Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Oh yes it is.

It seems unlikely that anybody who reads a newspaper or watches TV can have missed the fact that This Writer has been libelled left, right and centre by the mainstream media, with claims of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.

They have used an article by the Campaign Against Antisemitism, that is nothing more than hate literature, to support their claims – but there is one serious problem: None of the allegations against me that appear in the article are true. It is a mishmash of doctored quotes, comments attributed to me that are in fact by other people, and words taken out of context.

The trigger for the current round of outrage is the publication of “leaked” Labour Party documents that showed I had been readmitted into the party after my membership was suspended last year (on suspicion of having published material which could be inerpreted as anti-Semitic, after someone sent the CAA article to Labour HQ). I find this very strange, as I reported the decision to readmit me when it happened – along with my reasons for rejecting the terms.

(The idea was to give me a warning and require me to go for “training” with the Jewish Labour Movement. If I were to accept those terms, I would be admitting guilt – and I’m innocent of any wrongdoing in this respect.)

So far, the following newspapers have falsely accused me of Holocaust denial – with absolutely no evidence to support them: The Sunday Times, The Sun, Daily Express, Daily Mail, Jewish Chronicle, Israel National News, Jerusalem Post. Robert Peston falsely accused me in his TV show Peston on Sunday. I’ve just spent a merry evening writing complaints to all of them.

The Metro at least had the decency to say that I was facing allegations – admitting that nothing has been proved.

Particularly disappointing is the number of Labour MPs who have lined up to condemn me on the basis of nothing at all, including: John Mann, Wes Streeting, Gareth Snell, Anna Turley… If you know of any more, feel free to send your evidence in to the comment column.

In the midst of all this sound and fury today, I received an email from the Labour Party. It stated:

Notice of administrative suspension from holding office or representing the Labour Party

We acknowledge receipt of your email of 19 January 2018. In this email you reject the training, which
the NEC Disputes Panel on 16 January 2018 decided was a necessary condition of your membership.

In light of your refusal to comply with the requirements of the panel you have been automatically
placed under administrative suspension from Party membership and your case has been referred to a
hearing of the National Constitutional Committee (NCC) under rule6.I.1.A of the Labour Party Rule
Book:

“In relation to any alleged breach of the constitution, rules or standing orders of the Party by an individual member or members of the Party, the NEC may, pending the final outcome of any investigations and charges (if any), suspend that individual […] the NEC may instruct the General Secretary or other national officer to formulate charges against the individual or individuals concerned and present such charges to the NCC for determination in accordance with their rules”.

If you have any questions, please find enclosed appendix 6 of the Labour Party Rule Book which
explains the procedural guidelines in disciplinary cases brought before the NCC.

The Secretary of the NCC will be in touch in due course to arrange the hearing.

I can’t wait.

A hearing means I will be able to see the evidence against me, find out who my accuser actually is, and present evidence in my own support – at last.

You see, Labour’s disputes process means the actual defendant doesn’t actually get to see any of the evidence against them until they are at the point of being expelled – at a hearing by the National Constitutional Committee. Does anybody think that’s right?

After my membership was suspended in May last year, I was made to wait nearly six months until being called to an interview with a party officer. I was invited to bring a witness, documentary evidence and a list of any other people who could provide useful information. I don’t know why I bothered because my contacts went uncontacted, my documents went in the bin and my witness – I thought the point of having a witness was to ensure fair treatment, but she has never been offered the chance to ensure that the contents of the officer’s report tallied with what was said at the meeting. What was the point of her presence?

After the interview, I had to wait until the NEC’s disputes panel met in January to discuss my case. I was initially told, by the officer who interviewed me, that it would go straight to the NCC, but then my representative on that committee made the point that this was unconstitutional and they had to agree to put it on the disputes panel agenda. Someone in the Labour Party really wants to get rid of me, it seems.

It gets better. My case was left off the agenda of the disputes panel meeting in January, meaning those who were willing to speak for me were left rather unprepared when it was included after all, under “Any Other Business”. This treatment has been branded as “disgusting” – and not by me. It goes to show that someone really wants to get rid of me.

And in the end I was offered a warning and “training”. Perhaps that’s why the fake “leak” happened – so the party’s leaders would be forced to rethink their decision.

This seems likely. After all, I sent my email rejecting the disputes panel’s decision in mid-January, and the new suspension has only just happened – after the current controversy began. Doesn’t it all seem very suspicious to you?

Some have suggested that This Site has been attracting too much attention to events that are actually happening, in contrast to the distractions provided by the mainstream media, and that this is an attempt to poison minds against me.

If so, the move has failed. Views are up, and so are donations. Please keep them coming, via the “Donate” box below the text of this article!

The NCC meeting will not happen for at least six weeks after I receive delivery of all the evidence that will be used against me, so it won’t happen for a while yet.

We’ll have to see what happens then.

Whatever it is, it will be big.

UPDATE: Today (February 6) I found defamatory articles in The Times of Israel and the Huffington Post and have demanded apologies and retractions. Please let me know if you find any.


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook