comment

Johnson tells peer who quit Labour during sex-pest investigation to investigate ‘far left’ BLM and Extinction Rebellion

Woodcock described by BLM spokesperson as “hand-picked servant of a prime minister  who described black people using vile racist language that thankfully most people left behind in the 1950s”

Boris Johnson has told John Woodcock, the former Labour MP turned Tory-made peer who endorsed Johnson and the Tories before the 2019 general election, to investigate ‘far-left infiltration’ of movements such as Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion.

Woodcock quit Labour in 2018 before an investigation into ‘sex pest’ allegations could be concluded, but this has not been mentioned in ‘mainstream’ reports on Woodcock’s new project.

After his resignation, Woodcock tweeted attacking Corbyn’s Labour as ‘a gaslighting racist regime’ [sic]. Boris Johnson has used a string of racist terms to describe black and Muslim people.

A spokesperson for the Black Lives Matter movement described Woodcock as the:

hand-picked servant of a prime minister  who described black people using vile racist language that thankfully most people left behind in the 1950s

The move comes shortly after another Labour-quitter-turned-Tory-made-peer, John Mann, launched a smear campaign against left-wing news sites. Mann was interviewed by police in a ‘hate-incident’ investigation after publishing a pamphlet that included being a Gypsy Traveller in a list of anti-social behaviours. This did not prevent him being made Johnson’s ‘antisemitism Tsar’.

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 without hardship, 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.

53 comments

  1. BLM and XR are not allied to the working class. I’m sure some of their members are left wingers and some of their adherents are working class. They will get nowhere and their leaders will become successful members of the establishment, like Jack Straw who was once president of the NUS. It’s funny that Woodcock is investigating them, he’s just like them – a Cuckoo.
    Identity politics, factions, and entryists are a huge gift to the right.

    1. Thinking about it, the whole thing is fake. Both XR and BLM have predominantly middle class support. If anything XR should be investigated for green fascists and BLM for Shaun Bailey/David Lammy clones.

      1. And another thing. When organisations contain substantial numbers of left wingers they are infiltrated by security services and police spies. This is just another false flag.

      2. Here’s a link to XRs website and their ‘About Us’ page, and one can see at a glance that they are all green fascists who need to be investigated!

        Lundiel, yet ANOTHER lying fascist shill! Fuck off you Nazi piece of shit!

    2. Could you elaborate lundiel re what you said about BLM and XR not being ‘allied’ to the working class – ie what leads you to make such a claim? Funny how you make negative assumptions about them, and claim that their leaders will become ‘successful members of the establishment’. I don’t accept your assertion that they are not ‘allied’ to the working class – and it seems to me you are just out to discredit them in the eyes of readers of skwawkbox – but perhaps you could explain how they COULD ‘ally’ themselves to the working class.

      Both groups of course campaign for their respective causes and ARE, by their very nature, on the left, and you are spouting complete and utter bollox and obviously trying to discredit them and paint them as elitist. Funny, isn’t it, how the ‘discrediters’ so often get their comment(s) in first!

      By coming up with the B/S about their leaders becoming successful members of the establishment, lundiel wants to have people believe that they will sell out at some point in the future AND that they don’t involve themselves in such campaigns for genuine reasons.

      He is lying and just dissembling smears! The only thing that’s fake are lundiel’s oh-so blatantly obvious right-wing fascist falsehoods about the two groups.

      1. “Movements” are often seen as vehicles to public profile by the people who launch them, it’s true.
        I’d agree they need watching but so do all publicity seekers – and candidates for office of all kinds.
        I wouldn’t condemn them all out of hand though.
        I think one can tell the sincere from the ambitious if one looks hard enough.

      2. As Wirral In It Together rightly said. Read Cory Morningstar, she’s done extensive research into XR and her conclusion is it is for the ruling class, corporate power, finance in and capital.

      3. Could you give some examples David. Some examples of people who see Movements as vehicles etc. The reality IS of course that the vast majority of people who establish campaign groups do so because they feel very strongly about something or other and want to change it by campaigning about it and creating public awareness of the issue – eg global warming, factory farming, GM crops, fluoride in drinking water (which Johnson and Co want to poisonous ALL of us with, as the Sunday Times recently revealed), etc, etc, etc. And the idea that people ‘often’ see them as vehicles etc is complete and utter bollox! Yeah, they don’t really give a damn about the issue they are campaigning about, and it’s really just a vehicle….

        Yeah, and THAT is one massive Big Lie!

      4. Lundiel, you omitted to mention who these corporate sponsors are. So would you mind naming them? Cheers

      5. And it’s all very well you saying read this and read that, but why on earth don’t you post a link or two or three to said articles – ie ‘revelations’

        PS And I meant to say in my previous post that there are of course some large charities who use most of the money donated to them to pay themselves massive salaries, and very little ends up being spent on the particular issue/problem.

      6. Allan, contrary to what you seem to think, “often” does not imply a majority or any number or proportion, and “movement” does not imply a charity.
        UKIP, BNP, CAA are movements, so was National Socialism.
        I won’t name anyone – how about instead you name the people you’re 100% certain are above reproach?
        On second thoughts don’t bother – gimme a fucking break and don’t be another windbag.

      7. Thousands of them? Corporate sponsors? In the list you linked to there are a couple of dozen or so, some big, some not so big. But does that somehow make BLM illegitimate? Yes, no doubt some of them are donating money to BLM for cynical reasons – and seems unlikely that BLM are ignorant of the fact – but I have no doubt that BLM (and the other groups listed) use the money to further their cause.

        No doubt that once ONE big company donated money to BLM, other big companies felt obliged to do so also.

        Right, so how about a link or two regarding Extinction Rebellion…… And could you elaborate as to why you say they should be investigated for ‘green fascists’.

      8. Oh go on David, just one or two examples will do.

        Yep, McNiven slithered his way out of THAT one not so very subtly! Gordon Bennet, and the joke of it is you think you’re so clever AND obviously think that readers of skwawkbox are idiots and easily duped!

      9. I’m bored with this. You’ve been rude to me Howard and have the temerity to keep asking me stupid questions without even knowing what you’re talking about. Fuck off and do some research and stop acting like a starry eyed teenager. Also, I’m a woman so stop assuming I’m “he”. Idiot.

      10. And I should just add that lundiel fraudulently uses the term sponsors, and yet NONE of these companies are ‘sponsoring’ BLM, simply donating money to the organisation.

        And THAT is probably the biggest of lundiel’s falsehoods – ie that they are ‘sponsoring’ BLM – along with the garbage about the leaders (of BLM *and* XL) becoming ‘successful members of the establishment’. Funny, isn’t it, how there’s so many supposedly left-wing posters on this site forever putting down and trashing the left AND left-wing groups and organisations.

        And why don’t you post under your actual name? What is lundiel supposed to be! You claim you are a woman, but you don’t come across as remotely like a woman to me, and why would anyone call someone an ‘idiot’ for not knowing that they’re a woman. Oh, right, it’s so glaringly obvious from your user-name that you’re a woman, or claim to be!

        And just like McNiven, the slimy creep slithers his/her way out of responding. The only question I asked you was to provide a link or two to articles that supposedly expose XL, so where do you get the ‘stupid questions’ from. Yep, typical shill propaganda hyperbole!

        ‘starry-eyed teenager’ says the little creep and does the standard ‘Oh I’ve had enough of this!’ so as to get out of answering, and the scumbag won’t be explaining about ‘green fascists’ of course.

        It’s EXACTLY the sort of shite the Mail and the Sun dissemble! And I mean EXACTLY!!

        More than anything else, the comments section of this blog has become a platform for black propagandist shills trashing the left and left-wing groups whilst posing as left-wingers! I mean it’s literally every single day in practically every single thread! Please get wise to it if you’re not already.

      11. “NONE of these companies are ‘sponsoring’ BLM, simply donating money to the organisation.”

        Classic. Take a knee yo-yo.

      12. If someone has any questions about the American organisation that makes them a fascist. Are they beyond enquiries?

    3. “They will get nowhere”. No, not if the likes of yourself don’t get off your arse there won’t even be a planet let alone a civilised one

  2. IF woodentop wants to investigate racism he need not look further than the Conservative and unionist party were bigots,racists,and sectarianism flourish..

  3. John Mann, John Woodstock, ‘Sex Pest’ allegations and accepting requests from a hard-right, linguistically-racist Prime Minister to malign BLM and Extinction Rebellion. It would be barely acceptably if this were the bottom of the barrel and the LEAST desirable elements of some Labour people and its recent ‘new management’.

    But it probably isn’t.

    Labour’s poll collapse makes more and more sense (even without any MSM coverage).

  4. Of all those traitorous, pretend ex Labour MPs perhaps Woodcock is on a level of despicability of his own- consistent though.

  5. If you are against Jeremy Corbyn and/or the Socialist principles he adheres to then no matter how vile or how low you are or how despicable your behaviour then you are a good guy according to the Tories PLP Southside MSM establishment etc. Thats why the nasty John Woodcock and the equally nasty JOhn Mann were given peerages ( and a lucrative income for life) by the
    Tories.
    Regarding the BLM movement you do not have to be “far left” to see that police killing a black man by kneeling on his neck for over 8 minutes is wrong as is shooting another in the back 7(?) times. You just have to be a decent human being
    Racism blinds racist individuals. Ophra Winfrey is one of the richest if not the richest women in the world. All her clothes , makeup shoes etc are expensive designer items. She went into a shop in Switzerland a few years ago and asked to look at a handbag she was thinking of buying, The shop assistant refused to show it to her and said she couldn’t afford it. The shop assistant didn’t see the style and the glamour – she just saw a black woman.
    Its the same with the police who murdered our black brothers and sisters in USA and harass them at home – they just see the skin colour and assume because of it the black person is up to no good and that they are fair game. .
    I think the BLM movement is a step in the right direction but we have a long way to go before we achieve equality. Clearly John Woodcock and Boris Johnson are good ole boys from the Dixie school of racial equality but they need to realise that its not 1968 any more and that the black community has the full support of all decent people who want to see racism eliminated.

    1. McNicol was also given a peerage and Tom Watson was offered one, and Starmer was offered a place in the shadow cabinet. Have you spoken out against that “Smartboy”?
      You approve of that do you??? Yes or No??? The “Left” is helped by those actions??? Yes or No???
      You are a wicked deceitful but effective Right Wing plant. You cannot fool everyone. And some who are fooled want to be fooled. You feed them with pretend whining and moaning but your instructions are to sow and maintain hopelessness, helplessness, can’t do, tis all the fault of this that and the other, you can’t change anything. Don’t listen to anyone who says you can improve.

      You Smartboy, like DavidMcNiven and WhiteFlagMan are frauds because u r clearly not stupid. Repellant Right Wing infiltrator.
      🌹🌹🌹

    2. I never did believe that Oprah fable. She exudes love of wealth, shiny, twinkly diamonds. She expects deference due to her position and wealth. When she screams about the inhumanities in Libya, Yemen, Detroit then I might listen to her. Popped into a fucking jewellers my arse. I pick my heroes and heroines carefully. Rosa Parks, CPUSA, is a good start. I am a black man and I refuse to take the fucking knee. The irony is beyond belief. Oh and if the Democrats support it and the Cuban embargo then where do BLM stand? Regards ☮️

  6. Woodcocks has the cheek to stand around criticising one of the most decent MPs in Parliament. Which is laughable considering the allegations against him. Yet his vindictiveness towards Corbyn is shocking. Therefore he’s quite happy to be used by Johnson to deflect attention from many on the far right who have become supporters of the Tory Party.
    There is also the small matter of Woodcocks partner. A journalist that writes for the Spectator and Telegraph

  7. If you need to get the true measure of Extinction Rebellion, then DuckDuckGo “Cory Morningstar and Whitney Webb”. You’ll never look back, assuming you start out with an open mind…!

      1. So is anyone going to elaborate about WHAT will’ become clear’, or are you just going to do the usual generalisation tactic? And when someone comes out with something that is designed to discredit you – ie asserting that I am smitten, as lundiel does – then you KNOW you are dealing with a black propagandist, and that’s what lundiel is. So I defend two organisations against lundiel’s glaringly obvious falsehoods and his attempts to smear them, and lundiel then tries to dismiss my defence of them and rebuttal of his lies as me doing so on account of my being smitten with them. Yep, that’s what black propagandist shit-heads DO!

    1. How about a hint, WIIT? You’ve read it and been convinced – there must be a powerful argument that convinces you those two people are the only honest commentators and ER, BLM etc. are all either dupes of neoliberalism or Quislings?
      I’m not arguing either way – just asking for your assessment of the evidence because other minority views presented here have turned out to be bollocks and I’m sick of having my time wasted with dross.
      If you don’t want to it’s OK, I’ll stay ignorant.

      1. Here is a more general criticism of pressure groups in the modern era. “Pressure groups are not accountable, unlike Parliament and governments.
        Many pressure groups may have political influence which is well beyond their significance in society, e.g. because of wealth (industry groups).
        Related to the last factor, some wealthy groups may gain undemocratic influence by funding political parties.
        Some pressure groups may not be internally democratic so their political demands may not represent accurately the views of their members.
        Groups which temporarily capture the public imagination may create a climate for policy making which may not be democratically determined and may not be rational.
        Ultimately pressure group activity may have raised awareness amongst the public and possibly affected public policy at the margins, but “The flaw in the pluralist heaven is that the heavenly chorus sings with a strong upper-class accent”.

      2. I think it’s fair to say they learned the lesson of CND, and a pressure group like that will never be repeated.

      3. lundiel, I’ve read about half of it – there’s nothing I wouldn’t expect from a single-issue organisation – avoiding left wing politics makes sense from their perspective because we see everything through that lens and that’s not what xr is about.
        Two ways to look at accepting donations from the worst companies on the planet – either the recipient is beholden or it’s understood by both parties to be using those companies’ monies against them.
        On the psych thing, that’s everywhere now – what motivates people is crucial to every aspect of politics, markets, sales, sport – basically everything.
        What I’ve read (skimmed) one could assume to be collusion with big business but that’s not the only possibility – the planet wreckers can have an interest in buying a degree of green credibility with their donations while their money finances a movement that wants to put them out of business.
        It’s simplistic to believe that taking money from big business must always make a movement indebted.
        Corruption depends to a large extent on going unseen – if xr is declaring everything I believe it’s possible to allow target industries to donate as long as there’s no quid pro quo.
        Managed decline is a valid concept for brown businesses – in most cases instantly turning off the taps would be catastrophic for us all anyway.
        In sum I’m not saying xr is clean, just that what I read didn’t in my opinion prove it dirty.

    2. Extinction Rebellion isn’t what it seems. You only have to look at who attended DAVOS to see this. I was duped in the beginning, and wondered why we were allowed to see these protests, they used reverse psychology, pretty much what happened with us all screaming for lockdowns in the end, the establishment wanted them but they had to get us believing we needed them, and we’re still screaming for them. Sorry veered off into another path there.

      1. Who was it that attended DAVOS Teresa, and in what way were you duped by XR?

        Anyway, I just happened to end up on their website in the process of doing a search, and the following is their response to John Woodcock’s appointment:

        Extinction Rebellion to UK Special Envoy for Countering Violent Extremism, John Woodcock – ‘Why not give us a call?’

        This all feels a bit deja vu! The Home Secretary has tried labelling us as violent extremists before and it didn’t fool anyone. So as a nonviolent movement that is open to anyone, we’d like to make sure John Woodcock has our number. Will he be calling up one of the thousands of grandparents, parents and kids who are exercising their democratic right to protest? It feels slightly absurd that yet more public money is being put into useless party political projects rather than on the real crises we are facing.

        https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2021/02/08/extinction-rebellion-to-uk-special-envoy-for-countering-violent-extremism-john-woodcock-why-not-give-us-a-call/

      2. Teresa Steele, what was the establishment’s motive in blocking roads and railways?
        Who gained and how??
        How could they possibly have prevented us seeing the protests when everybody was filming them on their phones?

        “The establishment wanted [lockdowns] but they had to get us believing we needed them” – come ON – Johnson pooh-poohing CV, “We’ll take it on the chin” – what was that about?
        What did they gain from shutting down all their businesses?

      3. David McNIven, just follow the money, just look deeper into climate change. I’ve done my work, you must do yours. Tony Blair, Bill Gates and all the very important acronyms that are often bandied about. I have had the misfortune to be caught up in trying to expose corruption within one such acronym, PHSO, along with the CQC, and the DoH, and PACAC, all headed by very influential people, not forgetting the MET. I would never have believed the level of corruption in ALL our organisations, and when I got down to it I uncovered more. I’ve done 11 years now, and not to be believed even when you have enough evidence is beyond imagination. That’s with having thirty others submitting the same evidence against the establishment bodies that prove your case and still you are ignored. Think Hillsborough and the 27 years it took them to be recognised and then quickly forgotten. Do your research. Look up Dr Vandana Shiva for one. Look up all the eminent scientists being de platformed on social media, look at the MSM discrediting or completely ignoring the other side of the argument, and you may find an answer.

      4. Frankly, any argument can be summed up in a few simple sentences using everyday words – one or two prime examples are explained in detail and then links to further supporting evidence can be provided.
        The people you’re extolling begin a thread with a vague assertion and pepper it with links to other vague assertions also peppered with links and so on.
        The intent is to drag Alices down rabbit holes.
        Like Moonies at airports they concentrate on ready-made ‘believers’ – those already deceived by religions and conspiracy theories lack the logical discrimination to understand the con.

        There’s a clue in the glossy professionalism of the website Morningstar chooses to patronise – ask yourself whether it’s been designed by well-meaning amateurs or corporate PR propagandists.

        Then ask yourself whether corporate interests are best served by creating an XR or by discrediting it.

  8. Woodcock, Mann and Austin – the Three Stooges of contemporary turncoat politics.
    How anybody can take these three comedians seriously on the basis of their public political pronouncements, is beyond me.
    And let me us not forget the irony, based on one fascinating historical fact….
    How chuffed could anti-Semitism tsar Mann be with his job-title, bearing in mind how anti-Semitic the Tsarist regime was?
    But then again, in their weaponisation of anti-Semitism against Jeremy Corbyn, with all the lies and distortions, those who did so only demonstrated their own fundamental disregard for a very serious issue.

  9. Glad I am out of Labour Mann woodcock Austin Streeting Phillips Berger hodge Berger all would make a very nasty party indeed

    1. Don’t forget the ones that are still deeply, immovably entrenched, at all levels, within the LP. They shall not be moved except upwards in the party, journalism and finance. I remember the great anti-war marches culminating with Iraq. They didn’t make it on the telly never mind alter the actions of the Red Hand gang. Still I can concentrate on other movements that inspire me. BDS anyone? Who’s got the bottle? I’ve been active in one way or another for forty years and I have learnt to sniff an ops from far away. Sometimes you’ve got to trust your instincts. Remember the scab RCP, Identarians and Euros at the Party, abusers in the Trots and Maoist maniacal cults? Cops in the green movements. I’m just saying be a tightwad with whom you trust. Great posts from Teresa. Very nostalgic. There are many worthy people here and yes there are some obvious snake oil salesmen but I like it and enjoy adding my tuppence, hopefully pissing some people off as well. It has a tough core and some clever posters. Regards ☮️

  10. “…….the vile racist language that thankfully most people left behind in the 1950s”. What an insult to my parent’s generation. This smug comment appears to have slipped out of some Channel 4 programme informing this generation that older generations weren’t as ‘moral’ as they are now.

  11. Reply to Steve Richards- As a member of the older generation I can say that in the past people were not less moral than we are today but they were definitely more ignorant. It wasn’t just vile racist language that people used but women and gays were on the receiving end too. Many parents of newly born disabled children were advised by hospitals to put their baby in an institution and have another one – disabled babies were disposable . Up to 1967 a person could be jailed for a gay sex act in the privacy of their own home. All this created a “hostile environment” for anyone who was different or who did not conform to Society’s norms of behaviour. This was reflected in the language of the time.
    The way people behaved in the recent past is nothing to be proud of and its no insult to say they used vile racist language – its simply a fact. I would go further and say it that vile racist language was not the worst of it – people tolerated the beating of women and children, sexual assaults on women in the workplace, they looked down on unmarried women who had children and shunned or name called the children, divorce created a huge social stigma. in fact in the past people sat in judgement on their neighbours and did not hesitate to use vile language to describe them.
    For most people things are different to day and we show respect to others irrespective of their race, gender, disability, sexuality etc but there remains a rump of ignorant dinosaurs who continue to speak inappropriately about others by using as Skwawkbox says, vile racist and other bigoted language.

    1. Unfortunately sir, you are undoubtedly correct. Taking the knee and buying knick knacks won’t cut it. All the best. Wobbly

Leave a Reply to BackofBeyond Cancel reply

%d bloggers like this: