Analysis comment

What’s on his front bench shows Starmer’s Abbott attack ‘standards’ excuse is nonsense

Just a few examples of the unpunished behaviour of current front-benchers is enough to expose yet another Starmer lie

Starmer’s briefed defenders have told their media allies that the regime’s continued and escalating attack on Hackney North and Stoke Newington MP Diane Abbott – the UK’s first Black woman MP – have been to maintain ‘standards’.

Abbott was suspended over an article stating – correctly – that Black people experience racism differently than Jewish people, because their difference cannot be concealed. She quickly apologised – wrongly, according to many Black commenters, who maintained that their experience showed she was correct.

Starmer was rightly pilloried for his interference, to suspend her, in the party’s disciplinary processes.

Now former Corbyn speechwriter Alex Nunns has published a thread on what used to be Twitter, listing just a few of the examples of racism by Labour MPs who are still in the party and in many cases on Starmer’s front bench – exposing the lie that this has anything to do with ‘standards’:

Nunns is absolutely correct in his conclusion that these cases – all covered at the time by Skwawkbox along with Starmer’s double standard that has been ignored by the so-called ‘mainstream’ media. But the rot is not limited to the Commons benches.

Starmer’s party allowed paedophile Thomas Dewey to stand for election as a councillor despite knowing that he had been arrested for his crimes. Dewey’s free pass from the party despite his arrest for paedophilia was far from an exception for the Starmer regime. Among the ‘blind eyes’ or worse turned by the party machine, 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 was 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.

Starmer and his sidekick David Evans also 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.

Diane Abbott is well rid of Labour. The rotten, racist husk that remains under Starmer of what used to be the party is unworthy of her or any decent left-wingers. Very few now remain behind a red rosette and the country has been knowingly deprived of any meaningful parliamentary choice.

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. Bazza – Really?
      Several of the above incidents took place and were resolved during Corbyn’s tenure..

      1. All the more reason for the keef klux klan to show klemency then, eh?

      2. I’m just…

        I’m simply…

        I’m merely…

        I’m only…

        Except you’re NOT, are you?!! A bastarding mole with brass buttons for eyes can see what your game is.

        Keef is infallible.Even when he’s letting nonces off the hook and allowing kids to go hungry he’s completely right, isn’t he?

        Because the OPINION polls give him a lead. Therefore he’s RIGHT to persecute lefties and allow nonces and their enablers walk instead of throwing them inder the bus (literally and metaphorically)

    2. Toffee – That would obviously depend on the individual circumstances of each case. I’m just pointing out that any claims of double standards on the basis of the above examples are at best tenuous.

  1. Well said SKWAWKBOX, “Diane Abbott IS well rid of Labour.” Despite ignoring the departure of an estimated 250,000⁺ former members, the perpetual-austerity, flag-shagging Party knows it is light on the door-knocking front. A more-supportive MSM will not fully make up for this. The votes in many key seats may suffer.

    The five million⁺ votes that new Labour lost the party up to Corbyn are unlikely to materialise again under Starmer or similar.

    Dianne Abbott – and the dearly-departed – are well rid of Labour. The Davos billionaires to whom Starmer is gifting it probably won’t have much use for this former Peoples Party other than as a “stand-in” for when the tohries soil their pants once every 25 years or so.

      1. Fucking hell, it NEVER ends, does it?

        Each and every fucking thread just HAS to have an OPINION poll shoehorned into it by the paedophobe who has NOTHING else.



      2. Toffee – ……….. and yet Corbyn managed to lose 60 seats to one of those self same shitty PM’s that you talk about and left his successor to cope with an almost unassailable Tory majority.
        Hardly anybody, least of all the bookies, anticipated that a new leader would be able to turn this around within 1 term. Unless you are a closet ToryBoy you should be celebrating that Labour now have a substantial and consistent lead over the Tories.
        I’m looking forward to next year’s general election, are you?

        ps, despite the fact that the Tories didn’t even having a majority at the time I don’t remember Jeremy defeating Boris on even one occasion, do you?

      3. Toffee – I’m looking forward to the next general election, are you?

      4. The Toffee : 22/09/2023 at 3:17 pm :

        Well, we have Mad Nad’s By-election coming up, to be followed by ArsePincher’s – wherever that is.

        The one I’m, really, looking forward to is Birken’ead, in the GE. Alison McGovern v Jo Bird.

        I hope Jo buries her.

        We shall see how the polls predict those three, against the final outcomes.

      5. ………..because so many people will use the ‘anything but Tory’ vote. Even Der Sturmer can’t fail, can he? Look at the state of the nation.

    1. Decent observations.
      But there is no point directing them at or engaging with a certain troll.
      How many times does it argue in bad faith, misdirect and outright lie? For examples of this, take a look at the comment section in this previous Skwawkbox article. Yet after being caught out it unashamedly starts again on another page.
      Half the time it is not even fluent and knowledgeable on the sources it posts.

      1. Bernie – There are more than 130 comments on the article that you have linked to could you give some direct quotes to support your accusations of lying and link directly to the relevant comment?

    2. Btw the topic of this article is Starmer’s lies, hypocrisies and racism. If some insist on instead side-tracking debate to the Corbyn years then obviously we’d have to reassess and remind ourselves of the betrayals made by the Labour Right documented by ‘The Labour Files’.

      1. Bernie – Given that the above article refers directly to several incidents and disciplinary outcomes that occurred during the Corbyn years it is difficult to see how can justify your comment above at 11:19pm.

    3. Yes absolutely right. And as Skwawkbox says many Black critics think she shouldn’t have apologised either. Her description was a fairly standard definition of racism both across academia and institutional training, and one that has been around approximately 60+ years.

      This article goes into the historic background and cites Holocaust academics. It was then reposted by Jewish Voice for Labour so they’re obviously on board with this too.

      1. From which of the different black sections emerge. The ones fighting for lawyers, health workers, teachers or workers?

  2. You have to admit, there’s no flies on the smarmerites.

    …Even flies have standards

  3. Most of us on the Left know the depths to which Starmers has dragged the Labour Party so Alex’s comments are no surprise to us. However the electorate as a whole are mostlt unaware of them.
    Starmers Labour has been putting out crude and childish anti Tory slogans. Be in no doubt that the Tories are keeping their powder dry and come the run up to the next election they will counter the these slogans with yhe facts detailed in this article – Starmer allowed a paedophile to stand in a Council election, racism is rampant in Labour, Starmers Labour covered up for criminal abuse and exploitation of domestic violence survivors etc etc etc.
    Once these facts become common knowledge most normal decent people will react with disgust and as a result will elect another Tory government. That’s what Starmer wants – he’ll be off to the House of Lords, the purge of the party of Socialists anti Zionists and independent thinkers will be completed by somebody else and about 2030 a totally neutered Labour party will be “allowed” to win a General election.

    1. Smartboy – You might have had a point if you had some facts to support your assertion but you don’t, and you don’t. The facts as known actually disprove your rather wild assertions.

  4. “Starmer’s party allowed paedophile Thomas Dewey to stand for election as a councillor despite knowing that he had been arrested for his crimes.”

    The time-line (of who knew what and when) given below and freely available from multiple news sources published at the time clearly illustrates that any claims that the Labour Party knowingly allowed Dewey to stand in the borough’s council elections despite his arrest are simply untrue.

    Thomas Dewey (TD) was arrested on 29/04/2022 just 6 days before the election on 6/05/2022 and 24 days after the latest date that candidates could be changed in that election.
    The National Crime Agency who carried out the raid and arrest did not inform Hackney Council about TD’s arrest until 13/05/22 a week after the election and Hackney Council’s Chief Executive did not inform the Mayor Philip Glanville (PG) until a day later on 14/05/22.
    The Chief Executive of the Council officially informed the Labour Party on 16/05/22 10 days after the election took place.

    It has been reported that when TD was confronted on 16/05/22 he immediately resigned both his seat and his already suspended membership of the Labour Party.

    The house party that was pictured in a previous article on Dewey took place on the same day (14/05/22) that PG was first informed of TD’s arrest. It was reported that PG said the following when challenged about his attendance at this house party.
    ”Being with Tom Dewey at all on May 14 was clearly an error of judgement for which I wholeheartedly apologise.
    “I was told of his arrest, but not the full extent of the charges, in a brief discussion with the council chief executive the same day.
    “I shouldn’t have been at the event in which we were photographed but I did so as I feared to cancel the event, or not attend myself, may alert Tom to what I knew, during what I understood to be a live criminal case.
    “This does not alter the fact I had no involvement in the case, and shouldn’t deter from the actions, including moving out of the house the following day, as well as others I have taken since his resignation and conviction, which I have made clear in previous statements.”

    Given that to date there doesn’t appear to be any evidence that the Labour Party knew anything about TD being arrested and bailed until at least a week after the election had taken place then any assertions that Labour allowing TD to stand in the election knowing that he was on bail for the possession of child porn appears to be nothing more than ill-informed speculation.

    Maybe an enquiry will reveal further details but until someone comes up with some credible evidence that presents a radically different time-line on who knew what and when then it looks like the Labour Party were never in a position to prevent anything to do with this and given their knowledge at the time acted appropriately throughout.

    1. Sound reasoning SteveH, but the time-line isn’t the important issue here. It’s double standards and crass self-interest.

      1. qwertboi – I’m simply providing a necessary correction to the record above.
        Given that several of the incidents quoted above were resolved whilst Corbyn was in office and the debacle that surrounded Mike Hill’s reinstatement I’m also struggling with the claims about there being double standards

    2. Reply to Steve H
      I tried to reply earlier but something went wrong so I am reposting the gist of my original response
      We discussed the time line in previous posts and I am still of the opinion that the arrest would have been common knowledge locally and Dewey should not have been allowed to stand.
      However the point I was making was that this issue and others will be highlighted by the Tories in the run up to the election and will probably affect the outcome of the election

      1. Smartboy – You might have a point if you had any evidence to support your opinion, but you don’t
        Would you perhaps like to explain when and how you would have stopped Dewey from standing in the election?

      2. Reply to Steve H
        In relation to Dewey I am simply expressing my opinion that it would have been common knowledge locally that he had been arrested. You have contested this but I remain of the view that it would have been impossible for local people not to know what was going on.
        I notice however that you have not contested the other issues I mentioned – the rampant racism in Starmers Labour and their cover up of the criminal abuse and exploitation of domestic violence survivors.
        As you have made no attempt to refute my comments on these issues I assume you accept their validity. I think mt views are representative of those of most ordinary people – I would not vote for a racist party which covered up for criminals who exploited vulnerable people or who had a collection of child porn.
        Once the Tories let these ( and other similarly disgusting stories) appear in the MSM Starmers Labour will be sunk without a trace

      3. Smartboy – I picked out what I thought was the most egregious falsehood above. At the time I didn’t have either the time or the inclination to go over ground that I have already covered in the past

        For instance have you forgotten the discussion we had in Dec22 where I pointed out the very limited grounds that Cohen won her tribunal on. (Cohen’s win was quoted as supporting evidence above)
        I’m guessing that you never read the full judgement.

        SteveH 03/12/2022 at 12:07 am

        As can be seen below from the actual verdict of the Employment Tribunal the finding of Unfair Dismissal was on very limited grounds, most of the many claims made were dismissed.

        [this extract is a direct quote]
        “(1) The claim of unfair dismissal pursuant to section 94 & 98 of the Employment
        Rights Act 1996 succeeds, any award to be subject to deductions for
        contribution to her dismissal and under “Polkey” to be determined.
        (2) The claim of detriment because of a protected disclosure pursuant to section
        47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeds in respect of the allegation
        that she was marginalised and isolated in the period January 2020 until her
        [All the following complaints were dismissed]
        (3) All remaining claims are not well founded and are dismissed:

        a. The claim of automatic unfair dismissal pursuant to section 103A of
        the Employment Rights Act 1996;
        Case Number: 2203775/2021
        – 2 –
        b. All other claims of detriment because of a protected disclosure
        pursuant to section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996;
        c. Claims of direct discrimination because of race and religion or belief
        brought under section 13 and section 39 of the Equality Act 2010;
        d. Claims of harassment because of race and religion or belief brought
        under section 26 and 40 of the Equality Act 2010.

        You should read the full document – the evidence about Ms Cohen’s various actions regarding the concluded police investigations and her general conduct make for an informative and interesting read
        [Follow the link above for a link to the actual Tribunal judgement]

        Does anyone know how much compensation Ms. Cohen has been awarded?

      4. Smartboy – “In relation to Dewey I am simply expressing my opinion that it would have been common knowledge locally that he had been arrested. You have contested this but I remain of the view that it would have been impossible for local people not to know what was going on.”

        An opinion for which you have no supporting evidence for. 😕

    3. Well, lookit!?!

      A prolix rambling from someone who complains about ranting whenever a reply is over three hundred characters, let alone words.

      Any particular reason you’ve decided to post the equivalent of war-and-fucking-peace on the specific (and conventional) issue of paedophile whitewashing within smarmerite labour, wee paedophobe??

      Much unlike you to do so on ANY other subject…😙🎵

      1. Toffee – “Any particular reason you’ve decided to post the equivalent of war-and-fucking-peace”

        Isn’t that a bit rich coming from someone whose raise-en-detre is long-winded rants.
        But in answer to your inane question
        YES there is, it is a very serious accusation that is manifestly untrue.

      2. Isn’t that a bit rich coming from someone whose raise-en-detre is long-winded rants

        You mean “raison d’etre”?

        A phrase I used only the other day to describe your own pitiful shortcomings?

        Obviously you weren’t familiar with the meaning of the term so you’ve googled it…And then spelled it wrong on the very first opportunity you got to use it. 🤣

        All because you’re a fucking numbskull with delusions of grandeur.

        As well as a nonce excuser/enabler/apologist.

      3. Toffee – Thanks for the correction, but is that all you’ve got.😞

  5. Dianne shouldn’t have apologised for her letter for three reasons. Reason one: an apology is a de facto admission of guilt, something to apologise for. Reason two: despite the clumsy wording Dianne had a point, New New Labour has a hierarchy of racism. Reason three: her apology was never going to be accepted, no point.

    1. reply to Chris Mooney
      I agree with you . Diane had no need to apologise. Whether her comments were right or wrong ( I think they were right) she is entitled to hold an opinion on racism.
      However it shows how powerful a stranglehold the pro Israel lobby has on British politics when Diane’s innocent and in my opinion totally justified comments were deemed to be “antisemetic.”

      1. Smartboy – Diane and her colleagues in the SCG obviously disagree with you.

  6. The double standard is the issue here. There is a separate discussion about what prior comment can and cannot be excused and whether there is any extenuation (and it may well be that those offered up by Nunns have been defended in a manner similar to that the article employs with regard to Abbott) but the focus should be on what you say, not who you are. Unless Labour can delineate between the degree of offence in the case of Abbott as opposed to others named, then there is no defence to the charge that they are partial and discriminatory.

      1. And keef weighing on with his view on Abbott’s supposed antisemitism

        Tell us, nonce-case, do YOU agree with keef, and think it right that he accused Abbott of antisemitism

        Thereby prejudicing the subsequent whitewash investigation??

      2. Toffee – It is undeniable that even Diane herself and apparently the rest of her colleagues in the SCG have already admitted that she was wrong to publish this letter.
        Which bit of the word ‘independent’ did you have difficulty understanding.

      3. independent my arse…AND yours.

        Which bit of prejudicial and “The leadership doesn’t decide the outcome of such cases” (as you’re SO fond of reminding us) has escaped you, nonce-enabling gobshite?

      4. Reply to Steve H
        Well if Diane and other members of the SCG don’t think she had to right to express an opinion about the nature of racism then they are WRONG. To accuse her of antisemitism and sanction her for her legitimate views is totally absurd.
        It is quite clear Starmer, hard right, Zionist in chief ,Israel lobbist wanted her out- just like all the other decent people he expelled for “antisemitism”- and used her innocent comments as a means to do this.
        This is a sincere comment – the contrived ” antisemitism” smears worry me and I think of the fable of the boy who cried wolf. Antisemitism – Jew hated – is real and to trivialise it and use it as a stick to beat political opponents with is not only wrong but undermines genuine antisemitism complaints, may cause resentment and anger and may actually endanger Jewish people.
        It has to stop.

      5. You weren’t asked that, noncecase.

        You were asked if YOU agree with keef that Abbot’s letter was antisemitic.

        It’s a straightforward question that only requires a yes or no answer.

        So answer it with a yes or no

      6. Toffee – Have you forgotten that she also included the Irish and Traveller communities in her hierarchy of racism letter

        Racism is black and white
        Tomiwa Owolade claims that Irish, Jewish and Traveller people all suffer from “racism” (“Racism in Britain is not a black and white issue. It’s far more complicated”, Comment). They undoubtedly experience prejudice. This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they are interchangeable.

        It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. But they are not all their lives subject to racism. In pre-civil rights America, Irish people, Jewish people and Travellers were not required to sit at the back of the bus. In apartheid South Africa, these groups were allowed to vote. And at the height of slavery, there were no white-seeming people manacled on the slave ships.
        Diane Abbott
        House of Commons, London SW1

      7. Once AGAIN you have DELIBERATELY SWERVED the question.

        < YOU agree with keef, and think it right that he accused Abbott of antisemitism

        Once AGAIN, just answer with a simple ‘Yes’ or ‘No’.

        No more of your nonsense, nonsense.

      8. Toffee – I’m not evading anything, I’m simply pointing out that it is more complex than you are trying imply. I am not an expert but I would tend to think that anti-Semitism wouldn’t be the primary charge. It is however undeniable that it was a monumentally stupid thing for Abbott to publish and that it brought the party into disrepute. We’ll have to see how she fares in front of Labour’s independent tribunal. If the outcome doesn’t go in Diane’s favour then she only has herself to blame.
        Perhaps Diane should consider whether it is time for her to retire and let some new blood take up the reins.

        Do you happen know what ‘charges’ Diane is actually facing?

        This is what Keir is reported to have said

        “In my view what she said was to be condemned, it was antisemitic.
        “Diane Abbott has suffered a lot of racial abuse over many, many years … that doesn’t take away from the fact that I condemn the words she used and we must never accept the argument that there’s some sort of hierarchy of racism.
        “I will never accept that, the Labour party will never accept that, and that’s why we acted as swiftly as we did yesterday.”
        Asked whether Abbott might be prevented from standing again as a Labour MP, Starmer said: “There’s an investigation in place, I’ve got to let that investigation be completed.”

  7. YES there is, it is a very serious accusation that is manifestly untrue.

    What’s manifestly untrue about the mayor – knowing FULL WELL about the nonce’s arrest – and not only NOT informing the party the instant he found out – but actually partying with the vermin that evening?

    What’s manifestly untrue about the party ALLOWING the pair of them to resign, rather than EXPELLING them?

    Hmmm? Well? 🤔

    1. Toffee – Taking the time-line that I have given above (which is supported by numerous news reports) when and what would you have done in this situation and could you please also explain how you would have sacked an elected councillor and why your approach would have made a difference.
      Or is this just another example of you letting off wind?

      1. Are you for fucking REAL?

        Mayor is told nonce is nicked for abuse images, says fuck all to party central, PARTIES with nonce case,and BOTH ARE ALLOWED TO RESIGN?

        And to cap it all, party HQ BANS ALL DISCUSSION ABAR IT?

        Meanwhile keef can stick his oar into Diane Abbott and label her an antise.ite BEFORE the outcome of an investigation, thereby demonstrating PREJUDICE….and that’s ok?


      2. Toffee – Evidently you got so caught up with your flatulence that you forgot to impress us all by telling us what you would have done in this situation and when. You’ve also neglected to explain how you would have sacked an elected councillor and why your approach would have made a difference.

      3. I’ll tell you what id have done…

        Apart from expressing my abject shame a d disgust at the pair of them, I’d have EXPELLED BOTH. – And that’s AFTER Id have withdrew/forfeited the contest for the seat, or at least MOT contested the seat in a subsequent election.

        Whereas you just wring your hands, excuse & defend nonsenseism amd smarmerite lackadaisical attitudes towards it.

        That good enough for ya, paedophobe?

      4. Toffee – I suggest that you study the time-line that I posted

        You are talking nonsense. It is quite clear that the NCA didn’t inform anyone about this until a week after the election had taken place.

        As for Diane, even her colleagues in the SCG think that she was wrong to publish this letter. We’ll have to wait and see what the outcome of the independent disciplinary procedure is.

      5. You are talking nonsense. It is quite clear that the NCA didn’t inform anyone about this until a week after the election had taken place.

        And YOU are DELIBERATELY changing the REAL issue – which is that the mayor was told TWO DAYS before the chief exec…NOT THE MAYOR…informed party HQ about the nonsense’s arrest, while in the meantime the mayor PARTIED with said nonsense.

        But it’s to be expected that a paedophile protector would avoid the issue and obfuscate.

        Isn’t it, wee noncecase?

      6. Toffee – …..and there was I thinking that the central tenet of the time-line that I have posted is that it proves that the claim made above is untrue.

      7. It’s untrue?

        So the mayor had no need to RESIGN then, did he?

        You disgusting nonce.

      8. Toffee – “It’s untrue?”
        Yes, it is manifestly untrue, the evidence is there for all to see.

        “So the mayor had no need to RESIGN then, did he?”
        That was ultimately for him and/or the Labour party to decide, and he/they has self evidently decided that there was a need.
        Because I’m not privy to the contents of the phone call between the Chief Exec and the Mayor on the 14th and I don’t have enough knowledge around the law and regulations about naming someone who has been arrested but not charged (Dewey wasn’t charged with any offences until late June 2023) I don’t have enough knowledge to pass comment on the specifics of whether he should have resigned or not. However I would draw your attention to my initial response to a much earlier article on Dewey.

  8. Even, had some ‘Mummy’s boy’, in the Telegraph – this morning, or yesterday – calling Diane a ‘crank’.

    With churnalists like that, where do we go from here?

    It’s imperative, we get the ‘left’ media sorted out, into a coherent opposition to that kind of journalism.

    Print. Online. Television and Radio.

    1. George – It would perhaps be helpful if the press had a coherent message from the self appointed guardians of ‘the left’that they could report on.

      1. ‘The Left’ have plenty to say. The MSM don’t report it. Hardly, ‘The Lefts’ fault.

        I haven’t seen anything in the MSM about Lula’s speech at the UN, the other day.

        The MSM didn’t report on the packed house, applauding and cheering JC’s speech in Ostend, the weekend before last.

        Don’t blame ‘The Left’, blame the quisling journalists of the MSM.

      2. George – How many UK voters were at the Ostend rally? Did you go?🤔

        What lies at the root of your problem is that in the eyes of the electorate JC is now an irrelevance, yesterdays man. We don’t even know whether he is going to stand at the next GE.
        This was the scene just 10 days before the 19GE.

        What went wrong ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

  9. SteveH22/09/2023 AT 3:23 PM
    Toffee – That would obviously depend on the individual circumstances of each case

    But it’s generic with you is t it?

    A one-size-fits-all solution, dependent on the political leanings of the individuals, rather than the circumstances

    Oh, but there was sympathy and solidarity with the“VICTIM” of Claudia Webbe…Who was subsequently found to be lying through her fucking teeth.

    No…Webbe deserved everything she got.

    And then there’s the only sex case you can find from the Corbyn era – mike hill – who you never fail to bring up, even though there’s a plethora to choose from under keef’s tenure.

    But they don’t count. You never mention them and have a ready made obfuscative/evasive response if someone does (mike hill).

    And we have NEVER ONCE heard your condemnation of the likes of the animal dewey.

    No. That ratbastard wasn’t guilty until he WAS. Neither was the mayor.

    Neither were/are any of the smarmerites – until proven – and when it IS proven, there’s another obfuscative/evasive/defensive post from you.

    You condemn neither the action NOR the accused-cum-guilty party – if they’re smarmerite. It’s always: “We must let justice take it’s course”

    But keefs allowed to prejudicially stick his oar in at the first instance, either before or during an investigation – when it’s a corbynist.

    He’s allowed to retroactively expel members – without due process if they’re smarmer-sceptical.

    Keef is infallible to runts like you.

    You’re a shithouse. And a nonce-protecting shithouse at that.

  10. Toffee – Rant away, empty rhetoric is obviously all you’ve got left.
    I’m quite happy to stick with what I’ve said above.

    1. It isn’t empty rhetoric though.

      You excuse nonsenseism. No mistake.

      You excuse any sleaze from smarmerite labour and castigate any corbynist member without equivocation.

      It all pointsme to reckoning you have a penchant for seeing children harmed.

      Sue me.

      ps, despite the fact that the Tories didn’t even having a majority at the time I don’t remember Jeremy defeating Boris on even one occasion, do you?

      Is that despite the fact that nobody can remember keef ever once voting against de piffle, truss or sunak?

      Or publicly supporting all three repeatedly?

      Corbyn defeats toerag government FORTY-ONE times.

      Keef’s SUPPORTS toerag government as many times every bleedin week.

      You were saying??? Knobhead.

      1. Toffee – Don’t be daft. Why would I waste my money suing you. Your inane ineffectual expletive filled ramblings may pump up your obviously flagging ego but they are of little consequence to me or I suspect anyone else.

    2. Nothing “empty” in alerting people to the fact you continually condone nonsenseism.

      But regulars here already know that.

      1. Toffee – I’m not condoning anything. However I am baffled why you are winding yourself up when all I’ve done is publish the above time-line.

      2. Toffee – I haven’t condoned anything, I have simply corrected some of the factual mistakes in the OP

  11. Speaking of polls – this one is, either, terrifying, or bloody hilarious.

    Terrifying, in that, either, of those top two named could become PM. Terrifying that, either, of those parties could form the next government.

    Hilarious because if you don’t laugh, you’ll cry.

    The one concrete thing it does show is, very, very few people have much confidence in either party, or either party’s leader.

    Independents, the LibDems and The Green Party, should be optimistic.

  12. Toffee – I’m looking forward to the next general election, are you?

    Why? You don’t live here (so you say) so why are you so enthusiastic?

    And what do I have to look forward to?

    Another clueless, useless, self-serving austerity government, that’s what.

  13. By the way, who is Ian McKenzie, in the previous article? I’ve never come across him, before.

    The dates of the tweets were before my time, on Twitter.

      1. Thank you, qwertboi.

        I have a hazy recollection of that episode, but, I’m lucky in a way. I have no recollection of Ian McKenzie.

        That’s a good thing.

  14. SteveH22/09/2023 AT 8:20 PM
    Toffee – I’m not condoning anything

    You’re not condemning outright nonce protection and nonce cases neither.

    But you happily condemn Jeremy Corbyn, Diane Abbott, Claudia Webbe, Dawn Butler, Apsana Begum….

    See the patterns here

    1. All are on the left
    2. Four of the five are women
    3. And those women are BAME.


    4. Not one of them are nonces, or make excuses and put up ridiculous cases for nonsenseism.

    So what’s your excuse? .

    1. Toffee – I actually quite like Dawn Butler, a few days ago I drew attention to an excellent long format interview that she’d given on LBC and that your ‘considered’ response was “I might not have pissed off to the Caribbean (allegedly) but for what it’s worth, I have something resembling a life.”

      Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that you are the pathetic individual who is so desperate to score cheap points that you have now resorted to trying to make this all about racism and sexism. 😞

      1. Score cheap points?

        Resorted to trying to make all this about racism and sexism?

        You saying there’s NO patterns emerged; and that you yourself don’t adhered to said patterns?

        Nope. Have another few guesses,

        Clues: Nonce. Whitewash. Excuses.

      2. Reply to Steve H
        You actually like Dawn Butler. Lucky Dawn- I’m sure she will be ecstatic!

      3. Smartboy – Don’t be ridiculous. I very much doubt that she even knows I exist, why would she?
        I am however looking forward to reading her new book “A Purposeful Life: What I’ve Learned About Breaking Barriers and Inspiring Change” which I’ve pre-ordered and expect to be delivered sometime next week. .

  15. Well, it is about Starmer’s (and Labour’s) inability to be fair, just and equitable.
    Is it ego or just a preference for the ad-hominem that shapes your responses, SteveH? More people would seriously consider your posts and the ideas they present if you stuck to the issues which The Toffee (and others) challenge you with. It’s when you don’t do this that most people dismiss you as a shill – which you probably aren’t, despite reacting like one by reducing challenging points to ad-hominem attacks and patronising put-downs.

    Can you not see this? Respect your own intellect – and ours.

  16. </The National Crime Agency who carried out the raid and arrest did not inform Hackney Council about TD’s arrest until 13/05/22 a week after the election and Council’s Chief Executive did not inform the Mayor Philip Glanville (PG) via a telephone conversation until a day later on 14/05/22. The Chief Executive of the Council officially informed the Labour Party on 16/05/22

    Your own comment attempting to exonerate the mayor. From this thread

    Except it weren’t glanville informed party HQ, it was the chief exec. The same chief exec who informed glanville a full TWO DAYS previously.

    And you – ONLY YOU – seem to think that absolves glanville of any blame whatsoever.

    No doubt you were thoroughly taken in by his letter stating he was a victim of “a betrayal of trust”

    Well what about the trust the electorate placed in him, noncecase, hmm?

    And what about the VICTIMS? You’re not remotely concerned about them. (I suppose you’ll be hoping for the said victims to absolve glanville of any blame a-la saviles victims with keef – exceptbthats bullshit)

    You haven’t one expressed any revulsion about the sickening behaviour of both dewey AND glanville, but have instead tried to absolve smarmerites of blame.

    Even though the smarmerites subsequently put the kybosh on the CLP discussing the despicable actions and the laissez-faire attitude of the party on allowing BOTH to RESIGN,rather than their immediate and automatic EXPULSION.

    You haven’t once expressed concern or revulsion about that, neither.

    Why? Because you’re a noncecase yourself.

    So call me whatever, accuse me of whatever. I don’t put up a case for nonces, unlike you.


    1. Toffee – Is their a material difference between the time-line that I have posted above and the one that you have linked to for reasons only you know. What is the point you are trying to manufacture, or is that still a work in progress thing?

      I’ve posted the known facts and It is self evident that I have not excused the actions of anyone least of all Dewey. No amount of hyperbole and histrionics from you is going change the facts.

      Why do you keep doing this to yourself?

  17. Toffee – I actually quite like Dawn Butler, a few days ago I drew attention to an excellent long format interview that she’d given on LBC and that your ‘considered’ response was “I might not have pissed off to the Caribbean (allegedly) but for what it’s worth, I have something resembling a life.”

    Any retard worth their salt would’ve known I was referring to not wanting to hear the usual bullshit from the imbecile dale, rather than it being a criticism of Dawn Butler, as the previous posts from that thread made explicitly clear

    The Toffee07/09/2023 AT 6:19 PM
    That most definitely wasn’t wee Stevie nonsense making THAT call.

    As for dale – he’s as fooking hopelessly dull as any smarmer utterance, and just as annoying.

    Boring tosser.

    The Toffee07/09/2023 AT 6:59 PM
    A reminder of dales gobshitery…

    (From 3:14)

    **link removed to prevent post from not being shown due to multiple links**

    The Toffee07/09/2023 AT 7:03 PM
    And from 0:46

    **link removed**

    But then again, you’re just a retard not worth their salt.

    Have ANOTHER go, and then FAIL AGAIN, noncecase.

      1. Yeh, mon.


        …Mrs H will understand

      2. You have a tendency to resort to obsessing about where we live when you have run out of anything sensible to say.

      3. Run out of sensible things to say??

        Oh, ok then. Perhaps I have.

        Except I don’t put up a case for child-harming nonces, much unlike you. I do hope the locals are aware of your anti-social, child-harming propensities.

        And if I knew exactly where you were I’d make it so. You should not be allowed within a mile of any child in my view.

        One other thing. Please provide the exact timescale of your departure from the UK.

      4. Toffee – ……and yet anyone with half a brain can see that your claims are false. I have not “put up a case for child-harming nonces” I have however provided the known time-line of who knew what and when which happens to prove that your numerous accusations about who knew what, who did what and when are simply untrue.
        You could do the sensible thing and just admit that on this occasion you were wrong.🤔

      5. You haven’t ONCE condemnedeither for their disgusting actions.

        There is NO fence-sitting and no prevaricating where child abuse is concerned. It HAS to be condemned outright, and without reservation.

        Your reticence (I’m being kind – because it’s nothing other than an outright REFUSAL) to condemn either dewey or glanville (added to your agreement with keef on starving children), but rather to mitigate for both speaks volumes about you.

        Nobody normal would need to be reminded, or rather shamed into doing so; indeed, normal people will do so as a matter of course and decency.

        But you’re FAR from being normal OR decent

        I – for one – believe you harbour child abuse sentiments, a strong conviction garnered from your despicable attitude.

        You should never be allowed near children, in my opinion.

      6. And your own timeline says that on 14/05 chief exec told glanville of the arrest..glanville then PARTIES with nonce that very same day, and doesn’t even inform party HQ – because that is also done by the chief exec, a full TWO DAYS later on 16/05.

        So glanville sat on the information

        And THAT, noncecase, is why he resigned. And the party not only DID NOT EXPEL EITHER but ALLOWED both to resign.

        And to top it off, the party then put the kybosh on the CLP holding any discussion about it.

        And you haven’t condemned THAT neither.

        Because you are a disgusting noncecase.

    1. Toffee – Of course I unequivocally condemn child abuse. I just don’t understand or share your rather weird compulsion to run around desperately trying to convince everyone how anti child abuse you are.

      1. Oh you DO condemn child abuse??

        Unequivocally , too, eh? Had to be dragged out of you though, didn’t it?

        And you still think keef’s right to order peers to ABSTAIN on giving children a free school meal.

        You still mitigate for dewey, glanville and the smarmerite labour party for shutting down any discussion of dewey’s nonsenseism.

        You still try to tell us keef’s ultimately not responsible for savile, Rotherham and other abject failures.

        So I’m afraid I don’t believe you.

      2. Toffee – Why would you think that I GAF what you think. Your ill-informed obsessions and rants are of little consequence to me or anyone else.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: