Breaking: new Labour Files episode sees Forde respond to Labour racism

The Al Jazeera ‘Labour Files’ documentary series exposed afresh the rampant racism and war on democracy of the Labour right, both to sabotage the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn and to purge the left from the party under Keir Starmer.

Now a new episode sees Martin Forde – the barrister Starmer reluctantly commissioned to investigate the report’s allegations and whose findings have been ignored by the Labour right and their media allies ever since – respond to the programme’s evidence and conclusions:

Watch and share widely.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and 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 doing its job.

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


    1. Did you miss this

      Here a short extract
      Labour is the party of equality and anti-racism, and we are committed to tackling Islamophobia in our party and wider society. That is why a Labour government led by Keir Starmer will introduce a landmark Race Equality Act to tackle structural racism across society. Labour has also taken concrete action to root out Islamophobia within our party by introducing a new independent complaints process – potentially one of the most robust processes in the world – and a new code of conduct on Islamophobia developed with organisations that represent Muslim groups. Labour was also proud to adopt the APPG on British Muslims’ definition of Islamophobia in 2019 and has urged the leaders of all Labour groups in local government to do the same.
      Labour simply will not tolerate Islamophobia within our party. To give our members confidence that we will take action against it, we have published a new Islamophobia complaints handbook. This will provide our members with a comprehensive overview of our complaints system and how it works. Muslim members across the country, including our MPs, councillors and Constituency Labour Party officers, have provided input and assistance so we can set out, in clear detail, what Islamophobic behaviour entails, what are the common Islamophobic tropes and how our members can navigate our complaints process. In addition, Labour has already hosted a series of Islamophobia awareness training for party members, led by Afzal Khan MP.

  1. Look who got promoted Mann/Austin/sex offender Woodcock/and fucking dame Eagle by stocking false A/S I think the Torys will probably air the full docu before the next election to win back power

    1. That would be SOME string-pulling! It did occur to me recently that a (perhaps the only) guaranteed way of stopping Starmer in his tracks is widespread public exposure, via a repeat run of the series, trailed by a better advertising campaign. The Tories would be only too happy to fund THAT!

  2. Two things – not – mentioned are, first, the lack of discussion, on The Forde Inquiry Report, within this Labour Party, once The Report had, finally, been published, and, second, the removal of The Forde Inquiry Report – in its entirety – from this Labour Party’s website, without discussion or explanation, as though it had never existed.

    1. One other thing – thank you, Skwawkie, for this valuable public service.

      Much appreciated!

      1. George – Hidden in plain sight? I simply searched Google for “labour party forde report” and the first entry displayed took me to which has a prominent link to the pdf of the Forde Report

      2. Yeah George is right. Thanks Skwawkbox.

        The only thing online is a dodgy official Labour Party summary headed
        “What is the Forde Report?”
        which some people are misleadingly suggesting is full transparent publication.

      3. So, the full Labour Party open and frank discussion, on The Forde Inquiry Report, will be alongside it, as well, then?

      4. George is asking about the promised open and frank discussion being alongside the Forde report on the Labour website steveH.

        Do try and keep up at the back there. This Homer Simpson act isn’t working for you mate.

  3. I tried to look at the full text of the emails to Forde from the BBC and Ware shown in the episode. It’s difficult to see much but highly ironic that both of them complain that they were not contacted about Forde’s comments, when there were no alternative views in the documentary itself and Rica Bird was not asked before transmission about being accused of antisemitism.

  4. This is very interesting.
    In my dealings with legal people through my TU activities I am well aware that they are very careful to ensure that their wording is of the mildest when commenting on matters like the ones Martin Forde refers to in this programme.
    His comments, though presented in gentle phraseology amount to saying, in a legalistic way, that the Panorama programme played fast and loose with the truth and that the Labour Party were not interested in following up on his report.
    Brian61 is correct. Any party that wants to should approach Al Jazeera for permission to show this as one of their election broadcasts. It would be poetic justice if the BBC had to screen this.

    1. @Goldbach

      I saw this and thought of you

      …Zakharova told Kirby, who said it‘ll be hard to retrieve the MQ-9 drone, to get the phone number from The New York Times of the private Ukrainian company that, according to them, blew up the Nord Stream pipelines very, very deep in the Baltic Sea..

      1. That would be a good idea. I wonder if the number is registered to J. Biden.

      2. ……… and here, in my view, is a good compilation from Ray McGovern’s website which neatly sums up why we’re in the global pickle we’re in. Just click on the first video.
        And, should anyone wish to pass comment on the plight of children, I suggest that they watch the latest report by Patrick Lancaster, in which he reports on attacks on a residential area of Donetsk City which resulted in a number of casualties, including two children.

      3. goldbach – FFS give the gaslighting a rest. If your favourite war criminal Putin hadn’t illegally invaded Ukraine in the first place there would be 1,000s who wouldn’t have lost their lives.

      4. steveH FFS give your gaslighting a rest. If your favourite war criminal Western Governments had not been arming and training neo-nazi forces to shell, mine and shoot civilians in the Donbass for eight years in the first place there would be even more thousands who would not have lost their lives.

        There. Fixed it for you.

        You really do run away from inconvenient facts that do not suit your selective pound shop Lord Haw Haw propaganda.

      5. Dave Hansell – I see that you’ve already noted that the goat-lover has conveniently started his “assessment” at a point when around 15,000 civilians in Donetsk City had already been killed by Ukrainian shelling, not forgetting the 47 (or was it 48) burnt to death in the Odessa Trades Union building. Maybe he shares the perspective of the Ukrainian “nationalists” who consider those who speak Russian to be untermenschen.

      6. Dave Hansell (again) – Can you tell me what is meant by “gaslighting”. From the context, it seems to me that it means “adopting an opposing position”, though I suspect it is more than that.

      7. @goldbach

        Gaslighting (name comes from a film concerning the subject matter).

        Gaslighting is the subjective experience of having one’s reality repeatedly questioned by another.

        Seems we’re being gaslighted about that drone, amongst other things.

  5. Ware has a cheek – to me the omission of the information
    that the two Ladies were Jewish is absolutely crucial ..

    For Jewish Ladies to ask another Jewish person if they were from
    Israel is surely not anti-semitic – no matter what part of the conversation
    this occurred in and we now know that a lot of chit-chat went on during
    the recording ..

    (and I believe them when they said they never asked that ..)

    1. I don’t think that the information that the two ladies are Jewish is crucial.
      What is crucial is that the two ladies were clearly telling the truth and that Ware and Westerman were being ………………………….. let’s say themselves.

      1. Sorry I meant that the fact we were NOT told they were Jewish
        is enough by itself to indicate that no anti-semitism was involved –
        for the question “Are you from Israel” is not anti-semitic for a
        Jewish person to another Jewish person.

        Ware cannot deny that and he is wasting his time trying to
        defend himself ..

        However I believe the women of course about them not asking
        that question in the first place ..

      2. “Are you from Israel” is not anti-semitic for a Jewish person to another Jewish person.

        How’s it antisemitic if the same question comes from a “goy” 🤔

  6. Seeing as there is no comment section on the latest thread on this site I have a question:

    How did twitter know that over 40% of Starmer’s following were fake?

    Did they do some sort of poll?

    Asking for someone else whose staked his entire existence on polls which for all he knows could be the same kind of made up figures as those of Starmer’s twitter following.

    1. They are
      Red Wall will double down on voting Tory
      Scotland wants our
      Red Tories are proper fucked

    2. “How did twitter know that over 40% of Starmer’s following were fake?”
      I am far from expert in such matters but my understanding from those who know more than I do is that it is possible to trace some kind of electronic “signature” to determine their origin at what are referred to as “bot factories”. It all seemed a little arcane to me, but I’m assured that it is possible to do this.

      1. My apologies goldbach. I was obviously being a little to deep with that one trying to link it in to the fabled polls and their credibility.

  7. Revealing how Ware seems more bothered about the potential for harm to his reputation rather than addressing the fundamentally dishonest reporting in his programme.

    Either Ware didn’t know or failed to investigate; was lied to, or he was in on it? Which is it? None of those reflect well on him as an investigative journalist. or on his Panorama editor Karen Wightman.

    1. In 2020 The Grauniad reported that
      “The Jewish Chronicle has been sold to a consortium fronted by Theresa May’s former director of communications, saving the historic newspaper following a brief but messy takeover battle.
      The winning bid was led by Sir Robbie Gibb, a former BBC executive who worked in Downing Street throughout the Brexit negotiation process. It is also backed by a group including former charity commission chairman William Shawcross, ex-Labour MP John Woodcock, and journalist John Ware”
      A question is posed above “Either Ware didn’t know or failed to investigate; was lied to, or he was in on it? ”
      I leave you to decide what answer you come up with.

    2. Put it this way Andy, Ware is part owner of the Jewish Chronicle. Which is not renowned for it’s truthful cutting edge journalism is it? It’s been sued more times than the total number of Starmer’s broken pledges.

  8. “Starmer’s account reported to Twitter for almost 600,000 – over 40% – ‘fake followers’”

    Fake is as fake does….

      1. More to the contextual point I wonder why there is no comment about that report from the Caribbean (allegedly). Why the need to reframe the issue away from the context of fiddled statistics to that of the absence of a comments section?

        One might even think there is some crude pathetic attempt to divert attention from the substance of the article towards something far less relevant going on here.

  9. A lot of people will be suing Labour I’d like to see what the financial state of the party is like now

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: