In 2019, Starmer twice rejected an antisemitism claim. By his own standards, he should suspend himself
Last year, Keir Starmer appeared on the BBC’s Marr show and, with the BBC eagerly amplifying claims of antisemitism against the Labour Party and its leader, he was confronted with a claim from former Liverpool MP Louise Ellman. He twice rejected her accusation:
As Labour leader, Starmer has suspended Jeremy Corbyn for daring to point out that the level of antisemitism in Labour was tiny, even though Corbyn’s assertion was factual – and despite the EHRC report’s clear affirmation of Corbyn’s legally-protected right to say so.
Starmer went on to qualify his rejection on Marr, but Corbyn qualified his factual assertion about the low level of antisemitism in the party with clear expressions of concern about the impact of antisemitism on Jewish people and about the need to stamp it out. This was ignored in the media coverage and the party’s reaction, as was the EHRC’s clarity on his right to say what he did.
So by his own standards, mustn’t Starmer suspend himself?
Labour has banned members from discussing or voting on Corbyn’s suspension. It’s not too hard to see why.
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.