Analysis Breaking

Labour lies about EHRC to suspend Kent councillor for watching Corbyn film

Party letter says watching film ‘breaks EHRC’ – but EHRC report said the opposite

Labour has lied outright about the EHRC report on antisemitism in the party, in order to withdraw the party whip from Tunbridge Wells Councillor Raymond Moon for attending and supporting a showing of the documentary ‘Oh Jeremy Corbyn/The Big Lie’, which exposes the Labour right’s abuse, racism, misconduct, lies and weaponising of antisemitism smears to undermine and ultimately bring down Jeremy Corbyn and to attack the left.

Starmer’s regime has done everything it can – with the shameful collusion of the Unite union and of much of the so-called ‘mainstream’ media – to bury the truth and prevent the public learning what the right did to sabotage the prospect of the Corbyn government the country so desperately needed. The Forde Report that Starmer himself – reluctantly – commissioned reached the same conclusions as at least two forensic documentaries and has also been stubbornly ignored by the same people.

Labour had already told councillors in Wales, in an act of suppression of free speech and pure invention that ought to be shocking but isn’t, that watching the film broke the party’s rules. But the letter to Cllr Moon claimed that it ‘breaches the EHRC’.

This is an outright lie.

The EHRC report – massively flawed and politically biased as it is, yet still unable to say either Corbyn or the party he ran was antisemitic – is explicit that the freedom to discuss and challenge the right’s risible claims about the level of antisemitism in the party is protected in UK human rights law:

A film examining and even challenging Starmer’s farcical but stubborn narrative emphatically and explicitly does not ‘breach the EHRC’. And the same EHRC report was also explicit that, contrary to the claims of the Starmer regime and his union co-culprits, the hurt feelings or offence of the section of British Jews who support Israeli apartheid is no bar to the freedom to discuss either:

If speech cannot offend, it is not free – but UK human rights law does not allow offence or hurt feelings to inhibit others’ freedom to speak,

In short, Labour lied in order to suspend Cllr Moon, out of its desperation to keep the truth from view. Given the reflexive dishonesty and authoritarianism of its factional leader, this should surprise no one but is no less appalling for that.

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. Does this must also mean that anyone owning a copy of the White Stripes’ song ‘Seven Nation Army’ or sings ‘Oh Jeremy Corbyn’ is anti-Semitic? I live on Merseyside, that hotbed of anti-Semitism, which is where the ‘Oh Jeremy Corbyn’ chant originated and I play the song at every event I can………..very sinister.

      1. I do find myself wondering what would constitute a pro-semite? For a Palestinian homeland or a supporter of Greater Israel? An Arab friend or hater?

      2. Steve Richards – “Does this must also mean that anyone owning a copy of the White Stripes’ song ‘Seven Nation Army’ or sings ‘Oh Jeremy Corbyn’ is anti-Semitic?”

        Only if you are indulging in hyperbole
        Could you detail what it is that has actually happened with regards to the above story that would lead you to form this conclusion?

      3. Herr Flick
        What it means as our Resident Nazi and defender of the Fuhrer, you are on the side of the Vexatious and not the victims
        On another note, it is not possible to offend those who support the Apartheid Jewish State, by definition they are all Racists

      4. Doug – Wow!😲…..and you managed to glean all that from me posting a link (without comment) to the only other news report about this, incidentally a report that local people are far more likely to read than anything printed on these pages.

  1. Very interesting. The report from the local paper tells us that some members of the local paper say that the film spreads conspiracy theories and denies anti- Semitism.
    Who are these people?
    Are they credible witnesses?
    Unfortunately it doesn’t give us chapter and verse on such accusations, and so we are none the wiser unless they can provide clear evidence to back up such claims.
    I can, on that basis say here, that there are reports that Steve H plays loud music at 3 in the morning, and farts in the bath.
    Both are reprehensible actions.
    How could he convince us that the contrary applies?

    1. Ludus57 – I posted the link because I thought it added a little more depth to the above article. If you have any issues with it then either take it up with the journalist who wrote it or make your views known in their comments section.
      If I had intended to either condone or condemn this local newspaper report then I would have made that clear

      1. A few questions you’d do well to give direct and concise answers to, wee nonce protector…

        1. In your capacity as a fully paid-up member of the smarmerite cult, is it your belief – in any way, shape or form – that the councillor was in the wrong in watching the film?

        2. Was the cult correct to suspend him? (until/unless he recants and swears future unwavering fealty to the ultrazionist faction; expulsion and character assassination/ outright defamation being the result of his potential non-compliance)?

        3. Exactly which rule has been broken – and who passed this rule, with who’s consent?

        4. If any (or part) of the answers to 1 and/or 2 are in the affirmative, just how are you intend to explain and justify their (current and further potential) action(s)?

        I’m sure I’m not the only needing your enlightenment on this particular matter.

      2. Toffee – Why❓
        Follow the link above and read what Cllr Moon’s local newspaper reported and work it out for yourself, all the information you need is there.

      3. If I had intended to either condone or condemn this local newspaper report then I would have made that clear

        And what’s the label you (incorrectly, as usual) keep giving to Corbyn’s alleged dithering over Brexit?

        Something to do with “bloody useless prevarication “? 🤔🤔🤔

        Hope your wearing your kevlar-reinforced pokemon y-fronts, to protect your ‘arris from those splinters on that fence…

        So in that case a further question. Answer directly and concisely.

        Do YOU believe the film spreads antisemitism? We all know your views that the allegations within it are fabrications

        I’ll take the liberty of reminding you that your answer WILL be used in evidence…

      4. Toffee – I think the phrase you are looking for is
        ‘month after bloody month of constructive ambiguity’

      5. This is a bullshit response and you know it steveH.

        The article you link to adds no depth whatsoever to the Skwawkbox report by the very simple fact that it relies totally on unsubstantiated allegations and claims which are wholly subjective in nature and have not been tested in any form of due process with evidence to back them up.

        Once again, all the LP and you are offering are evidence free smears as the only sole basis to enact a decision of punishment. This is no different to the way accusations against people of being a witch were processed in the Middle Ages. Objective evidence, facts and proper standards and application of due process principles are the keystone of civilisation. The alternative on offer by the Starmer Junta – which you are acting as a shill for – is a regression to witch trials and lynchings and people being hanged for heresy.

        Legitimate questions need to be posed as to what this sorry bunch of parasitic Davos/WEF place-men would make illegal should the Loyal (to whom and what?) second eleven get a nominal turn on the Government benches? As well as how they would process allegations which are now equated to automatic guilt with no need to test those allegations with empirical evidence.

        In such a scenario you would no doubt be defending similar attempts by a Starmer led Government to punish citizens for watching or saying anything outside of The Official Narrative in the same way you are cheer leading for evidence free punishment with no evidence based due process applied in the case of LP members and representatives.

        This case provides yet a further example in a long, long line of cases that straying from The Official Narrative will get you cancelled with no proper due process. A situation which is rife not just in the LP but across the West. Such practices in the LP offer no alternative whatsoever and arguing to impose them on others as a viable alternative from the safety of being thousands of miles away (allegedly) would still end badly and a visit to the local A&E for anyone trying it on most High Street across the Country.

        You have proven once again, as you have on multiple occasions, that you have nothing to say of any meaningful substance. The only effective contribution you can make to anything in your remaining time on this rock is silence.

      6. Dave – ……and yet you still felt compelled to gift us 400+ words of empty rhetoric in response to me posting (shock horror) a link to a local newspaper article about a sitting Labour Cllr who had the party whip suspended because disobeyed his party whip.😴💤

      7. But, but, but Dave….A big boy scrawled it and then ran away….Don’t shoot the messenger!!

        (Preferably hang him, instead)

      8. Toffee he didn’t post the link because he “thought it added a little more depth to the above article.”
        He did it to wind people up – a genuine misanthrope.

      9. @goldbach, I very seldom click on the links the beaut provides. I haven’t done so on the latest offering.

        “for context” indeed. 😒

      10. Toffee – I’d long suspected that it was the case so thanks for admitting that you don’t have a f’ing clue what you are ranting about.

      11. Fantastic reading Dave Hansell (1.29pm) – enjoyed your contribution btl – what, no Starmer example?

      12. Once again, steveH, you deliberately misinterpret to suit your delusion. Portraying a point in defence of due process standards and principles against evidence free smears as “empty rhetoric.”

        So I’ll ask again. Have you any empirical evidence to substantiate the allegations made in the article you posted a link to? Have you any evidence that the unnamed people quoted in this article actually exist and that the local paper is not making them up?

        The facts are that such evidence does not exist – otherwise you would be pointing it out rather than knowingly and deliberately trying to present the genuine empty rhetoric contained in this report as something of substance via this pathetic and misleading projection.

        The one useful aspect of your contribution is that you have publicly made quite clear to everyone that you have no problem with the absence of due process principles and standards in either the LP or any any other sphere of life. That you are very comfortable with allegations with no evidence to support them being used as sufficient for an automatic guilty verdict and subsequent punishment for anyone who disagrees with you.

        That is a process which works both ways.

      13. “qwertboi – How gullible are you?”

        Still self-identifying as a kettle I see steveH.

        Coming from someone who openly rejects the very principle of facts and evidence in favour of the principle outlined here….

        ‘If my brain believes it is so then it is so’

        ……the rest of us grown up’s will stick with the Reality Based Community thanks very much.

        You stick to standing in the corner gibbering to yourself and playing with your abacus.

      14. You stick to standing in the corner gibbering to yourself and playing with your abacus.

        Well, I’ve never heard it called that before 😳

      15. Me, indulging in hype? How can you say such a thing? No! I’m fighting conflation, that ‘nasty little trick’ continually used by pro-Zionist MSM to marginalise Socialism and especially Jeremy Corbyn, using accusations of guilt via tenuous association. Taking reasons why so many honest and virtuous Labour Party members have been expelled to its logical conclusion i.e. that accusations of anti-Semitism are part of MSM construction aka ‘a Moral Panic’. Accusations of anti-Semitism alone are proof of guilt and anonymous accusations from one limited source was regarded as sufiicient proof by the corrupt EHRC.
        Stop peddling naivette, you know there is no representation and no debate allowed in MSM and guilt by conflation a useful stick to beat Socialism. A simple empirical truth is that Israel is, by its own legal constitution (it does have a legal framework if not a written constitution) a racist; fascist endeavour. Its government has ensured that is accountable to no authority and the recent Nation State Laws ensure there can be only one group of elites in the state of Israel, as voting rights and even basic human rights being denied to anyone not of ‘the faith’, the Israeli equivalent of the McCarthyite HUAC. Even you could imagine if such laws were passed in Britain, with only white protestants allowed to vote, what the consequences might be.

  2. Wales and Tunbridge Wells show that right-wing Labour is trying to curtail members’ free-speech. Although offensively stalinist, this is not the major abuse here. To control members’ free speech, freedom of thought has to be denied. This is the major wrongdoing here.

    It shows the Labour right to be ferociously anti-freedom; to have no respect for fundamental liberty, permissiveness, tolerance, democracy and, at a basic level, free will.

    It also shows that in Government, the Labour Right would be an enemy of functional Liberty, the sort of people our forebears fought to defeat 1939 – ’45 and who, today, are unleashing a New World Order designed and dedicated to the furtherance of ‘the Few’, their trans global corporations and control.

    No wonder many on the left call Starmer and his clique ‘fascistic’. That transforming ‘new party’ is needed more everyday

    1. This comment from a recent thread on Jewish Voice for Labour puts it perfectly:

      “The idea that voting for Starmer clones in a general election is to vote for a lesser evil is utterly false. A Starmer election victory with a large majority would be the shortest route to true despotism: worse even than a slim Tory majority, and far worse than a hung parliament. The reason for this is that if a Starmer regime did not quickly itself install an authoritarian regime worse than the present one, the unpopularity of its austerity policies combined with its false branding as ‘socialist’ by the populist right would very soon cause it to be replaced by a government dominated by the neofascist right, seeking to divert discontent into the purest forms of hatred of minorities. Politicians who play with fire risk being consumed by fire”.

  3. Qwertboi, you put that wonderfully. The parallels to then and now are clear to see. People just need to realise the danger sooner rather than later.

  4. Yes, I agreed with that comment when I originally saw it.

    Worth bearing in mind that Labour’s small majority after the 1964 may well have contributed to Harold Wilson’s decision not to participate in President Johnson’s invasion of Vietnam. A vocal minority of Labour MPs were very hostile to the idea and quite rightly so.

  5. Rumour that the US and Russia have started confidential talks.
    If this is correct – GOOD, and about time.

      1. It’s in a headline on a channel I visit. Unfortunately, since I’m enjoying the hospitality of the NHS again, the broadband width is insufficient to play the video. The report will say where it came from, but I won’t be able to find out until/if I am released.
        As soon as I have it, I will post it.

      2. This bizarre piece may be the source?

        The Moscow Times is a Western owned and controlled English language publication published in the Netherlands.

        The usual absence of empirical evidence for much of the contents of these puff pieces – up to and including the existence of the actual source – is on display. Of note is the continued delusional arrogance of a stance which is still convinced it can carry out the objective of the April 2019 Rand Report of forced Regime Change in the Russian Federation in order to control Makinder’s ‘Heartland’, ‘World Island’ and its resources.

        A position highlighted in the recent promotion of the rabid dog Victoria “Fuck the EU” Nuland to the number two position in, I think its the, State Department.

        Nothing to see here. Its more bullshit.

  6. Labour, like the other major political parties, is essentially Leninist. It operates according to a form of democratic centralism: we the informed, the intellectuals, the managers, the initiated must be in control because the rest of you are incapable of making important decisions. This is what really spooked them about Corbyn: he believes people should have control over their own lives. That’s heresy. The Jew-hating accusations are a masking operation. Take a look at the data about Jews in the UK. They’re flourishing. In the US, they’re doing even better. Jew-hating is very peripheral in the UK. That Labour is terrified of free debate is no surprise. That’s just what you’d expect of Leninists.

    1. I’d always thought Labour’s top-down model was the result of Fabianism and archaic social models(?)(rather than Leninism) and that democratic socialism as purported by (the wonderful) Jeremy Corbyn was anathema to it because it is entirely bottom-up. Your post’s challenging my thinking. Thanks Frank Dallas

  7. Warning To Members: If you bought a copy of Asa Winstanley’s book, whether it’s the kindle edition or the physical book, I would advise you not to read it whilst on public transport or in any other public place or space, as Starmer’s stasi Thought Police are everywhere on the look-out for people like you. And you will be excommunicated……

    The reason the MSM keep schtum about most of what Starmer and Co have been doing to the left during the course of the past three years or so, is because they know that the vast majority of ordinary people would see them for the fascist scum that they are if they knew.

      1. Doug – Say something about what, you winding yourself up because I’ve posted a link (without comment) to the only other news report that I could find about a sitting Labour councillor who has lost the Labour whip for disobeying his party whip. Incidentally a report that the people of Tunbridge Wells are far more likely to read than anything printed on these pages.

      2. A report with no empirical evidence to:

        a) Substantiate the allegations contained in the report

        b) Identify those making the allegations which is a basic requirement for the due process principle of innocent until proven guilty.

        I’ll ask again steveH: What evidence – other than hearsay – do you baser your claim that this Councillor has “disobeyed the party whip?
        What evidence can you offer to back up your position that normal, traditional standards and principles of due process have been applied in this withdrawal of whip punishment?

        Hint for the terminally gullible steveH: Standard due process requires those making the allegation to prove the allegation. It does not impose any requirement on the accused to prove their innocence – which substantive empirical evidence exists is the case within LP processes.

        Come on steveH. Don’t be shy. No bullshit. Answer the questions if you can.

    1. And THAT of course is another aspect of our reality – ie fascists protecting fascists. But then, as we all know, THEY – the MSM and the Labour right – made up two-thirds of the (visible) constituent parts of the A/S black op against JC and the left-wing membership, along with the Jewish Zionist propaganda outfits and their newspapers. And hidden from view of course, the so-called intelligence services.

      1. Allan – Unfortunately for you. your version of ‘reality’ is unsurprisingly only shared by a minuscule minority of the electorate. I wonder why?😩

      2. Doug – Are you an imbecile, would you rather it didn’t work?😕

      3. Herr Flick
        The reality is it has been a disaster, widely predicted for business and theres nothing the Fuhrer will do to remedy that
        What was also predicted by Labour Brexit is that the EU is nothing but a prisoner of the Banks and the Yanks, Ukraine, Nord Stream, Julian Assange proves JC and the rest of us correct on that
        Altogether now
        ‘Its the Rich what get the pleasure, it’s the poor what get the blame’

      4. Doug – You forgot to mention that the UK’s agreement with the EU is up for renegotiation in 2025.

      5. “Unfortunately for you. your version of ‘reality’ is unsurprisingly only shared by a minuscule minority of the electorate.”

        And unfortunately for you steveH the subjective collective ‘wisdom’ of a crowd is not the objective criteria used by reality. As Freud’s nephew Berney’s would have recognised the world is full of people – you being one of them – who subjectively believe six impossible things before breakfast aided and abetted by Berney’s propaganda model of mass manipulation.

        There are people out there whose subjective version of reality insists that men are women and can get pregnant; that the murder in Odessa and shelling of Russian speaking people in the Donbass over eight years never happened; or that the West never colonised and raped Africa. Yet the objective evidence exists to disprove all this and more despite the incompetent attempts to shore up The Official Narrative which is collapsing around the ears of those pushing it – including yourself.

        At least we now know what you look like:

  8. Toffee – Why❓
    Follow the link above and read what Cllr Moon’s local newspaper reported and work it out for yourself, all the information you need is there.

    No, I won’t click on your link. I’m not after the opinions of others I cannot ask. You were asked for YOUR opinions – opinions which you are only too eager to give as a matter of course, until questioned.

    Others have described your response as “bullshit” and the report in the link as: “adding no depth whatsoever”. I trust their judgement over yours every time.

    Now, answer the questions if you can prove you’re capable of doing so.

    And in doing so prove you have the courage of your own conviction.

    Except you won’t, because you haven’t.

  9. SteveH28/07/2023 AT 2:48 AM
    Toffee – I’d long suspected that it was the case so thanks for admitting that you don’t have a f’ing clue what you are ranting about

    Ah…the bravery of the nonce protector… Making the majority of his replies in the wee small hours when there’s next to nobody about to school him yet again.

    Having had several hours to compose himself to answer questions and put his OWN views across about the issue, you instead chose to write more evasive bullshit.

    Oh! Let me guess….You were far too busy enjoying a nice goat jerky on the verandah< while watching the kids “frolic” in the tropical sunshine…

    You’re a cowardly, nonce-excusing shithouse. Nothing more, nothing less.

  10. And now keef’s harping on about how he didn’t let his kids est meat until they were 10…

    Some kids don’t get that choice anyway. And some don’t eat enough of anything, keef.

    And they’re certainly far more likely to be having turkey twizzlers than filet mignon.

    “But we must consider the public finances.” 😒

  11. Re Rachel Reeves
    i- not properly taxing obscene tax profits,
    ii – being happy to enforce the 2-child cap,
    iii – removing Labour from the situation of under- and un-employed workers,
    iv – supporting accelerated refugee removal,
    v – means-testing any and every benefit to people, but
    vi – leaving the £ 1trillion+ spend for benefits to corporates intact,

    she and her boss are not the only Monsters in Labour. Journalist Andrew Kersley reprts on Novaramedia that many Labour Councils Are Paying Dodgy Bailiffs to Collect Tax Debts, resulting in “a “factory line” of council cases automatically being handed to bailiffs, he said, with bailiffs specialising in “exploiting grey areas” of the law to collect that debt.” Suicides and homelessness by debtees increase and “dodgy” bailiffs make a killing. Literally!

    1. Qwertboi

      You can add having her official credit card euspended for “failing to show spending was valid”

      This from our possible future chance(llo)r.

  12. Compare and contrast:

    Margaret Thatcher—windfall tax on the banks

    Rachel Reeves—-no windfall tax on the banks.

  13. Off-subject – North Ayrshire Council cancel screening of Corbyn film

    “Screening organiser Arthur West told the Star: “The venue was sold out. Sixty people were down to attend and we only found out that it was being cancelled at 4.30pm, so we couldn’t even let everyone know.

    “Thirty people turned up and many of them have now contacted the council demanding answers.”

    A council spokesperson said: “Having received a complaint regarding the proposed screening of this film, we decided it would not go ahead on Wednesday evening as a precautionary measure while we undertake a review.

    “We would like to offer an apology to those who turned up and were unaware of the late decision.”

    1. I’d make damn bleedin sure his tuna sandwiches had a new recipe if I worked in the commons kitchens, the ungrateful, entitled, slimy prick.

      He’d be consuming more human bodily waste material than michael winner or that other pretentious twunt, giles coren ever did.

  14. QUNT:
    New word for me. The genius alt.left site I discovered it on even gives a definition and examples:

    qunt n. Extreme-right politician, activist, journalist or commentator who promotes deliberate inhumane political analysis and who revels in hardships caused by conservative policy.

    By that definition, Starmer, Streeting and Reeves are all qunts

  15. Practical Solidarity.

    Emma Dent Coad’s gofundme fundraising appeal is encouraging – and it needs our support.

    Together with Mayor Jamie’s campaign, they will tell #SirKidStarver that Labour under him can count on nothing – well, less than he needs.

    Corporate backers, the MSM corporate press and a FPTP voting system count for nothing when courageous Independents get their message out.

    Help the message get out, help Emma Dent Coad. Solidarity.

    1. SOCIALIST Emma Dent Coad’s crowdfunding appea started on Friday, and by Sunday she could confidently say ” “It’s looking very likely that I will stand.

      “Certainly the last 24 hours have been pretty impressive, so it’s looking very positive.”

      The former member of Labour’s Socialist Campaign Group said she hoped to continue to work with trade unions if elected as an independent MP.

      Currently a member of Unite, she said: “Their work at the moment is outshining any of what the political parties are doing — their fight for fair pay.

      “I think for me it’s very much the issue about the social contract: you should get back what you pay in, that’s absolutely fundamental to me.”

      She ruled out forming a left-wing party with Mr Driscoll and the former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who is also standing as an independent in Islington. – credit, Morning Star

  16. Re: “goldbach27/07/2023 AT 8:09 PM
    Rumour that the US and Russia have started confidential talks.
    If this is correct – GOOD, and about time.”
    Home now, at least for a little while, and able to find the information.
    It sees that the report of the US/Russia talks was from a newspaper/website called Russia Times.
    The paper was set up by a Dutchman called Derk Sauer, who is referred to as a media magnate.
    It existed as print media from 1992 (when it was founded) until 2022 and was published in Moscow and was printed in English and Russian. Moved production to Amsterdam in 2022 (connection to the Russian intervention in the Ukraine civil war???)
    I have tried to find the article on the website, but it is behind a paywall.

      1. Unfortunately I was unable to find any trace of the story you’ve described above.

    1. You are correct. It was, indeed, Moscow Times.
      Odd how a lengthy hospitalisation can result in the mind doing something on autopilot and the word “Russia” appearing rather than the word “Moscow”, which had been the intention.
      Must say that I am surprised that you were happy to pay to get behind the paywall to follow up something that was a rumour.
      I continue to hold out the hope that there could be some basis for such speculation and would hope that all who visit this site would hold a similar view.

      1. goldbach – What pay-wall, I’ve used this site for a while and I haven’t encountered one yet.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: