Categories
Uncategorized

Starmer Don’t Call Me Keir- Supreme Leader will do Check his record up to 2013

 

 

Keir Rodney Starmer:

Born in Southwark, London on 2 September 1962. His parents were Labour Party supporters, and named him after the party’s first parliamentary leader, Keir Hardie. Raised in Oxted, Surrey he attended Reigate Independent Grammar School, then graduated from Leeds University with a BA(Law) in 1985, staying in education and gaining a postgraduate BA (Civil Liberty) from Oxford University in 1986.

He became a barrister in 1987 and was appointed Queen’s Counsel (QC) on 9 April 2002.

From 2003–08, he was the human rights adviser to the Policing Board in Northern Ireland before taking up a similar role with the Foreign Office.

 

 

Education and politics 1962-2008:

He excelled at school and at university achieving excellent grades and qualifications in law and civil liberties and his career as a lawyer was praiseworthy in part due to the human rights causes/trials he successfully supported/defended,(many pro-bono). In the years before university his political leaning was similar to that of Jeremy Corbyn. His views mellowed at university and he identified more with the political ideology of Gordon Brown.

“I like the ending to his fable.”

 

Marriage family and religion:

He married Victoria J Alexander b1963, in 2007. They have 2 children and live in Camden North London. Victoria is Jewish and has family in Tel-Aviv, Israel. the couple’s children are being raised in the Jewish faith.

Speaking to the Jewish Chronicle about his family he said “As you probably know my wife’s family is Jewish. On her father’s side there are bar mitzvahs, synagogues — there’s all the traditions. On Friday’s my wife’s family gather at our Camden home for supper. It is about just being with the family.

He told the Jewish news: “I absolutely support the right of Israel to exist as a homeland. My only concern is that Zionism can mean slightly different things to different people, and… to some extent it has been weaponized. I wouldn’t read too much into that. I said it loud and clear — and meant it — that I support Zionism without qualification.” He also told the Jewish Chronicle: “If the definition of ‘Zionist’ is someone who believes in the state of Israel, in that sense I’m a Zionist.”

afternote: Starmer is reputedly very protective of his wife and family and has withheld information from the public, other than the scant details already in circulation. I possess the knowledge but  honouring his wishes I will not reveal it. 

 

 

2008-2013: Poacher turns Gamekeeper

He was appointed Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and Head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in 2008, and held these roles until 2013.

Abandoning his work as a private practitioner for a high profile career in the employ of the State was risky and surprised many since his exposure to criminal law and personnel management was limited and taking charge of over 8000 employees would be a daunting task even for an experienced professional.

The CPS under the previous DPP, had started allocating advocacy work in-house and Starmer fast tracked the process determined to enforce the policy regardless of criticism and/or opposition, claiming the benefits of financial savings and consistent prosecutions to be paramount. The DPP and the CPS were merging and transformed into a state run investigation and prosecution agency, similar to the FBI.

The Chairman of the Bar, expressed concern that the transfer of the bulk of prosecution work to employees of the State could compromise the independence of process provided by self employed counsel. In his inaugural speech he said: “the ever expanding monolith of the state prosecutor may have detrimental consequences for the independence of the prosecuting service or at least the perceptions of its independence.”

An early warning of the potential excesses of a state run command and control, centralising, leader,  is to be found in the conduct of the FBI and J Edgar Hoover:

“For years the FBI was widely suspected of using questionable or illegal methods to gain information. Its counter intelligence programme penetrated suspect organizations and used state resources to disrupt and discredit them. After Hoover’s death a congressional committee investigated and documented the FBI’s surveillance of groups and individuals, many of whom had done no more than exercise their First Amendment rights to criticize the government. The committee concluded that the FBI had often abused its powers, spying illegally on U.S. citizens persecuting those who opposed the will of the State.”

 

Widespread abuse of the public by British police infiltration of environmental and anti-capitalist protest groups

In 2011, the trial of an environmental activist accused of plotting to break into Ratcliffe power station collapsed after it emerged that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had withheld vital evidence. The evidence was comprised of a number of recordings undercover policeman Kennedy, had made of planning meetings.

20 people previously prosecuted from the same evidence had their convictions overturned. And a further 29 people convicted of blocking a train carrying coal to Drax power station also had their convictions quashed due to Kennedy’s involvement.

Starmer who was present in court the day the case was thrown out later said that Kennedy’s actions were not systematic. But they were. In 2015, it was reported that 83 people could have been wrongfully convicted after evidence of spy cop involvement had been withheld. And details of exactly how systematic it was are still surfacing.

The campaign group “Opposing Police Surveillance” claimed “If the 150 or so officers under investigation have similar tallies (as Kennedy), it means about 7,000 wrongful convictions are being left to stand. It may well be that “spy cops” are responsible for the biggest nobbling of the judicial system in English history.

The scandal wasn’t just the police. Released papers showed the Crown Prosecution Service had been deeply involved. They knew about the plan before the arrests and they worked with the police to withhold evidence from the defence and the courts.

Starmer as DPP, promoted the report and agreed to be interviewed on television by Jeremy Paxton. Clearly untrained for media appearance’s his rapid eye movement under questioning was clearly evident when he lied.

Paxman opened by asking if Starmer could be sure there were no other cases of spy cops being in prosecuted groups of activists apart from Kennedy. Starmer did the blinking thing and said that the public had to accept the discredited conclusions of the report. Which was not an answer to the question, so Paxman asked again….It made for excruciating viewing.

Starmer went on to say “if anyone suspects a co-defendant might have been a spy cop, tell me.” But identifying an undercover cop is akin to getting burgled, finding a fingerprint and the police saying “come to us if you know whose print it is”. It is a proven fact that police officers deceived the courts and orchestrated wrongful convictions for decades, and they did it with the active collusion of the Crown Prosecution Service.

As head of the CPS, Starmer knew this but, rather than try to expose it, he covered it up, saying it was only rogue officer Kennedy who had been involved even though the public knew this to be false.

As DPP, Starmer also worked with Nick Paul, the CPS National Coordinator for Domestic Extremism, even though that term had no legal definition and thus no meaning in law. As the Undercover Research Group reported, Paul was in a powerful position of control from the start, overruling senior police as he steered the case.

Which raised unanswered questions about his role in other cases. He had already helped create another miscarriage of justice the previous year, securing the wrongful convictions for the ‘Drax 29’ group of climate activists. The CPS refused to reveal which other cases he had handled. And this raised questions about Starmer’s suitability for Labour’s top job, particularly for anyone who was ever photographed or filmed attending a protest and could be loosely labelled a domestic extremist.

 

Police working “deep” undercover were encouraged to establish long-term sexual relationships with female suspects and their supporters.

Mae Benedict, mother of a young child who was spied on said “This is about my people, our people, us. It’s hard to explain to generations below us the immense damage that these bastards did to us, not just as activists, as a community, but on a personal level, and much more so for those closest to them.

This will never, ever be forgiven or forgotten. Starmer was head of an organisation that supported and enabled political policing. And even if he didn’t have an oversight of what was happening with spy cops, he was happy to be part of the system. Starmer’s work as the DPP is a classic case of poacher turned gamekeeper. (The Canary)

 

Armed police execution of Jean Charles de Menezes

On 7 July 2005, 52 people were killed and more than 700 people wounded in coordinated suicide bombings across the London’s transport system, the deadliest terrorist incident on British soil since the Lockerbie bombing in 1988. Two weeks later, the capital was targeted again, but the explosives failed to detonate. Police found a lead for the suspects in the unexploded bag – an address in Scotia Road, Tulse Hill.

Menezes, who had been working as an electrician in London since 2002 and lived on Scotia Road, was wrongly identified as (Hussain Osman) one of the suspects, Police followed Menezes to Stockwell station and onto a train, where they pinned him down and shot him seven times in the head and once in the shoulder.

Scotland Yard was fined £175,000 for breaching health and safety laws, but the CPS said there was less than a 50% chance of convicting any individual officers, based on insufficient evidence that an offence had been committed.

The inquest jury decided that Jean had not been killed lawfully, that many terrible mistakes had been made and they did not accept police officers’ accounts of the incident.

The jury returned an open verdict after the coroner said it was not possible to conclude with certainty, that Menezes had been unlawfully killed. More here: (https://netpol.org/2017/02/23/cressida-dick/)

On review the CPS agreed that there had been inconsistencies in the officers evidence to the inquest jury, but pointed out that there were also inconsistencies in other witness accounts. The reviewing lawyer said: “I concluded that in the confusion of what occurred on the day, a jury could not be sure that any officer had deliberately given a false account of events.”

The officer in charge of the operation and gave the order to use extreme force was Cressida Dick. Later appointed Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/cressida-dick?)

In the first few months following his appointment Starmer, in a High Court appeal lodged by the family upheld the decision not to prosecute the officers who had executed de Menezes. Stating that there was not enough evidence which would make him reconsider the earlier decision not to prosecute more senior officers for negligence. Full story here: (https://gizmonaut.net/blog/uk/menezes_health_and_safety.html)

 

The Unlawful Killing of Ian Tomlinson

On 1 April 2009, in the midst of a huge protest against the G20 summit in London, newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson, was violently assaulted by Metropolitan police officer, Simon Harwood causing severe internal bleeding and his death. The incident was captured on video, and there were multiple witnesses.

Intent on justifying the assault the police lied, claiming protesters had thrown missiles at them when they were applying first aid to Tomlinson. They also instructed journalists not to talk to Tomlinson’s relatives and withheld information from his family. The so-called ‘Independent’ Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) repeatedly failed to handle the case correctly.

The police selected pathologist Freddy Patel to perform a post-mortem examination and asked him to “rule out any assault or crush injuries associated with public order”. Patel incorrectly concluded that Tomlinson had died from a a heart attack a finding crucial in preventing any conviction of Harwood. But two further examinations suggested Tomlinson had actually died of an abdominal haemorrhage caused by blunt force trauma to his back. Patel was struck off a few years later following a GMC investigation of 29 allegations of incompetence. Too late for Tomlinson.

In July 2010, Starmer announced the decision not to prosecute police officer Harwood in relation to the death of Ian Tomlinson leading to accusations by Tomlinson’s family of a police cover-up. After a subsequent inquest found that Tomlinson had been unlawfully killed, he announced that Harwood would be prosecuted for manslaughter. The officer was acquitted in July 2012 by a jury, but dismissed from the police for gross misconduct. Afternote: Three weeks after the announcement of the not guilty verdict the press released this information which had not been provided to the jury:

“PC Simon Harwood had a disciplinary record littered with complaints of aggressive behaviour and misconduct and once admitted being sent into “red mist mode”, In August 2001, a note was entered on his record to say that he would not be disciplined but he would be compulsory retired on medical grounds because of ongoing problems purportedly arising from a 1998 car accident. Three days after leaving the service he was reemployed by the Metropolitan Police Force as a member of its civilian staff. In April 2003 Harwood, (despite his record) successfully applied to join the Surrey Police Force as an officer. In January 2004 yet another allegation of aggressive behaviour was made against him, this time by one of his own colleagues.” So much for British justice.

 

2011 Rioting and Starmers “Lock em up” policy

During the 2011 riots, he intervened and introduced a policy prioritizing the rapid prosecution and long term incarceration of rioters, which he justified saying that the policy had been instrumental in bringing “the situation under control.”

Later that year following the revelations of police infiltration of environmental and anti-capitalist protest groups, he was forced to order a review of the convictions and invited protestors convicted of aggravated trespass to appeal their sentences. But he declined to authorise a wider enquiry, after a report from Judge Rose said issues arising were attributed to individual fault rather than a systemic problem.

The DPP/CPS and Jimmy Savile – The belated review of the police investigation and CPS indecision

In 2007 and 2008, Surrey Police investigated three complaints that Savile had “engaged in sexual behaviour with young girls”. During the same period, Sussex Police investigated a similar complaint involving a young woman.

Savile was interviewed under caution by police in October 2009 and denied wrongdoing. He was not arrested. No prosecution was brought in relation to any of the four complaints, on the grounds that none of the victims were “prepared to support any police action”, for example testifying in court.

Savile died in October 2011. After his death, it emerged that he sexually abused hundreds of children and women at locations including hospitals, schools and the BBC.

In January 2013, when news of his abuse was revealed, an investigation into whether the CPS had been right not to charge Savile in 2009 was published by Alison Levitt QC. who reported that she had “reservations” about the prosecutor’s decision not to press charges.

She said: “On the face of it, the allegations made were both serious and credible; the prosecutor should have recognised this and sought to “build” a prosecution.” She said the police treated the victims and the accounts they gave “with a degree of caution which was neither justified nor required”. Three of the victims told her that had they had received more information from the police at the time of the investigation and particularly if each had been told she was not the only woman who had complained they would “probably have been prepared to give evidence.”

Ms Levitt said that, in the case of two of the allegations, there would have been a “realistic prospect of conviction” if the women had given evidence. “Having spoken to the victims I have been driven to conclude that had the police and prosecutors taken a different approach a prosecution might have been possible,” she wrote. Ms Levitt was critical of the approach taken by both the CPS’ reviewing lawyer and the police in failing to build a prosecution against Savile in 2009.

 

 

2011: Operation Elvden – The Wtch Hunt

Starmer authorised a legal witch hunt by the Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service’s against journalists of the Sun newspaper, using as an excuse, an almost unheard of 13th century law “misconduct in a public office”.

The hunt (Operation Elvden) included dawn raids and searches on suspects’ homes. He attempted to shift the blame onto his successors when the botched £30 million probe fell apart.

Despite acknowledging that not a single one of the 24 Sun journalists arrested were convicted, he would not say sorry. Yet he was in charge when the five year process was launched. Senior MPs from across the political divide called for an investigation into the catastrophe and changes in the law so that the abuse of the public by the state would not be repeated. (The Sun)

 

 

2013: Benefit cheaters in his sights

Starmer introduced new sentencing guidelines threatening individuals found to be guilty of improperly claiming welfare benefits with up to ten years in prison. His critics levelled against him, the claim that he was the most contemptible of Labour archetypes, “the class traitor.”

 

Nov 2010: Jack Straw Labour MP for Blackburn Alerts the UK to Sexual abuse of young white girls by Pakistani men

A gang of men were convicted of systematically grooming and sexually abusing teenage girls in Derbyshire. Many of the victims were given alcohol or drugs before being forced to have sex in cars, rented houses or hotels across the Midlands. One girl described a sexual assault involving at least eight men. The nine men were convicted during three separate trials at Leicester Crown Court.

Straw said increasing numbers of Pakistani Muslim men view white girls as “easy meat” for sex abuse and highlighted it was endemic in Blackburn and in many other areas with significant Muslim populations across England.

 

 

Aug 2014: Pakistani Grooming gangs reportedly raped near a million underage non-Muslim girls and the CPS failed their pleas for justice

Jack Straw’s warning was ignored by the DPP and the CPS.

Four years and 1 million more rapes later the UK public was outraged and angered by party political attempts shift the blame away from the State onto the victims.

Reports suggested that there were around 1,400 raped Yorkshire children, (a conservative estimate) given there were multiple rapes on each child.

Adding in the Pakistani Muslim grooming operating in Oxford, Bradford, Rochdale, Newcastle and other cities in England takes the count of rapes committed by Pakistani Muslim men against white children into the millions.

The judge in the Oxford case said the brutal rapists demeaned their victims because they did not share the men’s “religion and culture”. Nor is it a “small number” of Muslims. It is an endemic problem in Muslim-dominated towns and cities.

The UK public needs to see justice. That means more than “historic abuse” “no blame game” “no party politics” “look to the future” and all the other rubbish politicians wheel out. We don’t need “the police”, “the council”, “the CPS”. We need names and prosecutions.

Police officers who abetted rape of children need to go to jail. And another thing — who will be responsible for prosecuting members of the CPS for their misconduct?

Keir Starmer, the highly politicised Director of Public Prosecutions, said his CPS did not prosecute because they made assumptions about the credibility of the evidence of victims. So the DPP and the CPS took on the role of judge and jury and failed the abused children. Why? As Jack

It was Labour who did this in Rotherham and Rochdale — to win Muslim votes. Labour police, Labour PCCs, Labour councillors, Labour-leaning prosecutors.

The Rotherham report says a Conservative councillor brought his concerns to the leader but was told not to make it public.

Head of Children’s Services Joyce Thacker told The Times she would punish the leaker — and in 2008 Labour gave her an OBE. For Services to Young People.

Labour’s greedy, sleazy pandering to Muslim votes brought us sharia tribunals — Labour set them up in law — postal vote fraud, uncontrolled immigration, Trojan Horse schools, and now this sick hell.

The Pakistani immigrant community has not integrated into British life. Instead of spreading out and adopting British values but keeping their own religion they have been encouraged to massively dominate a few towns where they attempt to impose their culture on others.

Social planning needs to address the undesirability of one community” taking over an English town or city.

We have seen that with our mixed Afro-Caribbean heritage Britons, with Jewish-heritage Britons and all classes and races up until now.

Politicians, the Media and the Press is persistent in their use of the expression “The Pakistani Community” providing confirmation of the  failed immigration policy of the labour Party who actively encouraged mass uncontrolled immigration of Pakistani immigrants so that they would be able to gain their votes in future elections. Reference to “the community” should address all citizens regardless of ethnic origin.(The Sun)

 

White girls abused by Muslim child rape gangs should shut their mouths for the good of diversity

Labour Party leader, Sir Keir Starmer has promoted MP Naseem ‘Naz’ Shah, who infamously shared a tweet statingThose abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths for the good of diversity”. The British-Pakistani Labour MP for Bradford West liked and shared a tweet in 2017 admonishing white, English girls who spoke out about being raped and sexually enslaved by organised gangs of Muslim paedophiles.

The UK has been rocked by a never-ending stream of scandals involving predominantly Muslim men targeting white English girls from working class backgrounds for sexual exploitation.

Most shockingly of all is the fact that authorities and the mainstream media were aware of this for years if not decades but refused to act, even when girls and parents pleaded for help, for fear of being accused of racism by PC fanatics.

The Labour MP for Rotherham, a town where Muslim child raping gangs were allowed to operate for years with impunity, Sarah Champion, has said that up to 1 million English girls are likely to have fallen victim to Muslim rape gangs as of 2016.

 

 

Categories
Uncategorized

how-israel-gained-control-of-the-labour-party-in-england-and-scotland-is-its-next-target-part-2/

 

Jeremy Corbyn sets campaign tone by targeting rich individuals | Financial  Times

Corbyn rewarded for thirty years of honest endeavour

In 2010, the financial crisis, brought ended thirteen years of a Labour Government. In 2015, under the “wishy washy” leadership of Ed Miliband, Labour lost again. Miliband resigned triggering a Leadership election. Three former members of Miliband’s shadow cabinet were regarded as front runners and entered the race.

Jeremy Corbyn lodged his application near to the closing date for applications and many doubted he would be able to gain the support of  the 35 MP’s needed to be included in the ballot.  He upset the odds when he gathered 36 nominations.

Standing on a platform of “socialism” his message was dismissed as irrelevant by his opponents, Party insiders and the press and media. Odds of 100/1 were available at the bookies for anyone foolish with their money.

But the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) and others misjudged the mood of the nation, following 5 years of austerity under a coalition government and that the election of the new leader would not be a decision for (PLP) to make. The Party membership would decide the outcome of the election.

Corbyn was in his element and addressed nearly one hundred rallies across the UK, speaking to ever increasing crowds each time.

Hundreds of thousands of Labour supporters were inspired by his vision of a socialist Government.

Former party members driven out by New Labour’s neo-capitalist policies and first time voters joined the Party increasing the membership from two hundred thousand to five hundred and fifty thousand in a period of less than six months.

He was duly declared Party Leader having gained an unprecedented 59.5 % of the vote, a larger mandate than any recent leader. But ominously, of two hundred and thirty Labour M.P.s only twenty voted for Corbyn.

The right wing press and media, spurred on by (PLP) members failed to support the Party and spread false rumours of coups to topple Corbyn.  But the plotting failed due to the support of Corbyn by the Labour membership.

Lord “Prince of Darkness” Mandelson, one of Blair’s closest advisers and an architect of New Labour remarked, “we are in a situation now where Corbyn is unelectable in the country but unassailable in the Party.”

But not long after, the shadow “Blairite” cabinet appointed by “peacemaker” Corbyn resigned, forcing yet another election on the membership, which the (PLP) tried to rig, only to be thwarted once again by Party members who returned Corbyn to office.

Having failed a second time the (PLP) started a character assassination campaign to overthrow him. When this tactic failed they cut a deal with the Israeli Government Lobby, the (JLM) and with their assistance and financial backing orchestrated an Anti-Semitism campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party.

UK Labour Party leader Starmer: We must change party culture - The  Jerusalem Post

The Jewish Labour Movement(JLM) Link up with Parliamentary labour Party (PLP) MP’s to overthrow Corbyn

The Israeli Government psychological warfare campaign against the Labour Party leader included the widespread use of an internet application containing instructions for social media users on how to contribute to the “mission” accusing Corbyn of anti-Semitism.

One such allegation falsely accused Corbyn, in a 2010 meeting, of comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. The truth was that Corbyn had hosted a meeting with Hajo Meyer, titled “Never Again For Anyone”, and it was Hajo, a survivor of the Auschwitz concentration camp and a fervent anti-Zionist who raised the comparison of Israel and Nazi Germany in his condemnation of the Israeli Government’s behaviour and his strongly held views in support of Palestinian rights. He once said of Zionist’s: “An Anti-Semite used to be someone who doesn’t like Jews, now it’s someone who Zionists don’t like”.

Read his moving story here. (https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/adri-nieuwhof/how-israel-lobby-attacked-auschwitz-survivor-smear-corbyn)

Another post invited Facebook users to click “like” to user “Nancy Saada’s” criticism of Corbyn’s “anti-Israeli” remarks which she claimed were used to disguise “anti-Semitism”. But the ploy fell flat when a photograph was published of an Israeli army uniformed “Nancy” posing on an armoured vehicle, draped with an Israeli flag.

The Act.IL application is a product of Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry, the organisation that directs Israel’s covert sabotage efforts of any opponent of Israel in the world. At its head is a top civil servant and former army intelligence officer whose organisation is staffed by veterans of various spy agencies.

The so called “mission” is yet more evidence of the Israeli psychological warfare campaign and is an aspect of part of long-term behaviour planning influencing operations by Israel and its lobby groups to smear Corbyn as “institutionally anti-Semitic.”

The operation was also aimed at pushing Labour to adopt and maintain a more pro-Israel policy aided by a number of Jewish MP’s in the Labour Party, the overall numbers of which significantly outweigh the Jewish population in the UK. And other MP’s, not of Jewish descent who join Jewish political lobby support groups in the Labour Party.

The Jewish Labour Movement, (JLM) is an anti-Palestinian group, deeply linked to the Israeli Government, and was at the forefront of the campaign to discredit Corbyn.

The group is run by former Israeli embassy officer, Ella Rose who admitted that as the (JLM) Director, she maintained close personal and working links to Shai Masot, the Israeli embassy spy forced to leave the UK after the Al Jazeera investigation exposed him plotting to “take down” a senior UK government minister.

Masot was also spearheading efforts to manufacture a grassroots pro-Israel organization within the Labour Party by infiltrating the Young Labour group using a tactic known as astroturfing. ( More on the Act.IL App here: (https://medium.com/dfrlab/how-a-political-astroturfing-app-coordinates-pro-israel-influence-operations-bf1104fa5c7f)

 

Candidates to replace Corbyn denounce him as anti-Semitic | The Electronic  Intifada

 

Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) force demands on Jeremy Corbyn.

Adam Langleben, (JLM) campaigns officer, issued Corbyn a list of demands including a requirement that Labour adopt “unamended”, the controversial “International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) a definition of anti-Semitism which would define it as anti-Semitic to accurately describe the Israeli state as a “racist endeavour.”

Corbyn, instead of shutting down the claims as the bad faith attacks that they clearly were continued with his strategy of concession after concession and in return, offered a “dialogue with community organizations, including the (JLM) to discuss their demand that the (IHRA) document be adopted in full, even, as he acknowledged that some of its provisions had “been used by those wanting to restrict criticism of Israel that is not anti-Semitic.” This fuelled further attacks and compromised his position on important matters of principle, such as the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement for Palestinian rights (BDS).

It is also unclear just what Corbyn hoped to achieve in “dialogue” with a group with close ties to a foreign power, hostile to himself and his Party and committed to manipulating his Party members against his leadership, from within.

Unsurprisingly, the (JLM) curtly dismissed Corbyn’s opinion piece as “another article bemoaning a situation.” and followed up saying:

“These measures would have been welcomed, and maybe even celebrated, two years ago, but matters have reached the point of no return. Decisive and significant actions, not words, are the only thing that can bring us back from the brink.”

Just what the actions required by the (JLM) were, is left unsaid, but subsequent events indicate they meant the removal of Jeremy Corbyn from office.

 

Starmer is failing to unite Britain's Labour Party – Middle East Monitor

 

Categories
Uncategorized

How Israel Gained Control of the Labour Party In England and Scotland is Its Next Target Part 1

 

Vanity, venom and a nation betrayed | Daily Mail Online

 

2017: Mandelson the malevolent sticks his knife into the back of his Party Leader

Blair and Brown loyalist Mandelson is a vociferous critic of Jeremy Corbyn and has been since he first won the top job in the Autumn of 2015 (confirmed in a second election by party members less than 2 years later) and his utterance: “I am is working every single day to bring to an end to Corbyn’s leadership” was unsurprising.

Corbyn supporters responded with a strongly worded statement: “The very thought of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister of a Labour Government implementing policies beneficial to the people absolutely petrifies Mandelson, Blair, Brown and their Labour Left colleagues whose policies brought the country to its knees incurring debts so large that many future generations will be subject to austerity policies reducing their quality of life, health and wellbeing.”

In the 2017 General Election a few months later the Labour Party made a net gain of 30 seats with 40.0% (its highest vote share since 2001 and the first time the party had gained seats since 1997).

But the Tory party was returned to power with a much reduced majority, despite a net loss of 13 seats.

It is a fact that had the Labour Party, moderate centre-left candidates supported Corbyn, Labour would have won the election by a small working majority.

In naively trusting that the Parliamentary Labour Party would set aside their differences in policy matters, accept his leadership and support him and his shadow front bench team he suffered badly in the fallout from losing the election and left himself vulnerable to attack from the moderate centre-left.

In retrospect he should have castrated the moderate-left and their supporters well before the election, starting with:

* Deselecting the 184 labour MPs who did not vote against the 2015 Tory welfare bill that contributed to a massive increase in homelessness and poverty such as food banks. A policy which did not adhere to labour values of defending the weak and oppressed.

* Deselecting those MP’s who failed to oppose the 2014 racist, Tory migration bill (only 6 labour MPs including Corbyn voted against) that removed the presumption of indefinite right to remain for “Windrush” migrants that in many cases lived here nearly all their lives and medical treatment for some migrants. (1)

* Removing Party membership from Labour MP’s that voted for intervention in Syria or for the Iraq war. Wars of aggression are not compatible with labour values.

(1). The lack of opposition within the labour party to the 2014 migration bill also gave credence to those that hold the view that the attacks on Corbyn’s leadership, on the grounds that he failed to deal with racism were contrived by those seeking personal advancement and a return to a more relaxed financial regime, as only six labour MPs, including Corbyn, can credibly claim to be genuinely interested in race issues.

Jewish leaders call for UK's Labour Party to act on anti-Semitism 'cancer'

 

2018: Labour Peer Mandelson, former minister in a centre-left government, accused Jeremy Corbyn and his Trades Union supporters of trying to exclude the centre-left from power, saying “throughout our history, it has been moderate-led centre left governments that have delivered radical change in our country, to redistribute power, wealth and opportunity to people, starting with the government of Attlee, Morrison, Bevin and Bevan after the second world war.”

But truth be told it was a large group of disloyal centre-left MP’s, including Mandelson who, only 18 months after his appointment forced a second party leadership election on members whose response was to return Corbyn to office with a much increased majority.

Yet still the centre-left politicians and activists routinely briefed and plotted his downfall and removal from office.

Picking up on Mandelson’s proud claims of the achievements of the last centre-left Labour Government.

This would be the Government that presided over increasing levels of inequality within society through the introduction of punitive measures designed to reduce welfare support to the least able members of society.

Those that were around at that time will remember the centre-left misnamed proclamation of the “new deal” which delivered policies including:

* The centralized control of wage levels through the extension of means testing and tax credits combined with a very low minimum wage.

* The introduction of “work capability assessments” which drove many to attempt suicide.

* The legislation, reducing or removing many disability benefits.

* The high levels of debt permanently transferred to the public through the cheap sale and expensive leaseback (PFI) of the nations capital assets.

* The failure to re-regulate the Tory deregulated financial sector on taking over government and Brown’s stubborn refusal to reverse deregulation despite the 2007/8 financial crisis.

* The condoning of illegal money laundering, through the City of London Financial markets, of Russian Mafia billions.

* The adoption of a foreign policy giving unqualified support to US imperialism engaging in illegal wars of aggression destabilising Eastern Europe and the Middle East for future generations further deepening the widespread hatred of the West from many centuries of imperialism.

Chief Rabbi attacks Labour Party forcing Jeremy Corbyn to defend record on  anti-Semitism - YouTube

2018 Mandelson stepped up the campaign to get rid of Corbyn by hosting a barbecue for centre-left MPs at his home.

The event, held in July 2018, was dubbed the “barbecue boys meeting” and was arranged subsequent to a meeting between Mandelson and Tom Watson following which they joined forces and discussed how to ramp up pressure on Corbyn over the summer, taking back control of the Party amid growing splits on Brexit and claims of a spiralling anti-Semitism crisis and/or the prospects of starting a new one.

Those present did not deny there were political discussions, one added: “It was more about saving Labour than setting up a new party and it was made clear that the meeting, invitees and conversation was not to be leaked.”

Watson later denied he was involved in any plotting, and said: “My kids and I spent much of the occasion playing with Peter’s two wonderful dogs, Jock and Poppy, which would have been far more interesting than idle gossip from the other attendees.”

 

Labour reinstating Jeremy Corbyn after 19 days showing it's just playing  politics with anti-Semitism after all. - Labour Heartlands

 

Not long after, following a public airing by the BBC of televised footage of Corbyn’s attendance at a wreath-laying ceremony for Palestinians over sixty Labour lords, including Mandelson, signed an unprecedented newspaper advertisement portraying Corbyn as soft on anti-Semitism, it read:

“The Labour Party welcomes everyone* irrespective of race, creed, age, gender identity, or sexual orientation. (*except, it seems, Jews).  Corbyn, You have failed to defend our party’s anti-racist values. You have therefore failed the test of leadership.”

The statement echoed the views of eight Labour centre-left MP’s who resigned the Party whip earlier in the year over claims of anti-Semitism and Corbyn’s position on Brexit, a move that angered many centre-left members who wanted Labour to adopt an unequivocal pro-European Union position.

Corbyn hit back with the statement:

“The Labour Party under my leadership totally opposes racism in any form whatsoever. Anti-Semitism has no place in our society, no place in any of our Political Party’s and no place in any of our dialogue. But neither does any other form of racism.”

And a Labour spokesperson later said the party under Corbyn’s leadership stood:

“In solidarity with Jewish people and is fully committed to the support, defence and celebration of the Jewish community. False and misleading claims, hostile to Jeremy, are being orchestrated by politically influential individuals within the Party whose policies in government previously failed the electorate. This powerful group of disloyal Party members is interested only in achieving control so that they can fulfil agendas dictated by persons out with the Party and not to do good things for the voter.”

The antisemitism of Sir Keir Starmer | rs21

 

But the relentless assault on Corbyn was stepped up by centre-left politicians of the Parliamentary Labour Party and their supporters who continued to attack Corbyn’s for failing to address anti-Semitism within the Party and their demand that facts and figures be produced supporting their allegations of widespread and ever growing incidences of antisemitism within the Party.

The information was produced but it did not support their claims of institutional anti-Semitism. The facts:

* 1,100 (approx.) complaints were lodged between April 2018 and January 2019.

* 433 (nearly 40 per cent) were found to relate to non-Labour Party members.

* 673 were investigated.

* 220 were dismissed on the grounds that there was no case to answer since the claims were found to be wildly exaggerated or vexatious.

* 44 members quit Labour while their hearing was pending suggesting that the Labour Party was not a hospitable or comfortable place for anti-Semites. They knew they would be found out and they jumped before being pushed.

* 439 were investigated and this resulted in a number of suspensions and/or written warnings. Twelve members were expelled. A further twenty four are still under investigation or appeal.

Party membership, at the time was approximately 550,000, so the figures represent around 0.07% of the membership.

Parliamentary Labour Party centre-left agitators felt this was much too small a number of expulsions but investigators had heeded a recent report that recommended that re-education should be the preferred first resort and that expulsion should the last.

* Margaret Hodge, one of a number of centre-left senior figures in the Parliamentary Labour Party who actively pursued a crusade against Corbyn submitted 200 of the complaints which concerned one hundred and eleven people, of these ninety-one were not members of the Labour Party.

Hodge was one of those most responsible for false and exaggerated claims against the Labour Party over anti-Semitism. No surprise in that!! So much for the allegations of a Party in crisis.

The British Labour Party's Anti-Semitism Problem | The Nation