Breaking comment Guest article

Exclusive: Corbyn’s chief of staff ‘sets record straight’ on Labour, antisemitism and EHRC – the FULL version

Jeremy Corbyn’s former chief of staff Karie Murphy

The Guardian has published an article by Jeremy Corbyn’s former chief of staff, Karie Murphy, along with a separate piece by its chief political correspondent Jessica Elgot. Below is Murphy’s full article, which may differ from the paper’s edited version.

In the coming weeks, we can expect to hear more about the handling of antisemitism complaints in the Labour Party. That’s because the investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, launched last year, is due to be published.

Dealing with the EHRC, and getting input into the investigation process, has not always been easy. So, as someone who was at the centre of dealing with these issues, in parliament and Labour HQ, I want to set the record straight.

Under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, antisemites were removed from the Labour Party more quickly, transparently and effectively than ever before.

As his former chief of staff, I’m proud of that record. It wasn’t easy to deliver – not because Jeremy and our team weren’t absolutely committed to protecting Jewish members and communities. Far from it. Every action we took was aimed at creating a process that got antisemites out of the Labour Party swiftly and fairly.

In February 2016, I joined Corbyn’s office and soon afterwards became his chief of staff. Frankly, the party machine was dysfunctional. The open civil war against the new leadership is well documented.

“The individual complaints system was a mess, with the unit meant to oversee it operating more often as a factional weapon than anything approaching a fair and rigorous process.”

But there was a deeper problem, at least as it related to proper processes for complaints and discrimination: there weren’t any.

Local parties often languished in suspended animation, banned from meeting or holding votes for years on end, without any way to restart members’ democracy. What common factor did these local parties usually have? Large minority ethnic memberships.

The individual complaints system was a mess, with the unit meant to oversee it operating more often as a factional weapon than anything approaching a fair and rigorous process.

This ugly backdrop informed the first flare-up of the antisemitism controversy in the Labour Party as a major media story. That took place in April 2016, when old Facebook comments by the Labour MP Naz Shah and pro-Corbyn activist Jackie Walker surfaced, along with Ken Livingstone’s thoroughly offensive attempted defence of Shah’s former online activity. Action was taken immediately and Naz worked hard to rebuild relations with the Jewish community.

“From an audit of over 300 antisemitism complaints received by the party [before Jennie Formby became general secretary], only 34 had been investigated, and of them only 10 were suspended at the time.”

Jeremy made strong public statements condemning antisemitism and demanded action be taken in the party. He also commissioned a report from the leading human rights lawyer Shami Chakrabarti. The Board of Deputies of British Jews called for her recommendations to be implemented in a “rigorous and swift” manner.

But despite assurances from the party HQ and the then General Secretary Iain McNicol, they weren’t, and the system continued not to function.

The figures are stark. From an audit of over 300 antisemitism complaints received by the party from November 2016 to February 2018, only 34 had been investigated, and of them only 10 were suspended at the time.

This shocking failure of basic processes only began to be fully uncovered after Jennie Formby became General Secretary in March 2018.

“whenever we were asked for our view, we almost always suggested stronger and swifter action.”

In 2019, I felt we were getting on top of the process problems in the party. The results are clear. In 2017, 28 cases brought to the National Executive Committee led to just one expulsion, while in 2019 274 cases led to 45, a more than four-fold increase in expulsions per case. We had a weekly, cross-departmental antisemitism working group of party officials, forcing through the necessary changes to the system.

We didn’t deal with individual cases at the leadership level – and nor should we have done – but we did act to improve the overall process.

Apart from one brief period in early 2018 between Iain McNicol leaving and Jennie Formby taking over, we were only consulted on cases involving MPs or other elected leaders, as has always been the case in the Labour Party with all types of complaints. And whenever we were asked for our view, we almost always suggested stronger and swifter action.

“there has been an extremely successful campaign to obscure the facts.”

Throughout the whole period, Jeremy asked me as his chief of staff to improve the process, get antisemites out of our party and begin to rebuild trust with Jewish communities. Jeremy is an anti-racist in every cell in his body and he wanted robust action following due process.

Many readers will find this all surprising given the dominant media narrative about antisemitism in the Labour Party, but it is the truth. While many victims of antisemitism and their allies rightly demanded action from the party, there has been an extremely successful campaign to obscure the facts. That was primarily driven by political opposition to Jeremy Corbyn’s socialist, internationalist politics.

Last summer’s BBC Panorama programme about Labour and antisemitism, based on testimonies from some of those responsible for the system that only investigated 10% of antisemitism complaints from November 2016 to February 2018, claimed that there was political meddling from Corbyn’s team to protect antisemites. There wasn’t.

Between McNicol leaving and Jennie Formby taking over as general secretary, those running the governance and legal unit began asking Corbyn’s team for their views on individual cases. Not only did we not ask for this oversight of individual cases, I thought it was a factional trap and I put a stop to it.

speaking out for the first time”

I’m not speaking out for the first time to run away from the fact that antisemitism reared its head among a small minority in the Labour Party. It did. It was wrong and the party as a whole was slow to deal with it effectively. That failure, combined with a relentless and highly politicised media campaign had a serious impact: it hurt Jewish people and disturbed and confused many in our movement.

Could more have been done earlier? Yes, of course. But what was done unquestionably made it easier and swifter to remove antisemites from the Party.

I hope Keir Starmer and his team builds on the hugely improved system we instituted and uses the space afforded to him by the dialing down of the politicised media campaign on this issue to rebuild relations and trust with Jewish communities. It deeply saddens me that we were unable to do so. But it wasn’t for want of trying, let alone any toleration for antisemitism.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site 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.


  1. What an excellent article by Murphy. Amazing the difference in the portrayal of anti semitism in the party by other commentators. Sheds new light on the effectiveness and motivation of the McNicol regime.

    1. I don’t have my own blog, so can’t click the like option but I like your comment.

    2. It does however beg the question – Was it a failure of leadership to leave MvNicol in office for nigh on 3 years?

      1. It is you who “begging the question” by your suggestion that removing the General Secretary from office is within the power of the elected ‘leader’. It isn’t and wasn’t because the NEC was still controlled by enemies of that leader, determined to subvert his position.
        It is greatly to the credit of Jeremy and his allies that they were determined not to abuse the constitutionalism of the ‘democracy’ within the party. Their failure in making Labour a full and functioning democracy was not their fault: apart from the opposition of the right wing, which fears democracy as vampires are said to fear garlic, the struggle was undermined by idiotic compromisers among the left’s few supporters in the PLP. It was they who prevented a full reform-and democratisation- of the selection process as well as insisting on the Party’s right to over rule the popular vote of the EU Referendum.

      2. bevin – “Their failure in making Labour a full and functioning democracy was not their fault”

        I’m struggling to see how you can absolve them when it was Corbyn who persuaded Len McCluskey to change Unite’s stance on mandatory reselection.

      3. SH “it was Corbyn who persuaded Len McCluskey to change Unite’s stance on mandatory reselection.” is this true❓I am unaware of our claim. When and where was that❓Thanks.

      4. Len McCluskey wrote this for LabourList, there is little room for any ambiguity in what he has written.
        “Unite has indeed got a policy in support of mandatory reselection. Had that issue been voted on directly, the Unite delegation would have voted in line with policy. But we have another policy, which I recommend to Chris and all Labour MPs: we support Jeremy Corbyn.

        If Jeremy and his team – taking the overview of the entire political landscape, including the situation within the parliamentary party and the leadership of Momentum – urge a particular course of action, Unite is not going to go against that without the most serious reasons. The changes adopted may not be “mandatory reselection” as some define it but it is at the very least a “selective mandatory reselection” that will make it far easier for local parties to choose a different Labour candidate if that is their wish. That is probably why the Momentum national leadership joined nearly all trade unions in supporting it.

        For Unite, this is not an issue of theological purity. It is above all about supporting the Labour leadership,

      5. “prevented a full reform-and democratisation- of the selection process as well as insisting on the Party’s right to over rule the popular vote of the EU Referendum.”✅✅✅

      6. Jeeeze, it’s oh-SO goddam predictable – ie SteveH – the paid right-wing shill – coming up with a negative angle!

        So go on then, answer yur own question instead of beating around the bush ffs!

        Yur so transparent it’s totally beyond belief!!

      7. Allan – Why, don’t you feel capable of answering it for yourself?

      8. does the leader have capacity to sack general secretary
        Steveh we get you don’t like corbyn, but come on

      9. helsbells – I suppose that would largely depend on whether he had the support of the Trade Unions.

        This is what the Rule Book says (page 23 of the 2019 Rule Book)
        4. Election of General Secretary
        A. The General Secretary shall be elected by Party conference on the recommendation of the NEC and shall be an ex-officio member of Party conference. S/he shall devote her or his whole time to the work of the Party and shall not be eligible to act as a parliamentary candidate. S/he shall remain in office so long as her/ his work gives satisfaction to the NEC and Party conference. Should a vacancy in the office occur, for whatever reason, between Party conferences, the NEC shall have full power to fill the vacancy subject to the approval of Party conference.

      10. You are both right and wrong and bevin is totally wrong. Corbyn didn’t have the power to remove McNicol but he had the political clout to do so.

        Firstly McNicol offered to resign when Corbyn became leader. He should have accepted. After his relection in September 2016 and after McNicol had done his best to stop him standing Corbyn should have privately asked him to go and if he had refused to make that call publicly putting immense pressure on him via conference. He would have succeeded and the sabotage at the 2017 election would have been avoided.

        Tony Benn’s advice for Labour Ministers was always to get on top of your civil servants otherwise they will get on top of you. Corbyn’s failure was to keep them in place and do nothing. After his reelection in 2016 he had enormous popularity and a call for McNicol to go would have been a rallying cry.

        As it is he will go down as the pathetically inadequate leader who gave in to the premises of the fake antisemitism campaign

      11. Tony – I agree with you reference getting rid of McNicol, I could have worded my comment better. Unfortunately I have to also agree that Corbyn’s indecision and fear of confrontation didn’t serve him or the party well.

      12. Well Jeremy may very well go down in YOUR book as such Tony – and let’s face it, you’ve been calling him weak and cowardly and spineless etc for most of the time he was leader of the party – but I think more and more people are waking up to the fact that the fascist owned and controlled MSM were never-EVER going to give him the opportunity to refute the very lies and falsehoods that THEY conspired in, and were disseminating from pretty much the outset.

        And to say otherwise is just a massive big black fucking lie Tony!

        Hope you got the message!

      13. Tony Greenstein, firstly I disagree with your contention that removing McNicol would have prevented the staff loyal to him and to Blairism from undermining Jeremy – they proved that time and again after he’d left.
        Knowing as little of Jeremy as I do it’s only my impression that he’s not the eye-gouging kind of politician who’s at his best politicking in smoke-filled rooms and behind people’s backs. More activist than greasy-pole-climber I think.
        I believe that was the source of his immense popularity.
        To be honest I find it a bit offensive that he’s now being criticised for not being more like a Twatson or a Bliar.

      14. Allan

        Sure I got the message, which is that you suffer from cognitive dissonance!

        There is no incompatibility between Corbyn being weak and spineless, which he was, and the MSM (they are not fascist owned that is just hyperbole) never going to let him speak for himself. But the MSM did their worst in 2017 and Corbyn more than survived their attacks.

        However conceding to the argument that there was antisemitism in the party was fatal. I warned b4 the 2019 election that Corbyn was going down to a disaster. Look at my letter to Seamus Milne, the real culprit on the even of election. I can’t help being right!

        The problem is that Corbyn’s ‘strategy’ was to appease the unappeasable. Instead of supporting open selection and putting the fear of god into the right-wing MPs Corbyn defended them. That was weak and cowardly.

        THe MSM is not omnipent. They can be defeated but NOT if you accept your opponents narrative.

        Look, I don’t know whether between the silly swearing (yes we all let off steam) you have the brain to work it out but its simple. ‘Antisemitism’ was the chosen method of attack because it is so potent. The fact that the it was a lie that Corbyn had introduced antisemitism into Labour is besides the point. It chimed in well with fucking identity politics (yes I’m copying you).

        Antisemitism of a low level has always existed in the LP but the Board of Deputies were never concerned about it or antisemitism. When we physically took on the NF in Brighton, when they marched through a Jewish area of Hove attacking ritual slaughter, the Board told Jews to stay at home. They did the same in 1936 with the Moseleyites and thousand of Jewish workers ignored them. The Board and the Zionists have NEVER been interested in antisemitism. After all, without antisemitism there is no Zionism hence why Zionism worked with antisemites in many countries. In Nazi Germany the Zionist Federation welcomed the Nazis to power. True they didn’t foresee the Holocaust but they foresaw that Hitler would be good for their project of a Jewish state. The Zionists who were 2% of the German Jewish community were known as ‘volkish Jews’.

        Yes there was a time when there was real antisemitism in the Labour Party and the Zionists said nothing. Peter Mandelson’s uncle, Herbert Morrison was Home Secretary in the war-time coalition government. Despite public opinion running at 80% in favour of the admission of Jewish refugees after the Holocaust was announced by the Allies on December 17 1942, Morrison set his face AGAINST the admission of Jewish refugees. Thousands died, some in very tragic circumstance such as 450 Luxembourg Jews because of Morrison’s antisemitism. But you don’t hear about this because the Zionist movement at the time was ALSO opposed to the admission of Jewish refugees to anywhere but Palestine.

        Now what was that ‘big black fucking lie’? Yes I certainly got the message but its probably not the one you mean to convey!

      15. It’s funny, but I keep asking SteveH – whose latest comment I just this minute noticed – what happened when Jeremy and his team condemned the Panorama hatchet job, and I must have asked him now – and other shills on here – at least a dozen times during the past few months (as I did in a post near the bottom of the page earlier on), but neither HE – or any of the OTHER shills that I put the question to have EVER answered. Never ONCE, because to answer would be to blow what they keep endlessly repeating right out of the water. But as they well know of course, Jeremy and his team were condemned and vilified across the entire MSM – with quotes from all the usual groups and individuals, suspects that is – for smearing the ‘courageous whistleblowers’, who were ‘brave’ enough to speak out blah, blah, blah.

        I’ve ALSO asked him and the other shills who post on this site on numerous occasions what happened each and every time Ken tried to explain that he was alluding to an historical fact, but yet AGAIN, not once have they ever answered, because what happened whenever Ken did so is just incontrovertable proof that they are lying through their nasty little fascist teeth every time they slag off Jeremy for capitulating and appeasing and not ‘fighting back’ etc, etc, etc AND that there is no way on this planet the fascist owned and/or controlled MSM were EVER going to report what Ken said fairly and squarely to their readers and viewers and listeners. Of course they WEREN’T, so please don’t be taken in by the fascist paid shills on here who repeat these falsehoods over and over and over again between them all, on the one hand so as to in effect brain-wash readers of skwawkbox with their falsehoods, and on the other hand to have them believe there is a consensus of opinion about it. Classic black propagandist tactics!

        Now I don’t believe Tony Greenstein is a shill – but I realised about two years ago that he has a massive big anger problem and that he was totally unjustly directing it at Jeremy (hope you can take a bit of it back Tony!) – but then again, who knows, but for sure the personas on here posting as SteveH and JackT and signpost and several others are ALL fucking paid shills. If they REALLY believed even just HALF of what they would have readers of skwawkbox believe about Jeremy, they would totally despise him, and yet at the same time as trashing him they would have people believe that they think he’s a wonderful man of great integrity etc, etc. Well if they REALLY believe – as they have said on scores of occasions – that Jeremy has thrown good colleagues/friembs under the bus, how could they possibly think of him as a man of integrity etc, etc. But they HAVE to lead readers to believe they support him etc so that those readers will think and believe that their ‘criticisms’ are legitimate.

        And if you believe them, then they are taking you for one gynormous ride into their cesspit of falsehoods and duping you Big Time

        PS My aplogies to the posters below for doing a ‘signpost’ on you!!

      16. Alan I don’t take back my comments on Corbyn at all. He threw decent people like Ken and Chris under the bus to appease racists. That is unforgivable. As Ken said to me, when he started explaining his comments about the Nazis supporting Zionism, and there is copious documentation on this incidentally, his hearing said they didn’t want to know. He wasn’t being charged with antisemitism but bringing the party into disrepute.

        You see although what he said was true it was offensive to Zionists and racists. I am working now on a book about the Zionist record during the holocaust. It is not a pretty one. They collaborated in Germany from a position of weakness. Their collaboration did them no good as when the Nazis killed Jews they didn’t differentiate (although some of the collaborators survived in the ‘model’ camp at Thereisenstadt. But it was the Zionist movement OUTSIDE Germany that was most responsible when they sought to block avenues of escape that didn’t involve Palestine.

        The Zionists had a real fear. That if people became obsessed with saving Jewish refugees from the Nazi hell they would divert their attention from the need to build a Jewish state. You don’t need to take my word for it. Just read the official biography of David Ben Gurion, Israel’s first Prime Minister by Shabtai Teveth. The final chapter is on the holocaust and it is entitled ‘Disaster means strength’. Literally the disaster of the holocaust strengthened the Zionists enormously.

        Yes of course this is ‘offensive’ to the Zionists. Telling people the truth is often offensive but hey, that’s what free speech is about

      17. Tony Greenstein, you’re not the only one here angry at how things turned out but you must concede that Jeremy was completely unprepared and unpracticed in leadership skills when he accidentally fell into the post – he could hardly have been otherwise given his history as a lone (almost) lefty on the back benches surrounded by Blairites.
        It’s a bit rich criticising him for that.
        If the MSM wasn’t at least 95% ‘omnipotent’ the people would know the truth about capitalism and the Tories couldn’t win a seat.

      18. Sorry Tony, but I got as far as the MSM is not fascist owned and/or controlled (or however it was you phrased it) and that ‘that is just hyperbole’, and THAT did it for me! You are not for real Tony, and I’m seriously beginning to wonder about you man. And I mean SERIOUSLY!

        Oh right, and the folks at the Daily Mail weren’t fascists when they supported Hitler. Yeah sure! And the good people at the Sun who concocted the headlines and the story about the Liverpool fans were all well meaning folk who just made a few unfortunate mistakes……

        Give over Tony, they are ALL fascist to the fucking core, and ALL go along with the warmongering and the hatemongering and the fearmongering etc, etc, etc, and vilifying and smearing and demonising their enemies, as they see them. Oh right, and they’ve just given themselves the power to start legally bumping us off….. Oh, but that’s just hyperbole. Yeah, like fuck it is!!!

      19. To David McNiven

        Yes I accept that Jeremy was completely unprepared and unpracticed in leadership skills when he accidentally fell into the post. He wasn’t alone in his opposition to Blair and others. Benn, Eric Heffer etc. were also opponents in their time. However the main point is that having stood for and gained the leadership Corbyn had a duty to get it together. Instead he sought to appease his critics. He refused to recognise the nature of the fight he was in and instead threw his victims to his opponents as a way of satisfying him.

        I’m sorry but sacrificing your friends and comrades to appease your enemies is just disgusting behaviour. Corbyn by the end was an amoral man with no political compass. When I read the stuff in the leaked report about how he urged that Jackie, Ken, Marc and myself – all active anti-racists – had to be sacrificed to the ‘Jewish community’ for which read the Zionist Board of Deputies and I was staggered. I had imagined I was expelled by the Right, Maggi Cosins who chaired the NCC. I didn’t realise Corbyn himself and his office had put pressure on the witchhunters of the Compliance Unit.

        As far as I’m concerned Corbyn’s behaviour was treacherous and unforgivable. He betrayed millions because he is a social democrat with pretensions to oppose imperialism. He supported the Palestinians but never understood that Zionism was the ideology of the movement committed to their transfer. He was utterly lazy intellectually and never grasped the apartheid nature of Israel and why Zionism is inherently racist.

        As for Allan Howard. Of course the MSM isn’t fascist owned. Its owned by mega rich individuals like Rupert Murdoch, reactionary in every sense. Racist without doubt but not fascist. I’m sorry if you can’t distinguish between conservatives and reactionaries and fascists but it’s not helpful to use the term ‘fascist’ as a form of abuse. It has a specific meaning which clearly escapes you.

        Yes Jonathan Harmsworth supported Moseley and indeed Hitler. You could say as an individual he was a fascist. But the Mail itself distanced itself from the British Union of Fascists after Olympia. It supported appeasing Hitler not turning Britain into a Nazi state. Just shouting ‘fascist’ really doesn’t help our understanding of the nature of fascist movements and how the bourgeoisie use them and in Germany’s case put them into power.

        The Sun is obvious a despicable paper. I come from Liverpool. Am I expected to make excuses for them? But just because they aren’t fascist doesn’t mean theyre not our enemies. I think I’ve been a target of these bastards more than you!

      20. Darren – If that were really the case then he wasn’t qualified to be the leaser of a major political party.

    3. Yes that is completely true. Corbyn slit his own throat. He saved right wing MPs from being deselected in order that they could then stab him in the back. A total fucking fool. Let’s not beat about the bush. He preferred sacrificing his friends to attacking the Right. His betrayal of Ken Livingstone and Chris Williamson in particular.

      When Tom Watson got a petition of 150 Lords and right-wing MPs together when Chris was unsuspended Corbyn could have spoken out that Chris was not a racist. Jennie Formby suspended him again. She is a detestable woman. A total snake and as for McDonnell, tearing his hair out about ‘antisemitism’. The fact is that these wimps would have been easy meat for the speculators and spivs once a run on the pound had started.

      1. Tony, as far from the centre as I am I have no inside knowledge whatever of any of the circumstances you describe so I won’t contradict you.
        I’d only ask if it’s at all possible that Jeremy might be somewhere in between the self-serving betrayer of comrades you describe – and the honourable man put into a hundred impossible positions at once by global neoliberal enemies bent on his destruction that I see – or that I imagine?

  2. On an urgent matter: Has Starmer questioned his Tory masters about their failure to put PENALTY CLAUSES for NON-DELIVERY of contract? OR, what penalties would he Starmer impose for DEADLY Tory privatised failures❓

    Should we the many continue to pay for Tory catastrophes while they buy more private jets and yachts and mansions?

    Why has Starmer not uttered a single question about these Tory daylight scandals❓ Why not a single question from Starmer about Tory shameless robbery❓Why should we the many pay, while Starmer bends over for the pleasure of the few❓

    Is Sir Starmer so desperate for directorships at SERCO, Deloitte, Blackwater, Amazon, Facebook, Morgan Stanley and/or Lockheed Martin, that he dares not whisper about very irregular contracts incl sweetheart HMRC deals to big corporations while small businesses are crushed? Not a whisper about … zero independent scrutiny, zero competition, zero independent auditing of Covid19 and other contracts❓Begs the questions:

    Who is Starmer❓ What is he❓

    Answers on the largest spaces everywhere, please.

    1. windchimes – I think you’ll find that the official record reflects quite a different reality from the one you are attempting to portray.

    2. I don’t have my own blog, so can’t click the like option but I like your comment.

      1. Don’t panic Richard, I feel fairly sure that you got your clarification in quick enough.😉
        ps – You don’t have to have to have a blog, just register with WordPress and don’t bother with the additional facilities registration gives you. You don’t have to fill in any further details apart from the minimal registration requirements.

  3. What a load of self pitying drivel. During McNicol’s and Formby’s tenure, members were suspended left right and centre without due process simply upon accusations from members of the Israel Lobby. Even committed anti-racists such as Chris Williamson, Jackie Walker and Tony Greenstein were suspended upon accusations from the Zionist Labour Movement.

    The Legal and Compliance Unit did not acknowledge the difference between antiZionism and antiSemitism. As we now know, their actions were driven and often triggered by those opposed to Corbyn’s leadership, working in the background at Labour HQ.

    1. I wonder if this article indicates that the publication of the EHRC report is imminent. Given the EHRC’s recent response to an FOI request where they refused to give a publication date I was beginning to wonder if we’d ever get to see this report.

      1. EHRC is expected this week. Suspect there will be a lot of spin from Corbyn’s enemies to try to make it seem damning

      2. SB – Thanks, much appreciated. I’ll be trying to avoid reading the various opinions in MSM, hopefully until I’ve had a chance to read the report myself or at the very least until I have the opportunity to compare MSM reports with the original.

      3. Let’s hope it opens up some opportunities for legal actions against our accusers, for that’s the only thing I see making any difference whatever at this late stage.

    2. This piece from Murphy shows just how she and others were thrown off beam by Zionists within the Party. Her whole comment was focussed upon dealing with antiSemitism yet members of the Jewish Voice for Labour were saying that antiSemitism in the Labour Party was minimal and probably less than in general society. It was intentionally amplified and distorted out of all proportion by those in the Party who hated Corbyn because of his support for Palestinian civil rights.

      The was not one mention of Zionist Tom Watson who before being elected as deputy, promised to support Corbyn 100% yet spent all of his time trying to undermine him.

    3. Absolutely. The fact that Murphy’s ‘Wasn’t me guv’ article mentions Naz Shah and Jackie Walker as voicing ‘anti-semitic’ opinions shows that she hadn’t, and still hasn’t, a clue.

      No wonder the Party got stuffed with that level of incompetence.

      1. RH you are absolutely right….yes the king with no clothes syndrome went to the heart of the Labour party were they started to believe the lies on AS .Many comrades sacrificed for loyalty to the Labour party and thrown under the bus to appease the liars… Last chance for socialism shot down by cowardice and waving the white flag…now look at the mess the whole country is in…Repeat a lie enough and it becomes fact.

    4. Coming from someone who readily hurls ‘zionist conspirator/collaborator shill’ accusations out at anyone who disagrees with him on anything…

      Don’t you, jackanory? I mean, only a ‘zionist shill’ would post something like this, wouldn’t they?

      How long until Mann pipes up?

      Also it appears Rowling and Riley are backing a new centrist ‘labour’ party according to GMB.

      Well go ‘ed then…. The REAL labour party’d do well to see the supposed mass exodus of MP’s it’s apparently gonna bring.

      Ain’t one of the maggots gonna be missed.

      You gonna tell us what the (44:1) represented in my username at the time of all the antisemitism allegations, Mr self-appointed resident zionist witchfinder general?

      My defence is as watertight as Wadsworth’s, Williamson’s and Walker’s, and yet I’m STILL a zionist shill, according to you.

      1. Oh, lest I forget Livingstone as well…Before omtting him brings further (fabricated) accusations of wanting him hounded out by our resident paranoiac ‘anti-zionist’ ; who’s ambiguous to the point of convenience on what’s pro or anti-zionist.

    5. “During McNicol’s and Formby’s tenure, members were suspended left right and centre without due process simply upon accusations from members of the Israel Lobby”.

      Not just accusations by the Israeli Lobby. Many members were targeted, using false accusations of antisemitism by right wing members of CLPs. Antisemitism was a convenient tool to settle old scores and discredit and remove political obstacles to their Labour party career progression.

      No mention is made by Carrie Murphy of the Labour party’s refusal to obey the law and give members the information the were entitled to in order to defend themselves of false accusations. I can’t think why this would be the case? Perhaps it’s because they are not what they purported to be. If the party wished to do so, they could discredit many of the accusers, simply by following due process and giving members an impartial hearing. Labour have denied members their legal rights and have shown no willingness to be fair and impartial – not a great look for a party with designs on forming the next government.

      I have evidence that supports my assertion of being targeted by the CLP, because I upset a useless councillor with delusions of adequacy. But despite many attempts to get the Labour party to act fairly and impartially the party recognise so to do.

      1. Nemtona, that’s an excellent point. Because the right wing could see how well the accusations of antiSemitism were working in getting members suspended without evidence, they too used that pretext to target left wingers.

      2. Jackanory continues to champion the cause of leftist members being expelled on trumped up antisemitism charges…A noble cause, unfortunately taken up by an ignoble hypocrite.

        Although at the time of the mass allegation contrivances, his recreant acquiescence and outright self-absorption over the EU issue allowed those same stammerite centrists encouraging the witch-hunt to stitch up the delegations to conference, enabling them to shit all over the policy and promise to respect the referendum result.

        All without so much as a murmur of disapproval. In fact,those warning him of the consequences for a following election (And especially those who had made their leave intentions known) were labelled ‘knuckle-dragging faragists’, or to that effect, as I recall.

        Jackanory wanted the best of both worlds – refused to heed the warnings – ended up with the worst of both – and everyone else is to blame.

        Jackanory wants you to think he’s the champion of those denied justice; the millions he’s denied a socialist labour government can take a back seat.

        Jackanory won’t allow anyone to be informed of his complicity in ensuring there’d be no socialist labour government to negotiate brexit – Because he didn’t want either. And he knew full well that shouting as loudly against the zionists was causing a distraction from the far more pressing issues that the electorate were focusing their attention on.

        Jackanory fails to see the irony or his complicity in what he’s contributed to. Jackanory thinks he’s not responsible for the zionists now having far greater influence than they EVER did within the party, as a result of his actions mentioned above. Nor is he in any way responsible for the eighty seat majority the toerags have been handed to cause misery for at least the next decade.

        …All because of his unhealthy paranoiac obsessing with zionism.

        Truth is, jackanory wouldn’t know a zionist if one jumped up and bit his arse. Merely disagreeing with jackanory makes you zionist…

  4. This person shows no sense she has a clue what the witch hunt was about – no wonder the left was left in disarray with drivel being the analysis at the top

    1. Corbyn’s enemies laid a false trail. Murphy and others followed it like fools with noses to the ground and never looked up to see the big picture and the Zionists laughing at them.

  5. I’ve never believed for a second that Mr Corbyn is anti-semitic, or indeed anti any ethnic group. The very idea is ludicrous, given his political and Parliamentary voting record.

  6. Clueless. Yes. McNicol’s Compliance Unit was a clueless factional mess, which only ‘investigated’ factions enemies. However, there is no insight into the political collapse indicated by confusion between opposition to the Israeli Government, it’s action and its supporters in Britain and antisemitism or the collapse of common sense and a sense of natural justice produced by vicious attacks by suppressing of Israeli Government.

  7. It’s all just pontificating over a corpse.

    The left had it’s only chance in decades and blew it/was sabotaged!

    1. marty – I strongly recommend that you read
      ‘Left Out – The Inside Story of Labour Under Corbyn”. Whatever your political leanings it is an easy read that is both engaging and informative. The best political book I’ve read for quite a while.

      1. Looks interesting but at 19 notes I’ll wait until it appears in the library. Probably a long wait!

      2. marty – will be in charity shops … the copies not pulped that is. Spend your money on chocolates, wine, charities, food banks, china ducks … ANYTHING but DON’t but that book. Even the MSM dropped plans to give it wall to wall coverage two months ago. 🌹🌹🌹

      3. One, need only read the promotional excerpts to conclude that though it has some interesting titbits, the thrust is intended to be poisonous / destructive / misleading ie 100% blame on Jeremy for the election defeat.

        Though anyone uninfected by the debilitating virus, White Flag Manitis-19 would recognise that Jeremy’s unforced errors of appeasement PLUS an extraordinary dedication to invisibility, EXCEPT eg: to rescue Twatson at conference, and rescue Arseworth after the deliberate leak of him rubbishing Jeremy with his Tory chum, and allow Chackrabarti to say on PPC 5Live that Arsetair Campbellend could be welcomed back after his expulsion, within hours of his expulsion.

        Free of the WFM-19 virus anyone would see defending oneself, friends, associates and MEMBERS, not as “confrontation” but as a normal part of human interaction. Furthermore it would be recognised as COMPULSORY to defend the reputation and welfare of others.

        Vile operators took advantage of these failings BUT they also bear significant responsibility for the defeat. Why? Because , Jeremy was elected overwhelmingly by the members. The saboteurs knew his weaknesses. They had a duty to respect the choice of the members and work COLLECTIVELY for the good of the party and the country.

        Instead they openly admitted that they were “working night and day to undermine him”. They worked for the party’s defeat. WMD Blair publicly endorsed Johnson & Cummings. We could predict the calamity Johnson and Cummings would unleash.

        Iraq WMD Blair and Sir Starmer exploited Jeremy and his teams weakness to deliberately help their Tory partners. That SteveH is in my view, indeed in the view of any honest person, the greater crime. UNFORGIVABLE. They put the monetary benefit of a few over ANY benefit of the many. They shat on loyalty to the Labour Party. They strangled honesty, decency, compassion… basic care.

        So SH it is not worth spending even £0.50 on the book you are promoting. If even the MSM dumped the wall to wall coverage they intended, assessing it as a crass obvious attempt to rewrite history casting villains as victims, then why waste money one could donate to a food bank? Plus it is best not to give even the tiniest encouragement or support to enemies especially when they make their intentions clear.

        In that respect, no one should be like Jeremy. We can all see (except AH) the glittering results of pathetic fantasies of bringing the whole world together. After the fogs of appeasement thin a bit, with what are we left??? At least Seventy Thousand dead, Tories advising poor patents to shop at M&S instead of being “chaotic”, £billions to Tory spivs and Max Headroom Sir Keith and Iraq WMD Blair dangling out of each other’s Tory lined anuses.

      4. windchimes – It is disappointing that you are advocating that yourself and others don’t step outside your little echo chambers and remain in ‘blissful’ ignorance. Why are you so afraid of people reading this book?

    2. you say they blew it and was sabotaged which is it ? I dont think the left blew it. Jeremy Corbyn offered the people of this country the chance of a lifetime . fools , all because they think Boris will get Brexit done and because people in this country dont like a prime minister who thinks we are all worth it. , ex miners how could they ? I remember the way they were ruined by the tories. They didnt have the town I was in support as people resented the fact the miners got what everybody else didnt. Back then you worked and were poor,, the miners were made to look bad and Scargill had a big mouth.

      1. JC did not deal effectively with r/.w dissenters in his own party. How, for example, was T Watson allowed to get away with his toxic sh1te for so long? The right has no problem or qualms about butchering their left opponents – sometimes literally! The left will never win unless it adopts a similar determination. You can’t make a pact with the crocodile that wants to devour you!

        Tolerating the right in a “left” LP was never gonna end up well. Flip flopping on Brexit didn’t help either

      2. You obviously don’t read or watch or listen to the MSM Marty!

        How you can leave the massive big mountainous elephant in the room out of your thinking is beyond belief!

      3. I think Jeremy’s fate was sealed when at the International section of 2017 Conference nearly the whole Conference hall waved Palestinian Flags. The concerted campaign to brand Jeremy an antisemite started in earnest then and never let up until he lost the election in 2019. Jeremy disappointment at losing the election was nothing to what we lost – the chance of having a decent man, a Socialist and anti racist ,a man who had a good life and who wanted others to have it too as our Prime Minister. It breaks my heart that people believed the awful things that were said about Jeremy and voted in Johnson instead. Things are very grim under the Johnson and Tories now but I truly believe, in the words of the song – you aint seen nothing yet.

      4. The A/S smear campaign was in full swing long before the 2017 conference smartboy, and flag waving or not, they were gonna finish Jeremy off one way or another. That said, after the shock of the 2017 GE result when Jeremy came within a hairs breadth of winning, the dark fascist forces trebled down on their smearing.

        ALL of the direct personal attacks on Jeremy happened in the months and couple of years afterwards, from the ‘Mural’ episode to the ‘English Irony’ episode to the ‘Book’ episode, and of course not forgetting the unbelievable beyond words ‘Epshtein’ episode, what with Jeremy being an anti-semite he deliberately pronounced it that way so as to make Epstein sound more Jewish than he actually was!

        What a complete and utter joke, and the Smearers no doubt laughed themselves silly when they came up with THAT one – ie that Jeremy pronounced it that way so as to make him sound more Jewish than he actually was.

      5. Allan – Whilst many of us rue the day the capitulation started I think we’ve all cottoned on that it is your avowed but bizarre opinion that Jeremy had no choice..

      6. Reply to Allan Howard
        The Epstein issue really was scraping the bottom of the barrel though its a wonder there was any bottom in the barrel given the amount of scraping that went on.

      7. @allan howard.. The MSM has always been against the LP, all the way back to the Zinoviev letter. That’;s nothing new. What was different this time was the sabotage from within the LP by members who would rather see another five years of tory govt than a social democratic labour govt. That. and the fragmentation of the wider left in general.

    3. Not pontificating determine who were the murderers, how it was done, and what can be done to prevent it happening again, if you believe there will ever be an again, which I don’t.

    1. Unfortunately somebody in their infinite wisdom decided to gift McNicol a lifetime platform in the House of Lords

      1. that was another act of Corbyn stupidity. McNicol got a peerage in exchange for resigning. Corbyn should have refused his offer, as it was corrupt anyway and just sacked him. By that time he had the majority on the NEC.

  8. A thought-provoking, conciliatory even, piece from Karie Murphy Thank you for publishing the full piece Skwawkbox.

    It will be very useful to see how theGuardian edits Karie’s words, if only to see whether time and Jeremy’s departure has mellowed their austere anti-Corbyn editorial-line. Has it or a Jessica Elcott article featured in it yet?

  9. QUESTIONS: 1️⃣ Are the approx 40,000 people who voted AGAIN for Jeremy antisemites❓
    2️⃣ If Jeremy is an antisemite as Hodge screamed in his face with an expletive, why has he not been expelled❓ 3️⃣ Murphy acknowledges the MSM filthy lies have vanished since the election was handed to BloJob & Cummings. Has antisemitism similarly vanished from the Party❓
    4️⃣ The Tory Party was, is and always has been the natural welcoming home of Antisemites with regular donning of Nazi uniform. Has Murphy and associates ever asked the slanderers why they have failed and continue to fail to remove the stain of anti semitism and all bigotry from the Tory party❓
    5️⃣ For month after month UNTIL the election, I heard double hours of a few Labour MPs … one more frequently than the rest, saying that they were extremely abused etc etc etc so left the party. They stood very much on that “ticket”. Than one and ALL the others, were soundly REJECTED by the electorate. DUMPED. Not worthy to represent them.. in Finchley nor anywhere else. Are the good people of Finchley, Hendon and elsewhere relaxed about antisemitism❓ Or did they consider the claims of those hoping to be elected, unconvincing❓Or VILE LIARS❓

    6️⃣That well known Revolutionary Socialist Republic of Putney voted for Jeremy’s Labour. Are they too rabid antisemites❓

    Some ANSWERS: When serious accusations are made of anyone holding public office AND thus the reputations of associates and supporters are at risk, it is not an option to keep one’s head down, or hide, or hope the slurs will pass, or accusers will somehow have a Damascene experience. NO‼️ Accusations must be assessed promptly and with clarity. If false accusations are made, they MUST be rebutted firmly AND if necessary legal action MUST be taken. AND APOLOGIES must be published in ALL MSM.

    One may take a limp attitude to one’s own reputation. However, it is a gross liberty to treat the reputations of others…THOUSANDS of them… in a similar limp manner.

    Facing truth is a precursor to creating change. Not sufficient, but certainly necessary. Only cults eg Monies, Jim Jones and Tories stifle truths and guard lies. Jone’s followers are very dead in the jungle and Tory followers are walking dead ie dead hearts, dead souls, dead vision from cataracts of greed. We must not be dead in anyway like Tories.

    1. The MSM are not stupid signpost, and they have legal teams to advise them as to what they can get away with, and what they CAN’T get away with. And they were NEVER going to apologise for any of their relentless smears of Jeremy and the left membership, but you will of course go on repeating this mantra every opportunity you get. As I said recently, given that you are forever finding fault with Jeremy and the left AND the left-wing members of your alleged CLP, why don’t you go forth and start your own party and show us all how clever you are and how it should be done.

      PS And are you REALLY incapable of speaking in plain English ffs!

  10. It ought to be remembered that the treatment of Ken Livingstone was very unfair.
    Ms Murphy might find Ken’s mention of the actual facts of Zionist/Nazi co-operation in 1933 and the years after, offensive.
    It may even be ‘offensive’ but it is true. And undoubtedly indicative of fascistic attitudes towards non-Jews which have been evidenced during the period in which Zionists have ruled Palestine.

    1. What Ken said was not remotely offensive, and when I got to the bit where Karie Murphy says that in the article, THAT put me right off. She SURELY must know that Ken was alluding to an historical fact, so the only reason I can think of for her throwing that in, is that she felt compelled to for fear of being attacked and vilified for defending him, or for NOT condemning him.

    2. I think anti-Zionist Jews like myself came in for some rough treatment too. I have known Corbyn for over 30 years and what shocked me was that he just didn’t get it. He was pro-Palestinian without ever understanding once the nature of the Zionist movement. A movement that certainly collaborated with the Nazis but that was the least of it. What was most egregious was that they actively sought to block any escape for Jewish refugees from the Nazis that didn’t include Palestine. Their argument being that Jews going to other countries would simply take antisemitism with them and recreate the problem whereas what was to become Israel would be the solution.

      Ken merely touched on what happened during the Holocaust and being sensitive to the fact that they did nothing during the Holocaust the Zionists rounded on him.

      As to being ‘offensive’. I am in favour of offending our enemies and the truth usually does but free speech is worthless if it does not include the right to offend racists. What matters is not whether something is offensive but whether it is true.

  11. Let “us” put the record straight, any anti-Semitism there may have been in the labour Party during Corbin’s leadership was exaggerated out of all proportion as a means to discredit his leadership and most likely funded and supported by Israel, the last thing they would ever want would be a Corbyn lead Labour Government. Is it not funny though now that he has gone so has all the complaints does that not tell us something??

  12. I don’t expect anything of worth to come from the EHRC. At best it will be full of “ifs”,”buts” and “then agains”. More likely it will seek to confirm the narrative that was so carefully constructed by the media between 2015 and 2019 with the help of many of the prominent people in the party (some now in the House of Lords, some on nice little earners with Edelman, Portsmouth Water, the Betting and Gaming Council or the Credit Services Association – true socialists all of them).

  13. Either steveh isn’t as knowledgeable as he likes to think,and believes leader can/should be able to sack general secretary or he is so blinded by dislike of Corbyn that he’ll say anything to put him down. Or both

  14. I got as far as “Ken Livingstone’s thoroughly offensive attempted defence of Naz Shah and stopped reading. When speaking the truth is thoroughly offensive to someone,I am no longer interested in what that person has to say.I was already uneasy when she boasted about “getting anti Semites out of the party”. Clearly the woman has no idea what antisemitism is. What is worse,it demonstrates that Murphy still has no idea what was going on and why.Pathetic.

  15. As expected,SteveH is all over this with his “advice” and opinion.Please please do not engage with him and he will go away.

    1. john – In your dreams, however I do admit that I would be quite happy to divest myself of my various inane and abusive stalkers. I will continue to make my opinion known as and when I see fit regardless of whether you rather laughingly attempt to censor my opinions by ignoring me or not. The choice is entirely yours and is of little consequence to me one way or t’other. As I pointed out to Toffee only yesterday whether he chooses to engage with me is entirely his choice.
      One of these days, hopefully sooner rather than later, you may be forced to acknowledge that running away from the issues is seldom the best solution.

      1. ‘One of these days, hopefully sooner rather than later, you may be forced to acknowledge that running away from the issue is seldom the best solution

        Said without trace of irony, hypocrisy or self-awareness….Yet again.

        Hasn’t stopped you from acknowledging that running away from each and every question you’re asked, no matter how innocuous nor challenging, is ANY solution.

        But to you it’s the ONLY one. You need diagnosing. Definitely some sort of ASD.

  16. Regrettably, this is like the EHRC report when it arrives – far too late to be of any good to anyone except historians.

    The right wing media tried smear after smear after smear. AS stuck, and the MSM piled on, aided by many in the PLP. Facts, let alone statistics, barely registered. Much as I loathe Blair, his rapid rebuttal lesson went out the window: the “hard left” were a total pushover.

    As a result of that chronic failure we now have a leadership prepared to tolerate rape, torture and murder (if it’s in the interests of ‘national security’ – whatever that is), let alone racist abuse.

    RIP Hope (and civil liberties).

    Yes, I am still hopping mad and am not going to be voting Labour anytime soon, let alone for our local stooge who will parrot whatever unprincipled garbage our New Leader proffers. (How can you lead by following focus groups FFS?!)

      1. Yes, well of COURSE you would Steve, what with you being a right-wing paid black propagandist shill!

        Rapid rebuttals my arse!!!

      2. Allan Howard,

        I have no idea who you are, just as I have no idea who SteveH is, and nor do I care.

        I joined the Labour Party to vote for Corbyn and voted for him again in the second leadership election. In him I saw a chance to begin to reverse 40 years of Thatcherism (and her greatest achievement, Blair).

        I have had depression for years and hate the PLP for what they did to him, ditto the media. Ergo ‘RIP Hope’.

        Whether the “Rapid Rebuttals” worked or not is besides the point: the need for them was recognised a loooong time ago:

        1995 for those who don’t want to follow the link.

        I don’t usually swear on ‘social media’, but for you I’ll make an exception. Fuck you too, you smearing obnoxious cretin.

        PS You’re right, I’m not “Dave”. To everybody who knows me it is David.

    1. ‘Much as I loathe Blair, his rapid rebuttal lesson went out the window: the “hard left” were a total pushover.’

      So can you give us a few examples of Blair’s rebuttals Dave?

      The reality is that Blair and his New Labour cronies were completely on board with the Establishment AND, as such, he was given an easy ride by the Establishment’s propaganda machine. And the idea that the very propaganda machine that was smearing Jeremy left, right and centre was EVER going to give him the column inches etc to refute the very lies and falsehoods that THEY conspired in dissembling is itself a falsehood. Of course they weren’t, and to pretend otherwise, and imply that he/they could have done if only they’d been as forceful as Blair – as you DO – is a blatant Big Lie!

      Yeah, if only Jeremy and his team had learnt Blair’s rapid rebuttal lesson they – the fascist owned and/or controlled MSM – would have let him expose their black propaganda smear op for what it was, but unfortunately Jeremy and his team were a bit slow.

      What complete and utter tosh!! There were no groups and organisations along with the MSM smearing Blair, so there was nothing for him to refute.

      1. Allan – …..and running away from MSM and refusing to address the issue head on worked out really well didn’t it.

      2. The main agenda of the shills on here – and there are more than a few (and they each have their ‘occasional’ personas who just post comments now and again) – is to blame the victims of the Establishment’s propaganda machine – ie the totally corrupt and fascist MSM….. Oh, and YES, they even blame Jeremy and his team for Starmer and the Blairites taking back complete control of the Labour Party, just as ‘Dave’ does above.

        Fuck of ‘Dave’ (no doubt one of SteveH’s ‘occasional’ personas) because you are a lying little unowhat!!

      3. Allan – Following along with your rather silly and desperate theme are you Toffee’s alter ego, like him when it comes down to it all you have is insults and profanities, it’s not a good look.

      4. Oh, I see, so it wasn’t the Establishment’s propaganda machine that was central to the black op smear campaign against Jeremy and the left that was the problem, but that Jeremy and Co kept running away from it. Yeah, right, sure Steve, so what happened when Jeremy’s team fired back and condemned the Panorama program/hatchet job, or when Ken tried to explain in the months after the radio interview that what he said was an historical fact, or when Chris Williamson was reinstated!

        SteveH and the other shills on here will just go on pretending and falsely claiming that Jeremy and Co could have ‘fought back’ when they know damn well that he couldn’t, and that the fascist owned and/or controlled MSM were never-EVER going to give him/them the opportunity to do so, and EVERY single thing they dissembled was concocted and designed to damage him and demonise him, along with the left membership.

        There was only one way that Jeremy could have reached the masses who were being fed all the lies and falsehoods and smears, and THAT was through the MSM, the very MSM that conspired in it from the outset, and they were never-EVER gonna let him do so, and the shills on here KNOW it of course!

      5. Allan – In answer to your first paragraph, the Corbyn team had exposed their own self perceived vulnerability during the ABC’s rather obvious phishing exercise before either of these events occurred and by the time of the Panorama program it was already pretty much game over on this subject. Ultimately though in my opinion it wasn’t AS that did for Jeremy.
        As for the rest, do you have any evidence that Jeremy was ever refused a platform to present his case. I may be wrong but I seem to remember at the time that Labour were continually being reported as refusing invites from the media.
        Incidentally your reply doesn’t really answer the stupid question I asked you.

      6. Allan – Google reveals there were various points of high intensity long before Feb17.

      7. ‘various high points of intensity’, such as what?

        And I don’t believe your B/S about Labour refusing invites from the media, and the reason I DON’T is because we both know it’s B/S. I mean just the way you phrased and composed the line is a dead giveaway that it’s just complete and utter tosh, complete and utter tosh that you’ve invented and concocted for the glaringly obvious reason:

        ‘I may be wrong but I seem to remember at the time that Labour were continually being reported as refusing invites from the media.’

        How can you be wrong, maybe, if you remember Labour were continually being reported as refusing invites from the media?! Doesn’t make sense Steve!

        Reported WHERE?! And at WHAT time?!

        I just did a search and the only thing that came up in the results was the following Indy article from August 2016:

        ‘Labour leadership contest: Jeremy Corbyn refuses to take part in hustings hosted by ‘biased’ media organisations’

        And most of the MSM – if not ALL – weren’t just biased, they were totally hostile!

        As I said Steve, your ‘caveat’ was a dead giveaway!

        PS Sorry to keep you up so late waiting for my reply (so that you can ‘respond’ to it!). As I keep saying, yur so transparent it’s a joke, but no doubt you’ll maintain yur ‘cool, calm and collected’ persona!

      8. Allan – Thanks for your concern but I don’t see anything to lose my cool about and whether you choose to believe me or not is unlikely to have much impact on my life..Why you would think that your patently untrue accusations would upset me is a bit of a mystery. I long ago accepted you were a bit of a joke who lives in his own personal echo chamber.
        Please don’t be silly, the only reason I put the caveat in there was because I was unable to prove it. However I do remember at the time hearing on far too many occasions across a range of news and current affairs programs that Labour had been invited to appear but refused. This is not something that tends to be reported in the press hence the caveat and me honestly declaring my comment as anecdotal rather than evidenced fact. It doesn’t make it any less true.
        As for your query about high points in the AS accusation that is simply a matter of opinion and as you know how to write a Google search with date criteria I suggest you do so and take your pick from the results, there’s plenty to choose from.

  17. And just for the record, Karie Murphy is wrong when she says that ‘the first flare-up of the antisemitism controversy in the Labour Party as a major media story’ were the ‘old Facebook comments by the Labour MP Naz Shah’. The FIRST ‘flare-up’, so-called, was the Oxford University Labour Club episode in the February, some two months before the Naz Shah story hit the headlines, and I have no doubt whatsoever that THAT is how it was all planned (AND that the allegations were completely false and vexatious, as such):

    1. In fact the first flare up was in the summer of 2015, even b4 the election when the Daily Mail led on a rubbish story of Corbyn associating with a holocaust denier Paul Eisen. They ‘forgot’ to mention that he was a constituent of Corbyn. The Guardian in the shape of Jonathan Freedland and the Jewish Chronicle followed up.

      There then followed the attack on Gerald Kaufman MP, the Father of the House of Commons saying that the Tories pro-Israel stance was because it was in receipt of ‘Jewish money’. A silly comment but not antisemitic.

  18. “A dollar short and a week late” doesn’t come close to describing the pointlessness of Murphy’s ‘explanation’ of what we all knew was happening as it happened.
    Trying to apportion guilt to Ken Livingstone at this late date – when we all know he merely quoted a historical fact – is completely unacceptable from someone in her position.

    1. Yes David, but I think you’re forgetting that it’s not an article she wrote for skwawkbox, it’s an article she wrote for the Guardian.

      1. Allan – Surely the truth remains the truth no matter who the audience/publication is.

  19. This explanation from Kary Murphy is utterly pathetic. She has absolutely no comprehension of what was happening. In the leaked report (p.306 and elsewhere) it states:

    Jeremy Corbyn himself and members of his staff team requested to GLU that particular antisemitism cases be dealt with. In 2017 LOTO staff chased for action on high-profile antisemitism cases Ken Livingstone, Tony Greenstein, Jackie Walker and Marc Wadsworth, stressing that these cases were of great concern to Jewish stakeholders and that resolving them was essential to “rebuilding trust between the Labour Party and the Jewish community”. GLU often failed to quickly progress these cases, as well as on several cases of antisemitism that LOTO staff directly raised or discussed with GLU.

    Well they did expel us and force Ken out. Did it ‘rebuild trust’ with this mythical Jewish community? Of course not. It went from bad to worse. There was only one thing that the ‘Jewish stakeholders’ ie the Israeli state funded Jewish Labour Movement and the Campaign Against Antisemitism wanted and that was Corbyn’s head. Hence why, in the words of Len McLuskey, they wouldn’t take yes for an answer.

    Instead of realising that they were facing a concerted campaign aimed at his removal, using ‘antisemitism’ as the pretext, Corbyn and Murphy and co. increased the expulsions. What was the result? The more people who were expelled the greater ‘the problem’. They were running ever faster to stand still and at the election the Chief Rabbi, who was trained on the West Bank at a racist yeshiva (religious school) delivered the coup de grace when he in effect told Jews not to vote Labour.

    What was Corbyn’s pathetic response? To ask to meet up with the Rabbi.

    I blame Lansman and John McDonnell equally but Corbyn threw his friends like Chris Williamson under the bus and in so doing condemned himself. I have no respect for Corbyn or McDonnell now. They capitulated to the Right and would not listen to the advice of comrades

    1. Totally agree. Karie’s piece confirms your analysis. She’s boasting the JC team burnt more witches and faster than McNicol’s gang. JC will not disagree or apologise yet the Labour left still supports him so poor are the alternatives RLB being the classic example. I am waiting for the anti witch-hunt LLA NEC candidates to attack Karie’s statement. I suspect I’ll be waiting a long time.

  20. Thanks, Skwawkbox, always useful to have the fuller insight than that edited by the Fallen Guardian. Still there are many of us who are unclear as to why seemingly good socialists, like Jackie Walker and Chris Williamson were treated with such hostility. I have seen nothing written, nor heard anything said, to suggest that (especially) Jackie Walker has done or said anything anti-Semitic.

    1. Corbyn and Murphy threw us to the wolves without ever providing any explanation. They knew of course that we weren’t antisemitic but Corbyn was too stupid to work it out that it wasn’t about antisemitism but Zionism. He couldn’t even work it out why Jews featured so prominently as their targets. If he had understood anything about Zionism he would know that anti-Zionists are their main enemies in many ways because we undermine their narrative that they and they alone represent Jews.

      To be honest I have contempt for Corbyn’s dishonesty and appeasement. I agree with John Thatcher. What Carrie Murphy says is more about her brain fog than anything else

      1. If Jeremy had realised just how ruthless the Zionists are and let’s face it, there can’t be anything more ruthless than threatening to destroy the world in a nuclear conflagration if you don’t get your way, as Golda Meir said she would do, he would have taken the advice which was given to him to assemble a group of Socialist Jews around him i.e. not Zionists, to go on the offensive against the antiSemitism smears.

        There were plenty of candidates ready and willing to help but instead he chose people such as Karie Murphy who just made the situation even worse by rewarding his enemies and ditching his friends. He had advisers in his camp who were working against him not with him.

        It’s never a good idea to let your enemy choose the battle ground. He could have turned every antiSemitic smear into a spotlight on the atrocities committed against the Palestinians by the Zionists. That way, every attack on him could have been made to rebound upon the accusers. It would have shown the public that he was a fighter and leader, whereas in the end they came to regard him as weak and incapable.

        And this brings us to the other disaster of Brexit, by the time the 2019 GE election came around, he had already been undermind and defeated.

  21. I’d love to know what McNicol’s thinking this morning. Does he have his lawyers on speed-dial, or is he, simply, looking forward to another easy £300 +, in the cosy confines of the Lord’s retirement home, with his mates, Mann, Austin and Woodcock.?

    What are the chances of suing the tw*ts?

  22. I found Karie Murphy’s piece overwhelmingly disappointing and in the light of it, I’m not surprised that we now have a Labour Party led by a right-wing, opportunist, appeaser of zionism and supporter of imperialism. Murphy fails to mention the suicidal adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism and the ensuing capitulation to the BOD, the Al Jazeera programmes that unearthed what was really going on, the weaponisation of (mostly) false allegations of antisemitism to damage Corbyn, Ware’s association with the Jewish Chronicle and the revelation that Ruth Smeeth was/is a US intelligence asset. It sounds as if she has swallowed the most poisonous parts of the right-wing narrative wholesale. That, coupled with her willingness to throw Walker and Livingstone under the bus (and by implication Mark Wadsworth, Chris Williamson and others – we’re not talking about holocaust deniers here, these are lifelong anti-racist socialists that she hasn’t the courage to speak up for) is utterly depressing.

    1. I think we should be thankful The Guardian gave her that limited space for an article, approaching that topic, from that angle. Perhaps, in the fullness of time…

      1. As I have said elsewhere, stop gratefully accepting bloody crumbs and start demanding the whole cake.

      2. john thatcher – ” gratefully accepting bloody crumbs ”

        In a nutshell and sadly true. Decent smart people with a key attitude / culture that plagues ALL “Left”, ALL victims ALL exploited animals including humans. They are all “gratefully accepting bloody crumbs.”

        An even bigger curse is WHITE FLAGGER VIRUS. Allan Howard is the virus’ hysterical, frantic, bubbling, wobbling, crawling culture. Howard is off his face with white flagger so like a crazed weird raving fanatic, peddles and pushes his petri dishes dripping with White Flag AH virus ⚠️⚠️⚠️

  23. Here’s one I got (half) right – regarding the treacherous toerag ian austin.

    And I suppose the only consolation of him enabling another toerag government is that at least he won’t be in parliament to continue assisting them. (❌) Went to the lords to become a tory (invested) peer

    The people of Dudley’ll just get themselves a tory what doesn’t breach the trade descriptions act. (✅)

    A noble sacrifice indeed

    Not as if they had plenty of opportunity as well as the ammunition with which to sack the likes of austin, mann, hodge etc…Would’ve blown over after a week or two; just like when de piffle sacked those 20-odd toerags; the ‘hoo-hah’ died down soon afterwards.

    1. Toffee – ” just like when de piffle sacked those 20-odd toerags; the ‘hoo-hah’ died down soon afterwards.” I argued exactly that to a friend at the time. Took much persuasion though. Alas, White Flagging Illness is rampant outside the party too. Allan Howard lacks the monopoly on that sadly.

      Howard goes berserk at ANYONE presenting plain facts and obvious common sense, yet with incoherence at plus and self awareness at zero, he screams hysterically that Jeremy could not have rebutted lies and argued his case. “No alternative” Howard prattles on, as if unforced and TOTALLY unwarranted CONSTANT appeasement to the very end eg Twatson recommended for a peerage, brought us the mother of all victories.

      Surely basic logic would be obvious to the so smart Allan Howard, that what was done did not work. That basic logic ie alternatives have greater probability of being successful. … But then again Allan Howard knows everything. The rest of us just can’t see the glittering successes APPEASEMENT GALORE has brought us.

  24. Tony Greenstein “Corbyn didn’t have the power to remove McNicol but he had the political clout to do so.
    Firstly McNicol offered to resign when Corbyn became leader. He should have accepted. After his relection in September 2016 and after McNicol had done his best to stop him standing Corbyn should have privately asked him to go and if he had refused to make that call publicly putting immense pressure on him via conference. He would have succeeded and the sabotage at the 2017 election would have been avoided.”

  25. The Labour Party & many of its members are anti-Semitic. We are by definition anti-Semitic as soon as the NEC adopted the IHRA definition. Very soon it will be illegal to criticise Israel in any way & will considered ‘hate speech’ by MSM. YOU ARE GUILTY BY DEFINITION! as the EHRC will find.

    1. Imagine if the Tories selected 650 Jewish candidates.
      Remember the attempt (last year was it?) to pretend criticising capitalism was antisemitic?
      Why wouldn’t they try again to make it antisemitic to vote for anyone but the Tories? Nothing illegal in that, right?

      1. ‘Remember the attempt (last year was it?) to pretend criticising capitalism was antisemitic?’ Yes, I remember that, for me, it just points to the real purpose of the witch hunt, it’s nothing to do with anti semitism and infact, if a few jews were attacked walking along the street they would relish the opportunity to accelerate the witch hunt into the wider public and particularly the unions, where anti capitalist talk could be banned. This is desperation to prop up dying capitalism before the pandemic took it’s toll.

    2. It might legally be considered hate speech in the future, so those demonstrations in support of Palestinians could be outlawed or demonstratore picked off by the police. This is the chilling situation this could lead to. The very things Corbyn himself campaigned for in the past could be deligitamised.

  26. The EHRC report should at least tell us why Starmer, on reading his advanced copy, decided the time was right to settle out of court.

    1. Could be a false memory but didn’t I read that what was submitted to Labour was for their comments?
      In other words, effectively a draft?
      If there’s anything redacted we’ll probably never be told anyway.

      1. @David McNiven: Apologies if I mislead you but I didn’t say he was sent the draft for comment. Was he sent the report so that he could take action in advance of it being published – like making sure those whistle-blowing staffers got their silver before it became obvious it was payment for services rendered.

      2. itsmespeakingtoyou no, you didn’t mislead me, your comment just triggered an almost-memory.
        Report due out tomorrow, Thursday, according to a few Twitterers.

    2. itsmespeakingtoyou – Don’t forget that we are also still awaiting the publication of the Forde Enquiry into the leaked dossier.

      1. itsmespeakingtoyou – Apparently Labour were advised to settle by two QCs.
        Caveat The following is a direct quote from an article that the infamous John Ware (yes that one) wrote for The Times Red Box.

        Both I and the whistleblowers wanted our day in court. The only reason we didn’t get it was because on legal advice from two QCs Labour made what is known as a Part 36 Offer admitting the claim. This put a heavy onus on us as claimants to settle.

      2. “On legal advice from two QCs” isn’t quite what it purports to be – it’s intended to convey the impression that the QCs told Labour they had no chance of winning but the advice could have been something completely different.
        For example it could have been “You’re certain to win but they can drag the case out for years – it would be all the tabloids would talk about. Do you really want that?”
        Or the “two QCs” could have been pure window dressing – simply an excuse for Starmer to do what he’d already decided was the easiest way to delegitimise Corbyn and the left.

      3. David – Surely the most likely explanation is the simplest one.

      4. That would be reasonable to assume if politicians and adulterers were not such inveterate liars..
        I have no proof of Starmer’s adultery.

      5. David – Perhaps you would have preferred it if Labour had followed McCluskey’s example who very recently blew £1,750,000 of his members subscriptions losing a libel/deformation case that he could have settled for £10,000.

      6. No, I’d have preferred it if Labour had fought and won damages from the company that made the Panodrama, from Ware, the actors in it and from the BBC.
        If truth doesn’t win a libel case it loses honourably and temporarily. Higher courts or history eventually expose liars for what they are.
        And the plain truth is that we are not antisemites and our enemies are politically-motivated liars.

      7. David – All very fine minded I’m sure, but that wasn’t what the court case was about. It would have been irresponsible for the Labour Party to have ignored legal advice.

  27. Tony Greenstein
    27/10/2020 at 3:54 am

    “As it is he will go down as the pathetically inadequate leader who gave in to the premises of the fake antisemitism campaign”
    Thank you. I agree.

    It was Jeremy Corbyn’s fault for the tsunami of anti Semitism allegations that plagued his leadership. He was weak and hopelessly defensive from the start. He should have faced up to it and nipped it in the bud.
    His approach (to the allegations) should have been; ‘well is it any wonder’.
    He should have said; if the Israeli government stops stealing the Palestinian peoples land, stops shooting Palestinian protestors, stops building walls, then (any perception one may have of) anti Semitism will disappear.
    He should have said, ‘ if you think it is anti Semitic for people to say ‘Israel under its present government is an apartheid state’ then go ahead and call me an anti Semite.
    He should have said ‘stop defending the indefensible’.

    If he had been a leader he would have faced up to the accusations from the start and said ‘we are not anti Semites, we are anti Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israel.
    If he had been brave and stood up for what he believes I think he would be Prime Minister now but he didn’t because it is not in the man.

    1. Chris Williamson did and look what happened to him. Thrown under the proverbial bus , but he was bang on right with his stance .
      Lets hope that should we ever get a real socialist leader ( Piddock ? ) then they kick the proverbial shit out of those lying twats with their false AS bollocks .

      1. Chris Williamson also apologised! ; Get Up, Stand UP; not Things can only get Bitter.

      2. yes Chris apologised as a way of getting them off his back but he had nothing to apologise for

      3. If “as a way of getting them off his back” excuses Chris Williamson’s apology why doesn’t it excuse Jeremy’s?
        Is it at all possible that Corbyn felt that (or was badly advised that) concessions, apologies and ‘special measures’ were the way to get our accusers off LABOUR’S back?

    2. This, Richard MacKinnon, is exactly what this ex-member repeatedly hoped for. When I watched Little Philip shouting at Corbyn, “Apologise! Apologise!” when I watch Marr in similar vein, or Neil, I thought, “Why doesn’t he speak truth to the Israeli/Zionists. I could do better!”

      Still, I wish it was Corbyn heading the opposition, hopefully instead now showing some support for many of those who were thrown under the bus, Williamson, Jackie Walker, Livingston. Starmer confuses me, he is like some sort of wraith, waiting for human form.

  28. Unfortunately, Ms Murphy’s words and actions are constrained by the IHRA definition of antisemitism. The same is true of all Labour members. You will never hear the truth spoken officially and you will never flagellate yourselves enough. You have signed up to the ministry of truth.

  29. A lot of Corbyn bashing going on about what he should have done with the benefit of hindsight.
    True he had no real Leadership experience before being elected.
    But he was part of a (democratic?) team.
    How about considering the advice he was being given by those around him some who had had some experience –
    SCG ? McDonnell (Mr appeasement himself ?) , Abbott , Lavery ,Trickett etc ??? Union Leaders past and present?

    Perhaps Tony Greenstein could comment?

    1. Iain – For some reason you’ve forgotten to mention his closest advisors the 4 Ms,

      1. It was never hindsight. We were all saying it all the time but not shouting it out for obvious reasons. He was the leader so no excuses. He fucked it up, for all of us on the left, and I do not see any way of retrieving it. Now that the right was nipped they’ll make damn sure it never happens again. The ‘morons’ will be permanently muzzled one way or another. Just look how fast the leaked inquiry has been inquired into etc. I was a young man when it started, now I’m a pensioner.

      2. McDonnell’s appeasement was and still is beyond contempt. Completely rubbished his reputation. Why Lavery bottled the leadership election is an open question, but he did, and left it all up to that child idio RBL who did not even know what BDS stood for but accepted a BoD explanation. Jesus Christ! How bloody dim can one MP get?

      3. Karie Murphy – Labour party chief of staff
        Seumas Milne – Labour’s head of communications and strategy
        Andrew Murray – Chief of staff, Unite Union; part time adviser to Jeremy Corbyn
        Len McCluskey – General Secretary, Unite Union

      4. @Ian Crawford: “3Ms?” – An opportunity to damn with some feint praise.

  30. Tories fail to bully universities into adopting the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism
    Only a minority of UK universities have adopted the misleading and politically motivated definition of anti-Semitism promoted by Israel and its lobby.

    Despite repeated British government threats, fewer than 22 percent of higher education establishments have adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s “working definition” of anti-Semitism.
    The IHRA definition has been repeatedly condemned by free speech defenders, Palestinians, Jewish activists, Palestine solidarity, Black and Asian groups.

    But Conservative Party education minister Gavin Williamson wrote to universities demanding they “formally adopt” the definition on 9 October.

    Antisemitism is abhorrent and I am urging universities to root it out by adopting the IHRA definition. If universities ignore the issue, I have asked officials to consider options e.g. directing the Office for Students to impose a new registration condition or suspending funding.
    — Gavin Williamson (@GavinWilliamson) October 9, 2020

    Williamson threatened to cut their government funding if they do not.

    He said he had asked civil servants to examine how to “impose a new regulatory condition” to suspend funding “for universities at which anti-Semitic incidents occur” that have not signed up to the definition.

    He threatened to act before Christmas, “if I have not seen the overwhelming majority of institutions adopting the definition.”

    1. Perhaps Gavin Williamson would be better employed sorting out the ongoing Covid-19 infection rates in schools rather than pandering to the Board of Deputies.

    2. It is excellent that 78% of universities have so far not adopted the IHRA but if financial sanctions become a reality then I suspect that figure will diminish. What is outrageous is that someone who gives not a fig about racism, is so concerned about ‘antisemitism’. That and the concern of the Sun, Mail etc. with ‘antisemitism’ should have told Murphy and Corbyn something. WHy should those who employed Katie Hopkins and are racist to the tips of their toes be concerned about ‘antisemitism’?

      Obviously it wasn’t about antisemitism but Corbyn was too thick to realise that and too wedded to the appeasement of the Right, a failed strategy, to wake up to what was happening. Not only did he lose in 2019 but all the millions who’d invested their hopes in him.

      1. So Corbyn was “too thick to realise” that the AS accusations were a vicious political instrument?
        Sorry but ‘hyperbole’ doesn’t cover that – that’s bollocks.
        I’m afraid that despite your obvious pain and anger I still see Corbyn as more victimised than you, me or any other of the 68 million who’ve lost the opportunity of a Labour government – and I haven’t heard him whine about it once.

  31. Could someone explain to me why superimposing a silhouette of Israel on a map of USA is in any way anti-Semitic? Was it because it wasn’t in New York?

    1. It is anti-Semitic, Steve Richards, because it feeds into and off a very long-standing anti-Semitic, and indeed pre-war onwards, Nazi, trope that the USA is entirely controlled by ‘The Jews on Wall Street”, and also in popular long-term fascist memes, the USA is referred to as ‘Jew America’ – so to superimpose the silhouette of Israel (representing its Jewish population) on a map of the USA , feeds into the longstanding Nazi’ anti-Semitic meme that all Jews should go and live in ‘Jew America’ (or Amerika in fascist terms) .

      You do grasp the issue for the pro Palestinian Left of the problem of the huge number of deeply embedded ‘dog whistle’ anti-Semitic memes and tropes that saturate our Western culture – after about 1,500 years of European (Christian) oppression and periodic mass murder of the Jews – being carelessly evoked by images and allusions that intentionally or unintentionally , feed off those deeply culturally embedded anti-Semitic lies and distortions , don’t you Steve ? If not, FFS do some further reading. Though your slimy reference in your post to ‘New York’, suggests you are well into feeding off old anti-Semitic memes , quite intentionally, scumbag

      1. What utter racist rubbish JPenney. Really your talk crap.

        The projection of Israel, a settler colonial state that defines itself as Jewish racially, a state based on ethnic cleansing, onto its sponsor the USA isn’t in the slightest antisemitic. It’s an amusing meme. The USA ruling class loves Israel so much, let em have it.

        Israel doesn’t represent the US’s Jewish population and if you weren’t so ignorant you would know that there is a slow burning dissociation of American Jews from the Zionists. You saying this demonstrates to me that you are deeply antisemitic and you are projecting your antisemitism on others.

        Israel does NOT represent Jews outside its borders despite the Zionist claim to the contrary. If you weren’t so blind you might realise that the most antisemitic elements in the US support Israel – starting with Trump who peddles antisemitism calling Israel ‘your country’ to a Jewish audience. Or Bannon, a Christian Zionist who tells his wife he doesn’t want his daughters going to school with Jews.

        You know nothing of t he history of Jews. It wasn’t 1,500 years of Christian oppression. Jews were both oppressed and oppressors at different times but mindless tape recorders like you give us this Zionist history – what Salo Baron, one of the most important Jewish historians called the ‘lachrymose version of history’. Jews were actors not just victims but what would racists like you know of the Bund, the Jewish revolutionaries who were in battle against Zionists like you who held out their hands to the pogromists and antisemites.

        The only scumbag as you call it is yourself. The Zionist Organisation of America invited Bannon and even worse Sebastian Gorka, Trump’s neo-Nazi adviser to be its guest of honour. Toerags like you are just the left face of Zionism’s alliance with the alt-Right in America.

        In the USA like elsewhere the most antisemitic elements, like the 1.4 million Christians United for Israel combine their Jew hatred with ardent support for Zionism. Just as the KKK supported Marcus Garvey’s Back to Africa movement a century ago.

        Why? Because if you don’t want Jews in America where better to send them than Israel. Fake left apologists like you for Zionism are just apologists for genuine antisemitism. Hence your false assertion of antisemitism against socialists and anti-racists.

      2. Well it’s quite obvious that Corbyn didn’t understand that antisemitism was being weaponised. That is why he simply denied he was an antisemite not realising that when Zionists talk of antisemitism they mean opposition to their racism.

        If he’s not too thick to realise perhaps David McNiven can provide another explanation for the response of Corbyn? By expelling people he simply proved that Labour had an antisemitism problem and the more Murphy expelled the greater was the problem so come the election Corbyn was fucked.

        Yes Corbyn was victimised and like many White racists he simply turned on those beneath him rather than standing up to the Zionists and their secret state backers.

        Corbyn’s cowardice and stupidity lost the election and no amount of special pleading will alter that fact.

      3. “Well it’s quite obvious that Corbyn didn’t understand that antisemitism was being weaponised.” I’m sorry because I still have immense respect for your past writing and activism but that’s ridiculous – of course Corbyn understood – how could anyone not?
        Bitterness seems to have overwhelmed your reason.

        “White racist?” Corbyn? That really is beyond the pale.
        I don’t care how well you know or knew him, you have no way of knowing whether he “didn’t understand” – or why he or his advisers chose for whatever (mistaken) reason not to respond aggressively – and neither do I.
        If I’d been accused I’d have responded very differently but I’m more bruiser than politician.
        My understanding was that he and his office were in no position to expel anyone and that they deliberately kept those decisions at arm’s length.
        Aren’t expulsions the prerogative of the NCC/NEC after all? (I haven’t even read the rule book)
        One more thing – you used to be an avid supporter of Corbyn didn’t you?
        And now you can’t stand the man?
        What does that say about your ability to judge anyone’s character?

  32. So to accuse Israel of being the 51st State of USA, or the beating heart of America transplanted into ‘Arab Lands’ would also qualify as a malicious trope & meet with your disapproval JPenny? It would appear that you are desperate to cite your interpretations of history to control any criticism, using accusations of anti-Semitism at every available opportunity to prevent freedom of thought & to straight-jacket free & open debate. I do not criticise or threaten Jews, I point a finger of mocking contempt at Israel & its violent genocide of Palestinians. As a catholic, it appears I must be very careful what I believe & say, especially at the Easter crucifixion. I doubt Biden will understand & I wonder if he welcomes ‘the Rapture’. What do most Zionists make of the prophecy?
    All Labour Party Members must also listen carefully to the words of Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis to realise that the state of Israel is a racist endeavour & incompatible with Socialism. The IHRA definition is an abomination!

    1. I’m sorry Steve Richards but you must understand that just because something you say is true doesn’t mean it isn’t anti-semitic. According to the new definition of anti-Semitism if you give offence to racist Zionists then that is anti-Semitic because those Zionists may be Jewish. Israel is the modern Jew or the ‘Jew among the nations’ according to Irwin Cotler, the person who invented the ‘new anti-Semitism’. Of course according to JPenney criticising Israel is antisemitic because apparently you can be racist against a state. Pity the Afrikaaners didn’t think of that one. Actually they did but most people possessing a few brain cells saw through it as they saw through the cries of the National Front that we were really ‘anti-White’ as they mounted their campaign ‘rights for Whites’.

      No doubt Penney was sympathetic to that racist nonsense too. The fact that Israel, legally, bars Israeli Arabs, who are nominally citizens, from hundreds of Jewish only communities because they ‘don’t fit in’ according to the 2011 Admissions Committee Law is acceptable to Penney because to him apartheid is acceptable if it has a Jewish face.

      Likewise if you point out that Israel bears comparison with Nazi Germany then that too is antisemitic, even though holocaust survivors like the late Professor Ze’ev Sternhell made just such a comparison. Because after all, according to Penney the fact that Israeli mobs chant ‘death to the Arabs’ just as mobs chanted ‘death to the Jews’ in Germany and Poland is irrelevant. The other explanation is that Penney is a common and garden racist and that no socialist can subscribe to supporting settler colonialism

  33. Sorry Tony, but I believe that we all share one basic human right …………the right to be insulted!

  34. Dearie, Dearie, me. Poor Tony Greenstein , in just a few , typically over-the-top, scabrous, posts, clearly illustrates why the Labour Party, under any leadership, was, and would always have been, quite correct to expel him – as it, and Momentum, also was in expelling the always attention-seeking Jackie Walker, with her now notorious posts, including that one claiming that ‘Jews were chief financiers of the African Slave Trade’. A total lie. Jewish capitalists, though historically involved at the margins, weren’t in any way ‘Chief funders’. It was of course, demonstrably, overwhelmingly ‘Christian’ European capitalists who funded the slave trade, and this entirely bogus claim , propagated for decades by the originally deeply anti-Semitic US-based Black Nation of Islam movement in particular , was simply feeding into and off another toxic anti-Semitic meme to make a cheap debating point .

    And that is the core problem for the tiny numbers of the fringe obsessive ‘anti-Zionists’ of the ‘Left’, ie, that the casual adoption of simplistic, sloganised, terminology , and a highly selective misrepresentation and editing of historical fact , which feeds of pre-existing anti-Semitic memes, has laid it , and unfortunately by association the much broader Labour Left, wide open to the cynical witch-hunting of the anti Corbyn Labour Right and MSM.

    So you, absolutely numerically tiny, obsessive fringe , just keep on with your strange little ‘anti-Zionist’ hermetically sealed echo-chamber bubble world . A world in which anyone who accepts the right of the state of Israel to exist, in any form whatsoever (but not necessarily in its current boundaries, or with its current oppressive policies towards the Palestinians of course) , ie, like the Labour Party, most of the UK population, the PLO, the UN, most world states, etc, etc, no matter how critical, is simply abused as ‘a Zionist’, or, maybe a ‘Social Zionist’, or just a ‘Zio., And the rest of the Labour Movement will just pass you by in bemusement as a bunch of obsessive, politically irrelevant, nutters, who share their extreme views on Israel and ‘Zionism’ only with the openly anti-Semitic clerico-fascists of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the theocracy of Iran.

    1. “… weren’t in any way ‘Chief funders’…” so is ‘Chief’ the only word you dispute in the statement you attribute to Jackie Walker?
      There were certainly Jewish financiers of the slave trade, as there were English and Italian.
      Other nationals too including African and Arab but I’ve personally seen no examples of documents supporting that.
      I was once shown rare examples of 18th/19th century records held by a company for which I worked. I only vaguely remember the ‘quaint’ terminology used to describe the trade in the documents as it was just an item of human interest included to liven up the ‘company history’ part of my induction training.
      The fact that there were Jews involved in the slave and slave-dependent trades is indisputable. It’s hardly surprising given that so much of the English aristocracy and the financial, commercial, ship-owning and seafaring classes were involved in one way or another – clearly far, far more Christian than Jewish – but the point is that the trade being so widespread allows almost all their heirs to describe them as “only marginally involved.”
      Condemning Jackie Walker for that one word “Chief” seems unreasonable – to me involved is involved whatever the degree – and the meagre evidence supports neither ‘chief’ nor ‘marginal’.

    2. I am tempted to tell Penney that if he has nothing to say then he should say nothing. Instead he thinks lying is his best response. So be it.

      Jackie Walker has never issued a statement that Jews were the chief funders of the slave trade That is an egregious lie and John Penney is just a shitty liar.

      Unlike Penney I am an anti-racist. That was what I was expelled for. Being Jewish and aware of what happened to the Jews in the holocaust, a time when the Zionist movement refused to even acknowledge the holocaust was taking place and when they actively obstructed opening up any places of refuge, I am vehemently opposed to Jews using the holocaust as an excuse for murdering and maiming Palestinians.

      Only last Saturday a 16 year old boy Amer Abdel-Rahim Snobar was helping fix a friend’s car when Israeli soldiers surrounded him. It was witnessed by his friend who managed to escape. He was put in a chokehold, beaten and died. That is what the disgusting racist Penney supports by his attacks on people like me.

      Jews opposed to Zionism are like Whites in South Africa opposed to Apartheid. Penney is just another version of the Afrikaaner. It is no accident that racists like him are the main supporters of Zionism because historically antisemites supported Zionism as a means of being rid of ‘their’ Jews. In much the same way that the KKK supported Marcus Garvey’s back to Africa movement.

      There’s nothing strange about opposing Zionism, which is a Jewish Supremacist movement intent on ‘cleansing’ Palestine of Palestinians. It is no accident that today the most ardent supporters of Zionism and Israel are the Trumps and Penneys of this world. And indeed neo-Nazis like Richard Spencer, founder of the alt-Right who declares himself a White Zionist (google it).

      Israel has no right to exist as a racist state but not being of a fascist mentality unlike Penney I don’t confuse states with people. Whites in South Africa were also attached to their state but survived its passing.

      The Nation of Islam incidentally is indeed a reactionary organisation. It is a form of Black Zionism so Penney should love it!

      Antizionism is not marginal. Jews today are moving away from it and it is only white racists like Penney who are attached to a movement whose desire is a Jewish only Israel.

      As for ‘zio’ its short for Zionist. If you think it is antisemitic that’s because you think Zionists and jews are synonymous. That to me is antisemitic.

  35. “So, how will the new Labour leader, Keir Starmer, deal with this report? And for those Jeremy Corbyn followers who feel this is just one of many attacks on the former leader’s politics … are they likely to accept the report’s findings?”

    …. says the Guardian. Are Corbyn supporters likely to accept the report’s findings? So the presumption is that the report will be anti-Corbyn ……….. Yet another interesting take from the G! Nothing like being judge, jury and executioner.

    1. Joe – I don’t know but given the speed with which MSM get their reports out following the publication of very long reports of this nature it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch to presume that MSM get to see a preview of the report (conditional on an embargo until the reports general release) so they can pre-prepare their news and commentary output prior to the reports general publication.
      Personally I’m going to refrain from speculating until I’ve seen it for myself.

  36. Ever since Starmer unilaterally decided to hand the HQ 5th columnists £600,000 (where in the rule book is that allowed?) left NEC members have asked to see the ignored legal advice. Their requests have never been acknowledged never mind replied to.

    1. Rita – Why bother, it would be far more logical to ask to see the most recent legal advice that the Labour Party’s QCs gave rather than bothering about the hopelessly outdated and redundant advice that was given many months ago.
      Also could you give a link to the evidence that this was a unilateral decision that was taken by Starmer alone.

      1. “… far more logical to ask to see the most recent legal advice that the Labour Party’s QCs gave rather than bothering about the hopelessly outdated and redundant advice that was given many months ago.”

        What in terms of evidence or law was not known then that is known now? Given that the reports surrounding the matter do not constitute (in my understanding at least) evidence or precedent?
        Or is some relevant factor other than the evidence and the law in play that you’re aware of and I haven’t considered?

      2. David – Have I understood you correctly, are you rather bizarrely claiming that the EHRC report couldn’t have been presented as evidence in the High Court?

  37. Yes, I am claiming that. The report itself is not evidence – it may contain actual evidence but only if each individual submission withstands examination by the court will it be admitted into evidence.
    The judgement of the authors of a report – for that’s what the report is – does not of itself constitute evidence – or set precedent – and nor can the authors’ judgement be considered in any way binding on a court.
    The above is based solely on memory of books read 52 years ago so please feel free to contest it.

    1. “It” in “will it be admitted” refers to the individual submission, not the complete report.

    2. Really ???
      Firstly for clarification I have not claimed that the High Court is bound by anything that the EHRC produces, that would be a ridiculous thing to do.
      However given that the ECHR is a statutory body created by the Equality Act 2006 and that the Act granted the EHRC considerable investigatory and enforcement powers. I still find your assertions illogical.

  38. I’m not in the Labour Party and won’t discuss most of this, but I want to answer Karie Murphy on the subject of Ken Livingstone. It is a fact that Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, and Len McCluskey threw Ken Livingstone under a bus. It is also a fact that what Livingstone said was broadly correct about the history of the Nazi period. I hope some of you will read this, written at the time, and rethink your position:

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: