Elections Aftermath: Was our 2019 Vote & the EU Referendum Rigged? #TORYRIG2019


Home Forums Discussion Forum Elections Aftermath: Was our 2019 Vote & the EU Referendum Rigged? #TORYRIG2019

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 40 posts - 281 through 320 (of 336 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #57711 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Warning the ‘SLAPP Happy’ Lawfare tactics targeting the progressive Left threaten Free Speech and our Democracy! US Website ‘anti-slapp.org’ alerts us to an alarming, rapidly growing trend as the UK seeks to emulate litigious hungry America; the acronym SLAPP stands for: Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Here in the UK we are about to get slapped about quite a bit as we dare to pit public interest against political and Corporate power and greed. This imbalance of power used to manipulate justice or indeed yet another route for what should be, as the Judge who threw out an attempt to shut down a legitimate BDS campaign said, “an impermissible attempt to achieve a political end by litigious means.” This dirty and disreputable legal battlefield is accruing its own terminology as we try to articulate the colossal danger that “Lawfare” poses to freedom of speech in our waning democracy. It is all out war to main freedom of the press and it challenges them to be more daring in exposing the truth, not less.

    Elaborating on how things stand in the US this organization under, “Amendment to the United States Constitution,” say that, “Free speech and healthy debate are vital to the well-being of a democracy. In fact, the United States Supreme Court has said that the right to petition the government is the very foundation of our democracy.” I thought the UK shared that principal, yet at this very moment the US Government is seeking to extradite political prisoner, Journalist, Whistleblower Julian Assange currently being held under inhumane conditions in Belmarsh Prison. How could the extradition, conviction and incarceration of WikiLeaks Editor Julian Assange affect freedom of the press worldwide? It contravenes the protection offered by UN Treaties to ‘Political Prisoners: it will gag the press: sign two PetitionsRSF. It would establish an extremely dangerous precedent where a foreign national could be charged for an alleged ‘public interest Journalism crime’ committed anywhere in the world with US censorship enacted globally.

    On their Website anti-slapp.org outline their goal, “The Public Participation Project (PPP) is currently working to pass federal anti-SLAPP legislation in Congress. Our coalition of supporters includes numerous organizations and businesses, as well as prominent individuals. PPP also assists individuals and organizations working to pass anti-SLAPP legislation in their states. An important part of our work includes educating the public about SLAPPs and the consequences of these lawsuits intended to limit free speech.” Under “Legal Resources” they wrote, “The Public Participation Project spent months drafting a balanced piece of legislation that provides excellent protection for First Amendment rights. Many of the sources are linked below, including seminal cases about the First Amendment rights of petition and free speech, and the history of protections for those rights. Materials on federalism issues, civil procedure, and other considerations in drafting federal anti-SLAPP legislation are also linked below.” In the UK; how can we learn to combat SLAPPs?

    anti-slapp.org explain how Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation corrupt our justice system. They warn that, “These damaging suits chill free speech and healthy debate by targeting those who communicate with their government or speak out on issues of public interest. SLAPPs are used to silence and harass critics by forcing them to spend money to defend these baseless suits. SLAPP filers don’t go to court to seek justice. Rather, SLAPPS are intended to intimidate those who disagree with them or their activities by draining the target’s financial resources. SLAPPs are effective because even a meritless lawsuit can take years and many thousands of dollars to defend. To end or prevent a SLAPP, those who speak out on issues of public interest frequently agree to muzzle themselves, apologize, or ‘correct’ statements.” We have every right to be totally outraged when Labour, our main UK opposition Political Party, faced a SLAPP and Starmer capitulated with a huge settlement and an unjustified grovelling apology.

    The Labour Party should have stood their ground and fought the case not just because they were in the right and their Lawyers advised them that they stood a good chance of winning the case, but because like most other SLAPP cases Ware would not have wanted to go to Court. But, this is the exact same reason you do not pay ransom money to a kidnapper, because all you manage to do is increase the likelihood of future kidnapping incidents! If the tactic pays off, morally bankrupt individuals like Ware will keep trying it on in the hope of another big payout. Starmer’s cowardly self-serving betrayal of the Labour membership, squandering their dues to bribe Ware, now has dozens of other fortune hunters getting ready to SLAPP Labour down so hard it will never get back up. But, the Labour Left knows better, as demonstrated by their overwhelming support for their venerated former Leader Jeremy Corbyn. We are all eagerly willing him to fight-back and countersue; with Legal Funds over £331,000, he has the means.

    Starmer might try to fool himself that he has acted decisively and in a way that will impress the right faction, with his zero tolerance policy, but the reality is that he has opened the flood gates. Cocky after his triumphant drubbing of the Labour Party to humiliate, demonize and erase the Corbyn legacy, by coxing weak-willed Starmer into putting personal power and his pro-Israel, right-wing agenda before justice and truth, Ware has now set his sights on two Journalist at the Jewish Voice for Labour. He wants to use a SLAPP to silence or shut down this Jewish, pro-Palestinian critic of the Israeli apartheid Government and force the Zionist agenda of the BoD as the unchallenged voice representative of all Jews within the UK. In reality there are large segments of Jewish society here who to not conform to the Zionist cause or support Israeli persecution of the Palestinians or the theft of their land. The right-wing JLM and the BoD do not speak for all Jews, but those who don’t subscribe to their politics are labelled ‘self-hating Jews.’

    To read the JVL response to this devastating news visit the JVL Website, as they get ready to fundraise where they say, “We are much encouraged by the flood of supportive messages and offers of financial help we have received since announcing that we are defending a libel action brought by John Ware against Jewish Voice for Labour and two of its officers. Solidarity in defence of principles and justice has been the driving force behind our work over the three years since JVL was founded, and we know this is what drives the many thousands of progressives, Jews and otherwise, who share our perspective. So, as well as seeking your support contesting litigation against us, we are also supporting fundraising for legal action planned by some Labour Party members who, like so many others, have found no other avenue for challenging injustices they have faced under the party’s disciplinary processes. Their aim, with our support, is to end those injustices and make those processes fit for purpose from now on.”

    Like a virus the pernicious Lawfare of SLAPPs spreads rampantly out of control; what did Starmer unleash? He might want to be remembered as ‘Forensic’ with a distinctive ‘ism,’ but to his dismay that might just be ‘Starmer Capitulism!’ Press Gang’s Editor Paddy French is also fending off a SLAPP. Press Gang say that, “Ware’s action concerns the Press Gang report, ‘Is The BBC Anti-Labour? Panorama’s Biased Anti-Semitism Reporting: A Case To Answer.’ John Ware claims this publication is ‘seriously defamatory’.” His demands include, “a full retraction; an apology; a statement to be read out in open court and payment of substantial damages and legal costs. Mark Lewis of Patron Law, who acts for Ware, has agreed a ‘conditional fee arrangement’ where the firm acts for Ware on a no-win, no-fee basis. In addition. Patron Law has taken out insurance which limits Ware’s exposure should he lose. This means that if Press Gang fails to win, the website will also be liable for the cost of the insurance.”

    Press Gang say they have, “instructed the London solicitors Bindmans to act for Paddy French. In a statement, issued today (April 15) Paddy French said “It’s clear John Ware feels our report is an attack on his professional integrity.” They said, “Press Gang feels equally strongly that the report met the highest standards of ethical journalism — and we’ll be defending it strongly. We’re confident it was a fair criticism of a contentious piece of broadcasting and that a court will agree with us. But we cannot get to that point without your help.” According to Press Gang they, “asked the BBC if it was supporting John Ware’s action. A spokesperson told us ‘the BBC won’t be commenting.’ In a 21st of April Update Press Gang said, “Yesterday our lawyers, Bindmans, replied to the letter from John Ware’s solicitor claiming the Press Gang pamphlet ‘Is The BBC Anti-Labour?’ is ‘seriously defamatory’.”

    Bindmans letter says, “editor Paddy French has ‘complete defences’ under section 2 (Truth), section 3 (Honest Opinion) and section 4 (Public Interest) of the Defamation Act 2013.” They conclude: ‘The defamatory allegations against your client are matters of opinion, based on the facts set out in the… report.’ ‘Mr French is surprised that an experienced journalist like your client has threatened libel proceedings rather than joining in public debate and we invite you to withdraw the threat forthwith.’ ‘In the event that your client commences legal proceedings then the matter will be vigorously defended.” They say, “John Ware’s solicitor, Mark Lewis of Patron Law, has acknowledged receipt of the letter and says he will reply by the end of the month.” Press Gang’s appeal now over £18,500 exceeded its initial £5,000 target. “It’s often said that libel is a rich man’s game,” said Paddy French. “In this case, the support of 200 people is helping to level the playing field. It’s also a vote of confidence in the integrity of Press Gang journalism.”

    Where does this end? These litigants use ‘no win, no fee’ Lawyers with backup insurance coverage to further reduce risk; we must render this option totally unviable with no insurer willing to cover that risk. Arron Banks has hit Guardian Investigative Journalist Carole Cadwalladr with a SLAPP for reporting his less than transparent, or downright dodgy, funding of the Brexit Vote Leave Campaign, alleging potential Russian connections. A number of civil liberties groups including, Reporters Without Borders (RSF); ARTICLE 19; European Federation of Journalists (EFJ); European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF); Greenpeace UK; Index on Censorship; PEN International and Scottish PEN all signed a letter drafted by Reporters Without Borders. Anyone interested in contacting RSF UK, their Press contact: RSF UK Bureau Director Rebecca Vincent on [email protected] or +44 (0)207 324 8903. These free speech champions all rallied to Cadwalladr’s defence drafting a letter that all of these civil liberties groups signed; it is printed on their Website as below.

    “We, the undersigned organisations, welcome today’s judgment on meaning in the case of Arron Banks vs Carole Cadwalladr. The judgment clarified the context of the comments that form the basis of this lawsuit, and noted that aspects of the claimant’s argument were ‘far-fetched and divorced from the specific context in which those words were used’. We consider this case to be an example of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), as it is vexatious in nature and intended to silence Cadwalladr’s courageous investigative journalism. We call on Banks to drop this abusive lawsuit and cease efforts to stifle public interest reporting.

    We note with concern the abusive approach Banks has taken in targeting Cadwalladr as an individual on the basis of comments she made orally – including a single sentence in a TED talk – and on Twitter, rather than similar reporting that had been published in the Guardian. Cadwalladr is a laureate of Reporters Without Borders’ press freedom prize – and a series of prestigious journalism prizes – for her courageous reporting on the subversion of democratic processes in the US and UK. As such, she has explored the funding of Banks’ Leave.EU campaign and questioned Banks’ ties to Russia following the leak of documents exposing the Russian government’s offer of a gold and diamond deal to Banks – serious matters that are clearly of high public interest.

    We are alarmed by the increasing use of SLAPP lawsuits as a means of attempting to silence public interest reporting – a trend that is posing a growing threat to freedom of expression internationally. We reiterate our call for the UK government to address this as a matter of priority, including through the consideration of anti-SLAPP legislation. We also encourage support for Cadwalladr’s crowdfunder to build up a team to pursue further investigative reporting into data, disinformation and democracy, and show that such bullying tactics will not be successful in silencing critical reporting.”

    So does that make Williamson’s legal challenge directed at the Equality and Human Rights Commission for making accusations that defame him a SLAPP? Good question, but emphatically and categorically no! While EHRC are supposedly an independent public body acting in the public’s best interests by exposing wrongdoing, Williamson’s concerns will undoubtedly focus on false allegation for which, despite an in-depth investigation, no evidence has been produced. If this were not the case Williamson would not be so determined to go to Court; that is the major difference Williamson is not seeking to avoid Court and bluff his way to a substantial payout. Beyond any personal desire to clear his name Williamson is also driven by a powerful and legitimate public interest obligation to expose corruption and party political bias within EHRC that poses a very serious threat to the integrity of our UK democracy. As the litigant Williamson is in the driving seat with no intention of settling for less than full exposure of EHRC bias.

    Why is this so important right now? During this miserable decade of austerity and rampant privatization the corrupt Tory Party have infiltrated every aspect of Governance; reaching well beyond the bounds of democratic votes in Parliament, to unfairly stack the deck in all of our regulatory bodies. The Tory strategy for these supposedly independent bodies includes: Dominating, Deviating, Defunding, Disempowering or Dissolving to remove all scrutiny and accountability from the Government and eliminate our checks and balances. The EHRC has seen ethnic minorities removed and replaced by wealthy business elites dominating decisions to match Tory goals.. The already amalgamated body has significantly deviated from its core goals and faced massive defunding. While not yet disempowered the power they do wield has been ruthlessly weaponized to attack the opposition Labour Party and derail the public vote in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election with baseless accusations and toxic propaganda: this violates the law!

    Why do I feel so passionately about this issue, the sanctity of genuine Whistleblowers like Assange and so deeply aggrieved that Ware and the ‘Poison Dartblowers’ succeeded in landing a costly SLAPP on the Labour Party? Although I myself brought lawsuit against an NHS Trust and my University, my case was most definitely not a SLAPP. I paid careful attention to the public good by decided not to demand huge damages, instead taking the moral high ground to accomplish certain important goals in the public interest: essentially public good must always be the litmus test. Keir Starmer has capitulated against the public good, sacrificing Labour party members dues and the public good for his own selfish political ambitions. This chronic injustice can only be rectified by going to Court to expose the truth so we must support this legal process with resounding solidarity. We cannot allow this vital process to be negated or stalled for time as we have just a few short months before crash-out Brexit ends all democracy in the UK.

    Exposure of the baseless smear campaign used to sell the fake ‘landslide victory’ ‘borrowed votes’ lie of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election will be publically revealed at last. There is a distinct possibility that the payment of state funds to the Integrity Initiative to spread propaganda targeting the Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party can be highlighted among the evidence submitted in at least one of the cases. This constitutes illegal sabotage of the Electoral process quite aside from the highly suspicious postal votes outsourced to Idox beyond the monitoring or inspection of the toothless Electoral Commission. The public must demand tougher scrutiny and “Rescue our Watchdog” as “A Watchdog that cannot watch is just a dog.” The disreputable role the BBC, played in disseminating Tory propaganda for the Covert 2019 Rigged Election will further render the unfathomable result invalid so we can demand a full Investigation and immediate removal of this Tory Government to enable the UK to hold free and fair elections. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #57786 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Britain gets a “D;” in fact were scoring a deluge of “Ds.” Distraction to destruction is this Tory Government’s devious PR plan to detract from the shambolic reality of their policies that have delivered a devastating death toll nothing short of a Global disgrace. It isn’t just those disappointed students dealing with a grotesquely unfair dent in exam grades to distribute the degradation of a result downgrade the most disadvantaged did nothing to deserve. Inequality in overdrive as the elite excel; a designer ploy to deliberately double-down on the damage to long deprived schools, destroying the life chances with a depressing destiny of destitution as dire future difficulties lie ahead in a diminished job market. A discarded class of desperate drones tirelessly toiling for a pittance as this Tory Government develops its policy of “Decimating Down!” Diversionary distractions as directives and disorganized decisions on lockdowns, districts, destinations and quarantine change on a daily dice roll dominating the news with disturbance and disruption.

    Disguising a far more sinister agenda, the distraction hides destruction of the core tenants of our democracy as we descend into decades of dictatorship. The Tory power grab continues unabated a potential corruptly facilitated by the stolen ‘landslide victory’ Tory majority delivered by Dominic Cummings’s deceitful plan in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. The shambolic, torturous and reckless policy meandering screams “could do better,” but while it would be hard to do much worse, the distress they are causing fills the airwaves, of little consequence and easily ignored by Johnson and Cummings focused on reaching that critical deadline of crash-out Brexit. Scrutiny and accountability is being steadily stripped away with the checks and balances of our parliamentary system increasingly neutralized. Formerly independent agencies and watchdog organizations are transformed into Tory compliant Quangos: due to a conscious program of Dominating, Deviating, Defunding, Disempowering or Dissolving, democracy is in decline.

    Meanwhile as the distraction of justified student outrage easily redirects public attention, the Tory cabal are spoilt for choice on who to scapegoat next in their blame-game ‘News Spin.’ Now there are massive fines for not wearing a mask decried as a liability only a few short months ago; the Tory majority does not require consistency or sane, logical, pragmatic leadership while they asset strip the UK! Headline news of ‘wretched migrants’ arriving in overcrowded unsafe boats always helps the Tories to stoke racial tension and calls for tougher immigration as we set up a new system for a ‘Scavenge, Exploit, Deport’ visa system to break all UK Unions after crash-out Brexit. Once we lose the protection still offered within the EU, workers rights will vanish overnight and our Human Rights will be ‘redefined’ into a more business friendly model that favours Corporate greed. Judicial Review will soon be severely curtailed to greatly reduce or totally eliminate our access to justice or holding the powerful and the Tory Government to account.

    The people of this country have already suffered massive injustice and faced international criticism for inhumane treatment of the disabled. The needless austerity decade cost thousands of lives, so I refuse to believe that the working poor were driven by mass Stockholm syndrome to vote for further exploitation following crash-out Brexit that was obviously going to cost countless thousands of jobs even before Covid 19 hit! Abandoning the International Court of Human Rights is a perilous warning sign, especially so as another Tory manifesto pledge is to target Gypsies! This is a clear signal of the UK decent into fascism. Despite ongoing ‘Black Lives Matter’ protests demanding equality, racial profiling for ‘Stop and Search’ has increased during the Covid 19 crisis. Despite the urgent need to remove dangerous cladding that led to the tragic loss of life at Grenfell Tower; robust building inspections and social tenant rights have been ignored as Housing regulations are about to be even further gutted for diminishing vital scrutiny.

    We must learn to recognize the deliberate distractions being spun as ‘News;’ firstly, was all the chaos really unavoidable? Imposing a local lockdown disproportionately targeting Muslim households to selectively disrupt the religious gathering, just hours before the celebration of Ede, while contact in the workplace and travelling to work remained inexplicably immune to infection risk? Spawned by the abysmal nondisclosure of crucial centralized data that effectively sabotaged any hope of early intervention, predominantly Muslim communities suffered collective punishment for Government failures while they were demonized and arbitrarily blamed for “not adhering to distancing rules.” It was a vile Tory campaign of ‘othering’ that still penalizes areas in the deprived north; there is no intention of ever ‘levelling up’ just the harsh Tory reality of ‘Decimating Down!’ The PM keeps repeating ‘levelling up’ while the lived experience of cruel Tory policy choices continues to target the most vulnerable: we must discredit Johnson’s fake narrative.

    Quarantine is back in the news. Did the UK impose quarantine when it could have drastically restricted Coronavirus entering the UK following the first early warning signs from China, Italy and then Spain? No, Boris was eager to “take it on the chin” realizing that there weren’t enough test kits, he tried to bluff through the looming crisis by hailing Cummings’ warped eugenics plan of “Herd Immunity.” Quarantine was saved for a PR stunt touting British exceptionalism to pretend that other countries were handling the crisis worse than the UK. He conned badly hit tourist destination countries into accepting “air-bridge” arrangements that had no real prospect of lasting. The wealthy could travel as they pleased knowing that if quarantine was reinstated they could work from home. Among those who did not share such distance work options some were foolish enough to go abroad. As if a foreign holiday is our single greatest concern, desperate stories of vacationers caught out scrambling to avoid the lockdown now dominate the news.

    Then there’s the facemask fiasco. When the Tory Government in its ignorant negligence had depleted the emergency reserves of PPE, with the dire shortage endangering medical staff they insisted masks were unnecessary; the Tories relied on ‘the science’ to assure us of nonsensical reasons why masks might increase risk. Once the rampant spread of infection had seriously taken hold in the UK, Johnson imposed a belated lockdown, but still issued dictates consistently at significant variance with the WHO as if our ‘science’ was superior to elsewhere. The public were not expected to strictly abide by lockdown, but they did, causing frustrating delays in the planned Tory cull of ‘economically unproductive,’ weak, elderly and disabled victims. The ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple’ was not going to plan so, on exceptionally short notice, he ordered people back to unprepared work places on overcrowded public transport. Finally a requirement to wear facemasks was introduced, strategically delayed for over a week to increase infections.

    Each of these shambolic decisions has prompted controversy and copious news coverage, but that 80 seat majority in Parliament, Tory MPs unable to rebel and Starmer’s impotent opposition, no meaningful debate or progressive shift was possible so the ‘fake news’ rumbled on. The BBC has morphed from public broadcaster to Tory Party mouthpiece; The PM and his Tory Ministers are coveniently never available for comment on Newsnight and even the News itself has changed. Now we announce the news as if the coverage targets an audience ‘around the world’ even the Paper Review is including foreign newspapers, but is it really a shift to ‘Global Britain’ or just another cheap Tory con trick? There is fastidious attention paid to any bad Covid 19 statistics overseas to detract from the dire crisis and phenomenally high death toll in the UK. There is coverage of Donald Trump as we switch to his press conferences in preparation for coming subservience to the US. Vaulting to a foreign story avoids bad news here in England; sunburnt British bums on Spanish beaches annoyed over new restrictions is ‘international news.’

    What is so important about the plight of tourists who should have had the common sense not to go abroad during a Pandemic? Far less attention was paid to Britain resuming arms sales to Saudi Arabia, despite concerns from campaigners that its weapons could be deployed to commit war crimes killing innocent civilian children in Yemen! The BBC and Mainstream Media aren’t just pumping out ‘Fake News’ they are padding this out with ‘Fluff News’ to placate the masses and keep the public docile until that critical point of no return has passed with crash-out Brexit done and dusted. Jonny Depp’s dirty Dobie dominated the ‘Fluff’ as his very public spat to quash accusations of abuse played out for weeks in the High Court. But by far a more important Court case was almost completely ignored as persecuted political prisoner, WikiLeaks Journalist Julian Assange, fought extradition to the US on trumped up espionage charges that seriously threaten our freedom of speech and vital protections offered to the free press worldwide.

    Young people are an easy and vulnerable target for Tory Government cuts and gross injustice; with their lower wages, zero hours contracts, insecure jobs and a reduced state safety net, they will be disproportionately hardest hit by the recession still to deepen and intensify. Grading scholastic achievement for teenagers unable to sit exams should have been anticipated and prepared for well in advance. Instead young people were dealt another cruel blow with the private and privileged receiving a boost while pupils from schools starved of cash for a decade were unfairly downgraded based on universally low expectations that drive the disparity between rich and poor. Where is Keir Starmer’s forensic analysis of this injustice as future Labour voter evaluate the ferocity of his response? He is too distracted by other matters following his cowardly capitulation and the inevitable rush to cash in with more vexatious legal threats as Labour NEC try to gag all descent over the capitulation with a ban on any discourse or motions on the matter by CLPs.

    In the Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Bigger class, bigger downgrades. Wrong postcode, bigger downgrades. Tories’ smash-and-grab algorithm scandal robs poor pupils and massively boosts rich” they expose the shocking manipulation that ignores years of hard earned progress and they justifiably alleging that the, “Theft of working-class and especially ethnic minority kids’ futures is a criminal act. The scandal of the downgraded A-level awards has grown bigger with the revelation that the government’s algorithm used to adjust grades was designed to guarantee a huge negative impact on students from working-class and especially ethnic minority areas – and a huge boost to the children of the wealthy.” This is the harsh reality underlying all Tory Government policies to relentlessly “Decimate Down” to keep the poor and disenfranchised perpetually poor and disenfranchised while granting copious privilege and advantages to the wealthy elite and getting the Tory ‘Fake News’ machine to keep repeating the ‘levelling up’ lie.

    The Skwawkbox reveal that, “The algorithm’s adjustments were weighted to apply downgrades to more children the larger their class size – and also included postcodes in its calculations. Bigger class? Down you go – in spite of years of Tory claims that increasing class sizes driven by cuts didn’t damage our children’s education. Poor postcode? Down you go again. The algorithm also weighted up for small classes and wealthier areas and the effect was clear: ordinary sixth form and further education colleges lost out massively – while the private schools used by the wealthy saw their number of As and above hugely increased. Private schools benefitted more than state schools to the tune of almost 16 to 1. The Sixth Form Colleges Association found that a third of their members had seen results from the process that bore ‘little or no’ resemblance to achievements in previous years – and that poor and ethnic minority students had been hammered.” This cannot be allowed to stand, MPs must demand justice for our youth.

    The Skwawkbox report that, “Some schools and colleges have reported fifty percent or more of their students being downgrades, with black children affected several times more often than the proportion of the population they represent. Huge numbers of students have reported withdrawn university offers based on the downgrades.” They claim a crime has been committed saying that, “Education Secretary Gavin Williamson admitted that the downgrades had been applied selectively to children from poor backgrounds in case they found themselves promoted to ‘jobs beyond their competence’.” They note that, “It doesn’t seem to matter if rich children go beyond their competence. Williamson’s department also boasted that ‘Almost 60% of grades students received are exactly the same as those submitted by schools and colleges’ – in other words, 40% weren’t – and admitted that the vast majority of those were downgraded.” MPs are calling for his resignation, but Johnson is standing by his man.

    The Labour opposition are hardly championing the downtrodden with a “could do better” interview performance the Skwawkbox have righty criticized saying, “Meanwhile, Shadow Education Secretary Kate Green’s ‘limp dishcloth’ performance on last night’s Newsnight came nowhere near to reflecting the justified outrage of parents and teachers.” In a far more realistic interpretation of the genuine anger over this injustice the Skwawkbox claim, “The Tories have performed a naked smash and grab on the futures of our children – and are dancing off laughing down the street with the spoils, while telling the rest of us to be happy about it and still claiming they’re ‘levelling up’.” In Scotland, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has admitted that a grave error has occurred and readily apologised. Realizing an immediate correction is required to put it right she announced that they would be scrapping the faulty moderation and respecting all of the assessments made by the teachers who know the children’s performance best.

    The Skwawkbox warn that, “many people are predicting the impact on GCSE grades will be even worse.” As Education Secretary Gavin Williamson has had five months to plan how the grades would be awarded in the absence of exam results and he cooked up a wealthy elite fast-tracking system to please the Tory base. Once again the Tories have found an ingenious way to help entrench their privilege while faking an agenda of ‘levelling up’ that they have no intention of fulfilling, but don’t expect the BBC or alt-right Media to call them out on it. Will the Captain of capitulation Keir Starmer bother to demand justice for the children of the working poor? He’s too busy pandering to the Zionist BoD, reinstalling the right-wing and obsessing over revamping the Labour Party in a capitalist image more acceptable to the wealthy elite; fighting vigorously for genuine Social justice just doesn’t make the news. The Tories know they needn’t be concerned young people will not vote Tory as their Dictatorship will render future voting superfluous!

    We cannot afford to keep falling for the ‘Fake and Fluffy News’ that detracts from reality; we need really impartial news that we can thoroughly trust to tell us the truth both on screen and online. Perhaps the hopefully short-lived triumph of Ware defending his defamatory Panorama Documentary will be the final straw for the public chocking down the obscene levels of BBC bias propping up the Tory Party. The impending Court cases could potentially not only restore justice, but also fatally discredit the rabid Tory Party propaganda machine and expose the Tory racket that stacks our so called independent regulators and watchdogs with Tory yes-men when EHRC is exposed in Williamson’s Court case. Tory funding of the ‘Institute of Statecraft’ and their ‘Integrity Initiative’ was exposed for generating propaganda to defame and destroy Corbyn’s Labour Party; they’ve also medalled in foreign elections. This illegal contract alone renders the Covert 2019 Rigged Election invalid: this Tory Government is too corrupt to remain in office!

    Viewing the footage of courageous rebellion in Belarus as their Dictator clings on after 26 years in power; will we emulate their solidarity and street protests to kick out this UK Government before a Tory dictatorship becomes entrenched? Will the EU support the British establishment even if their right to office is conclusively delegitimized? Will they support the public, including EU citizens as we seek to overthrow our Tory tyrant and his unelected puppet master? Possibly if it is in their best interests to protect the level playing field from “Singapore on the Thames” they might threaten Johnson’s global credibility and even call for sanctions; but the real drive to restore justice will come from us. We must derail the Tory Party agenda for eliminating scrutiny and accountability by “Dominating, Deviating, Defunding, Disempowering or Dissolving” our checks and balances. “A Watchdog that cannot watch is just a dog!” The Electoral Commission must have the power to fully investigate the Covert 2019 Rigged Election to kick out the Tories. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #57824 Reply
    cimarrón
    Guest

    Kim, You’ve obviously seen Carole Cadwalladr’s Ted talk video since it’s shown on her fundraiser page that you have linked to in your August 16, 2020, 16:22 comment.

    I thought it so good, and so relevant to this thread, that I’ve linked to the video here for others to see who may have missed it. I think it gives good insight, too, into some of the techniques used by Cummings and his cohorts to bend votes.

    Facebook’s role in Brexit — and the threat to democracy | Carole Cadwalladr

    #57866 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Cimarrón – This was a powerful presentation by Cadwalladr although I deviate, as does Craig Murray, from her thinking on the implied malevolent intervention of WikiLeaks in the 2016 US Election. I agree with him that the DNC data was not hacked by the Russians, but sent to WikiLeaks from an internal DNC source Julian will not reveal, but I believe the decision to publish was impartial. The real crime in the US Election was the DNC’s targeting of Bernie Sanders in favour of flawed candidate Hilary Clinton; the DNC have doubled-down on their mistake by backing yet another weak, flawed looser in Biden this time around! Cadwalladr has evolved into an accomplished investigative journalist, but I am both alarmed and confused by her connections to the Integrity Initiative, an organization that was paid by the Tory Party to generate corrupt smear propaganda targeting Jeremy Corbyn to sabotage the Electoral chances of the most progressive iteration of the Labour Party in decades! I would like to know how and why is she involved with this thoroughly disreputable organization?

    Truth, Justice and the integrity of the UK Electoral System that legitimizes our democracy still remain perilously at stake as we face yet another disastrous consequence of Boris Johnson’s Tory Government blunders since his unfathomably suspicious ‘landslide victory.’ I hope the industrial scale fraud that facilitated the Covert 2019 Rigged Election will be exposed, just as the fake promise of ‘levelling up’ unravels to reveal the standard Tory agenda of ‘Decimating Down.’ We have dodged a bullet, but the public realize they were lied to: the gross manipulation of the exam grading algorithm stands exposed as rigged to conspicuously disadvantage the already disadvantaged in favour of the wealthy elite. But, each and every time we discover that one man is at the very heart of all of this ongoing corruption: the despised puppet master controlling every decision the PM makes, a man whose Machiavellian manoeuvres serve the warped eugenics philosophy that drives his sick mind, none other than shameless grade ‘D for Dominic’ Cummings!

    Downgraded students are now spared the fallout of an injustice designed to sabotage future prospects via a maladjusted algorithm, but the malicious interventions of unelected Chief Adviser Cummings cannot be excluded from the fray. We should not forget that before Boris Johnson was eagerly sniffing Cummings’ dirty bum, Michael Gove was partaking of the Dom’s odious eugenics brain farts. Gove’s assignment at that time was none other than the Department of Education, where Cummings first got to wield his wrecking ball, reinventing Tory Education Policy; a disaster that cost us 50,000 loyal Teachers! A Canary Article entitled, “Dominic Cummings’ blog reveals he’s behind the A-Levels ‘class war’.” This is a shocking theory that, “The scandal over Ofqual’s downgrading of hundreds of thousands of A-Level results continues. But a blog post by Dominic Cummings in 2015, and his links to Ofqual, show where the motivation for what The Canary‘s editor-at-large Kerry-Anne Mendoza called ‘class warfare’ may have come from.”

    From whence does this troubling assumption arise? According to the Canary, Cummings himself implies as much, “Because Boris Johnson’s right-hand man explicitly wrote that civil servants and MPs had ‘corrupted’ A-Levels, essentially making them too easy… that the drive to give as many pupils as possible ‘access’ to be able to take them had ‘devalued‘ the whole process. But reading between the lines, it may actually be GCSEs that are the Tories’ real target, and it’s embedded in notions of Eugenics. ‘A-Level carnage…’ The Canary previously reported on a growing controversy over this year’s A-Level results.” They noted: “The proportion of A-level entries awarded an A grade or higher has risen to an all-time high, with 27.9% securing the top grades this year, figures for England, Wales and Northern Ireland show. But exam boards downgraded nearly two in five (39.1%) pupils’ grades in England, according to data from Ofqual – which amounts to around 280,000 entries being adjusted down after moderation.”

    The Canary reported that, “Since then, the education secretary Gavin Williamson has come under renewed pressure to resign, with Boris Johnson so far standing by him. Students have held protests over the results. ‘…dissent in the Tory ranks appears to be growing.’ The Conservative chair of the Education Select Committee told BBC Radio 4‘s World at One programme that: some figures suggest that disadvantaged students have been penalised again… If the model has penalised disadvantaged groups this is very serious and if it has disadvantaged colleges that has to be looked at. Ofqual will have to adjust the grades.” Despite creating yet another shambolic Tory mess, they said, “So far, Ofqual and Williamson have refused to budge, with the former appearing to be in chaos. In the space of a few hours on Saturday 15 August, it released then withdrew its guidance over the appeals process.” Where was Boris Johnson, our part-time Prime Minister, as the nation faced yet another perfectly avoidable crisis created by Tory incompetence? Relaxing on holiday again!

    In the Canary article, Mendoza was keen to point out that, “at the heart of this story is Ofqual’s algorithm, which favoured private school pupils best and students from the most deprived areas worst. This is because it was partly designed around subject pupil numbers – so the smaller the ‘cohort’ taking a subject, the higher the average grades would be. Some commentators are claiming that Ofqual should have realised this would happen. For example, one analyst correctly predicted the percentage of downgraded results over a week ago. The Good Law Project is planning a judicial review of Ofqual’s grading process. Although it may fall on deaf ears – because, by giving students free access to appeals, the Tories will say the issue is resolved.” Mendoza claims that, “a blog post by Cummings in 2015 shows that this huge downgrading of A-Level results fits almost exactly with his plans for education reform.” A bit like that 80 seat majority Cummings promised the Tories in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election and then miraculously delivered exactly as he had predicted!

    According to Mendoza, “In his blog, Cummings criticised a Department for Education (DfE) decision to stop independent annual reviews of A-Level papers. The A-Level Content Advisory Board (ALCAB) did this to see if they were of the right standard.” She said, “Cummings wrote: The DfE hated giving away control, obviously, and hated ALCAB. The very point of the process, a sword of Damocles in the form of eminent professors saying ‘crap questions’ each year was supposed to force the DfE, exam boards, and Ofqual to raise their game. You can imagine how popular this was. Now the situation will revert to the status quo, the DfE firmly in charge and those pesky professors who point out things like specific papers do not test the maths skills in the specifications, are happily excluded, with no ‘unhelpful’ public scrutiny of standards.” This last few words should alarm us all, as it reveals Cummings’s undemocratic beliefs that ‘public scrutiny’ of any variety is ‘unhelpful’ to his aspirations for total control of every area of UK Government!

    Essentially Mendoza is claiming this has exposed that Cummings motivations back when he ‘advised’ Gove in the Department of Education are perhaps only now reaching full fruition as if Gove’s tenure at DfE wasn’t damaging enough. She said, “In short, Cummings believes A-Levels ‘need improving’. But there’s another side to this story: next week’s GCSE results. It seems that Ofqual will be using the same algorithm to determine these results. Some organisations are warning that the effect on disadvantaged pupils may be worse than with A-Levels. Once again, Cummings wrote at length about the devaluation of GCSEs, bemoaning the fact that they had been made ‘easier’. His thinking appears to be that the whole education system is being watered down, and that pupils who are not naturally academic are still appearing as such, because of higher grades.” Mendoza notes, “a paper he wrote several years ago reveals why he thinks this is a bad thing;” she describes it as “Brazen Eugenics!” Thankfully that Tory U-turn offered a last ditch reprieve for Students!

    Mendoza revealed that, “Cummings wrote this paper during his time as a Special Adviser to the then Education Secretary Michael Gove. From the views expressed therein, Cummings appears to believe that ‘cognitive ability’ is hereditary. Therefore, as he notes: Raising school performance of poorer children is an inherently worthwhile thing to try to do, but it would not necessarily lower parent-offspring correlations (nor change heritability estimates). When people look at the gaps between rich and poor children that already exist at a young age (3-5), they almost universally assume that these differences are because of environmental reasons (‘privileges of wealth’) and ignore genetics.” Cummings has obviously never experienced the depravation of poor nutrition or near starvation in his own privileged upbringing! A serious drop in blood sugar caused by malnutrition starves the brain of fuel, cutting off critical thinking; that is why feeding children breakfast at school and the milk that “Thatcher, Bottle Snatcher” stole proved so vital.

    After Cummings immersed himself in discredited pseudoscience he should have lost his credibility to ‘advise.’ Mendoza quotes from Cummings’s misguided fake logic, “It is reasonable to hope that the combination of 1) finding the genes responsible for cognitive abilities, 2) scientific research on teaching methods, and 3) the power of computers to personalise learning will bring dramatic improvements to education – but this will not remove genetic influence over the variation in outcomes or ‘close the gap between rich and poor’. [Emphasis added] From this paper and his blog posts, it’s clear that Cummings has a problem with the focus on improving education for the poorest pupils, in terms of pushing them to get good GCSEs and go on to A-Levels. When you break his rhetoric down, he is essentially saying that by encouraging children who are not (in his opinion) intelligent to try and perform better in school, you’re dragging all other students down with them. Hence the idea that GCSEs and A-Levels are now devalued.”

    Cummings’ belief in the discredited pseudoscience of eugenics is alarming. Mendoza points out, “The idea that some children are genetically predisposed to be more stupid than others, and that we have to separate them out to make sure the brightest and most ‘naturally’ able reach the top, is nothing short of Eugenics. And it’s happening now – right under our noses. Williamson’s speech. In July, Paul Goodman wrote for Conservative Home that Tory education reform is coming. Essentially, it seems that the Tories (led behind the scenes by Cummings) will be shifting to an emphasis on more vocational education along with science. Williamson said in a speech on 9 July that: Further education is central to our mission of levelling up the nation. Or quite simply, giving people the skills that they need to get the jobs that they want. Essentially, the Tories want to stop so many people going to university. Instead, as Williamson put it, the focus will be: to put further and technical education at the heart of our post-16 education system.”

    Mendoza claims that, “Cummings is in the driving seat.” Saying, “The education secretary also noted: The tragedy is that for decades, we’ve forgotten about half of our education system. When Tony Blair uttered that 50% target for university attendance, he cast aside the other 50%. It was a target for the sake of a target, not with a purpose. This is similar thinking to what Cummings wrote in his blog. He said: There is massive political pressure to focus exclusively on the numbers taking an A Level rather than the quality of the A Level. He also said: Now, everything to do with A Levels is dominated by political not educational concerns about the numbers doing them and ‘access’. This has helped corrupt the exam system. If we had professors of physics, French, music etc every year publicly humiliating exam boards for errors, this would soon improve things from a low base and make it much harder for MPs and Whitehall to keep corrupting public exams.” This might seem to contradict his earlier objection to their intervention!

    Mendoza continues, “So, where does Ofqual’s algorithm fit into this?” The unhealthy connections: “The links between Cummings and Ofqual are already being exposed. As Miles King, CEO of People Need Nature, noted: Appears that Ofqual’s algorithm caused today’s A-level chaos. Ofqual chair Roger Taylor, also chairs the Centre for Data Ethics & Innovation (CDEI). Cummings’ fave AI consultants – Faculty, have some juicy contracts with CDEI. And Faculty’s COO Richard Sargeant is on CDEI board. On the same day Johnson took the PM’s office (23 July 2019), Ofqual announced three new board members. One of them was Mike Thompson, a former Barclays executive who specialised in apprenticeships and the new, more hands-on T-Level qualifications. As the then education secretary Damian Hinds noted, these appointments came as: Ofqual oversee an exciting period of reform to vocational and technical qualifications, as well as continuing to ensure the safe delivery of reformed GCSEs and A levels.”

    Mendoza takes note of those moving in on the action, “Interestingly, in October 2019, DfE strategy chief Tom Nixon left his civil service role to join Faculty – the AI firm Cummings used for the Vote Leave campaign. This firm is now embedded in the Tory government. As New Statesman Tech reported: Nixon… has been tasked with establishing the company’s Government practice and deepening its work with Whitehall and the wider public sector. In January of this year, Ofqual was already looking into AI marking of exams. Then when it came to designing 2020’s marking algorithm, more people came on board. These included Tim Leunig, a prominent civil servant who Cummings reportedly had ‘quite a good relationship’ with when they were both at the DfE. If Cummings did have a hand in (or influence over) the Ofqual algorithm, it would fit in well with the government’s drive to promote further education for the ‘less-intelligent’ (i.e. ‘poorest’), and universities for the ‘brightest’ (‘richest’) students.”

    Mendoza takes a closer look at the, “Material disadvantage: The breakdown of 2020 A-Level award results by socioeconomic status were broadly in line with previous years. But historically, there have been issues with the poorest students having their predicted grades wrongly estimated. ‘High ability’ but poor students (AAB grades or above) have seen this effect the most in terms of downgrading of their predicted results, while over-prediction is high among poor students generally.” However, according to reliable reports from the Teaching sector, there was a far greater in house scrutiny of Teacher predictions this time around than in previous years. Due to the increased responsibility for accuracy demanded by the absence of exams, schools typically reviewed the predictions at three levels before submitting their estimation of pupil’s results. Teaching institutions across the board wanted to be seen to be fair in the certain knowledge that their judgement might come under greater scrutiny due to the Covid crisis situation.

    In previous years a predicted grade would only affect a pupil’s potential for acceptance at their desired University, giving those who might otherwise be easily overlooked a fighting chance at consideration in the hope that the student would achieve their best result. But without the confirmatory process of exam results these predictions needed to be more seriously assessed. Mendoza explains the reality, “This disparity between predicted and actual grades could well be due to a student’s socioeconomic status and factors like availability of study resources, time poverty and so on. In other words, when it comes to sitting exams, poorer students may already be at a material disadvantage. This shows in the widening GCSE attainment gap between rich and poor. So, a sudden upsurge in poorer students’ final grades (both GCSE and A-Level), would throw the Tories’ and Cummings’ plans for education off kilter.” She claims, “Therefore, the status quo (rich students doing better, poor students not so much) had to be maintained.”

    Mendoza further explains the system that is, “maintaining the status quo. In non-coronavirus times, Ofqual uses previous years’ overall results as guidance for marking. It also uses something called the National Reference Test (NRT) – where thousands of students sit exams to get a benchmark result of what standard certain GCSE grades are at. So in short, this year’s grades will have the effect of maintaining the benchmarks for 2021 A-Level and GCSE results – and this will continue on and on. Moreover, if students don’t get the required GCSE grades for certain A-Levels, it allows the government to immediately start promoting its further education and vocational routes. Williamson and the DfE have already set out increased funding for these areas. The same principles apply to A-Level results and university places. So, by holding back poorer students this year, the Tories have maintained the environment for their ‘class war’ reforms to continue.” This alarming revelation should thoroughly disgust us all.

    The exam grades algorithm scandal comprehensively debunks the ‘levelling up’ lie touted by the Tories as they try to maintain the shallow façade of fake legitimacy and they cling to power with their ‘borrowed votes’ scam! It is just a blatant lie; the Tory boot will remain firmly on our necks as they pursue the perennial Tory goal of ‘Decimating Down’ based on an elite, exceptionalist belief that the poor should, “know their place!” Mendoza also reveals that, “Cummings wrote in no uncertain terms that: Many of those now attending university courses in the UK and USA are wasting their time, and their own and taxpayers’ money, and would be better off in jobs or work-based training. In many third-rate HE institutions, there is a large amount of ‘social science’ work (in economics, anthropology, sociology, literary theory, and so on) of questionable value both from an intellectual perspective and from the perspective of the students’ job prospects. Reform of the long tail of HE [higher education] and FE [further education] is crucial.”

    This latest grotesque injustice to our already disadvantaged and exploited young people was derailed through determined public protest but, “It seems that ‘reform’ is coming.” Mendoza separates certain undoubted advantages from the truly disturbing underlying agenda; she said that, “While an increase in vocational education is no bad thing, it’s why the Tories are doing it which is the problem. Make no mistake, it is little more than eugenicist classism: that poorer people should know their place, stick to manual jobs, and leave the critical thinking and complex study to those with the silver spoons in their mouths. Moreover, this class-based assault on the education system has long been in Cummings’ sights, since his ‘toxic antics’ as Gove’s ‘master of the dark arts’ special adviser. Under the guise of ‘levelling up’, Cummings and the Tories are hell bent on returning us to a Victorian class system.” Students won this last battle, but she logically claims that, “this year’s GCSE and A-Level students are on the front line in this ongoing class war.”

    One of the very few books I have felt compelled to read twice is US author Ira Levin’s, ominous sci-fi novel, “This Perfect Day.” In a book review it says: “The story is set in a seemingly perfect global society. Uniformity is the defining feature; there is only one language and all ethnic groups have been eugenically merged into one race called ‘The Family.’ The world is ruled by a central computer called UniComp that has been programmed to keep every single human on the surface of the earth in check. People are continually drugged by means of regular injections so that they can never realize their potential as human beings, but will remain satisfied and cooperative. They are told where to live, when to eat, whom to marry, when to reproduce, even the basic facts of nature are subject to the UniComp’s will, men do not grow facial hair, women do not develop breasts, and it only rains at night. With a vision as frightening as any in the history of the science fiction genre;” I agree it is one of Ira Levin`s most haunting novels.

    The more I discover about the Dom the closer we get to this doom filled drab future for the exploited drones with AI in overdrive and the eugenics mindset of Cummings dystopian nightmare ensconced. Cummings has a warped fascination with AI that is now being heavily funded by the Tory Party who benefited from his weapons grade PsyOps and VICS Voter Intention Collection System of data harvested, almost certainly illegally, from Social Media to manipulate vulnerable individuals and target areas for stealing of postal votes. Without Industrial scale fraud the grossly unpopular Tories could never have achieved the fake ‘landslide victory’ they claimed in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. Without the blatantly illegal Tory Government payments to the Integrity Initiative to relentless pump out propaganda in a campaign aided and abetted by the fully compliant biased BBC and all the Tory elite Media moguls, the public would have seriously questioned that unfathomable result and demanded an investigation, but it is not too late.

    It is vital that we change the narrative despite Tory dominance of the media and our once reliable ‘Auntie’ the BBC. The Tories have become overconfident regarding their seemingly unstoppable success, arrogantly pushing the boundaries of what they can get away with due to their stolen 80 seat majority. The ‘Special Advisor’ who brazenly ignored lockdown and now even an accused rapist MP both remain in post; Johnson is unlikely to fire Williamson as he thinks he and his Tory cabal can get away with anything. The Tory lies that once supported their fake credibility are being unravelled: the people know this exam fiasco was no ‘levelling up’ exercise, so how much longer will it take to pop the bubble of the ‘borrowed votes’? As I have claimed here many times before, Cummings is a massive threat to our democracy, but he also holds the key to exposing the truth about the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. His links to this latest eugenics scandal could enlighten the public to the extreme danger that he poses: we need him gone. Cummings is the grenade; oust him and you pull the pin! DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #57878 Reply
    SA
    Guest

    Cimaron
    All very good and wholesome. But Carole instead of sticking to fact attacks two soft targets, without evidence, Russia and Wikileaks, obviously to ingratiate herself to the neoliberals. Interestingly neither she nor the Observer bothered to apply their investigations to the way clearly foreign powers interfered with the 2019 elections and how the red wall magically collapsed. I have not seen a similar attack on the 2019 election results.

    #57903 Reply
    cimarrón
    Guest

    Kim, I agree that Carole Cadwalladr is somewhat compromised by the Integrity Initiative connection. Unfortunately, her Twitter response to criticism on this was very weak – https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1074356097870389255

    SA, I agree with your points about Carole Cadwalladr’s attacks on Russia and Wikileaks and her failure to investigate the suspect 2019 election result.

    My point, though, is that the methods she has highlighted regarding very specifically targetted Facebook advertising represent some of the techniques which Cummings and his data manipulation contacts are using to generate the results they want in referendums and elections.

    I believe that the main thrust of the 2019 election coup was via postal vote manipulation. However, closely-targetted Facebook advertising is obviously a powerful technique, and one of which everyone needs to be aware.

    #57908 Reply
    SA
    Guest

    cimarrón
    “I believe that the main thrust of the 2019 election coup was via postal vote manipulation. However, closely-targetted Facebook advertising is obviously a powerful technique, and one of which everyone needs to be aware.”

    I agree with you but this was done in broad daylight because it was very clear that the press will not investigate. Carole having discovered these techniques for the leave vote, hers and the Observer’s pet hate, seems not to be taking up the cause for the lost 2019 election. This is selective virtue signalling.

    #57956 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Cimarrón – SA – You are right to point out that it’s curious we “have not seen a similar attack on the 2019 election results.” I remain conflicted about where Cadwalladr’s allegiance might lie, but have seriously considered getting in touch to ask her to investigate. What you wrote made me realize that, with the inside knowledge she already has, surly she should be hot on the case already. In reality no one should need to persuade her that the result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election was so completely illogical and unfathomable that it reeks of industrial scale fraud. The lack of evidence supporting the various Russian conspiracies and WikiLeaks demonstrate an investigative blind-spot that aligns with the Integrity Initiative, but I cannot comprehend why she is onboard with them at all as it appears to conflict with her whole motivation for defending our endangered democracy. It’s hard to believe that anyone was fooled by the propaganda attempting to legitimize the 2019 vote, but we will only determine Cadwalladr’s take on this by contacting her.

    A CSW Civil Service World Article entitled, “Hancock confirms Public Health England axed with test and trace boss Dido Harding to lead replacement body,” imparted the extraordinary news. It said, “Harding will be interim head of the National Institute for Health Protection, which will aim to tackle threats like biological weapons and pandemics.” The tiny word ‘aim’ is extremely useful to inept Tory Government Ministers like current Health Secretary Mat Hancock: ‘aim’ leaves ample scope for future failures and the wholesale fudging of public expectation. In a sudden move that is universally understood to be an effort to erase the catastrophic Covid crisis healthcare failures of his recent past Hancock decided to ‘disappear’ the agency involved so that no one was left in a position where they could be held accountable for the huge unnecessary loss of life. “Matt Hancock has confirmed Public Health England is being scrapped and replaced by a new body to protect the nation’s health ‘now and in the future’.”

    As if this radical announcement wasn’t controversial enough Hancock proceeded to drop another bombshell with his choice to lead this ill defined new Quango. He said, “Baroness Dido Harding, who currently heads up NHS test and trace, will provide interim leadership for the new National Institute for Health Protection.” CSW said that, “Setting out his plans for a shake-up of the public health system in a speech to the Policy Exchange think tank, Hancock said: ‘The changes that I am announcing today are designed entirely to strengthen our response’.” His wording was deeply troubling, bearing in mind that Public Health England’s remit ranges well beyond the confines of ‘response’ to encompass a whole range of preventative strategies that are essential to reducing unnecessary burdens on our NHS. Everything from early screening, to smoking sensation, drug and alcohol programs and the Governments latest crusade for deflecting blame over the horrific Covid death toll through ‘fat shaming;‘ these were all handled by PHE.

    CSW dispassionately reported on the situation as, “Defending scrapping PHE in the middle of the pandemic, the health secretary said: ‘We are making the change now because we must do everything we can to fulfil our responsibilities to the public, to strengthen public health in the UK’.” But CSW didn’t fail to notice the coded message in that statement saying that, “PHE has been criticised by ministers for its response to Covid-19,” and leaving the reader to consider why the Health Secretary might have considered it an opportune moment to ‘scuttle the ship’ before any post Covid inquiry had a chance to expose the catalogue of policy errors that had caused so much unnecessary carnage.

    CSW report, “Announcing the formation of the NIHP, the cabinet minister said: ‘To give ourselves the best chance of beating this virus and spotting and tackling other external health threats now and in the future, we need to bring together the science and the skill into one coherent whole.” Hancock said, “The National Institute for Health Protection will have a single and relentless mission: protecting people from external threats to this country’s health… like biological weapons, pandemics and, of course, infectious diseases of all kinds.” It was as if he was trying to reinforce the British exceptionalism hype by stressing ‘external threats’ as if all bad stuff comes from the bad guys overseas. Like the Russian threat polluting our undemocratic elections with disinformation and the Chinese spying on us via 5G, the terrorist threat, immigrants and refugees… it serves the Tory Government to stoke paranoia detracting from a genuine threat posed by Tory propaganda to support the perpetual exploitation and neglect of our population as the wealthy elite asset strip the nation.

    CSW reported that, “Hancock said England’s public health system would learn from South Korea and Germany’s Robert Koch Institute ‘where their health protection agencies have a huge, primary, focus on pandemic response’.” So that’s a ‘lessons learned’ model adopted by a Tory Government incapable of learning from their past mistakes and far too arrogantly ‘world beating’ to even trust the WHO, let alone build on the success stories of better prepared well governed countries overseas. They say, “It will combine the existing ‘talent and science infrastructure’ of PHE with NHS test and trace and the work of the Joint Biosecurity Centre, and be dedicated ‘to the investigation and prevention of infectious diseases and external health threats’.” On no, not more ‘guided by the science’ excuses from the same team that supported the discredited science of unvaccinated ‘Herd Immunity’ and Dominic Cummings’s warped emphasis on eugenics; what could possibly go wrong?

    In praise of notorious Tory serial failure, “He said from today, PHE, the JBC and NHS test and trace will operate under a single leadership, reporting to Harding, who will establish the NIHP and ‘undertake the global search for its future leadership’.” I am sure she’s been promised a rich departure sum for when she has finally driven the project into the ground in preparation for a major sell out to a US Healthcare Corporation. He blathered on, “I have no doubt that under Baroness Harding we will found the NIHP as a thriving, mission-driven organisation.” No doubt he was instructed not to use the words ‘world beating, but his hype was in that vein, “We have a common mission, the greatest mission of any of our working lives, and we have no time to lose in building the institution of the future.” Tory Ministers must know ‘where to bury the bodies’ and when to ‘scuttle the ship.’ Public Health England had to go ASAP as there would be damaging information exposed when an inquiry looked into the shocking policy errors of Covid.

    CSW pointed out the folly saying, “There has been criticism of the decision to award the job to the Tory peer, who has no prior public health experience and was boss of mobile phone giant TalkTalk when it was fined £400,000 after the personal and banking details of thousands of its customers were accessed in a serious data breach.” They then quoted the scathing criticism of others, “Dr Michael Head, a senior research fellow in global health at Southampton University, told The Guardian her new role ‘makes about as much sense as [chief medical officer] Chris Whitty being appointed the Vodafone head of branding and corporate image’.” Labour shadow minister Jess Phillips said: “What the hell does Dido Harding know about cervical screening, substance misuse, sexual health, contraception, smoking cessation, obesity or even pandemic planning? This from government who brought you the death of 10% of care home residents and long drives for eye tests.”

    While Boris Johnson hides in a Scottish tent it seems the Captain of Capitulation our knight in rusting armour, Keir Starmer, might have crawled under a rock! How was such a massive shake up of our beleaguered Healthcare system waved through without the slightest intervention from Parliament? This wasn’t included in the Tory Manifesto and even the consummate lying king of spin, our hapless part-time Prime Minister couldn’t be bothered to deliver this latest disastrous pitch. This decision must have come from the very top, so why would Cummings want to pester the PM while he was on holiday? It was better to keep Johnson hidden in times of crisis and the exam grading scandal had yet to blow over. Even the Torygraph ripped into the Government over the appointment of Harding due to her obvious lack of experience and total unsuitability for the job.

    Is this another of Boris Johnson’s ‘Titanic success’s;’ deliberately doomed from the outset in order to help sink the NHS and leave the wreckage to be pillaged and picked over by our new US masters after the calamity of crash-out Brexit? CSW reported on calls for sanity, Liberal Democrat health spokeswoman Munira Wilson said: “We need to have total transparency in how appointments of this kind are made, rather than promoting a Tory insider who’s been responsible for the sub-par test and trace system.” This Tory Government are committed to the removal of transparency, scrutiny, integrity and all forms of accountability: we must fight back. CSW noted that, “Christina Marriott, chief executive of the Royal Society for Public Health, meanwhile said the planned changes would leave health officials ‘with more questions than answers. We question the timing of an announcement to scrap our national public health agency in the midst of a global pandemic and before any public inquiry any has started, let alone reported,’ she said.”

    Identifying the underlying reason for the move CSW reported Marriott saying, “We recognise that there have been some serious challenges in terms of our response to Covid-19, including the timing of the lockdown, the ongoing ineffectiveness of Tier 2 track and trace and postcode-level data previously not being available to DPHs. Multiple lessons need to be learnt before solutions can be in place in advance of the winter. To do otherwise risks avoidable mistakes in subsequent waves of the pandemic which will only harm the public’s health further.” CSW said, “Marriott argued that successive governments had ‘sidelined’ public health, with public health budgets ‘slashed’ under the coalition government. It may be appropriate for the functions to sit in different agencies – but clear accountability for outcomes in health improvement, health inequalities and health protection must be established.”

    In another Civil Service World Article entitled, “McKinsey banks £560,000 consulting on ‘vision, purpose and narrative’ for new test and trace body – DHSC drafted in consultancy to help plan permanent organisation to manage coronavirus programme,” the plot thickens. Is Hancock just making this up as he goes along? CSW report, “A contract document, made public ahead of today’s announcement that test and trace chief Baroness Dido Harding will lead a new National Institute for Health Protection, shows the Department of Health and Social Care enlisted McKinsey’s help in May to consult on what the organisation should look like.” “Building on the work to establish a national testing programme, the programme is now being expanded into a comprehensive NHS Test and Trace service. While this service is being rapidly stood up to meet near term objectives, work is required to develop options for the longer term future of the organisation responsible for this and associated services,” the document says.

    It really is sounding like a ‘back of a fag packet’ creation as CSW report, “The objectives of this work are to define options for: the vision, purpose and narrative; end-to-end journeys; organisation, roles and talent; interfaces and governance; and integrated roadmap all for the medium-term entity”. They say, “A business plan for test and trace was published at the end of last month, shortly after the work was completed, setting out objectives for the organisation. The plan said test and trace should provide rapid and accessible large-scale testing; conduct research into antibodies and immunity; deliver a resilient and stable service; and develop ‘a diverse and engaged workforce’.” Reports so far indicate that the ‘diverse and engaged workforce’ a bored rigid with scant few leads to do follow up on and hours spent feeling guilty about the frustration of doing nothing.

    CSW reveal that, “Health secretary Matt Hancock today confirmed test and trace would be combined with the existing ‘talent and science infrastructure’ of PHE and the work of the Joint Biosecurity Centre in the new NIHP. The body will have a ‘single and relentless mission’ to protect the UK from threats such as including infectious diseases and biological weapons, he said.” No doubt new fragrances of Russian ‘perfume’ and even more elaborate and fanciful false flag incidents can be more discreetly managed in house! For more confidence shattering news CSW confirmed that, “It will be led by Harding, a former TalkTalk chief exec who started out her career at McKinsey, and who has led the coronavirus test and trace programme since May. Consultants began working with Harding and other members of the test and trace leadership team on plans for a new, permanent test and trace body the same month.” Dido Harding might just beat ‘failing Grayling’s’ track record for catastrophic screw-ups!

    CSW report that, “A contract notice for the deal was published a couple of weeks before reports emerged of plans to scrap and replace PHE. A DHSC spokesperson said the work was non connected to the abolition of the public-health body and that the contract was to consider a range of options for a long-term test and trace organisation.” They admitted that, “Public Health England have played an integral role in our national response to this unprecedented global pandemic. We have always been clear that we must learn the right lessons from this crisis to ensure that we are in the strongest possible position, both as we continue to deal with Covid-19 and to respond to any future public health threat.” The British public have learned the right lessons from this crisis: we should have had a responsible Government in place to deal with the Covid 19 threat by always acting in the publics best interests. Because of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election we have a Tory cabal capitalizing on the disaster to line their own pockets.

    CSW report that, “Between May and June, McKinsey was helping to set the design principles and performance objectives for test and trace, as well as ‘user and data journeys across which the organisation will operate’. It also considered potential organisational structures and their pros and cons.” After one failed project you might expect not to get another contract, but Tories are impervious to logical considerations like that. The most disturbing information that CSW reveal is that, “Under the deal, McKinsey is authorised to process personal data for test and trace personnel, contractors, customers, users and suppliers, for seven years after the work is completed. The data includes people’s names and addresses, driving licence details, pay, biometric data, next of kin contacts and medical conditions. Once the work is finished, McKinsey will own all concepts, tools and databases and other outputs it has generated. It has agreed to give DHSC a worldwide, royalty-free licence to use and copy any tools developed through the work.”

    Although CSW say that, “The licence is non-exclusive but McKinsey must have DHSC’s permission to share any tools with other organisations or allow them to ‘remove or circumvent’ security or technological safeguards,” this is of little reassurance to the public given Harding’s data breach scandal at Talk-Talk. Cummings will be rubbing his hands with glee, a whole treasure trove of data for him to scavenge and manipulate as he establishes his fully funded AI eugenics nightmare scenario to get inside our heads. Our part-time PM is hiding in the highlands, Starmer has yet to crawl out from under his rock or perhaps he’s still fighting fake demons constructed by the BoD. We cannot wait for so called ‘leaders’ to demonstrate leadership they must be forced to act. The irate youngsters protested and got fair results; we need to harness that rage to demand an Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, overturn this latest assault to our NHS and the evil Dom must go. Cummings is the Grenade; oust him and you pull the pin! DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #57974 Reply
    SA
    Guest

    Thank you for this Kim. I agree with everything you say. We now realise the full scale of the nightmare facing us. A major health service shakedown without wide scale or even parliamentary discussion whilst parliament is suspended and in the middle of a pandemic is the beginning of an experiment whereby the Tories have done away with parliamentary democracy without much of a whimper from Starmer. This is obviously a blueprint for wide scale sell out of the whole NHS.
    The rather muted response to this is alarming.

    #57979 Reply
    SA
    Guest

    Kim
    My initial thought about contacting Carole was why bother? I presume you will either be ignored or fobbed off with some anodyne answer. However it may be a good idea, because exposure of double standards by the media is no bad thing.
    The ‘establishment’ or the PTB (beloved of conspiracy theorists and an expression I dislike) is not a monolith, it is a disparate group with different agendas and the aims sometimes coincide and sometimes are in conflict. Carole’s association with the II means that she is part of the loose network and the agenda of that part is anti Trump but also anti Russia remainers. The other faction, the Atlanticist Brexiteers are on the ascendant and the conflict between the two is as to whether it is best to throw all our efforts directly and openly behind the US, or to do it indirectly, with some safeguards offered by our European friends. The main aim of the II was to spread anti-Russia and anti Corbyn misinformation and Carole played a good part in that. I think this particular network is probably lower key than the main Luke Harding, security services one that has taken over the Guardian. The picture is that there is a diversity of opposition but in fact the main aim is to preserve the privilege of the ruling class of politicians, serving the interests of the few rather than the many. After all the main scandal about foreign interference in the 2019 elections by two states is there in plain sight and is very well known and documented but totally ignored, and is in fact made into a taboo not to be discussed. Pompeo said it openly, there was no outrage. Others did it in an organised clandestine way, but again no outcry. Good luck to you.

    #58004 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    SA – As I said before you’re right to draw my attention to why we “have not seen a similar attack on the 2019 election results.” One other thought though is that Cadwalladr one or more of the other investigative Journalists might actually be working on this already’ if so they would not want to break the story until it was well and truly solidified because to go off half cock would wreck a vital opportunity to restore justice. I sometimes wonder if Craig is on to this too. I think we should try to make contact with Cadwalladr and find out where she stands at least. With the inside knowledge she already has, she must have some good contacts as already said, “no one should need to persuade her that the result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election was so completely illogical and unfathomable that it reeks of industrial scale fraud… it’s hard to believe that anyone was fooled by the propaganda attempting to legitimize the 2019 vote.” Does anyone know how to message her without relying on Twitter?

    Cadwalladr knows the power that Cummings can wield by manipulating the public via access to personal data and now Covid has provided the perfect opportunity. The most seriously alarming revelation from the CSW was that, “Under the deal, McKinsey is authorised to process personal data for test and trace personnel, contractors, customers, users and suppliers, for seven years after the work is completed.” They will be gaining access to data they have no legitimate need of; it’s closer to the data points Cummings requires to crawl inside your head. It, “includes people’s names and addresses, driving licence details, pay, biometric data, next of kin contacts and medical conditions. Once the work is finished, McKinsey will own all concepts, tools and databases and other outputs it has generated. It has agreed to give DHSC a worldwide, royalty-free licence to use and copy any tools developed through the work.” This contract represents a data gold mine for the Dom; Cadwalladr should be hot on his case, but no one seems to care.

    The Johnson/Cummings Tory Government pick ‘D’ for Dido Harding to join their disastrous line-up of Dunces! Harding is definitely not on a winning streak with regard to her managerial track record. Harding’s dismal failures with organizing the UK Track & Trace system was preceded by her stellar screw-up as CEO of Talk-Talk; earning the worst Customer Service reputation in the industry and suffering a massive, very costly, data breach. It would be a real challenge for Matt Hancock to appoint a more abysmal choice to take charge of this most crucial healthcare role. This jockey, a notorious horse woman, is taking us all for a ride, but we fear she will stumble and fall before the new organization even gets out of the starting blocks, just as she did with the rapidly abandoned ‘world beating’ Covid 19 tracing App! This isn’t a race the Harding Horse should be running, so please PM postpone the disruptive hurdles of a hasty Healthcare shake-up, scraping PHE or more scapegoating during this national crisis and put Dido out to pasture!

    I was looking for more information on Dido Harding that might indicate why her catastrophic past managerial failures had not rulled her out of the running for her latest plumb job when I came across a Morning Star Article entitled: “The woman who will sell our NHS to the United States.” With an alarming headline like that I was eager to find out exactly who this privileged woman was and why she had even been considered for the challenging task she has now been assigned with regard to our NHS. They report that, “In the week test and trace has been declared inadequate, Peter Frost finds out a bit more about the woman friend Prime Minister Johnson put in charge. He calls her his Dido.” Frost reveals, “Surprise, surprise, Boris does have a real Dido in his life. How close the couple are is a tightly kept secret, but we do know Prime Minister Johnson has made her chairwoman of NHS Improvement.”

    Frost elaborates on the background of Dido aside from the most obvious detail of ‘privileged elite,’ he says, “Her real name is Diana Mary Harding, Baroness Harding of Winscombe. She has long been close mates with Johnson and before him she studied policy, politics and economics at Oxford alongside David Cameron. These long-term political friendships have placed her in the leadership of the corrupt political cabal the runs Britain today. Most people first heard her name when in early May this year Health Secretary Matt Hancock announced that she had been appointed to head up the introduction of the new world-beating coronavirus test and trace system. Later in May the Prime Minister told the House of Commons liaison committee that Dido, as he liked to call her, was a senior NHS executive. This was a strange way to introduce someone who didn’t work for the NHS, had never worked for the NHS and had certainly never been a senior NHS executive. Yes, it was another complete Johnson lie.”

    Frost reports that, “In fact she is a businesswoman, with some interesting failures and shortcomings in her business career. But she is married to a Tory MP and close to the Prime Minister — just the qualification you need to be drafted in as something called chair of NHS Improvement. Her husband is John Penrose, Tory MP for Weston-super-Mare. Penrose is a key member of the advisory board of a right-wing Tory think tank called 1828. This think tank argues Britain should scrap the NHS in favour of an insurance-based system. Sounds like the softening-up of British opinion before we sell our wonderful NHS to some US pirate health set-up. 1828 has also called for the abolition of Public Health England, which has a key role in the coronavirus test and trace system now headed by, yes, you guessed it, Dido Harding.” Perhaps, with her track record of failure, Johnson thought Dido was just the right person to oversee grotesque misspending of NHS funds and catastrophic bungling to kill off our precious Healthcare system.

    Frost elaborates on Dido’s NHS foray so far, “Harding’s first job was to get test and trace off the ground. Clearly, the world-beating app we had all heard so much about was the key part of test and trace. It failed to test or trace at all and was quietly pushed aside to play a minor support role (ie, no role at all). One reason the test and trace system didn’t work too well was because it isn’t run, as you might expect, by the NHS, but by Serco, the company that has become unbelievably rich from innumerable privatisations and public contracts. Serco has built a strong reputation over the years for inefficiency, money-wasting and not worrying too much about breaking the law. It has already illegally released the email addresses of some of its Covid-19 contact tracers. Many working for test and trace describe it as chaotic, so how the government gave Serco the job is a mystery.” He asks, “Transparent process? Competitive tender? No. Just as puzzling is how the woman Johnson calls Dido came to be in charge of the entire shooting match.”

    Frost inquires, “So how did Johnson’s Dido get the job? When you know her background there is little real mystery. Silver spoons and mouths come into her early story. She is the daughter of the late John Charles Harding, 2nd Baron Harding of Petherton, an army officer and hereditary peer. She went to a private school and Oxford, where one of her friends was David Cameron. A Harvard MBA followed. Always keen on horses down on the pig farm, she became a successful jockey. She worked in a series of jobs until in 2010, for no clear reason, she was appointed as CEO of mobile phone giant TalkTalk. With Dido at the helm, TalkTalk, in October 2015, lost the personal and banking details of about four million of its customers. Harding was severely criticised for her ignorance about hacking and her incompetent response to this disaster. The Information Commissioner’s Office imposed a record fine of £400,000. TalkTalk lost £42 million and over 100,000 customers. Amazingly, CEO Harding kept her job.”

    Frost explains how, “Rich Tories, like Dido Harding are rarely content with one job. Certainly she started to collect a few additional large pay packets. In 2014 she became a non-executive director of the Bank of England’s court of directors. At the bank she chairs the committee that decides our nationalised bankers’ pay. Her usual recommendation is ‘shitloads’.” But that’s not all, Frost says, “Ex-jockey Harding also became a director of the Jockey Club, which runs British horseracing.” This was to have special Covid 19 significance with regard to the timing and regulations applied during lockdown. More privilege was bestowed on Dido Harding as Frost reports that, “By now her old pal Cameron had elevated her to the House of Lords. He needed people who, like her, thought that maternity leave is too generous and held a bunch of other equally reactionary opinions. She became Baroness Harding of Winscombe in September 2014. She, of course, took the Tory whip. After all, since 1995 she had been married to a Tory MP.”

    Frost says, “By May 2017 Harding had finally left her job at TalkTalk.” The company had earned an atrocious reputation for the worst Customer Service in the industry during her tenure. Frost reports that, “Five months later, despite her disastrous track record, she emerged, after a supposedly open recruitment process, as the minister’s choice for the new post of chair of the board of NHS Improvement. Pay £62,000 for two to three days a week. That would pay for a good few care home workers, many of whom have laid down their lives fighting the virus. Even the House of Commons select committee on health commented on her complete lack of experience of the health world. It also recommended that Harding should give up the Conservative whip in the House of Lords. Did she give it up? Not on your Nelly. It’s a bit unfair to suggest Harding knows nothing about dealing with the coronavirus pandemic.” Frost was about to elaborate on another on her deadly intervention.

    Frost revealed the Tory dilemma, “For two weeks in March, Johnson’s government couldn’t make up its mind about the need for a lockdown. The virus rampaged through the country. The decision to allow mass gatherings certainly helped to spread coronavirus faster. The largest of these was the Cheltenham Horseracing Festival, which attracted over a quarter of a million people in March. The Jockey Club’s selfish and disastrous decision not to cancel the festival will rank as one of the worst examples of putting profits ahead of people’s health. Nearly 200 people died of coronavirus in local hospitals after the event, which is also generally believed to have sent hundreds of infected racing fans back to Ireland. Harding was a director of the Jockey Club and racecourse committee director at Cheltenham when the festival went ahead. We know the Jockey Club board lobbied the government to allow the festival to proceed but Harding has refused to talk about her role in this.” That warped health and safety decision increased the death toll!

    Frost is sceptical, “Whether Harding will make a success of her current job is open to question. The associated app, trialled on the Isle of Wight, has disappeared without trace. Early reports suggest that Serco’s practical arrangements for recruiting and training trackers are chaotic.” Reports say those employed in contact tracing are given few leads to contact. He says, “No surprise, really. Our Tory masters have dozens of examples of giving failed firms like Serco and G4S plum public contracts loaded with bonuses. Nurses and other healthcare workers of course get public applause in lieu of decent wages. The NHS’s proven management could do the job cheaper and better than Serco but if we give it to the public health professionals there will no shareholder payouts, which are the guiding measure of Tory success. Add to this the fact that over the years the Tory cuts in public spending and reduced funding for local authorities have deliberately weakened the ability of local government to operate public health schemes.”

    Frost criticized, “Even when she fails, Harding will simply be given another position in the Tory old boys’ (even if they are girls) network. Today in Britain it is still the same old story. Top jobs come not from ability but from the private education and social connections your parents have bought you. Even in 2020 we have a Cabinet made up in the main of Eton-educated men.” With this Tory Government there is no accountability, as Johnson clings to those who support him and his corrupt cabal. Despite multiple failures, the PM tried to reward ‘failing Grayling’ with another critical position of influence, but his inappropriate appointment was foiled. We were shocked Gavin Williamson even bothered to apologise for his exam grade debacle. We cannot stop demanding the removal of these incompetents, miscreants like Cummings and an unidentified accused Tory rapist. We must continue to demand a full Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election; one out is not enough, we want this entire Tory Government out of office. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58022 Reply
    Clark
    Guest

    Kim,

    I share the frustration you feel. Politics is broken, the ‘news’ media is dominated by propaganda. And I noted this from you elsewhere:

    “My protest outside the High Court in London demonstrates the impression a lone protester cam make with a shit-load of signage. I rarely want to include a photo, but this one tells a thousand words if I only knew how to embed it. The Birdcage protest got press attention; we need to get creative to combat the right-wing media.”

    Exactly. Extinction Rebellion (XR) are heading back into London to blockade Parliament starting Tuesday, 1 September. You and XR are ideally suited to each other; please come and join us:

    UK Rebellion 2020

    If you wish you can contact me; clark at killick1 dot plus dot com, or on oh seven eight nine oh, four five one four eight four.

    Love and Rage.

    #58047 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Clark – I am really grateful for the support that I feel from other contributors here and it was refreshing to be in direct contact with you the other day. You highlight, “My protest outside the High Court in London demonstrates the impression a lone protester cam make with a shit-load of signage.” Although we should be judicious about inserting photos, this one picture demonstrates the need to think outside the box and become more creative in our protests just as Vivian Westward excelled in her ‘canary in a birdcage’ protest outside the Old Bailey. The biased BBC and rightwing press wanted to ignore the Assange trial, but they couldn’t resist the ‘hook’ of that bizarre front page worthy image as it was just too tempting. We must rise to this challenge to secure media attention against the odds. I don’t go out that much now due to the current limitations, but my greatest contribution remain accessible in my slogans and protest ideas available for adoption by any and all progressive groups as the desire to ramp-up protests accelerates.

    Last Monday we discovered that if the public protest loud and long enough this Tory Government, with its worrying fake majority in Parliament, can be forced into making a significant U-Turn to correct damaging policy decisions. Last time it was a plucky young football hero who embarrassed them into shifting track; this time it was thousands of irate young people protesting the injustice of downgrades that could have wrecked their future. I doubt it was due to consideration of how this angry response might affect the future voting intentions of this growing cohort as they have been relentlessly exploited for the last decade and if we fail to protest, Investigate and overturn the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, industrial scale voting fraud will be so well established in the next few years that elections will become irrelevant to the Johnson/Cummings Dictatorship. We must take heed of successful tactics in the long battle ahead because sadly we can no longer rely on the progressive Left Labour opposition we had under Jeremy Corbyn.

    I am still trying to fathom how those who religiously cling to the total con trick of so called ‘borrowed votes,’ as perpetrated by the Tory propaganda mill with relentless repetition by an alt-right Media machine, can explain the selection of Keir Starmer as the new Labour Leader? Starmer was the MP who insisted on Labour support for a confirmatory Brexit vote that was supposedly the main driving force that resulted in Labour members ‘lending’ Boris Johnson their vote, so there is absolutely no logical reason why he shouldn’t have been blamed for the election failure instead of being rewarded. This is just one of the square pegs that refuses to be rammed into a round hole as the public are told nothing but a pack of lies in order to maintain the fake legitimacy of the ‘landslide victory’ that never really happened. Now the deceitful ‘levelling up’ lie has been exposed as just Tory PR spin to cover the usual malevolent callous Conservative exploitation and neglect of ‘Decimating Down,’ it’s time to change the narrative on voter fraud too.

    But the British people no longer have a trusted Labour Leader dedicated to equality and ready to fight against injustice as Jeremy Corbyn did. A treacherous Trojan horse has taken charge, to gut the Labour Party with divide and rule tactics designed to bury the progressive Left agenda for the foreseeable future. Despite promises to unify and retain the popular policies that swelled the ranks with enthused supporters after winning the top spot Starmer can now ditch the pretence that gained him votes and drag the Labour Party to the jingoistic, Zionist, elitist right and political oblivion. His weak performances at PMQs and his determination to support the shambolic Tory handling of the Covid 19 crisis have alarmed us all. But, worst of all his total subservience to the demands of the Zionists in the BoD, sacking Long-Bailey on a pretext and then offering a grovelling apology and massive payout in capitulation to John Ware’s ‘Poison Dart Blowers’ over the Panorama hatchet job, which will now open the Party up to countless lawsuits.

    This would have been a disgraceful performance for a leader without any legal training, but in Starmer’s case his flawed decisions reek of deliberate sabotage since this disastrous, destructive miscalculation was the work of a seasoned Lawyer with much touted ‘forensic’ legal analytical skills. Why was Starmer able to go against the advice of the Legal team handling the case in Court, who assured him that Labour would win? Starmer should have immediately recognized the Ware lawsuit as a classic SLAPP case that they would not dare bring to Court. How could Starmer not have anticipated that this unjust settlement would generate a rush to cash in on the unsupported admission of guilt over the anti-Semitism smear campaign? In a 7th of August article that appeared on the World Socialist Web Site, Thomas Scripps provided critical background information on Starmer that should really have served as a warning to members of the Labour Party when he asked, “Who is the new UK Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer?”

    Telling it like it is, in the article Scripps says that, “the election of Sir Keir Starmer marks the return to a business-as-usual Blairism shorn of any socialist pretensions. Starmer’s campaign sought to trade heavily on his early career as a Doughty Street lawyer, defending human rights and trade union cases—the aim being to spin out of these efforts to hold capitalism to its own laws a radical persona.” How many were so easily fooled by Starmer’s fake façade of Socialism into voting for him to lead the Labour Party, despite a chequered career and a centrist voting history? According to Scripps, “The real measure of Starmer’s politics is the fact that this youthful flirtation with the pseudo-left was no obstacle to his acceptance by the security services into the highest echelons of the British state, becoming Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in 2008. Once appointed, this millionaire ‘radical lawyer’ fitted seamlessly into the state apparatus and the defence of its crimes.” In reality he hasn’t budged an inch since then!

    Scripps highlights the appalling injustice of Keir Starmer’s legal decisions in the past, recalling how, “Three years earlier, on July 22, 2005, the Metropolitan police had killed electrician Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent man, with seven shots to the head in an underground train carriage. He had been misidentified as a terrorist in the aftermath of the July 7 London bombings. In 2006, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), under the leadership of DPP Sir Ken MacDonald, refused to prosecute any officer involved. After the police’s account of what happened on the day was comprehensively demolished, a 2008 inquest jury into Menezes’s killing returned an open verdict, refusing to rule that the police acted lawfully. They had been barred by the coroner from reaching a verdict of unlawful killing. Starmer, as the new DPP, nonetheless approved the decision not to prosecute any of the police officers involved.” So it’s little wonder that Starmer wants to downplay and insultingly marginalize the current Black Lives Matter protests!

    But Scripps reveals more saying of Starmer that, “He tried to do the same in 2011 in the case of Ian Tomlinson, a father of nine who was brutally attacked by police officer Simon Harwood in 2009. Harwood hit Tomlinson, who was walking with his hands in his pockets in the other direction, across the back of the legs with a baton. Tomlinson was unable to break his fall, causing fatal internal bleeding to his liver shortly afterwards. Fifteen months later, Starmer announced that Harwood would not be prosecuted. The CPS was forced to proceed a few months later when an inquest jury found that Tomlinson had been unlawfully killed.” There are similar disturbing revelations about the newly selected Democratic choice for Vice President in the US. Kamala Harris had a damaging track record of prosecutions that targeted wrongly convicted offenders and punished minorities and the working poor by ruthlessly prosecuting parents for the truancy of their children proving that ‘tough on crime’ has always been a great electioneering sales pitch.

    Ethical retailer Lush launched a well publicized campaign to expose the “Spycops” scandal and a Canary Article, “a message to anyone thinking of voting for Keir Starmer in the Labour Leadership race,” exposed his involvement. Scripps says that, “In 2011, Starmer was in court to witness the collapse of a trial of environmental activists after the involvement of undercover police officer Mark Kennedy was revealed. The case began the ‘Spycops’ scandal, which has since exposed the extensive, long-term infiltration of left-wing and environmentalist groups by police agents, who grossly abused the rights of campaigners and perverted the course of justice in countless court cases. The CPS is suspected of having been closely involved. As DPP, Starmer refused to pursue the matter. Referring to an in-house CPS investigation, he accepted the manifestly untrue: ‘If Sir Christopher Rose had found systemic problems, then I would quite accept perhaps a retrospective look at all the cases.’ But he didn’t, he found individual failings.”

    Scripps points out that, “Starmer was no less reliable on the crimes of British imperialism. Under his direction, the CPS refused to prosecute MI5 and MI6 personnel in 2010, 2011 and 2012. The agents were suspected of participating in CIA extraordinary rendition programmes and the torture of detainees in Guantanamo Bay and Afghanistan. Most infamously, in 2013 the CPS pressured Swedish prosecutors into maintaining a fraudulent investigation into WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, as a pretext for securing his arbitrary detention in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Uncovered emails show Starmer’s department writing to their Swedish counterparts, “Don’t you dare get cold feet!” Starmer’s undoubted jingoistic support for the Military Industrial Complex has earned him the trust of Tories, but the alarm of progressive Labour members who now realize that Sir Keir is a treacherous Trojan horse riding into their midst to betray and sabotage all of the achievements of the Corbyn era; Starmer’s craven capitulation to John Ware on behalf of the Zionist lobby leaves us in no doubt.

    Starmer is eager to ditch Labour’s economic policies too. According to Scripps, “The new Labour leader also proved himself a pliant tool of the coalition and Tory governments during their reign of austerity. After major student demonstrations in 2010 against the planned trebling of tuition fees were met with a brutal police crackdown, Starmer implemented new guidelines to encourage the prosecution of protestors. They read: ‘Prosecutors should have particular regard to whether there is evidence that a person had come to the protest equipped with clothes or mask to prevent identification, items that could be considered body protection, or an item that can be used as a weapon…’ The terms were kept deliberately vague to allow virtually any hand-held object or face covering to be used as a pretext for an arrest. His guidelines were designed to prepare the state for the implementation of the Conservative/Liberal Democrat government’s vicious spending cuts and the mass opposition they would provoke.”

    Scripps reports that, “Explaining his actions, Starmer told the Guardian at the time, ‘There’s a potential for a number of protests over the coming years that may be quite large…’ Following the London riots in 2012 and the rubber-stamp sentencing of over 1,000 young people, Starmer praised the efforts to rush defendants through the courts: ‘For me it was the speed that I think may have played some small part in bringing the situation back under control.’ He visited Highbury Magistrates Court in North London in the early hours of the morning to boost the morale of the prosecutors and praise their efficiency. In 2013, after Tory Chancellor George Osborne launched a gutter-press campaign against ‘benefits cheats,’ Starmer issued guidelines for the CPS allowing those accused of improperly drawing social security to be charged under the Fraud Act. This allowed for sentences of up to 10 years. He also removed the financial threshold on sending cases to Crown Court, meaning even the smallest ‘ofences’ could be punished with long-term jail time.”

    Scripps recalls how, “In 2014, Starmer was granted a knighthood for his services. A year later he was elected to the safe London Labour seat of Holborn and St Pancras. The same pro-capitalist, pro-state politics has characterised his parliamentary career. In 2015, Sir Keir abstained from the vote on the Tory Welfare Bill, which left 13 million of the most vulnerable people in society an average of £260 a year poorer. The year after, he voted for retaining the Trident nuclear weapons system, against an ‘Investigation into Contrasts Between Public Statements and Private Policy’ in the Iraq War, and for the Investigatory Powers Bill—better known as the Snoopers’ Charter. As shadow home office minister, Starmer spearheaded what he called a ‘constructive engagement’ between Labour and the Tory government to get this mass surveillance law on the books.” None of Starmer’s voting history chimes with the beliefs and sentiments of the vast majority of current Labour members, who if they knew better would label him a Tory.

    Then there was the ‘Chicken Coup’ debacle in which Starmer demonstrated his dislike an opposition to Corbyn. Scripps reports that, “The same year, Starmer joined the likes of Hilary Benn in resigning from the front bench to begin a coup of Labour MPs against the newly elected leader of the party, Jeremy Corbyn. During the subsequent leadership election, Starmer backed Blairite nonentity Owen Smith. Starmer’s leadership team includes Matt Pound, the head of right-wing pressure group Labour First, born out of the witch hunt of left-wing party members in the 1980s. After the 2016 leadership challenge, Starmer made full use of Corbyn’s prostration before the right and appeals for party unity to take up the role of Shadow Brexit Secretary. He used this position to champion a policy for maintaining British capitalism’s relationship with the European Union, working in alliance with pro-EU sections of the Tory Party.” Few details of his negotiating stance were made public, but Sir Keir Starmer gained credibility and attention.

    It was not long after Starmer managed to secure his place at the top that the strong signals of betrayal became evident to those who had foolishly voted for him. Scripps says, “Now Labour leader, he has signalled his readiness to join a full-blown government of national unity with the Tories, in response to the coronavirus crisis. Starmer’s shadow cabinet appointments have already won the praise of their Tory counterparts, with new Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds posting on Twitter: ‘My first act as Shadow Home Secretary has been to speak to [Home Secretary Priti Patel] this evening about the public health emergency we face and the constructive dialogue that is going to be needed in the days and weeks ahead.’ Other shadow cabinet appointments include former leader Ed (‘austerity lite’, ‘controls on immigration’ mugs) Miliband and arch-Blairites Rachel Reeves and Lord Falconer.” It is obvious that the Tories approve of this lurch to the right as it is reflected in BBC and media accolades.

    Scripps reports that, “Corbyn loyalists Richard Burgon, Dawn Butler, Barry Gardiner, Ian Lavery and Jon Trickett were removed, and Corbyn, John McDonnell and Diane Abbott jumped before being pushed. The political chameleon and loyal flunkey Rebecca Long-Bailey as Shadow Education Secretary is the supposed ‘flag-bearer’ of the ‘left’.” Starmer took the earliest possible opportunity to remove this token progressive from his front bench on the flimsiest of Zionist appeasement grounds showing he is in lock-step with the BoD. He adds, “Corbyn spent the best part of five years strangling a popular movement against austerity and war, in a stated attempt to prevent the total collapse of a discredited party of third-rate, right-wing politicians. The fruit of his labour is the election of a backroom state functionary to the Labour leadership.” Saying, “Starmer will make a fitting figurehead for the party’s final descent into political oblivion.” We must all hope that he is wrong and Starmer’s poor performance will see him challenged and ousted.

    By the time Labour launched their Leadership contest Keir Starmer had already gained a lot of public attention and valuable name recognition due to his role as the chief Labour representative in the negotiations over Brexit. This appointment won him credibility among a predominantly pro-remain contingent within the Labour Party, but he also gained acceptance as a tolerable ally among Tories opposed to a hard Brexit. However, it is logical to assume that Labour Leave supporting Party members would probably have felt compelled to punish Starmer in the Labour Leadership contest. Those who supposedly ‘lent’ their votes to Boris Johnson to “Get Brexit Done” in its most destructive iteration, would have taken the opportunity of retained Labour Party membership to show their disdain for the MP who was most responsible for Labour’s openness to holding a second referendum. So one of the above scenarios must be incorrect: either Starmer’s Brexit stance was immaterial to Labour voters or the “borrowed votes” spin is just a big fat lie!

    If progressive politics is to have any hope of surviving this crisis we must aggressively campaign to change the false Tory narrative that the BBC and mainstream media are so eager to push. We can disarm the Tory rhetoric: when “strong and stable” became a point of public ridicule for robotic May, she dropped it like a hot potato. The fake “Borrowed Votes” are just “Stolen Votes;” “Levelling up” must become “Decimating Down” and the “Red Wall” is now the “Tory Sinkhole!” Although I am not accomplished in blurting out pithy quips on Twitter this can prove a very useful tool in the hands of someone like Rachael @Swindon, with a progressive Left following online. We still need to convince Carole Cadwalladr, or any other professional investigative Journalist, to expose the truth about Covert 2019 Rigged Election and it would really be a plus if the Led by Donkeys’ team took up our cause. Anyone who has the contacts to direct these people to this Forum or put them in touch with me will be doing us all a really great service. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58360 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    On Monday the 17th of Aug 2020 Dr. Malcolm Segall wrote a letter addressed to Sir Keir Starmer that was printed in the Jewish Voice for Labour and is copied in its entirety here. The JVL presentation of this letter doesn’t just express the frustration of a British Jew who naively voted for Starmer in the hope of securing Labour Party unity, he is among the tens of thousands, deeply frustrated and dismayed by the subsequent actions of Keir Starmer now he is in office as Leader of the Opposition. No one feels reassure by his myopic preoccupation with an issue that has already achieved its primary goal of removing Jeremy Corbyn and crippling the progressive Labour Left. Just like playground bullies, no amount of appeasement or grovelling apologies will ever be sufficient to end the attacks. Starmer’s cowardly capitulation in the Ware Court case has presented an open invitation to liars and fraudsters to go after the weakened Labour Party in the hope of a massive payout: this is a brutally destructive storm of Starmer’s own making!

    Jewish Voice for Labour introduce us to the letter’s author by saying of him, “Malcolm Segall trained as a paediatrician in UK and became Professor of Paediatrics and Child Health in the new University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. He became Fellow of the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, from where he researched health systems in low income countries, and worked with governments and international agencies to develop public health services in Africa (including newly-liberated Mozambique, newly-liberated Zimbabwe and post-apartheid South Africa) as well as in Vietnam and China. He is now retired.” This is his open letter to Keir Starmer.

    “Dear Keir, I’m sorry for the delay in sending you this letter, but I have been poorly. Still belatedly I am writing because I want you to know that I, as a Jewish member of the Labour Party, characterise Israel as an expansionist, settler-colonial, ethnocratic, apartheid State, which has occupied, illegally expropriated, and may be on the point of formally annexing land belonging to the indigenous Palestinian people, who are deprived of their political rights. Do you think this characterisation of the Israeli State makes me antisemitic? I don’t. And I’d like to tell you why.

    First then: what does the word antisemitism means? The Oxford English Dictionary defines antisemitism as ‘prejudice, hostility or discrimination toward Jewish people on religious, cultural or ethnic grounds.’ That sounds pretty good to me. How about you? So the reason I think my characterisation of the Israeli State is not antisemitic is because it says nothing whatsoever about the Jewishness of the State’s leadership nor of the now majority population of the country. It is based entirely on objective and observable facts of the policies and actions of the State involved. In other words, we (and I mean we) should not conflate Jewish ethnicity with the political behaviour of a foreign country.

    Why am I going on about this now? Because it seems to me (and believe me to many members of our party) that this conflation must be the explanation for your extraordinary reaction to a passing comment made by Maxine Peake in a newspaper interview. This is not only important in its own right, but is the very conflation that has also mischaracterised our party as being riddled with institutional antisemitism, that has led to good party members being unjustifyingly accused, suspended or expelled, and that was so damaging to us in the recent general election. You have the deserved reputation for forensic dissection of arguments. So I’m going to a take a leaf out of your book and tease apart the different issues that are at stake here.

    Let’s start then with the Maxine Peake incident. This has well been publicised and I need only summarise it here. Maxine made the comment that Israeli secret services have trained US police in the kneeling technique that led to the death of George Floyd and you said that this constituted an ‘antisemitic conspiracy theory’. It is widely acknowledged that Israeli forces have trained the security forces of a number of countries, including the US in, among other things, restraining techniques and it is also documented that Israeli forces have employed the kneeling technique to restrain Palestinians. What is not known is that Israeli forces taught that particular technique to US police, so Maxine’s wording was loose and she has withdrawn the comment. But the issue for us here is that, even as the comment stood, there is no way that this criticism of Israeli forces could remotely be construed as antisemitic (let alone a conspiracy theory) since there was no suggestion at all that the criticism was because the people doing the training forces were Jewish.

    That comment of yours, conflating Israeli actions with Jewishness was completely illegitimate, for reasons I have pointed out above. So what were you thinking of? Was it a momentary aberration of muddled thinking or was it deliberate to send out an underlying message and, if so, to whom? You said you made the comment in order to reassure the ‘Jewish community’. What ‘Jewish community’ is that? Could it be the ‘Jewish community’ that the Board of Deputies (BoD)) of British Jews claims to represent? The deputies are elected by synagogues and other communal organisations, but some half of the roughly 300,000 British Jews do not have synagogue membership and a quarter of them self-describe as secular. So any implication that the BoD represents the collective views of Jews in Britain is far from the truth.

    Could it be that you are trying to placate the BoD and related pro-Israeli lobby groups such as their affiliate, the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM)? The JLM has been affiliated also to the Labour Party for 100 years, though for most of that time it was known as – what it actually is – as Poale Zion (Labour Zionist Movement). Its remit includes the promotion of self-determination of the Jewish people within the State of Israel and promotion of the centrality of Israel in Jewish life. These and related groups ran a relentless campaign, ably supported by the right wing press, of disinformation and lies about Jeremy’ Corbyn’s alleged tolerance of antisemitism in the Labour Party and even his being guilty of antisemitic acts himself. So is it that you are trying to earn relief from such relentless pressure?

    The problem is that if you give into playground bullies, they only bully you more. There’s no better example than the BoD’s demand that the then Labour leadership contenders must sign up to its 10 pledges, which include (I paraphrase): that Labour should only relate to the ‘Jewish community’ though its ‘main representatives’ (meaning principally themselves), that these representatives should have effective supervision of the handling of complaints of antisemitism, and that JLM should be engaged to teach party members what antisemitism means – can you imagine what their curriculum will be?! Well, the answer to that rhetorical question is to be found in Pledge 6. I quote this in full because it is central to the purpose of this letter: “The IHRA definition of antisemitism, with all its examples and clauses, and without any caveats, will be fully adopted by the party and used as the basis for considering antisemitism disciplinary cases.” What an absolute chutzpah this all is! Is the Labour Party to become a vassal of a self-interested pressure groups? And what is worse is that you signed up to this.

    So we’d better examine what exactly is this IHRA document defining antisemitism? I’m sure you studied this in forensic detail before you signed up to it but, if I may, I’ll just refresh your memory. The document has quite a long history. Essentially the same text was considered as long ago as 2005 by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia and later inherited by the Centre’s successor, the Fundamental Rights Agency, but no decision was ever made to adopt it. It was then finally adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2016. So what is the IHRA? It is effectively an intergovernmental task force, with at the time just 33 participating governments. The antisemitism document produced by the task force was actually adopted by only 8 of the 33 participating governments and 2 of 9 observer governments – which is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

    What of the IHRA document itself? It comprises a definition of antisemitism and 11 illustrative examples. The definition is described as a “working definition” which is “non-legally binding” and the examples could be considered antisemitic but only in certain contexts, which are unspecified. It certainly reads like a working document because a lot of the writing is unclear and confusing, leaving much room for interpretation. But despite the apparently unfinalised nature of the document, it has been seized upon cynically by people wishing to extend the definition of antisemitism to include anything other t¬¬han trivial criticism of Israel. Let’s see that now.

    The preoccupation of the IHRA document with Israel is shown by the fact that 7 of the 11 examples relate to the State of Israel. The most contentious of the examples is that it would be antisemitic to claim that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour. This example was resisted initially by the Labour Party, which finally caved in to persistent bullying. The wording “a State of Israel” in the example is very strange. It might have made some sense before 1948 as a kind of exercise of hypothetical model building. But now there is only one State of Israel. So is it racist? Ask the Palestinians.

    Twenty percent of the population of Israel proper are Palestinian citizens. Putting aside for this purpose the situation of the occupied territories (including the siege of Gaza and the illegal expansions in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights), since 1948 Israeli Palestinians have been subject to the political control of the Jewish majority. This de facto control changed to de jure in July 2018 when the Knesset passed the Nation State Law, which embedded Jewish hegemony structurally into the constitution of the country. The law established officially that Israel is the Nation State of the Jewish people and the Jewish people alone. This meant that, while Palestinian citizens have equal individual civil and human rights, they have no political rights as a people.

    Any state which defines political rights on the basis of ethnicity, as distinct from citizenship, is – in and of itself – racist. This is not a matter of opinion. The Nation State Law applies not only to Jews in Israel. Jews worldwide have the ‘right of return’ to Israel and the right to gain citizenship, while no such rights are afforded to the 700,000 Palestinian refugees (and their descendants) who fled or were expelled from the country in 1948, leaving behind their land and possessions. So, Keir, are you really going along with such a distorted, politically tendentious ‘definition’ of antisemitism. If so, you will be selling the Palestinian people down the river. What happened to Robin Cook’s ethical foreign policy?

    Now finally, what about your peremptory sacking of Rebecca from the opposition front bench for not instantly withdrawing her tweet of her constituent Maxine’s published interview and before she had a chance to speak to you? To draw on Shakespeare’s Mark Anthony: Oh, what a fall was there, my fellow party members! Rebecca was a first class Shadow Business Secretary with her Green New Deal. She gave a very creditable speech in Parliament as your Shadow Education Secretary laying out what needed to be done for schools to reopen safely. Don’t you see your sacking Rebecca on such flimsy grounds has driven a coach and horses through your claim to want to unite the party? Or is it that you actually just don’t care? Keir, I voted for you in the recent leadership election. So, please, now be a mensch, do the right thing: reconsider your current acceptance of conflation of antisemitism with any telling criticism of Israel, and reinstate Rebecca to a role on the front bench.” The letter is signed “In solidarity Malcolm.”

    The boy who cried wolf was ultimately devoured by that hungry wolf predator when, due to his prior deception, his cries were no longer heeded. False protestations of anti-Semitism do absolutely nothing to protect members of the Jewish community from any genuine threats of anti-Semitism or ethnic targeting and they might be making this community a lot more vulnerable to attack. In reality people with unsavoury views might have gained the false impression that they were welcome to become members of the Labour Party while the management team have been forced to battle against a fake enemy detracting from more important goals. As one observer cynically remarked that, within an allegedly institutionally racist party declared systemically anti-Semitic, it was not exactly a resounding policy success to have been compelled, in the previous Labour Party Leadership contest, to choose between two of the Jewish sons of Jewish immigrants who fled the holocaust!

    Malcolm Segall’s heartfelt letter to Keir Starmer is far more than just a simple request to reinstate the Labour Shadow Education Secretary, Rebecca Long-Bailey, as it so accurately dissects the ludicrous premise under which so many loyal Labour Party members have been falsely demonized none more so than former Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn. Starmer has embraced the ultra-extremist Israeli lobby Zionist cause with avengeance; ramping-up the fabricated anti-Semitism witch-hunt with the fervour of a truly obsessed zealot. With his ruthless ‘my way or the highway’ attitude there is now an attempt to shut down debate over this ongoing controversy in Constituency Labour Party meetings, but this effort to gag party members is destined to fail because there is strong support for the plight of Palestinians. Starmer cannot claim to be eliminated racism within the Labour Party while actively promoting the BoD’s agenda that wholeheartedly endorses state subjugation and persecution of 20% of Israel’s citizens on ethnic grounds.

    In the Open Democracy Article entitled, “Labour should ditch the IHRA working definition of antisemitism altogether,” Anthony Lerman discusses, “We need to understand the history of this attempt to define antisemitism.” He elaborates that , “In politics, neutralising a toxic controversy and moving on by taking a strategic decision to retreat, withdraw or compromise, may be a prudent course of action. But if this is what members of Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) are planning to do today by ditching the amendments it made to some examples of antisemitism in the guidance notes of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) ‘working definition’ of antisemitism, and embracing the entire text lock, stock and barrel, they would be party to a travesty of justice.” In his opinion, “The more the definition is held up to the light and subject to public scrutiny, the more we see holes and cracks in its flimsy fabric.”

    Furthermore Lerman claims that, “Not only is there now overwhelming evidence that it’s not fit for purpose, but it also has the effect of making Jews more vulnerable to antisemitism, not less, and exacerbating the bitter arguments Jews have been having over the nature of contemporary antisemitism for the last 20 to 25 years. Arguments that are inextricably linked to the Israel-Palestine conflict and generated by two questions: Are there forms of criticism of Israel which equate to antisemitism? If so, where is the line between ‘legitimate’ criticism and criticism that spills over into antisemitic hate speech? We should no longer be quibbling over the dodgy nature of some of the examples in the counterproductive explanatory text that follows the IHRA definition, in a futile attempt to reconcile adoption of the definition with protecting the last vestiges of freedom of speech about Israel-Palestine.”

    Lerman says, “We should rather be telling the unvarnished truth: no definition ever saved a Jew from experiencing antisemitism. It’s time to abandon this tainted and deeply flawed text and instead seek to codify and implement far more widely, commensurate with the danger racism poses today, the tried and tested methods of combating racism developed by anti-racist groups on the front lines of this struggle. And yet, a misguided or misapplied prudence looks certain to hold sway. Relentless pressure from inside and outside the party to get the NEC to abandon its amendments to the examples, coupled with a constant stream of attacks on Jeremy Corbyn for allegedly associating with antisemites and even allegedly being an antisemite himself, are now paying off. It’s widely expected, that today, the NEC will reverse its decision, making the entire, un-amended IHRA definition and examples an integral part of its code of conduct on antisemitism.”

    Lerman reports that, “A barrage of criticism greeted the NEC’s announcement on 5 July that it had agreed on those amendments. It stood accused of legitimising antisemitic hate-speech within the party and not allowing Jews to determine for themselves what antisemitism is. No matter that the code formally embraced the 38-word IHRA ‘working definition’ of antisemitism as well as all but 4 of the 11 examples of discourse that ‘could’ be considered antisemitic, added 2 more and, in discussing the 4 that were omitted, endorsed their content and strengthened their language with the aim of protecting freedom of speech on Israel-Palestine and simplifying the process for Labour officials conducting disciplinary hearings reaching judgements as to whether or not the code had been breached.” Lerman references a earlier Open Democracy Article where he says, “This was convincingly argued by Dr Brian Klug.”

    In the Open Democracy Article entitled, “The Code of Conduct for Antisemitism: a tale of two texts,” Klug remarks that, “Ironically, it is the drafters of the Labour party’s NEC Code, not their critics, who have grasped the meaning of ‘working definition’.” In it Klug reports: “I have not yet come across a critic of the NEC Code – I mean a critic who places a premium on combating antisemitism – who acknowledges [the points that significantly enhance the IHRA text], let alone welcomes them as the enhancements that they are. They are passed over in silence, as if the IHRA document were a sacred text whose words may not be tampered with – not even if the text can be improved.” Lerman says that, “Having followed a very great deal of the subsequent comment on IHRA, the Labour party and Jeremy Corbyn, I would say that Klug’s observation still applies.” These articles contain vital insight and an interesting timeline explaining the evolution of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and its progression to a point where this shaky guidance appears written in stone.

    The Lerman article was published in September 2018 and like a prophesy of worse to come the relentless accusations of anti-Semitism were weaponized to strengthen the targeted assaults on Corbyn seeking his removal. The entire progressive socialist project was sabotaged from within the Labour Party, but I doubt it was sufficient to account for the fake Tory ‘landslide victory’ of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. The Tory Party use of state funds to generate fake news targeting Corbyn was an egregious abuse of power and its illegality will be exposed when legal arguments blow the whole anti-Semitism scam wide open in Court. Corbyn’s defence unexpectedly well funded with £332,000 raised he must be persuaded to countersue if Ware backs down; Chris Williamson has raised £24,000 is determined to take EHRC to Court and Ware v French is already scheduled. We’re on the brink of exposing the truth that will justify a full Investigation as well as the removal of this corrupt Tory Government from office. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58433 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    I must admit that despite the recent hopeful sign of a serious fight-back against the fabricated and grossly exaggerated allegations of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party one rather crucial piece of evidence had slipped my mind: the Aljazeera undercover expose of Israeli influence in UK politics. The recent Russia Report was so myopically focused on wild speculations over on where, when and by how much Russia might have interfered with our democratic electoral process that they ignored one of the most serious, well funded and toxic political influences of unchecked interference by a foreign power. While I have no doubt that the wealthy elite here in the UK have and still remain equally guilty of using their wealth to manipulate the public with fear-mongering and rampant propaganda to vote against their own best interests, both US Corporate interests and the state of Israel have more contacts as well as the means and the motive to pose a greater threat than Russia.

    The Israelis were caught red handed on tape in the Aljazeera documentary; the fact that this evidence has been virtually ignored thus far demonstrates that their actions are tolerated precisely because the damage this malign interference causes has targeted the opposition and favours keeping the Tories in power. In the Electronic Intifada Article entitled, “This is the bogus anti-Semitism report that sank Jeremy Corbyn” Asa Winstanley exposes information that builds on the evidence gleaned by Aljazeera, claiming that, “The road to Jeremy Corbyn’s political downfall began at Oxford University Labour Club in February 2016. A rogue inquiry by a Labour staffer with close ties to the Israeli embassy included fabricated allegations of anti-Semitism. It destroyed the lives of several pro-Corbyn students sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. It also triggered Labour’s ‘anti-Semitism crisis’ in earnest.”

    “The manufactured crisis continues today, even with Corbyn now marginalized,” Winstanley reports that, “After an internal Labour disciplinary investigation, some of the accused were cleared of anti-Semitism the following year. But by that time the damage had been done. After a four-year investigation, The Electronic Intifada has obtained the full Rubin report, which has never been published. Michael Rubin, who wrote it, was chair of the right-wing group Labour Students. But the ‘inquiry’ was his own initiative and had not been mandated by either Labour’s leader or its ruling National Executive Committee. Rubin was also collaborating with Shai Masot, an Israeli ‘diplomat’ who would be kicked out of the UK the following year.” The fact that Rubin’s report wasn’t an authorized investigation, but a personal fishing expedition he carried out on behalf of a foreign government, to meet covert special interests of the Israeli Government in deflecting external criticism of their racist policies, totally delegitimizes this as fake news propaganda.

    Rubin’s involvement with Labour Friends of Israel, a seriously dubious faction of right-wing Zionist sympathizers within the Labour Party, put him right in the vortex of this storm in a teacup, able to engineer the scandal that has caused so much damage to the credibility of the Labour Party as a whole while relentlessly attacking Jeremy Corbyn. Winstanley reveals that, “Soon after writing the report, Rubin was hired by Labour Friends of Israel, a group which secretly coordinates with the Israeli embassy in London. Masot was caught in undercover footage recruiting to the Israeli front group. After years working for them, Rubin was promoted in July this year to director of Labour Friends of Israel. He also met with Corbyn’s right-wing successor, Keir Starmer, to discuss their opposition to the party’s policy of sanctions against Israel. The inquiry conducted by Rubin directly influenced the far better known Royall and Chakrabarti inquiries into alleged Labour anti-Semitism.” This should significantly increase Labour member’s suspicion of Keir Starmer’s true priorities!

    The Electronic Intifada say they, “protected some names in the report so as not to further Rubin’s disinformation campaign.” They have included a couple of redacted extracts within the article which demonstrate the main point they are making, that, “The document shows how vague or fabricated allegations of anti-Semitism against left-wing supporters of Corbyn were laundered into serious accusations. It states that Rubin reported to Labour staff six Oxford University Labour Club students he claimed were guilty of ‘repeated and potentially criminal anti-Semitism over a sustained period of time’.” They point out that, “the document fails to support this allegation. Rubin’s ‘evidence’ is at best tenuous. But it also includes outright falsehoods. The timing is also notable: The club had just voted to endorse Israeli Apartheid Week, an annual fixture in the Palestine solidarity movement’s calendar.”

    Winstanley states that, “One former student attacked in the report, who asked not to be named, told The Electronic intifada that the document had misattributed an anti-Semitic quote to them. According to the student, someone had falsely inserted the word ‘Jewish’ into a statement the student had made about the influence of the wealthy over elections. ‘As I recall, what I actually said was that there is ‘influence wielded over elections by high net-worth individuals.’ I would never blame this on Jewish people,’ the former student said. ‘The sections of the report on me are false. Labour Students never even contacted me to get my side of the story’.” If the accused student was never contacted to give an account of what was said then their case was not properly handled as they were not afforded due process.

    It is worth accessing the full report to see further examples but the ones included in the article cannot be considered as evidence; the ill defined subjective feelings of a desperately insecure student should not warrant discipline! Winstanley reveals that, “In other examples, one of the six allegedly ‘rolled [their] eyes’ when a Jewish student spoke. On another occasion, the same accused individual supposedly ‘jeered’ when the name of a former Israeli prime minister was mentioned. One anonymous Jewish student alleged only that they were sent ‘a message that was aggressive and delegitimized the feeling I had.’ But astonishingly, Rubin concluded that all four of these allegations constituted ‘sufficient evidence’ of anti-Semitism to report to Labour’s disciplinary staff.” This making a mountain out of a molehill approach characterises the vast majority of the anti-Semitism claims against Labour members who are typically targeted for supporting the Palestinian cause.

    According to Winstanley, “The document also inadvertently proves that Rubin’s ‘witnesses’ were often only relating hearsay and gossip. One anonymous student said they ‘heard from other students’ that one of the accused ‘engaged in songs which glorify rocket attacks against Tel Aviv’ but admitted that they hadn’t actually seen this. No one seems to be able to explain what this song supposedly was, how its lyrics went, or to have heard it sung. Rarely in the Rubin report are there any specific or dated incidents, or any direct claim to have actually witnessed anti-Semitism. Yet in such cases, Rubin often still claimed there was ‘sufficient evidence’ to report individuals for disciplinary action.” Subjective accounts and this style of unverified hearsay will be ripped to shreds in a Court of law just as the so called ‘Whistleblowers’ filmed by Ware in his Panorama hatchet job will be exposed lying; that is why it is so vital that Ware isn’t allowed to just drop the case because only in Court will he be held accountable.

    According to Winstanley, “The full document also suggests Rubin covered up allegations of racism by right-wingers in the Labour club – even alleged anti-Semitism. It records several such allegations against right-wingers, but they were either ignored or marked ‘not sufficient evidence’.” In stark contrast to the vague subjective feelings that Rubin judged as requiring discipline Winstanley reveals that, “One anonymous student quoted in the document states that during the club’s debate over Israeli Apartheid Week, a Palestinian student was ‘shouted down by the chair of the meeting, Alex Chalmers, called a terrorist sympathizer and subject to particularly aggressive questioning and speeches,’ especially by David Klemperer, another right-winger. A Jewish campaigner for Palestinian rights reported being on the receiving end of hostility from Chalmers: ‘Alex wanted to make me feel I was a traitor’ and ‘a self-hating Jew,’ the individual said.” How might they try to describe a ‘self-hating Jew’ when questioned under oath in Court?

    Winstanley reports that, “Chalmers’ main right-wing accomplice, former club co-chair Klemperer, was accused of anti-Semitism too. According to an anonymous student quoted in the report, Klemperer allegedly said: ‘You’re exactly the sort who should’ve died in the Holocaust’.” Now that really is serious hate speech but, “Rubin recommended no disciplinary action against either of the two, claiming there was ‘not sufficient evidence.’ Chalmers quit Labour and Klemperer was kicked out after they supported Liberal Democratic candidates in local elections. But Klemperer now appears to be back in the party.” Electronic Intifada report that, “Chalmers did not reply to a request for comment. Klemperer set both of his Twitter accounts to private soon after The Electronic Intifada emailed him a request for comment, but did not otherwise respond.”

    According to Asa Winstanley, “Chalmers’ false allegations of anti-Semitism against the Oxford University Labour Club made international headlines after his resignation as co-chair on the night of the vote for Palestinian rights on 15 February 2016. The Israeli embassy accused Oxford students of ‘disgraceful activity.’ Former Labour leader Ed Miliband cancelled a speaking event there and the government’s minister for universities Jo Johnson demanded Oxford investigate Chalmers’ allegations – despite how blatantly false they appeared even at the time. As The Electronic Intifada revealed soon after, Chalmers had also worked for BICOM, a pro-Israel advocacy organization. The ‘Labour anti-Semitism’ controversy rages on to this day. Some Israel lobbyists are even calling for Corbyn to be kicked out of Labour.” What if they did oust Corbyn, but instead of going independent, he became a Green MP; other progressive Labour MPs might follow his lead, along with like-minded Labour members and possible even Union funding seeking to support a true Socialist agenda!

    Winstanley surmises that, “It has for years been reported that two of the main targets of the Rubin report’s false accusations were James Elliott and Max Shanly – then leading pro-Corbyn activists in Labour’s youth wing. Shanly was a left-wing member of Young Labour’s national committee and a supporter of Corbyn. Elliott had advised Corbyn on youth policy during his 2015 leadership campaign. Elliott was also standing for election to a seat on Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee. Rubin’s ‘inquiry’ was wrapped up in about a week. Details from the report were then almost immediately leaked to the right-wing press – days before the NEC election. After the press smears about the pair, combined with a whispering campaign organized by Elliott’s right-wing rival, Elliott lost the seat by a single vote. In 2018, on his podcast All the Best, Shanly opened up about the effects of what he called a smear campaign against the pair.”

    Winstanley relays haw in the podcast Shanly, “revealed he had been suffering from serious depression for the previous two years, from ‘February 2016 when all the [Oxford University Labour Club] stuff kicked off.’ ‘I had my mental health destroyed entirely,’ he said. Shanly explained that in the years he was under investigation, the Labour Party refused to hear his side of the story – even Janet Royall when she did her investigation into Oxford. He said that Labour Students also never bothered to speak to him. ‘The allegations that were made against me were all false,” he said. “There was no evidence. It was all ‘I heard of.’ It all comes down to Michael Rubin’s report.’ ‘The reason I ended up getting so depressed is that no one wants to employ someone’ at the heart of an internationally reported, alleged anti-Semitism scandal, he said. That same year, Shanly was hospitalized after a severe mental health crisis. All that summer, Labour’s civil war over allegations of anti-Semitism had been raging.”

    Electronic Intifada said that, “Michael Rubin and Labour Friends of Israel did not reply to requests for comment for this article. In 2016, The Electronic Intifada asked Rubin in person if he regretted his part in the smear campaign against left-wing students at Oxford. ‘I don’t know what you’re talking about,’ he said, before rushing away. But he has admitted to conducting the investigation, in undercover footage released in 2017. The document itself confirms this in its metadata. Rubin had been close with Israeli embassy agent Shai Masot even before he started working for Labour Friends of Israel in May 2016. In the undercover footage Rubin admitted: ‘I knew Shai in my role at Labour Students, we did a couple of things together’.”

    Electronic Intifada have included the incriminating film saying, “You can watch him make this admission in this Aljazeera video;” I have embedded the Video Link. Winstanley reports that, “The footage was filmed by Al Jazeera for its investigative series The Lobby. Masot was expelled from the UK after it hit headlines in January 2017. The footage shows Rubin admitting to an undercover reporter that Labour Friends of Israel was essentially a front for the Israelis, but that ‘publicly we just try to keep the LFI as a separate identity to the embassy.’ It also revealed that the embassy finances Labour Friends of Israel’s activities. Rubin discussed launching a youth wing with events funded by the Israelis: ‘the Israeli embassy are able to get a bit of money.’ Masot apparently told Rubin he would ‘help fund a couple of events.’ ‘I don’t think money should be a problem,’ Rubin told Al Jazeera’s undercover reporter, who had been posing as a pro-Israel Labour activist.” You just don’t hear about this now so it had slipped my mind too.

    Winstanley revealed that, “After Al Jazeera’s film was broadcast, Boris Johnson – then foreign minister – said in Parliament that Masot’s ‘cover’ had been ‘well and truly blown.’ Posing as a ‘senior political officer’ at the London embassy, Masot was according to all indications an agent for Israel’s secretive Ministry of Strategic Affairs, which is staffed by former officers from Israel’s spy agencies. Since 2015, the ministry has been Israel’s semi-covert dirty tricks agency dedicated to fighting a war against BDS, Palestine’s boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.” For Boris Johnson to have known all of the details of this serious foreign interference in UK politics and not considered these facts significant enough to require a full scale investigation to eliminate all future meddling demonstrates that the Israeli meddling was beneficial to the Tory Party. Possibly of equal importance to the dodgy donations from Russian oligarchs in the Russia Report that was kept under wraps until after the Covert 2019 Rigged Election.

    The information in this article and the Aljazeera documentary offer solid proof that bogus anti-Semitism charges were weaponized to deliberately sabotage Corbyn and the progressive socialist agenda from within the Labour Party. Tory approved state funding of the integrity Initiative to magnify the anti-Semitism propaganda to lend legitimacy to a fake ‘landslide victory’ in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. These acts were criminal and fraudulent enough to remove this Tory government from power even without further Investigation into the Postal Votes. The legal suits threatened by Ware will backfire if he is forced into Court to present evidence under oath; solid legal arguments will blow the whole anti-Semitism scam wide open in Court. Corbyn’s defence is well funded with £332,000; Chris Williamson will take EHRC to Court and Ware v French is on schedule. Smoke and mirrors don’t hold up in Court so we’re on the brink of exposing the whole truth of this scandal and documenting irrefutable facts that could destroy the Tories. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58456 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Distraction usually works for the king of clowns so there was Boris on TV in a hardhat, defending outdated imperialist songs about the glory of empire and British rule – “Britannia rules the waves” with the British Navy ready to turn back and harass helpless refugees in the English Channel. “England never, never, never, shall be slaves:” tell that to a zero hours contract worker who’s paid below the paltry ‘living wage’ due to their youth! “Land of hope and glory” or ‘Land is for the Tory;’ Johnson’s Tory Party are far too busy enriching the wealthy elite to protect the impoverished masses from the harsh consequences of their rule. In reality the working poor and minorities feel eternally enslaved as they take to the streets in Black Lives Matter protests to fight prejudice and injustice. This PM who has made England a total global laughing stock with crash-out Brexit and his shambolic handling of the Pandemic crisis, the ‘Emperor with no clothes’ charlatan ‘leader’ who’s an embarrassment to us all, starts banging on about how our “British heritage is nothing to be ashamed of!” Boris Johnson is what we are ashamed of!

    Civil Servants advise and Ministers decide so when mistakes are made our deeply insecure narcissist PM scrambles to hang on to his compliant Ministers despite their serious gaffes and flaws; zero scrutiny, abandon accountability, just follow the direction of the Dom on his crusade to jettison expendable Civil Servants. In a cabinet where loyalty is more important than talent there are bound to be mistakes, hence all the screeching U-turns of this disastrous Tory Government, but there are rumours of disquiet among the ranks, but although not all Tory MP’s approve of the Cummings driven decimation of the Civil Service few have the spine to rebel. Johnson stumbles on distracting the public with a constant stream of changing restrictions often following the lead of Scotland’s Nicola Sturgeon in a belated damage control mode with vague instructions in a way that does not inspire public confidence.

    A similar tactic of selecting factionalist loyalty over talent was adopted by Keir Starmer who is failing to unify the Labour Party while creating a weak and ineffectual opposition meekly signalling approval of Johnson’s shambolic handling of the Covid 19 crisis and most policy decisions. Rather that representing a strong resistance and demanding critical U-turns Starmer just follows Johnson’s chaotic lead. Skwawkbox report that “after weeks of insisting masks aren’t needed in schools, Starmer and co copy Tory u-turn” They say, “For God’s sake, lead! For weeks now, Keir Starmer’s tactic of agreeing with the Tories wherever possible has led to Labour insisting that masks are not necessary in schools – in spite of the objections of unions seeking the safety of their members and the children they teach and in spite of the recommendations of the World Health Organisation. And now that the Tories have humiliatingly u-turned and said that masks are necessary, Starmer’s Shadow Health Secretary Kate Green has u-turned too.”

    With his shockingly blasé, “do as I say, not as I do” photo –op in the classroom Skwawkbox point out that Boris Johnson, wasn’t bothering to wear a mask or talk about the need for social distancing, when he set a poor example in a surprise classroom visit. You really would have thought that his PR team would have made sure the classroom chosen for the PM’s visit was fully compliant and properly prepared to meet the new guidelines, but amazingly the children were not appropriately separated. It was as bad as Boris’s ‘how not to wash your hands’ photo-op; in that it set another poor example. According to the Skwawkbox, “Reckless Boris Johnson visited a school today to tell pupils they’ve got nothing to worry about from the coronavirus.” He, “didn’t even tell them to be careful but not anxious – instead, telling them ‘schools are safe’.” Every message Johnson delivers appears engineered to provide a false sense of security so that the population is continuously at risk; the mixed messaging on masks is a typical example.

    In early video footage it looks like the PM is “a lot closer than 2 Metres from the pupils, he didn’t even stay ‘1m plus’ – a minimum of a metre plus some additional form of protection.” Skwawkbox say Johnson was, “aerosolising over two unfortunate children as one appears to try to mask her mouth and nose.” They remind us that even, “if anyone thinks ‘Oh, he had the virus so he’s safe’, how can anyone be confident he was really infected after his faked camping trip?” Although they don’t elaborate on a reason why the PM would have faked his Scottish Highlands camping getaway, another Skwawkbox Article provides a credible allegation that the trip was staged with his tent poorly erected on a slope and an obviously photo-shopped campfire. Boris takes us all for fools. Was the PM’s Covid infection just at attention seeking hoax? They say, “even if he was, scientists now say it’s possible to be reinfected with different strains of the virus. Johnson’s recklessness is unforgivable, putting at risk both children and their families.”

    According to the latest Skwawkbox Article, “If the Tories try to fine anyone for keeping their kids from school, they can just claim the Cummings defence.” They say that, “It might be technically illegal, but Johnson’s ‘did what any parent would’ excuse for Cummings would surely open the door for group legal action if Tories try to pursue parents for keeping their kids safe from unsafe school environment. The Tories are threatening parents with a £120 fine if they keep their children home out of fear for their safety while the coronavirus is still a threat.” They point out that, “But Boris Johnson’s decision to excuse Dominic Cummings’s complete disregard for the law in driving to Durham – and at least once, probably twice, to Barnard Castle – during lockdown by claiming Cummings only did what any responsible parent would do in the circumstances means that any pursuit of parents, for doing what they think the circumstances require, is intrinsically unjust and unsafe.”

    Skwawkbox remind the public that, “Parents have more than justifiable cause for concern,” and they outline a list of reasons.
    “almost 40 schools already in the midst of outbreaks before the general return to school next month
    • scientists warning of the ease of transmission among and by children and studies showing how fast a school outbreak can spread
    • the government’s own scientists admitting the school return will drive the ‘R’ rate of infection up – yet insisting there is no evidence for even the use of masks in school while still mandating masks in high-incidence areas
    • the clear danger to older family members if a child becomes infected
    • doctors calling on the government to abandon fines for missing school because of the dangers to the mental health of both parents and children”

    • I would add to that list the totally inadequate Track and Trace system that was supposed to be up and running months ago!”

    The Skwawkbox explain that, “Any parents penalised for keeping their children home would surely have a clear basis for a class-action style legal case against the government for acting against them and against the Cummings precedent – and Johnson would be committing political self-immolation if he fought it.” They suggest that you should, “Do what you think is right for your child and your family. What ‘any responsible parent would’.” Ultimately, the interpretation of British laws is governed by precedent and cannot se selectively or arbitrarily applied. The Government cannot selectively choose to prosecute parents for acting in the best interests of their children’s safety without explaining why it was acceptable for Dominic Cummings to do so. Just recently, further witlessness have come forward claiming to have spotted Cummings on a second visit to Durham during lockdown and one couple are determined to put pressure on the police to fully investigate, forcing Cummings to prove that he had remained in London.

    This comes at a sensitive time when news is being leaked of Cummings strong connections to the exam grade fiasco that has caused so much distress to students. Both Cummings and his wife do themselves no favours with their writing. Cummings’s wife Mary Wakefield wrote an article about emerging from their lockdown experience as if they had never left London; it failed to hide the truth and demonstrated her deliberate attempt to deceive the public. Cummings is even more brazen with his blog diatribe on controversial subjects like eugenics that makes for a revealing, if painfully laborious, read. He had to go back and edit out earlier posts on ‘Herd Immunity,’ when the whole idea went pear shaped. Embarrassingly for him, he was not fast enough to avoid his ramblings being captured for posterity and ‘rewriting history’ is never a good look. His personal sentiments on making higher education exclusively for the elite, due to his belief in their inherited superior intelligence, could also use a rewrite, but dare he try?

    Just when Johnson was hoping that the Cummings scandal was blowing over, another of his hastily applied threats, levelled as per usual at ordinary citizens, is due to come unstuck, exposing the PM to yet another chorus of loud calls for him to fire his slippery Chief Adviser. Although he might be desperately in need of a hasty escape, the PM has only just returned from his ‘get me out’a here’ experience camping in the Scottish Highlands to ride out his last two screeching U-turn crisis decisions. But was this healthy adventuresome break just a ‘Boris-Shit’ hoax? The pictures of his alleged campsite look fabricated, but maybe he was up in Scotland on a ‘leadership course’ learning ‘how to run a country?’ Our part-time Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, should seek a longer lasting hide than a fake camping getaway or just darting into a fridge to dodge the press. Perhaps the PM could be cryogenically preserved until the rest of humanity has become extinct; then he could emerge to realize his ultimate dream of becoming ‘World King!’

    The whole back to schools issue isn’t being pushed by Boris Johnson out of his deep concern over the damaging impact that a prolonged gap in education might have on children, especially those from deprived backgrounds who were promised a computer to keep up with their schoolwork. The learning laptop deal was another ‘Boris-Shit’ lie as most have not received this enticing tool, but this fake promise was a great PR stunt at the time. The real push is to force as many people back to work as possible; home schooling cannot be allowed as an option despite valid lingering concerns. In an earlier Skwawkbox Article they elaborate on how, “Johnson responds to removal of opposition in education by announcing parents will be fined for not sending kids back to school in September – safe or not.” The Captain of capitulation was already persuaded. They say, “Starmer has backed rapid schools return, while sacked Rebecca Long-Bailey sided with unions in their concern about explosion of coronavirus outbreaks in schools.”

    The Skwawkbox report that, “Boris Johnson has wasted no time in exploiting the removal of any opposition to his rush to re-open schools. Labour leader Keir Starmer sacked Rebecca Long-Bailey – in spite of the prevailing cover story – because she refused to stop backing the National Education Union (NEU), Unite and other unions in their insistence that children and teachers must only go back into the classroom when it is safe to do so. The doubling of coronavirus outbreaks in schools over the last few days shows that the UK is a long way from such safety – yet Starmer has continued to support an early return – and a string of so-called ‘centrists’ undermined Long-Bailey even when she was in post, appearing in radio, TV and print interviews to agree with their boss’s accommodation of Johnson’s wishes.” Starmer may soon regret ignoring Union advice as Union Leaders have threatened voting to withdraw their funding and new Union leadership will favour left leaning candidates determined to protect workers’ rights.

    According to the Skwawkbox, “with opposition removed from the Shadow Education brief, Johnson has immediately announced that children will be forced back to school in September – come what may – and that parents will be fined if they try to protect their kids by refusing to comply.” They say that, “Johnson told an interviewer: ‘I want all children back in school in September.’ Asked whether it would be compulsory, he responded: ‘Yes, it’s the law.’ It’s worth noting that Johnson is not demanding that all MPs return to the Commons chamber.” Even back then the warned, “How the Tories will enforce any prosecution if parents claim the ‘Cummings defence’ of following “the instincts of every father and every parent” is unclear. The UK epidemic has already seen at least 148 teachers die – and doctors are still trying to understand a new inflammatory disease in children following coronavirus infection. But with the opposition away, the man responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people from the virus can play.”

    The call for Boris Johnson to get rid of his Machiavellian unelected puppet master has continued unabated and from all quarters. Three months ago the Skwawkbox Article highlighted how, “Senior clergy come out in numbers to condemn Johnson’s double-standard and threat to public health.They reported that, “A string of senior Anglican clergy have made public statements calling Boris Johnson a liar or lacking integrity – and calling for the sacking of Johnson’s chief aide Dominic Cummings.” This followed the revelation that, “Cummings has admitted one 260-plus mile journey from London to Durham during the lock-down and while infected with the coronavirus – and is accused both of at least one more journey to the same destination and of a 30-mile trip from Durham to Barnard Castle after he recovered from the virus – yet Johnson yesterday feebly absolved his aide of any wrongdoing.”

    Saying, “The Church of England bishops were unequivocal in their condemnation,” The Skwawkbox Article posted a Video, and remarked on their utter surprise that, “even more remarkably, the BBC News channel covered their comments. At least six bishops condemned Johnson on social media, while the Bishop of Liverpool appeared on the BBC in person to agree with his colleagues. The Skwawkbox reported that at that time, “Senior Tory MPs have also called for Cummings’s removal – and even members of Johnson’s behavioural science advisory group have accused him of ‘trashing’ their work in bringing the public on board with the anti-coronavirus measures and of not being willing to listen to science – while police arrived at the Cummings’ home in London yesterday. Cummings must go – and the longer Johnson delays, the weaker and more abject he looks.” But several months later Cummings is still clinging on like the toughest barnacle to scrape off the bottom of the boat: we need to deep six the Dom!

    The sheer arrogance of protecting the incompetent, glossing over their blunders and finding scapegoats to blame for the chaos they are causing in Government is not going unnoticed in the media despite their overall support for the Tories. The stalled Brexit negotiation are creeping back into the news as the public are being prepared for the inevitable self-harm of crash-out Brexit. We do not need to settle for bad Governance, the reckless incompetence of a roller-coaster of last ditch U-turns and sham negotiations to deliver an even worse recession than Covid alone will inflict. People need to put this Tory Government under intense pressure with protests and strikes, because the ‘levelling up’ lie is heading for a ‘decimating down’ winter of desperation, soaring unemployment and a Tory enabled resurgence of the Covid ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple!’ We must restore accountability, demand an Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election to get this Tory Government out, but Cummings is the grenade, oust him and you pull the pin! DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58493 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    On the anti-slap.org Website, “The Public Participation Project,” an organization dedicated to, “Fighting for Free Speech,” Bruce Brown, Executive Director, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press writes, “Anti-SLAPP statutes are an effective way to terminate meritless lawsuits, thus reducing burdens on the courts, and at the same time promoting the exercise of speech rights.” This organization is making some progress in the US in getting anti-SLAPP laws in place one state at a time, but these vexatious lawsuits are still running rampant in the UK. Our whole Judicial system has been set back months with Court closures due to Covid 19, so it will be hard enough to get caught up without tying up the Courts with frivolous suits designed to weaponize our Judicial system for malicious intent. A couple of high profile people like John Ware and TV personality Rachel Riley are trying to game the system with faux outrage over anti-Semitism and they need to be stopped in their tracks for British justice to prevail.

    Government corruption exposed by the horrific murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia, an investigative journalist in Malta, made the EU take note of the growing menace of SLAPPs and the need for urgent collective EU legislation to end this grotesque perversion of the justice system. In the Columbia Journalism Review, Elaine Allaby recalls how Galizia, “was on her way to the bank when she was killed by a car bomb outside her house in October 2017. For months her assets had been frozen by a precautionary warrant issued in conjunction with four libel suits brought by Malta’s economy minister and his aide, and she was trying to get her account unblocked. The cases were among 42 civil libel suits open against her at the time of her death, most of them brought by Maltese politicians and their business associates. The people who ordered her assassination, which is linked to her excoriating, reporting on corruption and organized crime in Malta, have still not been identified.” Will the Labour Party now face multiple SLAPP lawsuits?

    Do we want similar injustice here in the UK? Allaby reports that, “Following Caruana Galizia’s murder, the suits all passed on to her family. Daphne’s husband, Peter Caruana Galizia, is a lawyer. Since his wife’s death, he has appeared in court twice a week to fight the cases. So far, 13 have either been withdrawn by the claimant or thrown out because they failed to appear in court; the Caruana Galizia family expects the same to happen to the remainder. Daphne Caruana Galizia was used to being sued in defamation cases, many of which ultimately fizzled out. ‘It’s just a form of harassment to eat up your time, eat up your money,’ Daphne’s son, Matthew, who is also a journalist, says. ‘It costs very little to file a libel suit in Malta… there’s almost no risk to the plaintiff. And the defendant has to pay to respond, otherwise they lose by default’.” In the UK those filing SLAPP lawsuits do so on a ‘no win no fee’ basis with backup insurance to reduce their financial liability to almost zero while crippling the targeted defendant!

    The UK is not alone in experiencing this same type of what is now being dubbed ‘Lawfare’ as epitomized by the recent bogus anti-Semitism cases. Allaby reveals that, “Journalists in other European countries say they’ve experienced similar harassment through what are called SLAPPs—Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.” These have been widely used in the US to shut down environmental protests from well known organizations like Greenpeace, but they are now being used to target Journalists and silence free speech. Allaby says that, “The purpose of a SLAPP is to intimidate a journalist or news outlet into removing critical coverage or into self-censoring reports by repeatedly taking them to court in order to exhaust their time and resources. Matthew Caruana Galizia says there was a spike in SLAPPs brought against his mother in the year leading up to her murder. ‘The last year of her life was basically horrible,’ he says. ‘She was in court almost every single day’.” No one should face that level of intimidation.

    Elaine Allaby reports that, “earlier this year, the Croatian Journalists’ Association (HND) led a march through Zagreb to protest the 1,100 libel cases open against journalists and news outlets at the time, brought on vague grounds including ‘mental anguish’ or ‘tarnished reputation.’ The HND says they are part of an attempt to suppress free speech. Claudio Cordova, who edits the Italian news site Il Dispaccio, says he spends an average of three months out of every twelve defending against libel suits. He has never lost a case, but it doesn’t exactly feel like he’s winning, either. ‘You’re not convicted, but you don’t have any way to recoup your losses, and no one will ever give you back the time you lost attending the hearings’,” he tells CJR. Sadly Starmer’s capitulation will put the fabricated anti-Semitism SLAPP suits into overdrive as his cowardly admission of guilt provides substance that does not actually exist in reality. The financial burden could bankrupt the Labour Party and effectively cripple the main political opposition.

    Allaby says that, “Anti-SLAPP legislation exists in much of the world, including in 28 US states and parts of Canada and Australia. But in Europe judges are often unfamiliar with the phenomenon of SLAPPs, and lack understanding that libel suits are being used by plaintiffs in this way. The EU currently has no anti-SLAPP laws. We don’t want to ban politicians from filing lawsuits, but we need to find ways to discourage politicians and powerful corporations from filing vexatious lawsuits against journalists and the media.” Have Tories and the wealthy elite been using the threat of a SLAPP to manipulate our media outlets and simply shut down negative reporting of their worst acts of corruption? With the current Tory stranglehold on power freedom of the press is vital to our dwindling democracy. How much control have the Tories already wielded over the compliant BBC and elite owned Media in the UK? We have gained a sorry reputation for one of the most biased Media in Europe and it is only likely to get a lot worse.

    In the CJR Article Allaby reports that now, “campaigners are working to change that. After Daphne’s murder, the Maltese European Parliamentary Member David Casa led a call for the introduction of an anti-SLAPP directive in the EU.” A good reason not to Brexit! “A coalition of NGOs including the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), the Committee to Protect Journalists, PEN International, Article 19, and Reporters Without Borders have begun conducting research into how such a directive might work. Their research is still in the early stages, but proposed measures include shifting the burden of proof from the defendant onto the claimant in libel cases involving freedom of expression, and speeding up procedures to enable judges to dismiss meritless cases prima facie. Their plan is to provide the European Commission with preliminary research that will enable the Commission to develop its own anti-SLAPP legislation, which will most likely draw on the Fundamental Charter of Human Rights as its legal basis.”

    CJR claim, “‘We don’t want to ban politicians from filing lawsuits, but we need to find ways to discourage politicians and powerful corporations from filing vexatious lawsuits against journalists and the media,’ Flutura Kusari, a legal advisor with ECPMF, says. ‘We also want to make judges across the European Union and beyond aware of the basic phenomenon of SLAPPs.’ Before an EU anti-SLAPP directive is drafted, however, there need to be changes to existing EU laws, says Dr. Justin Borg-Barthet, a senior lecturer at the University of Aberdeen, whom the coalition has commissioned to conduct research into EU libel law reform. In particular, Borg-Barthet advocates for reforming the Brussels I Regulation and the Rome II Regulation, which in their current forms allow plaintiffs to bring defamation suits in multiple jurisdictions of their choice (rather than being restricted to the state in which the dispute arose), and make it unclear which laws can be applied in a given suit, raising costs and increasing uncertainty for defendant journalists.”

    It’s known that, “Before her death, Daphne Caruana Galizia was repeatedly threatened with costly libel suits abroad, including a lawsuit filed in the US courts by the Malta-based Pilatus Bank, which she had accused of money laundering. (The bank was shut down in November 2018 after its owner was charged in the US with money laundering and fraud.) In the days after Caruana Galizia’s murder, members of Borg-Barthet’s network noticed that Maltese publications including Malta Today, the Times of Malta, and The Independent had begun quietly deleting their own stories about Pilatus Bank. When confronted, the publications’ editors acknowledged the deletions, saying that they had also been threatened with costly libel suits.” If they had not bothered to inquire this stealth removal of incriminating critical reporting would have gone unnoticed. If we don’t want corruption to reach such deadly extremes here in the UK we need to

    Elaine Allaby reports that, “The political blogger Manuel Delia wrote a post denouncing Pilatus’s tactics. ‘In every case they said we’re deleting these stories because it’s too expensive to litigate—so they stood by these stories,’ Borg-Barthet says. ‘It was very much 1984: ‘The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth.’” That sounds like the UK, right her, right now! However, Borg-Barthel proclaimed, “One small victory is we’re now hopeful that the erasure won’t be forgotten.” The fight-back requires those under attack to double-down on their efforts with regard to investigative reporting. After experiencing SLAPP suits intended to sabotage their protest efforts Greenpeace offer the following advice on their Website: “When you’re SLAPPED, stand FIRM.” As Lawfare targeting of their organization them ramped-up they, “created this easy acronym to remember what to do if you or your organization faces a SLAPP, or you want to stand up and support Greenpeace. Stand FIRM.”

    “Fight back: SLAPPs don’t stand up to scrutiny and it’s important to explore your legal options and build a strong legal defence.
    • Investigate: continue to examine and expose the practices of the corporation suing you– they wouldn’t resort to these tactics if they didn’t have something to hide.
    • Rally. Bring together your free speech allies to help support the cause and amplify your message.
    • Make some noise. Refuse to be silent. Don’t give up your free speech.
    For more information on fighting SLAPPs, check out Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Public Participation Project’s campaign for public laws to limit repressive SLAPP suits.”
    Identifying their principal adversary, ‘Resolute,’ Greenpeace request that, “Most of all, don’t let Resolute silence you! Take action now!”

    Many Labour Party members are angered by the incessant lies over anti-Semitism; when people say “no smoke without fire” I hit back hard with the documented evidence and a scenario that puts this issue into a truly realistic context. Imagine you have a family member or very close friend who has had a traumatic, serious battle fighting cancer. They appear to be in remission and return to their Doctor to find out where they now stand. Their doctor tells them “congratulations, you are 99.9% cancer free!” But instead of relaying the good news they tell you they are absolutely “riddled with cancer.” Among those in the Labour Party, anti-Semitism cases account for 0.01% of the 500,000 strong membership; that makes Labour well over 99.9% anti-Semitism free! Not perfect, but certainly not “systemically racist” or an “existential threat to the Jewish community” or any of the other alarming descriptions applied by those trying to tear the Labour Party apart just to remove Jeremy Corbyn and purge the party of the progressive left.

    The stats supporting this evidence were well established and clearly documented in a Labour Briefing in March of 2019, so why were Labour MPs constantly confirming the existence of a massive problem that simply did not exist? The single most serious complicating factor was that this disinformation was being driven by hostile elements within the Labour Party itself with the fatal collusion of the BBC and alt-right media lending them a megaphone. When Chris Williamson dared to challenge the fabricated seriousness of the anti-Semitism issue he was denounced for contributing to anti-Semitism. This groundless charge had the same effect as a SLAPP lawsuit because it served as a warning to others that the fake news was set in stone and those who challenged this warped narrative would be extricated from the Labour Party in disgrace. The most crucial opportunity to fight back before the Covert 2019 Rigged Election was lost when Jeremy Corbyn failed to discipline Margaret Hodge for her vile insult in the Commons.

    The EU could potentially put new anti-SLAPP laws in place at some point and their ideas are workable. Currently the burden of proof in a defamation case falls on the defendant, but the suggestion that this should change to placing the burden of proof on the Litigant would see vexatious cases thrown out at a much earlier stage. As a person who took a genuine case of career sabotaging defamation to the High Court in London I can say that this would not prevent such seriously impactful cases being heard in Court. I would have considered this requirement of proof fair and just as it was a burden I was fully prepared to meet in Court if my case had not been rejected on the grossly unfair technicality of ‘Absolute Privilege’ that protected my University from facing justice. That any proposed EU anti-SLAPP laws will not be in place for a while yet is not our major concern here in the UK as we will be forced to not only crash out of the EU, but this rogue Tory Government want to strip away the protection of the Charter of Human Rights!

    This makes the determination to fight the threatened SLAPP cases over fake anti-Semitism even more vital to salvaging our embattled democracy. Crowdfunding has opened up the potential to fight-back and we must continue to support these efforts in the hope of restoring justice. In Jeremy Corbyn’s case with a Fund of £332,000 he is in a strong position to countersue and he should prioritize this option before Ware has a chance to back away from the fray now that a settlement will not be forthcoming. This is important for two reasons. Firstly the burden of proof will shift from Corbyn trying to disprove a negative to Ware being forced to produce evidence in defence of his false assertions. Secondly, once his case is unwinnable a “no win no fee” legal defence is harder to secure and insurance to cover his loss will become prohibitive. This is precisely the type of proactive and decisive action that must be consistently taken to make these vexatious SLAPP lawsuits financially untenable in our Courts.

    As an accomplished lawyer Sir Keir Starmer was acutely aware of the fact that the Labour Party had more than enough evidence to fight the Ware SLAPP case in Court even without the supporting advice of Labour’s Legal team telling him not to settle. Solid evidence of the anti-Semitism hoax would have emerged had the case gone to Court, but it would have exposed the internal efforts of numerous centrist Labour MPs who were working against the best interests of the Labour Party to oust Jeremy Corbyn. His cowardly capitulation was intended to keep the disgraceful truth hidden with his own interests in retaining leadership a principal motivation at the expense of the Labour membership. However, his dishonourable conduct will now encourage numerous other SLAPP lawsuits cantered on his cowardly false admission of guilt and data issues from the leaked Labour Report that he is trying equally hard to keep under wraps. That will mean more settlements and the possibility that Labour Unions decide to block Union member funding of the Labour Party.

    The case Chris Williamson is bringing against the EHRC is for Judicial Review; the burden of proof is his and the case can only proceed if he presents credible evidence that there is an injustice that requires correction. Williamson’s Lawyers must be feeling really confident in the available evidence as this is not a SLAPP and he fully intends to go to present that evidence in Court. There is no way for EHRC to offer a settlement that would make this go away; they are a public body answerable to the British people with regard to adhering to their remit and investigating fairly. Although the leaked Labour Review was conducted precisely to rebut the allegations of mishandling anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, despite Starmer’s refusal to submit it to EHRC an unredacted copy was provided to them by Craig Murray which EHRC were obligated to consider. The threat of this legal action in response to the draft Williamson received should make them reconsider their final judgement, but we must continue to support his legal fund.

    The case Ware has brought against Paddy French at Press Gang is all part of the same massively corrupt false allegations that Ware is trying to cash in on using SLAPP cases and he needs our funding support too. Another case has been dragging on for nearly two years and is similarly interconnected with the fake anti-Semitism witch-hunt. Using the same disreputable lawyer, Mark Lewis, in a ‘no win no fee’ suit with backup insurance to cover costs despite her personal wealth TV personalities Rachel Riley and Tracy-Ann Oberman brought a SLAPP against Mike Sivier. He wrote an article about Ms Riley and Ms Oberman’s bullying of a teenage girl, so they threatened to sue him for libel, claiming that they didn’t behave inappropriately, but he has crowdfunded over £92,000 to Fight Back and you can help out. Mike Sivier is a news reporter with more than 25 years’ experience who currently runs the influential Vox Political website and is also a full-time carer for his disabled partner; Rachel Riley is a serial SLAPPER!

    Solid proof that bogus anti-Semitism charges were and still are being weaponized, to demonize Corbyn and deliberately sabotage the progressive socialist agenda of the Labour Party, will soon be exposed if and when these SLAPP cases make it to Court. Tory approved state funding of the integrity Initiative to magnify the anti-Semitism propaganda was concocted and widely disseminated in the media to lend legitimacy to a fake ‘landslide victory’ in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. These acts alone were criminal and fraudulent enough to remove this Tory Government from power even without further Investigation into the Postal Votes. Those who brought SLAPP suits hoping for a rapid payout that would avoid the troubling necessity of proving a case in Court will be starting to panic due to the huge level of grassroots support for those prepared to fight back. Smoke and mirrors will not hold up in Court so we’re on the brink of exposing the whole truth of this scandal and documenting irrefutable facts to oust this Tory Government. DO NOT MOVE ON! https://tinyurl.com/w4u9dwm

    #58542 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    The other day I briefly featured the Rachel Riley and Tracy-Ann Oberman SLAPP lawsuit targeting Mike Sivier for defending a vulnerable teen and I think this disgusting example is worth highlighting here. In an age where so many young people engage frequently on the internet parents want to know that their children can be kept as safe as possible from online bullying that in the past has driven young people to the brink of suicide. It is especially important that those in the public eye don’t use their influence to endanger the most innocent young members of society at a point where they are just starting to gain confidence in themselves. On his Crowdfunding Page Sivier identifies two women who seriously crossed the line, writing, “Most people who know of Rachel Riley and Tracy-Ann Oberman will consider them to be minor television personalities, known for Countdown and EastEnders respectively. But I know them as a pair of Twitter bullies who harassed and intimidated a teenage girl who suffers extreme anxiety.”

    Who is Mike Sivier? He introduces himself as, “a news reporter of 25 years’ experience, currently running a political news and opinion website (Vox) after giving up my day job to become a full-time carer for my disabled partner.” He explains the focus of his most well known reporting work, “exposing the thousands of unexplained deaths of people who claimed sickness benefits but were denied them after taking the Conservative government’s punitive work capability assessment.” He then admits that, “More recently I have met criticism over my interest in the misuse of accusations of anti-Semitism for political purposes. My research and articles on this matter attracted libellous articles about me in the national newspapers in early 2018. I took all of the newspapers involved to the press regulator IPSO, and all have been forced to publish articles correcting their false claims.” So far this sounds like a really resounding victory for freedom of speech and the progressive press, but he has now run into a major problem.

    Sivier describes what happened in response to a critical article that he wrote entitled, “Serial abuser Rachel Riley to receive ‘extra protection’ – on grounds that she is receiving abuse.” Sivier says, “When I wrote an article about their Ms Riley and Ms Oberman’s bullying of a teenage girl, they threatened to sue me for libel, claiming that they did not behave in the ways I stated and that I had caused serious damage to their reputations.” He posts Links to the article in question and says, “The Guardian is reporting that Rachel Riley is to receive ‘extra security’ at recordings of Countdown after receiving online abuse. Ms Riley ‘said she had been targeted by Labour supporters on Twitter for her criticisms of the party and its leader, Jeremy Corbyn’, over alleged anti-Semitism.”

    Sivier reports that, “The paper stated: ‘She has already spoken about being trolled online, but said the problem had worsened and included physical threats… ‘The more I speak, the more abuse I get, and the more abuse I get, the more I speak. It’s got to the point where I can’t look at my Twitter feed any more … it’s just a constant stream.’ ‘I’ve been attacked by people on the left and the best way to not have me talk about antisemitism on the left is not to be antisemitic.’ I find myself in a unique position to comment on this as a person who has been falsely accused of anti-Semitism – by some of the people with whom Ms Riley has allied herself – and been shown to be demonstrably innocent. Considering the quality of the debate, I wonder if I’ll be accused again as a result of this article” Well of course he was and the matter escalated to legal threats.

    Sivier states very clearly that, “It is absolutely right that abuse should not be tolerated, and anybody abusing or threatening another person – over any issue – needs to be tackled over it.” But he insists, “that includes Ms Riley – because she is, herself a serial abuser. She tells us she became involved in the debate on anti-Semitism in March last year, after seeing a news report on a demonstration outside Parliament. That’s when she began writing, speaking and tweeting about it. Nobody, at that time, had sent her any anti-Semitic abuse or even engaged her in healthy debate about her point of view. She has managed to provoke any adverse reactions herself (and bear in mind that I have already stated I do not support any abuse. I make this clear because experience shows that points like this need to be hammered home).” Like so many others who started ranting about anti-Semitism in the Labour Party Riley did not bother to search for actual evidence or fact check the statistics before she fired off her insults.

    Sivier Lists a few, “Examples of her contributions to the debate on anti-Semitism include:
    • Praising an organisation whose members publicly harass and abuse peaceful pro-Palestinian protestors, and even issue death threats.
    • Making anti-Semitism accusations against people who criticised Lord Sugar’s claim that he’d leave the country if Jeremy Corbyn became prime minister (most people didn’t even know he is Jewish at the time). Sugar himself has had to apologise for at least one public display of racism.
    • Supporting the anti-Semite Mark Meechan (aka ‘Count Dankula’) who taught his dog to perform Nazi salutes when he said ‘Gas the Jews!’ and ‘Sieg heil!’
    • Vilifying the great Jewish intellectual Noam Chomsky as an anti-Semite.
    • Cold-shouldering a 16-year-old girl with anxiety problems who had pointed out that Ms Riley has adopted questionable allies, in such a way that her (Ms Riley’s) supporters subjected her to an appalling amount of abuse (known as dogpiling).
    • Doubling-down on this behaviour by including a tweet from the same teenager as an example of anti-Semitism.
    • Comparing this teenager’s attempt to point out the inconsistencies in her own behaviour with ‘the spread of Antisemitism’.”

    Sivier also lists, “The consequences of Riley and Oberman’s obscene conduct have been as follows:
    1. Rosie’s Twitter account has been hacked several times, by people trying to delete screenshots. Now why might that be…?
    2. People have tried to track down her family’s address and her devastated mother’s Facebook page.
    3. Someone eavesdropped on Rosie in class and tried to sell the story to The Sun. Which in keeping with its reputation of being lower than vermin, printed something… before deleting it hours later.
    4. She has people in college believing she’s an anti-Semite.
    5. She, a 16-year-old child, has received death threats.”

    Sivier is quick to point out that he is, “not saying Ms Riley intentionally tried to get her followers to threaten this girl with death. But nobody can deny that her irresponsibility has encouraged others to do so, and that she has been reckless as to the consequences of her behaviour. So now we see that a person who has complained to the newspapers about ‘extra security’ on the TV show she co-presents – because of death threats – has herself provoked death threats against a teenage girl. And you can be sure this girl won’t be getting ‘extra security’ – or, indeed, any security at all.”

    In a lengthy Medium Article, written by Shaun Lawson, entitled, “Beneath Contempt: How Tracy Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley harassed, dogpiled and slandered a 16-year-old child and her father” that has further information about the shocking incident. As you can see, both pieces are based on actions that are directly attributable to these people. My piece on the intimidation of the teenager provoked a huge attempt at bullying on Twitter – known as a ‘dogpile’. Lawson provides a lot of very illuminating graphs full of data that debunk all of the vile garbage being hurled at Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party over anti-Semitism. He is himself Jewish with family members killed in the Holocaust so if anyone should feel very strongly about this issue he certainly has a right to. However, he fits the profile of so many who are now being targeted as “the wrong sort of Jew” or “self-hating Jews.”

    Further down in his extensive article Lawson focuses on the abuse and harassment of Rosie that was to prove so distressing and abhorrent. He says that, “Other than one tweet she deleted within seconds of issuing it, the tweets below were the only time she wrote to Oberman throughout this sorry saga. Rosie writes, ‘You have no idea the distress having a huge pile on has caused. I spoke about my anxiety way before this but it’s me that is the bad person. You ask anyone who knows me and they will tell you how upset I have been about this, the abuse reduced me to tears. – I am absolutely sickened that you have used me to make me out as an attention seeker. This whole time i have been debating politely but I was forced to block people after I was piled on and abused. I have never been racist once in this whole thing, just simply trying to make – My voice heard too, as a Labour member who’s sick of the idea that condemning the actions of Israel means someone is antisemetic’.”

    Lawson concedes that, “It is absolutely plausible (indeed, highly likely) that Oberman had been referring to someone else in her tweet. But that would be her only point of defence in all that would follow. Rosie had warned Oberman about pile-ons and her anxiety. Yet the latter suddenly started tweeting to her, and about her. First she tried to introduce Rosie to another young woman, Charley: a completely innocent bystander throughout what followed, to whom absolutely zero blame is attached. Then Oberman got a rather strange idea in her head.” The tweets Lawson screen-grabbed illustrate just how strange as Oberman repeatedly requests that they should meet up. Oberman tweets, “But, I’d love to meet you Rosie. When you are next in London let’s go for coffee. Maybe @charley_yorks could meet us too. It would be great to connect young people who could maybe open a dialog.”

    Lawson reports that, “Rosie, a 16-year-old child with anxiety, which she had already informed Oberman about, had been tagged into all three tweets. Oberman’s offer was pleasant enough; but any right-thinking adult would have left it at that. Unfortunately, Tracy Ann Oberman is no such adult.” Oberman continues to send a barrage of tweets. Lawson says, “At this point, a friend of Rosie’s stepped in and told Oberman what should have been blindingly obvious.” Oberman was seriously creeping Rosie out and they pointed out that Rosie’s parents would not want her going to London on her own. If Oberman was an adult male making similar suggestions online it would be flagged up as ‘grooming,’ but her invitation is just as inappropriate given Rosie’s age; have the BBC learned nothing since the Savel scandal. But does Oberman cease and desist? No the tweets get worse.

    Lawson reports that Oberman suggests, “Maybe we could come and meet Rosie?” Lawson is shocked writing, “Tracy: wake up and smell the restraining order!” He says, “It’s exactly that which, by now, would have been scaring the heck out of Rosie or anyone else, for that matter.” After a deluge of online abuse Rosie had the common sense to refuse face to face confrontation with people who shared the views and sympathies of those who had been so disgustingly abusive online. In the tweets that followed Oberman said Rosie’s parents could join them and it would be her treat. At what point was she going to accept that no, means no and leave the poor child in peace? Oberman is a 51-year-old woman. This complete stranger had now issued her invitation to a 16-year-old child with anxiety, who’d been bullied constantly over the previous few weeks, not once, not twice… but on SIXTEEN separate occasions. Goodness only knows what was in her mind.” That constitutes very serious abuse.

    Lawson says, “Think that was it? Think again. Incomprehensibly, Oberman continued to tweet to Rosie, talk about her in public, or copy her in to virtually every tweet she made.” Lawson printed a large selection saying, “This followed the sole tweet which a now terrified Rosie had sent Oberman, then deleted within seconds. By now, more and more people were stepping in on this petrified child’s behalf. How did Oberman respond?” She blocking the person trying to defend Rosie and “accused her of being part of a ‘smear campaign’. No Tracy: you’d been publicly smearing yourself for hours. Quite how Oberman had convinced herself that as this was all happening in public, and she’d been ‘open and welcoming’, it somehow wasn’t the textbook definition of harassment, I have no idea. Her world-beating levels of self-delusion would cause her to bury herself deeper and deeper over the hours ahead.”

    Lawson reported that, “Throughout this whole time, Rosie had not responded, while friends of hers had demanded Oberman stop. Yet had the latter now convinced herself they were friends or something?! Appallingly, for the crime of trying to protect a terrified child she was harassing non-stop, Oberman also instantly smeared others. Yes, you read that right. When informed that this 16-year-old girl was sitting in class out of her mind in panic at what was going on, Oberman described it as a ‘politically motivated smear… politically and race motivated’. By now, her behaviour should’ve had her ushered away from her computer screen by the men in the white coats. Yet still, she would not shut up. Unbelievably, she even retweeted this outrageous pile of nonsense sent to, of all people, Rosie’s father.”

    Lawson claims, “Tracy was harassing her in plain sight; and none of her allies, including other public figures, had done anything to stop it. Not one. Including Riley, who’d also been copied into many of the tweets. As, on a significant number of occasions, had Al Murray, Frances Barber and JK Rowling. As if to confirm that irony had just died, the woman who’d been publicly harassing a child for hours on end now accused someone else of bullying her. What had that someone else done? Only try to stop this completely out of control harassment. Oberman continued to double down (by now, it was more like sextuple down) on anyone calling her out. By this point, Oberman had sent an unsolicited invitation to Rosie 16 times, sent her direct tweets a further nine times, copied her into her tweets another 17 times, mentioned her a further 11 times… and smeared various people who’d desperately tried to stop what was going on.” Lawson has posted screen-shots of dozens of tweets that could be used in evidence to prosecute Oberman!

    Lawson continued saying that, “One of Oberman’s followers, Rachel Bridge, had also seen fit to accuse Labour Left Voice of… ‘grooming Rosie’?! Believe it or not, we still hadn’t reached the worst of it yet. First, Oberman went into yet further denial. ‘Smear nonsense’? 63 tweets was awfully close to the truth. He says, then she moved on to something truly wicked. ‘Used’? By whom? Did she ask you to send her nigh on 60 tweets in 7 hours while she was in college? …At length, the absolute lowest of the low. When a 16-year-old child has spent the entire day being harassed, in public, by a celebrity, there’s only one thing that’s going to make her feel even worse. When her father is attacked too. Yet that’s what Oberman did. All Rosie’s Dad had done was try to protect his daughter from this utterly revolting madness.” Right blame the dad! Rosie’s father had had quite enough of this horrific behaviour;” he tweeted his response that should have shaken some sense into a normal humane individual, “But not our Tracy.”

    Lawson said, “Then, for some unfathomable reason, Oberman started referring to her prey as an ‘18-year-old’. And it wasn’t a typo, because she did it not once, not twice, but three times: and once more defamed Rosie’s father in so doing.” He says, “Oberman wasn’t done. She committed another grotesque slander against Rosie’s father. And then, the lies began. In polite English, this is what’s known as ‘frantic arse covering’. She is 16. How dare you suggest otherwise? Still, never mind: up popped Riley to lend her support to someone who had relentlessly harassed a child and abused her father for good measure.” “…the lies, the dissembling, the nauseating self-regard, the astounding levels of conceit continued:” Celebrity abusers slung painful insults at the terrified teen; in her defence Lawson says, “Education’? Rosie is an extremely well educated, gifted young woman, with a massive future ahead of her. Do you think she needs reprogramming or something? Is this something out of Orwell? Who do you think you are?”

    I don’t recognize the famous names mentioned here, but Lawson says that, “just to remind us how stupid so much of Britain’s glitterati is, Emma Kennedy had her entirely ill-informed say as well. Memo to Emma: chatting openly to a 16-year-old child on a public forum is one thing. Sending this child 16 unsolicited invitations to meet a complete stranger, around 60 unsolicited tweets in total, slandering anyone trying to protect her and even defaming her Dad is quite another.” Lawson points out that “on the subject of libel: telling the truth is an absolute defence. But hey ho, who cares about any of that? It’s only harassment of a terrified child by someone more than three times her age, after all. Harassment, I might add, which didn’t just occur at Oberman’s hands. When public figures behave like this, there are horrible consequences for the victim.” Lawson reports that, “the police have certainly been contacted… They’re currently investigating.”

    Sivier poses a question regarding his lawsuit, “Why is this important?” He explains, “Perhaps worst of all is the fact that Ms Riley and Ms Oberman justify their behaviour by saying it is part of the fight against anti-Semitism. It is nothing of the sort. It is vital that this cynical manipulation of the debate on anti-Semitism should be fought. Bullying a school-age young person under the pretence of fighting anti-Semitism may lead to genuine hatred of Jews – on the grounds that they are using their ethnicity to seek unfair advantage over others.” Referring to Riley and Oberman Sivier then says, “if they get away with this, who else are they likely to victimise? Already we have seen multiple political attacks on the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, with accusations of anti-Semitism that have been proved false. Ms Riley is a part of that.” While the public remain myopically focused on one particular ethnic minority they are oblivious to the increasing problem of Islamophobia and the fact the Tories have pledged to target Gypsies!

    The Media including the BBC have driven this faux outrage and not it is not just targeting adults it is persecuting young people as well. For me this incident crossed the line and was serious enough that Riley and Oberman should be dropped from all BBC programming with immediate effect, because to support their conduct sends a very dangerous message. These were two TV celebrities with a lot of powerful supporters, but the BBC must demonstrate zero tolerance towards those who bully and harass children. It is worth wading through Lawson’s lengthy article as it also contains important stats on anti-Semitism that represent evidence that cannot simply be ignored by EKRC. This crucial evidence strongly supports the Williamson Case against EHRC, the case targeting Corbyn and the Press Bang SLAPP as well. We are right on the brink of exposing all the lies that were used to legitimize the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. One more massive heave and the Tories will be out, Investigation or not, but we cannot give up the fight; : it’s not won yet! DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58583 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    We need to recognize the danger posed by the agenda of ‘othering’ because the British Government are past masters of this policy of divide and rule, having practiced it for centuries. An alarmingly racist eugenics agenda is embedded at the very core of the Tory cabal in power right now with Cummings manipulation of a weak narcissistic PM as he calls the shots from his unelected shadow position in charge of decision making! The Tory manifesto states outright that Gypsies will be targeted, but they will only be the first soft target just as they were under the Nazis. The principal is to selectively dehumanize a sector of society while discrediting and bullying anyone who attempts to protect them. Populist rabble rousers, hate-mongers like Farage, Robinson and Katie Hopkins, serve as the most obvious Tory tools, but widely accepted TV personalities like Rachel Riley and Tracy Ann Oberman pose a far more insidious threat as does author JK Rowling cheering from the sidelines, as she holds sway over so many of our children.

    The tactic is slightly modified this time around with a campaign to distract with faux protection of one ethic minority while another is contrasted as a danger to society. Beyond the Gypsies, the Muslim population of the UK are in grave danger of being targeted right now. The laws designed to criminalize the Gypsies and rid the UK of their encampments, can far too easily be adapted to target the homeless who will be turned onto our streets in growing numbers as a consequence of the inevitable widespread destitution due to crash out Brexit compounding the economic meltdown of Covid 19. All immigrants and suspected immigrants will again be the target of misdirected public anger over the chaos that will follow mass unemployment and critical food shortages. This Tory Government will need a scapegoat for their shambolic mishandling and disastrous policy errors designed to cull the ‘economically inactive’ from society. But we must fiercely resist, as playing into their hands will enable a catastrophic ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple!’

    The Tory tools fermenting the hateful ‘othering’ in this country must be resoundingly called out and publically discredited for their actions, especially those who pose a more insidious threat like Riley and Oberman. Their sustained bullying of a terrified teen was unconscionable, but it is a just taste of things to come under the faux outrage banner of anti-Semitism; we can stop it in its tracks by fighting back. In the Guardian Article entitled, “Rachel Riley and Tracy-Ann Oberman drop libel claim over retweet” It says that they, “dropped their joint libel claim against a barrister for retweeting a critical blog post about the pair.” However, “Jane Heybroek, an immigration lawyer, said the duo had withdrawn their case after 18 months of legal action that cost her over £80,000 in legal bills.” So despite being forced to back down and drop their case Riley and Oberman achieved most of their devastating SLAPP lawsuit goals: inflicting a crippling time, stress and financial burden to warn others of the consequences of defending the innocent!

    The Guardian report that, “In 2019 Heybroek had retweeted a link to a lengthy blog post by a man called Shaun Lawson entitled ‘Beneath Contempt: How Tracy-Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley harassed, dogpiled and slandered a 16-year-old child and her father’. The article made allegations about the actions of Oberman and Riley towards a young Labour activist who had made comments about antisemitism in the party. Heybroek did not publish the original blog post, and said there was no evidence that anyone read it as a result of her retweet. Heybroek said she had spent tens of thousands of pounds on the case, while Riley and Oberman, who have been actively involved in highlighting allegations of antisemitism in the Labour party, were represented on a no-win, no-fee basis.” This is typical in SLAPP cases. Heybroek said, “This meant that there was almost no risk to them in bringing the claim. Many people would have felt forced to settle for reasons of pragmatism.” This bears all the hallmarks of extortion!

    The Guardian reveal that, “At a hearing earlier this year, a judge described Heybroek as ‘broadly supportive of Jeremy Corbyn’, but said there was no other clear evidence of her political position. Heybroek said that despite Riley and Oberman’s ‘vocal stance against antisemitism’ in other legal cases, this claim ‘did not actually involve any allegations of antisemitism’.” Describing how easy it is for people to jump on this bandwagon Heybrooke said, “Unfortunately, as a result of the litigation, I was the subject of a number of nasty comments from a small minority of people who simply presumed to know what the case was about and what the outcome would be. They were wrong on both counts.” The Guardian say, Riley and Oberman’s solicitor, Mark Lewis, of Patron Law, said in a statement that his clients “chose not to proceed further after the judge had determined that the opinion expressed was capable of being defamatory, in circumstances where Jane Heybroek claimed that she had promptly deleted her tweet”.

    What is the significance of their climb-down? While the Guardian report that, “They have both now made a contribution towards Heybroek’s costs,” they do not state the amount of this contribution. Certainly it would not have been made out of contrition or pity after realizing they were in the wrong, and I very much doubt it was their personal funds that were put forward. A deal will have been negotiated to end the case that probably involved shielding Riley and Oberman from public scrutiny of their egregious assault and bullying of Rosie, the original target of their dogpile of tweets, for the crime of failing to agree with their consensus of hatred towards Jeremy Corbyn. The Guardian report that, “Lewis said: ‘Their libel insurers each did not see any advantage in pursuing a case over the liability of a retweet that was deleted so quickly. There are bigger fish to fry in the pursuit of those who choose to maintain a serious libel’.” More harm to be caused elsewhere, but how tolerant are insurers in accepting financial SLAPP losses?

    At the point where these legal insurers are no longer prepared to accept the considerable financial risk of losing SLAPP cases this risk free back up plan will become untenable. The well funded broad public support of defendants like Corbyn who has raised Over £332,000, Williamson fighting EHRC, Paddy French at Press Gang, Jewish Voice for Labour and Sivier at Vox will make fewer and fewer cases rich pickings for the out of Court settlements so necessary to avoiding any challenge to the unsubstantiated evidence. Lawyer Mark Lewis will drop these cases like a hot potato once fully funded defendants are able to challenge faux anti-Semitism evidence and this racist scam is exposed under full legal scrutiny. When he realizes he cannot keep the cases out of Court and he stands absolutely no hope of winning in Court he will stop representing SLAPP cases. SLAPP cases win by avoiding Court, but they also succeed by shutting down public scrutiny, investigative reporting and open public debate: we must not let this happen.

    The poison of faux anti-Semitism allegations now stands a strong chance of being fully exposed as a hoax and Corbyn must be persuaded to countersue Ware. This is vital to demonstrate that the Starmer capitulation was a self-serving betrayal of the Labour membership, so he must step down. In another Vox Article Sivier writes, “Rachel Riley thought her support would boost a libellous petition against Jeremy Corbyn. Big mistake! That well-known self-proclaimed campaigner against racism and inequality, Princess Countdown (also sometimes known as Rachel Riley) has trumpeted her support for a libellous petition condemning Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. In so doing, she has very clearly libelled Mr Corbyn. He is not an anti-Semite – or indeed any kind of racist – and is certainly not unfit to hold public office. She may feel safe in this act as Mr Corbyn is unlikely to respond. He seems to believe that doing so would lend credibility to the lies, although I’m open to other opinions and evidence.”

    Sivier says. “The petition she is supporting was put on the Change.org website eight months ago by a little-known right-wing fringe group and fake charity calling itself the Campaign Against Antisemitism. I wrote about it at the time, pointing out that objectors could call for the petition to be removed by clicking on a link marked ‘Report a policy violation’. Unfortunately Change.org, in its wisdom, has only added a line saying, ‘We have received flags from our users that the facts in this petition may be contested. You should consider researching this issue before signing or sharing.’ One may also report the Campaign Against Antisemitism to the Charity Commission for violating the requirement that charities must be non-political, by Clicking this Link.” This isn’t the only fake ‘Charity’ doing Tory dirty work that required reporting; the Institute for Statecraft is also registered as a Charity. Their ‘Integrity Initiative’ has received substantial funding from the Tory Government to generate propaganda targeting Corbyn and the Opposition Labour Party.

    Sivier reports that, “Ms Riley’s libellous tweet has attracted a considerable number of responses – in opposition.” One responded “This is a vile tweet it is also encouraging hate towards an individual and I am reporting you to Twitter and I hope you are sued, you horrible woman.’ She continued: ‘You are obsessed and this is becoming clearer by the day. Corbyn probably won’t sue you he probably pities you your childish arrogance and ignorance. You have made a libellous tweet imo you have gone too far and everyone should report it. You really are obsessed Rachel.” Another said: “Hopefully Jeremy sues you for libel. Might be able to put your maths skills to some use and work out how much you owe him in damages.” However this is perhaps Jeremy Corbyn’s biggest fault, if you can call it that: he is far too ready to turn the other cheek! There are numerous occasions where Corbyn should have fought back with legal action and Margaret Hodge MPs vile accusations should have removed her from the Labour Party!

    Sivier raises the issue of how much funding he is trying to raise, saying, “These are well-paid, well-resourced TV personalities. They are targeting people like myself, who have little money, with the cynical intention of embroiling us in legal proceedings that will cost more than we can afford, in order to force us into giving up and paying them money they do not deserve.” This was written at the beginning of his long campaign when he hoped to raise “an initial £5,000 with this appeal, with a ‘stretch’ target of £25,000, to cover the costs of retaining solicitors and a barrister who can take this case to court and put a stop to this nonsense.” He said back then that his solicitors believed they had “a very strong case but we need to be able to take it to court and have it heard. Otherwise, this case will be a victory of wealth over justice.” Since then his Crowdfunding Appeal has raised over £92,000!

    Sivier regularly updates information on the case, so when Downing Street attempted to make a highly suspect appointment he had something to say about it, “Downing Street racism reveals why we must get Riley into court.” He reiterated that Riley’s libel case against him “was based on an allegation that she did not victimise a teenage Labour supporter, linking the girl with anti-Semitism after she questioned the Countdown co-presenter’s claims. Ms Riley has attacked Labour supporters and members, running right up to party leader Jeremy Corbyn, as anti-Semites, and published a series of Twitter threads that led her supporters to ‘dogpile’ the girl – who suffers with anxiety problems – in response to the criticism.” Sivier points out the hypocrisy saying of Riley that, “The TV presenter claims to be fighting anti-Semitism and racism. But how can that be true when a racist eugenicist was found to have been employed by the Conservative government as a Downing Street advisor, and Ms Riley had nothing to say about it?”

    Sivier informs us that, “Eugenics is about selectively breeding ‘undesirable’ genetic aspects out of the human race. The Nazis were strong supporters of it – hence their many pronouncements about racial purity and their persecution of minority groups they believed to be inferior, leading up to and including the Holocaust. Now-former Downing Street advisor Andrew Sabisky,” (who Sivier included a picture of in his post), “had to resign his position as a lieutenant to Boris Johnson’s chief SpAd (special advisor) Dominic Cummings after it was revealed that he held the same views. From this is it easy to deduce that Cummings and Johnson both hold similar racist views.” I would add that, while Sabisky’s appointment was derailed, both Johnson and his puppet master Cummings remain in post. Cummings support for eugenics is well know and confirmed in his lengthy Blog rants; it was probably responsible for both the ‘Herd Immunity’ and the disastrous exam grade algorithm, but no comment from Riley on that!.

    In Sivier’s most Recent Update headed, “Leaked Labour report shows Riley libel case is based on a falsehood,” Sivier wrote, “This is not a good look for Rachel Riley.” He explains why saying that, “Her tweet refers to a threat by her lawyer, Mark Lewis, to sue people publicising the leaked Labour Party report on how its officers handled (or rather, didn’t) accusations of anti-Semitism by members. The substantive revelation is that Labour’s leadership – especially Jeremy Corbyn – was not at fault in its attempts to handle the issue; it was hampered by right-wing officials who deliberately acted against their instructions in order to make Corbyn look incompetent, thereby putting the public off voting for him and ensuring that he could not form a government. The report does not accuse anybody of anti-Semitism who had not been accused already – although, as officials acting against Corbyn failed to act on many of those accusations, it could be argued that their inaction indirectly supported anti-Semitism.”

    Sivier makes an important point that is far too often missed by those obsessing over unsubstantiated allegations of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Sivier expresses his take on this by saying, “So Mr Lewis, by threatening to sue people who are making a fuss about this report’s revelation, is acting against the interests of anybody who is genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism; he is supporting people who suppressed investigations, and he is supporting their treachery. Or so it seems to me. Ms Riley, by publicly supporting him with a claim that he is ‘suing nasty Jew-haters’ – when he isn’t, is pushing a false narrative that brings into question much of her own behaviour – including her libel case against This Writer. The case arose because I had pointed out that Ms Riley had caused extreme distress – both directly and by encouraging others – to a teenage girl who had defended Mr Corbyn. Ms Riley’s claim was that Labour was doing nothing about accusations of anti-Semitism by party members.”

    Sivier reveals that, “Because the teenager said she did not believe Corbyn was responsible for this, Ms Riley attacked her on Twitter and her tweets encouraged others to do the same – to the point where the girl reported that she had received death threats. The Labour report shows that, if the party machine was doing nothing, this was nothing to do with Mr Corbyn. So, if the report is accurate (and I have reason to believe it is), the basis on which Ms Riley attacked the girl was false.” He asks if she had apologised? No! He informs us, “She has doubled down by claiming the information in the report is false and anybody publicising it must be an anti-Semite (even though they are pointing out how anti-Semitism was allowed to happen within the Labour Party because of the inaction of party officers). If I’m right, her lawsuit is based on a falsehood. She had no justification in attacking a teenage girl in the way she did, and therefore no reason to accuse me of libel, for pointing out what arose from Ms Riley’s behaviour.”

    The leaked Labour report does a whole lot more than just exonerate Sivier for his defence of the young girl targeted by Riley; it is solid evidence for exonerating the Labour Party with regard to the EHRC investigation. The Williamson case presents a tangible stumbling block for EHRC regarding any attempt they might make to declare Labour institutionally anti-Semitic by ignoring the leaked Labour report, an unredacted copy of which was provided to them by Craig Murray before the interim finding was sent to Williamson. Obviously the EHRC didn’t count on Williamson’s Judicial Review, where the burden of proof will be on them. If Corbyn can be persuaded to countersue Ware the burden of proof is on Ware and his band of con-artists. Once the truth emerges in Court the Labour membership will want to oust Starmer for his betrayal and craven capitulation that has cost the Labour Party dearly. Many of the SLAPP cases that Mark Lewis is representing on a ‘no win no fee’ basis are all linked to the same tainted evidence!

    Could Ware, and the ‘Poison Dart Blowers,’ be charged with committing perjury or perverting the course of justice and could their ruthlessly opportunistic Lawyer Mark Lewis face being disbarred? Lying in Court documents to threaten an innocent defendant in order to coerce a settlement payment could also potentially lead to charges of fraud and/or extortion. I am no legal eagle, but this would potentially seem possible, especially since this is such a high profile political case. The Labour Party as a whole or certainly Corbyn could bring multiple defamation cases against rogue Labour MPs, Tory MPs and news outlets including the BBC. This is worth pursuing because if these MPs and right wing outlets have to settle out of Court the progressive Left will be able toWe need to recognize the danger posed by the agenda of ‘othering’ because the British Government are past masters of this policy of divide and rule, having practiced it for centuries. An alarmingly racist eugenics agenda is embedded at the very core of the Tory cabal in power right now with Cummings manipulation of a weak narcissistic PM as he calls the shots from his unelected shadow position in charge of decision making! The Tory manifesto states outright that Gypsies will be targeted, but they will only be the first soft target just as they were under the Nazis. The principal is to selectively dehumanize a sector of society while discrediting and bullying anyone who attempts to protect them. Populist rabble rousers, hate-mongers like Farage, Robinson and Katie Hopkins, serve as the most obvious Tory tools, but widely accepted TV personalities like Rachel Riley and Tracy Ann Oberman pose a far more insidious threat as does author JK Rowling cheering from the sidelines, as she holds sway over so many of our children.

    The tactic is slightly modified this time around with a campaign to distract with faux protection of one ethic minority while another is contrasted as a danger to society. Beyond the Gypsies, the Muslim population of the UK are in grave danger of being targeted right now. The laws designed to criminalize the Gypsies and rid the UK of their encampments, can far too easily be adapted to target the homeless who will be turned onto our streets in growing numbers as a consequence of the inevitable widespread destitution due to crash out Brexit compounding the economic meltdown of Covid 19. All immigrants and suspected immigrants will again be the target of misdirected public anger over the chaos that will follow mass unemployment and critical food shortages. This Tory Government will need a scapegoat for their shambolic mishandling and disastrous policy errors designed to cull the ‘economically inactive’ from society. But we must fiercely resist, as playing into their hands will enable a catastrophic ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple!’

    The Tory tools fermenting the hateful ‘othering’ in this country must be resoundingly called out and publically discredited for their actions, especially those who pose a more insidious threat like Riley and Oberman. Their sustained bullying of a terrified teen was unconscionable, but it is a just taste of things to come under the faux outrage banner of anti-Semitism; we can stop it in its tracks by fighting back. In the Guardian Article entitled, “Rachel Riley and Tracy-Ann Oberman drop libel claim over retweet” It says that they, “dropped their joint libel claim against a barrister for retweeting a critical blog post about the pair.” However, “Jane Heybroek, an immigration lawyer, said the duo had withdrawn their case after 18 months of legal action that cost her over £80,000 in legal bills.” So despite being forced to back down and drop their case Riley and Oberman achieved most of their devastating SLAPP lawsuit goals: inflicting a crippling time, stress and financial burden to warn others of the consequences of defending the innocent!

    The Guardian report that, “In 2019 Heybroek had retweeted a link to a lengthy blog post by a man called Shaun Lawson entitled ‘Beneath Contempt: How Tracy-Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley harassed, dogpiled and slandered a 16-year-old child and her father’. The article made allegations about the actions of Oberman and Riley towards a young Labour activist who had made comments about antisemitism in the party. Heybroek did not publish the original blog post, and said there was no evidence that anyone read it as a result of her retweet. Heybroek said she had spent tens of thousands of pounds on the case, while Riley and Oberman, who have been actively involved in highlighting allegations of antisemitism in the Labour party, were represented on a no-win, no-fee basis.” This is typical in SLAPP cases. Heybroek said, “This meant that there was almost no risk to them in bringing the claim. Many people would have felt forced to settle for reasons of pragmatism.” This bears all the hallmarks of extortion!

    The Guardian reveal that, “At a hearing earlier this year, a judge described Heybroek as ‘broadly supportive of Jeremy Corbyn’, but said there was no other clear evidence of her political position. Heybroek said that despite Riley and Oberman’s ‘vocal stance against antisemitism’ in other legal cases, this claim ‘did not actually involve any allegations of antisemitism’.” Describing how easy it is for people to jump on this bandwagon Heybrooke said, “Unfortunately, as a result of the litigation, I was the subject of a number of nasty comments from a small minority of people who simply presumed to know what the case was about and what the outcome would be. They were wrong on both counts.” The Guardian say, Riley and Oberman’s solicitor, Mark Lewis, of Patron Law, said in a statement that his clients “chose not to proceed further after the judge had determined that the opinion expressed was capable of being defamatory, in circumstances where Jane Heybroek claimed that she had promptly deleted her tweet”.

    What is the significance of their climb-down? While the Guardian report that, “They have both now made a contribution towards Heybroek’s costs,” they do not state the amount of this contribution. Certainly it would not have been made out of contrition or pity after realizing they were in the wrong, and I very much doubt it was their personal funds that were put forward. A deal will have been negotiated to end the case that probably involved shielding Riley and Oberman from public scrutiny of their egregious assault and bullying of Rosie, the original target of their dogpile of tweets, for the crime of failing to agree with their consensus of hatred towards Jeremy Corbyn. The Guardian report that, “Lewis said: ‘Their libel insurers each did not see any advantage in pursuing a case over the liability of a retweet that was deleted so quickly. There are bigger fish to fry in the pursuit of those who choose to maintain a serious libel’.” More harm to be caused elsewhere, but how tolerant are insurers in accepting financial SLAPP losses?

    At the point where these legal insurers are no longer prepared to accept the considerable financial risk of losing SLAPP cases this risk free back up plan will become untenable. The well funded broad public support of defendants like Corbyn who has raised Over £332,000, Williamson fighting EHRC, Paddy French at Press Gang, Jewish Voice for Labour and Sivier at Vox will make fewer and fewer cases rich pickings for the out of Court settlements so necessary to avoiding any challenge to the unsubstantiated evidence. Lawyer Mark Lewis will drop these cases like a hot potato once fully funded defendants are able to challenge faux anti-Semitism evidence and this racist scam is exposed under full legal scrutiny. When he realizes he cannot keep the cases out of Court and he stands absolutely no hope of winning in Court he will stop representing SLAPP cases. SLAPP cases win by avoiding Court, but they also succeed by shutting down public scrutiny, investigative reporting and open public debate: we must not let this happen.

    The poison of faux anti-Semitism allegations now stands a strong chance of being fully exposed as a hoax and Corbyn must be persuaded to countersue Ware. This is vital to demonstrate that the Starmer capitulation was a self-serving betrayal of the Labour membership, so he must step down. In another Vox Article Sivier writes, “Rachel Riley thought her support would boost a libellous petition against Jeremy Corbyn. Big mistake! That well-known self-proclaimed campaigner against racism and inequality, Princess Countdown (also sometimes known as Rachel Riley) has trumpeted her support for a libellous petition condemning Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. In so doing, she has very clearly libelled Mr Corbyn. He is not an anti-Semite – or indeed any kind of racist – and is certainly not unfit to hold public office. She may feel safe in this act as Mr Corbyn is unlikely to respond. He seems to believe that doing so would lend credibility to the lies, although I’m open to other opinions and evidence.”

    Sivier says. “The petition she is supporting was put on the Change.org website eight months ago by a little-known right-wing fringe group and fake charity calling itself the Campaign Against Antisemitism. I wrote about it at the time, pointing out that objectors could call for the petition to be removed by clicking on a link marked ‘Report a policy violation’. Unfortunately Change.org, in its wisdom, has only added a line saying, ‘We have received flags from our users that the facts in this petition may be contested. You should consider researching this issue before signing or sharing.’ One may also report the Campaign Against Antisemitism to the Charity Commission for violating the requirement that charities must be non-political, by Clicking this Link.” This isn’t the only fake ‘Charity’ doing Tory dirty work that required reporting; the Institute for Statecraft is also registered as a Charity. Their ‘Integrity Initiative’ has received substantial funding from the Tory Government to generate propaganda targeting Corbyn and the Opposition Labour Party.

    Sivier reports that, “Ms Riley’s libellous tweet has attracted a considerable number of responses – in opposition.” One responded “This is a vile tweet it is also encouraging hate towards an individual and I am reporting you to Twitter and I hope you are sued, you horrible woman.’ She continued: ‘You are obsessed and this is becoming clearer by the day. Corbyn probably won’t sue you he probably pities you your childish arrogance and ignorance. You have made a libellous tweet imo you have gone too far and everyone should report it. You really are obsessed Rachel.” Another said: “Hopefully Jeremy sues you for libel. Might be able to put your maths skills to some use and work out how much you owe him in damages.” However this is perhaps Jeremy Corbyn’s biggest fault, if you can call it that: he is far too ready to turn the other cheek! There are numerous occasions where Corbyn should have fought back with legal action and Margaret Hodge MPs vile accusations should have removed her from the Labour Party!

    Sivier raises the issue of how much funding he is trying to raise, saying, “These are well-paid, well-resourced TV personalities. They are targeting people like myself, who have little money, with the cynical intention of embroiling us in legal proceedings that will cost more than we can afford, in order to force us into giving up and paying them money they do not deserve.” This was written at the beginning of his long campaign when he hoped to raise “an initial £5,000 with this appeal, with a ‘stretch’ target of £25,000, to cover the costs of retaining solicitors and a barrister who can take this case to court and put a stop to this nonsense.” He said back then that his solicitors believed they had “a very strong case but we need to be able to take it to court and have it heard. Otherwise, this case will be a victory of wealth over justice.” Since then his Crowdfunding Appeal has raised over £92,000!

    Sivier regularly updates information on the case, so when Downing Street attempted to make a highly suspect appointment he had something to say about it, “Downing Street racism reveals why we must get Riley into court.” He reiterated that Riley’s libel case against him “was based on an allegation that she did not victimise a teenage Labour supporter, linking the girl with anti-Semitism after she questioned the Countdown co-presenter’s claims. Ms Riley has attacked Labour supporters and members, running right up to party leader Jeremy Corbyn, as anti-Semites, and published a series of Twitter threads that led her supporters to ‘dogpile’ the girl – who suffers with anxiety problems – in response to the criticism.” Sivier points out the hypocrisy saying of Riley that, “The TV presenter claims to be fighting anti-Semitism and racism. But how can that be true when a racist eugenicist was found to have been employed by the Conservative government as a Downing Street advisor, and Ms Riley had nothing to say about it?”

    Sivier informs us that, “Eugenics is about selectively breeding ‘undesirable’ genetic aspects out of the human race. The Nazis were strong supporters of it – hence their many pronouncements about racial purity and their persecution of minority groups they believed to be inferior, leading up to and including the Holocaust. Now-former Downing Street advisor Andrew Sabisky,” (who Sivier included a picture of in his post), “had to resign his position as a lieutenant to Boris Johnson’s chief SpAd (special advisor) Dominic Cummings after it was revealed that he held the same views. From this is it easy to deduce that Cummings and Johnson both hold similar racist views.” I would add that, while Sabisky’s appointment was derailed, both Johnson and his puppet master Cummings remain in post. Cummings support for eugenics is well know and confirmed in his lengthy Blog rants; it was probably responsible for both the ‘Herd Immunity’ and the disastrous exam grade algorithm, but no comment from Riley on that!.

    In Sivier’s most Recent Update headed, “Leaked Labour report shows Riley libel case is based on a falsehood,” Sivier wrote, “This is not a good look for Rachel Riley.” He explains why saying that, “Her tweet refers to a threat by her lawyer, Mark Lewis, to sue people publicising the leaked Labour Party report on how its officers handled (or rather, didn’t) accusations of anti-Semitism by members. The substantive revelation is that Labour’s leadership – especially Jeremy Corbyn – was not at fault in its attempts to handle the issue; it was hampered by right-wing officials who deliberately acted against their instructions in order to make Corbyn look incompetent, thereby putting the public off voting for him and ensuring that he could not form a government. The report does not accuse anybody of anti-Semitism who had not been accused already – although, as officials acting against Corbyn failed to act on many of those accusations, it could be argued that their inaction indirectly supported anti-Semitism.”

    Sivier makes an important point that is far too often missed by those obsessing over unsubstantiated allegations of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Sivier expresses his take on this by saying, “So Mr Lewis, by threatening to sue people who are making a fuss about this report’s revelation, is acting against the interests of anybody who is genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism; he is supporting people who suppressed investigations, and he is supporting their treachery. Or so it seems to me. Ms Riley, by publicly supporting him with a claim that he is ‘suing nasty Jew-haters’ – when he isn’t, is pushing a false narrative that brings into question much of her own behaviour – including her libel case against This Writer. The case arose because I had pointed out that Ms Riley had caused extreme distress – both directly and by encouraging others – to a teenage girl who had defended Mr Corbyn. Ms Riley’s claim was that Labour was doing nothing about accusations of anti-Semitism by party members.”

    Sivier reveals that, “Because the teenager said she did not believe Corbyn was responsible for this, Ms Riley attacked her on Twitter and her tweets encouraged others to do the same – to the point where the girl reported that she had received death threats. The Labour report shows that, if the party machine was doing nothing, this was nothing to do with Mr Corbyn. So, if the report is accurate (and I have reason to believe it is), the basis on which Ms Riley attacked the girl was false.” He asks if she had apologised? No! He informs us, “She has doubled down by claiming the information in the report is false and anybody publicising it must be an anti-Semite (even though they are pointing out how anti-Semitism was allowed to happen within the Labour Party because of the inaction of party officers). If I’m right, her lawsuit is based on a falsehood. She had no justification in attacking a teenage girl in the way she did, and therefore no reason to accuse me of libel, for pointing out what arose from Ms Riley’s behaviour.”

    The leaked Labour report does a whole lot more than just exonerate Sivier for his defence of the young girl targeted by Riley; it is solid evidence for exonerating the Labour Party with regard to the EHRC investigation. The Williamson case presents a tangible stumbling block for EHRC regarding any attempt they might make to declare Labour institutionally anti-Semitic by ignoring the leaked Labour report, an unredacted copy of which was provided to them by Craig Murray before the interim finding was sent to Williamson. Obviously the EHRC didn’t count on Williamson’s Judicial Review, where the burden of proof will be on them. If Corbyn can be persuaded to countersue Ware the burden of proof is on Ware and his band of con-artists. Once the truth emerges in Court the Labour membership will want to oust Starmer for his betrayal and craven capitulation that has cost the Labour Party dearly. Many of the SLAPP cases that Mark Lewis is representing on a ‘no win no fee’ basis are all linked to the same tainted evidence!

    Could Ware, and the ‘Poison Dart Blowers,’ be charged with committing perjury or perverting the course of justice and could their ruthlessly opportunistic Lawyer Mark Lewis face being disbarred? Lying in Court documents to threaten an innocent defendant in order to coerce a settlement payment could also potentially lead to charges of fraud and/or extortion. I am no legal eagle, but this would potentially seem possible, especially since this is such a high profile political case. The Labour Party as a whole or certainly Corbyn could bring multiple defamation cases against rogue Labour MPs, Tory MPs and news outlets including the BBC. This is worth pursuing because if these MPs and right wing outlets have to settle out of Court the progressive Left will be able to set terms. The Tory ‘landslide victory’ will be delegitimized even before any Investigation of the Vote; lying politicians who refuse to resign will face huge settlement costs; it could clear the decks and wipe out the fake Tory majority stolen in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58598 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    We need to recognize the danger posed by the agenda of ‘othering’ because the British Government are past masters of this policy of divide and rule, having practiced it for centuries. An alarmingly racist eugenics agenda is embedded at the very core of the Tory cabal in power right now with Cummings manipulation of a weak narcissistic PM as he calls the shots from his unelected shadow position in charge of decision making! The Tory manifesto states outright that Gypsies will be targeted, but they will only be the first soft target just as they were under the Nazis. The principal is to selectively dehumanize a sector of society while discrediting and bullying anyone who attempts to protect them. Populist rabble rousers, hate-mongers like Farage, Robinson and Katie Hopkins, serve as the most obvious Tory tools, but widely accepted TV personalities like Rachel Riley and Tracy Ann Oberman pose a far more insidious threat as does author JK Rowling cheering from the sidelines, as she holds sway over so many of our children.

    The tactic is slightly modified this time around with a campaign to distract with faux protection of one ethic minority while another is contrasted as a danger to society. Beyond the Gypsies, the Muslim population of the UK are in grave danger of being targeted right now. The laws designed to criminalize the Gypsies and rid the UK of their encampments, can far too easily be adapted to target the homeless who will be turned onto our streets in growing numbers as a consequence of the inevitable widespread destitution due to crash out Brexit compounding the economic meltdown of Covid 19. All immigrants and suspected immigrants will again be the target of misdirected public anger over the chaos that will follow mass unemployment and critical food shortages. This Tory Government will need a scapegoat for their shambolic mishandling and disastrous policy errors designed to cull the ‘economically inactive’ from society. But we must fiercely resist, as playing into their hands will enable a catastrophic ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple!’

    The Tory tools fermenting the hateful ‘othering’ in this country must be resoundingly called out and publically discredited for their actions, especially those who pose a more insidious threat like Riley and Oberman. Their sustained bullying of a terrified teen was unconscionable, but it is a just taste of things to come under the faux outrage banner of anti-Semitism; we can stop it in its tracks by fighting back. In the Guardian Article entitled, “Rachel Riley and Tracy-Ann Oberman drop libel claim over retweet” It says that they, “dropped their joint libel claim against a barrister for retweeting a critical blog post about the pair.” However, “Jane Heybroek, an immigration lawyer, said the duo had withdrawn their case after 18 months of legal action that cost her over £80,000 in legal bills.” So despite being forced to back down and drop their case Riley and Oberman achieved most of their devastating SLAPP lawsuit goals: inflicting a crippling time, stress and financial burden to warn others of the consequences of defending the innocent!

    The Guardian report that, “In 2019 Heybroek had retweeted a link to a lengthy blog post by a man called Shaun Lawson entitled ‘Beneath Contempt: How Tracy-Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley harassed, dogpiled and slandered a 16-year-old child and her father’. The article made allegations about the actions of Oberman and Riley towards a young Labour activist who had made comments about antisemitism in the party. Heybroek did not publish the original blog post, and said there was no evidence that anyone read it as a result of her retweet. Heybroek said she had spent tens of thousands of pounds on the case, while Riley and Oberman, who have been actively involved in highlighting allegations of antisemitism in the Labour party, were represented on a no-win, no-fee basis.” This is typical in SLAPP cases. Heybroek said, “This meant that there was almost no risk to them in bringing the claim. Many people would have felt forced to settle for reasons of pragmatism.” This bears all the hallmarks of extortion!

    The Guardian reveal that, “At a hearing earlier this year, a judge described Heybroek as ‘broadly supportive of Jeremy Corbyn’, but said there was no other clear evidence of her political position. Heybroek said that despite Riley and Oberman’s ‘vocal stance against antisemitism’ in other legal cases, this claim ‘did not actually involve any allegations of antisemitism’.” Describing how easy it is for people to jump on this bandwagon Heybrooke said, “Unfortunately, as a result of the litigation, I was the subject of a number of nasty comments from a small minority of people who simply presumed to know what the case was about and what the outcome would be. They were wrong on both counts.” The Guardian say, Riley and Oberman’s solicitor, Mark Lewis, of Patron Law, said in a statement that his clients “chose not to proceed further after the judge had determined that the opinion expressed was capable of being defamatory, in circumstances where Jane Heybroek claimed that she had promptly deleted her tweet”.

    What is the significance of their climb-down? While the Guardian report that, “They have both now made a contribution towards Heybroek’s costs,” they do not state the amount of this contribution. Certainly it would not have been made out of contrition or pity after realizing they were in the wrong, and I very much doubt it was their personal funds that were put forward. A deal will have been negotiated to end the case that probably involved shielding Riley and Oberman from public scrutiny of their egregious assault and bullying of Rosie, the original target of their dogpile of tweets, for the crime of failing to agree with their consensus of hatred towards Jeremy Corbyn. The Guardian report that, “Lewis said: ‘Their libel insurers each did not see any advantage in pursuing a case over the liability of a retweet that was deleted so quickly. There are bigger fish to fry in the pursuit of those who choose to maintain a serious libel’.” More harm to be caused elsewhere, but how tolerant are insurers in accepting financial SLAPP losses?

    At the point where these legal insurers are no longer prepared to accept the considerable financial risk of losing SLAPP cases this risk free back up plan will become untenable. The well funded broad public support of defendants like Corbyn who has raised Over £332,000, Williamson fighting EHRC, Paddy French at Press Gang, Jewish Voice for Labour and Sivier at Vox will make fewer and fewer cases rich pickings for the out of Court settlements so necessary to avoiding any challenge to the unsubstantiated evidence. Lawyer Mark Lewis will drop these cases like a hot potato once fully funded defendants are able to challenge faux anti-Semitism evidence and this racist scam is exposed under full legal scrutiny. When he realizes he cannot keep the cases out of Court and he stands absolutely no hope of winning in Court he will stop representing SLAPP cases. SLAPP cases win by avoiding Court, but they also succeed by shutting down public scrutiny, investigative reporting and open public debate: we must not let this happen.

    The poison of faux anti-Semitism allegations now stands a strong chance of being fully exposed as a hoax and Corbyn must be persuaded to countersue Ware. This is vital to demonstrate that the Starmer capitulation was a self-serving betrayal of the Labour membership, so he must step down. In another Vox Article Sivier writes, “Rachel Riley thought her support would boost a libellous petition against Jeremy Corbyn. Big mistake! That well-known self-proclaimed campaigner against racism and inequality, Princess Countdown (also sometimes known as Rachel Riley) has trumpeted her support for a libellous petition condemning Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. In so doing, she has very clearly libelled Mr Corbyn. He is not an anti-Semite – or indeed any kind of racist – and is certainly not unfit to hold public office. She may feel safe in this act as Mr Corbyn is unlikely to respond. He seems to believe that doing so would lend credibility to the lies, although I’m open to other opinions and evidence.”

    Sivier says. “The petition she is supporting was put on the Change.org website eight months ago by a little-known right-wing fringe group and fake charity calling itself the Campaign Against Antisemitism. I wrote about it at the time, pointing out that objectors could call for the petition to be removed by clicking on a link marked ‘Report a policy violation’. Unfortunately Change.org, in its wisdom, has only added a line saying, ‘We have received flags from our users that the facts in this petition may be contested. You should consider researching this issue before signing or sharing.’ One may also report the Campaign Against Antisemitism to the Charity Commission for violating the requirement that charities must be non-political, by Clicking this Link.” This isn’t the only fake ‘Charity’ doing Tory dirty work that required reporting; the Institute for Statecraft is also registered as a Charity. Their ‘Integrity Initiative’ has received substantial funding from the Tory Government to generate propaganda targeting Corbyn and the Opposition Labour Party.

    Sivier reports that, “Ms Riley’s libellous tweet has attracted a considerable number of responses – in opposition.” One responded “This is a vile tweet it is also encouraging hate towards an individual and I am reporting you to Twitter and I hope you are sued, you horrible woman.’ She continued: ‘You are obsessed and this is becoming clearer by the day. Corbyn probably won’t sue you he probably pities you your childish arrogance and ignorance. You have made a libellous tweet imo you have gone too far and everyone should report it. You really are obsessed Rachel.” Another said: “Hopefully Jeremy sues you for libel. Might be able to put your maths skills to some use and work out how much you owe him in damages.” However this is perhaps Jeremy Corbyn’s biggest fault, if you can call it that: he is far too ready to turn the other cheek! There are numerous occasions where Corbyn should have fought back with legal action and Margaret Hodge MPs vile accusations should have removed her from the Labour Party!

    Sivier raises the issue of how much funding he is trying to raise, saying, “These are well-paid, well-resourced TV personalities. They are targeting people like myself, who have little money, with the cynical intention of embroiling us in legal proceedings that will cost more than we can afford, in order to force us into giving up and paying them money they do not deserve.” This was written at the beginning of his long campaign when he hoped to raise “an initial £5,000 with this appeal, with a ‘stretch’ target of £25,000, to cover the costs of retaining solicitors and a barrister who can take this case to court and put a stop to this nonsense.” He said back then that his solicitors believed they had “a very strong case but we need to be able to take it to court and have it heard. Otherwise, this case will be a victory of wealth over justice.” Since then his Crowdfunding Appeal has raised over £92,000!

    Sivier regularly updates information on the case, so when Downing Street attempted to make a highly suspect appointment he had something to say about it, “Downing Street racism reveals why we must get Riley into court.” He reiterated that Riley’s libel case against him “was based on an allegation that she did not victimise a teenage Labour supporter, linking the girl with anti-Semitism after she questioned the Countdown co-presenter’s claims. Ms Riley has attacked Labour supporters and members, running right up to party leader Jeremy Corbyn, as anti-Semites, and published a series of Twitter threads that led her supporters to ‘dogpile’ the girl – who suffers with anxiety problems – in response to the criticism.” Sivier points out the hypocrisy saying of Riley that, “The TV presenter claims to be fighting anti-Semitism and racism. But how can that be true when a racist eugenicist was found to have been employed by the Conservative government as a Downing Street advisor, and Ms Riley had nothing to say about it?”

    Sivier informs us that, “Eugenics is about selectively breeding ‘undesirable’ genetic aspects out of the human race. The Nazis were strong supporters of it – hence their many pronouncements about racial purity and their persecution of minority groups they believed to be inferior, leading up to and including the Holocaust. Now-former Downing Street advisor Andrew Sabisky,” (who Sivier included a picture of in his post), “had to resign his position as a lieutenant to Boris Johnson’s chief SpAd (special advisor) Dominic Cummings after it was revealed that he held the same views. From this is it easy to deduce that Cummings and Johnson both hold similar racist views.” I would add that, while Sabisky’s appointment was derailed, both Johnson and his puppet master Cummings remain in post. Cummings support for eugenics is well know and confirmed in his lengthy Blog rants; it was probably responsible for both the ‘Herd Immunity’ and the disastrous exam grade algorithm, but no comment from Riley on that!.

    In Sivier’s most Recent Update headed, “Leaked Labour report shows Riley libel case is based on a falsehood,” Sivier wrote, “This is not a good look for Rachel Riley.” He explains why saying that, “Her tweet refers to a threat by her lawyer, Mark Lewis, to sue people publicising the leaked Labour Party report on how its officers handled (or rather, didn’t) accusations of anti-Semitism by members. The substantive revelation is that Labour’s leadership – especially Jeremy Corbyn – was not at fault in its attempts to handle the issue; it was hampered by right-wing officials who deliberately acted against their instructions in order to make Corbyn look incompetent, thereby putting the public off voting for him and ensuring that he could not form a government. The report does not accuse anybody of anti-Semitism who had not been accused already – although, as officials acting against Corbyn failed to act on many of those accusations, it could be argued that their inaction indirectly supported anti-Semitism.”

    Sivier makes an important point that is far too often missed by those obsessing over unsubstantiated allegations of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Sivier expresses his take on this by saying, “So Mr Lewis, by threatening to sue people who are making a fuss about this report’s revelation, is acting against the interests of anybody who is genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism; he is supporting people who suppressed investigations, and he is supporting their treachery. Or so it seems to me. Ms Riley, by publicly supporting him with a claim that he is ‘suing nasty Jew-haters’ – when he isn’t, is pushing a false narrative that brings into question much of her own behaviour – including her libel case against This Writer. The case arose because I had pointed out that Ms Riley had caused extreme distress – both directly and by encouraging others – to a teenage girl who had defended Mr Corbyn. Ms Riley’s claim was that Labour was doing nothing about accusations of anti-Semitism by party members.”

    Sivier reveals that, “Because the teenager said she did not believe Corbyn was responsible for this, Ms Riley attacked her on Twitter and her tweets encouraged others to do the same – to the point where the girl reported that she had received death threats. The Labour report shows that, if the party machine was doing nothing, this was nothing to do with Mr Corbyn. So, if the report is accurate (and I have reason to believe it is), the basis on which Ms Riley attacked the girl was false.” He asks if she had apologised? No! He informs us, “She has doubled down by claiming the information in the report is false and anybody publicising it must be an anti-Semite (even though they are pointing out how anti-Semitism was allowed to happen within the Labour Party because of the inaction of party officers). If I’m right, her lawsuit is based on a falsehood. She had no justification in attacking a teenage girl in the way she did, and therefore no reason to accuse me of libel, for pointing out what arose from Ms Riley’s behaviour.”

    The leaked Labour report does a whole lot more than just exonerate Sivier for his defence of the young girl targeted by Riley; it is solid evidence for exonerating the Labour Party with regard to the EHRC investigation. The Williamson case presents a tangible stumbling block for EHRC regarding any attempt they might make to declare Labour institutionally anti-Semitic by ignoring the leaked Labour report, an unredacted copy of which was provided to them by Craig Murray before the interim finding was sent to Williamson. Obviously the EHRC didn’t count on Williamson’s Judicial Review, where the burden of proof will be on them. If Corbyn can be persuaded to countersue Ware the burden of proof is on Ware and his band of con-artists. Once the truth emerges in Court the Labour membership will want to oust Starmer for his betrayal and craven capitulation that has cost the Labour Party dearly. Many of the SLAPP cases that Mark Lewis is representing on a ‘no win no fee’ basis are all linked to the same tainted evidence!

    Could Ware, and the ‘Poison Dart Blowers,’ be charged with committing perjury or perverting the course of justice and could their ruthlessly opportunistic Lawyer Mark Lewis face being disbarred? Lying in Court documents to threaten an innocent defendant in order to coerce a settlement payment could also potentially lead to charges of fraud and/or extortion. I am no legal eagle, but this would potentially seem possible, especially since this is such a high profile political case. The Labour Party as a whole or certainly Corbyn could bring multiple defamation cases against rogue Labour MPs, Tory MPs and news outlets including the BBC. This is worth pursuing because if these MPs and right wing outlets have to settle out of Court the progressive Left will be able toWe need to recognize the danger posed by the agenda of ‘othering’ because the British Government are past masters of this policy of divide and rule, having practiced it for centuries. An alarmingly racist eugenics agenda is embedded at the very core of the Tory cabal in power right now with Cummings manipulation of a weak narcissistic PM as he calls the shots from his unelected shadow position in charge of decision making! The Tory manifesto states outright that Gypsies will be targeted, but they will only be the first soft target just as they were under the Nazis. The principal is to selectively dehumanize a sector of society while discrediting and bullying anyone who attempts to protect them. Populist rabble rousers, hate-mongers like Farage, Robinson and Katie Hopkins, serve as the most obvious Tory tools, but widely accepted TV personalities like Rachel Riley and Tracy Ann Oberman pose a far more insidious threat as does author JK Rowling cheering from the sidelines, as she holds sway over so many of our children.

    The tactic is slightly modified this time around with a campaign to distract with faux protection of one ethic minority while another is contrasted as a danger to society. Beyond the Gypsies, the Muslim population of the UK are in grave danger of being targeted right now. The laws designed to criminalize the Gypsies and rid the UK of their encampments, can far too easily be adapted to target the homeless who will be turned onto our streets in growing numbers as a consequence of the inevitable widespread destitution due to crash out Brexit compounding the economic meltdown of Covid 19. All immigrants and suspected immigrants will again be the target of misdirected public anger over the chaos that will follow mass unemployment and critical food shortages. This Tory Government will need a scapegoat for their shambolic mishandling and disastrous policy errors designed to cull the ‘economically inactive’ from society. But we must fiercely resist, as playing into their hands will enable a catastrophic ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple!’

    The Tory tools fermenting the hateful ‘othering’ in this country must be resoundingly called out and publically discredited for their actions, especially those who pose a more insidious threat like Riley and Oberman. Their sustained bullying of a terrified teen was unconscionable, but it is a just taste of things to come under the faux outrage banner of anti-Semitism; we can stop it in its tracks by fighting back. In the Guardian Article entitled, “Rachel Riley and Tracy-Ann Oberman drop libel claim over retweet” It says that they, “dropped their joint libel claim against a barrister for retweeting a critical blog post about the pair.” However, “Jane Heybroek, an immigration lawyer, said the duo had withdrawn their case after 18 months of legal action that cost her over £80,000 in legal bills.” So despite being forced to back down and drop their case Riley and Oberman achieved most of their devastating SLAPP lawsuit goals: inflicting a crippling time, stress and financial burden to warn others of the consequences of defending the innocent!

    The Guardian report that, “In 2019 Heybroek had retweeted a link to a lengthy blog post by a man called Shaun Lawson entitled ‘Beneath Contempt: How Tracy-Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley harassed, dogpiled and slandered a 16-year-old child and her father’. The article made allegations about the actions of Oberman and Riley towards a young Labour activist who had made comments about antisemitism in the party. Heybroek did not publish the original blog post, and said there was no evidence that anyone read it as a result of her retweet. Heybroek said she had spent tens of thousands of pounds on the case, while Riley and Oberman, who have been actively involved in highlighting allegations of antisemitism in the Labour party, were represented on a no-win, no-fee basis.” This is typical in SLAPP cases. Heybroek said, “This meant that there was almost no risk to them in bringing the claim. Many people would have felt forced to settle for reasons of pragmatism.” This bears all the hallmarks of extortion!

    The Guardian reveal that, “At a hearing earlier this year, a judge described Heybroek as ‘broadly supportive of Jeremy Corbyn’, but said there was no other clear evidence of her political position. Heybroek said that despite Riley and Oberman’s ‘vocal stance against antisemitism’ in other legal cases, this claim ‘did not actually involve any allegations of antisemitism’.” Describing how easy it is for people to jump on this bandwagon Heybrooke said, “Unfortunately, as a result of the litigation, I was the subject of a number of nasty comments from a small minority of people who simply presumed to know what the case was about and what the outcome would be. They were wrong on both counts.” The Guardian say, Riley and Oberman’s solicitor, Mark Lewis, of Patron Law, said in a statement that his clients “chose not to proceed further after the judge had determined that the opinion expressed was capable of being defamatory, in circumstances where Jane Heybroek claimed that she had promptly deleted her tweet”.

    What is the significance of their climb-down? While the Guardian report that, “They have both now made a contribution towards Heybroek’s costs,” they do not state the amount of this contribution. Certainly it would not have been made out of contrition or pity after realizing they were in the wrong, and I very much doubt it was their personal funds that were put forward. A deal will have been negotiated to end the case that probably involved shielding Riley and Oberman from public scrutiny of their egregious assault and bullying of Rosie, the original target of their dogpile of tweets, for the crime of failing to agree with their consensus of hatred towards Jeremy Corbyn. The Guardian report that, “Lewis said: ‘Their libel insurers each did not see any advantage in pursuing a case over the liability of a retweet that was deleted so quickly. There are bigger fish to fry in the pursuit of those who choose to maintain a serious libel’.” More harm to be caused elsewhere, but how tolerant are insurers in accepting financial SLAPP losses?

    At the point where these legal insurers are no longer prepared to accept the considerable financial risk of losing SLAPP cases this risk free back up plan will become untenable. The well funded broad public support of defendants like Corbyn who has raised Over £332,000, Williamson fighting EHRC, Paddy French at Press Gang, Jewish Voice for Labour and Sivier at Vox will make fewer and fewer cases rich pickings for the out of Court settlements so necessary to avoiding any challenge to the unsubstantiated evidence. Lawyer Mark Lewis will drop these cases like a hot potato once fully funded defendants are able to challenge faux anti-Semitism evidence and this racist scam is exposed under full legal scrutiny. When he realizes he cannot keep the cases out of Court and he stands absolutely no hope of winning in Court he will stop representing SLAPP cases. SLAPP cases win by avoiding Court, but they also succeed by shutting down public scrutiny, investigative reporting and open public debate: we must not let this happen.

    The poison of faux anti-Semitism allegations now stands a strong chance of being fully exposed as a hoax and Corbyn must be persuaded to countersue Ware. This is vital to demonstrate that the Starmer capitulation was a self-serving betrayal of the Labour membership, so he must step down. In another Vox Article Sivier writes, “Rachel Riley thought her support would boost a libellous petition against Jeremy Corbyn. Big mistake! That well-known self-proclaimed campaigner against racism and inequality, Princess Countdown (also sometimes known as Rachel Riley) has trumpeted her support for a libellous petition condemning Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. In so doing, she has very clearly libelled Mr Corbyn. He is not an anti-Semite – or indeed any kind of racist – and is certainly not unfit to hold public office. She may feel safe in this act as Mr Corbyn is unlikely to respond. He seems to believe that doing so would lend credibility to the lies, although I’m open to other opinions and evidence.”

    Sivier says. “The petition she is supporting was put on the Change.org website eight months ago by a little-known right-wing fringe group and fake charity calling itself the Campaign Against Antisemitism. I wrote about it at the time, pointing out that objectors could call for the petition to be removed by clicking on a link marked ‘Report a policy violation’. Unfortunately Change.org, in its wisdom, has only added a line saying, ‘We have received flags from our users that the facts in this petition may be contested. You should consider researching this issue before signing or sharing.’ One may also report the Campaign Against Antisemitism to the Charity Commission for violating the requirement that charities must be non-political, by Clicking this Link.” This isn’t the only fake ‘Charity’ doing Tory dirty work that required reporting; the Institute for Statecraft is also registered as a Charity. Their ‘Integrity Initiative’ has received substantial funding from the Tory Government to generate propaganda targeting Corbyn and the Opposition Labour Party.

    Sivier reports that, “Ms Riley’s libellous tweet has attracted a considerable number of responses – in opposition.” One responded “This is a vile tweet it is also encouraging hate towards an individual and I am reporting you to Twitter and I hope you are sued, you horrible woman.’ She continued: ‘You are obsessed and this is becoming clearer by the day. Corbyn probably won’t sue you he probably pities you your childish arrogance and ignorance. You have made a libellous tweet imo you have gone too far and everyone should report it. You really are obsessed Rachel.” Another said: “Hopefully Jeremy sues you for libel. Might be able to put your maths skills to some use and work out how much you owe him in damages.” However this is perhaps Jeremy Corbyn’s biggest fault, if you can call it that: he is far too ready to turn the other cheek! There are numerous occasions where Corbyn should have fought back with legal action and Margaret Hodge MPs vile accusations should have removed her from the Labour Party!

    Sivier raises the issue of how much funding he is trying to raise, saying, “These are well-paid, well-resourced TV personalities. They are targeting people like myself, who have little money, with the cynical intention of embroiling us in legal proceedings that will cost more than we can afford, in order to force us into giving up and paying them money they do not deserve.” This was written at the beginning of his long campaign when he hoped to raise “an initial £5,000 with this appeal, with a ‘stretch’ target of £25,000, to cover the costs of retaining solicitors and a barrister who can take this case to court and put a stop to this nonsense.” He said back then that his solicitors believed they had “a very strong case but we need to be able to take it to court and have it heard. Otherwise, this case will be a victory of wealth over justice.” Since then his Crowdfunding Appeal has raised over £92,000!

    Sivier regularly updates information on the case, so when Downing Street attempted to make a highly suspect appointment he had something to say about it, “Downing Street racism reveals why we must get Riley into court.” He reiterated that Riley’s libel case against him “was based on an allegation that she did not victimise a teenage Labour supporter, linking the girl with anti-Semitism after she questioned the Countdown co-presenter’s claims. Ms Riley has attacked Labour supporters and members, running right up to party leader Jeremy Corbyn, as anti-Semites, and published a series of Twitter threads that led her supporters to ‘dogpile’ the girl – who suffers with anxiety problems – in response to the criticism.” Sivier points out the hypocrisy saying of Riley that, “The TV presenter claims to be fighting anti-Semitism and racism. But how can that be true when a racist eugenicist was found to have been employed by the Conservative government as a Downing Street advisor, and Ms Riley had nothing to say about it?”

    Sivier informs us that, “Eugenics is about selectively breeding ‘undesirable’ genetic aspects out of the human race. The Nazis were strong supporters of it – hence their many pronouncements about racial purity and their persecution of minority groups they believed to be inferior, leading up to and including the Holocaust. Now-former Downing Street advisor Andrew Sabisky,” (who Sivier included a picture of in his post), “had to resign his position as a lieutenant to Boris Johnson’s chief SpAd (special advisor) Dominic Cummings after it was revealed that he held the same views. From this is it easy to deduce that Cummings and Johnson both hold similar racist views.” I would add that, while Sabisky’s appointment was derailed, both Johnson and his puppet master Cummings remain in post. Cummings support for eugenics is well know and confirmed in his lengthy Blog rants; it was probably responsible for both the ‘Herd Immunity’ and the disastrous exam grade algorithm, but no comment from Riley on that!.

    In Sivier’s most Recent Update headed, “Leaked Labour report shows Riley libel case is based on a falsehood,” Sivier wrote, “This is not a good look for Rachel Riley.” He explains why saying that, “Her tweet refers to a threat by her lawyer, Mark Lewis, to sue people publicising the leaked Labour Party report on how its officers handled (or rather, didn’t) accusations of anti-Semitism by members. The substantive revelation is that Labour’s leadership – especially Jeremy Corbyn – was not at fault in its attempts to handle the issue; it was hampered by right-wing officials who deliberately acted against their instructions in order to make Corbyn look incompetent, thereby putting the public off voting for him and ensuring that he could not form a government. The report does not accuse anybody of anti-Semitism who had not been accused already – although, as officials acting against Corbyn failed to act on many of those accusations, it could be argued that their inaction indirectly supported anti-Semitism.”

    Sivier makes an important point that is far too often missed by those obsessing over unsubstantiated allegations of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Sivier expresses his take on this by saying, “So Mr Lewis, by threatening to sue people who are making a fuss about this report’s revelation, is acting against the interests of anybody who is genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism; he is supporting people who suppressed investigations, and he is supporting their treachery. Or so it seems to me. Ms Riley, by publicly supporting him with a claim that he is ‘suing nasty Jew-haters’ – when he isn’t, is pushing a false narrative that brings into question much of her own behaviour – including her libel case against This Writer. The case arose because I had pointed out that Ms Riley had caused extreme distress – both directly and by encouraging others – to a teenage girl who had defended Mr Corbyn. Ms Riley’s claim was that Labour was doing nothing about accusations of anti-Semitism by party members.”

    Sivier reveals that, “Because the teenager said she did not believe Corbyn was responsible for this, Ms Riley attacked her on Twitter and her tweets encouraged others to do the same – to the point where the girl reported that she had received death threats. The Labour report shows that, if the party machine was doing nothing, this was nothing to do with Mr Corbyn. So, if the report is accurate (and I have reason to believe it is), the basis on which Ms Riley attacked the girl was false.” He asks if she had apologised? No! He informs us, “She has doubled down by claiming the information in the report is false and anybody publicising it must be an anti-Semite (even though they are pointing out how anti-Semitism was allowed to happen within the Labour Party because of the inaction of party officers). If I’m right, her lawsuit is based on a falsehood. She had no justification in attacking a teenage girl in the way she did, and therefore no reason to accuse me of libel, for pointing out what arose from Ms Riley’s behaviour.”

    The leaked Labour report does a whole lot more than just exonerate Sivier for his defence of the young girl targeted by Riley; it is solid evidence for exonerating the Labour Party with regard to the EHRC investigation. The Williamson case presents a tangible stumbling block for EHRC regarding any attempt they might make to declare Labour institutionally anti-Semitic by ignoring the leaked Labour report, an unredacted copy of which was provided to them by Craig Murray before the interim finding was sent to Williamson. Obviously the EHRC didn’t count on Williamson’s Judicial Review, where the burden of proof will be on them. If Corbyn can be persuaded to countersue Ware the burden of proof is on Ware and his band of con-artists. Once the truth emerges in Court the Labour membership will want to oust Starmer for his betrayal and craven capitulation that has cost the Labour Party dearly. Many of the SLAPP cases that Mark Lewis is representing on a ‘no win no fee’ basis are all linked to the same tainted evidence!

    Could Ware, and the ‘Poison Dart Blowers,’ be charged with committing perjury or perverting the course of justice and could their ruthlessly opportunistic Lawyer Mark Lewis face being disbarred? Lying in Court documents to threaten an innocent defendant in order to coerce a settlement payment could also potentially lead to charges of fraud and/or extortion. I am no legal eagle, but this would potentially seem possible, especially since this is such a high profile political case. The Labour Party as a whole or certainly Corbyn could bring multiple defamation cases against rogue Labour MPs, Tory MPs and news outlets including the BBC. This is worth pursuing because if these MPs and right wing outlets have to settle out of Court the progressive Left will be able to set terms. The Tory ‘landslide victory’ will be delegitimized even before any Investigation of the Vote; lying politicians who refuse to resign will face huge settlement costs; it could clear the decks and wipe out the fake Tory majority stolen in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58610 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    This mid June Vox Article just grabbed my attention, “Why did Labour suspend members after anti-Semitism dossier leak – and keep quiet about it?” Mark Sivier reports on, “The Labour Party has said it has suspended party members named in a leaked party report as having broken rules. The claim, it seems, was not made voluntarily but in response to High Court litigation. A party member named Mark Howell has brought a claim for breach of contract against the party, demanding damages as well as the expulsion of members who broke internal rules and a referral to the CPS for possible prosecutions. He claims party funds and resources were deliberately deployed at the 2017 election, ‘not to win vulnerable seats presently held by rival parties but instead to increase majorities in safe seats of certain favoured party Members of Parliament.’ In other words, he says Labour breached its contract by sabotaging its election campaign in not trying to win enough seats to win a Parliamentary majority.”

    I was remis in being late to notice this news item. Vox report that, “According to the Evening Standard: The court heard three separate investigations have been launched by Labour since the report was leaked, while a written legal argument on the party’s behalf confirmed that members have been suspended. ‘The party has promptly commenced an investigation into whether any members referred to in the Report have, based on the materials referred to in the Report, breached the Party’s rules’, it said. ‘Some of the party members have been suspended from membership so far as it is necessary to do so to protect the integrity of the investigation’.” This was supposedly done, “To protect the integrity of the investigation” According to Sivier, “that suggests the suspensions were of party officers who might have had a chance to interfere – such as those in the governance and legal unit, which investigates anti-Semitism accusations, among other complaints. But it may also indicate suspensions of people suspected of leaking the report.”

    Sivier comments that, “The party has faced multiple, insistent demands for suspensions over the allegations in the report but stonewalled – suggesting the latter is the more likely case. Labour has insisted that no further hearings will be needed until its internal investigations – three of them – are concluded, around mid-July.” Although he optimistically states that, “We’ll know the way the wind is blowing by then, in any event, depending on whether any of those accused of sabotaging the 2017 election or racially abusing Labour MPs end up facing expulsion or other punitive action – or if someone is named as the whistleblower who leaked the report;” we are still waiting the hear. Sivier says, “that should tell us everything we need to know about Keir Starmer’s position on this issue.” I think most progressive members of the Labour Party hold strong opinions on Starmer after his cowardly capitulation and craven apology in the Ware case. But does the case brought by Mark Howell offer clarity and hope?

    Few media outlets picked up on this news item at the time and I’m sure Howells case didn’t make Newsnight, but I could be wrong. A Morning Star Article entitled, “Labour faces legal action from one of its own members over claims party staff ‘sought the victory of rival parties’” elaborates further on the case. It reports, “Labour has suspended some of its members following the leaking of an internal report into allegations of anti-Semitism in the party, the High Court heard today. The 860-page report, which found ‘no evidence’ of anti-Semitism being handled differently from other complaints and that ‘factional opposition’ towards Jeremy Corbyn had hindered efforts to tackle the crisis, was leaked in April. Labour is now facing legal action from one of its members over claims that party staff ‘sought the victory of rival parties’ in key constituencies in the 2017 general election.”

    Morning Star say, “Mark Howell, a member of Vauxhall CLP who joined Labour in 1969, says the leaked report shows that Labour staff breached party rules by ‘promoting the election of rivals of party candidates.’ Mr Howell claims that the party therefore ‘breached its contract with the claimant and its non-contractual pact with the voting public of the UK.’ At a remote hearing today, Mr Howell told the court: ‘At stake is the democratic pact underlying the country’s political integrity and civil society.’ He said, ‘On the evidence, arguably a different government should have been in position ever since June 2017, the 2019 general election should not have occurred and the enactment of the result of the EU referendum should have been done in a different manner. The subversion of rules of democracy that has taken place is much like […] gambling crooks paying a bent goalie to let in his team’s opponent’s goals’.”

    According to the Morning Star, “Labour’s barrister, Rachel Crasnow QC, told the Ms Justice Eady, sitting at the High Court, that ‘some of the party members have been suspended from membership so far as it is necessary to do so to protect the integrity of the investigation’.” A claim was issued on 12 June in the High Court against David Evans as general secretary and Iain McNicol. Mark Howell began his campaign calling for Justice on behalf of Labour Party Members has set up a Crowdjustice fundraising page. The greatest challenge in any campaign of this kind is not persuading people that the cause is important enough that they should offer financial support; it is getting your campaign noticed in the first place. The concerted effort to discredit the leaked Labour Report was not just keeping the media from publicizing the fact a case had been bought, it was also battling the new right leaning Labour Leader Keir Starmer’s efforts to persuade the membership there was ‘nothing to see here!’

    Explaining what motivated Mark Howell to initiate the legal fundraising campaign the Crowdjustice fundraising page explains that:
    “Labour staff breached party rules by promoting the election of rivals of party candidates. The party therefore breached its contract with the claimant and its non-contractual pact with the voting public of the UK. At stake is the democratic pact underlying the country’s political integrity and civil society. On the evidence, arguably a different government should have been in position ever since June 2017, the 2019 general election should not have occurred and the enactment of the result of the EU referendum should have been done in a different manner. The subversion of rules of democracy that has taken place is much like gambling crooks paying a bent goalie to let in his team’s opponent’s goals. Those who should be MPs of 3 years’ standing and others who have a story about 2017 to tell are welcome to join the claim. A comprehensive judgment will clear the air and get politics back on track.”

    Howell has provided regular updates on the Crowdjustice fundraising page as the legal campaign has progressed. In Howell’s first update posted on the 24th of June, 2020 he outlined the initial actions taken, saying, “Suspensions have been disclosed in the High Court.” He said that, “My claim was issued two weeks ago in the High Court against David Evans as general secretary and Iain McNicol personally (as opposed as former general secretary). There are other possible co-claimants and co-defendants who the Judge urged the current defendants to recognise as having been given notice of. No part of the claim was conceded or removed at the hearing last Friday.” Given the serious impact of what occurred, it was encouraging that Howell was able to report that, “On the contrary, permission was given to introduce additional allegations against Iain McNicol, and potentially others. Ian McNicol tried to get his name removed, but was refused because of the potential ground of chapter 2 clause II rule 7.”

    Howell also noted that, “I withdrew my request for an order for suspensions since the party in the early hours of Friday morning admitted that they already had. Because I had originally asked for more detail, the Judge (Dame Jennifer Eady) said that she had to award them half their costs. I have not yet decided whether to appeal against it. I knew that the names of those suspended, or at least some of them, would inevitably come out pretty soon since, as the defendants pointed out at the hearing, many members are authorised to interrogate the central membership database and see whether someone has the suspension flag against them. The next steps will be to elaborate on the additional claims against Iain McNicol (potentially others) and then for the defendants to supply their defence on the part of the general secretary David Evans or Iain McNicol, unless of course either or both decide to submit to judgment on liability without further ado.”

    Howell reported that, “An application will be made to add claimants – narrowly losing 2017 candidates or others with first-hand knowledge – and defendants who were in a similar position to McNicol. Following the determination of liability, whether by trial or admission, a further hearing will then be needed to assess damages under various heads. The court can also make declarations and conceivably referrals, for example to the director of public prosecutions. Such declarations and referrals should rise to the historic import of the events of the United Kingdom’s general election campaign of 2017.” Ominously Howell points out that, “The world might now have been a rather different place if the relatively small band of individuals against whom evidence has recently come to light had not, as they seem to have done, interfered.” It wasn’t just an issue for the UK’s working poor seeking an end to the cruelty of austerity, EU citizens deserved a secure future, reckless arms sales and jingoistic foreign policy would have stopped.

    In Update 2 posted on the 27th of June, Howell said, “David Evans and Iain McNicol have until Tuesday to say what redactions in, or excisions from the Report they want.” In Update 3 on the 30th of June Howell reported as, “Seat pairing pattern emerges, UK-wide, grassroots reports are coming in of pairs of neighbouring seats in 2017, one safe Labour, the other the Leader’s marginal target seat that it was the aim to gain. Head office and nation/region offices misdirected activists, digital advertising and resources to such pairs of seats across Britain, especially England and Wales. Instead of being sent to the marginal of the pair, people were sent to the safe one.” Howell asks, “Were you one of them, turning up at a marginal ripe to be gained yet turned away and told to go to the nearby safe seat? If so, please get in touch and tell your story. PS Despite the efforts of a small band of officers, 36 Marginals were gained by Labour in 2017 (6 Labour Marginals were lost) but it could so easily have been many more.”

    In Update 4 posted on the 7th of July Howell appealed for, “More funds needed for the next stage.” He went on to describe, “The next stage is to convince the court that there are additional aggrieved claimants whose devotion of energy and emotion and expenditure of money and, in the case of candidates, loss of prospective income, was nullified in the 2017 general election campaign by industrial scale rule breaking, criminal acts and casual racism that there is abundant evidence of, but also that there are other defendants to be held accountable for the most egregious examples of this as well.” Howell warns that, “As the scale of involvement of solicitors and barristers ramps up their modest fees are going to be thoroughly deserved and should be begun to be prepared for now.” It is never an easy or inexpensive decision to go to Court, but the importance of correcting this injustice cannot be overstressed when you consider the impact it is still having on the people of this country.

    In Update 5 posted on the 10th of July, Howell reported on the, “Court of Appeal Reviews Report Confidentiality and Costs Order. While preparations continue, in terms of strengthened legal team, further evidence and additional parties, the Court of Appeal, as of today, has begun a review of the confidentiality and costs parts of the decision made at the High Court hearing on 19 June at which suspension of members named in the report was revealed. While the order to pay costs may be reduced there is still a need to build up a financial reserve for at least one important hearing before the trial can take place.” That end in Update 6 on the 12th of July 12, Howell said, “Less is More. To get the fund over the hump and ready for one or two important hearings coming up, could people contribute just £10? If 500 did by the end of the coming week we would be in a strong position. Less is more. Remember, this case is for the many, not the few.” Do not expect any big Corporations or wealthy Tory donors to chip in on this one!

    In Update 7 posted on the 17th of July Howell warned that there was just, “One week to go to hit the target.” Referring to the original fundraising deadline he said, “With seven days still to go 312 believers in justice have already shown solidarity to reach nearly 60 % of the target.” In reality this type of fundraising campaign doesn’t just require people to believe in justice what is most urgently needed in the first place, is for people to realize that there is a campaign to bring this to Court; I have only just discovered this effort, but it’s not too late to ‘megaphone’ it to get the word out. Howell reminds us that, “Justice in the Labour Party, in the country and everywhere, which means unrigged democracy.” He appealed, “If only another 312 contribute an amount of just £15 during the course of the next week then we will make it.” He says, “the road will be open to legal remedies for the cheating in the general election of 2017 that changed the course of history for the worse since.” It got worse in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election.

    In Update 8 posted on the 18th of July Howell appeals, “SEND FUNDS AND FACTS.” He reminds Labour members of the progress so far saying that, “My claim was issued on 12 June in the High Court against David Evans as general secretary and Iain McNicol. There are other possible co-claimants and co-defendants on the court file. On 19 June Ian McNicol tried to get his name removed, but was refused because of the potential ground of chapter 2 clause II rule 7. I withdrew my request for an order for suspensions because the party a few hours beforehand admitted that they already had. With the Court’s permission, on 10 July I introduced additional allegations against Iain McNicol, and potentially others and I also referred the Report and costs order to the Court of Appeal.”

    Howell announces that, “On 30 July, physically at court, the defendants will try to challenge the legal basis of the claim. Although this hearing will be about law it will helpful nevertheless to have further information from members who were involved in the 2017 general election campaign, whether in Tory Marginals starved of help or Labour held seats on which over generous help was bestowed. The end result of the claim will be to determine the defendants’ liability for the results of wrong doing. A further hearing will assess damages under various heads.” Howell warns that, “The court can also make declarations and conceivably referrals, for example to the director of public prosecutions. Such declarations and referrals should rise to the historic import of the events of the United Kingdom’s general election campaign of 2017.” Howell once again reminds us of what could have been. The massive difference in policy decision on spending in the UK as well as our support for interventions overseas; it is a sobering thought!

    In Update 9 posted on 24th of July, referring excitedly to the initial fundraising goal deadline, Howell exclaims. “We did it, with 30 hours to spare. The minimum necessary target was passed yesterday with 30 hours to spare to the deadline, and this case is now moving towards securing further professional involvement.” He offers a, “Huge thanks to all.” Howell isn’t just seeking funding, but also expecting those with knowledge and evidence of the diversion of funds from Marginal seats that required the funding with resources squandered in safe seat constituencies that had little need of additional funding or extra canvassers on the ground. In Update 10 on the 26th of July, Howell posts an Email [email protected] and appeals for evidence: “Any contact, particularly evidence of paired neighbouring Labour held and non-Labour held marginal constituencies where leader’s order to focus on the marginal was undermined by officials’ secret instruction to misrepresent data as an excuse for focusing on the Labour held seat.”

    In Update 11 posted on the 31st of July 31Howel reports on the, “Court of Appeal now dealing with sham hearing that purported to strike out claim.” He explains how, “On 30 July, at a sham hearing in the Royal Courts of Justice that took place (but should not have) before a biased judge, who, without warning, organised a premeditated ambush concerning my previous complaint of several months ago, the court purported to strike out my claim against David Evans and Iain McNicol. I had considered whether to request that a different judge deal with the hearing but concluded that the listed judge would obstruct this, which could have made matters worse.” This development sounded ominous, but the battle was not over yet.

    Howell reported that, “I spoke to the senior administrator at the Court of Appeal immediately afterwards who, as a result, has now linked the court’s review of the removal of the internal report from the High Court file on 19 June, which had already threatened to undermine the 30 July hearing, together with its consideration of the defects in the dramatic strike out decision at the end of the hearing, including the previous complaint. In doing so, I should make clear that, quite properly, the internal report and all of the other relevant evidence is very much part of the Court of Appeal’s file. It aims to come to a provisional conclusion before the end of August. I also spoke to supporters immediately afterwards, who I am moved to say seem to whole heartedly back me in the light of this further peculiar development.”

    In Update 12 posted on the 1st of August Howard says, “Thank you for your support,” and tells us that, “The Court of Appeal is deciding whether to allow the Labour Party internal report evidencing the subversion of the 2017 General Election together with other evidence to proceed to trial.” In Update 13 posted on the 13th of August Howell said the, “Judge awaiting transcripts: The Court of Appeal Judge is awaiting transcripts of the hearings in the High Court on 19 June and 30 July.” He said that, “The Labour Party has contributed toward the cost. Next steps will be decided in the week commencing 1 September.” In Update 14 posted on the 25th of August, Howell again appeals for, “Funds needed for counsel now instructed. David Lemer of Doughty Street Chambers will represent the case before the Court of Appeal. Further funds are needed as the amount of work involved is considerable.”

    As stated before Howell isn’t just seeking funding, but he is also expecting those with knowledge and evidence of the diversion of funds from Marginal seats that required the funding with resources squandered in safe seat constituencies that had little need of additional funding or extra canvassers on the ground. I presume it is still not too late to come forward with information while the fundraising continues apace. We are about to enter that critical first week of September, but still I hear scant mention of this case in the media so I was determined to ‘megaphone’ it here. All of these legal battles contribute to the restoration of justice that will highlight the massive necessity for Electoral Reform in the UK. If Labour had won in 2017 a corrupt Tory ‘landslide victory’ would never have taken place. This judgement and the exposure the anti-Semitism propaganda could oust Starmer and will be further delegitimize the fake Tory majority stolen in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election even without a full Investigation of the vote. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58633 Reply
    SA
    Guest

    Kim
    Thanks for this massive labour of love. It must be time consuming for you but so important for our democracy. Corbyn was too nice, he thought that the machinery of the Labour Party would automatically support a democratically elected leader but that was not to be. Many would prefer tory rule rather than a Corbyn government. I myself don’t know whether it is better to resign from the party or to stay in case membership becomes essential to combat this enemy from within.

    #58677 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    SA – Thank you for your support. I think if you have Labour membership right now it could be strategically important to hang onto it for a little while longer as there could be an earthquake of outraged backlash against Starmer for his lurch to the right, his treacherous capitulation and recklessness in squandering the membership dues on the cowardly craven grovelling to Ware’s Poison Dart Blowers. There are NEC elections where the progressive Left might just wrestle back control of Labour so that sane individuals can remove Starmer from power once his manipulations to hide the truth are exposed by all pf the Court cases. If the Zionist Israeli Lobby, via the BoD, force Starmer to oust Corbyn then my hope is that Jeremy will decide to continue serving, not as an Independent, but as a Green Party MP. If this occurred you might see a whole slew of progressive Labour MPs join him as Green MPs, precipitating a massive exodus of Labour members to the Green Party and possibly a realization by the Unions that their interests are far better served by funding a fully Socialist Party.

    It is now five years on from Angela Merkel’s decision to offer hope and welcome to the many refugees fleeing conflict and privation in countries where our foreign intervention has done little more than exacerbate violence and destruction as a consequence of our proxy wars to control resources. That sea of humanity that flooded over Europe has had an opportunity to recover from the horror of conflict, move on, build new lives and become assimilated within the EU. For a few, the trauma of their experiences was so deeply etched in their troubled minds that the support offered was too little, too late, and as Corbyn stated after the Manchester bombing, our senseless overseas interventions have consequences! We cannot bomb countries into joining our sham democracy of tyrants; we just engender hatred and enlist jihadists to a cause. Perhaps if we were able to create a genuine, truly democratic, fairly elected Government in our own country first, there might be a stable and just society worth emulating with the credibility to negotiate for lasting peace.

    I am reminded of more than just the packed trains and lines of people trudging across Europe to seek freedom, but also the awful tragedy of that shocking picture of the body of a little boy washed up on a Greek beach. Yet even that horrific reality failed to instil a universal determination to resolve the carnage we had set in motion. Countries strengthened their borders increasing the risk and desperation of the dispossessed crammed together in camps awaiting rescue that was increasingly refused. While countries with the least capacity to offer sanctuary are still forced to accept the greatest burden, the EU did a deal with a ruthless despot to halt the flow of people who must remain virtually imprisoned in limbo. The boat crossings have become more dangerous and deadly as countries seek ways to contort Maritime Law, searching for an excuse not to rescue those in peril on the sea. Moving vessels away from the area of greatest traffic to police relitively few crossing the English Channel undoubtedly sealed the fate of thousands drowning in the Med.

    The Greeks and Italians have grown weary of the lack of cooperation from other EU states, who have refused to take a fair quota of migrants. Dubs battled to secure refuge for a number of unaccompanied children, but our wicked Tory Government rapidly minimized the hope offered only to a token few. All safe passages of asylum entry are being blocked off while the Tories continue to stoke foreign conflict with bombing raids and deadly weapons sold to despots to target and extinguish rival ethnic groups. Across the channel the French are persecuting migrants and breaking up their dismal encampments to essentially drive desperate escapes, while Priti Patel wants to use the Royal Navy to harass refugees on the high seas! Artist folk hero Banksy has sponsored a rescue vessel to save the abandoned refugees fleeing North Africa. Their crew may have underestimated the logistics of managing this valiant effort, but Banksy’s high profile will ultimately help jog the conscience of those rare philanthropists who occasionally step up.

    Theresa May of the ‘Go Home’ vans was finally ousted only to be replaced by an even more incompetent Tory PM, who is equally happy to ignore the almighty mess she created with the Windrush scandal. Most victims remain uncompensated for the ruthless persecution they suffered due to May’s targeted bigotry. Despite the protests Black Lives still don’t matter enough to this Tory Government who have stepped up ‘Stop and Search’ during the Covid crisis. Nigel Farage and his Britain trashing Brexiteers are still relentlessly stoking hatred and blaming migrants; when their precious crash out departure prevails, who will they blame for the massive deprivation that will follow? In a Byline Times Article, “Fact-Free Farage UK Asylum Applications Fall,” Sam Bright reports that, “New Government figures show the Brexit Party Leader’s asylum ‘invasion’ for what it is: a myth. The number of people applying for asylum in the UK has fallen in 2020 – exposing the fallacious warnings of an ‘invasion’ stoked by Nigel Farage and the right-wing press.”

    Bright shows, “New figures released by the Home Office today show that, in the first half of 2020, asylum applications in the UK stood at 13,305, compared to 19,118 in the second half of 2019 – a fall of 31%. This drop in asylum applications was particularly stark in quarter two of this year – the period from April to June – with only 4,850 applications recorded, 37% fewer than during the same period last year. This stands in stark contrast to the assertions of the political right, which has insisted that the UK is experiencing an uncommon, unacceptable influx of asylum seekers. Indeed, this is such a priority for the Home Office that it yesterday released a video taking aim at ‘activist lawyers’ allegedly blocking the deportation of these individuals. Farage’s lockdown project has been to direct his newly unassigned political fury at vulnerable individuals crossing the Channel on dinghies.”

    Sadly despite never being elected Farage still knows how to push the right political buttons to forward his bigoted agenda. Bright reports that, “In response to his outrage campaign – amplified by the tabloid media – Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Home Secretary Priti Patel have buckled to pressure, deploying the Government’s military and rhetorical might to scare off the asylum seekers. While the Prime Minister was labelling the actions of the asylum seekers ‘stupid and dangerous and criminal’, he was scoping out whether the Navy could be used to repel their small vessels, and even let loose an RAF aircraft to patrol the strait between the UK and France. Yet, even ignoring statistics from the past few months, the UK welcomes far fewer asylum seekers than its European counterparts. In both 2018 and 2019, Germany received 150,000 asylum applications, while the UK received roughly 40,000. The UK’s combined total over these two years was less than France, Spain, Greece and Italy.”

    Bright points out that, “The pet project of Farage, Johnson and Patel will actually make their war against asylum – incidentally, a human right enshrined in the 1951 UN Geneva Convention – more difficult.” He explains how, “Currently, under EU law, the UK has a right in some circumstances to return an asylum seeker to the first EU country they entered. So, if the asylum seeker in question had made the journey from Iran to France and had then crossed the Channel, the UK could attempt to hand responsibility back to Paris. However, after Brexit, the UK’s participation in this agreement – known as the ‘Dublin III Regulation’ – will end, and the EU has given no indication that it will seek to negotiate a new deal with Johnson’s Government.” The French are notoriously stubborn in EU negotiations, so with the UK determined to enforce exclusive fishing rights they might decide to be a lot less cooperative in dealing with the refugees seeking to cross the channel: the dishevelled camps may be moving to Kent!

    Bright comments that, “Having paraded the ‘technocrat’ as an enemy of the people, it seems that Brexiters now have no other option than to pursue irrational, fact-free policies devoid of expertise that simultaneously drum up nationalist fervour while making the nation weaker. As Mike Buckley has noted in these pages, the climate of foreign loathing institutionalised by Brexit and the consummation of Johnson is hollowing out British society and the economy. Doctors, nurses, labourers and academics are either leaving the country or have simply chosen not to arrive. The myths of populism – such as the asylum invasion fantasy – are not just slogans. They are now the prevailing beliefs of the Government, and the nation is suffering the predictable, dire consequences.” The new immigration policy after crash out Brexit will be one of “Scavenge, Exploit, Deport” where the UK reduces the burden of offering UK training opportunities to cash in on the brain drain of cheaper professionals from overseas on fixed term visas.

    Aside from an almighty mess over immigration that has stoked so much far-right nationalist fear mongering and senseless hatred in the UK what else can we expect in the dystopian nightmare of crash out Brexit? Asking that very question is another Byline Article entitled, “Project Fear Becomes Project Reality Whither Brexit Negotiations Now?” Mike Buckley “looks at the most likely options for the UK as the Brexit transition phase nears an end – and sees a catastrophic ‘no deal’ break as the most likely outcome. Brexit is set to be a disaster. By January, there is likely to be food and fuel shortages, public disorder and price hikes. The Navy may be called on to protect British waters from European fishermen, while troops may be drafted on to the streets to help police retain a semblance of control. This is not the return of Project Fear – it is a leaked Government document which describes likely outcomes this winter in the face of a COVID-19 second peak and the end of the UK’s current trading relationship with the EU.”

    Buckley reports that, “Brexit negotiations are, in the words of EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier, going backwards. Barnier is keen to resolve outstanding areas of disagreement on fishing rights and the level playing field, which covers commitments on state aid rules, workers’ rights, food and environmental standards.” He warns that, “Barnier and David Frost, his UK equivalent, operate at cross purposes. Where Barnier seeks to minimise damage, Frost is tasked with playing to the choir of the Conservative, pro-Brexit, European Research Group (ERG) of MPs and the Leave voters who gave Boris Johnson’s party a majority last December. Under Johnson, the UK position has been reduced to merely restating the UK’s intention to ‘take back control’ of sovereignty, laws and fishing waters, in wilful disregard of the fact that trade deals entail compromise.” The British conveniently forget that the largest market for the seafood we catch is France who will no longer be a free market for the UK to trade with tariff free!

    Buckley points out that, “The prioritisation of sovereignty presumably polls well with voters the Conservatives need to keep, but it is also the only possible distraction from the real-world costs of Brexit which are now increasingly hard to hide. Trade Barriers and Hard Borders As the leaked Government document makes clear, the approaching end of the transition period brings with it consequences that the Conservatives have long tried to deny. There will be a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, destabilising the peace process and increasing costs for business. The building of huge lorry parks in Kent and Hull is an admission that trade will be disrupted, deal or no deal, despite years of claims that all would carry on as before. The City of London faces barriers to trade that will cost it and the Treasury billions. Terrorists and organised criminals will benefit from Brexit as security ties are lost. The list could go on.” You do not have to love the EU and all it stands for, to pragmatically reject Brexit.

    Buckley also warns that, “Even if a Brexit deal is concluded, it would make little difference to trade barriers. Checks would still have to be conducted on every piece of freight, taking time and causing chaos. The prioritisation of rhetoric over planning has also left the UK unable to negotiate worthwhile future trade deals. Three years have been wasted failing to agree what Britain wants from its negotiations, argues the Institute for Government – risking trade and regulatory policy being dictated by better-prepared partners. The public is increasingly aware of this, with 60% now believing that Brexit is likely to lead to higher food costs.” Having this self-harm coincide with the massive unemployment that will result from the Covid crisis will create the perfect storm as more and more people experience the Tory Government designed destitution program that is Universal Credit. Living costs are steadily increasing, with the benefit paid delayed by over a month and inadequate to live on despite being raised, people will starve and start rioting.

    Buckley says, “The Conservatives provide mixed messages on the Government’s commitment to an EU trade deal. Some in the party apparently want to open the ‘real’ negotiations with the EU next year, confident that Leave voters will have been satisfied by exulting ‘no deal’ headlines on 1 January. If this is the plan, they may find the same response that some hard Brexiters have received on asking for last year’s Withdrawal Agreement to be reopened: it’s a little late. The EU already has the main prize it wanted – Single Market integrity and an enforceable border backed by a legally-binding international treaty. It is unlikely to come back for round two, after a ‘no deal’ rupture – at least until there is a change of government in the UK. Deal or No Deal? If the caricature is true and Dominic Cummings is the power behind the throne in Downing Street, then a ‘no deal’ may be the outcome.” Cummings is a principal instigator of this insanity: we must get him out. Cummings is the grenade; oust him and you pull the pin!

    I cannot believe how many people are prepared to accept that this unelected cretin has the right to dictate our future. Buckley says that, “The Financial Times reported that the Prime Minister’s chief advisor wants a ‘minimal, light-touch regime for state aid for British business after Brexit’ – anathema to the EU. It quotes a Government insider who believes that Cummings’ view is ‘once you’ve left, you should just do whatever you want’. There is no chance of the EU concluding an agreement on these terms. ‘The EU is a creature of law,’ argues George Peretz QC, an expert in EU law at Monckton Chambers in London. ‘Having a body issuing reports, saying ‘this was a bit naughty, don’t do it again’ in the place of a proper independent regulator with teeth is just not going to cut the mustard.’ Some believe that the UK will fudge the issue by concluding a deal that allows the Government room to diverge from EU norms on rights, standards and state aid – only to never make use of its new freedom.” The UK is no match for the EU 27!

    Buckley explains that, “This ‘Brexit in name only’ would allow Johnson to claim that sovereignty has been returned while retaining a level of market access. But the chance of the Conservatives’ ERG accepting such an outcome is minimal, while the EU is unlikely to want to sign a deal that would require it to monitor UK behaviour for years to come. It is far more likely that the UK is heading towards what has been the logical conclusion of Brexit since day one: a clean break.” I have never considered for an instant that this band of Tory crooks wanted anything more than full on crash out Brexit, but Buckley warns, “With that choice comes consequences the public may not be willing to pay. Voters are increasingly sceptical about the benefits of Brexit and new trade deals, and are concerned about deals that would reduce environmental and animal welfare standards.” The compromises to our NHS will signify the end of free access to care and an insurance based system that makes healthcare another exclusive privilege of the wealthy elite.

    Buckley reports on how, “A clear majority of all voters, including 2019 Labour-Conservative defectors, believe that COVID-19 has shown that there is a need for more international cooperation rather than less.” Why do so many totally accept the ‘borrowed votes’ scam that purports to explain a fake Tory ‘landslide victory’ in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election? Severe hardship and deprivation will bring people to their senses to demand a full Investigation. He says, “If Brexit does lead to higher food prices, lower standards of food and animal welfare, fewer jobs and a slower economic recovery than our former EU partners, it could quickly become a millstone for the Government. Johnson and co. have justified Brexit on the basis that it is ‘the will of the people’, but few voted for complete severance. A BBC/ComRes poll in July 2016 found that more than 60% of Leave voters expected to stay in the Single Market, for instance. No one voted for chaos, higher prices and shortages.” That is why we must get the Tories out ASAP! DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58737 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    The UK has one of the oldest and most established democracies in the world, but our dissent towards authoritarianism has been shockingly rapid and following the Covert 2019 Rigged Election the looming dictatorship can no longer be complacently ignored. In the Open Democracy, openJustice Article entitled, “The coronavirus crisis: revealing an ugly truth about the UK and human rights,” they announce a commitment to publishing a series of pieces on the issue of our rapidly dwindling Human Rights under Tory rule. They say that, “The UK is not protecting the rights of its marginalised people – and matters are worse in the wake of coronavirus. But civil society is providing hope. The coronavirus pandemic has revealed to many what was already obvious to plenty: that after forty years of privatisation and deregulation and after 10 years of austerity, the United Kingdom is a country in which financial interests too often override those of our most vulnerable citizens. We are in a time of upheaval, in which nothing is certain.”

    OpenJustice say, “Britain is leaving the European Union and over the next five years the Conservative Party will likely succeed in its intention to repeal the Human Rights Act. In autocratic fervour, it is also planning to ‘reform’ (read: restrict) a citizen’s ability to challenge the lawfulness of its own decisions.” Judicial Review has allowed our Judiciary to provide a level of scrutiny that does not fit the current Tory Government agenda and they are eager to dispense with such problematic niceties. Checks and balances are surplus to requirement in the Johnson/Cummings dictatorship, where ‘accountability’ is a dirty word. Any watchdog organizations that are not already totally neutered and powerless to set compliances will be taken over, dominated and strictly controlled by Tory Government appointed elites, just to provide a public veneer of oversight while what little remains of tiresome ‘red tape’ is rapidly stripped away. We should anticipate more appalling tragedies like Grenfell in their deregulated Tory utopia for the wealthy few.

    After we are forced to endure crash out Brexit we will lose any and all of the protections enshrined in our membership of the EU and workers will be vulnerable to the exploitation of powerful US Corporations; control of our newly privatised NHS will help them to accomplish this perverse goal. OpenJustice warn that, “This should concern us all – in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, human rights and the rule of law are more important than ever. Amidst the new pressures created by this crisis, the rights of minorities are easily left behind. Meanwhile, across the globe, some authoritarian governments are using the virus as a cover for cracking down on the freedoms of their citizens and stripping away state support. Crises provide those with power the opportunity to do such things, and a natural response to this can be a tacit acceptance that extreme measures are necessary in extraordinary times. Human rights legislation was meant to guard against this, to provide a robust defence against a slide into autocracy.”

    They announce that, “This week openJustice is launching a new series – The Unlawful State: Stories from a Pandemic – in which we investigate and report on the stories of people whose voices we do not normally hear but whose rights have been trampled in the wake of the pandemic. In our previous series, The Unlawful State, we discovered that even before the coronavirus crisis, the UK government frequently engages in unlawful activity, failing again and again to uphold the picture of a civilised society that is painted in legislation. In the exercise of power and the pursuit of profit, the law is trampled on.” OpenJustice provide a chilling Rothschild quote: “’The time to buy property is when there’s blood in the streets’, Baron Rothschild said in the 18th century. Today’s powerbrokers and profiteers often seem to follow this maxim when it comes to property and much more besides, with the carnage wrought by the pandemic creating conditions ripe for the exploitation of the vulnerable and the abandonment of the law.”

    “As part of the first material we are publishing in this series, openJustice spoke to an asylum-seeking woman in London who gave birth during the pandemic. Facing layer upon layer of vulnerabilities and disadvantage, including substandard accommodation and mental health problems – she experienced a stark lack of care prior to and following the birth of her child. Her story is only too familiar to many other women around to world, who have been denied the minimum standard of care set out by the World Health Organization for childbirth as a result of sometimes unnecessary measures introduced in response to COVID-19.” For decades the British public have enjoyed the security of not having to worry about the cost of Healthcare, but this Tory Government’s determined to end all that. Workers in the US know that losing your job means losing Healthcare insurance if you are lucky enough to have a job that includes that benefit. This makes American workers beholden to their employers and silently compliant with exploitation.

    It is alarming to witness how many really critical decisions are being taken without any debate in Parliament, the appointment of grossly inappropriate leading figures and massive expenditures without oversight or tendering. Replacing Public Health England with an ill defined new organization to be led by serial failure Dido Harding who lack experience in the field is just one example. Open Justice report that, “the Coronavirus Act 2020, rushed through Parliament in May, gives the UK government unprecedented emergency powers that have an extraordinary impact on democratic norms and civil liberties, leading human rights charity Liberty to call for the Act to be repealed. The Act allows, among other things, for the cancellation or postponement of elections and gives government powers to ban protests, demonstrations or indeed any gatherings at ‘any place’. This piece of legislation allows the government to more easily detain (or ‘section’) people on mental health grounds and medicate people against their will.”

    OpenJustice say “Black people are four times more likely to be detained under measures contained in the Mental Health Act and 61 percent of refugees will experience a mental health crisis or breakdown. So, there are no prizes for guessing which communities are most likely to be affected by these measures. The act relaxes standards in social care – essentially suspending the Care Act 2014 – which, according to Disability Rights UK, is already having a ‘devastating impact’ on disabled people. Despite all of this, the legislation did not receive the warranted level of Parliamentary scrutiny, being ‘fast-tracked’ through Parliament and receiving Royal Assent just four working days after its first reading.” The Government have yet to report on how or why BAME communities have been disproportionately impacted by Covid 19; it is just another of those investigations announced that never materializes.

    According to openJustice, “The pandemic has hit Britain at a time when human rights were already being drastically undermined following 10 years of austerity. Policies such as severe cuts to local government budgets and the virtual destruction of legal aid have combined to create the perfect conditions for a raft of unlawful decisions made by public bodies over many years.” This Tory cabal are oblivious to criticism when they fail and get things wrong; there are no ‘lessons learned’ and there is never an apology. OpenJustice say, “Following his visit to the UK two years before the coronavirus crisis in 2018, Philip Alston, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights commented that: ‘great misery has also been inflicted unnecessarily, especially on the working poor, on single mothers struggling against mighty odds, on people with disabilities who are already marginalized, and on millions of children who are being locked into a cycle of poverty from which most will have great difficulty escaping’.”

    OpenJustice relay how, “Last year, we met Shairaz Khan who, despite his learning difficulties, had been placed in substandard, rodent infested accommodation and without the care that he needed to clean and feed himself. Prior to our report, Ealing council were failing to meet their duties under the Care Act 2014, and many described a ‘crisis in social care’. This was before things went from bad to worse, with the Coronavirus Act suspending local government’s duties in social care.” The ‘Holocaust in Care’ has culled the most vulnerable, but abandonment of such costly obligations will form part of the next wave of austerity that we all know is imminent given Tory Government commitments not to increase the taxes on those who could really afford to contribute more. OpenJustice, “also reported, as part of our first series, on how children with Special and Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) are being forced to fight for their education. This was before the closure of schools to prevent the spread of the virus.”

    OpenJustice noted that, “Arising from the pandemic, there are also important questions around the use of big data and automated decision making, with the use of an algorithm that appeared to discriminate against A-level students on the grounds of class and race leading to an embarrassing government U-turn following protests from students.” Even more worrying is the concern over patient data, “ministers and activists are questioning how the personal health information of millions of NHS users might be used after it was handed over to the controversial artificial intelligence giant, Palantir, in the name of tracking the spread of COVID-19. But Palantir has a worrying track record including pioneering a policing software which has been accused of creating racist feedback loops. This, combined with a complete lack of transparency over the deal, creates a worrying picture.” This is a data goldmine all too valuable to US Healthcare Corporations and insurers who ration care based on excluding existing conditions.

    OpenJustice claim, “All is not lost, though. Following the pandemic, civil society quickly galvanised. From successful legal action that resulted in disadvantaged children receiving free laptops or tablets so that they could partake in virtual learning, to the self-organising MutualAid groups that have connected millions of locals across the country, people have come together, helped one another and learned from one another in ways we couldn’t have imagined.” This type of community cooperation and the support of volunteers will be needed to combat the onslaught in the months ahead. It provides an unexpected disruptor to the insidious Tory Government plan to cull the ranks of the ‘economically inactive’ with a mass ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple’ expected in a virulent next wave of Covid 19. Herd Immunity has not been abandoned it has just been modified to sweep the nation in a series of devastating resurgences that will hit the elderly, the disabled, the working poor and ethnic minorities the hardest; they don’t vote Tory!

    Ending their article on a high point openJustice say, “Alongside the voices of those who are disproportionately suffering during this pandemic, our new series will be profiling inspiring stories from civil society. We hope that people from many walks of life who are advocating on behalf of marginalised communities will be moved to look at ways in which they could be using human rights and the law as a tool in their mission. This piece is part of our series The Unlawful State: Stories from a Pandemic where we lift up the voices of those whose lives are being disproportionately affected by the coronavirus crisis. We also find out what civil society are doing about it. Click here for more.” It will be worth checking back with the Open Democracy website for more articles in this series. This article highlights a number of the areas where our human rights are under threat in our vanishing democracy, but the situation is set to become a lot worse as we head towards the point of no return, crash out Brexit in a midwinter resurgence of the virus.

    I remain seriously alarmed by how many have accepted the unfathomable result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election without even questioning the legitimacy of the vote. The Tory use of state funds to pay a charity to dig up dirt and disseminate propaganda on the opposition Labour Party should have had people removed in handcuffs. This alone was enough to delegitimize the vote even without a full Investigation into the highly suspect postal votes. Too many people faithfully believe there will be a chance to vote the Tories out in a few years time; this is not guaranteed and even if it were the Electoral System remains wide open to industrial scale fraud, the Tories maintain a stranglehold over the media and the progressive opposition has essentially disappeared. We need a change of leadership in both main political parties, but a really good start would be to keep the pressure up for the removal of Dominic Cummings. As I have said before, “Cummings is the grenade; oust him ad you pull the pin!” DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58820 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    When Prime Ministers Questions returned on Wednesday it seemed fitting that analysis of a catastrophic train wreck was top of the agenda as three weeks on from the incident near Stonehaven that killed three and rocked the entire Scottish community. That deadly ‘Train wreck’ was emblematic of Boris Johnson and his corrupt cabal’s totally shambolic handling of so many issues over the past few months as there is little doubt we are right on track for a lot more mayhem in the months ahead, unless we demand a full Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election to derail this Tory Government and force them out of office. Tory MP Andrew Bowie asked for “deepest condolences” to be offered to the family and friends of the three men who died, “as well as our thanks and heartfelt gratitude to the incredible men and women of our emergency services and multiple agencies who worked in incredibly difficult conditions to help the survivors from that incident.” Tories only show huge respect for such vital workers in emergencies!

    Bowie said, “The interim report is on the desk of the Transport Secretary as we speak, and I know that the full report will take time to run its course, as is only right, but what assurances can my right hon. Friend give my constituents that the serious questions that they have will be answered, that any recommendations will be implemented and that the Government will do everything they can to prevent an accident like this from ever happening again?” The PM responded by thanking him for raising the matter, added his own condolences and took his customary opportunity to extol the virtues of rescuers by “paying tribute to the extraordinary work of the emergency services and the public for the bravery that they showed.” Boris boasted that, “Britain’s railways are among the safest in Europe, partly because we take accidents like this so seriously, and therefore we must ensure that we learn the lessons of this tragic event to make sure that no such incident recurs in the future.” Tories exploit our dedicated EMS staff: they never learn lessons!

    Keir Starmer began by joining the PM in his comments regarding the tragic events of just a few weeks ago followed by paying tribute to John Hume, who died during recess calling him “a beacon of light in the most troubled of times” and saying “He will be seriously missed.” Starmer proceeded by saying, “Let me start today with the exams fiasco. On the day that thousands of young people had their A-level grades downgraded, the Prime Minister said, and I quote him: “The exam results…are robust, they’re good, they’re dependable”. The Education Secretary said there would ‘absolutely’ not be a U-turn; a few days later—a U-turn. We learned yesterday that the Education Secretary knew well in advance that there was a problem with the algorithm, so a straight answer to a straight question, please: when did the Prime Minister first know that there was a problem with the algorithm?”

    Boris Johnson stalled by offering birthday greetings then replied, “I say to him, on the exams and the stress that young people have been through over the summer, that both the Secretary of State for Education and I understand very well how difficult it has been for them and for their families, going through a pandemic at a time when we have not been able, because of that pandemic, in common with most other countries in the world, to stage normal examinations. As a result of what we learned about the tests—the results—that had come in, we did institute a change. We did act. The students, the pupils of this country now do have their grades, and I really ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman whether he will join me in congratulating those pupils on their hard work, and whether he agrees with me that they deserve the grades they have got.” He evaded an answer with distracting congratulations.

    The only point of Starmer’s question was the need for Education Secretary Williamson to resign. Starmer persisted, “I have already expressed congratulations to all those students and I do so again, but I want to go back to my question, which the Prime Minister avoided. I know why he avoided it, because he either knew of the problem with the algorithm, and did nothing, or he did not know when he should have. Let me ask again: when did the Prime Minister first know that there would be a problem with the algorithm?” Starmer failed to insert another question and the PM was pursuing his standard avoidance strategy; both men had returned to type!

    The PM was evasive saying, “As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows perfectly well, Ofqual made it absolutely clear time and again that in its view the system that was in place was robust. Ofqual is, as he knows, an independent organisation and credit had to be given to its views. All summer long, he has been going around undermining confidence and spreading doubts, in particular about the return to school in safe conditions… It is absolutely true. And today is a great day because the parents, pupils and teachers in this country are overwhelmingly proving him wrong and proving the doubters wrong, because they are going back to school in record numbers, in spite of all the gloom and dubitation that he tried to spread. It would be a fine thing if, today, after three months of refusing to do so, as pupils go back to school, he finally said that school was safe to go back to. Come on!”

    Equally capable of baiting, Starmer said, “The Prime Minister is just tin-eared and making it up as he goes along. I am surprised… The Education Secretary stood at that Dispatch Box yesterday and acknowledged that Labour’s first priority has been getting children back to school. That has been our first priority. I have said it numerous times at this Dispatch Box, and the Prime Minister knows it very well. He is just playing games. The Prime Minister is fooling nobody. Even his own MPs have run out of patience. The vice-chair of the 1922 Committee, the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Sir Charles Walker), has said that the Government are ‘saying one thing on Monday, changing its mind on Tuesday, something different presented on Wednesday.’ That sounds familiar doesn’t it? Another of his MPs, who wisely wants to remain anonymous, is perhaps in the Chamber today. He or she said… I am speaking for you, because this is what was said by his own MPs. He or she said, ‘It’s mess after mess, U-turn after U-turn. It’s a fundamental issue of competence, God knows what is going on. There’s no grip.’ His own MPs are right, aren’t they?” Who’s a naughty boy then?

    This was like watching two little boys in the playground as Johnson hit back with, “This is a Leader of the Opposition who backed remaining in the EU and now is totally silent on the subject. Now he has performed a U-turn. He backed that, and perhaps he still does. This is a Leader of the Opposition who supported an IRA-condoning politician who wanted to get out of NATO and now says absolutely nothing about it. This is a Leader of the Opposition who sat on the Front Bench…” He couldn’t have strayed any further from the point and the Speaker lost patience: “Order!” He scolded, “I think that questions are being asked, and we do need to try to answer the questions that have been put to the Prime Minister. It will be helpful to those who are watching to know the answers.”

    But the PM was determined to distract and bait Starmer saying, “I think it would be helpful to all those who are watching to know…” The Speaker interrupted again, “Order! Prime Minister, I think I will make the decisions today. Come on!” But spoilt toff Johnson just blathered on, saying, “Mr Speaker, if I may say so, I think it would be helpful to all those who are watching to know that this Opposition, and this Leader of the Opposition, said absolutely nothing to oppose the method of examinations that was proposed and, indeed, they opposed the teacher accreditation system that we eventually came up with. Is he now saying that those grades are not right, or is this just Captain Hindsight leaping on a bandwagon and opposing a policy that he supported two weeks ago?”

    Starmer replied, “The problem is that he is governing in hindsight, as well as making so many mistakes. Mr Speaker, before I go on, the Prime Minister said something about the IRA, and I want him to take it back. I worked in Northern Ireland for five years with the Police Service of Northern Ireland, bringing peace. As Director of Public Prosecutions, I prosecuted serious terrorists for five years, working with the intelligence and security forces and with the police in Northern Ireland. I ask the Prime Minister to have the decency to withdraw that comment.” That barb had hit a raw nerve, but he was foolish to let Johnson see his hurt and anguish over the insult. He said, “It is the same every time: pretend the problem does not exist, brush away scrutiny, make the wrong decision, then blame somebody else. This has got to change, because the next major decision for the Prime Minister is on the furlough scheme. The jobs of millions of people are at risk. The longer he delays, the more they are at risk, so will he act now, finally get this decision right and commit to extend the furlough scheme for those sectors and those workers that desperately need it?”

    Johnson was defensive, “What we are doing in this Government is getting our pupils back to school, in spite of all the doubts that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has tried to sow, and we are getting people back to work. What he wants to do is extend the furlough scheme, on which this country has already spent £40 billion. What we would rather do is get people into work through our kick-start scheme, which we are launching today—£2 billion to spend to support people, young people in particular, to get the jobs that they need. He wants to keep people out of work in suspended animation. We want to move this country forward. That is the difference between him and us.”

    The Speaker intervened, “There was a question about the allegation regarding Northern Ireland, and I was very concerned—that was the point I was making. I think that, in fairness, I am sure you would like to withdraw it.” Surely he didn’t expect Johnson to remove that painful barb that had been so offensive? Johnson doubled down, saying, “Mr Speaker, I am very happy to say that I listened to the protestations of the right hon. and learned Gentleman, and I think they would have been more in order, throughout the long years in which he supported a leader of the Labour party.” The Speaker had to concede; expecting decency, let alone an apology from Johnson would never be an option. The Speaker announced, “We are leaving it as it was. I call Keir Starmer.”

    Starmer shouldn’t have revealed such vulnerability; unable to let the matter drop he said, ”When the Prime Minister has worked with the security and intelligence forces on prosecuting criminals and terrorists, he can lecture me. I asked him to do the decent thing, but doing the decent thing and this Prime Minister don’t go together.” Stating the obvious he returned to his familiar ‘who’s been a naughty boy’ tactic and still failed to articulate a real question, “This has been a wasted summer. The Government should have spent it preparing for the autumn and winter. Instead, they have lurched from crisis to crisis, U-turn to U-turn. To correct one error, even two, might make sense, but when the Government have notched up 12 U-turns and rising, the only conclusion is serial incompetence. That serial incompetence is holding Britain back. Will the Prime Minister take responsibility and finally get a grip?”

    Johnson needed to reinvent his litany of disasters as a resounding success story! He said, “I take full responsibility for everything that has happened under this Government throughout my period in office. Actually, what has happened so far is that we have succeeded in turning the tide of this pandemic, and, despite the negativity and constant sniping from the Opposition, we are seeing a country that is not only going back to school but going back to work. Britain is in the lead in developing vaccines and in finding cures for this disease—dexamethasone—and treatments for this disease. Not only that, but we are taking this country forward, despite the extreme difficulties we face. What I think the people of this country would appreciate is the right hon. and learned Gentleman and I, the Labour Front-Bench team and everybody across this House coming together, uniting and saying that it is safe for kids to get back to school. I must say that we still have not heard those words from him. Will he now say, ‘School is safe’?”

    Starmer now allowed Boris to bait him into agreement, saying, “I have said it so many times. School is safe. My own children have been in school throughout. There is no issue on this. The Prime Minister is seeking to divide, instead… I wrote to him on 18 May, in confidence and in private, offering my support to him to get kids back to school. The only reason they were not back before the summer was because of his incompetent Education Secretary.” There is zero accountability from Cabinet Minister as Civil Servants are ousted; the Johnson/Cummings dictatorship value loyalty far more than competence from the compliant Tory cabal in office.

    Starmer limped on, a wounded beast trying to regain his dignity as he said, “The Prime Minister will recall that before the recess I asked him whether he would meet the Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK group. I had the privilege of meeting the families on 15 July. They gave me incredibly moving accounts of how covid-19 had taken their loved ones from them. On Sky News last week, the Prime Minister was asked whether he would meet the families and he said: ‘of course I will meet…the bereaved—-of course I will do that.’ But yesterday they received a letter from the Prime Minister saying that meeting them was now ‘regrettably not possible’. The Prime Minister will understand the frustration and the hurt of those families that he said one thing to camera and another to them. May I urge him to reconsider, and to do the right thing and find time to meet these grieving families?”

    Johnson replied, “May I say to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that it is absolutely typical of him that he should frame it in that way? Of course I am very happy to meet the families and the bereaved and I sympathise deeply with all those who have lost loved ones throughout this pandemic; we all feel their pain and their grief. But it turns out that this particular group he refers to are currently in litigation against the Government, and I will certainly meet them once that litigation is concluded.” This was a typical cowardly stance to avoid accountability for his shambolic handling of the crisis. Egged on by Starmer’s concession he wanted more grovelling from this inept Labour Leader. He continued on the offensive with, “I say to him that it would be a better thing if, rather than trying to score points in that way, he joined together with this Government and said not only that school is safe to go back to..”

    He continued baiting Starmer in the hope of eliciting more grovelling compliance instead of genuine opposition, “By the way, that is the first time in four months that he has said it, so I am delighted to have extracted it from him over this Dispatch Box… He has never said it to me in the House of Commons. I hope he will also say that it is safe for the workforce of this country to go back to work in a covid-secure way. We want to take this country forward. Not only are we getting the pandemic under control, with deaths down and hospital admissions way, way down, but we will continue to tackle it, with local lockdowns and with our superlative test and trace system, which, before Opposition Members sneer and mock it, has now conducted more tests than any other country in Europe. The right hon. and learned Gentleman might hail that, rather than sneering at this country’s achievements.”

    Tory MP David Jones obviously hadn’t got the memo on not mentioning Brexit because his question was on tariffs, “Discussions in the Joint Committee established under the withdrawal agreement will have the most crucial bearing on the future of trade, not only between the UK and the EU but within the UK itself. Unless otherwise agreed in that Committee, goods passing from Great Britain to Northern Ireland will be subject to the full rigour of the European customs code and to the imposition of tariffs. That would be quite unacceptable, so will my right hon. Friend commit to do whatever it takes to ensure that it does not happen?” Johnson had to just lie his way out of this one; uttering pure Boris-shit he said, “My right hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise the concern that he does. We must, of course—and will—deliver on what the protocol says, which is that there shall be unfettered access between GB and NI, and NI and GB, and there shall be no tariffs. We will legislate in the course of the next months to guarantee that.”

    SNP Ian Blackford MP said, “May I associate myself with the remarks of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition on the tragedy that we witnessed close to Stonehaven, and indeed with the Leader of the Opposition’s tribute to John Hume—a man who did so much for the delivery of peace in the island of Ireland? Yesterday the Prime Minister told his Cabinet: ‘I am no great nautical expert but sometimes it is necessary to tack here…in response to the facts as they change’. It was surprisingly honest for the Prime Minister to admit that his Government are all at sea—a UK Government now defined by eight U-turns in eight months. But if the Prime Minister is true to his word, surely he must see sense and change tack for a ninth time. With the clock ticking for struggling businesses and workers, will the Prime Minister commit today to extend the job retention scheme beyond October—or are Boris’s Government making the political choice to accept levels of unemployment last seen under Thatcher in the early 1980s?”

    I would say the PMs ‘tacks’ were more like ‘crash gybes;’ at sea an uncontrolled gybe can result in serious injury or broken gear! The epitome of Johnson’s reckless conduct, but he took onboard one recurring message as he replied, “Opposition Members of all parties seem to want to extend the furlough scheme, which has already cost the country £40 billion. It has supported 11 million people, but, after all, keeps them in suspended animation and prevents them from going to work. We want to get people back to work, and that is why I hope the right hon. Gentleman will instead support our kick-start scheme to get young people into jobs and support them in those jobs. How much better is that than languishing out of work?” So brace for sustained waves of unemployment then!

    Blackford corrected him saying, “My goodness, ‘languishing out of work’; the furlough scheme is there to protect people so that they can come back to work when the time is right. France, Germany and Ireland have extended their furlough schemes until 2021. They have made a moral choice. They are not prepared to punish their people with record levels of unemployment. People in Scotland are seeing a tale of two Governments. While the Tories are cutting furlough scheme support, yesterday Nicola Sturgeon was announcing new investment to protect jobs, including a youth guarantee. We all know that jobs are under threat if the furlough scheme ends in October. The power to end this threat lies with the Prime Minister. Will he do his duty and extend the furlough scheme, or are we going to return to levels of unemployment last seen under Thatcher, with the resultant human misery?”

    Determined to refuse an extension, at least for now, the PM said, “We are not only continuing with the furlough scheme until the end of this month, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, a scheme that is far more generous by the way, than anything provided in France, Germany or Ireland. We are continuing with that scheme, but after it elapses we will get on with other measures to support people in work. Starting today, there is the kick-start scheme to help young people to get the jobs that they need. That is in addition to a £160 billion package that we have spent to support the economy throughout this crisis. The Government have put their arms around all the people of this country to support them throughout the crisis. That is what we are doing, and we will now help them to get back into work.” Oh no, not another deadly Tory death hug! Tory arms around the Care Homes led to a ‘Holocaust in Care!’

    The dire situation we are in could get really bad with another Tory Government ‘train crash’ coming down the track very shortly as the infection rate rises due to increased transmission in schools, work places and on public transport. Johnson isn’t on solid ground with concerns growing among backbench Tory MPs over his chaotic leadership; Boris Johnson is all at sea and floundering with yet more ‘crash gybes’ imminent. That deadly crash-out Brexit iceberg is dead ahead and he is refusing to turn away from the inevitable ‘Titanic’ disaster; the Titanic success’ of Brexiteer fantasy land is fading fast. Just as that unsinkable ship sank and many innocent souls perished, many will die due to Johnson accepting Cummings’s delusional ‘Herd Nerd’ plan. Keir Starmer is revelling in his role as the ‘Captain of Capitulation,’ offering zero opposition to the Tories and sabotaging Labour from within. Cummings and both these rogue Captains need to walk the plank before they completely scupper any hope of the UK not sinking into the abyss. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58839 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    While our sadly corrupted BBC now proudly tout “News from the UK and around the world,” the selective output of distraction I call ‘Handyfloss’ and blatant propaganda has increased exponentially. Despite serious and legitimate concerns over the algorithmic rejigging of exam results to further disadvantage the already disadvantaged, the sorry saga morphed into a massive distraction tool as the hapless Tory Education Secretary dithered and delayed over correcting the problem. Now the news has reverted to what is supposedly everyone’s most important priority: tourism, playing the travel quarantine lottery and the minutia of the Government’s shambolic smorgasbord of highly discriminatory lockdown restrictions that support leisure spending, the necessity to return to work and get children back in school while punishing personal and familial interactions that exclude a cash register. This was highlighted by Craig in his recent Post: “The Currency of Absurdity.” While we are distracted by such banal ‘Handyfloss’ what of the real news?

    It was really important for ‘Auntie’ to double-down on the latest allegations regarding the highly predictable discovery of Novichok poisoning in the mysterious case involving opposition politician Navalny’s attempted assignation by the evil Russian state on the direct orders of Putin. In his Post: “Novichok, Navalny, Nordstrom, Nonsense,” Craig has dissected the logic-free analysis, arguing convincingly to demonstrate that this has all the classic indicators of another ‘false flag’ event. One need only consider how conveniently it ties all the Novichok lose ends together to target Russia as a major pariah global enemy. Meanwhile other grievous atrocities are ignored. The humanitarian crisis in Yemen is only noted for their beleaguered healthcare system’s inability to provide reliable data on Covid 19 while there is no mention of our continued supply of arms to the Saudi’s to bomb their citizens into oblivion! The ongoing Israeli atrocities persecuting the Palestinian people also remains under wraps.

    The title of the Canary Article, “Israeli forces attack a 68-year-old Palestinian man using brutal knee-to-neck tactic” tempts readers who, following the brutal murder of George Floyd in the US, have started to question this ruthless tactic and its deadly origin as a technique of severe oppression used by authoritarian regimes. However, the full extent of the Israeli assault on the Palestinian people in the violent theft of their land continues unabated; it is exposed in this piece along with a call to protest. Under the final heading, “Get Involved” they appeal, “Palestine Action is holding a demonstration against Israeli Arms Company Elbit on Saturday 5 September. Join them.” The scheduled start time of 1:00PM at 77 Kingsway, London might provide too little notice for you to attend, but this pro-Palestinian solidarity group needs our ongoing support now more than ever and not just to: #ShutElbitDown

    The Canary report that, “Once again, Israeli forces have been caught on camera using the brutal knee-to-neck tactic. This time it was to restrain a 68-year-old Palestinian man. On 1 September, Khairy Hanoun was savagely attacked after a demonstration in the northern West Bank. He was protesting against the confiscation of his land. Video footage shows the occupation forces shoving Hanoun to the ground, while one soldier rams his knee into the farmer’s neck. Meanwhile, other soldiers pointed weapons at those filming the assault.” The Bulldozing of land continues unnoticed by the Western media and our heavily biased BBC ‘world news’. They say that, “Hanoun’s land is located in Shufa village, close to Tulkarem city in the northern West Bank. Abdelkarim Dalbah, an activist and researcher from Tulkarem, told The Canary that Israel plans to confiscate around 800 dunums of land from Shufa village in order to build an industrial zone.”

    According to the Canary, “Dalbah said: The [Israeli occupation’s] bulldozers came two weeks ago and started bulldozing the land and making roads for the industrial zone. People were prevented from being on their land. Of course, the inhabitants started to demonstrate in order to prevent this terrible Israeli project. On Tuesday we had four demonstrations in the area. The IOF [Israeli Occupation Forces] prevented us from reaching the land. They used sound bombs and tear gas on people. After the demonstration had finished, the Israeli soldiers followed some teenagers, so Khairy and some activists tried to talk to the soldiers to tell them not to shoot at the kids. You can see from the video what happened. We managed to release Khairy from their hands. Khairy is a great activist, and he’ll continue to demonstrate against the confiscation of his land.” The Israelis apartheid regime have felt emboldened by the unquestioning support of US President Trump who now endorses their expansionist takeover of the West Bank.

    The slightest mention of the Israelis apartheid policy of Palestinian subjugation, persecution and confiscation of land is effectively silenced by the Israeli Lobby here and elsewhere as anti-Semitism is redefined to encompass any criticism of this rightwing rogue state. The Canary warns that the Israeli Government are, “Slicing up the West Bank. Dalbah explained the significance of Israel’s latest land grab plans. He said: ‘There’s already an Israeli industrial zone in west Tulkarem with ten Israeli chemical companies inside’. This existing industrial zone has had massive impacts on people’s health in the area. It even contains one factory which was forced to close down inside Israel’s borders because it was so hazardous. Dalbah continued: Now they are planning this new industrial zone in south Tulkarem. If the land is confiscated it will be terrible: it is the south gate of Tulkarem city and it is the only space that the city can expand in the area. This industrial zone will connect up the [illegal Israeli colonial] settlements in this area.”

    The Canary provide historical context for the alarming territorial annexations by reporting that, “In 1949, the furthest advance of the Zionist forces onto Palestinian land became known as the Green Line, separating what the mainstream media now calls Israel and the West Bank. Then, in 1967, the Israeli military crossed the Green Line, occupying the West Bank, remaining an occupation force ever since. In the early 2000s, Israel built its illegal apartheid wall. A massive 85% of the wall is placed beyond the Green Line, stealing swathes of West Bank land. The new industrial zone will steal much more land. Dalbah said: The new industrial zone will be connected to the Green Line, cutting another Israeli corridor of land even further into the West Bank [isolating Palestinians from even more of their land].”

    The Canary article highlights the additional Checkpoints saying that, “Dalbah argued that the plans will cut off Tulkarem city from other areas of the West Bank: It will isolate Tulkarem from the south region. Palestinian people will only be able to pass through under controls, checkpoints. Israel can claim that the industrial zone will provide work for thousands of Palestinian workers, but this is bullshit of course. According to the UN, Israel already imposes 58 obstacles such as roadblocks or checkpoints, on the Tulkarem area, preventing free movement for Palestinian people. And there are currently 593 obstacles all over the West Bank.” Netanyahu is increasingly coming under fire over corruption charges; he has only been able to avoid prosecution by remaining in office, but his luck may be running out. Bibi’s poor management of the Covid19 Pandemic has enraged Israeli citizens who are now taking to the streets in protest; he has thrown the red meat of sped-up expansion to his hard-core supporters in a desperate attempt to hang on.

    Could Netanyahu’s waning popularity and the wrath of angry young protesters spell the end for Likud Party dominance, with a new opportunity to rescue the Palestinians from ethnic cleansing policies and a chance to salvage peace talks? The Canary make a heartfelt appeal to us, “Don’t forget the people of Palestine” They “asked Dalbah if the Israeli forces use the knee-to-neck tactic regularly on demonstrations. Dalbah replied: ‘Almost always.’ Israel’s brutal tactics are barely ever reported on in the mainstream media. Meanwhile, Israeli soldiers and police officers continue to get away with extreme violence, knowing that there will be no consequences. The UN has reported that there have been at least 5,585 Palestinian people killed since 2008, and another 113,990 injuries. There have been many attempts by Israel and its supporters to smear Palestine rights campaigners as antisemitic. These attempts to shut down all criticism of the brutal Israeli occupation haven’t worked. Let’s all shout out for Palestinian rights.”

    Written back when Boris Johnson chose his new cabinet, the Middle East Monitor Article entitled, “Priti Patel, who asked for UK aid for Israel army, now Home Secretary,” offers a stark warning based on Patel’s authoritarian beliefs and toxic connections. They reported that, “The UK’s new Prime Minister Boris Johnson has appointed Priti Patel as Home Secretary despite the fact that she was forced to resign two years ago after holding secret, unofficial meetings with Israeli ministers. The former international development secretary made several unofficial meetings including with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and was accused of conducting her own foreign policy in the Middle East. The meetings included a visit to an Israeli army field hospital in the occupied Golan Heights; Patel asked officials within her department to look into whether British aid money could be funneled into the medical centre. In her resignation letter Patel herself admitted she ‘fell below the high standards that are expected of a Secretary of State’.”

    MEMO said, “Her appointment has drawn outrage across the board due to her record on key human rights issues. Despite the fact that her parents migrated to the UK in the sixties, Patel has voted for a stricter asylum system and against banning the detention of pregnant women in immigration jails.” They said, “The Essex MP has suggested using the potential of food shortages in Ireland in the event of a no-deal Brexit as leverage against the backstop being introduced. In 2011 Patel supported the death penalty on the BBC’s Question Time arguing it would ‘act as a deterrent.’ Before being elected as an MP in 2010, Patel worked for the PR company Weber Shandwick, whose clients included the government of Bahrain, which has been criticised for its high number of torture and forced disappearance cases. Shortly after being elected the Bahraini Ministry of Foreign Affairs flew Patel to Bahrain to meet several ministers. She has also been on a UAE-funded trip to the country and attended a conference in Washington paid for by the Henry Jackson society.”

    MEMO said that, “Patel will replace former Home Secretary Sajid Javid who is now Chancellor. Earlier this year Javid ordered that Shamima Begum be stripped of her British citizenship and let her two-year-old son die of pneumonia in a refugee camp in Syria. At the time her family accused him of making the decision based on political gain.Last week Javid labelled a number of Muslim organisations as extreme, including Cage, the Islamic Human Rights Commission and MEND, saying of Cage that it was ‘one of the most prominent organisations that rejects our shared values.’ Two years after becoming MP Javid told the Conservative Friends of Israel annual lunch that as a British born Muslim if he had to go and live in the Middle East, he would not go to a Muslim majority country: ‘There is only one place I could possibly go. Israel. The only nation in the Middle East that shares the same democratic values as Britain. And the only nation in the Middle East where my family would feel the warm embrace of freedom and liberty’.”

    In a Guardian Article, written when Patel was fired by former PM Theresa May her unapproved meetings while on holiday in Israel, was examined when they posed the question, “What did Israel hope to gain from Priti Patel’s secret meetings?” They said, “The international development secretary’s covert summer trip was a gift to Israelis who seek to influence British policy. For the second time in less than a year, Israeli efforts to discreetly influence British policy has been disclosed. In January, the embassy official Shai Masot was caught in an al-Jazeera sting to ‘take down’ politicians regarded as unfriendly to Israel.” We should all be deeply concerned that the Israeli Government have already been caught red handed, actively interfering in UK politics to suit their own warped PR agenda. Both this and US interference in our democracy pose a far greater threat than Russia and Vladimir Putin.

    The Guardian reported, “This time a bigger fish has been caught: the UK’s international development secretary, Priti Patel. Official visits to Israel by senior British political figures are common, but the sensitivities are usually acute; embassy and consulate staff carefully vet the locations and personnel visited by British diplomats and ministers. Visits are always accompanied by diplomatic staff, with agendas designed to reflect UK policy – for example, making sure to include meetings with Palestinians and groups and individuals who may not be popular with the Israeli government. Patel’s summer trip, organised with the head of the Conservative Friends of Israel lobby group, skipped all those protocols, despite a timetable that was highly orchestrated – including a reported visit to an Israeli field hospital in the occupied Golan Heights, which could have taken place only with both Israeli military and political clearance.”

    According to the Guardian, “To Israeli officials her private visit would have seemed like a gift, not least because those involved would have been immediately aware that, unaccompanied by diplomats, Patel was operating freelance. Embedded in the more humdrum elements of her tour were three key encounters. The first was with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who was ‘interested’ in meeting her, officials told the Guardian. Also significant were meetings with Yuval Rotem, the director general of Israel’s foreign ministry (a key appointment for Netanyahu, who is also Israel’s foreign minister), and Gilad Erdan, the abrasive minister from Netanyahu’s Likud party, who is in charge of public security, strategic affairs and information. They say Gilad Erdan, who is in charge of Israel’s attempts to counter the global BDS movement.”

    The Guardian stated that, “The three – as Lord Polak would have known – represent key pillars of Israel’s international diplomacy.
    ‘[Lord Polak] has his own network,’ one senior figure involved in Israeli-British advocacy told the Guardian. The source was unaware of Patel’s visit, and suggested it had been clumsily handled. Israel’s interest in Patel is less hard to fathom. As well as wanting to promote Israel’s image, Patel’s department is at a key intersection of Israeli interest. The Department of International Development (DfID) gives aid to the Palestinian Authority as well as human rights groups that criticise Israel, including Amnesty International. Israel has pressed DfID to cut aid to the Palestinians due to the payments given by the Palestinian Authority to the families of people killed or jailed for involvement in attacks on Israeli targets. Patel ordered a review of some funding in 2016. Netanyahu also raised the issue of (it turns out, non-existent) UK funding for the Israeli civil rights group Breaking the Silence with Theresa May earlier this year.”

    The Guardian said, “it is Erdan’s presence in meetings with Patel that is most telling because his role is largely unconnected with the work of DfID. As public security minister he has oversight of Israel’s police; as information minister he has a propaganda role; but of most interest is his position as strategic affairs minister. Erdan has emerged as the key figure in Israel’s international efforts against the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement [BDS], and against other groups and movements that Israel accuses of seeking to delegitimise it through criticism of its human rights record. In that context, Erdan’s ministry was asked in 2015 to ‘guide, coordinate and integrate the activities of all the ministers and the government and of civil entities in Israel and abroad on the subject of the struggle against attempts to delegitimise Israel and the boycott movement’.”

    The Guardian reported that, “Most controversially, Erdan has been put in charge of large-scale efforts to target foreign individuals and organisations, reportedly including staff recruited from the Mossad foreign intelligence agency, the Shin Bet domestic intelligence agency, and the military intelligence directorate. Among those who have fallen foul of Erdan’s ministry have been Isabel Phiri, a Malawian official in the World Council of Churches who was detained arriving at Ben Gurion airport and deported for alleged involvement in the BDS movement.” The Guardian said that, “Raed Jarrar, advocacy director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International – some of whose international projects are supported by DfiD – was prevented from crossing from Jordan into the West Bank. A spokeswoman for Israel’s interior ministry said Erdan had recommended he be denied entry.”

    The token appointments of ethnic minority Tory MPs to Cabinet positions should not have us fooled when their toxic beliefs are equally as seriously xenophobic as the worst of the wealthy elitist lily white toffs infecting the Tory Party with alt-right nationalism right now. Their allegiance is to Israel and to Trump, who will feast on this nation as vultures prey on rotting carrion! As long as the catastrophic impact of crash-out Brexit only devastates the poor and disenfranchised the hard core Johnson/Cummings Brexiteers will keep steaming full speed ahead towards the ‘Titanic Brexit Iceberg!’ Real news heralding this horrendous impending disaster is being drowned out by the relentless propaganda and ‘Handyfloss’ news spin. We must ignore the ‘bums on beaches’ tripe, the success of ‘eat out to help out’ and complex lockdown restrictions deliberately designed to confuse. Craig Murray and other outspoken journalistic outlets need our support or the bright flame of free press in an open and just democracy is extinguished. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58931 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    To fight the barrage of propaganda it is an urgent and vitally necessary priority that we change the pervasive toxic Tory narrative to disarm the dangerously hostile rhetoric of hate mongering on the far-right of our perilously endangered democracy. Cummings unleashed weapons grade PsyOps on unsuspecting and vulnerable ‘persuadables’ whose data was stolen by Cambridge Analytica and undoubtedly still remains in his grubby hands. For far too long we have gone into battle in this war of words and fake imagery without even the most rudimentary defence. “Cummings is the grenade; oust him and you pull the pin!” Until the PM’s Machiavellian puppet master can be removed, we must disarm all the deceitful and damaging slogans and false promises with greater creativity in the language that we use and the slogans that we adopt until they become the dominant persuasive speech of our rebellion in the fight to rescue our democracy. As an innovator, there are few things more fun to invent than new words and slogans!

    Covid 19 is dominating the airwaves right now, hence the reason I write so frequently of its evil menacing twin as the “Covert 2019 Rigged Election.” We need this alternative description of the corrupt 2019 Election to become so deeply embedded in people’s minds that they no longer question whether there might need to be a full Investigation into the postal votes. As people live to regret the painful consequences of shambolic toxic Tory rule, ‘Get the Tories Out’ must become a national priority. We cannot allow our Electoral System to remain so vulnerable to industrial scale fraud again in future, but only complete exposure and clear realization of this critical weakness will secure change to “Rescue our Watchdog” as people demand that “All Votes Must Count” because: “A Watchdog that cannot Watch is just a dog!” The frequent repetition of these slogans might seem tedious, but they make logical sense, they get an important message out there and they are absolutely essential to the new language of our robust fight-back.

    The Tory claim of ‘landslide victory’ was in reality the ‘Seismic Sin’ of ‘Industrial Scale Fraud;’ before, during and still long after the Covert 2019 Rigged Election they are desperately trying to legitimize this by manipulating the Tory compliant BBC, tabloid press and alt-right media, utilizing an onslaught of further lies: urgently in need of ‘correction.’ We can no longer accept the grotesque lie about the ‘borrowed votes’ when we know full well that they were in fact ‘Stolen Votes.’ We cannot let the Tories crow about their assault on Labour’s solid and impenetrable ‘Red Wall.’ We must persuade those who will soon discover the extent of this hideous con that, if we do not remove them from power, this Government will turn the north into another neglected ‘Tory Sinkhole!’ The sickening lie of Johnson’s ‘levelling up’ agenda is already being exposed with the targeting of the exam results of disadvantaged students; but how many more examples will it take before the working poor realize that Boris’s real priority is ‘Decimating Down!’

    How was the Covert 2019 Rigged Election somehow justified as valid to the point where the public actually bought into the scam? An obscene amount of money bought political influence, enabling Tories to use their wealth to solidify their perpetual stranglehold on power. With all that money came grotesque corruption: it funded the industrial scale fraud of Idox rigging of the postal votes, the PsyOps propaganda campaign to warp minds, deregulation and neutering of our compliance and monitoring organizations that left our democracy defenceless. The single greatest threat to UK democracy comes from malign forces within our current Tory Government who paid a fake Charity to dredge up toxic rumours and relentlessly spew out anti-Corbyn anti-Labour propaganda on the public tab. The Tory contract with the Institute for Statecraft’s misleadingly named ‘Integrity Initiative’ was a criminal misuse of public funds that alone is sufficient to delegitimize the Covert 2019 Rigged Election and oust the Tory Party on corruption charges!

    The ‘London Laundromat’ of stolen money was embezzled from ordinary citizens from the former Soviet Union, but also a whole host of other corrupt regimes and Corporations from around the globe who use our secure British tax havens to hide their ill-gotten gains. Dirty oligarch money fed the Tory beast, but as we ranted about unproven ‘Russian interference’ we dismissed the far more obvious threats. The clandestine foreign intervention from the UK Zionist Lobby, on behalf of the Apartheid Israeli Government of Benjamin Netanyahu, was launched in an effort to silence all defence of the deliberately persecuted Palestinians! Fake allegations of anti-Semitism have been weaponized and need to be disarmed. The fabricated and pure fantasy allegation of ‘anti-Semitism are just ‘Fanti-Semitism’ or ‘fantisemitism!’ We can and must defeat the fake news with the new narrative of truth! We cannot continue to totally ignore this insidious Israeli and US manipulation of our elections in favour of a dangerous Trumpist, pro-Israeli agenda.

    Why do I call Ware’s band of lying Labour traitors, those who collaborated in the defamatory Panorama documentary, ‘Poison Dart Blowers?’ They have no right to sully the noble title ‘Whistleblower,’ for which dedicated individuals have followed their conscience in the public interest, so often forced to make huge personal sacrifices and suffer career sabotage, destitution or take their own life after exposing genuine corruption, embezzlement, negligence, safety violations or other serious wrongdoing. Those who, out of malicious intent, selfish greed, an attempt to settle personal scores or seize power, deceitfully pose as Whistleblowers to spew their pernicious lies and fabricated allegations are as deadly as the Amazonian natives who blow poison darts to stun and kill their prey! We cannot allow them to bask in heroic victimhood when, by reason of their evil treachery, they have duly earned the title: ‘Poison Dart Blowers.’ We will coax the media into adopting this more accurate title for those who’ve so richly earned our contempt.

    I feel my innovative mind is going into linguistic overdrive to tackle this Tory scourge; so while we’re at it there are a couple of those rousing jingoistic songs of Empire that need, ‘rewording’ shall we say. Boris Johnson wants us to sing “Land of hope and glory” as if British exceptionalism will be boundless after he makes a “Titanic success” of crash out Brexit. His words, not mine; did no one remind him that the ‘unsinkable vessel’ sank just as ‘get Brexit done’ will morph into ‘Get Brexit Dung!’ The Brexiteers much touted ‘sunny uplands’ have become the looming ‘Dystopian Nightmare’ of hardship, deprivation and torment for the working poor and the newly unemployed subsisting on Universal Credit. As unemployment rises, more ordinary people in once secure jobs will discover a Tory planed path to destitution and debt purposely built into what remains of our beleaguered social safety net. It is intentionally stressful and cruel, with unnecessary delays, punitive sanctions and paltry, wholly inadequate, provision: no longer fit for purpose.

    It is time to give these odiously jingoistic songs a more realistic rewording for our neoliberal vulture capitalist age; to be sung to the distinctive tune of “Land of hope and glory” punctuated by an abrupt pause and emphasis on ‘Drop Dead’ for maximum effect.

    Lost hope and past glory, never to be free,
    Powerful privilege eternal, breads Tory cruelty.
    Poorer still and poorer, while on the treadmill set,
    Work until you – Drop – Dead – forever in their debt!
    Wealth made Tories mighty, it makes them mightier yet!

    I am not a talented lyricist so this was chucked together in a ‘fit of pique’ watching Boris Johnson defend Empire in all its obscene excesses of blatant criminal plundering and subjugation. Just as he defends the memory of Churchill: the man responsible for the Bengal Famine and the first use of chemical weapons in Iraq against the Kurds that he despised as ‘savages.’ Why should we continue to sing “God, who made thee mighty, make thee mightier yet,” when this represents ample reason to become an atheist? How could any merciful God genuinely endorse cruel persecution under British rule? Boris is still trying to make that one fit. I have also reworded the jingoistic song “Rule Britannia;” we sing: “Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rules the waves – Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.” But in a cruel dystopian reality the 99% truly are slaves, due to chronic wage stagnation, zero hours contracts and an even more punitive payment system for younger workers that leaves them trapped unable to leave home. New words please…

    Cruel Britannia! Vile Tories rule the Slaves…
    Only by ousting Boris Johnson will lives be saved!

    The priority must now be saving lives. We know that the discredited eugenics policy of ‘Herd Immunity’ has been exposed as a mass slaughter of the weakest and most vulnerable in our society, the ‘economically inactive’ elderly, disabled, homeless, Gypsies and other ethnic minorities or simply those now out of work, but all surplus to capitalistic requirements and a ‘burden on the state!’ Never mind that this Tory Government destroyed their jobs and forced them into destitution, Tory Government policies are being designed to drive vulnerable sectors into danger as they ramp-up their ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple’. This time Herd Immunity will advance beyond the ‘Holocaust in Care’ using innocent school children as vectors to spread Covid to the vulnerable grandparents that poverty forces them to cohabit with. The rising death toll will be blamed on them, blamed on non-compliance, falsely blamed on obesity and diabetes, anything to deflect from the truth. In reality this is a deliberate Genocide we must call out as: ‘Covicide!’

    Tell it like it is: “If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s not a giraffe!” The Tories drum home their deceptive messages over and over again until their expansive fake news becomes the latest hot topic news flash and blatant lies become the new truth. In reality a promise made by Boris Johnson is just a ‘Bromise’ that will never be kept; a Tory pledge is just… more “Boris-shit!” The content of BBC news broadcasts is increasingly crammed to capacity with irrelevant drivel, laboriously spun like candyfloss into a voluminous, but handy distraction tool; this neatly obscures the harsh reality of a truly dire situation here in the UK. This pervasive tripe of vacuous spin, masquerading as relevant news, is more appropriately referred to by me as: “Handyfloss!” If anyone ever dares to attack me as unpatriotic, I tell them that I am a “Peaceful Patriot of the Planet” and I will defend the integrity and diversity of this unique “Blue Planet” without fear, favour or fake boundaries of jingoistic nationalism: join me to become a: “#PPP.”

    In a perverse constraint on honesty and accountability in the House of Commons it is forbidden for an MP to accuse another of lying in the Chamber, while the actual telling of horrendous lies and expounding on fanciful pledges has become the signature of Johnson and his corrupt Tory Ministers. We do not expect the PM or any MPs to tell “Porky Pies,” we must demand honesty, by criminalizing this conduct, starting with a campaign to get “Porkies out of Parliament” – “Scoop the POOP!” We failed to prevent Johnson from doubling down on the lie written on the side of the Brexit bus and his ‘Bromise’ of huge sums to be reallocated to our NHS. Capitalizing on our lack of resistance he Bromised UK voters “40 new Hospitals;” highly unlikely to materialize unless US Healthcare Corporations fully privatize our NHS. There was that “world-beating” Covid App that was scraped as a component of Tallyho Harding’s ‘world wanking,’ err, ‘ranking’ Test and Trace! We must aggressively call the PM out on his outlandish Bromises.

    I created posters for highlighting Johnson’s complicity in the Grenfell Tower disaster after decimating the London Fire Department for cash! I captured a simple message that could have evolved into a Gif to incite the ire of abandoned pensioners; it was entitled: “Get Rid of Nits” and featured Boris Johnson scratching his head in the hope of appearing innocently benign. This message really resonates with older people who remember nit infestation as well as calling very stupid people ‘nits’ back when they were in school. When Boris Johnson was insisting that he would rather “die in a ditch” than postpone Brexit, it was his second shallow pledge to perish in a ditch, but his pledge to protect against Heathrow expansion vanished in a heartbeat because Boris… just lies, has no conscience and no moral obligation to anyone! An imaginative Social Media contributor feminized Boris into a slightly pudgy blond called ‘Diana Ditch!’ It was a great image for my anti-Boris poster campaign, but I still lack the Social Media network to promote it.

    Right now most major screw-ups consistently lead back to Dominic Cummings, yet he’s still in post: why? I believe he’s in a strong position to blackmail Boris Johnson and that if he is ousted he will drag the entire Tory Party down with him as he owes no special allegiance to the Conservatives. He is the supreme egotist, who believes that his master plan must dominate and be implemented in full. If he loses control of the PM there is no need for continued loyalty that will no longer revolve around him. He wants us all to know the full extent of his brilliant deception, but that’s the ultimate Tory weakness as he could easily spill the beans: why not if he is excluded from the program? We must continue to demand his immediate removal; “Cummings is the grenade, oust him and you pull the pin!” Mr. D. Cummings, the ‘Herd Nerd’ soft brain behind the ‘hard rain,’ could have his name appropriately abbreviated to ‘Dummings!’ ‘Ditch Dummings’ has a certain ring to it! I’ve created a wee limerick featuring the infamous Johnson/Cummings pair:

    Dummings and Diana Ditch,
    Insisted on making their pitch,
    But the goal they were after,
    ‘Titanic’ Brexit disaster,
    This pair is just too dumb to switch!

    It is time to ditch the futile defensive mode that has generated a truly obscene number of humble apologies over what is essentially fantisemitism. The poison of fantisemitism allegations now stands a strong chance of being fully exposed as a cruel hoax that does nothing to protect the Jewish community from genuine prejudice or persecution and potentially incites both while sidelining other areas of ethnic and religious targeting. For this reason, if for no other, Jeremy Corbyn must be persuaded to go against his natural ‘turn the other cheek’ instincts and aggressively countersue John Ware. Lawyer, Mark Lewis of Patron Law is expecting to rake in megabucks with multiple large out of Court settlements, but he is in for a rude awakening when Crowdfunded support for justice sees defendants robustly fight back: his ‘no win, no fee’ will become a no fee financial drain! When legal insurers are no longer prepared to accept the considerable financial risk of losing SLAPP cases this risk free back up plan will become untenable too.

    The well funded broad public support of defendants like Jeremy Corbyn who has raised over £332,000, Paddy French at Press Gang, the Jewish Voice for Labour and Mark Sivier at Vox, will make fewer and fewer cases rich pickings for the out of Court settlements so necessary to avoiding any challenge to the unsubstantiated fantisemitism evidence. The pro-active battles need our support too because we do not want them to drop their cases due to lack of funds. Chris Williamson fighting EHRC to expose corruption and bias is one; another is the ‘Mark Howell for Justice,’ a case to expose misuse of Labour Party election funds and resources. Corbyn’s battle to expose the truth about ‘fantisemitism’ might also become a proactive fight if Ware’s Lawyer Mark Lewis realizes that the case is unwinnable in Court. SLAPP cases only win by avoiding Court and eliminating risk, but they still succeed by shutting down public scrutiny, investigative reporting and open public debate: we must not let this happen.

    Even without the SLAPP cases, rescuing free speech and restoring the integrity of our democracy face significant challenges. Keir Starmer’s lurch to the right has been noted approvingly by the vulture press, but the ‘Captain of Capitulation’ has proven himself a dangerous Trojan horse. Hopefully Starmer and his destructive faction of the Labour Party will be exposed and promptly ousted when the truth of the leaked Labour Report is validated in Court cases. Unjust legal attacks on investigative Journalists and honest publishers who hold Governments and Corporations to account are seriously worrying. Craig Murray will be travelling to London to try for a place in Court in support of Julian Assange at his hearing, while he too is still under attack from trumped up charges. Craig Murray will need funds to fight his own case and Assange requires our ongoing support. In the horrendous event the UK were to allow the US to extradite Julian Assange it would set a precedent for America to intimidate the free press into compliance globally! DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #58981 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    The UK’s most relentlessly persecuted Political Prisoner, Whistleblower and Investigative Journalist Julian Assange will face yet another unjust hearing this week to authorize his extradition so that the US can set an alarming precedent as the universal arbiter of what news people are permitted access to worldwide. This excessive overreach is designed to terrify investigative Journalist into compliant silence on controversial issues by inflicting severe punishment on a global hero of free speech; it remains unreported in the disreputable ‘Murdoctored press!’ Half a dozen SLAPP lawsuits targeting outspoken individuals and progressive news outlets with intimidation are seeking to prevent exposure of the Labour ‘fanti-Semitism’ smears against Corbyn and the Left that helped to falsely validate the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. But, while Captain of Capitulation Starmer is pushing to get the Russia Today’s UK TV broadcasting shut down, a solitary day’s disruption of mainstream propaganda by XR is what has elicited major faux outrage!

    Meanwhile the Captain of Capitulation was called out in the Skwawkbox who pointed out how. “Starmer campaigned on his record of defending workers against the predations of Rupert Murdoch in the Wapping dispute, with both tweets and his official campaign video leading with it. Even then, it was exposed as a manoeuvre when he was asked if he would refuse to give interviews to the Murdoch S*n – and responded carefully that he did not intend to give it interviews during the campaign. The mask slipped further when Starmer was interviewed recently and asked whether he wanted the S*n’s endorsement – and did not say ‘no’, instead answering that he wants ‘as many people to endorse the Labour Party as possible’.” But Skwawkbox say that, “after the ‘XR’ protest on Saturday, Labour’s official position, approved by its leadership, was to defend the ‘free press’ – which in post-truth UK is a collection of billionaire-owned rags dedicated to obscuring reality – and condemn Extinction Rebellion.”

    For the ‘heinous crime’ of delaying distribution of these propaganda rags on a single day, Home Secretary Priti Patel is threatening to legally classify XR as an organized crime gang, to assist in their prosecution and stiff sentencing! In reality, the XR protest was more symbolic than seriously damaging to the so called “free press,” owned by the tiny wealthy click that manipulate and warp UK news to suit their political and financial goals. It would be far more accurate to designate the Tory Party as an organized crime gang for using state funds to pay a fake Charity to dredge up toxic rumours and blatant propaganda to be spewed out in their right-wing rags targeting Corbyn and Labour in a deliberate subversion of UK democracy. As stated before, “The Tory contract with the Institute for Statecraft’s misleadingly named ‘Integrity Initiative’ was a criminal misuse of public funds that alone is sufficient to delegitimize the Covert 2019 Rigged Election.” It represents one of many instances embezzlement fraud and criminal corruption!

    We must aggressively call the Tories out on this obscene hypocrisy until it’s too great of an embarrassment to be raised anymore on the BBC or in print, but they have already made fools of themselves with the extent of their disproportionately agitated response so far. This huge boost to protesters was well summed up in Rupert Read’s exuberant tweet: “We’ve stopped the Sun. For one day, we’ve stopped the lies. For one day, a climate-denying foreign billionaire is not dominating the newsstands. It’s not a ‘free press’ when it’s controlled by a handful of hard-Right oligarchs!! WE are freeing the truth today. Join us…” A Canary Article points out that, “While XR disrupts the ‘free press’, the Tories are attacking independent media.” They say that, “As Extinction Rebellion (XR) shut down the print versions of major UK newspapers, an actual attack on the free press was taking place. It’s one which shows that the Tory government’s creeping authoritarianism is still alive and kicking – and growing more concerning by the day.”

    “The Canary reported that on Saturday 5 September, XR activists blocked some corporate newspaper printing presses. This resulted in the deliveries of newspapers like the Sun and Telegraph being delayed in parts of England. As The Canary wrote: Under a banner reading ‘Free the truth’, XR tweeted that it was using the disruption to expose the newspapers’ ‘failure to report on the climate & ecological emergency, and their consistent manipulation of truth to suit their own agendas’. MPs and people on social media responded differently to XR’s actions. Some people were supportive of the blockade,” Rupert Read was among those whose tweets were highlighted. For XR protesters it is amazingly satisfying to know that their one day disruption had managed to cause such deep concern among politicians and the mainstream press; it genuinely magnified their effort to the status of a major incident.

    The Canary remark that, “with both Priti Patel and Boris Johnson on the war path, the news that came out on Sunday 6 September may be of little surprise. The Telegraph (currently ‘free to read’ due to XR’s blockade) reported that the PM and home secretary are clamping down on XR. It said that the group: could be treated as an organised crime group as part of a major crackdown on its activities that may also include new protections for MPs, judges and the press… Whitehall sources said Boris Johnson and Priti Patel have asked officials to take a ‘fresh look’ at how the group is classified under the law. It continued: A Whitehall source said one option under discussion was for XR to be viewed as an organised crime group, which could result in its members being policed primarily by the National Crime Agency – Britain’s FBI.” While, despite the negative impact this has had on public confidence, the transgressions of Dominic Cummings remain ignored, this knee-jerk reaction could unleash the threat of significant prison sentences just for protesting. Although such extreme reactions have been tried in the past and failed, it could be a very different scenario after crash-out Brexit.

    The Canary reveal that, “Under the 2015 Serious Crime Act an organised crime group ‘has at its purpose, or one of its purposes, the carrying on of criminal activities, and consists of three or more people who agree to act together to further that purpose’.” For me what bounced off the page when I read this definition was how easily this statement could be justifiably used to prosecute the current Tory Government for the multitude of deeply corrupt practices and serious endangerment of life deliberately inflicted on the British public. Even without a full Investigation into the stolen postal votes of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election there are so many other reasons they could be prosecuted under the Serious Crime Act, not least of which is for gross misuse of public funds during their Covid 19 cash giveaways to Corporate chums. The lack of tendering is suspicious enough, but this is compounded by grossly inappropriate contracts awarded to Tory cronies, despite obvious conflicts of interest, who have then repeatedly failed to deliver.

    The Canary report that, “Labour’s former shadow home secretary Diane Abbott called the potential move by the government ‘ridiculous’: Whether or not you agree with XR’s action, tarring them with the ‘organised crime’ brush seems wholly excessive and somewhat authoritarian. Moreover, MPs’ views that the group’s actions stifled the ‘free press’ are also ridiculous. The Canary are quick to decry the term ‘free press’ in association with the news outlets that were targeted by XR saying, “As writer Alex Tiffin reported, across the world just 24 companies own ‘the majority’ of ‘the world’s most powerful’ media outlets. And as Novara Media‘s Aaron Bastani tweeted, the ‘free’ British press is hardly free from agenda and bias. But against the backdrop of the XR protests, the government is actively trying to stifle the actual ‘free’ press in the UK. And it reeks of yet more authoritarianism.”

    “As The Canary previously reported, the independent media outlet Declassified UK recently broke a story. It was about the military police arresting a serving member of the army. They did this because he was protesting over the war in Yemen and the UK government’s involvement. But since then, the story has become about Declassified UK. The outlet claimed that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has ‘blacklisted’ it. An MoD spokesperson told Declassified UK: we no longer deal with your publication. This attracted some attention from press monitoring groups, other independent organisations, and industry publications. The site’s editor and co-founder Mark Curtis told Press Gazette that Declassified UK was considering legal action against the MoD. On 4 September, the Council of Europe officially issued a ‘media freedom alert’ over the situation.” This courageous Yemeni soldier should be hailed as a hero for daring to highlight the shameful atrocities the British are inflicting on the country of his birth.

    According to the Canary, “this attempt by the UK government to sideline an independent, investigatory media outlet is nothing new.
    In 2015, Disability News Service‘s (DNS) founder John Pring was blacklisted by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).”
    As the National reported, “Pring: uncovered the first suicide case directly linked to the UK Government’s welfare cuts. As well as revealing: that the DWP had secretly investigated more than 60 deaths of benefit claimants since 2012, without publishing the findings or the more than 30 resulting recommendations for change. Yet, in Pring’s case there was little outcry from press freedom organisations, nor any action from the Council of Europe.” This well documented unnecessary death toll, started long before the most recent deliberate Tory cull of the ‘economically inactive’ during the avoidable ‘Holocaust in Care’ of the Covid 19 Pandemic. Repeatedly ignoring strong warnings from the UN Rapporteur this was the most serious crime attributable to the Tory Party.

    The Canary report that, “it seems that while Declassified UK is the latest victim, it’s not the only one in the ongoing war against independent media. But there’s a particularly concerning narrative building from the government. The push-back to label the corporate media as ‘free’, while stifling the actual freedom of independent outlets, is Orwellian levels of propaganda. That, coupled with the BBC‘s appalling record as a public service, impartial broadcaster, paints a worrying picture for the future of the press in the UK.” The constant drivel focused on whose holiday was spoiled when they had to fly home early because they were too stupid to avoid foreign travel during a pandemic, all I can think of is what serious news is being replaced by what I now call: ‘Handyfloss?’ When I compare the vacuous spin of BBC “News from the UK and around the world” with the crammed news slots on RT it is like night and day. Even if you find fault with the Russian influence on RT at least they are telling the news not obscuring it with junk.

    In the proactive fight-back that lies ahead XR must learn to use the tabloid press’s own weaponry to attack Murdock. After Dominic Cummings made a mockery of lockdown restrictions it must be harder to go after protesters for not obeying the Covid restrictions, but if ‘Social Distancing’ is manipulated by the police to break up demonstrations, then XR must steal the Covid guise to utilize in their own campaigns. There are footprints being painted on the pavement all over the country to remind us to stay separated, but they could be hijacked to get the XR message across. Create a stencil for spray paint of a ‘Dirty Carbon Footprint;’ say a black footprint with the distinctive iridescent green XR logo superimposed on the heal. Make it a similar size to the footprints already marked on our pavements and it will effectively bluer the lines between public protection and protest; the former is necessary messaging from the Tory Government, the latter is an important added reminder to the public from XR. If a campaign began gradually, it would start to get the message out before being fully identified as distinctive footprints approaching newsstands to target the propaganda press!

    The Monty Python foot is much loved by people of my generation and it could be adapted with a black base to represent the ‘dirty carbon footprint’ that is so damaging to our planet. I heard that the Greta boat had been confiscated, but that was an object on the ground that could be targeted as ‘an obstruction.’ A giant ‘foot’ balloon would be dramatic and highly visible from a distance with a strong possibility of getting pictured just as the Trump baby did. This is the bait that the tabloid press cannot resist; it’s an attention grabbing picture for the front page: XR’s message out there, XR wins. XR immediately captivates the attention of the slightly older ‘Monty Python’ generation as this was a hugely successful comedy show back in the day. The bottom of the foot balloon could be black with carbon/oil with a tie in of the iridescent XR logo on the heal so that the public identify with the XR ground message.

    XR must also create a way to convince those in total denial about the climate crisis that dirty fuel is not without significant harmful consequences and damaging impacts on society that could be mitigated in a green new deal. They do not need to be convinced about the harmful impact of climate change when their grandchild has a life threatening asthma attack due to city traffic pollution on the way to school! They do not need to make the direct connection between selective foreign interventions when their only son dies needlessly in a foreign conflict instigated to secure UK/US resources. It doesn’t take an ecological rocket scientist to figure out that foreign powers are being manipulated at the expense of ordinary people, devastated by growing global inequality; a driving force behind refugee flight. Even if you strip away an area of science that they are not convinced by, there are still other valid arguments you must use to get all of the public onside. Do not write climate deniers off as a lost cause in your battle for hearts and minds.

    I hope that Vivian Westwood will put in a headline grabbing appearance at Julian Assange’s hearing this week. Seeking to decry any potential for personal attention seeking totally misses the point; the last time she dressed up as a canary trapped in a cage to highlight the injustice against Assange, she grabbed media attention with her quirky political appeal despite the initially media determination to dismiss the matter. Regardless of any personal opinions of Westward, her protest was successful in hitting the headlines seriously against the odds. It serves as a perfect example of what works to get a controversial subject that the media would much rather avoid, begrudgingly propelled onto the front page of rightwing tabloids: we must learn from this example.

    What remains a very serious threat to freedom of speech globally is the US extradition of Julian Assange, for publishing truthful information about the war crimes of the US Government. The treatment and wretched demise of Assange in US custody will serve as a warning to others who consider uncovering the truth regarding US complicity in crimes against humanity. There will be no refuge from US revenge if investigative Journalists can be captured for alleged crimes committed outside the US and extradited to face trial in America. Assange needs us to continue voicing our outrage in protest against his unjust incarceration in Belmarsh and shout out loudly so that he cannot be extradited as this would severely endanger all investigative Journalists worldwide; we must also offer our Funding support. Craig Murray will be there this week to offer his support and report on the hearing, but it is precisely such action that has brought him into the legal crosshairs and he too needs our Funding right now to fight his own legal battle.

    The furore over Extinction Rebellion’s minor disruption to the toxic waste pumped out by the Rupert Murdock rags that currently masquerade as our ‘free press’ offer an obscene parody of where our attention in offering protection should lie. With a progressive Government we would have had the Leverson 2 inquiry clean up this heavily corrupted industry that has seen the UK become one of the least respected press environments in Europe. We need proper regulation with Ofcom doing its regulatory job to properly monitor and pass harsh judgement on our now totally out of control biased Tory mouthpiece that used to be the trusted BBC. There can never be proper scrutiny or accountability of the Tories if they remain protected by a fully corrupted BBC covering up and condoning their mistakes. This is one of the key elements of establishing a lasting dictatorship: absolute control of all state broadcasting and the media – we must vigorously fight back because after crash-out Brexit it may be too late to protest our fate.

    We must protect the progressive news outlets from the increasing onslaught that they will face as dictatorship takes grip in the UK. The SLAPP lawsuits have been stalled in their attempts to silence free speech by the overwhelming public support from those prepared to donate to defend the truth. The threat of legal action quickly disappears when there is a real prospect of a Court battle where they would lose due to lack of evidence, but those falsely accused like Corbyn must do more than calmly walk away. It is necessary to force these bluffing accusers into Court to face the consequences of their perjured testimony and disrupt the viability of their disreputable scam so that they can no longer silence free speech with shallow threats in future. Labour’s treacherous Captain of Capitulation could have his deceitful operation exposed by these lawsuits to remove him from the leadership role, while the lies that sabotaged former leader Corbyn will call into question the validity of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election when uncovered. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    My last post contained an annoying typo in my alternative wording for “Land of hope and glory” It stands corrected here:

    Lost hope and past glory, never to be free,
    Powerful privilege eternal, breeds Tory cruelty.
    Poorer still and poorer, while on the treadmill set,
    Work until you – Drop – Dead – forever in their debt!
    Wealth made Tories mighty, it makes them mightier yet!

    #59065 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    The vindictive delusion of John Ware continues apace as we await his next onslaught targeting Corbyn and the Labour Party over their refusal to admit guilt over ‘fantisemitism!’ In an Article he wrote for The Critic entitled, “The anti-Corbyn plot that never was” it misleadingly says, “John Ware looks at the hard facts behind Momentum’s claims of centrist betrayal” Ware attempts to debunk the findings of the leaked 851 page internal Labour Report entitled, “The work of the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit in relation to antisemitism, 2014-2019,” which he says, “also has a section on the alleged 2017 election plot.” He claims a devious motivation for drafting the Report but, in reality, the Report was commissioned as the required official Labour Party response to the EHRC investigation as directly requested by the EHRC. For the former Labour Leadership not to commission such a report in defence of the actions taken with regard to anti-Semitism responding to the EHRC would have been a serious dereliction of duty.

    Ware’s Critic Article is crammed with far too much nonsensical thinking to warrant more than a few damning quotes here. He pleads, “Don’t be fooled by the portentous title. The report was written by some of Corbyn’s most loyal allies — by a faction for a faction.” It would be truly extraordinary for those working for the Labour Leadership team to fail to support the person who was overwhelmingly elected by the majority of the party membership to represent them on two separate occasions, however Ware tries to make this sound like a perverse form of treachery. He ridicules the Report saying, “It claims to be the result of an ‘in-depth and extensive investigatory work providing a ‘full and thorough account of the evolution of the Party’s disciplinary processes in relation to dealing with complaints of antisemitism.”

    In his evidence-free reporting Ware claims, “It’s nothing of the sort, though the report continues to provide ammunition for those who cling to the belief that ‘Jeremy’ was betrayed rather than defeated in the same way that doomsday cult members blame the calendar when the world fails to end.” If only he had been able to add a sinister sound track as he did with his Panorama hatchet job… Ware refers sympathetically to ‘Poison Dart Blower’ Sam Matthews as “an open, intelligent, easy-going 28-year-old who, as an official in the Governance and Legal Unit was responsible for investigating complaints, including those relating to antisemitism.” As with all of the PDBs he fails to mention their strong commitments to the Israeli Lobby with its witch-hunt agenda of targeting the progressive Labour Left by weaponizing fantisemitism.

    Ware writes that, “Having spent many hours interrogating Matthews and other party officials ahead of the Panorama broadcast, I regard him as a man of integrity.” Ware desperately wanted to believe the lies because of his obsession in hating Jeremy Corbyn, but I wonder how quickly he will throw the PDBs under the bus as evidence emerges to debunk their leis? Ware is using classic SLAPP tactics trying to dither and delay while building a case in the media that might pressure Corbyn into a truly dishonourable capitulation, but courageous Corbyn is no Starmer style traitor to the cause of Socialism and I doubt he will back down given the massive support of contributors to his Legal Defence Fund. he just doesn’t need to. But will Ware take it to the next stage given he will need to prove an unprovable case in Court. I doubt it, but how will he attempt to wriggle out gracefully without revealing the criminal extortion that was knowingly propagated by his collaborators that he supported in this criminal deception?

    Ware has already made a criminal admission with regard to this case regarding the alternative use of Labour Campaign funds. Can you imagine if an exclusive click among the Tory Party decided to divert 12% of Party dnations and membership dues to an alternative agenda during an Election Campaign? There is absolutely no defence that might justify such clandestine manouvers no matter how they might be perceived as somehow beneficial to the Party. The members selected Corbyn and his team to lead the Labour Party, trusting in his judgement as to what was the correct strategy to win an election. Absolutely no other faction or group of individuals, no matter what their intent, had any authority what-so-ever to disrupt this election strategy even if they feared it might result in a catastrophic defeat. Ware’s documented admission that this was exactly what happened is proof positive of unlawful embezzlement of Labour Party funds for which the perpetrators should be held criminally liable.

    In his meagre concession to the truth Ware admits that, “The leaked report, however, is correct to say there was a project, which it calls the ‘Ergon House project’, so named because it operated out of Ergon House, the party’s London regional office. The report is also correct in saying that the project was run by Matthews, although it was inspired by more senior officials who, like Matthews, had witnessed levels of ineptitude not experienced with any previous Labour leader and their private office. The project was also secret in as much as it was not disclosed to Corbyn or his office. But beyond reporting these facts accurately, the authors provide no evidence from scouring (they claim) 100,000 emails that the motivation was to sabotage Corbyn’s chances of becoming prime minister.” The motivation of these rogue staff members going out on a limb in support of a personal crusade that they obscured from the official Labour Party Leadership is completely immaterial, because their use of Labour Party campaign funds was illegal.

    The above documented admission is evidence of embezzlement; would a Corporation allow a group of employees to wing-it using Corporate funds; no they would face criminal charges as should this group of traitors to the Socialist cause. Ware claims that, “The report’s authors ‘are trying to build a mythical ‘stab in the back’ conspiracy theory to absolve themselves of the consequences of their incompetence,’ one former official told the Guardian.” He states that, “The project was actually called the ‘Bespoke Materials Service’. Unite’s submission to Forde even misreports the amount the BMS spent which was £135,014, just 1.2 per cent of Labour’s reported £11 million election spend. Even if they had won the extra seats, this would still only have brought a ‘Rainbow coalition’ level-pegging with the Tories.” All of this is totally immaterial because there is absolutely no justification for unauthorized use of Labour Party campaign funds. Even those who support the centrist cause need to realize that illegal is illegal!

    But Ware is so absorbed in the righteousness of his own warped delusion that despite the depth of the hole he has buried himself in he refuses to stop digging. In further desperate attempts at justification he claims that, “In fact, the rationale behind the BMS was this: with the Tories 19 points ahead when Theresa May called the 2017 election, officials in Labour’s senior management team (SMT) feared for the very survival of the party as a viable opposition. Based on information about where voter sentiment was moving away from Labour, all the party’s 231 seats were graded according to whether they were ‘key’, ‘should be OK’, or ‘not winnable’.” He blathers on in centrist neo-con justification, oblivious to the fact that he just betrayed his clients in print; they could even justifiably try to get him disbarred! Ware’s Layers must realize that without bluffing their way to an out of court settlement they have no chance of winning in Court. They are relying on the hostile tabloid press to push their case in the gutter press.

    In a Guardian Article entitled, “Labour was warned antisemitism report was deliberately misleading, leak reveals…” Or not! “The Party’s lawyer said private messages were presented selectively and without context.” However Formby told the Guardian, “she authorised the search of the party’s internal systems, including WhatsApp groups, after the EHRC asked her to do so for its inquiry. Formby told the Guardian she had authorised the searches of emails and WhatApp messages, which were legitimately carried out at the request of the EHRC ‘As general secretary, I authorised the searches which were legitimately carried out. The information used in the internal report into the handling of antisemitism complaints came to light when searches were undertaken in response to EHRC requests,’ she said. ‘The EHRC asked the Labour party to search all its internal systems, including WhatsApp groups where possible, and the party’s staff handbook makes clear that staff communications on internal party systems can be searched in this way’.”

    The critical piece of information from Jeanie Formby, exposed here to the dismay of conniving legal teams. is that this action was taken in line with what was permissible within the written contract of Labour Party employees regarding access to their internal communications for normal Labour Party business communications. The fact that these legitimate channels were hijacked by a dissident faction of the Labour Party who were exposed via the internal investigations is massively important. The “we had a better plan” defence is just deeply insulting to all of those who chose the progressive Labour Leadership with a very specific objective and were woefully betrayed by those who illegally embezzled Labour Party finds to pursue an alternative agenda against the will of the electorate.

    The evidence of malfeasance is so blatantly obvious that few can have disregarded the call and contesting the evidence became a huge risk. All of the people involved in this conspiracy to subvert our Electoral System should be prevented from any and all future participation in future elections. It is telling that a Report that was directly requested by the EHRC was prevented from being submitted to the EHRC by Sir Keir Starmer the eminently legally qualified man who assumed the leadership of the Labour Party. He then promptly sold Labour Party members down the river in a cowardly capitulation that was against the advice of the Labour Party Lawyers working on the case. The Labour Party is being asked to accept the insult of fantisemitism and move on, accept the betrayal that obliterated Corbyn’s hopeful message and wait another decade to be free of Tory oppression! So as yet another Tory flunky ‘Tallyho Harding’ is appointed to take the reins of our precious NHS do we do nothing or protest? Thankfully Craig Murray made sure that EHRC got an unredacted copy of the Report.

    The Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Corbyn legal crowdfund appoints trustees” gave details of the latest update No 7 posted by Carole Morgan the Organizer who first initiated the fund raiser which has now raised over £332,600. They said, “ The successful fundraiser, which like Corbyn has been frequently smeared by disgruntled right-wingers, has announced the appointments in a new update on its page.” Following an informative exert they add, “Any who wish to donate or to view the whole update can do so here,” and the imbed a direct Link. Following the Link the latest information on the fundraiser contains the following update posted the other day by Carole. She writes:

    “Hello Everyone, I hope you are all staying safe and keeping well as we head towards autumn. The bank holiday certainly seemed to give us a taste of things to come! In spite of the chilly weather, I hope you all had a pleasant holiday weekend. I have received a couple of enquiries about John Ware’s threatened legal action. At this point we don’t know whether the case against Jeremy will proceed.” In Morgan’s update she does not indicate whether Corbyn’s Legal team are considering going on the offensive with a countersuit, instead focusing on how the considerable sum of money raised will be judiciously administered by a new Trust of reliable well known, reputable individuals. If only we could trust the reckless Tory Government to make such carefully chosen appointments in the public interest!

    Morgan reports that, “There has been some progress in terms of setting up the Trust for Jeremy Corbyn’s Legal Fund. I can now tell you the names of the three Trustees; Liz Davies, who has known Jeremy for more than 30 years. She works as a Barrister specialising in housing, and will be undertaking the role of Trustee in a personal capacity. The second Trustee is Andy Gregg. He is an experienced trustee and company director and has known Jeremy through human rights activity and community work in Islington for over 30 years. They first met when Andy was the General Secretary of Islington Voluntary Action Council in the late 1980s. Both Liz and Andy have worked with Jeremy in the political sphere over many years . As you might already have guessed, I will also be a Trustee and I am delighted to be joining Liz and Andy to ensure that your donations are kept safely within the Trust until such time as they are needed by Jeremy to fight the legal battles ahead.”

    Carole Morgan offers a timeframe of when we might expect more definitive news regarding the Trust that hopefully will give some indication of whether there the potential for this case to go to Court will remain up to John Ware, who might back down, or will become more proactive in clearing the smear campaign that has blighted Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party. She writes, “In terms of the Trust itself, as I mentioned in my previous update, this remains with Counsel and I hope to have more information on progress by the middle of next week. The aim is to have the Trust set up before the end of September. Of course the legal process needs to take whatever time is necessary to ensure that the Trust is legally watertight. Given the hostile reception our Fund received from the right wing press and anti Socialists within the various political parties I feel that this is particularly important.”

    Morgan requests that we should be patient, writing, “Please bear with me while the Trust is being set up. I promise you that as soon as I have some definite news to report I will not delay in sharing it with you. My love and solidarity to you all, Carole.” I think it is time for people to become a great deal more vocal on the internet regarding the progression of this case so that Corbyn realizes that he has strong support not just to defend himself if necessary, but to force Ware to publically retract the ‘fantisemitism’ lies that continue to cause so much harm. Fantisemitism is extremely harmful to the Jewish community because the public have become weary of hearing the constant petty accusations and smears so really serious threats might go unnoticed. A massive amount of damage could spiral out of control with copycat SLAPP Lawsuits due to Starmer’s cowardly capitulation and this onslaught cannot be countered by continuing on the defensive; trying to disprove a negative is an uphill battle rarely won.

    Yesterday David McNiven added this Comment, “I’m convinced Jeremy, given that Starmer was too cowardly, should countersue if Ware is foolish enough to throw away his future, those of his collaborators and possibly the rest of the MSM’s on this futile and duplicitous attempt at self-exoneration by the mere threat of legal action. In Jeremy’s place I’d initiate a suit myself to avoid the weasel weaselling out of his responsibility as his endless delaying tactics suggest is his intention. Admittedly it can take decades but like Grandma always said, ‘Truth will out.’ Anyone with any kind of social media profile should be linking to all four parts of the documentary “The Lobby” on YouTube at every opportunity – and anyone with the skills should be downloading them or uploading them to file sharing sites it in case Larry Page decides to suppress them.”

    My comment is still awaiting moderation which can be quite slow with Skwawkbox, but in reply to David McNiven I wrote, “You are so right, these SLAPP cases are only won by intimidating the innocent into paying an out of Court settlement. Corbyn must be encouraged to overcome his, ‘turn the other cheek’ instincts. If he does countersue, refusing to allow Ware and the Labour traitors an easy out, then the lies on which they won their out of Court ransom can be used against them in Court. The staff in question do not have any right to claim victimhood as Whistleblowers; to me they are, PDBs, ‘Poison Dart Blowers’!” It would be great if a few of these more accurate titles, minor ‘adjustments’ and helpful additions to the public discourse could be more widely publicized on Twitter, Facebook and elsewhere, sadly a task beyond me where I need your help.

    I then analysed the legal implication for Ware and the PDBs given that they would have needed to submit the substance of their legal claim as testimony that they would be prepared to swear to in Court under oath risking penalty of perjury. I continued my comment by elaborating on that point, writing, “Just because they didn’t go to Court to secure the huge payout from Labour, does not mean that they did not prepare sworn testimony that I believe would constitute an act of perjury in support of criminal extortion and fraud. This will be exposed if Corby takes Ware to Court and submits all of the factual evidence that debunks the total fallacy of rampant anti-Semitism in the Labour Party that I now call, ‘fantisemitism!’ The leaked internal report would then demonstrate the corruption and treachery that they relied on to fabricate their extortion racket that defrauded the Labour membership.” Are there any Lawyers among our circle of contributors who might be able to advise on this?

    In conceding my weakness in this regard I wrote, “I am no legal eagle, but I think this might offer a means by which the Corbyn countersuit could potentially initiate the recovery of funds squandered by Keir Starmer in his cowardly capitulation. This would then call into question the selfish and equally corrupt motivations of the Captain of Capitulation and Starmer could then be forced out. If Corbyn is exonerated in Court and deliberate sabotage contributed to the loss of what I refer to as the “Covert 2019 Rigged Election,’ there should be no reason he couldn’t resume his leadership role or at least enter a new leadership contest which I have no doubt he would win. If you share my concerns about this damage to our democracy please sign my Petition…” I supplied the Petition link and reminded Skwawkbox supporters, “DO NOT MOVE ON!”

    I think as the situation in the UK continues to deteriorate further the resistance to increasing Tory oppression will grow and the protests will not be deterred by petty restrictions from Priti Patel. However, I have noted an attitude of fatalistic complacency that must be strongly discouraged so sounding the alarm bells I wrote, “Progressive Labour members need to stop blindly accepting the toxic Tory propaganda that continues to support a fraudulent Tory grip on power that will morph into full-on dictatorship after the self-harm of their crash-out Brexit. Even those who strongly supported Brexit must now understand that once the Tories hijacked the negotiations it spelt disaster for the working poor. The Tories are prepared to break international treaties that will make any future trade deals highly unlikely. The Good Friday agreement and all humane options for a deal will be ignored. Our citizens will lose basic human rights in the emerging dictatorship so it is vitally important that we fight back.”

    It is really hard to get any logical message across on the Skwawkbox because the hard core Brexiteers are still clinging to the pathetic life raft of betrayal concocted for them by an efficient Tory propaganda machine under the direction of the ‘Herd Nerd’ Dominic Cummings. ‘Dummings’ unleashed his weapons grade PsyOps on the persuadables who have continued to propagate Tory lies. I have learned to tread extremely carefully around these deluded individuals or they unleash a torrent of abuse that the Skwawkbox moderator is inclined to tolerate making me suspicious of their overall agenda. I then introduced a few nuggets of new wording in the hope the concept might catch on I wrote, “This battle starts with changing the narrative to disarm the Tory lies before the ‘Bromise’ of ‘levelling up’ becomes the cruel reality of ‘Decimating Down.’ For more new language options designed to hook the press with catchy headlines and slogans visit our Elections Aftermath Discussion Forum on Craig Murray’s Blog;”

    I posted the Link to my page 8 Post # 58931, my last but one, which was full of alternative language. I then introduced another controversial contribution by saying, “Let’s start by rewording that rousing anthem of elitist imperialism: Land of hope and glory:

    Lost hope and past glory, never to be free,
    Powerful privilege eternal, breeds Tory cruelty.
    Poorer still and poorer, while on the treadmill set,
    Work until you – Drop – Dead – forever in their debt!
    Wealth made Tories mighty, it makes them mightier yet!”

    After adding, “Pause and emphasize ‘Drop Dead’…” I came up with a suggestion for where it could be sung for maximum impact, writing, “Take that to a vocal demo at the Proms or sing it to the PM at his Downing Street enclave. Soon he will wish the song had never been written or he had not made such a fuss defending the cruelty and exploitation of empire. There are my new words to ‘Rule Britannia’ that Boris might seriously object to, so easily learned for use at protests, but I lack the Social Media reach to make these ‘amendments’ go viral. Cruel Britannia! Vile Tories rule the Slaves… Only by ousting Boris Johnson will lives be saved!” It would be perfect if I could get these reworded versions taken up on Social Media; if you have Twitter savvy friends who might help, please forward these lyrics. If I was more tuned into this medium, younger and fitter my campaign ideas would be a lot more effective, but sadly this old sea dog has “swallowed the anchor!” If you can help out, please get in touch and: DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59258 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Justice within the rule of law is being heavily trampled upon both here in the UK and under the lawless authoritarian jackboot of the US stomping down on the collective necks of innocent citizens across the globe in just as lethal a manor as was used to extinguish the life of George Floyd. Britain’s incarceration and torture of political prisoner, outspoken Wikileaks Journalist Whistleblower Julian Assange is at the behest of the American Government determined to force through their illegal extradition hearing at all costs. The show trial is proceeding as expected with every move by defence Lawyers blocked, justice and human rights denied while public access limits the escape of real information. Craig made it into Court to report on the worst abuses, unprecedented restrictions and the Judge’s decisions formulate without hearing the arguments presented; she knows what is required of her: deliver the lamb to the slaughter. The global bully who decides all has passed judgement; subvert the law, whatever it takes: he will prevail.

    Under Trump the US have ramped up their dictating to the world slapping sanctions on independent minded national leaders who would not bow to his demands and support the interests of US Corporations and subjecting the poorest citizens of those countries to untold hardship. With Iran it was the nuclear deal an Obama legacy had to be destroyed; Venezuela it was oil reserves he wants to control so he nominated a new Leader and organized coup attempts. He considers the whole of South America his territory to dominate and plunder resources; the ABC of Lithium wealth spells subjugation for Bolivia, Chile and Argentina. Never missing an opportunity, the Navalny incident might be Trump’s chance to sabotage the Nordstrom pipeline. What would that achieve? It will keep Germany beholden to Poland for gas supplies routed through their territory with Poland’s hard right Government willing to bribe and be bribed by the US. Increase manufacturing costs and limit power within the EU, plus he can sell American LPG.

    Boris Johnson is deluded if he thinks he can stand up to Trump once the UK is severed from the EU after crash-out Brexit. Right now, as China becomes more powerful with economic success, the Trump wrecking ball has found a new target. He unleashed faux outrage over human rights, then the ‘Chinese’ virus, Huawei: Trump does not like China’s leading position in tech so he will try to sabotage all their business ventures, not just in the US, but globally through sanction bullying. Trump is desperate to maintain the dominance of the US dollar as the premier world currency, but steeped in debt the greenback might be on the wane according to the Keiser Report. Trump has few friends left, but his buddy Bibi Netanyahu is grateful for support and moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem. Trump favours corrupt, cruel despots like the sadistic Saudis who trimmed down the justice demanded for chopping Journalist Khashoggi into manageable chunks! Assange is in grave danger as Trump’s distain for Journalists is readily apparent.

    But Trump is now attacking established global organizations like the WHO and now the ICC. In the Guardian Article entitled, “US imposes sanctions on top international criminal court officials,” they report that, “The US has imposed sanctions on the chief prosecutor of the international criminal court, Fatou Bensouda, in the latest of a series of unilateral and radical foreign policy moves. Announcing the sanctions, the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, did not give any specific reasons for the move other than to say the ICC ‘continues to target Americans’ and that Bensouda was ‘materially assisting’ that alleged effort. He also announced sanctions against Phakiso Mochochoko, the ICC’s director of jurisdiction, complementary and cooperation division. The US Treasury issued a statement saying Bensouda and Mochochoko had been deemed ‘specially designated nationals’, grouping them alongside terrorists and narcotics traffickers, blocking their assets and prohibited US citizens from having any dealings with them.”

    Wikileaks contribution to the evidence exposed about US war crimes has angered Trump; silencing Assange in an inhumane way will send a message to Journalists globally. The Guardian report that, “In June, Donald Trump issued an executive order imposing sanctions on ICC officials involved in investigating Americans, in response to the court’s decision to open an inquiry into war crimes committed by all sides in Afghanistan. The US also opposes ICC scrutiny of potential Israeli crimes against Palestinians as part of an investigation that also looks at abuses carried out by Palestinian security forces. The US was roundly condemned for its anti-ICC campaign, which was not supported by any other western democracy or US ally apart from Israel. In a statement in response to the sanctions on Wednesday, the ICC said: ‘These coercive acts, directed at an international judicial institution and its civil servants, are unprecedented and constitute serious attacks against the Court…and the rule of law more generally’.”

    According to the Guardian, “Richard Dicker, the international justice director at Human Rights Watch, said the announcement ‘marks a stunning perversion of US sanctions, devised to penalize rights abusers and kleptocrats, to persecute those tasked with prosecuting international crimes’. ‘The Trump administration has twisted these sanctions to obstruct justice, not only for certain war crimes victims, but for atrocity victims anywhere looking to the international criminal court for justice,’ Dicker said. The decision to escalate its campaign against the ICC is one of a series of radical steps the Trump administration has taken on foreign policy that have left it isolated on the world stage. On Monday, it was alone in voting against a counter-terrorism resolution in the UN security council. On other recent council votes involving US efforts to reimpose UN sanctions on Iran, Washington has only managed to secure the support of the Dominican Republic.”

    In another warped decision, the Guardian say that, “On Wednesday, Pompeo also confirmed that the US would not be taking part in an international effort to find a vaccine for Covid-19, because the World Health Organization was involved. The administration has sought to blame the WHO for the pandemic, against which the US has fared worse than any other major industrialised economy. ‘This administration wants multilateral institutions to function, to actually work, but multilateralism just for the sake of it, just to get together in a room and chat doesn’t add value,’ Pompeo said on Wednesday. ‘This should be a five-alarm fire for the UN,’ Mark Leon Goldberg, the editor of the UN Dispatch newsletter, said on Twitter. ‘It’s one small step from imposing sanctions against top WHO officials as part of Trump’s campaign to shift blame for his handling of Covid-19′.” Boris Johnson is emulating Trump: disbanding DfID was warped, but binning Public Health England in the midst of a Pandemic to avoid blame is insane.

    In an Electronic Intifada Article entitled, “Trump goes nuclear against ICC,” they too report on how, “The Trump administration in Washington has placed economic sanctions on the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court and another senior official at the Hague. The move was announced on Wednesday by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who said the US would ‘not tolerate [the court’s] illegitimate attempts to subject Americans to its jurisdiction.’ Pompeo’s announcement came shortly after returning from a trip to Israel, during which he boarded the first direct commercial flight between Tel Aviv and Sudan. The US and Israel face investigations by the court for suspected war crimes in Afghanistan and the West Bank and Gaza Strip, respectively. The ICC’s probes, still in a preliminary stage, represent a challenge to the impunity of both states.”

    According to EI this also represents a real “test of the credibility of the tribunal, which has so far only tried African nationals. The US and Israel reject the application of court jurisdiction that could see the indictment of their nationals and have teamed up to thwart the ICC’s scrutiny. The sanctions announced by Pompeo are by far the most severe measures taken thus far. The US Treasury now lists prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and Phakiso Mochochoko, director of the court’s prosecution jurisdiction division, among its “specially designated nationals.” By doing so, the Trump administration has put the court officials in the company of ‘terrorists and narcotics traffickers’ or individuals and groups working on behalf of countries sanctioned by the US.” However, under the Donald the US is becoming a lot more authoritarian and arbitrary about where they seek to impose sanctions and for the flimsiest of reasons, while expecting all other countries to unquestioningly follow the example of global tyrant Trump.

    EI document the shocked reaction to the latest US “Attack on the rule of law.” They say that, “The ICC condemned the ‘coercive acts’ targeting its personnel as an attack on the court and ‘the rule of law more generally.’ Human Rights Watch accused the Trump administration of attempting to ‘block justice for the world’s worst crimes.’ The sanctions will ‘seriously affect’ Bensouda and Mochochoko, the New York-based group stated. They will lose access to assets in the US and be ‘cut off from commercial and financial dealings with ‘US persons,’ including banks and other companies.’ Human Rights Watch added that the sanctions will ‘also have a chilling effect’ on banks and companies outside the US ‘who fear losing access themselves to the US banking system if they do not help the US to effectively export the sanctions measures’.” Although there are expectations that Trump will lose the Presidential race and no longer be in a position to continue his damaging and disruptive coercion, we could face four more years!

    EI say, “Amnesty International said that the move ‘penalizes not only the ICC, but civil society actors working for justice alongside the court worldwide.’ The sanctions on Bensouda and Mochochoko are extreme and unprecedented but not surprising. In June, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that threatened to impose such measures against parties that cooperated with the court’s probes into the situation in Afghanistan. The sweeping order declares that ‘any attempt by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute’ would constitute an ‘extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the US.’ The order includes in its declaration of ‘a national emergency’ any investigation of ‘personnel of countries that are US allies and who are not parties to the [ICC’s] Rome Statute,’ an oblique reference to Israel. Amnesty International USA warned that the vague and broad language used in Trump’s executive order means that anyone cooperating with the court may find themselves ‘implicated’.”

    EI report, “Senators Bernie Sanders and Patrick Leahy were among only a handful of members of Congress who spoke out against the sanctions against court officials: Silence among the Trump administration’s usual critics in Congress is also not surprising. In May, a bipartisan grouping of members of Congress in both houses encouraged Pompeo in his efforts to thwart justice at the court by signing letters authored by the Israel lobby group AIPAC. The European Union, whose cooperation or lack thereof will determine the success of the Trump administration’s sanctions, said it was ‘unwavering in its support’ of the ICC. UN Secretary-General António Guterres, who welcomed the normalization of relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates last month, was more guarded. A spokesperson for Guterres’ office said they would ‘continue to closely follow developments on this matter’.”

    EI reported that, “Others who closely observe developments concerning the court noted that the sanctions target the two African nationals among the five top figures in the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor. The three non-Africans with top-level posts in that office were not designated by the US order. Writing for the Just Security website, Haley S. Anderson states that the ‘relatively unknown Mochochoko’ may have been designated because he has ‘allegedly supported the inquiry into potential US wrongdoing in Afghanistan.’ She adds that Mochochoko’s remit of jurisdiction, which the court exercises in Afghanistan, and which a panel of judges is currently considering in the case of Palestine, is the US’s ‘core objection to the Afghanistan investigation’.” As the Black Lives Matter protester continue to take to the streets this is one more outrage that selectively targeted African’s on the ICC a body that seriously need to demonstrate that America, Israel, and yes the UK too, are not beyond the law.

    According to EI, “The legal scholar Kevin Jon Heller told Al Jazeera that the US is hardly the first to object to its treatment by the ICC. ‘The only real difference is that the US has the power to do this kind of overt action against the court in a way that most African states that feel unfairly targeted don’t,’ he said. He stated that there are diplomatic and court mechanisms that the US could pursue if it ‘took these allegations of torture by the CIA [in Afghanistan] seriously’. In the case of both Israel and the US, credible investigations and prosecutions of alleged abuses by its forces would prevent any formal investigation at the ICC. As a court of last resort, the ICC only exercises jurisdiction ‘where national legal systems fail to do so.’ Trump’s predecessor, Barrack Obama, declined to prosecute the authors and executors of the Bush administration’s torture regimes in Afghanistan and beyond.”

    EI report that, “The US has chosen instead to ‘use the dominance of US financial markets,’ as Anderson puts it, to undermine the court and consolidate its impunity – and that of Israel.” Obama might have wanted to keep Pandora’s box tightly closed while he was in office, but it is precisely this pandering to the military industrial complex condoning past atrocities that make future violations a lot more likely. Idi Armene, Pinochet and other ruthless tyrants have died quietly in exile, while in the UK Tony Blair is treated like a celebrity; if there is never accountability for atrocities and war crimes the violence will continue unabated. It is not about seeking vengeance it’s the requirement for even-handed justice, sending a harsh message that no one is above the law and restoring the trust of ordinary citizens who in a growing number of countries are treated as worthless. So many of the US police officers caught on camera dispensing lethal arbitrary justice are never charged that police forces believe they can kill with impunity.

    The Israeli Government will continue to persecute the Palestinians if they know they will never be held accountable for their crimes. Increasingly in the UK one is not even permitted to mention the crimes of the Israeli Government because such blasphemy has now been effectively coapted into an obscure form of anti-Semitism. We are not permitted to express solidarity with the Palestinian population who are also ethnically Semitic. Those who dare to show sympathy for the historic inhabitants of West Bank whose land is being seized or concern for Palestinians trapped within the open prison of Gaza as they battle deprivation and bombing are just ladled anti-Semitic. The disgusting fantisemitism witch hunt has trapped, demonized and excluded some of our finest civil rights activists, destroying political aspirations and the progressive agenda for our country to hide the shame of crimes perpetrated by a foreign power. SLAPP lawsuits moneyterized this deceitful operation to gag the finest of our Leaders and wreck our democracy.

    When the Tories froth in faux outrage over a minor one day disruption by Extinction Rebellion targeting their vile propaganda hate spewing rags, I can only cheer at the momentary success XR managed to score. This Tory Government would have freedom of speech selectively applied; freedom of the press for the RIGHT press and the Far-RIGHT Press, but not for alternative progressive voices. The BBC functioning unashamedly as a Tory mouthpiece, ignoring the need for balanced presentation, even right through Purdah and beyond with their lopsided far-Right agenda, but do not expect ofcom to reign them in no matter how excessive their abuse gets; the Tories appear to control Ofcom too. No instead there are calls to shut down RT by removing the broadcasting licence of Russia Today in case they venture to supply an alternative perspective on the news.

    A Canary Article sounded the alarm, “Astounding,” they exclaimed over the, “admission as minister confirms proposed change to Brexit deal would breach international law. A government plan to override elements of Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal with Brussels would breach international law, a senior minister has confirmed,” announcing it to the shocked the few MPs assembled in the Covid depleted House of Commons Chamber. “The comment by Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis provoked a furious reaction, including from some Tory MPs, and followed news that the head of the Government Legal Department had resigned amid reports he was ‘very unhappy’ with the proposal. Lewis told MPs legislation to ensure Northern Ireland could continue to enjoy unfettered access to markets in the rest of the UK would breach international law in a ‘very specific and limited way’.”

    The Canary report that, “In the Commons, former prime minister, Theresa May warned the government was in danger of losing the trust of other countries that it would honour its international agreements. May said ministers were now seeking to change the operation of an agreement which the government had signed up to and parliament had passed into UK law and asked: ‘Given that, how can the Government reassure future international partners that the UK can be trusted to abide by the legal obligations of the agreements it signs?!” This is relevant to another piece of fantasy brinkmanship: the UK will end negotiations and write off unpaid EU debt: prospective new trade partners would be truly spooked by that. “May said ministers were now seeking to change the operation of an agreement which the government had signed up to and parliament had passed into UK law and asked: ‘Given that, how can the Government reassure future international partners that the UK can be trusted to abide by the legal obligations of the agreements it signs?”

    The Canary report on the shocked responses, “Labour described the admission as ‘absolutely astonishing” Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy Tweeted, “Astounded to hear the Northern Ireland Secretary calmly confirm the UK Government’s plans do break international law. The rule of law keeps us safe, defends our national interest, and allows us to hold others to account. They are diminishing us on the world stage.” Meanwhile they say, “Downing Street has sought to play down the changes in the Internal Market Bill – to be tabled on Wednesday – insisting they were simply ‘limited clarifications’ to protect the peace process if they failed to secure a free trade deal with the EU.”

    The Canary say, “pressed in the Commons by the senior Tory MP Bob Neill as to whether they were consistent with the UK’s international legal obligations, Lewis said: ‘Yes, this does break international law in a very specific and limited way’. He said that the powers the government were taking would enable ministers to ‘dis-apply’ the EU legal concept of ‘direct effect’ – which requires the enforcement of EU law – in ‘certain, very tightly defined circumstances’. He added: ‘There are clear precedents for the UK and indeed other countries needing to consider their international obligations as circumstances change.’ However, Neill, who chairs the Commons Justice Committee, said adherence to rule of law was ‘not negotiable’. Tweeting, ‘Any breach, or potential breach, of the international legal obligations we have entered into is unacceptable, regardless of whether it’s in a ‘specific’ or ‘limited way’.” This is just like Johnson’s Proroguing Parliament fiasco – he tried to get away with it, he failed; no apology, no shame… move on.

    There is no honourable admission of guilt, never an apology, no one steps down; defying the law is almost a Tory right of passage: we still have Cummings in post. But this corrupt Tory cabal want even less scrutiny and less accountability as they ram through their unjust laws. The Judiciary are under fire, as the Tories are determined to reduce their power and effectiveness in holding this dysfunctional Tory Government to account. This is not a good time to be going to Court while these lawless bandits are in power; there is little hope of Justice for Julian at this time. Craig is making a herculean effort to get into Court and at least try to keep us posted. He wrote, “I went to the Old Bailey today expecting to be awed by the majesty of the law, and left revolted by the sordid administration of injustice.” We must Continue to Support Julian’s fight to block extradition; Whistleblower protections and freedom of the press depend on the outcome of this case. We must also support Craig’s efforts to help Julian and to fund his own defence.
    Please: DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59407 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    I had not realized quite how crucially important and extensive the impact of the Wikileaks disclosures were globally, until I read about the testimony of Clive Stafford Smith. It was a real eye-opener reading the latest of Craig Murray’s post on the Assange hearing, so if you haven’t read it do take a look now. Craig must be of a similar vintage to me, so I have no idea how he manages to maintain the stamina to be up at ‘sparrows fart’ in the morning to get a place to enter the court, keep pace with the note taking throughout the day in Court and then still have the energy to write his blog posts for us as well… I really appreciate his herculean efforts in support of Julian Assange and keeping us all informed. I hope he has a great team of logistical supporters down in London to keep him going like the Eveready Bunny so he doesn’t wear himself into the ground. In a more light-hearted vein I want to offer an Ausie jingle for Julian dedicated to:

    “THE OLD BAILEY KANGAROO COURT”
    Tie me Kangaroo Down Sport,
    Tie me Kangaroo down,
    Kangaroo Justice in this Court,
    So tie me Kangaroo Down…

    A Kangaroo ruling proceedings,
    Let’s Kangaroos wallop defence,
    No chance to bound away free now,
    Julian’s tied-up inside the fence!

    Here to see Assange bound over,
    Bounced to torture in the US!
    Kangaroo Justice in this Court,
    They tied me Kangaroo Down…

    There is a glaring connection between what I wrote yesterday with regard to the US targeting the ICC. I don’t doubt that Julian Assange would be willing to cooperate with the ICC and elaborate on many US atrocities in Afghanistan and elsewhere. This is a significant political reason that the US wants to take Assange out and do so in such a horrific way that it scares all investigative Journalists into silence for fear of the horrendous consequences. Nothing from the tabloid press, after all they have no need to fear reprisals if they continue functioning as the Tory mouthpiece here in the UK. So while Johnny Depp’s dirty dobie got done to death in the tabloids only a few short weeks ago, the demise of UK freedom of the press is not an issue of public concern; nothing to see here… so let’s move on! The press were not just excluded from the proceedings, but they were happy to be excluded, thus totally removing them from any serious obligation to report the case that the UK Government wants to keep well and truly under wraps.

    While a couple of the mainstream news outlets managed to briefly mention the atrocities disclosed in the shocking Wikileaks files back when they were published almost a decade ago, they made no coherent connection to the massive social upheaval that the exposure of war crimes precipitated. For young people this was not their news; they fail to comprehend the relevance, although the determination of the US Government to prosecute and incarcerate Assange well beyond one hundred years of his life expectancy should prompt them to question why? Trump wants Assange’s head on a pike or the most sadistic modern day equivalent; this will act as a terrifying deterrent to shut down investigative journalism and silence dissenting voices worldwide, consolidating dictatorial US strength of aggression. The global bullying power of the America is under threat if Assange cannot be gagged, discredited and disempowered: all of Journalism will feel this lethal hammer blow on freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

    Take note of my new abbreviation for Tory Government: Tor-Ment! Hey, tell it like it is! As if it were not hard enough to broadcast the truth, otherwise known as ‘progressive or alternative news;’ the Tor-Ment are using Covid 19 as a feeble excuse to shut down all public protests with restrictions to gatherings of less than six people, unless in the close vicinity of a cash register or a workplace time-clock. Apparently such iconic features miraculously confer special immunity protection from Covid 19 to all workers or those actively engaged in spending money! While the Tor-Ment distract us with news of parties so they can blame young people for the Government initiated surge in Covid cases, we need to be concerned about the real vectors spreading infection. The children, who although asymptomatic, will pass Covid on to vulnerable adults in poverty stricken three generation households are ignored. Those forced back into workspaces that aren’t Covid secure, travel to work on cramped public transport: the poor are meant to die!

    How can we protest and still be heard? When we were clapping for carers it was highly visible and the sound carried to increase the cumulative impact. If we can no longer join protests without being punished and dispersed by the police we can chose a much louder and more effective alternative that no one need leave home to join. It could be “Tin Pot Tuesday,” “Tin Pot Thursday” or both when we go outside to bang pots; it could be “Sing Along Saturday” when we all go outside our front doors all over the UK and sing songs that represent how we are really getting shafted by this Tor-Ment! Small family groups of six people or less could record their rendition of “Lost hope and past glory” sending the PM into apoplectic dismay! How many can make it down to a protest in London under the current restrictive rules enforced to shut down protests? Those who can make token protests in key places need to carry an inflatable cash register to highlight the sheer hypocrisy of current regulations; the masses can create YouTube videos to post and share online.

    The Government are hoping that restrictions on protests threatening huge fines will shut down all protest, but if we bring the protest right to peoples doors, every single home in the UK, it will engage huge numbers throughout the entire country with no one feeling excluded because they cannot travel or just cannot get down to London. We can see the Tory-Ment restrictions as strangling our right to protest or just moving protest into a more inclusive participatory format where no one is excluded from taking part. Create a huge press release to announce this triumph and thank the Government for offering a new way forward for those wishing to express their views! Extinction Rebellion should take Sunday with candles and death of the planet themes. There’s still “Morning Monday” for those who have lost family members; “Frugal Friday” for those who have lost jobs and been forced into destitution; leaving “Woeful Wednesday” for the homeless, Asylum Seekers Gypsies and the dispossessed! Either Tuesday or Thursday could megaphone the Brexit crisis.

    We cannot be deterred by the Tor-Ment rules to shut down protest; we must embrace this change as a triumph that makes protest louder, more effective and inclusive nationwide. The Tories will wish that they had driven us onto the streets to protest when the daily cacophony can no longer be ignored. All I can offer is the Link to Donate to Craig’s Legal Fund which I was thankfully able to use without being sucked into a PayPal membership page; an obstacle encountered with the regular donate button on Craig’s site. I wanted to set up regular direct debit, but had my donation thwarted by PayPal: I detest PesterPal! But this link does not request PesterPal membership although they do handle the transaction. This represents Corporate giants muscling in to coerce people into unwanted PayPal membership and it’s not on, so I have contacted my bank to set up a PesterPal free direct debit. Those who have the means will find a way to chip in; the link to the Julian Assange Legal fund is here.

    Until we remove this Tory Government, I do not believe that any of the most burning issues of the day will be addressed. From the criminalization of investigative journalism with the targeting of a prominent Whistleblower, to Extinction Rebellion, Grenfell Tower, Windrush, Black Lives Matter, humanity towards migrants, the persecution of Palestinians to our lethal arms trade bombing Yemen into oblivion will all be ignored. Covid 19 is a useful tool to help the Tories consolidate a new era of extreme oppression under the Johnson/Cummings dictatorship; the hardship accelerated by crash-out Brexit will finalize the dystopian nightmare that lies ahead. Poor people will be hit with fines while the elite remain immune, but we must shout out now, every one of us collectively in a safely separated chorus. Cummings remains a volatile wrecking ball ordering mayhem, but he is the grenade; oust him and you pull the pin! We have to rebel to demand just reversal of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, Investigation, inquiry: regime change, jail time! DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59493 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Liberal Democrat MP Munira Wilson began Prime Minister’s Questions with a brutally blunt point that directly targeted the lawless Tory Government. She asked, “If Ministers think it is acceptable for this Government to not obey the law, how on earth can the Prime Minister expect the public at home to do so?” Boris Johnson briskly swatted her query aside like a bothersome fly, he curtly said, “We expect everybody in this country to obey the law.” Tory Sir Robert Neil asked the PM to pledge Government support for Gibraltar and he might well ask now the Tories have openly stated that they are prepared to renege on International treaties? Johnson failed to consider a connection as he praised the rock for choosing to remain British. There are other treaties and commitments our current EU partners might wish to tear up: France might leave the UK to handle migrants on arrival in the UK rather than dealing with a growing number of refugees on their shores: Johnson will soon discover that other countries can play dirty too.

    Keir Starmer started into a familiar PMQ routine, saying, “Yesterday, I spoke to a mum who lives in London. She has a four-year-old daughter, who had a very high temperature yesterday morning. She phoned 111, and was told to get a test. She tried to book, and was told the nearest was Romford. That was 9 o’clock in the morning. She explored that, but there were no tests there. She was then told Haywards Heath, halfway to Brighton—on exploration, no tests there. By lunch time, this mum was told the nearest place was Telford or Inverness. A slot became available in Lee Valley in the afternoon—one slot—but, unfortunately, that was being offered across the country, including to people in Manchester, and it was impossible to book. At 9 o’clock last night, she was told the nearest centre was Swansea. This is, frankly, ridiculous. Who does the Prime Minister think is responsible for this?”

    Johnson replied, “Clearly, I take responsibility, as I have done throughout, for the entire handling of the coronavirus crisis, but I would just say to those who attack NHS Test and Trace, and those who deprecate the efforts of the people who are doing their level best to keep us safe, that it is precisely because of the success of test and trace that capacity has gone up from 2,000 a month in March to 320,000 a day. We know, thanks to NHS Test and Trace, in granular detail, in a way that we did not earlier this year, about what is happening with this pandemic. We know the groups that are suffering, the extent of the infection rates, and we have been able, thanks to NHS Test and Trace, to do the local lockdowns that have been working.” No, actually it most certainly not clear that the PM takes personal responsibility for the shambolic mess the Tories have made of controlling Covid 19.

    Johnson was following his familiar PMQ format, not answering the question, reframing the disaster as if it were a really resounding success, moving on to selecting a target for assigning blame and culminating with criticism of Starmer for not showering those who are managing a totally dysfunctional system with effusive praise. He continued, “We also know that, alas, some people have not been following the guidance in the way that they should and, therefore, we are seeing a rise in infections, and that is why today we are taking decisive steps to intensify our social distancing measures—the rule of six that will be familiar to the country—in order that we can keep our economy going, that we can keep our schools open and keep this virus under control. I hope that he will support those measures and, indeed, support NHS Test and Trace.” It’s an extraordinary tactic that takes a lot of gall!

    Starmer compliantly supplied support saying, “I will hear the measures later on, but we will in principle support them, as I have supported all the measures the Prime Minister has introduced, as he well knows. It is the right thing to do, and I have asked people to follow Government advice at every opportunity. Nobody is attacking here. The Prime Minister needs to know how anxious hundreds of families are. In the past few weeks, they have been sent all over the country or told there are no tests. It cannot be brushed off. Earlier this year, the Health Secretary said: ‘Anybody who needs a test can get a test, and it’s the most important thing that you can do to stop the spread of this virus.’ This is a very serious issue, but the Government line on it seems to be changing all the time. Yesterday, the director of NHS Test and Trace said, ‘Can I…offer my…apologies to anyone who cannot get a covid test…it’s our laboratory processing’ that is the problem’.”

    We patiently awaited a second question, but Starmer settled for a variant of the same question. He said, “This morning, the Health Secretary changed tack and appeared to blame the public. I note that he made a statement yesterday and faced questions but he did not say anything about the excuse that he puts forward this morning that emerged overnight. So who is right—the director of Test and Trace, who says it is a laboratory problem, or the Health Secretary, who says it is the public’s fault?” Johnson’s reply included more blame, bragging and ridiculous demands for approval. He said, “I, of course, sympathise with all those who are facing difficulties getting a test as fast as they want, but demand is at an unprecedented high, particularly because of demand for asymptomatic patients, but the right hon. and learned Gentleman should know that this country has done more tests—17.6 million—than any other country in Europe. He likes international comparisons.” Boris had not finished expansive bragging…

    Johnson blathered on, “That is thanks to the efforts of NHS Test and Trace, which is, in my view, doing an absolutely heroic job in spite of the difficulties that it faces. It has massively raised its output and it will be up to 500,000 tests a day by the end of October. This is an organisation that is working heroically to contain the spread of the disease, and it requires the public to trust the organisation and to participate. Yesterday, the right hon. and learned Gentleman said that it was on the verge of collapse. I think that those were ill-chosen words. I think he now regrets those words. I think he should reflect and he should take them back.” Sure why not try to get the opposition to apologise for not unreservedly praising the Tory Government failures, that’s ripe!

    Starmer stuck to the first question, “Hundreds of families have been trying to get a test in the last week, and they cannot get one. I do acknowledge the number of tests overall, but this is basic stuff. People who have got covid symptoms are very anxious about themselves, their children, their families and what to do. It means they cannot go to work and they cannot send their children to school. It matters, and if they cannot get tests the Prime Minister needs to take responsibility and not just tell us about the future or something else, but address this problem.” He said, “I want to take it further, because it is not just that people are being told to go hundreds of miles. Somebody contacted me yesterday and said: ‘My wife has a temperature and they said we needed to isolate and get a test done. I have been trying to book a test’. This is yesterday, Prime Minister. They continued: ‘the site says, ‘No capacity’. Then I tried for a home test kit and they are telling me that there are no kits available at present.’ That is the situation yesterday. Yesterday, there were no tests available in London and it was the same the day before. Prime Minister, what is happening?”

    Johnson indignantly replied, “I note that the right hon. and learned Gentleman will not take back his criticism and his attack on NHS Test and Trace, and I regret that. I gave him the opportunity to withdraw his verdict that it was on the verge of collapse: it is not. It is doing a heroic job and testing hundreds of thousands of people. Yes, we will do more, and the world we want to move to as fast as possible is a world in which everybody can take enabling tests at the beginning of the day and antigen tests to identify whether or not we have the virus., like a pregnancy test, within 15 minutes or so, so that we know whether we are able to live our lives as normally as possible. That is the vision that the Health Secretary and others have been sketching out over the last few days and that is where we intend to get to.” Warning the Tories are about to trot out another fanciful unicorn to dance on the sunny uplands!

    This back and forth banter was like watching tennis, equally boring and monotonous. One more hit from the PM, “In the meantime, NHS Test and Trace is doing a heroic job, and today I can tell the right hon. and learned Gentleman that most people get an in-person test result within 24 hours, and the median journey is under 10 miles if someone has to take a journey to get one.” Starmer hit back still harping on the same unanswered question, he said, “We all want test, trace and isolate to succeed, and I have offered my support before. The Prime Minister is ignoring the problem: if people are being told to go hundreds of miles, something is wrong. This has got a lot worse in the past week or two—all Members of the House know that, because they have all had constituents telling them that. The Prime Minister talks about capacity. The latest Government figures were updated last night. They show that, on average, 75,000 tests are not being used every day. If 75,000 tests are not being used, why yesterday were people being told to go hundreds of miles for a test? Why yesterday were people being told that there is no capacity?”

    Johnson returned with a weak excuse, “The issue at the moment is that there has been a massive increase in the number of people who need or want tests, particularly people who do not have symptoms. We need—I hope the right hon. and learned Gentleman agrees—to prioritise people such as NHS front-line staff and our care workers who urgently need those tests. As we massively increase the number of tests, it is those groups who are getting priority.” Determined to defend Tallyho Harding, he said, “The right hon. and learned Gentleman is wrong in what he says about the failure of NHS Test and Trace, so let me tell him that of those contacts who supply details, 80% are reached, and 320,000 people have been persuaded to self-isolate and stop the spread of the disease. That is the British people ignoring the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s attempt to undermine confidence in test and trace. They are ignoring his attempt to undermine confidence, and working together to get this disease defeated.”

    Starmer insisted, “I am listening carefully to what the Prime Minister says, and what is undermining confidence is families being told to go hundreds of miles and they cannot get a test. That is undermining confidence. I just want this fixed. We do not need to have an argument. What is the problem? The Prime Minister should accept that there is a problem, tell us what the solution is, and we will all muck in, try to make it better, and tell our constituents. I have been listening. Is the Prime Minister saying that too many people are coming forward for tests and that it is a capacity problem, or not? People are trying to do the right thing. They want to go back to work. We want children back in schools. The Prime Minister is encouraging that—quite right too—and we understand and support that. The Government side of the bargain was to deliver an effective test, trace and isolate scheme, but two weeks into September there is a glaring hole. Will the Prime Minister tell the House when he first knew about this particular problem of people having to go hundreds of miles, or that tests were not going to be available? It is in the last week that this issue has arisen. When did he first know that that was a problem?”

    The return fire was yet more self-congratulatory Boris-shit, “It is obviously a function of the growing demand and growing public confidence in NHS Test and Trace that we have to supply more and more tests, and that is what we have been doing. I do not know whether you have been listening, Mr Speaker, but I have been trying to give the House the figures. Thanks to the heroic efforts of NHS Test and Trace, we have gone up from 2,000 tests a day in March to 320,000 a day today. That is thanks to the efforts of thousands of people, who are listening keenly to the words of the right hon. and learned Gentleman for some support, encouragement or belief in what they are trying to do. Thanks to them, on average, people have to travel less than 10 miles, and thanks to them, 80% of the contacts that they or a coronavirus patient identify are reached and told to self-isolate. That is what we are trying to do. It is hard work. It is a big job, and they are doing a fantastic job. I think that what they would like to hear is some praise, encouragement and support from the right hon. and learned Gentleman.”

    Starmer wasted his last shot on “who’s a naughty boy then?” “Why can we not just hear from the Prime Minister an honest answer? If he stood at the Dispatch Box and said, ‘I know something’s gone wrong in the last couple of weeks. We have been getting hundreds of examples of people being sent all over the place or being told there is no test. I have looked into it. I have worked out what the problem is and here is my plan’, people might be reassured. But, as ever, he pretends the problem is not there. The infection rate is rising. This is the very point at which we need a functioning testing regime. Far from the ‘world-beating’ system we were promised, the Government cannot even get the basics right. The Government are lurching from crisis to crisis. They still lack even basic incompetence—They lack competence. Yes, Prime Minister, they lack competence, and that is what is holding Britain back. My final question is this: when is the problem with test, trace and isolate going to be fixed?” The score a pathetic six-love!

    Johnson was free to whack the ball right out of the court now, “I think the right hon. and learned Gentleman was on the money when he said that this Government lacked incompetence. I just say to him that we are working flat out to address all the issues confronting us today, including trying to get the infection rate down, and we are getting on with taking the tough decisions and making the tough calls that will take this country forward.” PMQs became PMs assault as continued on the attack, “When it came to saying schools were safe, the right hon. and learned Gentleman was silent because he did not want to offend his union bosses. When left-wing anarchists tried to destroy the freedom of the press, he was silent because for some reason he did not want to offend crusty left-wing anarchists.” Despite the fact that Starmer had readily capitulated on both issues, Johnson reinvented his complicity.

    Johnson was disappointed Starmer had not mentioned the latest cherry–bomb probably planted by Cummings. He had the answer ready to serve, but that ball wasn’t coming his way, “When it comes, by the way, to sticking up for our UK internal market and for delivering on the will of the British people—one of the most important issues facing us today—he is totally silent on the Bill that obsesses the rest of his Back Benchers. He is totally silent. A great ox once again has stood on his tongue. He has nothing at all to say about that subject today, because he does not want to offend the huge number of his Back Benchers who want to overturn the verdict of the people and take us back into the EU, which is of course what he wants to do himself.” Johnson was so pleased with the way Starmer let him turn PMQs into a perpetual self-congratulatory Spin show, but he felt let down over the one thing unasked.

    Johnson continued bragging about issues that had not yet been raised by questioners, reframing the whole intent of PMQs. He said, “This Government get on and take the tough decisions on behalf of the British people, delivering thousands of jobs through our kickstart scheme, record-breaking investment in affordable housing with a £12 billion programme, and getting on with all our work, working with the British people and working with the right hon. and learned Gentleman—if he would only do so—to get coronavirus defeated and to take our country forward. We make the tough calls; all he does is sit on the sidelines and carp.” In a similar vein Tory Andrew Lewer sought praise for armed forces who had given logistical support of the NHS, councils and volunteers during the lockdown. Johnson responded to the ‘stroking’ saying, “Indeed, I salute the work of the entire armed services in what they have done across the whole of our United Kingdom to help us fight coronavirus.”

    SNP Leader Ian Blackford asked, “Shortly, the Government will publish their internal market proposals. I have seen them. They are nothing short of an attack on Scotland’s Parliament and an affront to the people of Scotland. As we have already heard, this legislation breaks international law, but it also breaks domestic law. The Prime Minister and his friends—a parcel o’ rogues—are creating a rogue state where the rule of law does not apply. Why does the Prime Minister think that he and his friends are above the law? Johnson excelled at calling black, white with such conviction that the truth is supplanted by Boris-shit. He said, “On the contrary, the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill is about protecting jobs, protecting growth and ensuring the fluidity and safety of our UK internal market and prosperity throughout the United Kingdom. It should be welcomed, I believe, in Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and throughout the whole country.”

    Blackford raised the obvious question that Starmer was too cowardly to ask, sharply chastising the PM he said, “Of course, we saw the Prime Minister breaking the law last year with the Prorogation of Parliament. We have seen the behaviour of Dominic Cummings, and we know that the Government are prepared to break their international obligations. What the Prime Minister said is complete rubbish, and the Prime Minister knows it. His own White Paper was clear that state aid is going to be grabbed back from Scotland and handed to Westminster. If the Prime Minister will not listen to the Scottish Government, will he listen to the National Farmers Union Scotland president, who warned that the proposals ‘limit’ the devolved Administrations? The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee warned that they will ‘create new reservations in areas of devolved competence.’ The General Teaching Council for Scotland has warned that the proposals undermine devolved education functions. That, Mr Speaker, is the reality.”

    He said, “Scotland is speaking out, and I state that the Scottish Parliament will reject this attack on devolution, so the question is: will the Prime Minister break domestic law, disregard the settled will of the Scottish people, ignore the concerns of Scotland’s communities and press ahead with this Bill? The time for Scotland’s place as an independent, international, law-abiding nation is almost here. Our time has come.” Johnson was adamant, “The answer is that yes, indeed, we will press on with the Bill, because I believe that the right hon. Gentleman’s attacks on it are totally illogical. It actually represents a substantial transfer of powers and of sovereignty to Scotland, to Wales, to Northern—it is a massive devolutionary act. What it also does is—I believe this is common ground across the Dispatch Box— It also ensures the integrity of the UK internal market. He speaks of a transfer of powers to the UK Government. On the contrary, what he would do is transfer powers back to Brussels not just over competition and state aid but, of course, over fisheries too. That is the policy of the Scottish nationalist party, and it would be a disaster for our country.”

    The Speaker intervened saying, “I am sure that the leader of the SNP would like to withdraw that last comment about being a liar. No hon. Member would do that. Please withdraw it.” Blackford protested saying, “Mr Speaker, it is on the face of the Bill that the Government of the UK are going to trample over devolution. That is not a lie.” The Speaker replied, “Mr Blackford, you are a great Member of this House. You do the right things by this House, and I have accepted that you have withdrawn it.” The convention that no MP calls another a liar during debates in the chamber is quaint, but now insults those who are habitually lied to by the dishonest pathological liar who is our PM. It would be more appropriate to rule that the PM and all politicians should be harshly sanctioned for telling lies; get the “Porkies out of Politics:” time to “scoop the PooP!” If lies were already sanctioned we would not have this gang of charlatans in power because they no one would have believed the Covert 2019 Rigged Election result, we would have Investigated ant ousted them. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59502 Reply
    SA
    Guest

    Depressing. Johnson now knows that he can get away with anything because of the stolen elections. Rocky times ahead.

    #59571 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    SA – This bid to break an International Treaty bears all the classic signs of a horribly disruptive Dominic Cummings cherry bomb!
    Whoever suggested Boris Johnson call his latest harebrained PR stunt “Moonshot” gave him a really ‘bum steer!’ It’s incredulous, he can’t instantly have recognized the potential for a seriously disgruntled population, with a strong reputation for course humour, to take this opportunity to post rudely exposed bums on the internet just to demonstrate their utter disgust with this new excuse to siphon state funding into elite Corporate coffers. It seems consultancy firm Deloitte will be trousering most of exorbitant 100 Billion budget for a hypothetical rapid testing system, still yet to be invented. Johnson’s promoting it with all the effusive positivity that he hailed the “Titanic success” of Brexit: now careening towards a crash-out disaster iceberg that will sink the UK economy into the depths of a prolonged recession! After a deprived decade of ideologically driven austerity that has forced millions into destitution and despair this corrupt Tory Government is set to squander untold billions on another worthless fantasy project doomed to failure.

    It seems I am not the only one to cotton onto the potential for raunchy pictures being posted on Twitter, Facebook, and elsewhere on the Internet, that will make an absolute mockery of Johnson’s exceedingly poor choice of project name: Boris’s bare bum peeks out above his dropped trousers as pictured in a Canary Cartoon. The ‘cheeky’ cartoon title, “Operation moonshot laid bare,” also points to a Canary Article entitled, “Find out more about operation moonshot.” An image description of the cartoon says, “Boris Johnson is depicted standing on a podium with the words ‘operation moonshot’ on it. He’s holding a document with the words ‘100 billion on untested tech’ on the front. His trousers are down and his bare bum is exposed to a group of photographers. Johnson is depicted saying ‘Austerity was a lie we always have cash when we need it’. To the side of the podium, Dominic Cummings is depicted wheeling a wheelbarrow full of cash through a doorway marked with a sign that reads ‘secret tendering process’!”

    The Open Democracy Article entitled, “Operation Moonshot could be the biggest NHS privatisation in history, and civil servants are shaking their heads in disbelief,” exposes the delusional project. They say, “The British government had plans to test everyone in the country for coronavirus every week by October – and it’s handed most of the work to the global accountancy firm Deloitte, openDemocracy can reveal. Labour MP Clive Lewis has dubbed the deal ‘potentially the biggest NHS privatisation in history’. Last week, civil servants were instructed to carry out the plan for all 68 million people in the UK to be tested weekly, according to a senior civil service source familiar with the conversations. The ambitious cross-departmental plan, dubbed Operation Moonshot, anticipated a second peak of COVID-19 in the winter.” The Tor-Ment’s warped decision making on Covid 19 restrictions strongly indicate that this resurgence is a purposely driven eugenics cull of the ‘economically inactive,’ a ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple!’

    Open Democracy report that, “Civil servants greeted the scheme with widespread incredulity, given the government’s previous record on testing and tracing, which has lagged well behind most other leading economies. Those tasked with implementing the plan expressed doubt that it was even possible. One senior source told openDemocracy: ‘We all double-checked the figures,’ and they described the plans as ‘crazy’. The source also informed openDemocracy that Deloitte was being given the contract to deliver more than half of the work. Clive Lewis said: ‘Why not give the contract to the NHS?’ adding: ‘It’s too easy to get the impression that this government will hand out contracts to whoever happens to be mates with the right minister’.” Probably all these contracts have been awarded without tendering, as the Tor-Ment no longer feel the necessity for any level of accountability with regard to how public money is spent. This reckless allocation of contracts faces a Judicial Review, but Tories pledged to curtail this scrutiny.

    Open Democracy say that, “In the week since civil servants were instructed to make plans for weekly testing, the government has already seriously scaled back Project Moonshot, from testing 10 million people a day to 4 million a day – a reduction of over 40 million a week. It has also pushed back the plan’s target delivery date to February 2021, in recognition of the incredible scale of the challenge: ‘Timelines have already slipped,’ conceded one source. Whilst there is widespread support for more aggressive action against the pandemic, openDemocracy understands there is considerable cynicism across government agencies at the resources being ploughed into ministers’ ambitious, headline-grabbing targets, which are widely seen as unrealistic. The original plan required UK testing capacity to rise from 326,000 tests a day at present to nearly 10 million. It would have involved the UK’s already overstretched labs multiplying their capacity by 31 times, within six to ten weeks.” The Tories will find a way to fudge the numbers.

    Open Democracy say that, “Even the revised target involves completing twelve times as many tests a day. Asked about this capacity problem, a senior government planner sarcastically replied to openDemocracy: ‘Capacity is somehow solved by reducing the accuracy of the test’.” This is worrying enough without the Tor-Ment deciding to reinvent the wheel at the same time. They point out that, “All this comes in the midst of a major reorganisation of health authorities, with plans leaked in last week’s Sunday Times for Public Health England to be scrapped next month, and replaced with a new National Institute for Health. The new institute, designed by McKinsey consultants on a £563,000 contract, is likely to play a leading role in delivering the testing plans.” All this under the dubious leadership of serial failure Tallyho Harding who must be held responsible for the current shambolicly unreliable mishandling of track and trace that has seen infection rates skyrocket especially in newly reopened schools.

    Open Democracy also warn that, “The scheme also raises questions around compulsion. Health secretary Matt Hancock has already said he does rule out compulsory testing, but the sheer scale of the new plan comes as a surprise, and there are serious concerns around forcing groups such as children to be tested. There are also huge uncertainties around how enforcement would work, what any new legislation would say, what criminal penalties could be applied for non-compliance and whether police forces have the time or inclination to enforce the scheme.” This project could see significant pushback from independently minded individuals in the UK. What it will effectively enable is the opening up of private data and personal health details to a private company who will then own a goldmine of data for sale to giant US Healthcare Corporations and that Johnson’s evil manipulator Dominic Cummings will have at his disposal for targeting with weapons grade PsyOps in future rigged voting opportunities.

    Open Democracy remind us that in recent weeks they have “revealed a string of controversies around companies linked to the Conservative Party leadership being handed major contracts. There are currently fifteen workstreams within Project Moonshot. Eight have been handed to Deloitte. Other workstreams are in the hands of the Ministry of Defence, plus at least one other well-known private-sector consultancy.” This is an extremely concerning development in the race to privatize the NHS with an excuse to gather data during the Covid crisis that will compromise our future access to healthcare and the integrity of our rapidly fading democracy as we move ever closer to full scale Tory Dictatorship. They say, “Two days ago, Matt Hancock likened population-wide testing to a ‘moonshot’ – an acknowledgement of the government’s codeword for the plan.” How soon before people start baring their bums and posting ‘cheeky’ shots on the Internet along with gleeful salutation to Mat Hancock, Johnson and Cummings?

    Open Democracy state that, “Deloitte didn’t provide a comment for this article, referring us to the Cabinet Office.” They include the following update, “22 Aug: the Cabinet Office passed our inquiries to the Department for Health and Social Care, who have now said ‘we will continue to challenge capacity, and have routinely set and met ambitious targets’, and that they have announced a series of testing pilots.” There is no excuse for this massive spend on a support system to deliver technology that has yet to be invented! Are the current delays in testing, and the phenomenally lengthy journeys people are expected to make to get a test, just a result of the continuing poor management and total incompetence of Tallyho Harding or a pretext to help justify this obscenely costly fantasy project that will invade our privacy to steal our personal healthcare data? It will be simply impossible for these private companies to test every person in the entire country without obtaining crucial contact and healthcare data at the same time.

    This huge spending commitment comes at a time when children are being forced to return to school so that their parents are free to return to workplaces whether either of these spaces are Covid secure or not. This is driving the working poor onto public transport in unsafe numbers where the virus can easily spread. The token announcement of restrictions that will come into effect on Monday offer an equally nonsensical distraction from the reality of how and where Covid 19 is being openly encourage to spread within the population. There is an obvious priority for the Tor-Ment to reduce the contact, communication and support between families and friends, a modern take on a British tradition of divide and rule, with sectors of the population targeted for ‘othering’ to assign blame. Children studying together in class will be prevented from playing together beyond the school gates; those sharing a commute to the same place of work will be prohibited from meeting to socialize outside work except in the vicinity of a functioning cash register!

    The Tor-Ment know that many poor families are forced to live in cramped multigenerational households where grandparents will be extremely vulnerable to children newly infected by Covid 19 in school. This is a deliberate strategy to cull ‘economically inactive’ pensioners who they know are more susceptible to the disease and have a poorer prognosis for survival. At the same time as elite executives and more affluent managerial staff will continue safely working from home, the poorly paid drones are being forced back to work, but the logistics of how ‘Social distancing’ can be enforced in a lift have yet to be explained! The UK will experience ‘social cleansing’ of epic proportions in line with the original eugenics policy of ‘Herd Immunity,’ pushed by Herd Nerd Cummings that has never been abandoned by his compliant puppet Boris Johnson to effect their ruthless ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple’. As the NHS becomes overwhelmed, privatization will accelerate, and more people will be blamed and denied treatment in this Covicide.

    A Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Well-distanced Johnson and advisers take press briefing questions by VIDEO – but it’s ‘safe’ for kids and workers to be back in classrooms and workplaces,” exposes the blatant Tor-Ment hypocrisy. They say, “Boris Johnson and his chief science and medical officers still took questions from journalists by video link in his press briefing on Wednesday afternoon – despite ample room for ‘social distancing.” They expose the incomprehensible lack of logic that treats the public as if we were all too stupid to realize we are getting duped by the pathological liar who stole votes to become our Prime Minister.

    Skwawkbox point out that despite the obvious reservations of the presenters, “we’re supposed to believe that he thinks it’s safe:
    • for kids and teachers to be un-distanced in tight classrooms, where outbreaks are happening too fast to keep track
    • for workers to return to workplaces with the sick joke of ‘covid-secure’ to protect them, as the rate of infection turns exponential
    • for people to eat indoors in busy restaurants or drink in busy pubs – as long as its with more strangers than friends or family – even though Matt Hancock has admitted that pubs act as epicentres of outbreaks.”
    They remind us that, “Actions speak louder than words, Bozo. You’re heaping guilt onto the already towering pile atop your head.”

    Another Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Number of schools hit by virus passes 500,” is one of a growing number of alarming reports from them regarding the skyrocketing incidences of Covid 19 outbreaks hitting our UK schools. They warn that, “The number of schools hit by coronavirus outbreaks has reached 501 – up from 347 just yesterday morning. Reaching 347 after just a week of English schools opening was frighteningly fast, but an increase of 45% – and likely to beat 50% before the end of the day – in just a single day demonstrates what SAGE scientists have already termed the exponential growth in the prevalence of the virus in the community. Keeping schools open while the government tightens restrictions elsewhere is politically-driven madness that flies in the face of scientific knowledge. They must be closed and not re-opened until Boris Johnson’s boast of millions of instant at-home tests per day is a reality.” This insane discrepancy is not being challenged by the compliant BBC or the Mainstream Media, YET!

    In another Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Exclusive: Dept of Health denies tests being withheld from children – but parents are told otherwise when they try to book and insiders say it’s true,” it includes a number of twitter posts from concerned parents that verify the phenomenon. They say, “Parents are reporting that they are being told that children are not being tested when they try to book a coronavirus test for their child. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson told the SKWAWKBOX that it is not true that children are being denied testing. However, health insiders say that it is true that many children are being turned away and that the rationing is driven by the government’s desire to reduce its widely-condemned backlog and delays – and to mask the incidence of the virus among children.” This is obviously motivated by the desire to drive the working poor back to their jobs while deliberately putting older family members in multigenerational households at risk in a call of the ‘economically inactive.’

    Skwawkbox remind us that, “More than 500 schools have now been hit by coronavirus outbreaks, with England far in the lead in spite of its schools returning later than other UK nations. Children have been shown to carry the same viral load as adults and to transmit the virus within the school environment. Public health officials have also reported that children over ten are now as at risk as adults, while SAGE scientists say that the second wave is rapidly becoming exponential.” They say, “Parents are responding to the SKWAWKBOX’s article with their own experience of being denied tests for their children.” Visit Skwawkbox to see the reports from these parents and to get a true picture of the alarming trend of infection in school children that the Tory compliant BBC and Mainstream Media has endeavoured to keep hidden from the public.

    Students will be heading to colleges and universities all over the UK with a predictable spike in cases that the Tor-Ment will blame on reckless youngsters partying, as if contact during lectures and in halls of residence would be completely irrelevant. Tor-Ment determination to intentionally ignore the blindingly obvious unexplained discrepancies and scapegoat young people to hide their consistent incompetence will only work if the public neglect to call out their repeated failings. The dramatic increase in grotesquely inappropriate outsourcing of contracts without tendering, under the guise of emergency necessity, is being challenged in Judicial Review. But the Tories have pledged to remove this essential curb on obscene Government excess severely restricting the checks and balances so vital to what remains of our vanishing democracy. The sudden replacement of Public Health England with a new, vaguely defined entity under the leadership of Tallyho Harding who has a track record of inappropriate data loss should alarm us all.

    Data is the new gold, the single most valuable resource of the future and Dominic Cummings has a veracious appetite for stealing, abusing and maintaining control of our data. I have no doubt he is the driving force behind these drastic changes designed to grab our data so his removal remains an urgent priority. Cummings is the grenade; oust him and you pull the pin! If he loses access to that data gold his power over us is extinguished. The plan to steal our data with an App failed miserably and had to be abandoned. Bumbling Boris has offered us a perfect opportunity to ridicule this latest plot as the rude and ridiculous “moon shots” posted online will help us to inform the public of the underlying danger of allowing a suspect private company unfettered access to our contact and healthcare data that they can sell off to US Healthcare conglomerates. We must demand proper scrutiny and an Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, because the only way to derail the deadly Tory Government agenda is to force them out of office. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59611 Reply
    SA
    Guest

    This is totally insane. Why has ‘Test and Trace’ become an end in itself? Of course because there is big money. The purpose is to identify those who will then go on to transmit the disease to others, but the actions taken at present to isolate is merely to advise self-isolation and not proper medical quarantine., unless test and trace is followed by strict quarantine, it is useless. I have been saying this until I am blue in the face, but nobody, not even the public health officials are saying it or asking for it!!!!
    This is such a basic requirement in dealing with infectious disease I wonder whether the medical profession has become narcosed by the politicians. TEST. TRACE, QUARANTINE those should be the three slogans not this rubbish ‘Control the virus’ total meaningless garbage.

    • This reply was modified 2 weeks, 1 day ago by modbot.
    #59664 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    SA – Track and Trace are for the purpose of data mining, but effective quarantine would sabotage the Tory ‘Slaughter of the Sheeple” agenda! Despite my strong personal interest in “Disruptive Concept and Design Innovation,” I wasn’t aware of the ‘think outside the box’ Tech experiments launched by the likes of Google under the name ‘Moonshot.’ Indeed, it is the selfish, narcissistic and ultimately ‘evil’ motivations of the Johnson/Cummings dictatorship that seriously discredit their latest project’s assignment to this category. In reality the teams at Google X do not wildly grasp at a fanciful idea to hijack as a deceptive publicity stunt for disguising the wanton plunder of massive amounts of state cash to be greedily absorbed by the Corporate entities least capable of delivering anything tangible at all, let alone technology for the public good! It is their sinister goal of nationwide data mining to increase the vulnerability of the entire population that makes the Tor-Ment’s ‘Operation Moonshot’ such a perverse object of well deserved criticism and derision worthy of crude ridicule capitalizing on the most base interpretation of a desire to ‘moon’ those still intent on exploiting us!

    The name ‘Moonshot’ wouldn’t have attracted sneers, jeers and sleazy comments of cheekily exposed bare bums were it not for the overwhelmingly shambolic track record of failures sabotaged by the staggering levels of self-serving Tory greed that spawned the idea. But, it’s only fair to present the original thinking that motivated their seemingly bizarre choice of name; In a Wired Article entitled, “Inside X, Google’s top-secret moonshot factory” they explain the evolution of this concept. Revealing that, “X – formerly Google X – aims to pursue technological breakthroughs by taking crazy ideas seriously. When will its bets pay off?” They say, “X does not call itself a corporate research lab (it uses the term ‘Moonshot Factory’), but when it was founded in 2010, its remit wasn’t entirely clear.” Wired describes a visit to X on the most outlandish of days when those involved with the project were stretching their imaginations even further to arrive in costume on Halloween which is well observed in the States.

    Wired report that, “X originally grew out of Chauffeur, Google’s self-driving car project, then spearheaded by the Stanford roboticist Sebastian Thrun. Page and Brin admired Thrun for his work on Streetview and turn-by-turn directions in Google Maps, and at X they offered him free reign to pursue similarly offbeat ideas. “Initially, the title was called ‘Director of Other’, Thrun is quoted as saying, “We wanted to push technologies in many different directions, including self-driving cars.” They report that, “For at least a year, X’s existence was a closely guarded secret. Other Google employees were denied keycard access. Even within Google, where bottom-up management is a founding principle and employees are allowed to spend 20 per cent of their time working on their own ideas, X had a free-wheeling, intellectually anarchic style.”

    Wired reveal how, “Engineers from Project Chauffeur worked alongside those from Google Brain, Loon and a handful of other equally audacious projects.” They quote Thrun saying, “I wanted to get no bureaucracy, no PowerPoints, no financial reporting, no oversight, so that the people in charge could focus entirely on the challenge,” Thrun says. “Most of the early project ideas came from Page and Brin themselves, who took a close interest, and eventually moved into X’s building. (Teller once described X as Brin’s ‘batcave’.)” You can see how their model of “no bureaucracy, no PowerPoints, no financial reporting, no oversight” would fit perfectly with the Johnson/Cummings ‘wild west’ direction of zero accountability politics to abscond with public funds in support of absurd PR stunts with no determination driving follow-through of successful completion. The delivery of any tangible public benefit is immediately undermined by the Tories zero-tendering selection of serial failure profiteer Corporations and grossly inappropriate leadership.

    The public still question the actions and policies of Google, but we are reminded of an earlier ethical commitment made by the company by Wired after describing some of the areas of innovation abandoned by X. They say, “These events have reignited debates about the responsibility that Alphabet has, in Google’s once famous phrase, to not be evil. Although these projects did not come under X, Teller says he thinks deeply about the ethics of his team’s work. His grandfather, after all, worked on the Manhattan Project. ‘There definitely have been things people brought up [at X] that are like, ‘Nope, that’s evil’.” That must be an extremely tough legacy to live with considering the catastrophic destruction and loss of life of the Atomic Bomb that resulted from the ‘Manhattan Project.’ Sadly in the UK, a huge amount of the available funding for groundbreaking innovative design supports the top engineers in the country focused of lethal weapons systems for our rapidly expanding arms industry. Where should we focus?

    Wired highlight Kathryn Zealand’s novel idea to, “build a pair of assistive trousers that might help the elderly and immobile walk independently.” They quote Zealand, who is Australian, saying, “The space of ageing in general hasn’t had enough investment. The demographics mean it’s going to be a big thing in the future. The trousers, code-named Smarty Pants, are inspired both by recent advancements in soft robotics and Zealand’s own experience with her 92-year-old grandmother, who has Alzheimer’s.” I have tried to promote ‘Silver Sector Design’ myself as a member of the Seas2Grow collaborative initiative that spans several EU countries, that we hope won’t be jeopardised by crash-out Brexit. My despair over the Covert 2019 Rigged Election was driven in part by the callous attitude that led Cummings to declare that he was OK with old people dying as a consequence of his warped eugenics ‘Herd Immunity’ strategy. How can you promote innovation to assist the elderly to Tories intent on their annihilation?

    One of the concepts that I have been working on targeted combating malnutrition in the elderly, which I identified not so much as one of poverty, but primarily a logistical problem. The program I called [email protected] would have signed up a wide variety of local businesses, restraints, pubs and take away outlets, as well as grocery providers large and small right across the country to focus on catering to an elderly clientele, offering the option of smaller portions of well balanced meals and easy to prepare grocery items. Due to existing morbidities there would be strict standards for sugar and salt content for participating businesses offering a special [email protected] menu or entre and recyclable packaging standards too. Pensioners would receive an [email protected] card to manage their payments and a visit from a coordinator to help them create a custom shopping matrix for call in of orders. The logistics of home delivery of meals, groceries and also carers in green-tech vans would be a coordinated service for all participating businesses.

    Concerned elderly and compromised individuals were the first to remove themselves from the threat of infection; the last time I got on a bus was March 7th when I went into the city centre to cast my vote in the US Democratic primary. Fear of shortages caused by crash-out Brexit had already caused me to stock up on a few basics so, I was well prepared. Sadly many vulnerable people were the least well prepared and they really struggled to shop online. Computer savvy young people grabbed the delivery slots while those without family or neighbours were abandoned. Imagine if my [email protected] program had been in place before Covid hit! Ideas for compassionate governance that put the Health and welfare of ordinary citizens first are not a priority for this Tory Government The ‘Holocaust in Care’ and culling of the ‘economically inactive’ will no doubt trim down the demographic that I have focused on designing for to help maintain dignified independence. I feel compelled to stuff my brain in a matchbox until we get the Tories out!

    As someone who is truly passionate about disruptive innovation and design I am not impressed by the squandering of funding on Moonshot. Wired admits that, “It’s also possible to see moonshots as something more cynical: attempts to dominate industries that don’t yet exist.” Never more true that the hairbrained scheme announced by Boris Johnson to distract from his most recent string of life threatening failures in tackling Covid 19! Wired report that, “The concept of moonshots is now used widely by both startups and governments. Massive venture capital funds, such as SoftBank’s Vision Fund, are enabling startups to take moonshot-sized risks of their own.” Wired cautiously warn that, “Genuine breakthroughs require both immense capital, creativity and, perhaps most important, patience.” I do not recognize ‘patience’ as one of ‘bull in a China shop’ Boris’s qualities, but then he has precious few qualities to choose from. His entertainment value as comic relief is overshadowed by the seriousness of the disasters he creates.

    Wired report that, “‘If we define moonshots as trying to create something really radical… that’s really hard. The really big things, it’s tough to see who’s going to do it,’ Nathan Myhrvold, the former director of Microsoft Research and founder of Intellectual Ventures, told me. ‘But the flipside is if you’ve got those resources and you don’t do it, then we’ll never know if there was some fabulous technology that took that kind of effort’.” While certainly Government has the capacity and funding to take on radical ‘moonshot’ thinking, it is not an excuse for launching dubious vanity projects in a time of National crisis. When those who will ultimately pull together and implement the ambitious Moonshot testing program announced with such fanfare by heading up the team in charge gets thoughtlessly assigned to serial failure Oxford chum Tallyho Harding there is zero public confidence in any hope of success. There is also the sinister undercurrent of Dominic Cummings obsession with data mining and weapons grade PsyOps to consider.

    Wired describe how, “Sitting in front of Teller-as-Gandalf, it’s hard not to think of an even earlier moonshot factory: the labs of Thomas Edison, known as the Wizard Of Menlo Park. It may be that the self-driving car, or one of X’s many other moonshots, will end up transforming society in ways we can’t yet foresee. It might save the world, or it might just help Alphabet grow ever richer and more powerful.” I have always been a huge admirer of the Menlo Park model of collaborative effort driving innovation, but while the innovators at X are focused on the public good, the bean counters are unlikely to be thinking of anything beyond power and money. Teller is quoted as saying, “The real test is 15 to 20 years from now, when the dust is settled and we look backwards. Then how are we doing?” Teller says. “Until then, there will always be more crazy ideas worth chasing. The world’s got more than enough problems, sadly.” The wealthy global elite are not focusing on funding support for those intent on solving the world’s problems.

    The extensive Wired Article focusing on the origins of noble ‘Moonshot’ thinking is lengthy, but I found it reassuring and well worth reading as it elaborated on exciting future possibilities at a time when my on creative projects have ground to a standstill drowned out by the grotesque injustice of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. However, we shouldn’t confuse this area of disruptive innovative technology with the deliberately destructive cherry bombs that appear to emanate directly from Dominic Cummings in his unelected position of power dictating to the PM and the Tor-Ment. He remains a credible theta to the future of our democracy as he continues his agenda of dismantling every bit of it brick by brick. The technology of the App that failed to provide security for our data has been replaced by a new scheme potentially allowing Cummings access to mine and manipulate our data for sinister purposes of unleashing his weapons grade PsyOps. But, Cummings is the grenade; oust him and you pull the pin!

    With an appalling track record of the huge data privacy debacle at Talk-Talk plus the failure and abandonment of the much touted ‘world-beating,’ track and trace App to the controversy over the current handling of track and trace Tallyho Harding is without doubt the absolute worst person to be placed in charge of the new body about to replace Public Health England. The toxic combination of Harding’s careless regard for privacy, the sinister undercurrent of Dominic Cummings’s warped obsession with data mining and weapons grade PsyOps and powerful private Corporations with a vested interest in selling of this precious NHS data goldmine should alarm us all. Boris Johnson is setting this project up for abject failure right from the start; sadly the demise of Operation Moonshine will harmfully taint and discredit other project that share this innovative concept. Shame on Johnson, Cummings and the whole corrupt Tory cabal they thoroughly deserve to be called out with ranchy pictures of bare bums as we vent our rage.

    In the Canary Article entitled, “Moonshot or moonshine? Experts sceptical about government’s latest coronavirus plan,” they criticize the lunatic program and the unjustified massive spend. They say, “Boris Johnson’s government is considering shelling out up to £100bn for a mass at-home coronavirus (Covid-19) testing programme. But experts are sceptical about its ability to deliver. Known as ‘Operation Moonshot’, if it worked, up to 10 million tests could be carried out every day from the comfort of people’s own homes.” In explaining how Operation Moonshot would work they say, “Ministers and health officials are hoping for a test that doesn’t need processing in a lab. It would mean users get their results in a matter of minutes rather than days. The saliva test would mean people don’t need to travel to testing centres or wait for their result. Health secretary Matt Hancock says he hopes people can have ‘a happy and loving Christmas that people yearn for’, if a vaccine or mass testing becomes available.”

    The Canary cautions that, “it doesn’t exist yet… The first problem with this is that, as yet, a reliable at-home test has yet to be developed. So it will be some time before we can rely on it to help us return to normal. Chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance said on Thursday: There are prototypes which look as though they have some effect, but they’ve got to be tested properly. We would be completely wrong to assume this is a slam dunk that can definitely happen.” They also question the massive price tag asking, “how much will it cost? Operation Moonshot would cost £100bn – almost as much as NHS England’s entire £114 billion budget in 2018/19. That’s according to documents seen by the British Medical Journal (BMJ).”

    The Canary report that, “Last week, the government pledged £500m for a community-wide repeat testing trial in Salford, Greater Manchester, as part of pilot scheme for a no-swab saliva test. A number of residents will go for a weekly test, with up to 250 carried out each day. Meanwhile existing trials of tests in Southampton and other parts of Hampshire will also be expanded.” The Canary ask, “why are they doing it? After limiting groups meeting indoors or outdoors to just six people, the government needs some good news. The hope is that, with widespread home testing, society can reopen fully and the economy can get up and running even before a vaccine has been developed. Prime minister Boris Johnson said the programme would allow Covid-negative people to ‘behave in a more normal way in the knowledge they can’t infect anyone else with the virus’.”

    The Canary want to know why we are not building on what is in place right now, asking, “What are the problems with the current testing programme?” They say that, “The current testing programme faces considerable criticism for struggling to meet demand. On 8 September, NHS Test and Trace’s director of testing apologised to people who were unable to get a test. And many people who tried to access a test on Wednesday got an error message telling them to try again, and warning them not call the helplines. There are also numerous reports of people having to travel long distances to get a test, only to discover they don’t have an appointment. One man, from Maidstone, Kent made a 400-mile round trip for a test. Then his results were lost. On Wednesday, Hancock also blamed the shortage of testing slots on symptom-free people attending for a test. But people can be symptom-free and still spread the virus.”

    The Canary point out Tory Government failures citing, “Not the best track record.” They report that, “Separate information, also seen by the BMJ, suggests Operation Moonshot will include plans for 10 million tests to be processed each day. But figures the government proposes and those they deliver tend to differ significantly. This has been the pattern since the start of the crisis. On 25 March, Boris Johnson said the government was ‘massively ramping up’ testing and hoped that ‘very soon’ 250,000 tests would be carried out each day. The government no longer publishes daily testing figures. But the latest available figures say 175,687 tests were reported on 2 September.” The Canary say that, “on the same date, the estimated total capacity reported by laboratories was 369,937. So almost six months later, the government has still not met its March targets.” Given the consistent failures it would have been wise to select a really competent person to head up the new project, but Tory cronies won out!

    They report that, “in April, after intense scrutiny over failures in testing, Hancock set a target of achieving 100,000 daily coronavirus tests in England by the end of April. At the time, only about 10,000 tests were being carried out each day, but the health secretary remained confident that the government would meet its target. Around 80,000 tests were carried out on April 29. Then numbers jumped by 40,000 in the final 24 hours to just over 120,000. The government said it met its target, with Hancock heralding it as an ‘incredible achievement’. But there were plenty of questions over how those tests were counted, with last-minute changes meaning newer home test kits were counted as they were sent out. The overall total also included tests dispatched to ‘satellite testing locations’ – such as hospitals that had a particularly urgent need – but did not detail whether the tests were actually used. So the government figure was for the number of tests known to have been delivered. The number carried out in the 24 hours was only 81,978.”

    According to the Canary Operation Moonshot is probably just, “Another bit of moonshine? On Wednesday 9 September, Johnson said officials are: working hard to increase our testing capacity to 500,000 tests a day by the end of October. But by Thursday morning, when transport secretary Grant Shapps was sent out to defend the plans, he declined to give a time frame on Operation Moonshot. And he admitted the technology does not yet exist. He told Sky News: This is technology that, to be perfectly blunt, requires further development – there isn’t a certified test in the world that does this but there are people that are working on prototypes. Taking everything into account, it’s quite a jump to assume we can go from the current scenario to one where millions of tests, which provide a result in between 20 minutes and 90 minutes, are carried out daily.”

    The way forward is fraught with danger; as stated before: “Data is the new gold, the single most valuable resource of the future and Dominic Cummings has a veracious appetite for stealing, abusing and maintaining control of our data. I have no doubt he is the driving force behind these drastic changes designed to grab our data so his removal remains an urgent priority.” The App failed, but, if Cummings loses access to that data goldmine altogether by being ousted, “his power over us is extinguished. Bumbling Boris has offered us a perfect opportunity to ridicule this latest plot as the rude and ridiculous ‘moon shots’ posted online will help us to inform the public of the underlying danger of allowing a suspect private company unfettered access to all of our contact and healthcare data that they can sell off to US Healthcare conglomerates. We must demand proper scrutiny and an Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, because the only way to derail the deadly Tory Government agenda is to force them out of office.” DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59737 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    Law? What Law? There is no Law only the politics of oppression! Julian Assange heads back to Kangaroo Court this week, facing the lengthy arm of US overreach to enforce total suppression of the truth by intimidation, subjugation and torture, with our lawless Tory Government fully complicit in facilitating these crimes. In stark contrast the Johnson/Cummings “rule of six” will constrain and criminalize those who dare to protest the injustices that are being implemented to stifle free speech in the UK. The imposition of lopsided regulations still force all children to attend school to enable the working poor to risk going back to work on crammed public transport, encouraged to spread infection wherever it drives the economy, but at the same time curtailing family life and friendships with crack-downs and threat of fines. As if these demands were not audacious enough, given the disgraceful exclusions offered to protect the elite, the PM announced his intention to break the law and violate an international treaty he signed only months ago!

    The Assange case is not an isolated aberration it will firmly establish the ‘new normal’ for extinguishing all scrutiny of Governments around the world, eliminating accountability for war crime, torture and the persecution of civilians to maintain dictatorships and keep tyrants in power. This precedent will be veraciously seized by authoritarian despots; indeed Bolsonaro is already seeking to use this rogue power to silence critics of Brazil. If Assange, an Australian/Ecuadorian citizen, can be seized and extradited from a third country, the UK, for alleged espionage against the US, this would open up a wider world of possibilities for the global reach of persecution of the press. The Assange verdict could have a terrifyingly chilling effect on investigative journalism by criminalizing all controversial content damaging not just to the US and its allies, but to all national Governments prepared to abandon democratic principals of freedom of the press, free speech and the protection of human rights through robust scrutiny and accountability.

    In an Amnesty International Article entitled, “Julian Assange extradition hearing: Punishing the publisher,” the lay out the stark reality of what lies ahead and the implications of loosing the fight to free Julian Assange. Announcing his return to Court, “for the resumption of proceedings that will ultimately decide on the Trump administration’s request for his extradition to the US,” but they warn that, “it is not just Julian Assange that will be in the dock. Beside him will sit the fundamental tenets of media freedom that underpin the rights to freedom of expression and the public’s right to access to information.” According to Amnesty, the world’s premier authority on political imprisonment, “Silence this one man, and the US and its accomplices will gag others, spreading fear of persecution and prosecution over a global media community already under assault in the US and in many other countries worldwide.”

    Amnesty report that, “The stakes really are that high. If the UK extradites Assange, he would face posecution in the USA on espionage charges that could send him to prison for decades – possibly in a facility reserved for the highest security detainees and subjected to the strictest of daily regimes, including prolonged solitary confinement. All for doing something news editors do the world over – publishing public interest information provided by sources . Indeed, President Donald Trump has called Wikileaks ‘disgraceful’ and said that its actions in publishing classified information should carry the death penalty The chilling effect on other publishers, investigative journalists and any person who would dare to facilitate the publication of classified information of government wrongdoing would be immediate and severe. And the US would boldly go beyond its own borders with a long arm to reach non-citizens, like Assange, who is Australian.”

    Amnesty report that, “The US government’s relentless pursuit of Assange – and the UK’s willing participation in his hunt and capture – has now landed him in a prison typically reserved for seasoned criminals. It has diminished him both physically and emotionally – often to the point of disorientation. Breaking him by isolating Assange from family, friends and his legal team, seems part and parcel of the US’s strategy – and it seems to be working. The 17 charges levelled by the US under the 1918 Espionage Act could bring 175 years in prison; add a conviction on the single computer fraud charge (said to complement the Espionage Act by dragging it into the computer era), and you get another gratuitous five years. Assange is the only publisher ever to bear the brun t of such espionage charges.”

    Julia Hall, Amnesty International’s expert on human rights in Europe, insists that, “You don’t need to know the vagaries of extradition law to understand that the charges against Assange are not only classic ‘political offences’ and thus barred under extradition law, but more crucially, the charges are politically-motivated.” Amnesty has said that, “There is no doubt that the charges are politically-motivated under this US administration, which has all but convicted Assange in the public arena. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has claimed that Wikileaks is a ‘hostile intelligence service’ whose activities must be ‘mitigated and managed.’ The flagrantly unfair prosecution of Assange is an example of how far the US will go to ‘manage’ the flow of information about government wrongdoing and thus undermine the public’s right to know.”

    Amnesty report that, “Assange was on Barack Obama’s radar, too, but the Obama administration declined to prosecute Assange. Current US Attorney General William Barr, however, has turned out not one, but two indictments since 2019, the latest at the end of June. That second indictment was a surprise not only to Assange’s defence team, but to the Crown lawyer and the judge who were also taken unawares by the new indictment.” In his 7th of September Post, Craig Murray, who went to heroic lengths to finagle a place in Court in order to truthfully report on the reality of this political trial to railroad Assange and abolish freedom of the press, accurately described the lengths the Judge was going to in order to subvert justice. After dumping a huge volume of additional charges on the defence team when it was too late to review the content and contact witnesses, it was grotesquely unfair for the Judge, despite this insurmountable challenge to refuse to grant the defence a reasonable postponement.

    Amnesty International’s Julia Hall describes her well-founded concern over Assange’s deteriorating condition following months of inhumane confinement in Belmarsh that has been condemned by the UN Rapporteur as psychological torture. Hall recounts how, “Earlier this year, sitting 20 feet away from Julian Assange, I was struck by how much of a shadow of his former self he had become. He did spontaneously stand up several times during that week of hearings to address the judge. He told her he was confused. He told her he could not properly hear the proceedings. He said that barriers in the prison and in court meant that he had not been able to consult with his lawyers. He was not technically permitted to address the judge directly, but he did repeatedly, flashes of the aggressive tactics used in the past to advocate for himself and the principles he has espoused.”

    Speaking for Amnesty, Hall warned that, “If Julian Assange is extradited it will have far reaching human rights implications, setting a chilling precedent for the protection of those who publish leaked or classified information that is in the public interest. Publishing such information is a cornerstone of media freedom and the public’s right to access information. It must be protected, not criminalized.” What this will mean is that Trump, the US Government, as well as other dangerous and deceitful global tyrants including our rapidly evolving dictatorship, will be able to spew their propaganda lies unchallenged, gagging the press to subvert the truth, effectively dodging scrutiny, exposure and accountability in a frightening new world order. Socialist Governments intent on equitably serving the fundamental needs of their population will be demonized and unjustly sanctioned and their leaders driven out to install puppet dictators willing to exclusively serve US interests. The Assange trial outcome heralds another major global crisis.

    In the Canary Article entitled, “Assange extradition hearings see the defence expose the real reasons for his prosecution,” they elaborate on the underlying motivation driving the case. Reporting on the commencement of, “Formal hearings for the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Monday 7 September 2020,” they say, “Over three days, the defence fielded witnesses and presented legal arguments that cumulatively reveal some of the real reasons why Assange is being prosecuted.”

    The Canary report that on, “Day one of the hearings saw the defence argue that “conduct from a fresh extradition request” [superseding indictment] recently submitted by the US should not be allowed to stand. The judge, however, disagreed. Former vice chairman of the New York Times James C Goodale and lawyer Timothy Cuffman referred to the possible reason why this indictment was presented: US prosecutors packed the newest indictment with paragraph after paragraph of allegedly conspiratorial activities of Assange and his Wikileaks associates that happened as recently as 2015 and are therefore timely. However, they added: But the supposedly conspiratorial “recruitment” activities on which the indictment depends are indistinguishable from standard journalistic practices and political expression, and they are thus not criminal at all.”

    The Canary then report that, “On day two Professor Mark Feldstein told the court that soliciting information is the “lifeblood” of journalistic practice: Feldstein provided details of over 20 examples of published leaks from 1844 to 2018: here the Canary included excerpts from Feldman’s written testimony. Also on day two Reprieve human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith provided details of war crimes committed by the US that WikiLeaks helped expose. His testimony was accompanied by a written statement. In the statement he referred to how a court in Pakistan ruled that US drone strikes were a ‘blatant violation of basic human rights’.” He added that “evidence provided by WikiLeaks was key in the submission to that court. Moreover, he quoted US cables, published by WikiLeaks, regarding extraordinary renditions. Smith also mentioned how Trump announced an Executive Order that threatens sanctions against anyone who helps the I.C.C. [International Criminal Court] investigate American crimes”.

    Continuing on day three the Canary say, “On the matter of whistleblowers and soliciting leaks, Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) executive director Trevor Timm explained that SecureDrop, a ‘secure submission system’ developed by FPF, is used by 70 media outlets globally. These include: ‘the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Associated Press, USA Today, Bloomberg News, CBC, and the Toronto Globe and Mail’. In other words, each of these media outlets encourage and facilitate leaks. Again from Goodale and Cuffman: In order to perform their core function, journalists of all sorts must have the latitude and flexibility to undertake the types of actions that the government now alleges amount to criminal conspiracy, at least in combination.”

    Elaborating on what is being falsely portrayed as conspiratorial they say that, “These actions include associating with sources, communicating with sources, issuing broad invitations for sources to provide newsworthy information (including and especially classified information), telling potential sources what types of information would likely be newsworthy, promising to publish newsworthy content, receiving newsworthy information from sources, and publishing such information.” The Canary then report on testimony from, “Paul Rogers, emeritus professor of Peace Studies at Bradford University, testified about the Iraq war and the conflict in Afghanistan. He pointed out the importance of the Iraq War Logs (aka War Diaries), published by WikiLeaks and the additional civilian deaths found.” Here the Canary include references to the organization known as “Iraq Body Count” who did a phenomenal job of bringing the brutal reality of the carnage callously dismissed as ‘collateral damage’ to public attention.

    The Canary article includes a troubling film from Juan Passarelli which the say, “provides an overview of Assange’s prosecution. First, there is an ominous comment by journalist John Pilger on Assange: ‘what happens to him can happen to any journalist who does his or her job’.” The film highlights other quotes, “with regard to the soliciting of information, investigative journalist Barton Gellman comments: I solicit and I receive information. I ask questions and I hope to obtain answers.” They say that, “The video also provides examples of top officials in US, including Trump, who want to see Assange dead. Assange himself comments on the flawed charge of conspiracy he is facing: If I am a conspirator to commit espionage, then all these other media organisations, and the principled journalists in them, are also conspirators to commit espionage.”

    Also included in this video presentation, “Journalist Matt Kennard provides an example as to why the prosecution case should be thrown out citing a historical precedent. When Daniel Ellsberg was on trial for the Pentagon Papers [leak] during the Vietnam War, his case was thrown out because it come up that Nixon had ordered a raid on his psychologist’s office to try and get information which was embarrassing to Ellsberg… Assange has been surveilled by the CIA. That by itself should mean the case is thrown out. Journalist and former intelligence officer John Kiriakou further explains how if the extradition of Assange proceeds, his trial will take place in the eastern district of Virginia, where the jury would consist of people: from the CIA, FBI, the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, and intelligence community contractors or their family members.” The Canary also highlight other reasons the case appears to have been corrupted by bias to the point where the legitimacy of the Judge’s verdict is in question.

    The Canary say that, “As well as claims of US political interference in the case, there’s also the claim of bias by judge Emma Arbuthnot, who has overseen the hearings and sealed Assange’s fate in her 2018 ruling: On 6 February 2018, Lady Arbuthnot dismissed the request by Assange’s lawyers to have his arrest warrant for skipping bail withdrawn, after the Swedish investigation into sexual assault allegations was dropped. If this request had been granted, Assange may have been able to negotiate safe passage to Ecuador to prevent his persecution by the US government. A week later, in a second ruling, Lady Arbuthnot said: “I accept that Mr Assange had expressed fears of being returned to the United States from a very early stage in the Swedish extradition proceedings but… I do not find that Mr Assange’s fears were reasonable’.” Another irregularity is that “Arbuthnot’s husband has close connections with the Henry Jackson Society (HSJ), which was the subject of exposes by WikiLeaks.”

    The Canary warn, “there’s the matter of extraterritorial overreach. Assange is an Australian who is currently in the UK. Yet if the US extradition goes ahead, this will have two major consequences. One: the US will find it a lot easier to seek the extradition of other journalists who publish information it considers secret. Two: other countries will also regard journalists, whether domestic or foreign based, as fair game. NUJ general secretary Michelle Stanistreet believes if the extradition goes ahead it means journalists and publishers will be at greater risk: If this extradition is allowed, it will send a clear signal that journalists and publishers are at risk whenever their work discomforts the United States government. Media freedom the world over will take a significant backward step if Assange is forced to face these charges at the behest of a US president. In short, the wider reason for the prosecution of Assange is about making it easier for governments to conceal their criminal behaviour, including war crimes such as massacres, outright murder, and torture.”

    The Canary article expresses concerns over “concealing government crimes;” they note that, “Home Secretary Priti Patel, who signs off on extradition cases, was a member of the Henry Jackson Society Council. But there are major flaws in the prosecution case that could form the basis for legal challenge.” However, Assange could remain incarcerated at Belmarsh for more than a year awaiting an appeal hearing which is further punishment for his ‘crime’ of exposing the truth. Meanwhile the Tor-Ment are trying to regularize their own lawlessness at the same time they bear down their heavy boot of authority on our necks. They used to say that, “An Englishman’s word is his bond,” but Boris’s word is Bogus and Cumming’s word is catastrophic; Tories dictate to the masses and break the law with impunity! We must demand proper scrutiny and a full Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, because the only way to derail the deadly Tory Government agenda is to force them out of office.” DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59814 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    I must say Peter Hitchens has to be the most unlikely crusader for the freedom of Julian Assange so I was absolutely gobsmacked to read his Daily Mail Opinion Piece, entitled, “My defence of Julian Assange – a man I abhor.” Writing in that most disreputable of tabloid rags and taking aim at the corrupt Court convened to hand Assange over to the Americans, Hitchens might just enlist support from a few of its bigoted fiercely nationalist readers most of whom don’t really give a toss about human rights! The Mail say, “It ended badly the time they met yet PETER HITCHENS argues extraditing the WikiLeaks boss to the US violates British sovereignty, threatens press freedom and is nothing less than a politically motivated kidnap.” Hitchens admits, “I can’t stand Julian Assange. He is almost everything I do not like. His world is not my world, and his people are not my people.” Although he couldn’t condone his jumping bail, he quickly dispensed with any further attempt at character assassination to move on to his strongly felt, well articulated, points of principle.

    According to Hitchens, “The growth of an imperious, iron-bound security state in Washington DC has been one of the most dispiriting developments in this fast-darkening world. Mr Assange’s revelations exposed many of these bad things, plainly in the hope of stopping them – injustice, brutality, secret imprisonment, torture and rendition.” These are not points that resonate with most readers of the Daily Fail, but the US attempt to violate our precious British sovereignty will drive the Nationalistic Brexiteer masses into a frenzy. We have to move beyond just preaching to the choir and appeal to those who don’t yet realize the true value of press freedom. Moving on Hitchens insisted, “Now I have said that, I wish to add that I am wholly, furiously against the attempt by the United States government to extradite Mr Assange from this country, now under way at the Old Bailey. I think it is wrong in principle. I think it is clearly a political case and should be rejected on those grounds alone, if there were no others available.”

    To educate the less informed, Hitchens points out that, “Extradition on political grounds is expressly prohibited by Article 4 (1) of the 2003 Anglo-US Extradition Treaty. But despite such protections, that treaty, agreed in the Blair era, was, like so much of that government’s actions towards Washington, weak, servile and unfair.” He says, “’the courts have not done very much to defend British national sovereignty when it has been invoked.’ Astonishingly, it allows the US to demand extradition of UK citizens and others for offences allegedly committed against US law. This is so even though the supposed offence may have been committed in the UK by a person living in the UK. Do we really want the hand of a foreign power to be able to reach into our national territory at will and pluck out anyone it wants to punish? Are we still even an independent country if we allow this?’ The Americans would certainly not let us treat them in this way.” Now Hitchens was hitting a raw nerve capable of inciting nationalist gammon rage!

    Hitchens asserted that, “It is unimaginable that the US would hand over to us any of its citizens who had been accused of leaking British secret documents. Yet if Mr Assange is sent to face trial in the US, any British journalist who comes into possession of classified material from the US, though he has committed no crime according to our own law, faces the same danger. This is a basic violation of our national sovereignty, and a major threat to our own press freedom. I think that no English court should accept this demand. And if the courts fail in their duty, then I think that any self-respecting Home Secretary should overrule them. For this extradition is a lawless kidnap.” I can just imaging all those fiercely English Brexiteer types ranting about slinging those pushy bloody ‘Yanks’ out of our Courts accompanied by loud profanities and a resounding rendition of Rule Britannia! This unruly bunch might not be exactly the crowd you would ideally want by your side, but a huge number of people who share this mentality read the Daily Mail.

    Hitchens continues his pitch saying, “I love the rule of law, one of the main guarantees of freedom in the world. I used to think that this was one of the things that made the US a great country. But I have watched the decline of their legal system in dismay, worse even than the decay of our own. The growth of an imperious, iron-bound security state in Washington DC has been one of the most dispiriting developments in this fast-darkening world. Mr Assange’s revelations exposed many of these bad things, plainly in the hope of stopping them – injustice, brutality, secret imprisonment, torture and rendition. The prevention of these things is not some wild revolutionary cause. It is the duty of Christians and conservatives to oppose such wrongs as much as it is the duty of anybody. If not more so.” ‘Christians’ have been coapted into the fake mantra of ‘Compassionate Conservative’ which is really an oxymoron, because no one whose politics condoned the brutal deprivation of a decade of austerity can be either Christian or compassionate!

    But that is another battle and Hitchens is pitching to an audience most of us simply cannot reach, saying, “Let me explain why this extradition is wrong. First, the actions of Mr Assange, in publishing huge numbers of confidential US government files, are not a crime. He was acting under the protection of US law as a journalist, publishing information he had received.” Even more enraging, Hitchens correctly claims that, “If he were a US citizen, he would without doubt be protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution which declares: ‘Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press.’ Knowing this, Mike Pompeo, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, said on April 13, 2017, of Mr Assange and his WikiLeaks colleagues: ‘They have pretended that America’s First Amendment freedoms shield them from justice. They may have believed that, but they are wrong.’
    He also said: ‘Julian Assange has no First Amendment freedoms. He’s sitting in an embassy in London. He’s not a US citizen’.”

    Hitchens says, “It is not clear quite how even the CIA director could make that judgment. He also made a long and excoriating personal denunciation of Mr Assange and WikiLeaks. Mr Pompeo has since been promoted by Donald Trump to the still more important post of Secretary of State. If any British official or Minister of similar standing had made these statements about a person accused of a crime in a UK court, the trial would have to be stopped on the grounds that it had been hopelessly prejudiced. It is hard to see, in this case, how an English court could place Mr Assange into the hands of a justice system where the equivalent of a Cabinet Minister can freely denounce the accused before a jury has even been sworn in.” Here Hitchens is referring to the importance of not trying a suspect in the Court of public opinion as this act, if proven, can derail even a very solid criminal case.

    Hitchens recounts how, “Interestingly, a very similar event has happened before. During the Vietnam War, almost 50 years ago, the courageous and principled Daniel Ellsberg, a former lieutenant in the US Marines, did much the same. He supplied the so-called ‘Pentagon Papers’ to the New York Times. Eventually every court, of law and of public opinion and of history, concluded that Mr Ellsberg – a US citizen operating in the US – was not only innocent but justified in his actions. They also concluded that the US authorities of the time had behaved atrociously. Thugs hired by the White House even broke into Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office, looking for dirt on him (and failed to find any). The US government tried to prosecute him under that country’s Espionage Act, though he plainly was not a spy, just as Mr Assange is not a spy.”

    Elaborating on the Ellsberg case Hitchens says, “The documents were of no military value to an enemy. But they were deeply embarrassing to the US government, showing that they had systematically lied to the American people and to Congress about the disastrous Vietnam adventure. Almost everyone now accepts that Ellsberg’s action did America a favour, and hastened the end of this futile and bloody episode. You can certainly argue that the WikiLeaks papers could have had a similar effect on the Iraq War and many other questionable foreign policies and actions. They were deeply inconvenient to many of the more worrying parts of the American state. That, not alleged espionage, is why the US government is now so angry with Mr Assange. Significantly, Daniel Ellsberg himself is now one of Mr Assange’s foremost supporters.” Even among the rampantly nationalistic in the UK, the Iraq
    War was not a popular conflict and to most it is seen as an absolute disaster that may have increased our vulnerability to terrorism.

    Hitchens says that, “The other powerful evidence that this is a political extradition, and not a genuine criminal case, is its extraordinary timing. The leaks took place in 2010. Around the same time, in a TV interview, Donald Trump said WikiLeaks was ‘disgraceful’ and suggested there be a ‘death penalty’ for its actions. But prosecutors working for the Obama administration (2009-2017) decided, for legal reasons, not to prosecute Mr Assange almost seven years ago. They concluded that charging Assange would have meant they would then have to prosecute any journalist who published information alleged to endanger national security. That would have violated the US constitution. A former spokesman for the Department of Justice, Matthew Miller, told the Washington Post in November 2013: ‘If you are not going to prosecute journalists for publishing classified information, which the Department is not, then there is no way to prosecute Assange.”

    Hitchens says that, “by April 2017, with Donald Trump in the White House, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions had completely reversed this position. He announced at a press conference in El Paso, Texas, that the arrest of Mr Assange was now a ‘priority’. Mr Trump has, in fact, veered wildly on the issue. When WikiLeaks published emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, Trump and his campaign gleefully seized on them. Mr Trump at one point even said ‘I love WikiLeaks’ and rejoiced that the source was ‘like a treasure trove’. But his love quickly faded once he was in the White House and increasingly reliant on Washington’s security and military apparatus.” However, typical Mail readers who might admire Trumps brash, belligerent style do not like the UK being pushed around by US bullying tactics, that is key to gaining widespread public support in this case.

    Hitchens recounts that, “Then things became even odder. Mr Assange’s supporters say that in August 2017, a US Congressman, Dana Rohrabacher, visited Mr Assange in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, accompanied by a Trump associate called Charles Johnson. The Assange campaign say this strange delegation offered Mr Assange a pardon. In return he would have to say Russia was not involved in leaking the Democratic National Committee emails which Mr Trump had made such effective use of in the election campaign. Mr Trump has, unsurprisingly, denied that Mr Rohrabacher made any such offer on his behalf. Mr Rohrabacher was quick to back up the President. But what if this astonishing thing is true, along with the Assange team’s claims of surveillance and break-ins against them?” This is a mute point because Assange, who does not reveal any confidential sources, has always maintained that the leak did not emanate from a Russian source.

    Hitchens recalls that, “By April 2017, with Donald Trump in the White House, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions had completely reversed this position. He announced at a press conference in El Paso, Texas, that the arrest of Mr Assange was now a ‘priority’. Mr Trump has, in fact, veered wildly on the issue.” Hitchens logically claims that, “A non-political criminal prosecution would not have been subject to such wild political veering and switching. Nor would it have been openly supported by senior government figures.” Our biggest battle is to convince the Judiciary that ‘the people’ fully realize Julian Assange is a Whistleblowing hero and political prisoner who exposed the inhumanity and corruption of the US Government. This extradition hearing represents the vile torture and persecution of an innocent reporter doing the standard job of an investigative journalist in uncovering the hidden scandals that have served to keep our families safe and cannot be placed under Government threat.

    Has Hitchens stirred enough outrage to get Mail readers concerned over the unwarranted punishment he will face in the US? He says, “There is a final part of this which is deeply alarming. If the UK gives Mr Assange to the US Federal authorities, he passes for ever into a prison system quite different from ours. You may think, and I would agree with you, that our penal system has a lot wrong with it. But the USA’s has different faults. It can be astonishingly cruel to unconvicted defendants, placing them under special measures that mean they are almost wholly cut off from normal human society. If Mr Assange is then convicted by a US court, and this is statistically very likely, he could face decades in a modern dungeon such as the notorious ‘Supermax’ prison at Florence, Colorado, more or less buried alive with little hope of ever seeing freedom again. He is far from well at the moment. Those who know him fear that this might be more than he could bear.”

    Peter Hitchens states categorically that, “Mr Assange is not a terrorist, a spy or a killer. There is as far as I know no evidence that any of his disclosures has, in fact, led to any harm being done to anyone. WikiLeaks redacted documents to avoid such harm, and tried to prevent unredacted publication of material in its possession. The idea that he should face the strong possibility of being entombed alongside terrorist killers does not really meet any test of justice.” I am not sure where such injustice stands with readers of the Daily Mail as they appear to lurch from one angry rant to the next, all too often, without engaging their moral compass; this makes them easily led by the divisive Tory propaganda spewed by Murdoch against the public good. But Hitchens enlists their support for his argument by saying, “Like me, you do not have to like him, or agree with him, to see this. It is easy to defend those we like and approve of. But it is in my view far more important to protect those we dislike and disapprove of, if they face injustice.”

    I really do not like Peter Hitchens; in debates on drug policy he is bombastic, arrogant and holier than thou in totally dominating the argument in complete disregard of other people’s opinions. That said, once in a while he really shocks me, by coming out swinging for the good guy; even more impressive when he openly admits to not liking our political hero Julian Assange. Hitchens doesn’t even mention the concocted Swedish sexual assault charges that I’m sure a sleazy tabloid like the Daily Fail made a huge deal of; sex sells ‘presstitute’ style of reporting. What is so important about this piece is the readership Hitchens is able to reach, who often present as deeply intolerant of human rights issues. So when narrow-minded, hard to win over, acquaintances rip into our friend Julian, Craig Murray might be a hard sell so point them to Peter Hitchens in their own familiar rag. I’m very pleased Hitchens went out on a limb to write this for an otherwise extremely hostile news outlet; that is its unique value in convincing the unconverted!

    It will be next to impossible to overcome the bias in Court that would sabotage this case and the US agenda for punishing Assange for ‘committing’ Journalism. There do appear strong grounds for appeal and how might the US resolve change under a different flavour of Hawk in the Whitehouse if Trump is defeated. I am not at all confident of a Biden victory, do not trust the man and doubt it would radically change US policy on this issue. We do need to apply pressure in the UK and I believe even just a few articles that incite a reaction from those who are so vocal about our national sovereignty will help. However, I am even more pessimistic about the demise of justice in this country with Priti Patel as Home Secretary in this rogue Tory cabal who are so eager to trash a legally binding agreement over Brexit. This is why I feel compelled to prioritize demanding a full Investigation of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election because the only way to derail the deadly Tory Government agenda is to force them out of office. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59906 Reply
    Kim Sanders-Fisher
    Guest

    In a response to a comment of mine to Craig’s post “Bayleaf” offered up a little known piece of information on our fast eroding freedoms. Bayleaf reported that, “Re. the plundering of personal data, the UK government has quietly used the Coronavirus Act 2020 to authorise the “Retention of Fingerprints and DNA Profiles in the Interests of National Security” It’s been done via a Statutory Instrument, so bypassing any parliamentary scrutiny. What other mission creep towards a harsh totalitarian agenda has whistled by us unnoticed as the public was wilfully distracted by the compliant BBC and Mainstream Media offering bucket-loads of ‘Handyfloss’ on safe bets for holiday getaways no one can afford? The Handyfloss on the minutia of Jonny Depp’s dirty dobie was sickeningly copious during weeks of tawdry hearings, but Assange extradition determining the ultimate demise of press freedom globally and the criminalization of investigative journalism to obscure atrocities committed by an all powerful state goes unreported.

    Where are we going to? Look to history for a very strong clue! “The Enabling Act gave Hitler plenary powers and followed on the heels of the Reichstag Fire Decree, which had abolished most civil liberties and transferred state powers to the Reich government. The combined effect of the two laws was to transform Hitler’s government into a legal dictatorship.” Tories never let a good crisis go to waste; the plan was to exploit crash-out Brexit chaos, but Covid 19 has proved just as opportune a moment to consolidate power. The Pandemic was Johnson/Cummings’s ‘Reichstag Fire moment to impose draconian rules and penalties to keep the populous in check while they plundered state funds. Those innocuous sounding ‘statutory instruments’ will sneak in new laws by stealth without debate or Parliamentary consultation; these ‘Henry the eighth powers’ represent the Johnson/Cummings Enabling Act. But, the similarities with the strategy that facilitated the rise of Europe most infamous Dictator do not end there.

    The US Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) outlines how Hitler seized power. They state that, “The Enabling Act allowed the Reich government to issue laws without the consent of Germany’s parliament, laying the foundation for the complete Nazification of German society. The law was passed on March 23, 1933, and published the following day. Its full name was the ‘Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Reich’.” Johnson/Cummings have chosen a briefer, but equally deceptive propaganda pitch with their lies about an agenda of ‘levelling up’. USHMM say the Enabling Act, “it became the cornerstone of Adolf Hitler’s dictatorship. The act allowed him to enact laws, including ones that violated the Weimar Constitution, without approval of either parliament or Reich President von Hindenburg.” The really frightening thing about comparing the radical authoritarian actions of Hitler with the situation we now face here in Brittan is that we do not even have a written constitution in the UK!

    The USHMM Website states that, “On the day of the vote on the so-called Enabling Act, the Nazi leadership sent SS troops into the makeshift Reichstag building, formerly the Kroll Opera, to intimidate other political parties.” They say that, “Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party used intimidation and persecution to ensure the passage of the law.” So what did that require? USHMM report that, “They prevented all 81 Communists and 26 of the 120 Social Democrats from taking their seats, detaining them in Nazi-controlled camps.” Following the fake ‘landslide victory’ in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election the Johnson/Cummings Dictatorship do not need to resort to such drastic measures. Under the fraudulent guise of a legitimate Government they need only intimidate and threaten their own Tory MPs into complying with their will or having the Whip removed. Despite strong opposition to corrupt laws, like the one enable them to break an International Treaty, it only takes a simple majority to force toxic legislation through Parliament.

    The votes needed for Hitler to pass his Enabling Act required extreme measures, “Since the passage of this law depended upon a two-thirds majority vote in parliament, Hitler and the Nazi Party used intimidation and persecution to ensure the outcome they desired. They prevented all 81 Communists and 26 of the 120 Social Democrats from taking their seats, detaining them in so-called protective detention in Nazi-controlled camps. In addition, they stationed SA and SS members in the chamber to intimidate the remaining representatives and guarantee their compliance. In the end, the law passed with more than the required two-thirds majority, with only Social Democrats voting against it.” Johnson/Cummings did not even enlist the help of Gavin Williamson and his pet tarantula to coerce the rebels into line. Johnson had sacrificed his own Commons majority to enforce his will before the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, but the theft of postal votes complemented by Cummings’s weapons grade PsyOps had secured his win.

    According to the USHMM in 1933 Germany, “The Supreme Court did nothing to challenge the legitimacy of this measure. Instead, it accepted the majority vote, overlooking the absence of the Communist delegates and the Social Democrats who were under arrest. In fact, most judges were convinced of the legitimacy of the process and did not understand why the Nazis proclaimed a ‘Nazi Revolution.’ Erich Schultze, one of the first Supreme Court judges to join the Nazi Party, declared that the term ‘revolution’ did not refer to an overthrow of the established order but rather to Hitler’s radically different ideas. In the end, German judges—who were among the few who might have challenged Nazi objectives—viewed Hitler’s government as legitimate and continued to regard themselves as state servants who owed him their allegiance and support.” The heavy bias of the BBC and Mainstream Media convinced the British public that the totally unfathomable 2019 result was legitimate, but it requires robust investigation.

    In reality Hitler faced a far tougher challenge than Johnson/Cummings because in Germany it was necessary to get a two thirds majority in the Reichstag to amend the Constitution; sorry for repeating this important point The UK doesn’t even have a written constitution! Taken from the USHMM Website and “Translated from Reichsgesetzblatt I, 1933, p. 141. – The Reichstag has enacted the following law, which has the agreement of the Reichsrat and meets the requirements for a constitutional amendment, which is hereby announced: Article 1 In addition to the procedure prescribed by the Constitution, laws of the Reich may also be enacted by the Reich Government. This includes laws as referred to by Articles 85, Sentence 2, and Article 87 of the Constitution.” The PM didn’t need to debate or consult Parliament before ditching DfID, but there was no way to protest the demise of Public Health England in the middle of a Public Health crisis either, because the Johnson/Cummings Dictatorship is now all powerful.

    USHMM report that in the Enablement Act, “Article 2 Laws enacted by the Reich Government may deviate from the Constitution as long as they do not affect the institutions of the Reichstag and the Reichsrat. The rights of the President remain undisturbed.” Hitler needed to design a way to circumvent the German Constitution, an inconvenience our PM doesn’t have to consider. Hitler then added his stamp of supreme authority with “Article 3 Laws enacted by the Reich Government shall be issued by the Chancellor and announced in the Reichsgesetzblatt. They shall take effect on the day following the announcement, unless they prescribe a different date. Articles 68 to 77 of the Constitution do not apply to laws enacted by the Reich Government.” Any attempt to reign in Hitler’s absolute power was prohibited. Johnson/Cummings do not even feel obliged to give the public more than a few hours to absorb and adhere to their dictates, unless the PM sees a commercial reason for postponement.

    USHMM report that in the Enablement Act, “Article 4 Reich treaties with foreign states that affect matters of Reich legislation shall not require the approval of the bodies concerned with legislation. The Reich Government shall issue the regulations required for the execution of such treaties.” Even Tories who are drastically opposed to the latest Johnson/Cummings threat to the EU Brexit negotiations, authorizing the violation of an International Treaty signed just a few shots months ago, feel helpless to derail it. The stolen majority of THE Covert 2019 Rigged Election and the treat of being booted out of the Tory Party keep this crooked cabal in power and that power is growing by the day. USGMM include, “Article 5 This law takes effect with the day of its proclamation. It loses force on April 1, 1937, or if the present Reich Government is replaced by another.” It ain’t over until we say it’s over! Here in the UK there is nothing to stop Johnson/Cummings proroguing Parliament again, postponing or rigging the next election.

    It might seem shockingly harsh to compare our Government with that of Nazi Germany, but all of the indications are that we are moving rapidly in that direction and we have even fewer protections in place at the onset. With the new “Rule of Six” our basic freedoms are being controlled even more drastically. Groups larger that this can work together, children and students can study together, we can travel on packed public transport and please keep spending money no matter how packed the venue. The elite are excluded as we cannot curtail their blood sports like thirty at a grouse shoot, but family get together are out. And we are encouraged to ‘shop’ our own neighbours. If your family of four or five casually come across another similar sized family in the open on the street and you stop to socialize Priti Patel wants to charge you with the crime of “mingling!” This draconian lopsided clampdown will target minorities and the working poor when not slaving for a pittance, but protests can be shut down too.

    Gagging the press is an early priority for any rising Dictatorship so the Julian Assange trial is an opportunity to clamp down on Whistleblowers as we do the bidding of the US. I was appalled to discover that the Blair era 2003 Anglo-US Extradition Treaty, “allows the US to demand extradition of UK citizens and others for offences allegedly committed against US law.” According to Peter Hitchens, “This is so even though the supposed offence may have been committed in the UK by a person living in the UK.” He rightly argues, “Do we really want the hand of a foreign power to be able to reach into our national territory at will and pluck out anyone it wants to punish?” This extraordinary overreach comes at a time when the US have refused to extradite a woman who falsely claimed diplomatic immunity to escape to America after negligently killing one of our citizens. The UK continues to rant about independence from the EU while it remains week and servile towards US dominance, so where will we stand in a trade deal?

    In a Spiked Article entitled, “Julian Assange: the press-freedom trial of the century,” they say, “America’s attempt to treat journalism as espionage poses a terrifying threat to the free press. Assange’s publication methods were certainly radical – he and Wikileaks became famous for their attitude to transparency, publishing vast quantities of classified documents, unfiltered by the usual editorial choices made by journalists. But had he worked for a mainstream outlet, many of his methods for obtaining information might have been understood as normal practice for investigative journalists.” They say, “what he is accused of amounts to his attempts to cultivate a source, to get more information out of them and to keep them anonymous. A key question for the current hearings is whether the extradition attempt is politically motivated. Extradition for political purposes is expressly prohibited in the most recent UK-US extradition treaty, signed in 2003. This surely is political.”

    Spiked report that, “It is no secret that Assange is loathed by the US security state. He has been under investigation for 10 years now. In 2010, Wikileaks published its most significant leaks, including the ‘Collateral Murder’ footage, the ‘Afghan War Diary’, the ‘Iraq War logs’ and the US State Department’s diplomatic cables. These generated an enormous number of stories. Practically every news outlet in the free world has covered some aspect of what Assange made public, causing enormous headaches in Washington. At the time of those leaks, the Obama administration considered using the same Espionage Act to take down Assange, but in the end it declined to prosecute him. In the words of one Justice Department official, doing so would mean it ‘would also have to prosecute the New York Times and other news organisations and writers who published classified material, including the Washington Post and Britain’s Guardian newspaper’.” It is a great pity so few of them are vigorously defending Assange now.

    I was excited about voting for Obama, but I have felt deeply let down by some of his decisions in office. Spiked report that, “The Obama administration was no friend of leakers and whistleblowers – it prosecuted three times as many whistleblowers under the Espionage Act as every prior administration combined. But it at least recognised the disastrous precedent prosecuting Assange would set for publishers and journalists, who uncover and publish classified information as a routine matter.” Spiked say, “the next administration took a different view. In 2017, Mike Pompeo was appointed as director of the CIA by Donald Trump. In April 2017, he delivered a menacing speech branding Wikileaks a ‘hostile intelligence service’. He attacked Assange as a ‘fraud’ and a ‘narcissist, who has created nothing of value’.”

    Spiked report that, “Assange, Pompeo said, would have been on ‘the wrong side of history’ in the 1930s and 1940s. In a blistering attack on the First Amendment, Pompeo declared: ‘We can no longer allow Assange and his colleagues the latitude to use free-speech values against us. To give them the space to crush us with misappropriated secrets is a perversion of what our great Constitution stands for. It ends now’.” What if conscientious journalists had relentlessly reported the needless loss of life during the Bengal famine, forcing the Government to act would they or beloved Winston be on the wrong side of history? “Pompeo has since risen to the role of secretary of state. A week after Pompeo’s tirade of smears, Trump’s first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, said that arresting Assange was a ‘priority’ as part of a broader crackdown on government leaks. Within hours of this announcement, the authorities began to prepare the charges. Can Assange expect a fair hearing given these pronouncements of hostility from on high?”

    Spiked are equally scathing of our UK Judiciary saying, “The British state has behaved no better. Recently, it allowed the US to move the goalposts in the middle of the hearings. The first stage of the hearing began in February, though it was paused for the pandemic. In the interim, at the 11th hour, the US issued a brand new, wider indictment. Though it contained no new charges, it included additional accusations that Assange had recruited hackers and had conspired with hacking groups. His defence team was given just weeks to respond to the new allegations before the hearings resumed. The US Justice Department, in contrast, has had 10 years to get its story straight. The setting of the first half of the hearing spoke volumes as well: Woolwich Crown Court is adjoined to HMP Belmarsh and is usually used to try terrorists. Before any verdict had been delivered, it seems as if the UK was happy to give the impression that Assange was an enemy of the state. (The second half is taking place in the Old Bailey.)”

    Spiked point out that, “You could be forgiven for wondering why there has been so little press coverage and commentary over what could well prove to be the most important press-freedom trial of the century so far. Wikileaks once provided journalists with a rich treasure trove of stories, and Assange’s conviction would pose a terrifying danger to press freedom.” They say, “at the same time, Assange’s leaks did not only expose the wrongdoings of governments and state agencies – in a way, their also exposed the journalists who had propagandised on governments’ behalf. These ‘official truth-tellers’, says veteran journalist John Pilger, were ‘exposed as collaborators’. Indeed, those journalists who continually bang the drum for the latest Western war against whichever foreign country the dartboard lands on probably ought not to fear the strong arm of the state. But journalists who are interested in exposing the lies and the wrongdoings of their governments should fear the precedent which could be set by Assange. If the US succeeds, it could turn investigative journalism into an act of treason.”

    The alarming comparisons with the rise of Hitler in Nazi Germany are intended to shock because we are marching steadily in that direction. The authoritarian dictates and harsh restrictions, lies, propaganda, ‘othering’ in a blame to avoid accountability massive misdirection of public funds, manipulation of the press, prohibiting protest this will all turn ugly very soon. When the deprivation of unemployment and mass evictions due to Covid 19 are compounded by the food shortages of crash-out Brexit we could see rioting on the streets. The Tories are prepared to draft in the army to hit back hard. Good democratically elected socialist Governments have lifted millions out of poverty; Tyrants have been responsible or actively killed tens of thousands and clung on to power for decades. The injustice faced by Assange should worry us all, who will be next? We must overturn the Covert 2019 Rigged Election because the only way to derail the deadly Tory Government agenda is to force them out of office. DO NOT MOVE ON!

    #59909 Reply
    N_
    Guest

    “Unwritten constitution” is bullsh*t. A constitution must be written. Saying otherwise is taking the p*ss. It would be amusing, were it not so sad, when this phrase gets parroted by British journalists, politicians, and experts. Not one of these idiots has ever considered whether or not it stands up.

    It means “Don’t worry. Privately-schooled poshies have your best interests at heart; they know they can’t simply do whatever they want; and that’s the way they like it.” But of course if it were actually said like that, it would be a case of “I’m not lying to you”.

    The phrase means “Don’t have a revolution”. It means “tradition is democratic”. See what I mean about taking the p*ss.

    It is not surprising that it was coined around the time that revolution was going on across the Channel in France.

Viewing 40 posts - 281 through 320 (of 336 total)
Reply To: Elections Aftermath: Was our 2019 Vote & the EU Referendum Rigged? #TORYRIG2019
Your information: