Analysis comment

NEC members demand Evans explain on who authorised him to ban members from discussion and votes on Starmer’s surrender pay-out and EHRC report

Clear that NEC did not authorise action ruling out discussion of £600,000 pay-out

Elected members of Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) have demanded that the party’s new general secretary David Evans explain who authorised him to send an email to local party (CLP) chairs and secretaries banning discussion and votes on Keir Starmer’s £600,000 pay-out to ‘whistleblowers‘ involved in last year’s widely-criticised Panorama programme, as well as of the impending report by the EHRC on its investigation.

Labour members were not consulted on the decision not to fight a case the party’s lawyers said it could win – and on Friday night Starmer refused twice (video) to deny that he had gone against legal advice in the expensive pay-out that has emboldened Labour’s enemies.

But it seems that members of the NEC were not consulted either, even though the body is the party’s supreme authority – below the party’s annual conference of member and affiliated delegates.

That was made clear by a tweet from longstanding NEC member Rachel Garnham:

I and other left Labour NEC CLP reps have written to the General Secretary asking on whose authority his recent email, apparently prohibiting discussion of certain topics, was circulated; and expressing deep concerns about this attempt to curtail political discussion in CLPs.

NEC member Rachel Garnham

The ban was no trivial matter, with Evans telling CLP officers and members that they were bound by the party’s ‘unreserved apology’ and could be legally liable if they dared to contravene it. Yet according to Rachel Garnham, the NEC knew nothing about it before it the threatening email was sent.

Labour members have reacted with similar outrage to being told what they are allowed to discuss. Evans has previously said, before his appointment, that ‘representative democracy’ should be abolished within the party ‘as far as possible’.

The SKWAWKBOX is provided free of charge but depends on the support 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 to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

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

81 comments

  1. It’s OUR money (the membership of the LP) we should have a say how it is spent. Really pissed off being told ‘by the LP machinery’ what we can/cannot DO, SAY, THINK, DEBATE…… Think it’s time this Socialist did a Foxtrot Oscar.

      1. Richard McKinnon
        Are you
        a) A Cockwomble
        b) A Quisling or
        c) A Bad Actor
        Any one of three and off you must fuck

      2. It won’t be after the court case! Provided one gets to court, please God.

    1. Folks
      You don’t need a 1st Class Honours Degree in the bleeding obvious to see that’s what they want
      FFS stop with the dummy spitting and keep on keeping on until we force them out

    2. So the NEC
      DID NOT
      Authorise the pay off
      Can someone on here tell me where ‘Temporary Embarrassment ‘ got the authority to make this political decision

      1. Doug 16/08/2020 at 11:03 am

        <i<@So the NEC DID NOT Authorise the pay off

        Where does it say that ?

  2. It should of course cost him his newly acquired position,but he will say he was “acting under orders”.However,it is a stark warning to all who are prepared to listen just what they elected when the voted for the “Great Leader”.

    1. I have little doubt that the Blairights had Starmer lined up to replace Jeremy for a long time and, as such, they had him keep a relatively low profile in respect of the A/S smear campaign against Jeremy and the left membership, and for the obvious reason. Many left-wing members were ALSO duped and fooled by Blair TOO when he initially became leader.

      Anyway, it’s good to hear that NEC members have written to Evans demanding an explanation, because what he did is tantamount to suppressing free speech, and only fascists and dictators do THAT!

      1. PS And it wasn’t just Evans of course who decided to do such a thing.

      2. Allan, perhaps we can have as a topic for discussion at CLP meetings: Do David Evans and Keir Starmer behave as fascist? is there a possibility that both of them are fascist?

      3. It wouldn’t take very long to discuss Maria! About ten seconds!!

      4. I don’t think you understand Allan. The NEC is no longer of any relevance. It is the eunuch in the harem. Get used to it or do the decent thing.

      5. As I’ve said time & again, Allan. fatberg was the a/s side of the coin, stammer was the brexit side while Corbyn had the reins.

        Once the humiliation of the election came to bear (A roaring success to stammer & co – a disaster for the nation), once brexit was over with (stammer’s six tests for remaining were NEVER gonna be feasible) and once watson had done the frank bough (being the cowardly obese bag of excrement that he is), stammer dropped the EU issue like a hot potato and went full tilt on the alleged a/s issue, having not uttered a dicky-bird about it right up to the time he stole the reins from Corbyn.

        And now he’s shutting down debate AND dissent. And abject, sycophantic, lying shithouses like steve h say ‘wait n see’ every time.

        Well fuck him and fuck the party if that’s what it’s come to. My money will burn a hole in my pocket; my vote will go elsewhere. We’ll see who’s voice matters, just like we did last time.

      6. Maria
        Fascists taking over
        We know Cummings and Bannon piss in the same pot
        We know the 2019 GE was the dirtiest in my lifetime and not a squeak from authorities or so called ‘Free Press’
        Now all I’m watching in America are daily reports of vote rigging on a monumental scale
        In parts of Montana, post boxes are being removed
        Is one of the strange but true stories circulating
        Regards

    2. That usually was line of defence by Nazis in court for crimes against humanity, or those well versed in shifting blame onto others.

    1. G Millward
      That is so clear a blind man with a shitty stick can see what’s going on
      Thanks for introducing us to ‘Duncan’ Disorderly, a new hero of the left
      Regards

  3. How ‘Left Wing’ is the NEC? I’m sorry, I’ll say that again…….How many Socialists are on NEC?

  4. Maybe the membership should ‘Instruct’ waxman Starmer to not talk to or discuss anything with Murdoch/ his puppets or his dirty filthy rag. What’s good for the goose……………….

  5. “Representative democracy should as far as possible be abolished in the Party”. If these are Evans’ words – or even if he only concurs with them – then he is clearly a usurper, i.e. someone who is seizing illegally a power or authority which the party constitution entrusts elsewhere.

    Question is, if this were happening to you personally, if a visitor suddenly assumed the right to sell your family home and pocket the proceeds of the sale, what would you do?

    Would you leave your home immediately feeling abject disgust at your visitor and let the visiting usurper affect their theft, or would you challenge them by asserting your ownership rights?

    Should I stay (and fight) or should I go?

      1. Well some of us certainly are Richard,and I have to say I have not had many regrets since being suspended.

  6. There’s a fair few people on here saying: “stay and fight…change from within.”

    These same people complain about the zionists….

    Well, it was YOUR money that pieced them off…not mine.

  7. Would it not be great if NEC or us members could serve his sirship with a writ demanding immediate repayment of the payout plus interest or else he would be taken to court and done for theft and embezzlement, in any case that opton is on the table regardless. We, the membership sack the pair with forthwith for bringing our Party into disrepute.

    1. Maybe not as easy as we’d like, but it could be done. Moreover, it would give the leavers the issue they need to make their actions visible and also disallow the Party to ignore the exodus.

      Every departing member could log their former membership number on a public website. Then the party’s centrist apparatchiks would not be able to ignore and glide over the exodus. I’d like it if every departing member committed a year’s worth of membership fees to a fighting fund of some sort which could be used as and when necessary to either establish a new party or clean up the old one. JC could be entrusted as an executor of the fund.

      At least the MSM and therefore the public would know we are doing something and not just being shat upon or ‘removed’ by a new forensic leader like tumorous waste products of cancerous leftists cells, which is how the billionaire press will otherwise play it.

      1. I have already contributed to the fund for the members taking the party to law.I will do the same for any other similar move to the limit of my slender resources.

      2. quertboi
        Class Action is already underway and covers pretty much all the angles
        Regards

  8. Where’s our resident democracy ‘expert’ (AKA steve h) to debrief us plebs?

    I’m sure he’s gonna attempt to convince us this was all above board and we mustn’t ever query the beloved leader…

    1. Toffee,
      Let me help you in the absence of steve.
      Rule books and the NEC are an irrelevance now. This is real politik. Starmer is the Leader and he is now taking charge. He can do anything he wants. Get used to it. Stop complaining it sounds pathetic.

      1. I’m not a member so my voice doesn’t count anyway, Richard

        It’s official. That’s the decree of our resident authority on democratic matters and stammerite commissar – steve jong h

      2. That was another broadcast from the conservative and unionist party…Richard MacKinnon your comments are marked by your political and lodge affiliation.

  9. It’s up to CLPs, not Evans or Starmer to decide what they want to criticise or discuss – particularly when they act in the interests of a foreign state rather than the Party.

    The problem will be the timid member souls who like to be told what to do – a tendency displayed in neon during this current Tory crisis that has been endorsed by Labout.

    There are, as far as I can see, absolutely no constitutional grounds for these recent actions by Starmer and Evans. They need to be openly challenged.

  10. Chris Williamson lost his job and income to the kangaroo court of the NEC,,,who were supposed to be mainly left wing Corbyn supporters.Nothing changes,Chris was thrown under a bus by our previous leadership and loyalty was a one way street.Different leadership same result.Membership and money taken for a ride.Six hundred thousand poundon employees that broke every rule in the book,and I know many will feel cheated and used….Same old song different singer.

    1. Joseph, if you feel that way about Jeremy, then why do you come on a Jeremy Corbyn-supporting blog and post comments every day? And what do you think would have happened if Jeremy had defended Chris and refuted the claim that Chris had said anything anti-semitic? Yes, the smearers-cum-saboteurs would have gone ballistic, albeit COMPLETELY fake and phony, as is ALL their outrage and fury and condemnation.

      Perhaps ypu can remind me what happened when Chris was reinstated. The following should help jog your memory:

      ”An utter disgrace’: Fury as Labour MP and Corbyn ally Chris Williamson is let off with a warning after saying the party was ‘too apologetic’ about anti-Semitism claims’

      https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7184575/An-utter-disgrace-Jewish-fury-Corbyn-ally-Chris-Williamson-let-warning.html

      1. Allan, we cannot control what the MSM does, what we can control is our response to it. Throwing Chris Williamson under the proverbial bus, didn’t stop the MSM for attacking Corbyn did it? But the lack of defense for Chris Williamson meant that some people ideas were reinforced in their belief that Corbyn’s supporters were all a bunch of antisemites, so Corbyn must be an antisemite too.

      2. Maria, it was a no-win situation – ie you lose if you DO, and you lose if you DON’T. Or to be precise: “We’ll attack and condemn you if you DO, and we’ll attack and condemn you if you DON’T”.

        And it isn’t just the MSM per se, it’s Labour MPs and Labour peers and the BoD and the Chief Rabbi and the JLM and the CAA and LAA and the Tories and the LibDem leadership…… Here’s just ONE example (and there have been thousands during the course of the past five years):

        ‘Labour peers tell Corbyn: you have failed test of leadership’

        https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/16/tom-watson-backs-labour-motion-auto-exclude-racism

        Yes, you could argue that if THAT’s the case – ie that you get attacked and condemned anyway – then they SHOULDN’T have suspended Chris again, but on the ONE hand Jeremy has no say in such matters, and on the OTHER hand if CHris HADN’T been suspended again, the saboteurs would have just kept ratcheting up their condemnation more and more and more until he WAS.

      3. Allan, at least by defending Chris Williamson we will have stood by a comrade, it is called solidarity. What message do you think it send to the rank and file when the Socialist Campaign Group of MPs washed its hands? When a left controlled NEC re-suspended Chris on the say so of the right wing of the Party?
        Why do you think people keep leaving the Party? Could it be because they feel that the Socialist Campaign Group of MPs are perhaps spineless? Perhaps because they feel that the Labour left was never serious about been a Party of government? That the left is happier while in opposition even within the Labour Party?
        Compare the Socialist Group of MPs behaviour with MPs like Jess Phillips quickly in the defense of the indefensible.
        I don’t expect you to agree with me, but I believe we lost because quite simply, people around Corbyn including him, were scare of winning. So, they performed U turns on brexit, placate people that didn’t want to be placated and by doing so, plant the seeds of our defeat.

      4. Allan Howard, White Flag Man. Yes WFM we can see you above the crowd waving your flag as usual and shouting your normal message of ‘keep your heads down, the MSM are unchallengeable, retreat retreat’. A tactic from Starmer’s book of how to oppose without opposing!

      5. Both for the people who stay and the people who leave Labour the SCG needs to realise that it has to provide a leadership role now. Until it does, we look disparate.

      6. Of course they weren’t scared of winning. I’m sorry Maria, but THAT’s one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard. As Jack T said a few weeks ago, anyone that stood up for the likes of Chris or Jackie etc just got shot down (and accused of being an anti-semite themselves for ‘defending an anti-semite’, or of ‘being in denial’ and ‘being part of the problem’, as such), or words to that effect. In your initial post above you said: ‘But the lack of defense for Chris Williamson meant that some peoples ideas were reinforced in their belief that Corbyn’s supporters were all a bunch of antisemites’. On the contrary Maria, BUT the idea put forward by some posters on hear that the Smearers and saboteurs would have stopped their smearing and their sabotaging if only Jeremy had stood up to them, is just pure fantasy. Of course they wouldn’t have!

        Oh, and OH-so predictably, Jack the shill is back! Anyway, so when did you first arrive at the view that Jeremy was weak and cowardly and spineless for not ‘fighting back’ etc against the Smearers? And as I asked you in the other thread yesterday – and as I just asked Joe Okeefe a bit earlier – why is it, if you feel the way you do about Jeremy, that you are posting comments on a Jeremy Corbyn-supporting blog? It doesn’t add up or make sense.

        Unless of course…….

      7. Afterthought: It is of course impossible to know how damaging it was (in the public mind, so to speak) to have squaddies or whoever firing at a picture of Jeremy in a firing range, but I have little doubt that it had the desired effect on a significant number of working class Labour voters. It was a stroke of genius (from the Establishment’s point of view), and there is no way on this planet that it was the squaddies themselves that came up with the idea.

        But my point is THIS Maria, that THAT was something the dark forces dreamed up that there was absolutely nothing Jeremy could have done about it to reverse the damage that was done.

      8. Allan, I voted for Jeremy twice, and would still do. It doesn’t mean that I have to agree with everything he did. In dealing with the MSM, I agree we were in a non win situation. But he did have choices and in my opinion he and the rest of the Socialist Campaign Group made the wrong choices in trying to placate the right wing of the Party and the MSM.
        Yes, we would have lost the GE in 2019 too, but the fact is we did placate the right wing of the Party and we didn’t win the General Election, we sustained a heavy defeat. Hence, since we were going to lose no matter what at least we could have lost in our terms.
        Now look at the alternative, Corbyn could have withdraw the whip from several members of the PLP for bringing the Party into disrepute by pursuing the narrative that the Party was institutionally antisemite. Yes we have problem with antisemitism, nobody is denying that, but less than 1% of member under investigation doesn’t make the case os institutional antisemitism does it?
        I would argue that calling Corbyn a f…..antisemite in front of other MPs brought the Party into disrepute, that going around telling anyone that care to listen that she told Diane Abbott to f.. off also did bring the Party into disrepute too. The Labour whips should have been withdrew and another candidate selected to fight in those safe seats and gaining those seats for Labour but with different MPs.
        We would have lost the GE 2019, but at the same time, we could have clear the deck. Instead we lost the GE and in the process we lost the Party too.

      9. The PTB were never-EVER going to let Jeremy near the reins of power Maria, and I really believe that if Jeremy HAD won the 2017 election with a small majority, there could very well have been a military coup, on the pretext that he was a threat to national security. The fascist elite are capable of anything. Just look what they did to Iraq, and they don’t give a flying fox if a million people were killed in the process….

        Yes, we Really believed that it could happen, and with Jeremy at the helm, we could transform society for the better, even as THEY ‘transformed’ Jeremy into an anti-semite and the left membership into bullies and thugs and homophobes. And anti-semites TOO of course. But now that the dream is over, it’s easy to see with hindsight that the Dark fascist forces that are hidden to most people were never-ever going to let us take their power away from them. They really DO regard themselves as Masters of the Universe, and that this planet belongs to them.

        We live in a Psychopathocracy, and that is why the world – reality – is the way it is, and why our history is what it was. Wealth begets power, and power begets wealth, and they can never let go of it, and they will end up completely destroying the planet and making it uninhabitable. And we are well on the way.

      10. The logic of total control……you dare not criticise Jeremy Corbyn? Can’t reinstate Chris Williamson ’cause the Daily Mail won’t like it!

      11. The Labour Party & Corbynista Socialists must spend all their time on their knees grovelling & apologising. If you want to walk straight & proud, you need a back bone. ‘Get Up. Stand U!’

      12. Being critical of Corbyn (or anyone else)if you feel they were wrong about something is what is expected of democratic socialists Allan.It does not carry with it the implication of general opposition to everything Corbyn stood and stands for.I criticise him,but that doesn’t stop me wishing we had him as leader instead of the empty vessel Starmer.

      13. As I said before Maria, anyone defending someone who has been ‘designated’ an anti-semite, is then themselves accused of defending an anti-semite, and condemned and vilified for doing so. But anyway, I was just researching something re the leaked report and came across the following in a Daily Mail article from December 2019 (in relation to a different ‘leaked report’):

        It sets out in nine examples of Mr Corbyn’s past behaviour which the JLM claimed had acted as ‘signals to party members’ that ‘anti-Semitic views are acceptable’.

        This includes, defending Chris Williamson against allegations of anti-Semitism weeks before he was suspended for those allegations.

        So I then did a search re Jeremy defending Chris Williamson and came across the following article on the PoliticsHome website posted on Feb 1st, 2019, in which it says this:

        Jeremy Corbyn has defended Labour backbencher Chris Williamson against accusations that he is anti-semitic.

        The Derby North MP sparked controversy in 2017 by insisting that claims Labour had a problem with anti-Jewish racism within its ranks were a “dirty lowdown trick” and being used for “political ends”.

        Asked on a visit to Derbyshire whether he had concerns over the firebrand left-winger’s record on anti-Semitism, Mr Corbyn told the Derby Telegraph: “Chris Williamson is a very good, very effective Labour MP. He’s a very strong anti-racist campaigner. He is not anti-semitic in any way.”

        https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/jeremy-corbyn-defends-ally-chris-williamson-against-antisemitism-claims

        NB Another interesting aspect that this indirectly reveals is – that had they chosen to – the saboteurs could have gone after Chris much sooner than they did, because there obviously wasn’t a complaint submitted to the LP/NEC in relation to what he said in 2017, and they were obviously saving ‘Chris’ for later, although I believe he was being labeled as a ‘Jew Baiter’ long before he ended up being suspended. And just as with Ken and Jackie before him, I have no doubt that the security services so-called were keeping a close eye on him and accumulating ‘evidence’ for when they did decide to strike.

        Afterthought: And I don’t think you can blame Jeremy or the SCG for not speaking up for Chris once he HAD been suspended, because it was then in the hands of the NEC, and for them to arrive at a decision.

      14. Allan – The point you don’t seem to be able to grasp is that after several years of capitulation and surrender the stage had already been set. Once the capitulation started it was all downhill, the longer it went on the harder any fight back became

      15. It’s really weird how OTHER people ‘respond’ to something I said to someone else, and yet I know with absolute certainty that Joe saw my ‘Reply’ to him. But what happens…. Maria ‘responds’! Could it be that the main point I raised with Joe was one that he couldn’t really answer.

        Anyway, as I just noticed, Steve and Doug – a couple more every day all day posters – have now chipped in with their B/S. Joseph is a fucking fascist shill, who endlessly repeats things that are detrimental to Jeremy, because THAT is what black propagandists DO, so don’t give me your shit about criticism guys, cos THAT is what it is!

        Oh, right, and of course Joe didn’t answer my enquiring where he was a councillor because he’s a fucking shill who – at some point – was suddenly going to reveal ALL *and* accuse me – FALSELY – of accusing HIM of lying, and do so so as to discredit me in the eyes of readers of SB! It’s all so fucking transparent!

        All I can say guys is that you will ALL be in the book for the fucking frauds that you are, and thanks for the additional material! I appreciate it.

        PS Oh, right, and you both just happened to notice the ‘dialogue’ that had taken place between Maria and myself within ten/fifteen minutes of each-other. Yeah, what a coincidence eh!!

      1. I’m afraid that’s the trouble, John.

        No matter how many times he goes through the ignominy of his arse handed to him, he’s so lacking in self-awareness that he always returns for another berating. He almost revels in it, and goes out of his way to insult people’s far superior intelligence in order to receive his daily dose of redress.

        And Christ knows, some of the frankly over-exaggerated, unhealthy, stammerite-sycophantic garbage he spouts is impossible to leave unchallenged.

        Just as appropriate to call him out on his worn-out predictability, as it is to call him on what he has already said.

    1. Toffee – I’ve yet to see any evidence to the contrary. Could you post a link to the evidence that states the NEC did not agree to this settlement.

      1. Are you so fucking thick not to have read the original article that you want proof off me? It’s been put up there TWICE – once in bold lettering for complete and utter fuck’s sake.

        What sort of moron are you that you demand proof when it’s already staring you in the fucking face?

        It doesn’t work like that, whatsoever. Now that that’s been made clear, I want to see YOU provide proof it WAS agreed to seeing as you’re off on another one of your usual shithouse evasive manoeuvres.

      2. Toffee – I suggest you very carefully reread what it actually says in in the above article, it doesn’t say what you claim.

        I’ve never claimed to have any proof that the NEC supported the settlement. I just don’t happen to believe that Starmer has the authority to decide on this without the support of the NEC plus there hasn’t been a squeak from any of the NEC about them being sidelined on the decision to settle. If I’m subsequently proved to be wrong I’ll be more than happy to admit that I was mistaken

      3. And again with the cop-out. Typical of the shameless, stammerist shithouse tactic you routinely employ, but of no surprise value.

        ” I’ll be happy to admit I was mistaken” Oh, but of course you will.

        And you don’t get to make suggestions about reading articles to me, idiot. Now, I’ll ask again. We want to see you provide evidence the payout WAS agreed to. You’re saying stammer couldn’t possibly have authorised it on his own, we’ve seen the tweet that more or less confirms NEC members were NOT consulted.

        So, it’s on you to furnish us with evidence they WERE. Either do it, or shut your cave. Preferably permanently.

        Nothing else. No if’s, but’s or maybe’s (SWIDT?)…Just cold, hard irrefutable evidence.

      4. Toffee – As the best you could muster is ” more or less confirms” then instead of subjecting us to yet another rant you could have just admitted that you misread the article, it was an easy mistake to make.

      5. And true to form, he’s done the off again…Posting on other threads and making demands of other people, but refusing to answer simple questions being put to him. Hasn’t even got the courage of his own convictions.

        Still won’t stop him from convincing himself he’s answered the question and provided evidence, nor will it stop him demanding other people do his legwork neither.

        Evade, obfuscate, deny. One utterly detestable, pusillanimous rodent. Just like his beloved knight.

      6. Yawn all you like, plums, I am not the one on here deemed to have sold my country down the river like you did, and I’m not so dumb as to defend to the hilt, the thundercunt what planned it.

        And much unlike you and your dear leader, I’m not universally regarded as a hypocritical, duplicitous, imbecilic and cowardly rodent. And if I ever was, I’d at least have the shame to do the off and never return.

        But you obviously don’t have any friends in the real world (small wonder) which is the reason you plague this site. Added to that, you display all the classical signs of being an only child, what with your incessant demands which soon turn into pathetic evasion when the onus is placed upon you.

        Your unhealthy cultist-like obsession with stammer is your only form of escapism from bitter reality. Well, here’s the news sunshine; he’s not ever gonna reward you for your efforts. All the derision you get because of not only your fanaticism for your knight of the realm (and he gives a fuck for your views as much as the vast majority on here do, i.e. none.) but because you post utter cringe-inducing garbage about the muculent piece of shit, defending the entirely indefensible, and you expect us all to bend the knee to him like you do.

        You and your 70% can’t be wrong – right? After all, it got the toerags an eighty seat majority – didn’t it, gobshite? That in itself disqualifies everything you have to say about anything.

        But hey! He’s only the best of a bad bunch, isn’t he?

      7. Toffee – Apparently the endlessly prevaricating over the EU wasn’t the only
        reason people didn’t vote Labour.

  11. Just came across THIS in the Express from yesterday:

    ‘Jeremy Corbyn could be booted out of Labour by Keir Starmer NEXT MONTH, claims ex-member’

    Journalist Mr Hernon, whose book, Anti-Semitism and the Left, was published last year, told Express.co.uk: “Corbyn’s reaction to Starmer’s apology and compensation to the whistleblowers, when he said it was a political rather than a legal decision, I think was so appalling that Starmer should have started procedures to expel Corbyn from the Labour Party……”

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1323080/jeremy-corbyn-news-labour-party-keir-starmer-antisemitism-bbc-panorama

    Yet ANOTHER Blairight psychopath acting as if the whole A/S scam is real! And he even pretends (to the readers of the Express) that he is on the left of the party!

    And be sure to check out what Jon Lansman says at the end of the article.

    1. Jeremy Corbyn being “booted out” might be their biggest tactical mistake yet if it’s true.
      It might very well tempt him to form a new socialist party so I think they’d more likely do it close to the next election to give him less time to gather support.

      Settling with Ware and his gang of urchin con artists and denying us a voice gives us motive and opportunity to continue the “libel” and force Starmer’s hand.
      I don’t actually care that it was probably the Labour scum who approached Ware – he’s more culpable because the most superficial journalistic checks would have told him that he and they were about to commit treason – acting on behalf of a foreign power (in the person of the Israeli spy Shai Masot) to undermine the Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition.
      The urchins were dupes, easily brainwashed by the promised gratitude of powerful masters.
      I suspect they’ll already be filled with doubt and feeling a bit cheated, given that their masters will now view them with suspicion and fear of exposure.

      The left NEEDS court actions to go ahead to prove we’re not the liars, our accusers are – having their fucking trousers down in court is the only way to turn the tables on them in a way the MSM can’t ignore.
      That’s why Starmer and his masters are TERRIFIED of members continuing to call out the scammers – it forces them into further action or growing public ridicule and humiliation for not acting.
      Whatever the outcome they risk causing real antisemitism to spread beyond the far right in the UK after almost a century – if anyone doubts it, Farage and UKIP proved just how easily racist tendencies can be manipulated.

      1. Sorry, for “can’t ignore” please read “can neither ignore nor condemn”

      2. I have to disagree with you on a couple of points David….. I don’t think or believe for one moment that the ‘urchins’, as you refer to them, will be filled with doubt and feeling a bit cheated OR that their masters will now view them with suspicion and fear of exposure. I have no doubt whatsoever that the ‘urchins’ were fully on board and just lurved doing their ‘work’, and why would their ‘masters’ have even an inkling of fear about being exposed (by one or more of them) when they know that even if there was one or more of them that was thinking to expose it all, there is not a single main stream media outlet that would run with it and, in such a scenario, the person themselves would know that. AND, that they would very likely soon end up having an ‘accident’ if they DID approach some main stream media organisation. But I don’t believe for one billisecond that any of them WOULD contemplate doing such a thing in the FIRST place. They are all psychopaths and lurve all the skullduggery and decption and subterfuge and duplicity.

        And I disagree with you that the media can’t ignore such a scenario as the one you relate. Of course they can, and no doubt WOULD or WILL

  12. One thing’s for sure, the right-wing PLP are never going to let a left-wing contestant get anywhere near the leadership contest in the future, & certainly not one that’s up for confrontation, unlike Jeremy. The 2015 result was an aberration & shook them to the rooots – “What can happen if we take our eyes off the ball”.

    The rules will be re-written so that only candidates supported by the Tories, the Likud Party, POTUS, the MSM, the Establishment, the City & Big Business need apply. They’ve got it sewn up – always have had & always will have because money talks the loudest. BTW, the long list above can be summarised in the future as the GREEDIEST.

    1. itsmespeakingtoyou
      Capitalism disappeared up it’s own arse in 2007, the let them eat cakes then turned on money printer to avoid judgement day
      Financial Pandemic and No Deal should finish the job

    2. ‘The 2015 result was an aberration…’

      Was it though! I’m not so sure. I have no doubt whatsoever that within a few weeks of Jeremy entering the leadership contest, the security services (and NOT just the BRITISH security services), would have dug up EVERYTHING there was to throw at him and attack him and vilify him with in relation to anti-semitism (AND all the other smears against him), and they could have piled in with them during the latter weeks of the contest, but they chose not to. Yes, it probably WOULDN’T have made too much difference to the result, and Jeremy would more-than-likely have still received the highest number of votes and been elected leader…..

      There were three months from the time nominations for the leader closed on June 15th and when the results were announced on September 12th, and I think it was very clear from polls early on that Jeremy was the hot favourite to win. What I’m saying is – and yes, it is of course just conjecture – that the PTB could very well have known in advance of the contest that if Jeremy were a leadership candidate he would almost certainly win, How? By ‘private’ polling/research. They could have ‘transformed’ Jeremy into a rabid anti-semite in a matter of a few weeks had they wanted to, but for some reason they didn’t – ie the Mural, the English Irony, the Wreath-laying, the Israel Compared To The Nazis Meeting and the ‘Anti-semitic’ Book could have all ‘come to light’ during the latter half of the leadership contest…..

      BUT, if your goal was to demonise and smear the whole of the left as bullies and thugs and homophobes, and anti-semites of course, well THAT was going to take some time to execute.

      Anyway, it’s food for thought, but I CERTAINLY wouldn’t put it past the ruling elite of psychopaths!

      1. I disagree Allan,they were caught wrong footed like so many on the left were,me included.

      2. And then there was this from a month later, in which it said the following:

        Jeremy Corbyn….. is ahead in the race to succeed Ed Miliband by more than 15 points, private polling by his rivals suggests.

        https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11741659/Jeremy-Corbyn-set-to-win-Labour-leadership-shock-poll-reveals.html

        So the PTB would have known from pretty much the outset that Jeremy was hot favourite to win. If they didn’t know already that is!

  13. Allan, does it not occur to you that in your response to me you as good as said “The MSM will never tell the truth” and in two later comments you just illustrated that even the Torygraph sometimes prints the truth about Labour?
    It seems your go-to reaction is to disagree with some of us whatever the argument.

    The point of a Supreme Court decision is that it may not be misrepresented by the MSM – and that if they were to refuse to publish such a far-reaching decision they would lose all credibility because if we had to hang it on billboards everywhere and paint it on motorway bridges we’d get the word out to the people.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: