This Sunday I face Labour’s Star Chamber – my crime is supporting Palestine and opposing Zionist Apartheid

When I was informed, on November 2^nd that my hearing was to take place on December 11^th I was in hospital, recovering from surgery.  I immediately responded asking that the hearing be postponed till after the New Year. Any reasonable or fair minded person would have granted this immediately, bearing in mind that I had been suspended for 20 months.

However the Chair of the NCC and whoever else was implicated in that decision, are anything but fair minded.  Their remit was to be rid of me as soon as practicably possible. It was clear, from the evidence that I produced at the court that I was being treated differently, even from other accused persons. 

The Secretary to the NCC, Jane Shaw, was immensely pleased when she informed me that a photograph had been obtained showing me at Brighton railway station on November 4^th waiting for a train to London in order to go on a Palestine demonstration.  Apparently this was conclusive proof that I was able to reply in time to the charges laid against me.

I was therefore left with no other option but to apply to the High Court for an Injunction preventing a hearing on December 11^th.  Suffice to say the High Court was not impressed with the Labour Party’s reasoning. Counsel for the Labour Party didn’t even mention this photograph. Nor was Natalie Connor able to explain away the rush to judgement in the light of the 20 months suspension.

Sir Stephen Phillips found that ‘the Labour Party had dealt brusquely and without any real reasons’ with my application for an extension of time.  At a cost to Labour Party members of some £10,000, Justice Phillips granted me an injunction preventing the holding a hearing until 8^th January 2018.

The NCC Guidelines (Appendix 6) stipulate that no regard should be paid to any injustices prior to the notification of a hearing date. The Chair insisted on interpreting the Guidelines as narrowly as possible, regardless of the prejudice to me. Chapter 6(D)(i) of the Rules states that ‘the NCC is entitledto (and will) act on the basis that the charges are properly brought.’  There is however a caveat:  ‘unless it [a complaint] is material or relevant to the consideration of the evidence...’ 

Clearly not having enough time to respond to the charges against me was relevant to the evidence.  In any event Chapter 6(2) states that the Guidelines ‘do not form part of the Party’s rules.’ and s.3 stipulates that ‘Inevitably a degree of flexibility is required to deal with unforeseen circumstances or unusual cases.’  Chapter 1 Clause IX stipulates that the NCC ‘shall have the power... to modify its procedures in order to meet the circumstances of any particular case to ensure fairness to both the individual and the Party.’

It is clear that the Chair of the NCC in wilfully disregarding my representations displayed bias and prejudice and disregarded any notion of fairness.  I would therefore request that the Chair recuse themselves and plays no further part in proceedings.

It speaks volumes that capitalist justice, the High Court, set aside the Chair’s shoddy reasoning.  No doubt the Chair first sought ‘advice’ from those conducting the investigation. If the person who made the initial ruling has any integrity they will withdraw of their own accord.  However I realise that integrity is not at a premium amongst Labour’s apparatchiks.

This submission should be read in conjunction with the submission which I have already tendered as well of course as the expert witness reports.

I have already referred in my previous submission to the IHRA.  On page 2 of thebundlethere is a footnote reference ‘See IHRA definition of Antisemitism (Tab 9, page 179)’. In fact the definition is spread out over 2 pages, 178 and 179.  This rendition of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism comes from a press release  from the Romanian Chair of the IHRA Conference in 2016.  It has always struck me as strange that the only source documentation for the IHRA definition is a scrappy press release. 

The allegations under the heading Charge 1 are a mixture of the inane, the superficial, the tedious, the mendacious and trivial.  Apart from being based on a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998, as social media posts are my own property, they are irrelevant.  The social media posts which have been copied cannot be sourced and have not been sourced and therefore the context cannot be determined.

Twitter is the medium of quite bitter exchanges at times and heated confrontations.  In only displaying one side of these confrontations McNicol’s apparatchiks have displayed their usual fair mindedness. 

There is also deliberate policy of ignoring abuse by anti-Corbyn/rightwing Labour members on social media when it is directed at the Left and immediately picking up on any response when it is by the Left.  That is why it is absurd to even try to go through what is half the picture.  Below I give one important example:

Councillor Morgan is a committed supporter of Progress.  He is someone for whom truth and lies have little or no meaning.  They are mere expedients.  On July 9^th 2016 Brighton District Labour Party held its AGM.  Because so many people, over 600 turned up and the hall that was booked was too small, there had to be three sittings.  Momentum supported candidates won by over 2-1.  Immediately allegations of foul play, in particular spitting, were made. They were made primarilyby Warren Morgan.  Yet they were untrue. A dossier compiled by Greg Hadfield proved this beyond any doubt.  Greg was subsequently suspended because he insisted on the truth coming out. Videofootage was subsequently obtained proving that there was no spitting. Katherine Buckingham, who was appointed by the Disputes Committee to produce an Inquiry Report refused to even look at the video when she realised that it would contradict Morgan’s lies.  This is democracy and fairness in the Court of McNicol.

Last September Morgan was up to his old tricks again.  This time it was an allegation that the Labour Party was overrun by ‘anti-Semitism’.  He made the headlines with threats that the Labour conference would not be welcome in Brighton.  All Labour Party Branches which have discussed it have either called on him to resign or apologise or both.  Brighton Kemptown CLP has now endorsed these calls. Morgan’s comments were taken up by Theresa May in Question Time and thus used against the Labour Party. A clear case of bringing the Party into disrepute.  Morgan stated in his Open Letter to Iain McNicol that:

Morgan was referring to a comment made by a speaker at a Free Speech on Israel meeting that all subjects should be discussed, including whether the Holocaust occurred. It is a standard free speech argument, it didn’t indicate any agreement with Holocaust denial.

Morgan’s attack on me for simply being at the meeting were a classic case of guilt by association.  I therefore made a complaint, not once but three times, (12^th October, 16^th and 24^th November) to McNicol. McNicol has refused to even acknowledge my complaint.

Realising that making a complaint to crooked McNicol was useless, since Labour’s complaints system is only designed for use by the Right, I decided to make a complaint to Brighton and Hove Council’s Standards Board. Whilst I am unable to provide full details of the outcome at the present time, I am pleased to say that Warren Morgan has been forced to amend his post above and has now deleted all references to me. He has in addition offered, via the relevant Standards Board officer, an apology.

However this was obtained through a statutory process.  It would have been impossible to achieve any measure of recompense through the Labour Party’s Complaints System because it is a factional instrument of the Right.  It does not contain any element of fairness which is why I had go to the High Court to rectify the bias of the Chair of this Panel and what Steve Bell called the National Kangaroo Court. 

This submission has therefore been compiled for the record not in the hope that the leopard will change its spots or that you will overcome the habits of a lifetime and reach a decision on the weight of the evidence rather than your ingrained biases.

Labour’s Compliance Unit have gone to great length to try to gather samples of abusive posts by me. Such things as ‘Gay Zios make me puke’ which is no more than an expression of belief about gays who use their own oppression to justify the oppression of others or references to ‘Zio scum’ seem to disturb them no end.  All of the above posts lack any context. The latter comment is in response to abuse from a Zionist and was entirely justified.

In fact, as the 6 pages of abusive tweets I have already submitted demonstrate, far from me abusing others I have been the victim of abusive social media posts.  The use of the word ‘scum’ is perfectly justified for racists or fascists.  I realise that members of the Panel are likely have no experience or involvement in anti-fascist activity and those who compiled the dodgy dossier are even less likely, but if they had then they would know that one of the key slogans shouted on anti-fascist demonstrations was ‘Nazi scum off the streets’.  In Brighton we had a variant on this ‘Thick and dumb, Nazi scum’.  No doubt McNicol’s poisonous scribes would have declared we were being oppressive to the local fascists!

The exchange on Warren Morgan’s Facebook page was between a former Labour councillor Craig Turton and Warren Morgan.  In response to Craig Turton’s statement that ‘Greenstein is a poisonous piece of shit – the sooner he’s kicked out of the party the better’ Morgan responds ‘Thanks Craig, appreciate that.  Hope you are well.’

If I had posted this truly abusive post to or about another member of the Labour Party then the Compliance Unit would have been down on it like a ton of bricks. My posts have been robust but not abusive.  They have primarily been political not personal.

I therefore made a complaint about Warren Morgan’s posts to McNicol. What was the response? Not a dicky bird. Crooked McNicol’s only concern is abuse by the Left not abuse against the Left. 

No doubt there will be some tendentious excuse by Panel members as to why selective indignation by McNicol’s apparatchiks is irrelevant. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. I expect the panel will follow the example of the 3 wise monkeys and see, say and hear nothing. However it is important to put these things down for the record.

In Charge 13 exception is taken to my description of John Mann MP as someone ‘addicted to murder and racism.’  This is my assessment of the rent-a-mouth who accused Ken Livingstone of being a supporter of Hitler! Mann has gone out of his way to accuse opponents of Israel of ‘anti-Semitism’.Itwas his Committee that was behind the introduction of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance which conflates anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. Mann also penned an open letter (27.7.15) to Jeremy Corbyn accusing him, during the first leadership election, of having turned a blind eye to child abuse.  This disgusting man used the suffering of children in order to mount a political vendetta against the soon to be leader of the Labour Party.  It is about time that Mann was made accountable.  I regret nothing.

Mann is the man who alleged that an open letter to him by a 90 year old Jewish Dr Sam Glatt, a Labour Party member, telling him to stop undermining Jeremy Corbyn was a forgery.  It was only when I obtained a signed copy of a letter denying Mann’s spurious allegations that Mann’s defamatory Facebook post was taken down.

As someone who has deliberately targeted supporters of the Palestinians as ‘anti-Semitic’ my accusations against him are well founded.  It is suggested further that my comments are ‘potentially defamatory’ .  Fine.  Let him sue, bearing in mind that the comments are not only true but fair comment – a defence in all defamation cases.

I do not intend, in view of the clear and demonstrable hypocrisy of my accusers to waste any more time  on social media posts unless there is a wider political that needs making

Allegation No: 11 - The idiot who compiled the 189 page bundle makes repeated reference to the above phrase but fails to point out that it can be found on p.39. He pompously states that ‘the singling out of Gay Zionists has caused offence’.  I singled out no one. In any event it is no business of the snoop in compliance.  He should not be monitoring my social media posts and then s/he would not take offence.

Political debate often causes offence.  Only those who wanted to be offended would have read what was an exchange between Independent journalist, herself an Israeli Mira bar Hillel and myself.  Mira pointed out that Elton John had dedicated his Your Song to Israel.  She might also have pointed out that Elton John is a despicable racist who broke the boycott of South Africa when he played in Sun City.  But maybe the idiot who compiled this thinks that that Boycott too was racist?

Allegation No:s 21 & 22        The waste of space who collected the two tweets referred to here allege they are in Tab 5.  They are not.  If the idiot had bothered to put in page numbers then they might have been found by me rather than wasting my time.

The first allegation refers to my alleged comment ‘racist whore’  I don’t know what the context of this tweet was, assuming I said it.  However if it was in reaction to the racist rubbish that I regularly receive, which the idiot who collected these tweets deliberately ignored, then it is understandable.

The second allegation that I referred to another member of the party as ‘a Janus faced whore who bears the impression of the last person who sat on him’ is not to my knowledge a saying of mine.  I’m not a student of the classics!  It might however refer to my applausefor a similar comment by a Terry Kelly about Owen Jones.  Seems most appropriate!  I did think it had originated with George Galloway but I might be mistaken.  If the person who collected this had bothered to reference it then the context might have been obvious.  I do not have the time to source all these given that over 17 months Labour’s useless bureaucrats were unable to reference their findings.

If we want to talk about anti-Semitic and racist tweets here are few that McNicol’s minions didn’t locate 

McNicol’s monkeys spent a lot of time monitoring my blog, my social media posts and much else.  First they suspended me, then they went digging.  However they did not unearth anything that is remotely racist.  Political yes.  Socialist too.  However what is more interesting is what they ignored.  They certainly learnt nothing.

On page 9 of the Bundle, accompanying Complaint No. 2 from the JLM, presumably from Jeremy Newmark, there is a tweet by me saying that if you have the racist JLM taking a training course on anti-Semitism you may as well invite Nick Griffin of the BNP.  I stand by this remark.  Asking racists to take a course on opposing racism beggars belief.  I also made the joke that it’s like asking the late Dr Harold Shipman to take a course on medical ethics.   Clearly, apart from all his other deficiencies, Newmark doesn’t possess a sense of humour either.

There seem to be a host of pages in the 189 page bundle that do not seem to be attached to any charges.  Pages 127-137, 158-162 focus on blog posts criticising the Jewish Socialists Group over their lack of support for Jackie Walker.  All very interesting but what relevance is it to the charges against me?   Or is just general surveillance and a means of creating jobs at Southside to have semi-permanent monitoring of my blog? 

It is now nearly a year since Gerald Kaufman, the then father of the House of Commons died.  When I first met him he was a died-in-the-wool Zionist.  However the actions and behaviour of Israel over the years had taken its toll of the man who coined the ‘longest suicide note in history’ pun to describe Labour’s 1983 Manifesto.  Sir Gerald, although on the Right of the Labour Party,, was a dedicated humanitarian and he had spoken out about Israel’s war crimes, especially in regard to Gaza.  That was why the Zionist movement loathed him.  No less than 10% of the bundle is devoted to my blog posts on Sir Gerald.  Why?

On page 138 in my appreciation on Sir Gerald’s death I reprint the famous speech he gave in 2009 at the time of Operation Cast Lead when Israel killed 1,400 people in Gaza.   Sir Gerald denounced this in no uncertain terms comparing the actions of Israel in killing Palestinian grandmothers to the actions of Nazi soldiers who killed his grandmother in a Polish ghetto.  Perhaps the cretins of the Compliance Unit want to have a posthumous denunciation of Sir Gerald for offending against the even more cretinous IHRA definition of anti-Semitism?

On page 139 we have the obnoxious John Mann being reported as saying that ‘Kaufman is a disgrace to Parliament and the Labour Party.’ 

On pages 142-146 there is a blog post ‘Sussex Friends of Israel – Our Code of Conduct is based on the principles of Respect, Responsibility and Integrity’and I then proceed to describe how this far Right Zionist group greeted news of Sir Gerald’s death.  It is truly a lesson in Zionist hypocrisies to contrast their noble statement of principles with the Facebook comments. 

The nicest comment from Peter Stockton was ‘On the basis that  you shouldn’t speak ill of the dead I’ll say nothing.’ Page 143

Since McNicol’s poisonous pigmies have seen fit to reproduce pages of my blog on Sir Gerald I will post some of these Zionist comments.  Perhaps the Compliance Unit was thinking of inquiring if these scumbags were members of the Labour Party?  Comments include:

Melvyn Wineglass:    Good riddance to this evil man who calls himself Jewish. (143)

Eddie Goldberg:        Looked like ET, behaved like a Nazi.  Glad he lived to see the Donald in power before he died.

Lizbeth Ruffman informs us ‘Nothing worse than an anti-Semitic Jew.  He will not rest in peace. (144)

Ros Ellis was quite witty ‘some days are better than others’

Reuven Magnes was fulsome in his tribute ‘And what a repulsive man he was’

Sylvia Goodman was effusive ‘Good riddance to bad rubbish’ (145)

Julian Kruger likewise ‘I’m sorry good riddance.  These Jews are the worst.’

Alex Ian was brevity itself ‘every dog has its day’

Landman again could only find one word ‘Traitor’ though to whom or what she didn’t say

Barry Ziderman was clearly the intellectual of SFI – ‘Good Labour politician – Lousy Jew.’

These are only a selection of the obnoxious and racist posts.  The question is why this blog post was included.  One can only assume that my posting these vile comments was seen as anti-Semitic and that McNicol’s monkey sympathised with the comments.

I am fortified in this belief by another post on Sir Gerald Kaufman’s death headed ‘Have they no shame?  Whilst his body is still warm Fake ‘Anti-Semitism’ Charity Continues to Defame Gerald Kaufman’s Memory.  Pages 150-155

The fake Zionist charity Campaign Against Anti-Semitismalso paid tribute to Sir Gerald.  ‘Sir Gerald Kaufman MP’s words have left a rotting stain on our institutions.’  So the question is why did McNicol’s poisonous dwarves think that these pages were worth including in the bundle? 

One of the most outrageous charges against me is that ‘Mr Greenstein publicly accused the Director of the Jewish Labour Movement and the Jewish Labour Movement itself of being “racist”.’ 

It is outrageous because of the assumption that there are certain beliefs which are outside an unwritten Labour Party catechism.  The narrow minded haters of free speech in the Compliance Unit not doubt believe that the racist Israeli state is a flourishing, western style democracy that just happens to be based in the Middle East.  After all it even participates in the Eurovision contest.

Yes the Jewish Labour Movement, the British wing or as it terms the ‘sister party’ of the Israeli Labour Party is without doubt racist.  Since when is it illegal to have a dissenting opinion in the Labour Party?  McNicol’s henchmen are waging  a war on free speech and debate via the misuse of the disciplinary process.

It would appear that the mere holding and expressing of a political opinion is, in itself, a disciplinary offence if it strays into criticism of Israel beyond the normal platitudes.  This is a police state mentality.  I don’t know the name of the narrow minded bigot drew up this charge but this is a complete waste of staff resources. What kind of disciplinary process is it which penalises a political opinion?  This is McCarthyism or maybe McNicolism gone mad.

It is a statement of fact that the JLM and Newmark have no hesitation in accusing other people, such as Ken Livingstone, of ‘anti-Semitism’. I am not aware that Newmark has ever faced disciplinary action for such allegations but accusing the JLM of racism is apparently a disciplinary offence.  #

Newmark is not only a racist liar but he is a perjurer.  The Employment Tribunal in Fraser v University College Union was quite explicit.  They did not believe a word of the evidence he gave when trying to frame UCU for racial discrimination because it passed pro BDS policy.

Allegation 34 consists of my posting an article stating that ‘The JLM are the British wing of the Israeli Labour Party and affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation.  Their role is to prettify Israeli racism and repression.’  Err yes.  What is the point of this idiotic allegation?  It is a fact married to an opinion.

The Israeli Labour Party was the party of government in Israel from 1948-1977 and again from 1992-96 and from 1999-2003.  It is unlikely to form a government again in Israel.  The JLM is a creature of this racist party and it is reasonable therefore to say that the JLM is racist.  The reasons why the Israeli Labour Party are racist include:

i.                    The ILP was responsible for the ethnic cleansing of ¾ million Palestinians in 1948 and for imposing military rule over those Arabs who continued to live in Israel until 1966.

ii.                  The ILP has supported every war against both Arab countries and the Palestinians. 

iii.                The ILP began the settlement of the Occupied Territories and its policy is to opposethe dismantling of any settlement.

iv.                The ILP erected the architecture of Israeli Apartheid such as the special place of the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund.  These are parastate organisations whose existence is predicated on promoting and favouring the interests of Jewish as opposed to non-Jewish citizens.  For example 93% of Israeli land is reserved for the benefit of Jews only and despite an adverse decision in Kadun v Israeli Land Administrationthe State of Israel has continued to discriminate in land allocation passing for example the Reception Committee Law in 2009.

v.                  It was the ILP which during the 1920s and 1930s when it dominated the Zionist movement campaigned on the policies of Jewish Land and Jewish Produce.  These policies were best described by David Ha'Cohen, former Managing Director of Solel Boneh, the Histadrut (Zionist Union) Building Company.

From its inception the Israeli Labour Party was a party of first economic and then political apartheid.

vi.                The ILP was not unique.  Similar Labour Parties were set up amongst the white settlers in South Africa, Canada, Australia and Rhodesia.  Almost without exception these parties were advocates of a colour bar.  In Australia for example the Labour Party and Trade Union Movement were the foremost proponents of a White Australian Policy. In no case were any of these parties represented inside the British Labour Party. For historical reasons, primarily the necessity to win over the Labour Party to support the Balfour Declaration, the ILP (then Mapai) was represented by Poale Zion as an affiliated socialist society. This is a historical anachronism, a relic of the British Empire.

vii.              It is a disgrace that the ILP is, via the JLM, an affiliated socialist society. If there is a need for a separate Jewish affiliate then it should not be affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation as the JLM is or have any connection with the ILP.

viii.            The WZO acts specifically to support one section of the Israeli population, its Jewish citizens. It funds and supports the illegal Jewish settlements on the West Bank. The JLM is affiliated to the WZO. In November Ha’aretz, published an editorial calling for the closure of the WZO’s ‘land theft division.’

ix.                It is, thus, an outrage, that a racist and apartheid supporting society, the JLM should be affiliated to the Labour Party.  In describing them as ‘racist’ I was merely telling the truth. 

x.                  Whereas in the former White Dominions the old Labour Parties have either disappeared (South Africa/Zimbabwe/Canada) or changed (Australia/New Zealand) in Israel the ILP is as racist as it always was.  If the ILP had changed its spots and de-Zionised in the same way as the Australian Labour Party had decolonised, then there might be some reason why the JLM should remain an affiliate.  However the JLM has not shake off its past.  On the contrary it is one of the main organisations behind the false anti-Semitism campaign.

xi.                The ILP today is as racist as it was when it was in government.  It is moving further to the racist Right in order to catch Netanyahu up: 

a.       Its previous leader Isaac Herzog declared that his nightmare was waking up to find that Israel had a Palestinian Prime Minister and 61 Palestinian Members of Israel’s Knesset (Parliament).  Who needs the Right when we have Isaac Herzog?  If someone were to say that they didn’t want a Jewish Prime Minister.  Would that be racist?

b.      Herzog also recently declared that he wanted to dispel the false impression that the ILP were ‘Arab Lovers’ 

c.       Herzog has now been succeeded by Avi Gabbay, who is even more right-wing. One of his first acts was to declare that none of the major settlement blocs on the West Bank will be demolished.

d.      Gabbay followed this up with full support for Netanyahu’s intention to physically deport Black African refugees from Sudan and Eritrea.  The reason?  Because they threaten, in Netanyahu’s words, the Jewish identity of Israel.  Racist?  Perish the thought. 

e.       None of this should be of any surprise.  As another former leader, Shelly Yacimovich stated, Labour is not a Left Wing Party.  Indeed in a British context, this redneck party of settlers would be between the Tory Party and UKIP.   It is noticeable that the JLM does not have links with the only leftist Zionist party, Meretz. 

Allegation 37 takes exception to my blog in which I say ‘It is time for Labour to say goodbye to Labour Friends of Israel.’Is this also anti-Semitic?  Why?  Are you confusing Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism?  If you look at your IHRA definition of anti-Semitism doesn’t it say something about blaming Jews for what Israel does and here you re saying that Jews and Israel are synonymous.  The Compliance Unit are total fucking idiots. 

I first became politically active in 1970 with the demonstrations against the South Africa Springboks Rugby Tour.  It was through organising the opposition to it that the Chair of the Young Liberals Peter Hain first came into public prominence.  At that time prominent Labour right-wingers like Ray Gunter, Minister of Labour, supported the arms trade with South Africa.

The State of Israel under the ILP was the closest ally of South Africa during the Apartheid years.  Israel not only helped South Africa develop a nuclear device it established an arms production company, Iskandor in South Africa.  And who can forget the visit of South Africa Premier John Vorster to Israel.  Despite having been interned during the war for Nazi sympathies Vorster made the obligatory visit to Yad Vashem the Holocaust propaganda museum.  Thus the victims of the Holocaust were used in the sanitisation of a white supremacist. Yad Vashem does this regularly having been the host for visits of Herr Strache, the neo-Nazi leader of Austria’s Freedom Party, Michal Kaminski et al.

Allegation No. 40 is that I posted a blog entitled ‘Crooked Iain McNicol... rides again’.  What is the objection?  McNicol presided over a regime where thousands of Labour Party members were suspended on the basis that they were voting for Jeremy Corbyn.  That seems to me to be crooked but if McNicol disagrees he can always sue for libel!

Allegation No. 41 seems to take exception to my remarks made after the death of the late Sir Gerald Kaufman.  Although still a Zionist, at least nominally, Sir Gerald was a rare species who actually believed in some of the rhetoric they engage in. I said that his famous speech in Parliament at the time of Operation Cast Lead ‘was unforgivable because we must not compare Israel to Nazi Germany.  Only Zionists may use the Holocaust to defend their bastard state of racial supremacy.’  What is the objection to this passage.  It is a fact that the Zionist movement shamelessly exploits the Holocaust for political purposes.  But it is held to be unforgivable when others make comparisons, as Sir Gerald did, between Israel’s actions and those of Nazi Germany. I disagree. 

Allegation No. 44 – Says I posted a blog ‘The abuse of anti-Semitism to silence free speech on Israel.’  Yes.  What is the objection?  False allegations of anti-Semitism are always used to silence support for the Palestinians.  It is a trite point.

Allegation No. 45 is that Labour NEC member Rhea  Wolfson stabbed Jackie Walker in the back.  Is the objection that I should have paraphrased Jess Philips comment on Jeremy Corbyn that she would rather stab him in the front?  Rhea Wolfson broke down in tears on the NEC when she thought Darren Williams wouldn’t vote to refer Jackie to the NCC.  It’s called fair comment although I doubt the fool who wrote these sentences understands why.

From pages 168-177 the bundle covers opinion poll reactions to the false anti-Semitism campaign in the Labour Party.  This is of course to be expected from Progress’s lackeys.  The technique is one that Goebbels himself was adept at.  Keep bombarding people with the lie that the Labour Party is overrun with anti-Semitism and some people will believe it. Then taken an Opinion Poll and guess what, you find that ‘Anti-Semitism is tolerated in Labour, say 8 in 10 Jews.’ pp. 168-171.

Let us subject this nonsense to analysis. People will remember the polls that told us, when a General Election was called back in April 2017, that Theresa May would win by a mile. She was a most popular politician. Why the Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, Joan Ryan MP even told her constituents that she understood why they preferred May to Corbyn.  Labour candidate defending London seat admits people have more confidence in Theresa May than Jeremy Corbyn.  A sentiment McNicol and those who compiled this dodgy dossier would no doubt agree with.  After all that is why this useless Labour General Secretary starved of resources and help any Tory held marginals since he believed Labour was going to lose seats.

Two of my blog posts that haven’t been included in the dodgy dossier are those of April 20th when I predicted that there would be either a hung Parliament or Labour could even win Labour Can Win if Corbyn is Bold and on June 3rd General Election - Is Labour on the threshold of victory? No one has been more disappointed with the success of Labour’s campaign than the Labour Right and Zionist Jewish Labour Movement

This cretinous Blairite idea that Labour must be in thrall to Opinion Polls and follow what is a reflection of the Conservative press is what lies at the root of Labour’s electoral weakness.  It stands for nothing but received opinion. It was to Corbyn’s credit that he went out and campaigned on a radical manifesto but that would never have happened if the logic displayed in this dodgy dossier had applied.

No doubt 80% of Jews have been convinced that Labour is too tolerant of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party.  Especially since there has been no pushback by Labour.  But if you were to ask what exactly Labour is tolerant of and what this anti-Semitism is then they would be stumped. It just goes to show you can fool most of the people all of the time.  It is the job of the Labour Party to rebut this idea not sustain it.

The idiots who pursue this nonsense may believe that by expelling a few Jewish and Black anti-racists that they will mollify the Jewish Chronicle and The Times and Mail.  That the headlines will disappear.  Appeasement never works as a strategy.  That is the lesson of Corbynism.  It is by standing up to this narrative that it will be defeated.  It is the cowardice of McNicol and the Compliance Unit sustains the idea that Labour is an anti-Semitic party.

Even Eric Pickles, former Tory Chairman and former Chair of the Conservative Friends of Israel  is quoted (p.171) to say that ‘modern anti-Semitism has been allowed to ‘flourish in the left of British politics, unchallenged by the Labour leadership.’  There are no depths that McNicol’s monkey’s won’t sink to.

Instead of repeating what Tory Zionists say perhaps Labour could take a leaf out of David Miliband’s book circa 2009. The Tories were in alliance in the European Parliament with the European Conservative and Reform group.  Members of this group included the Polish Law and Justice Party and the Latvian LNNK.  The sole member of the LNNK was Robert Zile.  Zile spends one Saturday every March marching with veterans of the Latvian SS. The Chair of the ECR group in 2009 was Law & Justice Party MEP Michal Kaminski, whose constituency when a member of the Polish Sejm included a village in Polish, Jedwabne

Now I know that the sycophants and incompetents who drew up this dossier will not have heard of Michal Kaminski or Jedwabne so let me educate you. Jedwabne was a village in Eastern Poland in 1941 where there was a large Jewish community. When the Russians left in June 1941 the Nazis moved in. But it wasn’t the Nazis who murdered the Jews of Jedwabne but some of their fellow Polish citizens. Up to 1600 Jews were rounded up and herded into a barn which was then set alight. The Jews of Jedwabne died at the hands of their fellow Poles.

Shocking you might think. There have been 2 books which have reconstructed the history of what happened. Neighbours by Thomas Andrew Grosz and The Crime and the Silence by Anna Bikont. I wouldn’t expect you to know much about this because unlike me, you know little or nothing about the Holocaust.

Kaminski gave his support to the Committee to Defend the Good Name of Jedwabne, formed by the local Catholic priest, Father Orlowski. Its main function was to deny that Polish hands had set fire to the barn and to blame it on the Nazis. There is however no doubt, as Bikont and Grosz demonstrate, that it was Polish fascists of the Nationalist Endek Party that were responsible. Kaminski led the protests against the national apology given by the then Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski  on 10 July 2001 to mark the 60^th anniversary of the massacre when a memorial was built to the victims in Jedwabne.

Kaminski has travelled to Israel and paid homage at Yad Vashem. He has spoken at Israel’s prestigious security conference in Herzliya. Like many if not most anti-Semites, he is an ardent Zionist. He doesn’t much like Jews in Poland but he is happy for them to go to Israel. The Law & Justice Party which is now in government in Poland is a far-Right anti-Semitic party. For example its Education Minister Anna Zalewska insinuated that the Jedwabne massacre of 1941 was a matter of “opinion.”   in an interview in July on the Polish public broadcaster TVN.