Labour First figure and former Hackney councillor Tom Dewey has been charged over indecent images of children
Former Hackney councillor Tom Dewey, 36, has been charged with offences linked to indecent images images of children – and was allowed by Labour to stand as a candidate in the borough despite the arrest happening a month before the local elections.
Dewey was arrested in April 2022 by the National Crime Agency. He has now been charged with three counts of making indecent images of children, possession of extreme pornographic images and possessing prohibited images of children.
As local left-winger Heather Mendick has pointed out, Dewey was deeply embedded in the Labour right’s structures and is an activist with right-wing pressure group Labour First:
And as Twitter user @jrc1921 noted, Dewey’s arrest took place before the local elections – yet he was still allowed to stand, despite the party regime’s supposed determination – as an excuse for purging left-wing candidates – to remove anyone who might bring disrepute or embarrassment to the party:
The blind eye turned by the right on Dewey’s alleged crimes are anything but the exception. Redbridge council leader Jas Athwal was allowed to become a Labour parliamentary candidate despite the party’s own lawyer saying he should be investigated over allegations of ‘serious’ sexual assault. MP Neil Coyle has been welcomed back into the party by Keir Starmer despite making racist remarks and being found by Parliament to have sexually harassed at least one person.
And the party’s eagerness to get a right-winger into the safe Liverpool seat admirably filled by left-winger Ian Byrne that a local councillor with unanswered allegations of disgraceful anti-disabled ‘concentration camp’ comments was put up to stand against him.
Keir Starmer and his sidekick David Evans covered up a whistleblower’s allegations of ‘sadistic’ and ‘criminal’ abuse and exploitation of domestic violence victims by a front-bench MP’s staffer who was also his lover – and Starmer kept two other MPs in his Shadow Cabinet despite them being investigated for sexual harassment.
These are just a small selection of the Labour right’s horrific record on sexual harassment, sexual assault and racism.
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.
yes but they aren’t socialists. That’s the difference. Why should Sir Starmer care what pecadilloes they might be guilty of? Socialism is the greatest of crimes in his eyes
I agree with you Tony, but in this particular case Labour did the right thing. I checked on the interned and Dewey resigned from the position straight away after been elected forcing a bi-election.
Far more relevant would be to check if Labour expelled him from the Party or allowed him to stay as member. Don’t you think so?
The comparison if Dewey was allowed to stay would be staggering since according to the Labour Party their isn’t room for “antisemites” (Jews socialists) one is one to many. However, the same rule if Dewey has been allowed to stay as member of the Labour Party doesn’t appear to apply for those with paedophile tendancies, to put it midly.
It seems that the evidence against this creature far surpasses that of Brickgate. One law, destroy the left before the next GE.
Sorry but, this is spin as Tom Dewey stood down before the first meeting of the Labour group forcing a by-election.
With a month before the local election Labour couldn’t possibly file a new candidate and as the earliers opportunity forced him to stand down and called a by-election.
Far better would be to investigate if Dewey was expelled from the Labour Party
What part of it is spin Maria? It appears rather straightforward to me. Rather than forfeit the seat in embarrassment (But we’re all too aware they don’t do shame) they allowed a (suspected) nonce case to contest it.
And if you’re to be believed, the nonce ‘stood down’ rather than was expunged.
It’s an open-and-shut case of ‘Power at all costs’. For smarmerism, if that means imposition of nonces, so be it.
Strange, how they’ll let wrong’uns contest seats, but will expel people for liking/retweeting a tweet from someone from a different party.
Stranger still, how they’ll bar incumbent regional mayors from standing under their banner for being competent at their job; their only ‘crime’ being to have spoken to a proscribed former member who’s views on an apartheid regime are at odds with their own.
The sleazier one is, the further they’ll go in that cabal.
Have you forgotten all about the Mike Hill scandal from 2019?
Maria, surely no candidate is preferable to a nonce, proven or not, we all know that the cop only pursue such matters if they are certain of winning.
I’m not going to dig into the politics, but for those who aren’t aware, there is now a push to accept pedophilic behaviour.
Minor attracted persons or MAPs
Just a matter of time before his nonce behaviour is made normal and expected to be accepted…
NVLA – it seems to me that the whole manufactured Trans issue is the beginning of a push to normalise mental illnesses, with paedos next in the queue of “oppressed” minorities. I think it’s a conscious effort to tear society apart by sending it completely mad!
Many LGBQ+ members thinks the same, timfrom. Not that Trans people do not exist as an oppressed minority (they obviously do and are), but that the issue is being manipulated and exploited by powerful people to facilitate the elite’s ‘culture war’ against the Many and its inclusive morality, which is – obviously – the Many’s defence and and its only power against the Few.
““Thus arises an intriguing ‘binary’ relationship between extreme individualistic subjectivism and extreme state authoritarianism. Assertion of non-negotiable pseudo-sacrosanct narcissistic power is common to both. Objective law as irreducible sphere of reality is subverted by arbitrary personalism. Might determines right. Autocracy of self-ID is mirrored by autocracy on high.”
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh
https://davehansell.substack.com/p/joining-the-dots
“This rebranding and relabeling something as “left” or “progressive” makes it possible to enforce and get away with any old reactionary policies and behaviours. A double whammy because too many on the left are are eagerly embracing this process and its reactionary ideology and insisting it is ‘progressive.’
The political left’s abdication — allowing the authoritarian right to re-frame a reactionary right wing approach and philosophy as belonging to the political left with the left doing a great deal of the heavy lifting to promote and impose it — is a gift to the political right as it allows those on the political right to pose as the sane ones.
Indeed, the political right can barely believe their luck. Not only are significant parts of the political left doing all the heavy lifting for this post-modernist/post structuralist Thatcherite/Randian contagion — which the Establishment elite have injected into the left body politic using Establishment institutions and organisations acting as support for the enforcement of the process and its narratives — it is making it possible for the political right to gain significant ground by presenting themselves as coming to the rescue of the wider society as the last bulwark against mob rule.
Indeed, no longer an alphabet but an atlas. Stonewall is winning. The misogynist agenda will be on show everything they wave their damned flag. No surprises there . People have revealed their black hearts in poems, essays and jokes. The number of councillors involved in this perversion is historically noticeable. There is an old Web site which outed them. It wasn’t Pie and mash, I’ll post the name when I remember. Blood curdling stuff.
Heir starmer is a protector of pedafiles he has one advising him who was a regular visitor to Epstine pedo island Peter Mandleson
Unbelievable – regardless of the morality of this pragmatically who’s going to vote for someone labelled as a paedophile (a.k.a. Kiddy fiddler).
He won’t be able to appear on a public platform or canvas without some sort of protest (potentially violent) taking place.
Even if they reverse this decision Labour is going to smeared as the Perverts Party this sort of thing sticks particularly when their opponents can use it for political mudslinging.
Iamcrawford, Dewey resigned as soon as he was elected councillor “for personal reason” forcing a bi-election on the 7th July 2022.
In this case the Local Labour Party did the right thing. Dewey arrest was in April 2022 and the list of candidates were already closed as the local election was the first Thursday of May 2022. Hence, Labour couldn’t take him down and place another Labour candidate in his place.
Has Dewey stand down Labour would have lost the seat for lack of a candidate for the next 4 years. By allowing Dewey to stand and be elected, once he resigned the position, the local Labour Party was able to file another candidate that managed to retain the seat for Labour.
The real questions that Skwawkbox in its eagerness to report this non-news is failing to ask is:
1-whatever Dewey that officially resigned from his position as Cllr for “personal reason” was allowed to remain a member of the Labour Party or was he suspended pending the result of the police case against him?
2- Now that Dewey has been found guilty would the Labour Party expel him?
Or as I suspect the Labour Party has not tolerance for socialist but is willing to tolerate paedophiles?
Sorry, correction Dewey hasn’t been found guilty yet but the police has decided to press charges.
I would like to know if in view of the charges Labour has suspended him.
I just did a search to see if any of this was reported by any of the MSM, and there was absolutely zilch. Needless to say, if it had been a left-winger or an ally of Jeremy Corbyn, it would have been headline news all across the MSM.
When the MSM conspire in the character assassination of Jeremy (and the left-wing membership) on the one hand, and ‘protect’ an unscrupulous lying malevolent and malicious piece of shite like Starmer (and his buddies) on the other, we are well and truely living in a fascist state.
And here is further proof that we ARE:
‘Punishment without trial: Britain’s latest weapon in the war against dissent’
Companies are taking out devastating ‘civil injunctions’ against climate activists – and making them pay the costs
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/29/punishment-without-trial-britain-civil-injunctions-climate-activists
That’s a great George Monbiot article, Allan Howard, thanks. The last paragraph puts the Martin Niemöller quote in my head. “First they came for the…”
Fascism being resurrected by a global elite.
The problem with Monbiot – much like Richard Murphy – is an inability, perhaps even a refusal, to join the dots. To take the advice of EM Forster and ‘only connect’.
http://steelcityscribblings.uk/wp/2022/12/04/jonathan-cook-on-a-myopic-monbiot/
Like the Labour Party Compliance Unit and its selection process he is very selective as to what situations such principles and standards apply to.
As such he is always going to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
I think anybody who for any reason – including as Maria V has mentioned holding on to a Labour seat which would otherwise be lost – supports a paedophile or other totally immoral person as a Labour candidate has brought the party into disrepute and should be suspended pending investigation.
Tony Blair said he’d rather lose an election than win it on a Socialist platform. Well I say that most right thinking people people would rather lose an election than elect a paedophile, racist, sadist or criminal.
Starmers Labour really is a cess pit of depravity when it backs scum over decent people solely because the scum are not socialists.
Smartboy, Dewey didn’t hold onto the seat. He resigned a week after he was elected triggering a bi-election on the 7th July 2022.
I agree with you that Dewey should have been suspended from Party membership after his resignation. The question to ask is why he wasn’t suspended?
To be honest with you if Dewey has been candidate with Corbyn as leader the same would have happened. Probably, he wouldn’t have been asked to resign straight away to enginner a scandal against Corbyn.
But if it had happened when Jeremy was leader, it would undoubtedly have been all over the MSM that Tom Dewy had been charged with offences linked to indecent images of children and, as such, most unlikely that Jeremy wouldn’t have heard that it was, and he – Jeremy – would have then made absolutely certain that Dewy was suspended immediately and couldn’t stand as a candidate.
Allan, I am quite convinced that the MSM wouldn’t had reported because the right within the Party would have kept quiet to protect Dewey and would have allowed to go for a few month at least. Corbyn wouldn’t have been informed.
During the General Election in 2019, I visited London for a few days and canvassed for Emma Dent-Coad. On the doorstep I keep hearing about the Labour candidate for Chelsea & Fulham, as the reason some people weren’t prepared to vote Labour. I am 99.99% sure that Corbyn didn’t know anything about it.
How Labour allowed this person to be the candidate? Despite the protestation of the majority of the membership and a left wing candidate that apparently raised complaints with the Regional Director as well for the manner in which the selection was conducted.
I was told this candidate wasn’t selected by the branches but, was nominated by the Co-Op Party and on that basis made it to the shortlist, despite the rep from Unite in the interviewing panel rising objections as to his suitability.
The Labour candidate for Chelsea & Fulham in GC 2019 had a chequered past well reported by the MSM at national level in previous year (he served a jail sentance) yet nothing was done to redress the matter.
London Region’s EC was in the hands of the left and the Regional Director was at the time a Corbynista.
Ironically, had Region taked a stand the candidate that would had stand for Labour in Chelsea & Fulham would have been the candidate supported by Unite.
My educated guess is that Region regarded Chelsea & Fulham as unwinable and with too much on their plate decided not to pick a fight with the right wing and allow the selected candidate to stand without batting an eyelid.
However, in the process it made more difficult to campaign in neighbouring Kensington as both the Tories and LibDems were bringing the matter on the doorstep.
Reply to Maria V at 8.15pm on 1/7
Yes Maria I know what happened. But I still think Starmers Labour was wrong under ANY circumstances to support a paedophile
Bear in mnd that that I have a dozen or more windows open with probably a hundred tabs between them and that I always restore my previous session.
So I was just checking what was on some of my tabs and, as such, came across something I’d completely forgotten about – ie that around three weeks ago I was gonna start a petition (on Change.org) calling for Change.org to remove a petition started by the CAA because it was based on lies and falsehoods, but I hadn’t finished saying everything I wanted to say, and was gonna finish it the next day, and then forgot about it. Anyway, I’m not gonna bother now, and they’ve only managed to get 4,000 or so signers in over a month anyhow, but here’s a link to the page and what they said, and then what I was gonna say in my petition:
https://www.change.org/p/venues-must-stop-hosting-roger-waters?recruited_by_id=86d52280-1db1-11e5-84c4-87bbf1716bb0
__________________________
On May 28 the Campaign Against Antisemitism started a petition on Change.org entitled ‘Venues must stop hosting Roger Waters’, and the reasons they state for doing so are flat-out lies and disinformation.
Their petition starts by saying that ‘Roger Waters, the former Pink Floyd musician, has a long history of baiting Jews, which he has now taken to the next level’, which is in effect TWO lies. Roger has never-ever baited Jews, which is the first lie, and if that is a falsehood, which it is, then he can hardly take it to the next level.
The CAA then go on to say the following, which are yet more falsehoods:
In the last week [bear in mind the petition was started on 28 May], Berlin police have confirmed an investigation after wide disgust at the costume worn by Mr Waters at a 17th May concert, where he compared Anne Frank, a Jewish girl who was murdered during the Holocaust, to a journalist killed in crossfire between terrorists and Israeli security forces last year in the Palestinian Authority.
Needless to say Berlin police are wasting their time, and they know it, and nothing whatsoever will come of their so-called investigation. As for the ‘wide disgust’ at the costume worn by Roger at the May 17th concert, the disgust is of course totally false and contrived, and the CAA and other propaganda groups disseminating such a malevolent smear know that this sequence in the concert – as portrayed by Bob Geldof in the 1982 movie The Wall – is a fantasy sequence, and the exact polar opposite of what the CAA and other propagandists claim. And there was no ‘comparison’ between Anne Frank and the Al Jazeera journalist, and a number of victims of wars and conflicts were depicted on a screen. And the other falsehood of course is that Shireen Abu Akleh – the Al Jazeera reporter murdered by an Israeli sharpshooter – was NOT killed during crossfire between Palestinian gunmen and Israeli security forces. So that’s another three or four falsehoods on top of the initial two.
The CAA then go on to mention the concert (in 2013) in which the Star of David was depicted on the inflatable pig – that both Floyd and Roger have used at numerous concerts over the years – along with an array of other religious and corporate symbols. And although the CAA don’t make the claim themselves (but don’t actually mention when the concert happened), the lie is being disseminated that the Star of David symbol on the inflatable pig happened at a recent concert in Germany, and is of course a massive lie and deception (to mislead potentially tens of millions of people), as with the other lies and falsehoods.
Allan Howard, Why be surprised at the protection of Paedos connected with the Labour Party ? Starmer ‘failed’ to prosecute Savile, Smith and other Establishment abusers. They even destroyed case files to cover up their tracks……
I’m never surprised at new revelations from the dirty Labour Party.
I think you must be reponding to the wrong person baz!
Where’s the resident nonce excuser/enabler to defend
/excuse this latest example of smarmerite contempt for common decency?
Vote smarmer – authorise and empower (child) sex offenders.
No two ways about it.
Perhaps Dewy skipped the bit in his declaration to Labour that all prospective cadidates must complete where it is asked if the applicant is aware of any circumtances where their previous personal conduct might bring the Party in to direpute of cause it embarrassment.. Or may he did and Labour just don’t give a toss and think that he’s a fine candidate who is deserving of its full endorsement.
More likely that Starmer’s hard-right apparatchiks just remembered their own historical role in keeping Establishment paedophilia hidden, and arrogantly thought it’d never be uncovered?
To think smarmer had the fucking chutzpah to publish that advert about sunak allegedly allowing nonces to walk the streets…
God, but I detest that slimy, arrogant rat’s bastard with every fibre of my being. See if I ever saw him in the street I’d make Audrey White’s rebuke of him look like a like a glowing appraisal.
He’d never be pictured kissing babies. Parents would rightfully keep their kids at home when he was in town.
Every feature of this matter – from the fourteen months it has taken from arrest to issuing a charge to the partisan application of selection criteria to suit political and ideological convenience – points to a total breakdown of due process standards and principles at every level across every institution and organisation.
Examples of such are piling up by the day and, regardless of what my subjective opinion might be of this individual, due process has to take its course because, to quote Stuart Campbell from Wings Over Scotland, [objective] “evidence and facts are the keystone of civilisation and the alternative is a regression to witch trials and lynchings and people being hanged for heresy.”
Whilst that might not go down well in certain circles consistency in the application of due process regardless of who is involved its all we have to prevent the kind of arbitrary application of power seen in examples such as the misuse of the selection processes – as well as the suspension and expulsion of LP members, the smearing of Corbyn or the persecution of Assange – among other examples available.
Here’s a typical example of the problem of the same kind of double standards which forms the basis of the smearing of anyone and everyone who does not toe the line of The Official Narrative – from Corbyn and non-Zionist Jews as rabid anti-Semites to Assange to LP activists and members and beyond.
“My advice to Labour Party members is that it is never OK to respond to allegations of racism by being defensive.
The only acceptable response to any accusation of racist prejudice is self-scrutiny, self-criticism and self-improvement.”
Rebecca Long-Bailey MP: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/i-will-sign-up-to-all-of-boards-asks-in-antisemitism-fight/
And that’s from someone whose sold as being of the “left”. An allegation is now equal to an automatic guilty verdict along with the associated sentence which is always some kind of what was once known as outlawing but today is known as cancelling.
Its the same kind of example of an approach which saw Ester Giles deplatformed as a speaker for defending the free speech rights of a ‘gender critical’ comrade at a free speech event a few years back organised by Jewish members of the Labour Party who had been accused of anti-Semitism and expelled/de-platformed from the Labour Party.
You could not make that situation up. Yet it happened and the fact it happened has wider consequences.
The point being emphasised is that its not reasonable to want to have it both ways. Due process standards and principles have to be applied for everyone because it might well be you in the firing line next in this Kafkaesque process.
Back in 2015 there was a huge wailing and gnashing of teeth in ‘left’ circles over an organisation titled ‘Propornot’ which had complied a public list of ‘left’ media sources which, along with other similar organisations with the same objective, they were seeking to outlaw.
Then all of a sudden the hue and cry stopped and went into reverse gear simply because the sources being targeted and cancelled were the likes of Alex Jones, Briebert, and anything Trump.
In the context of what has occurred since – which is not limited to the kind of examples featured on this site daily; from the expulsion of the ‘left’ in the LP to the anti-protest and anti-strike legislation – that went well didn’t it. In the present climate and context any deviation from The Official Narrative (TON) has consequences regardless of who you are or where you sit on the political spectrum.
A process used by those who cares less about what is being done, and more about who is doing it to whom. Those designated as virtuous can do no wrong, and those designated as villains can do no right. At every level. In every context.
Which brings us to the latest example. Apparently Nigel Farage has had his bank account terminated and cannot get any bank in the UK to give him banking facilities. Whilst I’m unlikely to be alone in having no time for people like Farage that is neither the issue or the point. It was only a couple of years back that the Canadian Government were doing exactly the same thing – closing down bank accounts – of ordinary citizens who had donated even small sums of money to the truckers protests. Not to mention confiscating trucks which were the livelihood of independent self-employed workers.*
If you cannot have a bank account – personal and/or business – you cannot function. No one does wages or pension payments in cash any more. Its difficult, if not impossible, to pay utility and other bills without a bank account. How do you receive payment from other sources who you have supplied goods and services to or pay creditors in the supply chain of any business, small as well as large? Effectively, you are outlawed from earning a living and paying your way.
And if it can happen to someone like Farage for whatever reason – payback for his role in Brexit or Sir Chris Bryant’s unproven allegation (using Parliamentary Privilege), which now apparently equates to proven guilt under the doctrine outlined by RLB above, of Farage receiving half a million pounds from the Russian Federation? – what’s to stop the same thing happening to you or anyone who does anything to challenge The Official Narrative (TON) in any way shape or form?
Whether its taking part in a protest, posting unofficial and inconvenient facts on social media, or expressing anything subjectively designated as, lets go with, “Officially Unacceptable Utterances”.
The UniParty is watching you.
*Its worth bearing in mind that there was a self-referencing section of the so called “left” in Canada – who have their counterparts elsewhere, including the UK – which aligned itself with the neo-liberal elite in Canada by denouncing the protesters as bigots.
Protesters which included a range of what is usually referred to as ethnic minorities – from Sikhs to First Nation Peoples and everyone in-between. Demonstrating not only the existence of a hierarchy of racism but also a hierarchy of ‘oppression’ which is destroying class based political action and discourse.
That alignment at the hip of the neo-liberal, neo-conservative and neo-feudal elites and their Oligarchy with the self-identity “progressives” who view and treat everyone not one of them as a deplorable to be outlawed/cancelled tells you everything you need to know about what is really going on here.
Addendum:
So this is now where we are with dissent from The Official Narrative:
https://wingsoverscotland.com/ruined-in-a-day/
Because the examples of people not towing the Official line losing their banking facilities is clearly not limited to Nigel Farage, Canadian truckers, or those donating to them.
In addition to the publisher of the Wings Over Scotland blog – Stuart Campbell – having his bank account withdrawn by First Direct (a division of HSBC) along with his crowdfunder platform on the basis of an allegation not tested in any court under due process principles prior to passing the automatic outlaw/cancelling sentence we have:
– An Anglican vicar having his bank account closed by the Yorkshire Building Society – Reported in The Times Saturday July 1st 2023;
– Barclay’s Bank having to pay compensation to a religious ministry for closing its bank account over the issue of “conversion therapy”. Reported in The Times, June 28th 2023;
– Not to mention similar cases in which; Paypal shut down the accounts of the Free Speech Union for defending ‘gender critical’ academics; Allison Bailey having her crowdfunder shut down by the inaptly named “crowdjustice”; and events shut down by Eventbrite.
And these are only those which make the headlines. Raising the question as to how many unreported similar instances are likely to be taking place.
This is no different in terms of process to that experienced by LP members suspended and expelled and elected representatives prevented from standing via arbitrary fiat. Except in these cases the consequences for anyone classified as a dissenter from The Official Narrative and not toeing the line are far more serious than loss of Party Membership.
The banks are clearly taking a leaf out of the Labour Party practice of trawling social media for any deviation from The Official Narrative.
Perhaps we ought to refer to such practices as “Starmer’s Law”?
Dave – Here’s the actual reason that Nigel Farage lost his prestigious bank account with Coutts.
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/revealed-the-real-reason-farages-bank-account-was-closed-352051/
“the prestigious bank Coutts has told the BBC that Farage’s account was closed because he fell below the financial threshold required to hold one.
He was offered a normal account at Natwest, which owns Coutts, but seemingly refused to take it.
Coutts requires customers to borrow or invest £1 million with the bank or hold £3million in savings, hence why the decision was entirely commercial and not in any way political. “
see update below at 1:45pm
https://skwawkbox.org/2023/07/01/labour-allows-now-charged-right-winger-to-stand-despite-child-porn-arrest/#comment-245887
Missing the point again steveH. Given the scale of recorded lies, propaganda, and incompetence from every organisation and institution one encounters most sensible people will take that with a pinch of salt regardless of how one feels about Farage.
Meanwhile, we wait with bated breath for the bullshit reason you will no doubt be posting soon along the lines of nothing to see here as to why Stuart Campbell, the Rev Richard Forthergill, The Freespeech Union, numerous Canadian Citizens, Alison Bailey and a whole host of other cases had their bank/Paypal accounts withdrawn, crowdfunder’s stopped, and events cancelled by Eventbrite.
Couts claims Farage was offered an alternative Natwest account. Farage claims he was denied service from at least seven other banks. (A situation akin to Wednesday playing Leeds – you want both of them to lose).
Regardless of who is telling the truth in the Farage/Couts case or whether both of them are LTR’s (Lying Toe Rags) it does not detract from the point of a plethora of other cases which are, as with most everything else only those which make the headlines and are therefore on the balance of probabilities likely to be the tip of a larger iceberg.
Dave – “Missing the point again steveH.”
Have I really, where did I do that, I wasn’t aware that I had made one?
All I’ve done is provide a link.
Your contextual counterpoint steveH is in this statement:
“Dave – Here’s the actual reason that Nigel Farage lost his prestigious bank account with Coutts.
No if’s, no buts. A definite statement claimed as an incontestable fact (“actual reason” – the words are the words) which is clearly made to imply that the general point made about banks closing accounts based on customer adherence to an Official Narrative is contestable based on the self-interested claims by the one specific bank in one specific example.
However, if you want more here’s yet another recent example which has just emerged from this particular swamp ….
https://archive.is/l8B1b
in which the Royal Bank of Scotland has closed down the bank account of Scotland’s Equalities Commissioner:
” Professor Lesley Sawers, the 64-year-old Equalities and Human Rights Commissioner for Scotland, has been with RBS for 32 years but two weeks ago, she and her husband Allan McKechnie were told it would be shut next month.
The account contained thousands of pounds, but the RBS said it would be ceasing its “banking relationship” with the couple and they would have to make other arrangements outside the NatWest group.
McKechnie, a private pilot from South Ayrshire, said that they had spoken to another bank about an account only to be told that Sawers has a “mark against her name”….
…Banks are facing a Treasury inquiry into claims that they are closing customers’ accounts because they do not like their views on politics, Brexit and gender.
Almost 10,000 people have joined a Facebook group called “NatWest closed down my account”.”
It would seem reasonable to anticipate, you being a Starmer groupie, that you will forthwith be abstaining on this matter.
Dave – It may come as a shock to you and your ego but you taking it upon yourself to presume to know what someone really means or is implying doesn’t make it so. You can dress it up all you like but it’s just yet more stuff that you’ve made up.🥱
Addendum (because this site does not permit more than one URL in a single post);
Here’s some relevant legal observations on this emerging phenomena of cancel culture:
The words are the words – as we used to say at Union Conferences.
If you are to dumb to construct an argument that does not allow any wriggle room that’s your problem son. Deal with it.
Better a nonce than a Left Winger, eh Starmy baby?
update….. Farage has just (sort of) claimed that this is all lies on World at One BBC R4.