvassing for Jewish candidates. Including some “self-hating” Jews no doubt.
Looks like ALL of the daily papers have covered this, but here’s a few clips from the Mail:
Countdown co-presenter Rachel Riley and former EastEnders actor Tracy Ann Oberman have threatened legal action against Twitter users who are alleged to have targeted and harassed them online.
Oberman, who played Chrissie Watts in EastEnders from 2004 to 2005 is now a contributor to the Jewish Chronicle and the Guardian, among others.
The 52-year-old was previously a member of the Labour Party, but left due over the decision not to revoke Ken Livingstone’s membership following allegations of antisemitism.
(Ends)
So Tracy Ann Oberman left the LP (alledgedly) over the decision not to revoke Ken’s membership for referring to an historical fact – ie the Haavara Agreement. Well, I mean, you WOULD, wouldn’t you.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6730671/Rachel-Riley-threatens-legal-action-against-70-people-harassment-defamation.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ito=1490&ns_campaign=1490
In the Guardian’s coverage of the story, they at least said the following (regarding Mark Lewis, the lawyer who is dealing with it for Riley and Oberman):
Lewis has been a repeated critic of Labour’s treatment of claims of antisemitism. At the end of last year the lawyer was fined £2,500 by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal after it concluded he acted with a lack of integrity when he sent offensive tweets to his opponents, including one which said: “Happy to celebrate your death too. I have not got time for your hideous evil.”
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/21/rachel-riley-and-tracy-ann-oberman-to-take-legal-action-after-twitter-abuse-antisemitism
The sense of entitlement some famous people have just beggars belief. Settling some of these issues in court is long overdue but I wonder if, should the courts find for the defendants, the MSM will be as keen to make a story of that… and whether the complainants will then accuse the courts of antisemitism.
If antisemitism were really as widespread as claimed by the AS-mongers the courts system would be collapsing under the strain.
No chance of the MSM ‘reporters’ making that connection themselves of course – but pass up on a case involving Riley? No way.
It’s about time the courts had the opportunity to support free speech and condemn false witness, invention, hearsay, rumour, supposition – and interference in our democracy by foreign powers.
I think Riley will wish she hadn’t opened this particular Pandora’s box – some of her own tweets have been bullying, offensive and transparently false. Good job our friends archive them 🙂 am I right in thinking dates of deletion can be determined too?
I know nothing at all of Oberman and Lewis.
I was just scrolling through Rachel Riley’s twitter page looking for some examples of the abuse she claims she’s received, and I looked through fourty or fifty tweets, but didn’t come across a single one. All I saw were dozens of tweets – mostly by HER – abusing Jeremy Corbyn AND falsely accusing him of being anti-semitic.
Someone did in fact tweet about Joan Ryan falsely accusing an LP member of anti-semitism, which RR just completely ignored of course, and the fact that she DID tells you everything you need to know about where SHE is coming from.
Anyway, at another point she put a link to the following Jewish Chronicle article, and despite reading it TWICE, I can’t make head nor tail of it. Can anyone else? Mind you, it was written by Lee Harpin, who recently claimed in an article that members of Walton CLP had posted vile anti-semitic comments on their facebook page in relation to Luciana Berger, which was complete fabrication on his part. And the fact that he didn’t apologise, was HIS way of saying “It wasn’t a mistake of course. and obviously I knew it wasn’t your facebook page”. With a smirk all over his face, of course.
And they – the black propagandists that infest our media – don’t just do these things for their OWN amusement, but also to amuse others of their ilk. They literally get high on concocting falsehoods and smears AND the deception – collectively – of millions of people AND manipulating them with their falsehoods.
I think Mr Howard hits the nail squarely on the head here. For some time I have wondered why Labours legal team choose to ignore the vile and provable accusations made against individuals and the party I have no knowledge of the law but if Riley can take legal action over offensive tweets surely there is a case for the Party to take action.Whilst on the subject,I know it’s exceedingly difficult given the media bias,but I see little evidence of rebuttal from our press team to all the vilification. I am yet to hear a senior MP say yes there are problems but there is also a lot of mischief making going on. Hopefully this will be like Ali in the Foreman fight,the famous “rope a dope”, absorb all the punishment then deliver a stunning knockout blow on general Election Day.
Two points :
Firstly, these accusations are nebulous and work by the usual technique of smearing imprecision. Tying such down in a legal sense is extremely difficult.
What is interesting is that where a worker has been suspended as a result of such accusations, the quasi-judicial process of tribunal has reinstated them without question. We *know* the reverse – a large percentage of the allegation smears don’t stand up under forensic examination.
But that’s not the problem – the constant drip of propaganda is what the right wish to achieve to maintain the fictional trope in the media.
Secondly – in terms of action by the machinery of the Party. I’m afraid that the policy is and has been one of placation – which should, by now have proved its pointlessness. Even Jenny Formby runs a mile from endorsing the notion of conspiracy – which there clearly is (in both a loose and a tight sense).
At the fringes, the Graun, for example, has operated a policy of censorship of intelligent criticism that creates a massive silence about what is going on. This despite publishing some decent pieces about the assaults on Palestinians in Gaza and the Occupied Territories, the two issues are never coherently linked. And counter-evidence is just absent. Fear or Design? I don’t actually know.
You will find no mention *anywhere* in the MSM of :
1. The ten-year old Dispatches documentary on the Israel Lobby
2. Mention anywhere of Al Jazeera’s more recent coverage of the same issue (despite both showing a mountain of relevant evidence)
3. Reporting of the academic study of the bias – and indeed falsification – of coverage over the IHRA issue.
This silence is truly remarkable, even for those of us with a pretty sceptical view of the media.
And – sadly – it works. Senior Labour figures will *not* speak out, and always preface any comment with a reinforcing apology for the miniscule occurrence of actual antisemitism – much of which isn’t connected with the Labour Party in any way. Note, for instance, that one successfully prosecuted example where the evidence was tested, aimed at Luciana Berger, came from a Facebook saddo who self-identified as a ‘nazi’.
I’ve often made the point that in cases where the evidence and detail is in the public arena – the subjects of the accusations are more likely to be (a) black and./or Jewish and (b) have impeccable records on anti-racism. These are the salient characteristics – *and* the fact that they are of the left, not that they are ‘antisemitic’. They have simply been forthright in their calling out of the persecution of Palestinians behaviour and the concept of Zionism. The latest example is that of Derek Hatton – towards whom I have no other sympathy or allegiance – who has once again been suspended from the Party for suggesting that the Jewish community should exercise their force as a relevant pressure group on Israel.
The term ‘antisemitism’ has been drained of real meaning. And that is serious. Discrimination is too important an issue to be used as material for cheap political ends – particularly when it seeks to fictionally recruit a whole group to its nefarious ends.
I just came back to this thread for the first time since posting my comments and, as such, spotted that I forgot to include a link to the Jewish Chronicle article I was referring to in the last of my comments, so just for the record, here it is:
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/labour-snubs-mp-luciana-berger-over-assault-threat-1.472234
Mis-spells Göring, and probably meant Goebbels anyway. Not the first time I’ve seen this by right wing nutters.
No no, Kevin it’s a clever ploy, they get it wrong on purpose so when YOU put them right on the ‘who’s who of nazi heirarchy’ they can accuse you of being a neo-nazi yourself; else: ‘You wouldn’t know so much if you weren’t! ‘
Where is my previous comment?