[skinster]

^ The Guardian lot within Labour are Blairites and they are rightwing and yes, they should all get out of a party that's meant to be serving the working class . These snakes in the party were getting help from their frands at The Guardian with attacking their own leader/party for years. They were accusing the left of the party of not handling racism accusations properly even though they themselves mishandled those reports that we now know from the leaked report and they pretty much made up the antisemitism accusations. They should all be fired at a minimum. Chris Williamson was suspended immediately for the crime of calling out the antisemitism smears for what they were, and the investigation ended up having him win his legal case because he did nothing wrong. Those who are racist and misogynist and bullies in black-and-white from the leaked report remain in their positions.

One of those implicated has stepped down:

[skinster]

Lol @ JohnRawl acting like the snakes within the party, even after the leaking of this report.

[skinster]

Compare


And contrast



Anti-Black racism here. Where are the pearl-clutchers now?

[JohnRawls]

@Donna @skinster

Cry me a river and continue with the ad homs. Surely it helps your cause? Surely the great leader Corbyn and his Trot following achieved something by now? Oh no, they didn't. Let Starmer have his 2-3 elections and if he fails then you can replace him for a Trot again. Not to mention that he won the support fair and square.

[Donna]

@Donna @skinster

Cry me a river and continue with the ad homs. Surely it helps your cause? Surely the great leader Corbyn and his Trot following achieved something by now? Oh no, they didn't. Let Starmer have his 2-3 elections and if he fails then you can replace him for a Trot again. Not to mention that he won the support fair and square.

You're so obviously stewing with resentment for the left. It's sad.

[JohnRawls]

You're so obviously stewing with resentment for the left. It's sad.

I don't resent the left, that has always been my point. I resent Labours left for great many reasons but stupid Brexit policy being the chief among them. While i disagree with Ters views on Eu and Brexit, i can't disagree with him that Labours left being crazy and abandoning the working class along with large chunk of its own ideologies. That is why, the Trot must be purged from Labour.

[skinster]

‘The People Have Spoken. Bastards’: Leaked Labour Report Shows Party’s Own Senior Staff Acted To Keep Corbyn Out Of Power
In the June 2017 UK general election, Labour under Jeremy Corbyn came within a whisker of power. If just 2,227 votes had gone the other way, seven Tory knife-edge constituencies would have been won by Labour, putting Corbyn in a strong position to lead a coalition government.

Labour achieved 40 per cent in the election, increasing its share of the vote by more than any other of the party’s election leaders since 1945. As we noted at the time, it was one of the most astonishing results in UK political history.

A leaked internal Labour report now reveals that senior Labour figures were actively trying to stop Labour winning the general election in order to oust Corbyn as party leader. The 860-page document, ‘The work of the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit in relation to antisemitism, 2014 – 2019’, first leaked to Sky News, was the product of an extensive internal investigation into the way Labour handled antisemitism complaints.

The report includes copious damning examples of email and WhatsApp exchanges among Labour officials expressing contempt for Jeremy Corbyn and anyone who supported him, including other Labour staff, Labour MPs and even the public.

The document includes:

*Conversations on election night about the need to hide internal Labour disappointment that Corbyn had done better than expected and would be unlikely to resign
*Regular sneering references to Corbyn-supporting party staff as ‘trots’
*Conversations between senior staff in Labour general secretary Iain McNicol’s office in which they refer to former director of communications Seamus Milne as ‘dracula’, and saying he was ‘spiteful and evil and we should make sure he is never allowed in our Party if it’s last thing we do’
*Conversations in which the same group refers to Corbyn’s former chief of staff Karie Murphy as ‘medusa’, a ‘crazy woman’ and a ‘bitch face cow’ that would ‘make a good dartboard’
*A discussion in which one of the group members expresses their ‘hope’ that a young pro-Corbyn Labour activist, whom they acknowledge had mental health problems, ‘dies in a fire’

The investigation was completed in the last month of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. According to Tom Rayner, Sky News political correspondent, the report found:

‘“no evidence” of antisemitism complaints being treated differently to other forms of complaint, or of current or former staff being “motivated by antisemitic intent”.’

However, the report did conclude that:

‘factional hostility towards Jeremy Corbyn amongst former senior officials contributed to “a litany of mistakes” that hindered the effective handling of the issue [of antisemitism].’

Emilie Oldknow, a senior Labour staffer, boasted that she had orchestrated that deputy leader Tom Watson delay the expulsion of Ken Livingston. This was with the deliberate intention of embarrassing Corbyn, despite the Labour leader demanding a speedy resolution of a controversy surrounding comments made by Livingston about Hitler and Israel.

An unnamed pro-Corbyn ‘senior source’ who worked in Corbyn’s leadership office said:

‘This report completely blows open everything that went on.’

Referring to then Labour party general secretary Iain Nichol, the source added:

‘We were being sabotaged and set up left right and centre by McNicol’s team and we didn’t even know. It’s so important that the truth comes out.’

This is part of the bigger picture that we have repeatedly highlighted of the weaponisation of antisemitism to prevent Corbyn gaining power. The fact that senior figures within the Labour Party itself were actively working to prevent Corbyn’s victory is grim indeed.

The report says that:

‘The party’s resources – paid for by party members – were often utilised to further the interests of one faction and in some cases were used to undermine the party’s objectives.’

In particular, anti-Corbyn party officials conspired to divert funds to Labour candidates critical of Corbyn. Senior management agreed to ‘throw cash’ at the seat of Tom Watson, then deputy leader and a persistent Corbyn critic.

Significant resources were also channelled to a ‘secret key seats team’ in May 2017, without the knowledge of Corbyn or his office. This secret team worked to support MPs, including Watson, who were on the right wing of the party, diverting funds away from marginal seats.

Novara Media’s Aaron Bastani, who has examined the leaked report, gives examples of remarkable exchanges that took place among senior staff conspiring against Corbyn’s leadership. These include Labour managers expressing hope during the election campaign that the most pessimistic polls were correct. Greg Cook, Labour head of political strategy, said on June 4 – four days before the general election – that he hoped the ‘sheer hypocrisy’ of a Corbyn speech would make his views ‘a legitimate topic’ for attack, even referring to the Labour leader as ‘a lying little toerag’.

When a YouGov poll showed Labour’s rating going up during the campaign, Francis Grove-White, the party’s international policy officer, said:

‘I actually felt quite sick when I saw that YouGov poll last night.’

On election night, after the exit poll revealed that Labour had overturned the Conservative majority, Tracey Allen, the general secretary’s office manager, said that the result was the:

‘opposite to what I had been working towards for the last couple of years.’

She described herself and her anti-Corybn allies as ‘silent and grey-faced’ and in need of counselling.

McNicol – recall that he was the party general secretary – reacted with dismay as the pro-Corbyn results came in:

‘It’s going to be a long night.’

The following morning, Allen bemoaned:

‘We will have to suck this up. The people have spoken. Bastards.’

Emilie Oldknow, a senior Labour staffer mentioned above, was scathing about Labour MPs expressing support for Corbyn following Labour’s surprisingly good election results, describing one MP as ‘grovelling’ and ‘embarrassing’.

As Bastani summarises, the leaked report:

‘depict[s] a disloyal, dysfunctional culture at the top of the party – one which held Labour’s twice elected leadership, party members, and any MPs they disagreed with, in contempt. Far from a few “bad apples” the messages expose systematic and sustained efforts to undermine the leadership by multiple figures in director-level positions.’

Bastani concludes:

‘These revelations should end any debate around whether Labour’s senior management team, including McNicol, were serious about a Labour government in 2017. To the contrary what this stunning cache of documents reveals is how McNicol – and a tight, unelected circle around him – made every effort to undermine and denigrate that year’s election campaign, frequently stating how they hoped it would fail while simultaneously planning to replace Jeremy Corbyn from as early as January [2017].’

Although long suspected, it is still breathtaking to see that senior Labour figures essentially conspired to prevent a Corbyn-led government, and that they would have actually preferred the re-election of an extreme-right Tory government.

Film director Ken Loach told the Morning Star that the leaked report was ‘dynamite’. He added:

‘If the evidence – all the emails and the secretive, abusive messages – is accurate, there has to be a reckoning, there must be consequences for this behaviour.’

David Rosenberg of the Jewish Socialists’ Group said:

‘Many left-wing Jewish Labour members had criticised the Labour right wing for cynically using allegations of anti-semitism as a factional weapon. We believed that the leadership was genuine and principled in its efforts to address any such problem. Perhaps this report will validate us.’

It surely does.

Historian Louise Raw responded to the leaked report via Twitter:

‘It’s sickening to read, even though we all *knew*. Destroying Corbyn was a malicious game. The zest of the wreckers, and their hatred for those us who supported him, hits you like a punch to the gut.’

‘Mainstream’ Media Decree What The Story Should Be
But the utterly damning evidence in the leaked Labour report that Corbyn was undermined by his own party’s senior figures – that they were actually complicit in weaponising antisemitism to keep him out of Downing Street – is not the ‘correct’ story to tell from the perspective of power. Instead, the focus for ‘mainstream’ media has been immediately twisted and deceptively presented as a desperate ‘smear campaign’ against ‘antisemitism whistleblowers’ by Corbyn allies.

Thus, for the staunchly right-wing establishment Times, the required takeaway from the Labour report is this cynical diversion:

‘Jeremy Corbyn’s allies have been accused of a last-minute bid to “smear whistleblowers” and “discredit allegations” of antisemitism in the Labour Party during his tenure.’

Under the headline, ‘Antisemitism “smear campaign” by Corbyn allies’, reporter Eleni Courea features quotes from Gideon Falter, chief executive of the lobby group Campaign Against Antisemitism which played a major role in the relentless attacks on Corbyn:

‘In the dying days of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, the Labour Party appears to have invested in a desperate last-ditch attempt to deflect and discredit allegations of antisemitism. Rather than properly dealing with cases of antisemitism and the culture of anti-Jewish racism that prevailed [sic] during Mr Corbyn’s tenure, the party has instead busied itself trawling through 10,000 of its own officials’ emails and Whatsapp messages in an attempt to imagine a vast anti-Corbyn conspiracy and to continue its effort to smear whistleblowers.’

The Telegraph gave its reporting a similar spin, ignoring the mountain of evidence of internal Labour hostility towards Corbyn, acting to prevent a general election victory. Instead, it led with the trumped-up accusation that ‘supporters of Jeremy Corbyn’ had released ‘unredacted details of anti-Semitism whistleblowers into the public domain’. The Telegraph report, like The Times article, gave prominent space to comments from the Campaign Against Antisemitism.

Clearly singing from the same hymn sheet, the Evening Standard, edited by former Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, told its readers:

‘Jeremy Corbyn’s allies have been accused of using a report to “smear whistleblowers” and “discredit allegations” of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party during his tenure.’

Once again, rather than include any of the many damning quotes by senior Labour staff smearing or disparaging Corbyn, the newspaper gave space to the Campaign Against Antisemitism with its chief executive Gideon Falter once again to the fore. It is worth adding here that Joe Glasman, who heads the political investigations team at the Campaign Against Antisemitism, boasted after the 2019 UK general election that ‘the beast is slain’ and that Corbyn had been ‘slaughtered’.

Evening Standard columnist Anne McElvoy was scathing about the leaked report, denouncing it as:

‘a Stasi-like trawl of internal mails and messages in search of disloyalty.’

She continued:

‘As conspiracy theories go, this one is up there with 5G equipment spreading Covid-19.’

By contrast, the Independent took the leaked Labour report more seriously and quoted from a statement by the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs:

‘We understand the disappointment and frustration that many Labour members will feel with the details revealed in this report.

‘It contains revelation of senior officials undermining the 2017 general election campaign and suggests there are cases to answer on bullying, harassment, sexism and racism.’

To its credit, the Independent later published an extensive follow-up piece with a headline that summed up the incredible revelations of the 860-page Labour report:

‘Anti-Corbyn Labour officials worked to lose general election to oust leader, leaked dossier finds’

But, true to form, BBC News struck its usual pro-establishment ‘impartial’ stance by featuring the omnipresent Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Antisemitism. However, it did at least permit a tiny hint at the essential awkward truth in a brief line:

‘…some [senior Labour figures] seemed to have “taken a view that the worse things got for Labour, the happier they would be since this might expedite Jeremy Corbyn’s departure from office”.’

A later piece, clearly meant as a more extensive account but buried deep in the ‘Politics’ section of the BBC News website, had all of seven sentences of ‘analysis’ by BBC Political Correspondent Helen Catt; the crucial one being:

‘it’s the allegation that Labour staff worked against a win for Mr Corbyn in the 2017 election that is likely to be most incendiary, if proven.’ [emphasis added]

‘If proven’. Once again, copious examples of senior Labour staff working against a Corbyn win are excluded from a ‘mainstream’ media report.

And where is BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg? Has she gone into hiding? This is a major BBC figure who, month after month, channelled a one-sided account of Labour’s supposed antisemitism crisis, including an infamous BBC Panorama programme demolished as a ‘catalogue of reporting failures’ by the Media Reform Coalition.

Her silence now on the leaked Labour report is shameful and a kick in the teeth to the TV licence fee-paying public which she supposedly serves. Where are all her tweets decrying the betrayal of so many British voters, and the betrayal of democracy itself? Why is there nothing about it on her BBC blog?

And yet, Kuenssberg was happy to use her influential Twitter platform to amplify a message from Iain McNicol on April 4, less than two weeks ago:

‘Labour’s former General Sec now Labour Peer, Iain McNichol [sic] – “The sad fact that Labour has the lowest number of MPs since the WW2 tells you everything you need to know about the Corbyn experiment. I like, thousands in the Labour party, am thankful that chapter is now closed.”’

Her silence now on the revelations concerning McNicol’s despicable role in thwarting a Labour victory in 2017 is telling indeed.

Likewise, where is Robert Peston, the ITV political editor? Why does his blog have nothing on this scandal? Where are all his Twitter remarks on the shocking truth of the subversion by senior Labour figures of Corbyn’s attempt to win the 2017 general election? According to Michael Walker of Novara Media, reporting via Double Down News on 15 April, Kuenssberg and Peston, along with Paul Brand of ITV and Tom Newton Dunn of the Sun, have not tweeted at all about the report.

The harsh truth is that these journalists have been selectively filtered upwards into their highly influential positions, having demonstrated that they would be safe choices at each stage of their respective careers. In other words, there would never be a serious risk that they would pursue real journalism that truly holds power to account.

And will BBC Newsnight’s ‘lead presenter’, Emily Maitlis, be commenting? On April 1, she retweeted a thread from someone called Dave Rich. The first tweet in the thread all but described Corbyn as a Nazi:

‘Goodbye Jeremy Corbyn. They said you don’t have an antisemitic bone in your body. That may be true, but your brain is full of it. Can we remember all the examples? Probably not but I’ll have a go /1’

This was retweeted by this senior BBC journalist to her quarter of a million followers. Maitlis has interviewed and discussed Corbyn innumerable times over the last five years. Can anyone believe, after reading this, that she was impartial, objective and neutral in so doing?

Perhaps the state-corporate media’s elitist and arrogant attitude to the leaked report can be summed up by the disdainful dismissal from Times columnist Iain Martin:

‘shut up, no-one cares right now.’

True enough: ‘no one cares’ about the subversion of the 2017 general election…if you are a beneficiary of the inequitable system of what passes for ‘democracy’.

As for the relentlessly anti-Corbyn Guardian, a lead player in the propaganda blitz to keep even a moderate socialist out of power, its report by deputy political editor Rowena Mason led with a mild headline merely suggestive of the underlying reality:

‘“Hostility to Corbyn” curbed Labour efforts to tackle antisemitism, says leaked report’

How about ‘Hostility to Corbyn curbed Labour efforts to win the 2017 general election’? That would be more of a fitting headline.

Mason gave no details of the copious examples of anti-Corbyn plotting and loathing we cited earlier in this media alert. But she did somehow find space for a tweet from Ian Austin, a former Labour MP who had left the party because of its supposed endemic antisemitism. Austin called the leaked report ‘unreliable’, adding:

‘In last days of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, Labour trawled through 10,000 emails and messages to produce a report into antisemitism that attempts to shield him and his supporters from any blame, and instead pin responsibility on whistleblowers and former members of staff.’

Unmentioned in the Guardian piece is that Austin is now the UK trade envoy to Israel, a reward for his pro-Israel services.

Compare Mason’s bland piece of ‘balanced journalism’ with the succinct summary offered by former Guardian journalist Jonathan Cook:

‘The Labour party inquiry now being suppressed has a trove of emails – some cited in this article – *proving* that Labour’s top officials plotted to bring down Corbyn and sought to engineer a Tory election win. Their actions probably cost Labour the 2017 election.

‘Don’t forget that the gang of Labour officials quoted here – boasting to each other about how much they wanted Corbyn gone, even if it meant letting in the Tories – were *extremely* close to the gang at the Guardian who led the media’s efforts to sabotage his leadership.’

Adding to the shame of the Guardian’s role in stopping Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, the anthropologist and social commentator David Graeber observed via Twitter on April 12:

‘in Aug 2019 I tried repeatedly to get a piece in the Guardian suggesting anti-Corbyn saboteurs in the LP [Labour Party] were fanning the flames & doing so was itself #antisemitism. Editor told me explicitly I would NOT be allowed to criticise Corbyn’s critics motives’

Graeber shared the relevant text of what a Guardian editor had told him:

‘I understand what you’re saying but we can’t carry an article which reads like an ad hominem attack on people who most prominent Jewish people call allies. It’s too much of a leap from most people’s understanding of this issue (not to say libellous) to declare people such as Tom Watson antisemites – or, at best, manipulative.’

This ‘argument’ from a Guardian editor – whom Graber declined to name – is nonsensical. As one Twitter user said, replying to Graeber:

‘Readers’ understanding of the issue having of course been formed by the articles The Guardian did chose to print. It is a chilling admission by the paper that it is no longer prepared to print articles that dissent from its editorial line.’

Graeber agreed:

‘yes exactly – this is the circularity that’s amazing. “No one will believe this because it departs from the conventional understandings which we’ve been hammering into them for two years now so you can’t say it.”’

In fact, far from it being ‘too much of a leap from most people’s understanding’, Graeber sets out his case very clearly and compellingly in this new clip titled ‘The Weaponisation of Antisemitism’ from Double Down News (April 12, 2020). In particular, Graeber points to the insidious roles played by such Labour figures as Ian Austin, Margaret Hodge, Tom Watson, John Woodcock, Joan Ryan, Jess Phillips and Tony Blair in promoting a supposed crisis of antisemitism in Labour:

‘What actually happened [was] a group of people, most of whom were not Jewish, going to the media and screaming their heads off, trying to create hysteria, trying to terrify the Jewish population, trying to create an atmosphere of fear, of potential purges within a political party. Because then people are going to think, well maybe there is some kind of conspiracy going on. I mean, it wasn’t as it turned out largely a Jewish conspiracy going on because most of the people doing it weren’t Jewish. And most of the people who were Jewish were hardly representative of the Jewish community at large.’

Graeber has set out this theme at greater length in an article he wrote last year for openDemocracy, titled: ‘For the first time in my life, I’m frightened to be Jewish’.

Closing Remarks
The newly leaked Labour internal document reveals the fear and disgust amongst many figures in senior Labour Party management towards socialism in the UK. So many Labour figures at the top simply could not bear the prospect of the mildly progressive Jeremy Corbyn reaching Number 10 Downing Street.

Where are the media headlines, interviews and extensive analyses of how senior insiders colluded for Labour to lose a general election? What about the betrayal of all those Labour MPs, staff and volunteers who worked to overturn a destructive right-wing Tory government? What about all those millions of British people who voted for a shift to a more just and compassionate society? A society in which the NHS is truly valued, the welfare and benefits system really does act as a safety net for all, radical carbon cuts in emissions are implemented immediately, and in which foreign policy is no longer guided by outdated and discredited brutal imperialism and the supposed need for a profitable ‘defence’ industry.

Is ‘democracy’ so unimportant – or so repellent – that the UK’s most highly-rewarded and prominent news media, editors and journalists can dismiss the revelations behind the 2017 general election with such superficial reporting or, worse, a disdainful silence? Especially given the present coronavirus pandemic, and the ever-looming climate catastrophe that threatens to overwhelm us all, the implications of stifling a rational leftward shift in British society, and the wilful refusal to examine what happened, are almost too horrendous to imagine.
https://www.medialens.org/2020/the-peop ... -of-power/

You're so obviously stewing with resentment for the left. It's sad.

It is sad, but also amusing because he doesn't know what he's talking about with his constant whines of "purge the left", as though that hasn't happened with Sir Keir Starmer's recent election.

I don't resent the left, that has always been my point. I resent Labours left for great many reasons but stupid Brexit policy being the chief among them.

"I don't resent the left but..."

The rightwing of the party forced Corbyn into adopting a second referendum, Blairites like Tom Watson and your boy Keir Starmer. If Corbyn was able to stick to his guns, Labour would not have lost those 60 or so seats in Leave constituencies in the 2019 election. It is the right of the party that was undermining and sabotaging the left, likely under the direction of Tony Blair who kept sticking his oar in throughout until he realized every time he spoke up, Labour under Corbyn's membership grew larger. The left was only responding to the Blairite attacks, and unfortunately they didn't respond properly, but capitulated to the saboteurs.

[JohnRawls]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6oOj7BzciA&feature=emb_title





It is sad, but also amusing because he doesn't know what he's talking about with his constant whines of "purge the left", as though that hasn't happened with Sir Keir Starmer's recent election.



"I don't resent the left but..."

The rightwing of the party forced Corbyn into adopting a second referendum, Blairites like Tom Watson and your boy Keir Starmer. If Corbyn was able to stick to his guns, Labour would not have lost those 60 or so seats in Leave constituencies in the 2019 election. It is the right of the party that was undermining and sabotaging the left, likely under the direction of Tony Blair who kept sticking his oar in throughout until he realized every time he spoke up, Labour under Corbyn's membership grew larger. The left was only responding to the Blairite attacks, and unfortunately they didn't respond properly, but capitulated to the saboteurs.

Right, blame everything on the "Right" wing within Labour. Reality is that the "Right" wing in the Labour party are more pro-worker compared to your Trots. This includes pro-EU position and not overtaxing both companies and individuals while at the same time shifting reasonable amount of resources to the NHS. Something along those lines.

[snapdragon]

Labour under Corbyn wasn’t working class. He doesn’t understand the working class and never has. He thinks it’s cool, whereas working class people are like anyone else. Some of us have aspirations and some don’t. Some are racist, others aren’t. He couldn’t ever see that. He was taken to a council estate as a young man and was very impressed by the squalor. He has no idea. None.

[Rich]

I don't resent the left, that has always been my point. I resent Labours left for great many reasons but stupid Brexit policy being the chief among them. While i disagree with Ters views on Eu and Brexit, i can't disagree with him that Labours left being crazy and abandoning the working class along with large chunk of its own ideologies. That is why, the Trot must be purged from Labour.

The Trots largely supported Brexit, as they largely opposed us joining in the first place. The far left have generally taken the view that the EU is a capitalist club. Jeremy Corbyn and his mentor Tony Benn shared that view. The original revolt by the Labour in 2016 was fuelled by anger against Corbyn for not really supporting Remain.

Labour's membership was overwhelmingly Remain. Even in the fabled Northern Constituencies, in most if not all, the majority of Labour voters backed Remain. Labour's big mistake was made in 2013. They should have trumped Cameron by calling for an early in /out referendum. By letting The Tories own the referendum, they ensured that the Tories would benefit from the result whether it was in or out. The Lib Dems showed themselves up as total hypocrites calling for an in / out referendum in 2007 and then opposing it six years later.

[skinster]

How top Labour officials plotted to bring down Jeremy Corbyn
Leaked report shows that staff worked relentlessly to damage the party's leader, including by exploiting antisemitism

The findings of a leaked, 860-page report compiled by the British Labour Party on its handling of antisemitism complaints is both deeply shocking and entirely predictable all at once.

For the first time, extensive internal correspondence between senior party officials has been revealed, proving a years-long plot to destroy Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader who recently stepped down.

The report confirms long-held suspicions that suspected cases of antisemitism were exploited by head office staff to try to undermine Corbyn. Anyone who was paying close attention to events in the party over the past five years already had a sense of that.

But the depth of hostility from party managers towards Corbyn – to the extent that they actively sought to engineer his defeat in the 2017 general election – comes as a bombshell even to most veteran Labour watchers.

Hankering for Blair
As the report reveals, party managers and a substantial section of the Labour parliamentary party barely hid their contempt for Corbyn after he won the leadership election in 2015. They claimed he was incapable of winning power.

These officials and MPs hankered for a return to a supposed golden era of Labour 20 years earlier, when Tony Blair had reinvented the party as New Labour – embracing Thatcherite economics, but presented with a more caring face. At the time, it proved a winning formula, earning Blair three terms in office.

Many of the officials and MPs most hostile to Corbyn had been selected or prospered under Blair. Because Corbyn sought to reverse the concessions made by New Labour to the political right, his democratic socialism was reviled by the Blairites.

In 2017, one of the architects of New Labour, Peter Mandelson, unabashedly declared: “I work every single day in some small way to bring forward the end of his [Corbyn’s] tenure in office. Something, however small it may be – an email, a phone call or a meeting I convene – every day I try to do something to save the Labour Party from his leadership.”

That sentiment, the report makes clear, was widely shared at the highest levels of the party bureaucracy. Senior officials actively sought to sabotage Corbyn as leader at every turn.

Bid to rig leadership contest
The Blairites found a plethora of self-serving reasons – aggressively shared by the media – for arguing that Corbyn was unfit for office. Those ranged from his unkempt appearance to his opposition to Britain’s recent wars of aggression, resource grabs repackaged as “humanitarian interventions” that had been a staple of the Blair years.

Corbyn was falsely presented as having a treasonous past as a Soviet spy, and of being at the very least indulgent of antisemitism.

While members of Corbyn’s inner circle were busy putting out these endless fires, the leaked report shows that Labour officials were dedicating their time and energy to unseating him. Within a year, they had foisted upon him a rerun leadership election.

Corbyn won again with the overwhelming backing of members, even after party officials tried to rig the contest, as the report notes, by expelling thousands of members they feared would vote for him.

Even this second victory failed to disarm the Blairites. They argued that what members found appealing in Corbyn would alienate the wider electorate. And so, the covert campaign against the Labour leader intensified from within, as the extensive correspondence between party officials cited in the report makes clear.

Blue Labour
In fact, senior officials frantically tried to engineer a third leadership challenge, in early 2017, on the back of what they expected to be a poor showing in two spring byelections. The plan was to install one of their own, Tom Watson, Corbyn’s hostile deputy, as interim leader.

To their horror, Labour did well in the byelections. Soon afterwards, a general election was called. It is in the sections dealing with the June 2017 election that the report’s most shocking revelations emerge.

Again assuming Labour would perform badly, senior staff drew up plans to stage yet another leadership challenge immediately after the election. Hoping to improve their odds, they proposed that an electoral college replace the one-member, one-vote system to ensure no leftwing candidates could win.

These same staff had boasted of “political fixing” and interfering in constituency parties to ensure Blairites were selected as parliamentary candidates, rather than those sympathetic to Corbyn.

It was already well known that Labour was beset by factionalism at head office. At the time, some observers even referred to “Blue Labour” and “Red Labour” – with the implication that the “blue” faction were really closet Tories. Few probably understood how close to the truth such remarks were.

'Sick' over positive polls
The dossier reveals that the Blairites in charge of the party machine continued undermining Corbyn, even as it became clear they were wrong and that he could win the 2017 election.

According to the report, correspondence between senior staff – including Labour’s then-general secretary, Iain McNicol – show there was no let-up in efforts to subvert Corbyn’s campaign, even as the electoral tide turned in his favour.

Rather than celebrating the fact that the electorate appeared to be warming to Corbyn when he finally had a chance to get his message out – during the short period when the broadcast media were forced to provide more balance – Labour officials frantically sent messages to each other hoping he would still lose.

When a poll showed the party surging, one official commented to a colleague: “I actually felt quite sick when I saw that YouGov poll last night.” The colleague replied that “with a bit of luck” there would soon be “a clear polling decline”.

Excitedly, senior staff cited any outlier poll that suggested support for Corbyn was dropping. And they derided party figures, including shadow cabinet ministers such as Emily Thornberry, who offered anything more than formulaic support to Corbyn during the campaign.

'Doing nothing' during election
But this was not just sniping from the sidelines. Top staff actively worked to sabotage the campaign.

Party bosses set up a secret operation – the “key seats team” – in one of Labour’s offices, from which, according to the report, “a parallel general election campaign was run to support MPs associated with the right wing of the party”. A senior official pointed to the “need to throw cash” at the seat of Watson, Corbyn’s deputy and major opponent.

Corbyn’s inner team found they were refused key information they needed to direct the campaign effectively. They were denied contact details for candidates. And many staff in HQ boasted that they spent the campaign “doing nothing” or pretending to “tap tap busily” at their computers while they plotted against Corbyn online.

Writing this week, two left-wing Labour MPs, John Trickett and Ian Lavery, confirmed that efforts to undermine the 2017 election campaign were palpable at the time.

Party officials, they said, denied both of them information and feedback they needed from doorstep activists to decide where resources would be best allocated and what messaging to use. It was, they wrote, suggested “that we pour resources into seats with large Labour majorities which were never under threat”.

The report, and Trickett and Lavery’s own description, make clear that party managers wanted to ensure the party’s defeat, while also shoring up the majorities of Labour’s right-wing candidates to suggest that voters had preferred them.

The aim of party managers was to ensure a Blairite takeover of the party immediately after the election was lost.

'Stunned and reeling'
It is therefore hardly surprising that, when Corbyn overturned the Conservative majority and came within a hair’s breadth of forming a government himself, there was an outpouring of anger and grief from senior staff.

The message from one official cited in the report called the election result the “opposite to what I had been working towards for the last couple of years”. She added that she and her colleagues were “silent and grey-faced” and in “need of counselling”.

Others said that they were “stunned and reeling”, and that they needed “a safe space”. They lamented that they would have to pretend to smile in front of the cameras. One observed: “We will have to suck this up. The people have spoken. Bastards.”

Another tried to look on the bright side: “At least we have loads of money now” – a reference to the dues from hundreds of thousands of new members Corbyn had attracted to the party as leader.

Investigated for antisemitism
In short, Labour’s own party bosses not only secretly preferred a Conservative government, but actually worked hard to bring one about.

The efforts to destroy Corbyn from 2015 through 2018 are the context for understanding the evolution of a widely accepted narrative about Labour becoming “institutionally antisemitic” under Corbyn’s leadership.

The chief purpose of the report is to survey this period and its relation to the antisemitism claims. As far as is known, the report was an effort to assess allegations that Labour had an identifiable “antisemitism problem” under Corbyn, currently the subject of an investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

In a highly unusual move, the commission launched an investigation of Labour last year. The only other political party ever to be investigated is the neo-Nazi British National Party a decade ago.

The Labour report shows that party officials who helped the Tories to victory in 2017 were also the same people making sure antisemitism became a dark stain on Corbyn for most of his leadership.

No antisemitic intent
Confusingly, the report’s authors hedge their bets on the antisemitism claims.

One the one hand, they argue that antisemitism complaints were handled no differently from other complaints in Labour, and could find no evidence that current or former staff were “motivated by antisemitic intent”.

But at the same time, the report accepts that Labour had an antisemitism problem beyond the presence of a few “bad apples”, despite the known statistical evidence refuting this.

A Home Affairs Select Committee – a forum that was entirely unsympathetic to Corbyn – found in late 2016 that there was “no reliable, empirical evidence to support the notion that there is a higher prevalence of antisemitic attitudes within the Labour Party than any other political party”.

Even that assessment was unfair to Labour. Various surveys have suggested that Labour and the left have less of a problem with all forms of racism than the ruling Conservative Party.

For those reasons alone, it was highly improper for the equalities commission to agree to investigate Labour. It smacks of the organisation’s politicisation.

Nonetheless, the decision of the report’s authors to work within the parameters of the equalities watchdog’s investigation is perhaps understandable. One of the successes of Corbyn’s opponents has been to label any effort to challenge the claim that Labour has an antisemitism problem as “denialism” – and then cite this purported denialism as proof of antisemitism.

Such self-rationalising proofs are highly effective, and a technique familiar from witch-hunts and the McCarthy trials of the 1950s in the United States.

'Litany of mistakes'
The report highlights correspondence between senior staff showing that, insofar as Labour had an “antisemitism problem”, it actually came from the Blairites in head office, not Corbyn or his team. It was party officials deeply hostile to Corbyn, after all, who were responsible for handling antisemitism complaints.

These officials, the report notes, oversaw “a litany of errors” and delays in the handling of complaints – not because they were antisemitic, but because they knew this was an effective way to further damage Corbyn.

They intentionally expanded the scope of antisemitism investigations to catch out not only real antisemites in the party, but also members, including Jews, who shared Corbyn’s support for Palestinian rights and were harshly critical of Israel.

Later, this approach would be formalised with the party’s adoption of a new definition of antisemitism, proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), that shifted the focus from hatred of Jews to criticism of Israel.

The complaints system was quickly overwhelmed, and delays worsened as officials hostile to Corbyn cynically dragged their heels to avoid resolving outstanding cases. Or, as the report stiffly describes it, there was “abundant evidence of a hyper-factional atmosphere prevailing in Party HQ” against Corbyn that “affected the expeditious and resolute handling of disciplinary complaints”.

The report accuses McNicol of intentionally misleading Corbyn about the number of cases so that “the scale of the problem was not appreciated” by his team – though the scale of the problem had, in fact, also been inflated by party officials.

The report concludes that Sam Matthews, who oversaw the complaints procedure under McNicol, “rarely replied or took any action, and the vast majority of times where action did occur, it was prompted by other Labour staff directly chasing this themselves”.

Amplified by the media
Both McNicol and Matthews have denied the claims to Sky News. McNicol called it a “petty attempt to divert attention away from the real issue”. Matthews said the report was "a highly selective, retrospective review of the party’s poor record" and that a “proper examination of the full evidence will show that as Head of Disputes and Acting Director, I did my level best to tackle the poison of anti-Jewish racism which was growing under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership."

But there is too much detail in the report to be easily dismissed and there remain very serious questions to be answered. For example, once Matthews and McNicol had departed, Labour rapidly increased the resolution of antisemitism cases, dramatically stepping up the suspension and expulsion of accused party members.

The earlier delays appear to have had one purpose only: to embarrass Corbyn, creating an impression the party – and by implication, Corbyn himself – was not taking the issue of antisemitism seriously. Anyone who tried to point out what was really going on – such as, for example, MP Chris Williamson – was denounced as an antisemitism “denier” and suspended or expelled.

The media happily amplified whatever messages party officials disseminated against Corbyn. That included even the media’s liberal elements, such as the Guardian, whose political sympathies lay firmly with the Blairite faction.

That was all too evident during a special hour-length edition of Panorama, the BBC’s flagship news investigations programme, on Labour and antisemitism last year. It gave an uncritical platform to ex-staff turned supposed “whistleblowers” who claimed that Corbyn and his team had stymied efforts to root out antisemitism.

But as the report shows, it was actually these very “whistleblowers” who were the culpable ones.

'Set up left, right and centre'
The media’s drumbeat against Corbyn progressively frightened wider sections of the Jewish community, who assumed there could be no smoke without fire.

It was a perfect, manufactured, moral panic. And once it was unleashed, it could survive the clear-out in 2018 of the Blairite ringleaders of the campaign against Corbyn.

Ever since, the antisemitism furore has continued to be regularly stoked into life by the media, by conservative Jewish organisations such as the Board of Deputies, and by Israel partisans inside the Labour Party.

“We were being sabotaged and set up left, right and centre by McNicol’s team, and we didn’t even know. It’s so important that the truth comes out,” one party source told Sky News.

Stench of cover-up
The question now for Labour’s new leader, Keir Starmer, is what is he going to do with these revelations? Will he use them to clean out Labour’s stables, or quietly sweep the ordure under the carpet?

The signs so far are not encouraging.

The intention of current party managers was to bury the revelations – until someone foiled them by leaking the report. Predictably, most of the media have so far shown very little interest in giving these explosive findings anything more than the most perfunctory coverage.

Unconvincingly, Starmer has claimed he knew nothing about the report until the leak, and that he now intends to conduct an “urgent independent investigation” into the findings of the earlier inquiry.

Such an investigation, he says, will re-examine “the contents and wider culture and practices referred to in the report”. That implies that Starmer refuses to accept the report’s findings. A reasonable concern is that he will seek to whitewash them with a second investigation.

He has also promised to investigate “the circumstances in which the report was put into the public domain”. That sounds ominously like an attempt to hound those who have tried to bring to light the party’s betrayal of its previous leader.

The stench of cover-up is already in the air.

Fear of reviving smears
More likely, Starmer is desperate to put the antisemitism episode behind him and the party. Recent history is his warning.

Just as Williamson found himself reviled as an antisemite for questioning whether Labour actually had an antisemitism problem, Starmer knows that any effort by the party to defend Corbyn’s record will simply revive the campaign of smears. And this time, he will be the target.

Starmer has hurriedly sought to placate Israel lobbyists within and without his own party, distancing himself as much as possible from Corbyn. That has included declaring himself a staunch Zionist and promising a purge of antisemites under the IHRA rules that include harsh critics of Israel.

Starmer has also made himself and his party hostage to the conservative Board of Deputies and Labour’s Israel partisans by signing up to their 10 pledges, a document that effectively takes meaningful criticism of Israel off the table.

There is very little reason to believe that Labour’s new leadership is ready to confront the antisemitism smears that did so much to damage the party under Corbyn and will continue harming it for the foreseeable future.

The biggest casualties will be truth and transparency. Labour needs to come clean and admit that its most senior officials defrauded hundreds of thousands of party members, and millions more supporters, who voted for a fairer, kinder Britain.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/h ... own-corbyn

No wonder he didn't want to release info on his donors before the leadership election.

Right, blame everything on the "Right" wing within Labour.

I was specific about what I was blaming the right of the party of. You and your ilk - boring centrists - are not addressing any of the fucked up shit they did and keep bleating "purge the left" like dumb sheep. Suggesting the right and the left in the party are equal when it comes to infighting is absolutely false - unless you want to show me how - because what was actually happening is the right was constantly attacking and undermining the left and the left were constantly having to respond to the attacks or capitulate in an attempt to end the "infighting" so they could focus on being a solid opposition and win, something the right spent years destroying any chances for.

Reality is that the "Right" wing in the Labour party are more pro-worker compared to your Trots.

I'm not a trot but lol at you regurgitating the snakes in this story Admin Edit: Rule 2 Violation.

And citation needed.

This includes pro-EU position and not overtaxing both companies and individuals while at the same time shifting reasonable amount of resources to the NHS. Something along those lines.

The pro-EU position the right kept pushing after the vote took place is one of a few reasons why Labour lost the 2019 election. Your "Something along those lines." suggests you don't know what you're talking about (again) in the preceding sentence.

Labour under Corbyn wasn’t working class. He doesn’t understand the working class and never has. He thinks it’s cool, whereas working class people are like anyone else. Some of us have aspirations and some don’t. Some are racist, others aren’t. He couldn’t ever see that. He was taken to a council estate as a young man and was very impressed by the squalor. He has no idea. None.

I don't know why you have this tendency to constantly share your opinion on things that nobody asked for or are relevant to what's being discussed (the leaked report).

When do you plan to address how the rightwing of the party spent years sabotaging the party that you apparently support? Who campaigned to lose elections? So far you've dismissed it as "infighting" as if it was coming from both directions, but it was only coming from the right. Unless you have anything aside from your opinion to support your position.

Anyway, where did all the Brits go?

[JohnRawls]

No wonder he didn't want to release info on his donors before the leadership election.








I was specific about what I was blaming the right of the party of. You and your ilk - boring centrists - are not addressing any of the fucked up shit they did and keep bleating "purge the left" like dumb sheep. Suggesting the right and the left in the party are equal when it comes to infighting is absolutely false - unless you want to show me how - because what was actually happening is the right was constantly attacking and undermining the left and the left were constantly having to respond to the attacks or capitulate in an attempt to end the "infighting" so they could focus on being a solid opposition and win, something the right spent years destroying any chances for.



I'm not a trot but lol at you regurgitating the snakes in this story like a dumb cuck.

And citation needed.



The pro-EU position the right kept pushing after the vote took place is one of a few reasons why Labour lost the 2019 election. Your "Something along those lines." suggests you don't know what you're talking about (again) in the preceding sentence.



I don't know why you have this tendency to constantly share your opinion on things that nobody asked for or are relevant to what's being discussed (the leaked report).

When do you plan to address how the rightwing of the party spent years sabotaging the party that you apparently support? Who campaigned to lose elections? So far you've dismissed it as "infighting" as if it was coming from both directions, but it was only coming from the right. Unless you have anything aside from your opinion to support your position.

Anyway, where did all the Brits go? :?:

The Trotskyist left lost the leadership race because Starmer has more support. Now you are trying to remove Starmer against the will of the Labour electorate. Your side is irredeemable.

[skinster]

Leaks show how Labour sabotaged Corbyn
A leaked internal report shows that the UK Labour Party’s bureaucrats conspired to undermine their own leader Jeremy Corbyn from the start, even sabotaging the 2017 general election campaign.

It also reveals how Labour’s left-wing leaders came to embrace the right’s witch hunt against members over the manufactured anti-Semitism crisis.

The document shows that right-wingers at Labour headquarters, led by former general secretary Iain McNicol, orchestrated “a hyper-factional atmosphere” against Corbyn.

The report describes a “purge” of Corbyn-supporting party members.

You can read pages from the leaked document below.

Keir Starmer, Labour’s new right-wing leader, on Tuesday announced an investigation into who leaked the document.

“The content and the release of the report into the public domain raise a number of matters of serious concern,” he said.

From the moment Corbyn first won the leadership in 2015, the report shows, left-wing members were obsessively demonized as “Trots” – slang for a faction of communists. Many were expelled or suspended on flimsy pretexts – including false accusations of anti-Semitism.

One senior Labour Press officer privately described Corbyn as “that fucking Trot” and said that some MPs who nominated him for leader deserved “to be taken out and shot.”

A Labour staffer described the atmosphere at headquarters: “everyone else is much more right-wing” and considers anyone to the left of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown “to be a Trot.”

The internal sabotage of Corbyn included budgeting $280,000 for a “secret key seats” project allegedly intended to “funnel additional resources into seats of key figures on the right of the party.”

This confirms what The Electronic Intifada reported at the time: “Labour Party headquarters had funnelled campaign resources away from seats being contested by pro-Corbyn candidates and towards so-called ‘moderates.’”

“No evidence”
Pro-Israel figures were prominent among the party’s right-wing candidates – including Labour Friends of Israel and the Jewish Labour Movement’s then chairs Joan Ryan and Jeremy Newmark.

The report does not mention these candidates by name, however.

Ryan worked to undermine Corbyn. Despite “misgivings about the Labour leadership,” Ryan wrote to her constituents, “I hope that you will consider voting for me as your local MP.”

Yet despite such efforts, Corbyn did much better than expected, giving Labour its best result for years and denying the ruling Conservative Party a majority.

The leak shows that one senior Labour staffer was furious at voters: “The people have spoken. Bastards.”

The leaked internal report concludes there was “no evidence” Labour staff have been motivated by anti-Semitism, or that complaints about anti-Semitism were treated differently from others.

But it also reveals the extent to which Corbyn and his supporter, party general secretary Jennie Formby, conceded ground to the Israel lobby and the false narrative of rampant Labour anti-Semitism.

After Corbyn, a lifelong Palestine solidarity campaigner, became leader in 2015, pro-Israel groups relentlessly attacked him and his supporters as anti-Semitic.

This defamation campaign ultimately succeeded. The “crisis” was a top focus during the 2019 general election, and polling showed that Corbyn’s mishandling of it was one of the top five reasons for voters not supporting Labour.

The Israel lobby declared victory, with one group claiming to have “slaughtered” Corbyn.

Israel lobby
Despite all this, and the misleading nature of most of these attacks, Corbyn, to his own ruin, embraced the very same groups that were promoting the “crisis” lies.

The report came to light on Sunday, in stories by Sky News and Novara Media.

The leaked document was also passed around among journalists and Labour members.

In 851 pages of often tedious detail, the report examines the work of the party’s disciplinary unit around anti-Semitism between 2014 and 2019.

It was written as part of Labour’s response to the investigation of the party launched last May by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

But the document reportedly will not now be submitted to the body, after Keir Starmer took over as leader.

A Labour Party staffer told The Electronic Intifada that colleagues had “vanished for literally months on end” to work on the report. The source predicted that the new Labour leader would now use the leak to clean out the current Labour staff.

The Commission, the UK’s official anti-discrimination body, has come under criticism after launching its investigation into alleged anti-Semitism in Labour at the request of two pro-Israel groups – the Jewish Labour Movement and the Campaign Against Antisemitism.

The Campaign Against Antisemitism is the one that later claimed to have “slaughtered” Corbyn.

Labour’s internal pro-Israel lobby played a key role in keeping the crisis rumbling, as revealed in 2017 by Al Jazeera’s undercover film The Lobby.

But the leaked report shows the extent to which Corbyn and his team capitulated to the lobby’s demands, in the forlorn hope its campaign against him would stop.

The report repeatedly attacks some of Corbyn’s high-profile supporters, several pushed out of the party after being smeared as anti-Semites.

Smears
Those again smeared in the document include former London mayor Ken Livingstone, anti-racist activists Jackie Walker and Marc Wadsworth, left-wing former Labour lawmaker Chris Williamson, Jewish anti-Zionist Tony Greenstein and this writer.

A farcical example of the document’s conflation of criticism of Israel with anti-Jewish racism comes in its section on me.

The authors claim that my accurate reporting of the fact that former lawmaker Louise Ellman was then a “Labour Friends of Israel officer” amounted to an anti-Semitic “trope.”

The report in most cases does not explain or offer evidence as to why the acts of these “high profile” individuals were supposedly anti-Semitic. It merely asserts that they are.

A “joint meeting”
Corbyn, Formby and their staff repeatedly intervened to speed up disciplinary action in some “high profile” cases of smeared activists – often at the insistence of the Jewish Labour Movement.

“After Jennie Formby was appointed general secretary in March 2018, action on anti-Semitism complaints increased dramatically,” the authors contend.

As The Electronic Intifada has reported for years, the Jewish Labour Movement has close ties to the Israeli embassy.

Founded in 2004, it was resurrected in 2015 specifically to fight Corbyn.

Corbyn and Formby’s commitment to obeying the dictates of the Israel lobby even extended to Labour Friends of Israel – which functions as a front for the Israeli embassy.

An April 2018 email from Corbyn shows he discussed setting up a “joint meeting” between Labour Friends of Palestine and Labour Friends of Israel to “agree on [a] two-state statement on Israel-Palestine.”

The report’s authors took the email as proof of Corbyn’s “desire for the party to lead on tackling anti-Semitism and racism.”

It is yet more evidence of Corbyn and Formby’s muddled and self-defeating approach that cosying up to the Israel lobby would help them fight the false allegations of anti-Jewish animus.

Labour factionalism and right-wing racism
The report appears to be an effort to exonerate the current Labour general secretary Jennie Formby and the cadre of bureaucrats around her, while attacking their internal enemies.

A main target is Sam Matthews, a former party bureaucrat.

Matthews and other right-wing Labour staffers eventually quit their jobs at party headquarters.

Matthews took part in last year’s hatchet job BBC Panorama “investigation” of Labour anti-Semitism claims.

He asserted in the film that he was “heartbroken and disgusted that the party I joined over a decade ago is now institutionally racist.”

But internal Labour Party emails and conversations in WhatsApp groups contained in the leaked report show that Matthews and other right-wing bureaucrats actively worked to sabotage Corbyn from the start.

Dan Hogan, another right-wing bureaucrat who appeared in the Panorama film as a “whistleblower,” had in September 2015 reacted with violent contempt to a visit by the party’s new leader to headquarters.

A staffer who “whooped” for Corbyn’s speech “should be shot,” wrote Hogan.

“Massive elephant in the room that we all kind of hate” Corbyn, a colleague responded.

Other staffers deployed anti-Black stereotypes against Diane Abbott, calling her an “angry woman” and “truly repulsive.”

The UK’s first Black female member of parliament, Abbott was one of Corbyn’s few supporters among Labour lawmakers.

Who wrote it?
The leaked document’s metadata suggests the report’s lead author was Harry Hayball, a current Labour Party staffer.

Written over several months following Labour’s defeat in December’s election, the report took a dozen staffers to prepare.

The leaked document’s metadata suggests that its lead author was Harry Hayball, a senior Labour Governance Officer who works solely on anti-Semitism.

Hayball was recruited by Labour in 2019 to exclusively work on anti-Semitism.

He previously worked on the same topic for Momentum, the Labour organization forged by Jon Lansman after the original Jeremy For Leader campaign.

As part of this work, Hayball met the Jewish Labour Movement and other groups to discuss “tackling anti-Semitism within the party and on the left,” the report states.

A second staffer recruited under Formby specifically to work on anti-Semitism was Patrick Smith.

Smith is a former organizer with the Alliance for Workers Liberty – a small Trotskyist sect particularly controversial on the British left due to its support for Zionism and Israel.

Smith quit the group in 2013, but still toed their line, describing Palestine Solidarity Campaign activists as “essentially mad.”

The report spins this history, claiming instead that Smith was “hired specifically because of his knowledge of anti-Semitism and the forms it takes on the left.”

“Smith had been a member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, but he left the organization in 2008,” over alleged anti-Semitism, the report asserts.

Witch hunt against left
The document also alleges that right-wing Labour staffers’ obsession with purging “Trots” meant that they often missed or delayed work on the small number of credible complaints about anti-Semitism.

The authors suggest that some staffers may have “failed to act on extreme cases of anti-Semitism in order to undermine the Labour Party as led by Jeremy Corbyn.”

They also speculate that “staff were simply not motivated to deal with such cases properly, and that they were only motivated to work on things that contained a factional element.”

Despite these admissions of bias, the report ignores how many of the complaints involved politically motivated false charges echoing Israel lobby smears of the left and Palestine solidarity campaigners.

The authors even denounce reporting of how smears have been used against campaigners as anti-Semitism “denialism.”

Indeed, the authors enthusiastically contribute towards this smear campaign.

The leaked report states that former staffers neglected a complaint of alleged anti-Semitism against Labour members in the constituency Louise Ellman then represented in Parliament.

But they ignore how the allegations against the local party branch, Liverpool Riverside, were part of a political witch hunt against the left.

The Jewish Chronicle’s reporting of the alleged anti-Semitism in the constituency was ruled by the UK’s press regulator last year to be “significantly misleading.”

After a libel suit, the paper settled out of court with local activist Audrey White, admitting that it had published allegations about her that were “untrue.”
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/as ... ged-corbyn

[Ter]

That's a lot of sour grapes. From the electronicintifada no less, the neutral news medium par excellence.

It should come as no surprise that a party that was led by a person who called Hezbolla "his friends" will be criticised by people with a different opinion. From within his own party no less. As it should be.

Labour led by Bae Jeremy has lost the election with a historical defeat, al-hamdullila hallelujah thank god !

Corbyn will be more useful growing vegetables in his allotted garden. I wish him a peaceful, pleasant, healthy and long retirement.

Long live Boris Johnson.

[foxdemon]

I went looking to get an understanding of this leaked document. It seems the media is confused as well.

Let’s see if I have it straight.

Corbyn is a well know terrorist supporter. Those terrorists are extremely anti-Semitic.

Then Corbyn gets his Momentum fruit loop movement to join Labour enmass, to enable branch stacking. And so he gains power.

All of a sudden, now that Labour is chock’a’block with Momentum activities, there is an enormous rise in anti-semitism.

The leaked documents go on to complain that the far left are in fact victims and therefore they should be granted leave to be as bigoted as they please.


Many people around the world, myself included, are struggling to understand how these far left activities are able to lay straight in bed at night.

[Rich]

Accusations of "Anti-Semitism" are themselves the most disgusting racism. They come from the predicate that the only Semites that really matter are the Jews. Even when some of those identified as Jews are not Semites and the majority of their ancestors are probably not Semites either. Notice how modern Jewish supremacists and old style Nazis hold essentially the same belief. Its just that for the Nazis, the Jews were the preternatural evil of history, while for Jewish supremacists, Jews are the preternatural heroes and moral givers of history. Semitic cultures made contributions to human progress before the Islamic night came.

Its time we recognised the life of a poorly educated Ukrainian peasant girl, starved to death in the Holodomor has the same value as a well educated middle class German Jew, starved or gassed to death in a concentration camp. The former has the same right to vengeance, even if she left no diary to record her plight. The same also goes for the victims of the Armenian genocide. We do not forgive. We do not forget!

[ingliz]

the UK Labour Party’s bureaucrats

Burning the house down.

It appears that two lost elections were not enough for them. They, the Red Tory traitors named in the report, are playing the victim now and working in concert to bankrupt the party through countless individual legal actions for data protection violations, libel and defamation (15 separate cases per 'victim', on average, according to the Guardian).

[skinster]

Long live Boris Johnson.

He's currently being asked to resign / a coup within the Tory party at play right now.

I went looking to get an understanding of this leaked document. It seems the media is confused as well.

Let’s see if I have it straight.

Corbyn is a well know terrorist supporter. Those terrorists are extremely anti-Semitic.

Then Corbyn gets his Momentum fruit loop movement to join Labour enmass, to enable branch stacking. And so he gains power.

All of a sudden, now that Labour is chock’a’block with Momentum activities, there is an enormous rise in anti-semitism.

The leaked documents go on to complain that the far left are in fact victims and therefore they should be granted leave to be as bigoted as they please.

Many people around the world, myself included, are struggling to understand how these far left activities are able to lay straight in bed at night.

Looks like it's you who is confused, you don't have it straight at all. How does anyone read any of the news on the Leaked report and come to the above conclusions?

What happened:

Just a few nights ago, Twitter was set ablaze with the leaking of an internal report into the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit. The 860-page document, including emails and WhatsApp messages, was the result of an investigation into antisemitism within the party, however, it ended up revealing much more.

What has been brought to the fore is an intricate web of bureaucratic plotting and contemptuous commentary from some of the most senior officials in the Labour Party.

Alongside denigrating their colleagues and blocking Jeremy Corbyn’s investigations into antisemitism, this right-wing sect of Labour sought to undermine their elected leadership at every turn, going as far as seeking to scupper their party’s 2017 general election campaign. However, even amid all the deception, conspiracy and sabotage, what comes through loud and clear is the utter contempt with which Labour Party members view black women, specifically their own MPs.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/la ... source=twi

Maybe try reading the articles in this thread a little slower, that might help with your comprehension issues.

It appears that two lost elections were not enough for them. They, the Red Tory traitors named in the report, are playing the victim now and working in concert to bankrupt the party through countless individual legal actions for data protection violations, libel and defamation (15 separate cases per 'victim', on average, according to the Guardian).

Ha, that's the story they think is going to lead.

The Guardian's Comments sections are closed for articles like this. Just as they were whenever they sold the antisemitism smears. For reasons that should be obvious.

Left members will happily help along the way in destroying the party before leaving, if heads don't roll. Maybe they can now do what the right of the party has been doing for the last 5 years, if you can't beat them...

[Patrickov]

It is most stupid to keep revolving around a non-argument like antisemitism.

A more serious issue is why these supposed Saints fail to rally enough people to unseat the Tories.

People who get easily sabotaged must be weak or flawed in a serious way. For Corbyn's case I suspect the problem lies in his supporters. They must have made people think them being either incompetent, arrogant or intolerant.

[skinster]

A more serious issue is why these supposed Saints fail to rally enough people to unseat the Tories.

Labour would've won the 2017 election but that didn't happen because the Blairites were sabotaging their party's chances of winning: they were campaigning on the election to lose. This is what is revealed in the leaked report.

^ And left Labour weren't only under attack by the right in the party, but by the British establishment; intelligence, military, it's media, Israeli lobby groups, Saudi lobby groups, etc. We would be living under a Corbyn government today if democracy existed here.