BBC admits ‘anti-Semitism’ claim against Jackie Walker was false. Where’s LABOUR’S apology?

Vindicated: Jackie Walker.

The BBC has upheld a complaint against former BBC political editor Nick Robinson after he wrongly tweeted that Jackie Walker had claimed that “the Jews controlled the slave trade”.

This was a principal complaint against Ms Walker and part of the basis on which both she and This Writer have been expelled from the Labour Party. As it is false, Labour’s reasons for expelling us both may also be false – if the party’s accusers were mistaken on one point, it is likely they were wrong about all of them.

So when will Labour apologise and re-instate us?

The BBC‘s apology came in a letter to Twitter user and campaigner against injustice Simon Maginn, who had complained about a tweet by Nick Robinson on February 26.

It seems Mr Robinson had claimed that Ms Walker had stated that “the Jews controlled the slave trade” and that this was an example of “anti-Semitism in the Labour Party”.

But in a letter to Mr Maginn that he tweeted yesterday (July 1), a representative of the Corporation’s Executive Complaints Division stated [boldings mine]: ‘What she had said, however (in response to a friend who had raised the question of ‘the debt’ owed to the Jews because of the Holocaust), was “Oh yes – and I hope you feel the same towards the African holocaust? My ancestors were involved in both – on all sides as I’m sure you know, millions more Africans were killed in the African holocaust and their oppression continues today on a global scale in a way it doesn’t for Jews… and many Jews (my ancestors too) were the chief financiers of the sugar and slave trade which is of course why there were so many early synagogues in the Caribbean. So who are victims and what does it mean? We are victims and perpetrators to some extent through choice. And having been a victim does not give you a right to be a perpetrator.”

‘Even allowing for the element of compression often seen in tweets, I think the paraphrase of Ms Walker gave an insufficiently accurate impression of her actual words, so I am upholding that aspect of your complaint.’

There can be no doubt that Ms Walker was referring specifically to matters in the Caribbean. If the reference to the sugar trade was not sufficiently exact, the comment, “which is of course why there were so many early synagogues in the Caribbean” is self-explanatory.

And I made all this abundantly clear, nearly three years ago!

Read my articles here and here for the evidence.

The former of those pieces was actually used by Labour in its “evidence” (ha ha) against me!

I had written that – as is now well-documented – Ms Walker’s Facebook page had been hacked by members of an organisation called the Israel Advocacy Movement (whose founder, Joseph Cohen, used to be a member of the organisation that originally accused me – the fake charity calling itself the Campaign Against Antisemitism).

They grabbed part of a conversation she was having with a friend and gave it to the Jewish Chronicle as evidence of anti-Semitism – and that is the origin of the accusation against her.

I had written: “She was subjected to racist abuse by people who pose as campaigners against racism (albeit that very specific kind of racism that relates to the Jewish people). The same people claim the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews, thereby discriminating against all the other groups who faced genocide at the same time including, most famously, the Roma, the sick and disabled.”

Labour’s claim was “Qualifying racism in this way Mr Sivier has done is dismissive of antisemitism. There are very few, if any campaigners who ‘claim the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews’. Stating this discredits and diminishes antisemitism and the work done by campaigners.”

Oh, really?

Apparently the part that’s supposed to be dismissive of anti-Semitism is where I stated that the accusers were posing as campaigners against racism “albeit that very specific kind of racism that relates to the Jewish people”. That is, of course, exactly how anti-Semitism is defined.

As for there being “few, if any campaigners who ‘claim the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews'” – here are a few examples, quoted in my defence against Labour’s false accusations:

“If only my accuser had actually read the article they were quoting, they would have found two examples of campaigners who claim the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews. From the article quoted in my piece: “The late Elie Wiesel said that to compare the sufferings of others with Jews was a “betrayal of Jewish history”. And Lucy Dawidowicz, a well known holocaust historian and rightwing Zionist, held that “subsuming Jewish losses under a universal or ecumenical classification is to effectively justify anti-Semitism”.”

“More currently, how about Jonathan Freedland’s words, in his recent article – – on the Guardian website? He wrote: “The Holocaust, the murder of 6 million Jews, is, for us, a very recent memory: part of our own lived experience, barely one generation away.” Here we see a national opinion-former claiming the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews. Who knows how many people have read his words and believed them?

“The following Jews, in a letter supporting Jackie Walker against her suspension after being unethically filmed at a Jewish Labour Movement event on anti-Semitism, stated: “It has always been a principle of the Zionist movement that the Nazi Holocaust was exclusive to the Jews. Yehuda Bauer, professor of Holocaust studies at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, has argued that ‘the Nazis only attempted to annihilate one people, the Jews’. According to Bauer, ‘the Holocaust is very much a unique case’. The signatories were: Tony Greenstein, Professor Haim Bresheeth, Professor Emeritus Jonathan Rosenhead, Leon Rosselson, Ruth Appleton, Rica Bird, Mike Cushman, Dr Merav Devere, Mark Elf, Sylvia Finzi, Ken Fryde, Leah Levane, Claire Glasman, Selma James, Michael Kalmanovitz, Helen Marks, Elizabeth Morley, Diana Neslen, Ilan Pappe, Martin Parnell, Roland Rance, Dr Brian Robinson, Amanda Sebestyen, Glynn Secker, David Selzer, Sam Semoff, Sam Weinstein and Naomi Wimborne-Iddrissi.

“I have found others in the course of my work on my website.

“For example: Beth Rosenberg, who I mention in my article as tweeting, “Minimising the Holocaust is antisemitic, which you know and are doing deliberately to cause offence”. The problem is, I did not minimise any Holocaust – and HMD commemorates many holocausts and genocides, not just what happened to the Jewish people. Her tweet very clearly claims the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews – and cemented this in with her further comment: “The mythology from the left compared to the systematic murder of 6 million Jews.” So HMD refers only to the Shoah and not to any other such events, according to Ms Rosenberg.

“Here’s Christina Wallis: “I just find it upsetting that you’re using an atrocity that lead to the death of six million people, including members of my family to make a political point.” The Nazi holocaust killed 17 million people in total but she omits everybody who was not Jewish. So her tweet also, very clearly, claims the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews.

“Here’s another one, from ‘Plastic Fantastic’ on Twitter: “The Holocaust has a specific meaning – Nazi Germany systematically murdering some six million European Jews.” See:

I don’t honestly expect Labour to back down and apologise on the basis of a single admission of wrongdoing by the BBC – the prejudice in favour of the witch-hunters is far too strong in that organisation at the moment.

But I do think there is a clear message here – that the Labour Party machine now needs to engage in full and open discussion with those of us it has wronged, about its reasons for attacking perfectly innocent people, for dragging our names and reputations through the dirt, and for protecting those who have lied about us – both inside and outside the organisation.

How about it, Jennie Formby? Let’s have an open debate – or are you afraid?

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

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

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at

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:


16 thoughts on “BBC admits ‘anti-Semitism’ claim against Jackie Walker was false. Where’s LABOUR’S apology?

  1. Stu

    Problem being that whoever apologises and however loudly, the damage will never be undone.
    It’s a proven technique used by right-wing press where with an apology months later it’s no longer relevant and mission has been accomplished.

  2. trev

    There were also a lot of Scottish Presbyterians involved in the slave trade, not exclusively Jewish people.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      She didn’t say they were the ONLY financiers of the Caribbean slave trade.

  3. Robert

    From where did you get the information that a total of 17 million people were killed?

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Are you referring to the official estimate of the total number of people killed in the Nazi holocaust?

  4. jaguarjon53

    How can the covert filming of someone, later claiming them to be the actual film maker, not change the general point? Bizarre management double-speak.

  5. Peter Croll

    Hi Mike, Apologies if you’ve already seen this, but if you haven’t, there’s loads of interesting detail that may be relevant to your case which you and your lawyers may find useful –
    Also, I’ve just read the LPNI in a link on the Skwawkbox re the statement on Chris Williamson; you have friends in Northern Ireland. Best wishes from Pete.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      The question you asked at 5.03pm and couldn’t wait a few hours for me to get around to moderating?

      I’ve just answered it but I should have binned it. You do not come here and start acting like a spoiled child, demanding attention, thank you very much!

      1. Robert

        Wow! All that calmness when you are under attack from trolls and yet my mild disparagement draws both barrels!
        I don’t spend all day on line so didn’t realise that moderation took so long.
        I just wondered if the ‘official estimate’ of 17 million (non combatants i presume) killed by the Nazi’s included the now completely discredited figures that came out of the USSR after the war. You have also to take into account the agenda of the ‘officials’ who came up with the ‘estimate’.
        I think that figure is pure fantasy but i respect the views of others.
        Don’t bother to reply……I’m easily hurt!

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        I have to, because you’ve asked the question!

        The 17 million figure would be deaths in countries under Nazi control.

  6. Mark Gibson

    Hi Mike ,
    This is what I wrote to my MP , off topic i know but it’s late ! reagrding Chris wWilliamson bollox : ( Kate Green , Lab, Stetford & Urmston)
    Dear Kate ,
    This is what he said : ” Speaking in Sheffield, he told campaigners for Momentum: “The party that has done more to stand up to racism is now being demonised as a racist, bigoted party.
    “I have got to say I think our party’s response has been partly responsible for that because in my opinion… we have backed off too much, we have given too much ground, we have been too apologetic.”

    How on Earth can that be construed as racist ? How can that be seen as anti-semitic ? The Labour membership has been shown to have less than 1% of members with any sort of A-S sentiment or expression . A good deal less than any other party . A good deal less racism than any other party .

    As a response to the massive attack by mainstream media upon the Labour movement ; as a response to the proven attack by the Israeli Government upon the Labour movement and as a response to the disruptive elements within the Labour movement – his comments are a valid opinion and in no way hurtful to UK Jewish people .

    What worries me deeply is that you , and many other MP’s , have fallen into the trap of conflating several issues and have brought the party into disrepute by buying into a concerted effort to destabilise the current leadership which , by the way , has the massive support of the membership.

    It is worrying that you have seemingly approved and supported the apartheid war criminals that run the state of Israel and their huge propaganda campaign at the expense of your party and the greater part of its membership. Israel as a nation is despicable in its actions and ideology , both of which are contrary to any form of Labour thought or aspiration.

    There are many UK Jews that support criticism of Israel ; there are many members of the Board of Deputies that are violently anti – Labour and ” express our community’s bond with the State of Israel .” , i.e. are expressly Zionist .

    I ask you directly : do you support the apartheid war criminals currently running the State of Israel ?

    Do you support the current leadership of the Labour party ?

    You cannot ,in my opinion, support both .

    You cannot , in my opinion, throw a long term Labour man who has fought against racism for his whole career and given his best to his community to the wolves – in blatant publicity rather than in-house – without having some kind of ulterior motive . I dearly wish to know what your motivation was because your previous reply was nonsensical to me . You would hang a man and destroy his career and reputation for expressing a sane opinion and then reply to me with ” political gibberish ” that says nothing in many words .

    Whose side are you on and why ?

    Yours sincerely ,

    Mark Gibson.

  7. Jeffrey Davies

    hmm the real answer is blairites the one left behind greedie peoples yet until they are shown the door many more finger pointing showing up those who are the real labour who support all

  8. Tony

    Not good enough! His tweet was inaccurate and did not include words such as ‘allegations of’. There was a clear implication of guilt.

    This has, and should have, big implications for the Williamson suspension as this was one of the lines of attack used against him.

    Well done to whoever challenged the BBC on this.

Comments are closed.