Analysis Guest article

Jewish councillor writes of her harassment by Starmer’s Labour – and her legal response

Wirral councillor Jo Bird has published an article about her treatment during Keir Starmer’s war on left-wing Jews. It is reproduced below with her permission

The Labour Party sent me yet another bullying letter on 24 August – the fourth disciplinary action against me by head office in two and a half years.

The Labour Party wrote that I may not remain a member because, more than a year ago, I gave a great speech, spoke at a meeting and signed a letter arranged by Labour Against the Witchhunt, an organisation they banned only in July 2021. My legal response was submitted today, Rosh Hashonah.

Its time to tell the story of continuing hostility by the Labour Party towards me. I am a twice-elected Labour councillor who happens to be Jewish. My complaints of harassment and victimisation have been ignored by the Labour Party. Such intimidation in public life is not OK.

A long tradition of Jewish Socialism

I come from a long tradition of Jewish socialists, passionate about equality, justice and fighting all forms of racism. My part of the Jewish community are mostly descended from refugees from antisemitic fascism. Nazis persecuted us for Bolshevism.

We continue the work of Yiddish Revolutionaries, trade unionists, resistance leaders, Jewish Radicals, Kinder Scout trespassers, anti-fascist street fighters in Spain, Manchester and London, scientists, freedom-riders, anti-apartheid activists, nuclear whistle-blowers, peace protestors, anthem writers, subversive comedians, human rights defenders, and young men and women who refuse to serve in the Israeli army.

Many of us live in mixed heritage families. Many struggle to keep contact with relatives in Israel and don’t visit settlements. Most of all, we say ‘Not In Our Name’ does the Jewish state violate Palestinian human rights.

My lived experience

Along with hundreds of thousands of passionate people, I re-joined the Labour Party in 2015 and found warm welcome in our party political home. I was first elected as a local Labour councillor in summer 2018. Here are my reports from my first, second and third years.

Suspended before investigation

In March 2019, the Labour Party suspended me before investigation, for a self-deprecating play on words, despite my public apology. Like Shami Chakrabarti, I had spoken up for disciplinary system worthy of our trade union movement, based on natural justice and due process – or what I called Jew process. It’s a common Jewish pun, made famous by Woody Allen’s 1977 film, Annie Hall and not intended to cause offence.

The Labour MP for Wirral South told local members to be silent. The Party linked my name to allegations of antisemitism in the media. Like Kafka in The Trial, they threaten me with more disciplinary action if I defend myself. Media articles did not mention that I am Jewish. I started to receive hate emails, calling me a Nazi, logged by the Police as hate crime.

My anxiety hit the roof and I modelled my responses to this Witch Hunt on courageous Jackie Walker, suspended Black Jewish comrade. I was reinstated after 9 days of public protest, with no explanation nor apology.

In October 2019, the vice-chair of Labour Friends of Israel and Liverpool Riverside MP, Louise Ellman resigned from the Labour Party. My video was shared by over a thousand people and viewed 47,000 times. Many Riverside members ask me to seek selection to become their MP. But the NEC chose to interview eight other candidates and I was passed over, with no reason given.

Second suspension during NEC election

In early 2020, Jewish Voice for Labour and other left groups backed me to stand for by-election to Labour’s National Executive Committee. The Party suspended me when more Constituency Labour Parties had nominated me than any other candidate. This vexatious action was for anonymous complaints about a popular Just Jews video released five months earlier.

Sixty CLPs continued to nominate me although some other CLP officers denied their members a choice. Fellow candidates petitioned for free and fair elections. Some members invoked Spartacus and referred themselves to the Party for antisemitism. I was reinstated 9 days later by an NEC panel, with no breach of rules, no explanation and no apology. Campaigning for fairness and justice, I came fourth in NEC by-election with 46,150 votes.

Backed by Socialist Councillors, JVL and other left groups, Cllr Matt White and I contested election for two local government seats on the NEC, in summer 2020. 28% of Labour councillors across the country voted for us.

Intimidation before local election

In November 2020, I agreed with what Jeremy Corbyn said about “the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons”. The Labour Party sent me another Notice of Intimidation, I mean Investigation, which was concluded in March 2021. There was no breach of rules, no explanation and no apology.

Antisemitism by new Labour leadership

The new leader of the Labour Party claims his first priority is tackling antisemitism (not alongside other forms of racism too). But he still has not recognised the existence of Jewish Voice for Labour.

In December 2020, while the country was dealing with another deadly combination of covid and Conservative corruption, the unconfirmed acting general secretary of the Labour Party issued some edicts. He overrules agreed Rules and safeguards for democracy and free debate, singles out Jewish members and wrote “anything that may cause members to continue to feel unwelcome and unsafe must take precedence over our rights at this time.”

When a few powerful people point at Jewish members as the reason for mistreatment of many members – this is antisemitism. The leader wraps himself in the union flag of military occupation. I experience this as far-right behaviour at senior levels of the Labour Party.

When some Labour MPs talk about antisemitism in our Party, I think about how its mistreatment of socialist Jews and these anti-Jewish policies of the leadership. But they cry wolf and blame me, my family and comrades.

Standing Against Injustice

We know that injustice comes to all of us and our communities, especially if we stay silent. One of the best ways to communicate with thousands of people is to stand for election. Backed by another great team, I stood for re-election as a local Labour Councillor.

Many ward residents said they were voting for me not Labour. They kindly asked, “What’s it like for you, being Jewish in the Labour Party who treat you so badly?” To which I answer, “It’s a hostile environment created by an oppressive regime – and support from people like you carries us through together.” We won with 61% of the vote, a vote swing of 13%, in May 2021.

Then they came for the Jews and the Socialists

In August 2021, Jewish Voice for Labour published evidence that Jewish JVL members like myself are thirty one times more likely to be investigated for antisemitism by the Labour Party than other Party members.

The Party expelled socialist film maker and national treasure, Ken Loach, last month. Alongside myself, the Party also sent letters to dozens of other members, saying their previously legitimate political activities are now grounds for automatic exclusion unless we can magically prove we do not support newly banned groups.

The Party continues to bring itself into disrepute. Given how the Labour leadership persecutes its internal political opponents, how could they be fit to govern the country?

Political Trauma

Around half a million Labour members like myself, millions of voters at home and supporters abroad are enduring a type of vicious political violence. This Labour Party leadership are destroying good people’s work, character, livelihoods and above all, hope for a better world. No-one is safe as the cold fingers of fascism suffocate parts of political and public life.

Our experience with the Labour Party is traumatising. Welsh Labour AM, Carl Sargeant, took his own life within days of his removal from office by the Labour Party. Precious comrades are struggling with mental health triggered by similar letters from the Labour Party. Its long overdue for this continuing witch-hunt to stop. Enough already!

Everyone reacts differently to this kind of trauma. I’ve built more resilience as we go. My Jewish family didn’t schlep the red flag from Prussia to England for me to stop now.

As the Torah says, ‘Justice! Justice we shall pursue!’

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.


    1. Thanks 4 speaking up Jo Bird
      despite absolutely vicious sustained attacks from politically motivated parasites infesting our UNIVERSALLY known HISTORICAL home of ALL THROUGHPUT the UK, who stand against ALL bigotry🔵

      It’s not rocket science, if our attackers were not insincere + had the tiniest jot of care, their sustained attacks would be against their own nasty nest, their Tory Party🔵

      Parasites can DEFINITELY be dumped🔵

      Every strength to you and all against those who are expelling Jewish people of faith and none, at TWO HUNDRED TIMES the rate of all others. THAT is anti-Semitism with wicked determination from Mandelson, Blair, Evans, Hodge, SIR starmer & rest in nests of pest🔵

      BUT Jo where there’s life, there’s hope. Where there’s hope, we can WORK with disciplined focus to defeat the wicked pestilent regime abusing our party and depriving the UK of TRUE choice.

      1. Ah, so it’s ‘disciplined focus’ that will defeat Starmer and the Blairites, is it. And what precisely do ‘we’ have to focus on signpost to defeat them? Could you elaborate. Thanks

        PS Does anyone else know what signpost is referring to – ie what it is we have to focus on so as to defeat them?

      2. I just did a quick search to see if the MSM – ie any OF – had covered this, but didn’t find anything. No doubt they WILL if and when Jo IS expelled.

        But the sham, fake, fraudulent CAA black propaganda outfit posted a piece about it:

        NB The point I’m really making is that when someone – as signpost often does when a left-wing politician ‘speaks out’ – criticises the leadership, their ‘speaking out’ only gets covered by one or two left-wing blogs (the readers of which know the score anyway), so it’s not as if the ‘speaking out’ has the slightest impact on the general public. In other words, don’t be duped into thinking that the WHOLE country is aware of what Jo said in her legal response, as it’s described.

      3. That should have read: ….when someone praises a left-wing politician for ‘speaking out’ – as signpost often does……

  1. The Labour MP for Wirral South told local members to be silent.

    Ah, yes, the ‘permawhinge’ that is alison mcgovern. Ready to shed tears at the drop of a hat. No tears for the treatment Ms Bird has endured though, oh no siree!

    The same mcgovern, who, I’m informed, sent ZERO party members to canvas for the the prospective (Now incumbent) labour MP (Margaret Greenwood) in the neighbouring constituency (Wirral West), against possibly the most callous of toerag MP’s fester mcvile esther mcvile.

    Solidarity, sister mcgovern…😒

  2. Awful, how accusations of antisemitism became Labour’s right’s weapon of choice in their battle to tarnish and ultimately oust the left. With the Jewish community understandably unsure who or what to believe with the tabloid press amplifying any and all accusations against the left.

    Empirical data never did support the idea the left were more anti-Semitic than the general population or other party members, if anything the opposite was true. Of course, trapped in a lie, the right has had to double-down and continue pursuing this increasing absurd nonsense, to the bitter end.

    1. As usual the Labour right demonstrate their lack of self-awareness and total lack of morality or decency, hence the doubling down.

  3. 12 members of the NEC have written to Evens expressing their concerns about the way the recently agreed proscription of 4 organisations is being implemented.
    Here’s the full text of their letter

    Dear Margaret Beckett and David Evans,
    Members of the National Executive Committee feel deeply uncomfortable about the way in which the proscription of political organisations paper has been implemented subsequent to the decision of the meeting of the 20th July 2021. It is the view of those who have signed this letter that the true intent of the decision, as to how it would be applied to individuals, was concealed and/or misdescribed.
    We have been made aware that members of the Labour Party, said to be supporters of proscribed groups, have had notice of auto-exclusions applied retrospectively, in so far as it is alleged support prior to the decision of the NEC and that is being used as justification for auto-expulsion.
    At no point in the NEC discussion about proscription of political organisations, and nor within the officers papers, was it suggested or stated that members would be subject to suspensions or auto expulsions for past support given to any of the proscribed organisations. Such alleged support of an individual would of course have been given when the organisation in question was implicitly or expressly welcomed into Labour. The mere fact that Labour took no action to either proscribe the grouping or suspend an individual for giving alleged support to such grouping, is reflective of that fact that at that time neither the grouping in question, nor an individual’s support, was considered contrary to Labour values. This retrospective application is unfair, likely contrary to our rules and not something that the NEC should be taken to have agreed to without specific debate.
    If this retrospective application is to be applied consistently then anyone who has ever been a member of another political party (proscribed by Labour) can never become a member of Labour. An MP can never cross the floor to Labour.
    We are further alarmed at the definition of ‘support’ for the organisations now being applied by GLU. It is a definition that is not only all encompassing but one that’s application is subjective. It is a paid member of staff, not the NEC, who now decides what actions amount to ‘support’ of a proscribed organisation and subject to auto-expulsion.
    The examples given to the NEC of what amounted to support were clearly understood by the signatures to this correspondence, intended to be definitive. If the list of what constituted “support” was to be added to then this would be in consultation with the NEC. We accept the papers use the Latin “inter alia”, although the meaning of this Latin term was not explained to the NEC members, it does not mean that the authority for deciding the meaning of “support” would transfer from the NEC to paid staff. This is obviously of the utmost importance as members being accused of “support” are then being subject to auto expulsion and denied the opportunity to make their case to the NEC. This is against natural justice, contrary to the fairness principles that run through our Rule Book but also entirely contrary to the custom and practice of the application of the auto expulsion rule which until now has been precise as to the member’s conduct and not open to such a level of subjective analysis.
    Based on the discussion at the NEC and information contained in the the papers, it is our opinion that the Labour Party administration is current acting outside of the authority granted by the NEC.
    The officials must now recall the NEC to have a clear and transparent debate about whether the retrospective application is either fair or capable of consistent application. The recalled NEC must also clearly define what future actions will constitute “support” and confirm that it is for the NEC to consider any additions to the list of actions considered by the administration to be capable of constituting “support”. If the NEC is not recalled we wish to formally request to have this matter added to the agenda for our next meeting on 17th September.
    If the integrity of the NEC decision making process is to be upheld then the recall must happen without delay and before any further auto expulsions occur.
    Yours sincerely,
    Laura Pidcock, Nadia Jama, Gemma Bolton, Lara McNeill, Andi Fox, Ian Murray, Yasmine Dar, Mish Rahman, Mick Whelan, Jayne Taylor, Andy Kerr & Ellen Morrison

      1. Thank u 4 providing that info SteveH

    1. A great many words to say…………….what? The Labour Party made threats to people & should not have? Anyone responsible? Anyone held to account or threatening behaviour just the norm?

    2. What a pathetic letter. Left members of the NEC should have objected to ANY proscription of those groups whether retrospective or not. Instead, left members should be cpaigning for proscription of the JLM and the LFI, not Socialist groups.

      1. The point, Sherlock, was to demonstrate the existence of substantive evidence of the claim of one rule for the sectarians gerrymandering the procedures (whatever form they take) and another rule for everyone else who are deemed not worthy of having any agency.

        You really need to get down to the chemist for a tube of gorm when you are so lacking in gumption as to not recognise the difference between general and specific details in a legal process context. So you were provided with a generic description of the nature of the complaints but wanted specific details and when these are not provided, with rationale, you conflate general with specific and cry foul in order to construct a basis for point scoring whilst projecting that behaviour on others.

        And, like I said earlier. I’m not your unpaid hard drive for your increasing senior moments. You want to find it get off your bone idle backside and do it yourself. What did your last serf expire of?

      2. Dave Hansell – Yet another round of bluster to avoid answering a simple question that you claim to have answered weeks ago but you expect me to search for some unspecified comment that may not exist.
        As it stands all we know at the moment is that you’ve apparently made a complaint about something or other and that for some reason you are reluctant to disclose in full why it was rejected.
        You’re getting to be a bit of a joke.

    3. The nub of the issue being raised here by these NEC members is the consistent and systematic across the board denial and application of recognised due process principles, protocols and standards.

      It is certainly necessary for these principles to be defended vigorously in the face not only of their total absence from any process within the LP GRU but also from very public positions, some from within the PLP, which explicitly deny the right of someone to defend themselves on the basis that a subjective opinion based allegation is sufficient to determine automatic guilt and subsequent sanction.

      However, in order to have the necessary credibility that position has to be applied consistently. Applying that position, for example, in defence of due process principles and standards in regard to one issue but not another would simply undermine the credibility of such initiatives.

      Unfortunately, there exists at least one name on this letter with whom I am not convinced the necessary level of consistency has been applied in the recent past.

      1. Dave Hansell – We can but hope that when the new ‘approved’ disciplinary processes are put in place they will turn out to be an improvement on the discredited processes put in place by the previous administration.

      2. As previously explained to you whatever procedures are put in place have no efficacy whatsoever when those charged with administering them blatantly and systematically gerrymander them for their own sectarian objectives. Treating the organisation as their own personal fiefdoms.

        There is nothing in the current procedures, for example, to prevent the investigation of a complaint involving a breach of existing rules of discrimination, uncomradely behaviour and potential breaches of ECHR and GDPR legislation.

        Yet, those administering the complaints procedure have just advised me that such a complaint submitted in my name cannot be investigated.

        If a complaint involving a breach of Party Rules by a member cannot be investigated than a breach of Party Rules cannot be investigated and actioned by the Party hierarchy. Yet letters are going out.

        This represents clear evidence of sectarians in the Party picking and choosing which complaints to process and which not to process dependent upon whether it suits them or not. Its called gerrymandering steveH and no matter how good bad or indifferent a set of procedures are they are useless in the face of bad faith actors.

        Something of which you have a well deserved reputation for.

      3. Dave Hansell – “Yet, those administering the complaints procedure have just advised me that such a complaint submitted in my name cannot be investigated.”
        You are understandably peeved that your complaint hasn’t been dealt with but what was the actual reason given for not investigating your complaint.

      4. Corbyn isn’t to blame for any of what Starmer has done with the disciplinary process, and nothing he did or didn’t do as leader justifies anything Starmer has done instead.

        Everyone in the Labour Party and the prohibitive majority(at least 99%) of the overall Left is implacably opposed to AS and always has been.

        But the IHRA guidelines and examples- whose own author has repeatedly stated that he never meant them to be used as a disciplinary or legal document- are far too open to abuse by those who have an agenda that might be served by such abuse.

        Would you support replacing the discredited IHRA guidelines and examples- guidelines and examples which repeatedly make the false equation that essentially ANY criticism of the Israeli government-even from a left-Zionist perspective that supports Israel’s existence while acknowledging that ordinary Palestinians have valid and legitimate grievances regarding their treatment by the Israeli government and especially by the IDF, which for years now has been engaged in a systematic campaign of collective punishment and repression against ALL Palestinians for the acts of the armed few- with the far more reasonable definition offered by the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism:

        “Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish)”.

      5. kenburch – But Corbyn is responsible for all those whose loyalty he betrayed. CW being a prime example. Plus the discredited existing and soon to be replaced disciplinary processes are Corbyn and Fornby’s legacy.

        I have never supported its adoption. I do remember though that Len McCluskey was one of those who persuaded Corbyn to accept the IHRA.

        On several occasions I have made it clear on these pages that I believe that there should be no religious based organisation affiliated to the Labour party and that the party should have a single secular code of conduct.

      6. Thank you for not defending the IHRA and for calling for a single secular code of conduct.

        I think we can safely say that any decision Corbyn made on AS was made under relentless and unbelievably nasty pressure on the- pressure he is STILL being put under, even though he is no longer leader and will never seek the leadership again. You should be calling for Starmer to end the purges and stop treating everyone who had anything to do with Corbyn as the enemy, because the polls prove Labour cannot win if all of those people and everything they stand for us are erased from Labour. The 2010 and 2015 GE results prove that nothing but humiliating defeat- and the possible reduction of Labour to and England-only, possibly London-only party can come of Keir’s approach.

      7. Why assume I’m peeved about what was a wholly predictable dead cert?

        The Party Rules are clear enough in regards complaints relating to breaches of Party Rules on uncomradely behaviour, discrimination ( particularly following the Forstater ruling) and potenal breaches of legal statute.

        Yet, whilst the Knight of the ducking stool and his fellow sectarians running the shop can retrospectively charge members (including many Jewish members for being be wrong sort of Jew) and demand they prove a negative for what they allege is a breach of the Party Rules ordinary members who use those same rules are predictability informed it’s not possible to process those complaints “because what you have complained about does not fall within what we can accept for investigation under our Complaints Policy.”

        One rule for the Tufty Club elite and another for everyone else. Yup. As JVL co-chair Leah Levene observes, why would the electorate trust this bunch of Malice in Blunderland carpetbaggers who are more corrupt in terms of the espoused values on the tin than the Tories?

      8. Dave Hansell – Is there a reason why you are avoiding giving us any meaningful details.

      9. I see we have our obtuse head on today steveH.

        Firstly, the actual details of the complaint were spelled out to you on another thread some weeks ago. I see no good reason to act as your unpaid hard drive by continually reminding you of information already given.

        Secondly, outside of generalities it does not meet good due process protocol to discuss specific details of an ongoing matter.

        I can see why that second point is not something you, along with the sectarians you shill for, have little time for. However, not everyone operates to such low standards.

      10. Dave Hansell – Well thanks for taking the time to respond to my question

        “Firstly, the actual details of the complaint were spelled out to you on another thread some weeks ago. I see no good reason to act as your unpaid hard drive by continually reminding you of information already given.”
        Were they? Perhaps though it would have been a more constructive use of your time if you’d either provided a link to your previous comment or repeated the details instead of indulging in childish attempts to score points.

        “Secondly, outside of generalities it does not meet good due process protocol to discuss specific details of an ongoing matter.”
        I thought the point of your post above was to highlight that there was no due process or ongoing matter.

        “I can see why that second point is not something you, along with the sectarians you shill for, have little time for. However, not everyone operates to such low standards.”
        and yet you’ve clearly stated above that “the actual details of the complaint were spelled out to you on another thread some weeks ago”. You can’t have it both ways.

        What was the point of your original post if it wasn’t to highlight some perceived injustice. As it stands all we know at the moment is that you’ve apparently made a complaint about something or other and that for some reason you are reluctant to disclose in full why it was rejected. I’m guessing you don’t work in PR or advertising.
        Given your inexplicable reluctance to provide any further details I guess that we will all have to draw our own conclusions about the veracity of your complaint and whether its rejection was justified.

      11. The point, Sherlock, was to seek, obtain and present substantive evidence of the observation that the sectarians led by the Knight of the ducking stool and his sycophantic forelock tugging acolyte cheerleaders and entryists in the bureaucracy and hierarchy operate on the basis of one rule for themselves and no rules for everyone else – who are denied any agency because we are clearly unworthy of such.

        A trip to the chemists for a tube of gorm seems well overdue for someone so lacking in gumption as to be unable to make the distinction between a general outline of a case and the specific details in the context of an extant rule based process to the extent of projecting their own consistent bad faith behaviour and position onto others.

        Rather than spending more time pontificating and bellyaching expecting others to Janet and John everything for you it would be more productive to get off your idle backside and do your own search – as previously advised.

      12. Dave Hansell – I would be quite happy to search if I knew what I was searching for.
        To date you’ve written nearly a 100s and 100s of words making excuses and all anyone knows is that you’ve apparently made a complaint about something or other and that for some reason you are reluctant to disclose in full why it was rejected.
        Given your inexplicable reluctance to provide any further details I guess that we will all have to draw our own conclusions about the veracity of your complaint and whether its rejection was justified.

      13. Oops – To date you’ve written nearly a 1,000 words. 100s and 100s of words making excuses

  4. I remember flagging this up a few years ago. It started in Wavertree. I think I said, ‘coming your way soon’. Fascists don’t have to racists, though most are. The core of their belief is dictatorship on behalf of capital. If it looks like a pig…….
    In the meantime, waiting around for the fascist organisations to gear up isn’t advisable. Best get out there on campaigns that enlighten the public, cutting the ground from under the feet of fascist ideology. The LP is finished, although I’m still a member to be nuisance value, it’ll never get into power. A task which Sir Starmer and crew are ensuring, nearer the far right in ideology than anything resembling socialist.

    1. They have become the modern equivalent of the post-WW 1 SDP in Germany, who suppressed the party’s left wing and ultimately made the rise and takeover of the Nazis possible. They are dangerous.

  5. Hoping that Jo Bird will be able to get to the march on Saturday against the Arms Fair due to be held in Liverpool in October.

    Some of the invited speakers on Saturday are:
    Jeremy Corbyn, Lowkey, Andrew Feinstein, Lindsey Germain and Maxine Peake as well as Chantelle Lunt (Black Lives Matter),Haifa Alkhanshali
    (Yemen)Sarah Ashaikh (Syria)and Haneen Awaad(Gaza, Palestine).

    1. What has BLM got to do with this? See me, first see my colour racism.

      1. Steve Richards – Just a guess but maybe they are concerned about arms sales to authoritarian, oppressive and corrupt regimes.

      2. Just a guess SteveH? Concerns about arms sales to authoritarian, oppressive & corrupt regimes should be a matter of concern for us all, not just a select group given a platform. BLM are an American Political Grouping set up by afro-americans to highlight social injustices in America. The Arms Fair in Liverpool has nothing to do with skin colour despite accusations now being made to the contrary by Lowkey & Chantele Lunt. BLM marchers didn’t carry banners drawing attention to the social injustices & genocide being carried out in Yemen & Palestine. Lowkey made a record ‘Free Palestine’, which I bought & play publicly at every opportunity but his personal message is ‘White Supremacy’ & ‘White Privilege’ which is a corrupt agenda. Dr.Martin Luther King had a dream in which he saw black & white children playing together; the dream is being changed.

      3. Steve Richards – I’m struggling to understand the point you are trying to make, are you advocating that BLM should be excluded from the protests and if so on what grounds.

      4. fao SteveH Just a guess but it seems you are easily confused about many things so let me explain in more simpleton terms…………..I am not talking terms of excluding anyone but question why BLM are ‘so special’ in the bourgeois elite pecking order as to continually merit a platform. Arms Fairs are not about skin colour but there are some who believe that the entire history of people with white skin is one of exploitation; supremacy & privilege. Mohamed Ali & Malcolm X to name but 2. A dangerous game, preaching race hate..

      5. Steve Richards – Perhaps you should be asking yourself why are you the only one who is singling out BLM (or anyone else) from the list of speakers.
        We have taken part in a BLM protest and contrary to your assertions our experience was that we found it to be a very inclusive and welcoming event.

      6. fao SteveH I couldn’t care less if people agree with me or not. MSM actively campaign to promote BLM including local newspaper Liverpool Post & Echo (aka Trinity Mirror) which dictates your moral compass. With regard to being the only one; you should know! Nothing wrong with being a lone voice..

      7. Steve Richards – I thought I’d made it clear that my personal experience is at odds with your opinions that appear to be based on nothing else but your self declared prejudices..

      8. Here is the report from the Liverpool Echo about today’s protest
        Chantelle Lunt, founder of Merseyside Black Lives Matter.
        Ms Lunt, 34, energised the protest with her chants through a megaphone as the crowd marched through Liverpool, only momentarily stopping for water when her voice grew hoarse.
        Pink-haired powerhouse Chantelle Lunt, 34, leading the chants as hundreds march through Liverpool in protest against a planned ‘arms fair’ in the city.

  6. As the Scouse band sang;

    If you’ve heard all they got to say
    You looked but turned away
    Just walk away, walk away
    If you’ve said all you got to say
    Now the words just slip away

    Just walk away, walk away, walk away
    That’s what they say, what they say, what they say
    You gotta walk away

    Bye Labour💨

  7. Spot on Ludus. Anyone who doesn’t know the role that the SDP in Germany played in that period should read up on it, from 1923 onwards. They colluded with fascists to murder the socialists. Most of the SDP then ended up in concentration camps for their efforts, alongside the socialists and communists they’d condemned.
    The Nazis rounded up about 2 million Germans opposed to their rule, handed to them by the ruling class, never won electorally. It’s estimated than about half a million of the prisoners were murdered, many by guillotine.
    That doesn’t include the many that perished before the nazi’s took power, like Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxembourg, simply brutally murdered. The perpetrators receiving light sentences, while the SDP were in power.
    I look at some of the rancid individuals now infesting the whole machinery of the LP, racists, homophobes, nationalists, and in Wavertree, clrs who publicly ridicule disabled people on social media; Phil Maxwell, now himself a target of officialdom.
    There’s many similarities and I don’t doubt for a minute that the same creatures would side with fascists here if they ever become a force. I hope they’re reading this, especially officers of Wavertree CLP of whom some fit perfectly into that category. They know who they are.

  8. Bliars PLP and officers nationwide who are arrogant conceits are not going to let the left to run the party. Not ever not never.

  9. In my opinion if Jo Bird has been the subject to a course of conduct which has caused her alarm or distress on at least two [2] occasions [it appears she has] should make a complaint of Harassment to the police.

    2 Offence of harassment.

    (1)A person who pursues a course of conduct in breach of [F1section 1(1) or (1A)] is guilty of an offence.
    7 Interpretation of this group of sections.

    (1)This section applies for the interpretation of sections [F1sections 1 to 5A].

    (2)References to harassing a person include alarming the person or causing the person distress.

    [F2(3)A “course of conduct” must involve—

    (a)in the case of conduct in relation to a single person (see section 1(1)), conduct on at least two occasions in relation to that person, or

    (b)in the case of conduct in relation to two or more persons (see section 1(1A)), conduct on at least one occasion in relation to each of those persons.]

    Jo Bird has an excellent case, which should be pursued, if not other innocent individuals will be persecuted.

    1. Harry Law
      I once approached the police in a case of bailiffs harassing my client, the process includes a warning from the police, if that is ignored then they will prosecute

  10. All power to Jo, who never even mentioned above how 20+ local Wirral Tories and hard right former “Labour” colleagues ganged up on her and walked out of the Wirral Council chamber as one when she spoke about the antisemitic treatment she’d received and about her family’s terrible experiences during and after the war.

    The press never covered it of course, either locally or nationally. It was as though it had never happened. I lodged a standards complaint against three councillors including the Tory leader for their hideous conduct, but it was never investigated properly and got whitewashed. Who knows how many unelected senior officers are undeclared Freemasons and closet Zionists? We just don’t get to discover the answers to these crucial questions.

    Lots of contained links here:

  11. The Torsten Bell tweet asks the question does Temporary Embarrassment have a progressive bone in his body
    We know the answer to does he have a socialist bone

    1. The only bones Starmer has in his body are the bones that ensure inequality continues. That’s the whole point of the trilateral commission.

  12. Doug I think the Police no longer use those notices.
    Police approach to stalking or harassment cases
    In response to a freedom of information request this was decided…
    The use of PINS [Police Information Notices] was regarded as not fair and as far as I am aware the Metrropolitan Police do not use them now
    Q1 – Have the Met-Police decided to follow the advice of the College of Policing / NPCC to stop issuing PINs?
    Yes. This decision was made in December 2019.
    Q2 – If the Met-Police decided to follow the advice of the College of Policing / NPCC: When did the Met-Police stop issuing PINs?
    The MPS has not stopped issuing Police Information Notices (PINs) yet. This will be communicated to staff and will be included within the harassment policy review in early 2020.
    Q3 – If the Met-Police have decided to not follow the advice of the College of Policing / NPCC and decided to continue to issue PINs: What were the reasons why did Met-Police decided against the advice of the College of Policing / NPCC?
    The advice was under consideration. A decision was subsequently made in December 2019 to stop issuing PINs.
    Q4 – If the Met-Police have decided to not follow the advice of the College of Policing / NPCC and decided to continue to issue PINS: How many PINs have the Met-Police issued since the 1st of April 2019?
    Please find below a count of suspect screens where the suspect elimination reason code equals: ‘NG – First Instance Harassment Warning’.
    Police Information Notices (PINS 1 Aril 2019 – 30 November 2019:

    1. Harry Law
      Im not a caseworker now, so that’s interesting
      The notice had a remarkable effect on the bailiff firm, they rang me to discuss sacking the individual concerned, I politely pointed out he could safely rely on custom and practice in any tribunal
      They were all as bad as each other
      Which begs the question I raised previously, how can any Labour run council use private bailiffs

  13. Best of luck to Jo who demonstrates that the Jewish community is not homogenous but Right Wing Labour defers to Right Wing Jewish groups who arrogantly decide if you don’t agree with their perspective then you don’t count!
    And US Academic, Richard Silverstein argues what is under attack “is Jewish diversity.”
    The Right Wing media piled in as some of their tax dodging owners would have had to cough up under Corbyn!
    And Right Wing Labour jumped on the bandwagon because they couldn’t beat Corbyn and his supporters on IDEAS!
    My experience of the Labour Right (after leaving Labour after over 40 years) is (a) they are generally poorly read (b) they are frightened of being radical (c) the political morons actually enjoy fighting the Left and (d) they want the power for themselves.
    As a Left Wing Democratic Socialist I believe WE should be about trying to politicise the masses, to empower diverse working people and to have a MANY of critically thinking citizens and we all decide how society should be run which could be done in every country.
    Top down Right Wing Labour don’t want a politicised masses they want to CONTROL diverse working people and they put out vapid leaflets to try to win just enough votes for for their potential MPs and councillors, their ‘Great Men and Women of History’ (without an original idea in their heads) who nationally and locally take the power for themselves.
    Under the likes of Starmer they won’t challenge the rich and powerful plus just seek crumbs for diverse working people but nice careers for themselves.
    I think we need a Left Wing Democratic Socialist List for the next GE to challenge the Labour Right and independent socialists in each CLP could chose a good local socialist fighter.

  14. On another note …

    Fat-tongued ashworths appearance on ch4 news this evening….

    If you have high blood pressure I suggest you don’t look for it.

    ‘We want to work with the govt. We want to work with the govt. We want to work with the govt. We want to work with the govt’… Ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

    No, honestly – that’s all he was about.


    Although, on second thoughts….😕


      Like voting against vaccine passports. Fat chance. Labour can defeat the Govt on it, but would rather prefer to see a cornerstone of authoritarianism cemented into place. Could come in handy when, in their demented dreams, they win the next election…

    2. If they want to work with the government, they should do the honest thing, cross the floor and join the Tories.

      A zoom meeting tonight on the NHS reforms and the Jonathan Ashworh is down as a speaker.

      I can hardly wait.

  15. Both the EDL and BNP will be rallying in Lpool on Sat. As predicted, coming out from under their rocks as the LP destroyed by the toe-rags. Please show your support for the Arms Fair demo.

  16. In other local politics news Sir Richard Leese has announced that after being in tenure for 25 years he will be stepping down as the leader of Manchester City Council

    1. So what? Why does the retirement of an irrelevant right-wing timeserver whose only contribution to politics was to make Manchester Labour a socialist-free zone even matter? What does it have to do with the need to oppose the useless, offensive and inherently reactionary arms show in Liverpool, a city where no significant number of working-class unionised jobs are ever created by war spending?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: