Analysis Breaking Exclusive

Exclusive: Unite ‘smears Corbyn film claiming it calls rabbis ‘enemy within” – it doesn’t

Footage of ‘enemy within’ section shows only anonymised party staffers, not the scene Unite and pro-Israel groups are claiming – see for yourself below – and the attempts to suppress the film have led to the making of another one

Sharon Graham and her team have been slammed by Unite members for banning the use of Unite buildings for screenings of the documentary ‘Oh Jeremy Corbyn/The Big Lie’ – a film also banned by Keir Starmer’s regime and which exposes the abuse, lies, racism and smears perpetrated by the Labour right – and readings of Asa Winstanley’s forensic book Weaponising Anti-Semitism: How the Israel Lobby Brought Down Jeremy Corbyn.

The union first denied that any outside pressure had contributed to the decision to impose the ban – but subsequently gave away that it was caving in to pressure from pro-Israel groups – one of whom boasted about its ‘success’.

But now, Unite insiders have told Skwawkbox that the union management is claiming that the film contains:

a clip of a group of Rabbis with a voiceover stating “the enemy within”

and that this is the reason the union has acted.

The claim is, unsurprisingly, completely untrue.

The film does contain one section in which the wording ‘The enemy within’ is shown on screen – never spoken aloud – but the section has nothing to do with rabbis or any Jewish people and none are shown. Instead, the segment shows anonymised representations of right-wing Labour staff, along with quotes from abusive and racist WhatsApp and email messages sent by right-wing (then-) staffers, as the clip below proves:

No rabbis in sight. Skwawkbox understands that the union is parroting briefings, apparently without even bothering to watch the film, by right-wing pro-Israel pressure groups who see the evidence revealed in the new film and book – like that of earlier documentaries by Al Jazeera – as a threat to their political interests and Israel’s oppression and illegal occupation of Palestinians and their land and the apartheid regime imposed on them.

The film does show rabbis or identifiably Jewish people on two occasions: a group of Orthodox Jewish people protesting against Israel and an Orthodox rabbi greeting Jeremy Corbyn as a friend – but nowhere near the section on internal party enemies.

Unite’s ban has rightly been condemned by members and others as a blatant attack on members’ right to freedom of speech – and it apparently takes falsehoods to shore up the supposed excuses for the ban.

But the smear campaign and attempts to prevent people seeing the film continue to backfire. Filmmaker Norman Thomas told Skwawkbox that the attempts to stop people seeing the film have only made more people want to see it and there are still many who want to – and that the makers are now making another film, a sequel about all the tactics used to try to stop people seeing it. The new film is expected to be released before the end of the year.

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. There is a very big lesson in this clearly disgraceful situation.
    It highlights the problem of union bureaucracies which fundamentally undermine the interests of their members by following or promoting an agenda that favours the same interests of the Labour right, with such vices as careerism, narrowing of vision, restrictions on possibilities, and an overall unwillingness to undermine a system that exploits their membership, the classic example being the now defunct electricians union which did so much in the 1970s to support the Labour right against the left’s attempts to reform the party, and the way the electrician’s themselves were tied up with poor deals, because the union developed “sweetheart” relationships with certain employers.
    This situation that has arisen in Unite comes from a similar place. A dishonest and cynical resort to false claims of anti-Semitism was the weapon chosen by the right to protect the status quo from necessary change and reform. Perhaps the left should now press the truth that the Labour right supports the evils of apartheid and genocide abroad, and is weak in the face of our own huge list of social and economic problems, offering only sticking plasters instead of the major surgery needed.

  2. Imagine that! A film is effectively banned. The banning causes people who would not normally have watched the (banned) film to recognise that powerful people (the Powers-that-be) are using every means at their disposal to suppress the film. Suddenly the suppressed film becomes a clarion call for freedom of information and freedom of thought. A Sequel is produced and released in the same year.

    The mere threat of non-violent resistance to their power and wealth – especially as embodied by Jeremy Corbyn in his brief leadership of Labour – causes the Powers-that-be – and their supporters – to fear for their lives.

    This is why the powerful Few fear the Many and why “The Big Lie” is suppressed. “Like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number”, the mere possibility that we restore our democracy and re-assert our economic and human rights terrifies them.

  3. Could this be because there’s a ‘revolving door’ for right wing centrists from jobs at top of Labour administration to jobs at top of Union administration?

    1. “a ‘revolving door’ for right wing centrists from jobs at top of Labour administration to jobs at top of Union administration?”

      A revolving door or something worse? Sharon Graham didn’t hold any Labour party roles (or even claim membership?) before she became GS of Unite. When she was 27, she studied at the Trades Union Congress’s Organising Academy. When, in 2021, she was elected Unite GS with 4% of members votes (37.7% of the votes cast), sure, she publicly warned Keir Starmer that he had “lost touch with reality”, and even announced that all remaining Labour funding by Unite was “under review”, but she also pursued the policies and actions that (thank heaven) Skwawkbox highlights, criticises and disapproves of.

      Graham, like Starmer, is as likely to be a centrist entryist to the Labour Movement and intent on its destruction, than a broad-church rightist of old.

      This is only my opinion and it is unprovable, but I judge the tree by its fruit and see her fruit to be every bit as worrying and duplicitous, as Starmer’s broken pledges are to Labour.

  4. As much as I respect Corbyn, I do wish he’d confronted these falsehoods head on much earlier. Mocking them dismissively, as patently absurd, as Blair would’ve done. They were demonstrably false, given JC’s political career fighting all forms of discrimination and inequality. Confronting, rather than letting them fester, which ultimately ended in a grovelling apology in that ‘car crash’ pre-election day interview with right-wing presenter Andrew Neil [Johnson backed out of his grilling remember]. That apology played straight into the hands of those in the PLP and media out to destroy the left.

    The lack of any defence of key ally Chris Williamson, was also baffling. As was, prior to that, not forcing through open selection as the price for the ‘crap coup,’ followed by the leadership challenge of 2016. Corbyn was never stronger than immediately after defeating ‘big pharma’ PR man Owen Smith. Empowering the membership in CLPs against the unrepresentative RW PLP, should’ve been priority number one. It would have been game over for the Red Tory centrists. And why didn’t Seumas Milne, whom I’d respected based on his guardian output, see this as a vicious internal war being waged against his boss?

    Yes, Corbyn was bullied by the PLP, but bullies only win if you consent.

    1. I tend to agree that he should have come out swinging.
      If they’re determined to get you, it’s time to stop being “reasonable”.
      But that doesn’t appear to be one of his strategies, and I suspect that the vile rats on the RW of the LP knew it.

      1. goldbach

        I think it’s important the left learn the lessons because Starmer will let people down and the left will eventually get another chance. Starmer may even be secretly terrified of a big majority because of all the expectation that will carry with it. Austerity and no constitutional reform won’t cut it! A tiny Tory rump and then what comes next? Something radical, no doubt.

        BTW, I think they’d have similarly rolled over Rebecca Long Bailey were she leader, or even mild-mannered Barry Gardiner too. RLB was already prostrating herself before the Israel lobby, another two who are ‘far too nice and reasonable’ for the snake pit that is the Blair’s RW legacy PLP.

        You’d need a leader with a bit street fighter about them, someone whon rellishes being challenged and enjoys fierce debate, Galloway-esque. Or someone with humour to humiliate opponents by belittling them,.a la Trump with his Republican rivals, his “Little Marco (Rubio)’ and ‘Ron DeSanctimonious’ jibes have stuck..

      2. Regardless of how arrogantly Labour’s right act, they know the left can decide their fate at the next election. Disgruntled Tories likely just won’t vote, as happened in 2005, when Blair was returned to No.10 with 35% and only 9.5m votes.
        Even if the left are a minority among Labour voters, unlikely, but even if so, the left are a very substantial minority, a minority that that Starmer and co need to turn out to vote. Understandably everyone on the left are feeling torn between a possible opportunity(if the polls are correct) to push the Tories into third place in the HoC – possibly eliminating them from the British political system altogether! But it may mean holding your nose to vote for the RW toerags in Starmer’s Labour. Should be interesting.

      3. Andy, what Labour has done to millions over the last 6 years is unforgivable. There is only one way to reward their duplicitous behaviour.

        All they care about is your vote. Don’t listen to their voices because it’s only ever going to be lies.

        Before power
        “We’ll break up the HoL”

        In power
        “You can’t undo an omelette”

        Let their financial backers vote them in.

      4. And what would this ‘swinging’ have consisted of precisely? And when do you think it should have started, and in relation to what exactly?

        I mean bearing in mind that 80% of Labour MPs were against him, along with practically all the Jewish organisations, and all the Jewish newspapers and – last but not least – the WHOLE of the MSM, Jeremy really didn’t stand a chance.

        And what do you think of the fact that Andy lied through his teeth about Jeremy making a ‘grovelling apology’ in the Andrew Neil interview, and THEN goes on to build on his falsehood by saying that: ‘That apology played straight into the hands of those in the PLP and media out to destroy the left’?

        And it’s really odd that no other poster pulled him up about it, and yet it was headline news at the time all over the MSM that Jeremy refused to apologise four times – ie refused to apologise on each of the four occasions Neil asked him.

    2. Johnson also hid in a fridge, remember, during the same campaign.
      Of course the upshot of it all was his victory.
      I always remember to remind fellow members that Johnson also had the Labour bureaucracy and most sitting Labour MPs/candidates working for his victory as well.
      That must be our reminder when members of the Labour right accuse us of creating the opening for Tory advance.
      No: but they actually were.

    3. Oh I see Andy’s off again with his anti-Corbyn propaganda! It’s a regular thing with Andy, which he repeats about once or twice a month. So he finishes his little diatribe by saying ‘Yes, Corbyn was bullied by the PLP, but bullies only win if you consent’, which is complete and utter bollocks. Right, so there’s some big, tough, strong bully beating the shit out of me, who has literally picked me up then thrown me down on the ground and is kicking me to fuck. Am I consenting! NO of course I’m not you twisted cunt Andy. Fuck off with your fucking lies and twisted logic so as to try and deceive readers of this website.

      But to deal with the specific situation Jeremy Corbyn faced, the PLP was just a part of the problem, and Jeremy’s main and most powerful enemy was of course the corporate MSM and the semi-corporate Tory run-and-controlled BBC, who gave a platform and a voice to all the smearers and Zionist propaganda outfits like the JLM and CAA and LAA, and along with the Jewish so-called newspapers, the lies and the faux outrage was just relentless, and Jeremy is undoubtedly the most smeared politician on the whole planet EVER. Oh, right, but the fucking shills on here – posing as left-wingers – would have you believe it was all Jeremy’s fault for not fighting back. What total scum!!

      And being the nasty little malicious piece of shill-shit that he is, Andy throws in the lie that Jeremy made a grovelling apology in the Andrew Neil interview when he did EXACTLY the opposite, and refused to apologise not only once, but on the FOUR occasions that Neil asked him:

      But little fascist propagandist shit like Andy just lurve to rewrite history and amuse themselves and their fascist buddies in the process! And note – as the fascist shit DO – that he starts by saying ‘As much as I respect Corbyn…..’, before he then goes on to try and deceive readers with is lies and falsehoods. Yeah, THAT’s how much he respects Jeremy!!

    4. Yes he smashed the Smith entourage and didn’t take advantage of the real backing he had to secure his base and position his true allies in influential positions. Did he find the role of leader uncomfortable and could that have made him wary of having too many true followers in his shadow cabinet. He never was one for nepotism but he could have done more to fight the right. A clever and generous man, genuinely honest. His sense of fair play and refusal to recognise the real ideas driving the fifth colum caught him off guard. Sadly some of his actions or non actions led to his downfall as many of his friends and allies in the wider CLP feared that it would. I say friends but were they as sits alone pondering what might have been while his one time friends keep their distance and their lucrative jobs.

  5. I resort now to my usual defence of Corbyn!!

    He saw the charge of anti-semitism being asserted by one
    faction of the Jewish Community, ie JLM and went along
    with the incorrect assumption that this part of the Community
    represented members of the Labour Part who were Jewish.

    This certainly fooled me for I thought that too – till I had a
    light-bulb moment that the Jewish Community were just like
    every other Community with a whole spectrum of
    beliefs and loyalties. It was obvious really given that the
    Christian Community is just the same. Now if I as a Roman
    Catholic didn’t realise this – it is understandable why Corbyn
    would not.

    I’m not even sure that JVL existed at that time –
    to point this out – I think they formed to do exactly that.

    1. You don’t need to leap to Mr Corbyn’s defence.
      I have met him twice and know what a thoroughly decent man he is.

    2. JLM had faded into obscurity, but was mysteriously resurrected to cause “inconvenience” against JC’s leadership.

      1. Ludus, very good point. Not a whisper about them and as if by magic they are produced from a top hat. Well organised, offensive with media access on tap. Not just the JLM, other grassroot organisations with sound financial backing, media savvy and articulate popped up and went to work with daggers drawn. This happened without any questions from the media whose job was to ask questions, that didn’t happen because they were part of it. Southside had a close, sinister friendship with state assets who tipped them of with names and information used to attack the left. This constant attrition proved to be successful. It continues yet good people stay loyal to the end which will visit them before the GE.

  6. Unions being affiliated with Labour is as wrong as Tories being affiliated with business. Any party should be as viable as the individuals that chose to support it, not dictated to by conglomerates.

    1. That’s a very individualist, liberal assertion. I’d disagree: the Many, whether cloth-capped or not, are weak. They stay weak until they organise themselves. Organised workers own and operate trade unions. Trade unions are essential to Labour politics. Trade unions are NEVER conglomerates, they are the protectors and advocates of their members.

      1. qwertboi – Well they might be if they were bothered enough to vote.


        Its all about The Narrative:

        “Reading through the stupid disinformation stuff one stumbles over this sentence:

        ‘[T]he information released by the United States on Friday is designed to show how much deeper Russian influence operations are than those efforts to sow dissent on the internet.’

        That is quite revealing. The information contained in the CIA release was ‘designed’ or construed to create a certain propaganda narrative. It wasn’t just information that could be found or observed by a reporter but a curated collection of items put together to create a certain effect.

        Think about that for a minute and you will recognize that most of the ‘news’ one reads is made like this.

        Someone asserts that there is a need for to create a certain effect. A narrative is thought up that could lead to it. The some bits of facts or rumors are collected, sorted, filtered and then written up until the constructed narrative is thought to be likely to create the desired effect. This is then the declassified product and fed to the media which are willing to distribute such stuff.”

      2. Dave – ‘moonofmoscow’ would be a more appropriate title for the website you’ve linked to?

      3. steveH, on your previous record I’ll wager you stayed up all night thinking that one up. Come back when you’ve got some objective fact based evidence rather than this redundant masturbatory nonsense.

        Such as an explanation as to why the Western based OSCE recorded massive increases in breaches of the Minsk agreements (2,000 alone on the weekend prior to Feb 24 2022) in the form of the bombing of civilians in the Donbass from an invasion force of the best troops of AUF on the contact line whilst the bulk of the Russian forces were exercising far to the north in Belarus.

        Was it the ‘works weeks’ in Ukraine and all those forces were at a transit point with their buckets and spades waiting for a charabanc to take them to the seaside?

        The facts are that the civilians being slaughtered (for the crime of speaking Russian) by your fellow neo-nazis asked for assistance and Putin initially turned down the request to recognise them as independent agencies. It was only following that very obvious prelude to invasion that the request via the Duma was accepted and the Russian Government invoked via the UN the R2P process.

        Simple question to you steveH: why do you reject the rights of only Russian speaking people to self defence?

        No wriggling, wormtongue, Answer the simple question.

      4. Whats up steveH, Its a simple enough question. Cat got your tongue?

      5. ……whilst steveH attempts to answer a straightforward question without this happening;

      6. Quelle surprise!

        Another no show from steveH to a straightforward question.

  7. They could make a third film about the silence of the anti-cancel culture brigade on the cancelling of the first two.

  8. All unions claim to be democratic but in practice there two loci of power: the NECs and the bureaucracies. Unions of hundreds of thousands of members have NECs of fifty or so. Those people have huge power and we know what Lord Acton observed about power. Then the bureaucrats: in theory they are outside the unions’ democracy, but in truth they wield huge influence. The answer is to flatten the hierarchies and dissolve the bureaucracies. Unions should belong to their members and the members should make the decisions. But how to operate nationally if power is kept at local grassroots? By federation. The irony of unions is their structures imitate those of capitalist outfits. General Secretaries mirror CEOs. Power and money should stay at the grassroots in unions and each local organisation should be autonomous. The autonomous local bodies than federate into a national structure, but crucially power and money stay at the grassroots. That’s the way to prevent what is happening in Unite, where Graham is deciding for more than a million members. They can decide for themselves. The common folk are intelligent and creative, that’s why the rich fear them.

  9. Rachel Reeves’ interview with the Telegraph…

    Asked if the party had ditched Sir Keir’s 2020 pledge to increase the top rate of income tax, Ms Reeves replied: “Yeah….”

    So brazen about betraying those pledges.

    In 2011, under then leader Ed Miliband, Reeves argued the banks and those earning over £100k must contribute more.
    Everyone knows Starmer lied by promising continuity Corbynism in his ‘making the case for socialism’ slick campaign. But they’re now pushing an agenda well to the right of centrist Ed Miliband. This is late, unpopular Thatcherism, and Reeves is in the wrong party.

    1. cont.

      Starmer defenders/apologists online seem to be taking the line: he lied his way to the leadership, he’ll lie his way into No.10. As if being a brazen liar and using deception is a perfectly justified political strategy.

      Reeves says they’ll fund extra public spending ‘only’ through the proceeds of economic growth. But ‘economic growth isn’t in their gift to deliver; what if it doesn’t materialise? If the Tories can’t make Brexit work, what are these ‘magic beans’ Labour will find.

      Starmer and Reeves will quickly face criticism from Labour MPs if they fail to improve things. That’s if they get in at, because at this rate the Labour manifesto will be a copy/paste of that of the Tories.

      1. Got to wonder how policy is being formulated.

        Reeves seems to be at liberty to make sweeping binding commitments like some autocrat. Ruling out any tax rises for capital gains, property and earnings, for a whole parliament, regardless of potential crises is a politically reckless decision.

        Where is the democratic oversight and debate around the contents of the manifesto and Labour’s policies? Have the Shadow cabinet , MPs,CLPs, members and unions been consulted? Or have they abdicated all responsibility to an god like autocratic few issuing statements from on high?

        The Labour party has less democratic checks and balances than the Kremlin.

      2. Andy – It is unfortunate that you self evidently don’t have a clue.

      3. “Andy – It is unfortunate that you self evidently don’t have a clue.”

        And once again, steveH, you provide zero evidence or reasoned rational argument for your petulant outburst.

        What’s up? The goat ate your crayons again?

      4. Dave – Isn’t it self evident that he doesn’t have a clue?

      5. steveH, the only person here for whom not having a clue is self evident is yourself,

    2. On tax, Labour now to the right of Thatcher government.

      Top rate of tax 60% for her first 9 years.

      Later on, unearned income taxed at same rate as unearned income.

      1. Reeves and Starmer are unavailable and unanswerable to members too. They’ll only be interviewed by those applauding this shift to the right. They’ll create a shielded protected environment at conference with only unthinking loyalists in attendance.

        This is not a democratic party, it’s a hostile takeover by people who are essentially just proxy Tories.

    1. …….The individual named in this latest Skwawkbox piece is also named here….

      … the source of a complaint against the candidate originally selected by the Bassetlaw CLP in 2019 which resulted in the removal of the candidate by the LP. The seat was lost at the election. Go figure.

      Eslamdoust was a Camden councillor, at the time and is married to Labour’s former head of compliance Thomas Gardiner. Both represented the Kilburn ward. Other pieces from the local Campden media at the time reference a background of serious Labour group infighting in the Ward as a prelude to this ‘complaint’.

      Eslamdoust also applied to stand as a candidate in four other Constituencies. The application form – a copy of which I still have somewhere – lists four constituencies. The preferred top of the list choice being the former constituency of Angela ‘Tinge’ Smith. At the time I was unable to find any evidence that Eslamdoust even made the shortlist in the other three Constituencies.

      The short listing panel which met in Wakefield in October 2019, where the head of Momentum, Jon Lansman, attended as an apparent replacement for someone else at the last minute, considered a short list of five candidates from an original long list. One of whom was found to not even meet the eligibility criteria for length of Party membership. Quite how they made it that far suggests either gross incompetence or gerrymandering.

      Despite the Momentum candidate being the subject of two outstanding complaints alleging illegal acts which the Party had failed to process over eighteen months and the Panel being advised as such, that individual, along with the alleged primary complainer in the Gimson case, was selected on to the short list of three for a Constituency ballot.

      At the Constituency selection meeting it was announced that the Partner of the senior figure in the Complaints and Compliance Unit and one of the alleged complainers in the Gimson case had withdrawn that afternoon. Providing the Momentum candidate with a convenient even chance in a two horse ballot. Pressure was placed on members that anyone attempting a Point of Order in regard to outstanding serious complaints of illegal acts against the Momentum candidate – in reality just another fellow traveller political careerist – would not be heard.

      The very obvious fix was successful. The outstanding complaints were conveniently buried and rejected and despite over a year of correspondence the Party point blank refused to provide evidence of any investigation. Inevitably, the Party went on to lose the seat to the Conservatives. Indeed, at the announcement of the result in an act of characteristic puerile petulance I and other local Branch and Constituency members, among others, had become accustomed to our gerrymandered Labour candidate publicly refused to shake hands with the newly elected MP.

      On the basis of her past record no sane or sensible individual would trust Eslamdoust as far as you could throw a grand piano.

  10. Starvernomics
    All the same
    Follow the money, who is getting what share of the cake, name and shame them

  11. On another matter
    The ‘Fuck Me To’ movement is gathering pace, I do hope the Rubiales case goes to court and a jury gets the chance to make a sensible judgement
    Toxic Feminism needs putting in its place
    And before you start if it had been my daughter and it had been non consensual she would have knocked him out
    Where we come from, women have always ruled the roost

  12. Well fancy that. The LP refusing to pay bills and stopping a food bank from operating.
    The Labour Party – Always on the side of the ??????????????

  13. goldbach
    The Co op Bank allowed the regional office to take over the Broxtowe Bank Account, that needs looking at
    Go directly to the top of the bank then take it to the Ombudsman/ Regulator, if that doesn’t work put in a claim in the County Court for the money, then when you get judgement send bailiffs into the Regional office to seize assets to 10 x value of the award

  14. Doug, just when we thought that they couldn’t… Nothing is beneath them. The parade about with their snouts in the air, when not in the trough, like proud Thatcherite spivs and urban and rural bandits. Revolting, really despicable and they don’t give a damp about appearances apart from on the telly.

    1. alexanderscottish
      They rely on inertia, that people will not do anything about it, mostly because folk think there is nothing you can do
      That’s fatal when your up against Dognonces like Red Tories
      Start at Citizens Advice can’t help then they will know who can
      Shy bairns get nowt

  15. Perhaps one of the 2 Public Service Broadcasters would honour their charter and challenge the fascistic monoculture of MSM or perhaps GB News, the self-penned champion of ‘Free Speech’ channel would advocate its screening? The phrase ‘snowballs chance in hell………’ springs to mind.

  16. Something seems to be hitting the fan in Brussels.
    I am told that the FT carries an article saying that the European Commission is out of money and is demanding an increase in funding from member states of 87bn euros for next year. This is at a time when the German economy is starting to whither. The Netherlands has now officially gone into recession. France and Italy have borrowed huge amounts to keep their own budgets afloat.
    Looks like the perfect storm is brewing.
    And this is at a time when there are no leaders in Europe (or indeed in the UK) who have any idea what to do. Look at them all and I am reminded of what Teddy Roosevelt once said of one political opponent – “I could carve a better man out of a banana.”

  17. One has to wonder why on earth they didn’t think to deposit all the donations that were explicitly given to their ‘Community Hub’ into a separate bank account.😕

    1. One possibility could be that it never entered their heads that those in charge of the LP could be such a crowd of s***s.

      1. The other one is stupidity. Why on earth would anyone think it was even appropriate (never mind a good idea) to mix together funds that were intended for entirely different purposes. Have the Charities Commission had anything to say about this situation?

      2. Another – not necessarily unrelated – factor is the sheer difficulty of actually getting a separate bank account up an running in a context in which;

        a) Many communities across the UK don’t have a single bank in their community. You have to travel miles to actually see another human being to discuss such matters if you don’t want to spend most of the day hanging onto the end of a telephone queue.

        b) Just changing the signatories on an existing account when a new treasurer is elected is a major operation which can take anything up to six months or more, if at all. An issue, borne of numerous previous experiences, not just for local LP Units but any local charity or community organisation.

        But then, WTF do we know? We only live here in the dysfunctional hellhole this country has become run by incompetent and malevolent idiots who think they know better than anyone else from the other side of the Atlantic.

        Mind your own business steveH. Because you haven’t a clue from wherever you really are.

      3. Dave – My interpretation is that SH is acknowledging that those in charge of the LP are, indeed, a crowd of s***s and is suggesting that the good people of Broxtowe were “stupid” for not realising it.
        I would call it misplaced trust.

      4. goldbach,

        Maybe there was misplaced trust; maybe there was no trust? The point I’m making is the sheer practical and logistical difficulties of attempting the route suggested by Britain’s answer to the birth pill here.

        For locally run community level groups – whether its LP Branches/CLP’s; play groups; church/chapel groups; village halls/community centers et al – just changing the signatories with the banks is a massive time consuming and frustrating exercise which from experience and observation takes months of bureaucratic too-ing and fro-ing. Attempting to set up a separate fund in this particular context would involve even more hurdles – Party Rules; bank checks on money laundering and the like; permission from the Party Regional ‘Bosses” and so on – would be beyond the available capacity at that level.

        No one whose been through the comparably more simple process of attempting to change the signatories* would even contemplate attempting it.

        * Sidebar: An issue which highlights the massive disparity of power relations which are operating here. The Not The Andrew Marr Show posted video interview reveals that the hurdles faced by the ‘deplorable’s’ at local level in attempting to change signatories are rapidly removed by the banks holding the accounts when the self-styled ‘Professional and Managerial Classes’ (PMC’s )come calling.

        What takes months for the plebs at local level is dealt with in an instant with no delays or checks when the Regional or National Bosses come calling. In this case over the heads of and without even a courtesy reference to those at the coalface who are doing ALL the real donkey work whilst these incompetent wankers modern day robber barons swan about lording it over everyone.

        steveH is no different in that regard. He’s just doing it by proxy. A wannabe parasite me-tooing on the back of the parasitic bigger boys.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: