Let’s start by setting out the situation: after dozens of people were arrested before the coronation under the Tories new, fascist Public Order Act, Labour’s David Lammy has said his party will not repeal that legislation if it gets to form a government.
His dismissal of demands for it, and his attitude in general, has been greeted with shock by an electorate that had been relying on Labour to actually fight Tory dictatorship, not join it:
It has left some of us asking where we could possibly turn instead.
Fortunately, a few options have presented themselves after the results of last Thursday’s local elections became clear. Several of the surprise winners appeared on the net-based Not The Andrew Marr Show on Sunday.
For example – the Green Party, exemplified by former Labour councillor Jo Bird:
So, people on the doorstep are not meekly accepting the claims of the main parties on the doorstep; they’re checking out those claims and voting on the basis of whether those claims are accurate or not. That could be a serious challenge for the Tories, whose relationship with the facts has always been unstable, but now also for Labour.
How about the former Liverpool Labour councillors who formed the Liverpool Community Independents and stood for election there? Here’s their account:
“The Labour Right can befriend you and then stab you in the back.” If that’s how they treat their fellow party members, how do you think they’ll treat ordinary voters who elect them into Parliament?
The victory also adds credibility to Lucy Williams’s claim that the Labour-run council is “incompetent”. We hear Tories attacking Labour councils on that basis, in Parliament, all the time and to have former Labour councillors elected back on that basis is damning for Starmer’s party. What’s going on there? Are these Labour councillors acting on duff orders from Starmer? Or are they complacent in their positions and can’t be bothered?
And they are already actively calling on voters to unseat the Labour MP in the constituency that includes their council area – Maria Eagle – in favour of an Independent.
Finally, former Labour activists linked up with others and formed a group called ‘Salt of the Earth’ to take 14 of 15 available seats on Winsford Town Council, in Cheshire:
“People were being patronised by Labour… It’s been crazy. There’s been a lot of smearing. It’s been really unpleasant.” Who wants to be represented by people like that?
I’m not saying this kind of unpleasantness is all that Labour has to offer; This Writer is a former Labour member and activist and I know plenty of people who are still party members and are, themselves, great human beings.
They’re all on the left wing of the party, of course.
These victories show that complacency of the kind that Lammy is displaying may well have had its day.
I certainly hope so. But what happens next is up to all of us.
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:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
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!
Betty Boothroyd: first female Commons Speaker dies aged 93.
This Writer is saddened to learn of the death of first female Speaker of the House of Commons, Betty Boothroyd, at the age of 93.
She was also the first Speaker I can remember who became a media personality in her own right – not only because she was a woman but because she was a former Tiller girl (it was a famous dance troupe, back in the day).
The best comment I’ve seen on her passing is this:
Goodbye Betty Boothroyd, the working class lass from Yorkshire who kept all those bellend public schoolboys in their place. pic.twitter.com/PBmtGUx3Zw
But with people like Hoyle around, and politicians like Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer, it seems unlikely that they’ll turn up for a long, long time.
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:
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.
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!
It’s nearly the weekend and time for something to cheer us all up.
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:
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.
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!
You may remember that Keir Starmer ordered members of the Labour Party’s Socialist Campaign Group of MPs to withdraw their names from a Stop the War Coalition statement on the Russia-Ukraine crisis that criticised Nato – in the late afternoon of February 24.
It seems that, while the decision to threaten them with the loss of the Labour whip was his, the idea came from former Conservative MP David Gauke – as former Labour MP Chris Williamson has highlighted:
Just seen this tweet from Tory MP David Gauke. It seems Sir Keir Starmer is even closer to the Tories than I realised and is taking instructions directly from the Conservative Party.@UKLabour is finished, there really is no basis to be a member or to vote for this party. https://t.co/ZxhwIpKw4e
Check the time on it: 3.51pm. Around an hour and a half later, right-wing columnist Dan Hodges tweeted to say that the Labour whips had done exactly as Gauke had suggested:
Understand the Labour chief whip has written to those Labour MPs who signed the Stop The War letter on the Ukraine, instructing them to withdraw their names.
Confirmation came from LabourList an hour after that:
11 Labour MPs pull their signatures from a Stop the War statement criticising NATO after being urged to do so by the chief whip: https://t.co/1HLN5xYOCB
So it seems Mr Williamson is right and Labour leader Keir Starmer takes orders from Tories. This could devastate Labour’s credibility with voters.
Gauke has tried to distance himself from the revelation – and insulted Mr Williamson in the process by saying Labour was becoming respectable again. The response is scathing:
My apologies David, I meant to say 'former' Tory MP.
However, I'm not sure an endorsement by a prominent Conservative will persuade many erstwhile and current Labour supporters about @UKLabour's "respectability".
We are days away from a by-election in Erdington, Birmingham, where Labour has struggled to attract campaigners while the left-wing candidate, Dave Nellist, has enjoyed huge support on the streets.
How will this damning revelation affect public opinion and – more importantly – the vote?
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:
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.
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!
Boris Johnson: “Drunk? At a party? Me? How would anybody know the difference?”
Should we be grateful to former Tory attorney-general Jeremy Wright for reminding us that, if Boris Johnson is found to have attended or known about rule-breaking No 10 parties, he’ll have to resign?
This Writer reckons so; it’s important to keep the facts in mind because otherwise, one of Johnson’s cronies will slither in and pretend they’re different – which is what they’re trying to do.
Mr Wright’s reminder is that Johnson will have no escape route, because he will have misled Parliament when he said no rules were broken.
Meanwhile, here comes Johnson’s personal lawyer to claim – desperately – that – even if he attended gatherings found to be illegal parties – he broke no rules if he went back to work immediately afterwards and did not drink excessively.
The biggest problem with this argument is that it is clearly nonsense. If he drank anything at all, or came into contact with anyone at all in a social setting, then he broke the rules.
Mr Wright’s test of culpability is much simpler – and therefore, far more believable. In a letter to his own constituents, he states:
“If the prime minister has attended events he knew broke the rules, or was aware of events he knew broke the rules, he should not have advised the House of Commons, on several occasions, that as far as he was aware, no rules were broken there.
“Doing so in those circumstances would be misleading the House and must in my view lead to his resignation or removal from office.”
That’s good to know, at a time when Johnson is expected to receive a fixed-penalty notice from the Metropolitan Police – for attending rule-breaking parties at 10 Downing Street.
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:
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.
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!
Geoffrey Cox: the former Attorney General is pointing the finger of accusation at Boris Johnson.
That’s scuppered the claims that the row over Boris Johnson’s plan to break international law is a last gasp of the so-called ‘Remainers’, then.
Geoffrey Cox – a devout Brexiter – was Attorney General when Boris Johnson signed his EU withdrawal agreement in January.
His announcement that he will not support Johnson’s Internal Markets Bill is proof that the controversy extends much further than the established battle lines.
The story broke in The Times, which is behind a paywall. However, the East Fife Times has this:
Boris Johnson’s former attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, has said it would be “unconscionable” to override the Brexit divorce deal.
The Tory MP said there is “no doubt” the “unpalatable” implications of the Withdrawal Agreement were known when the Prime Minister signed it, a time when Mr Cox was the chief law officer.
So he should know!
He stated:
“No British minister should solemnly undertake to observe treaty obligations with his fingers crossed behind his back”. @BorisJohnson’s previous attorney general @Geoffrey_Cox is merciless in his contempt for the PM’s attempt to renege on the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement.
The Brexiteer warned he would not back the UK Internal Market Bill unless ministers dispel the impression they plan to “permanently and unilaterally” rewrite an international agreement.
[He] said tariffs and customs procedures on certain goods entering Northern Ireland from Britain were part of the deal.
“There can be no doubt that these were the known, unpalatable but inescapable, implications of the agreement,” he wrote in The Times.
He said if the powers in the Bill were used to “nullify those perfectly plain and foreseeable consequences” then it would amount to the “unilateral abrogation of the treaty obligations”
Cox said ministers could use “clear and lawful” options under the withdrawal agreement to remedy their concerns that food imports may be blocked from Britain to Northern Ireland – or, “in extremis”, take “temporary and proportionate measures” via independent arbitration.
“What ministers should not do, however provoked or frustrated they may feel about an impasse in negotiations, is to take or use powers permanently and unilaterally to rewrite portions of an international agreement into which this country freely entered just a few months ago,” he said.
It seems he also said this:
Geoffrey Cox writes in The Times
“When the Queen’s minister gives his word, on her behalf, it should be axiomatic that he will keep it, even if the consequences are unpalatable.” https://t.co/eySxz4w6Me
The QC… was attorney general during the unlawful suspension of Parliament.
That’s right; Boris Johnson prorogued Parliament illegally – and lied to the Queen in order to do it.
It seems Cox has had enough of such illegalities – and his words carry weight on the Conservative benches in the House of Commons.
They are also carrying weight on the social media:
Really significant as Geoffrey Cox is not only a former attorney-general but also a Brexiteer.
Him speaking out against the internal market bill could be a problem for No10 as it might catch the eye of some Tory backbenchers. https://t.co/9gdvxv64SE
Reminder that Geoffrey Cox is an avowed Brexiter. Let’s nail the lie once and for all that this is the same old culture war, the same old ‘failure to accept the referendum’. This is not about Brexit and Remain. It’s about right and wrong. https://t.co/7S0ZxEg4Du
this Telegraph snippet revealing Brexiteer former attorney-general Geoffrey Cox will rebel over internal market bill is latest proof that this row is *not* (contrary to some claims) a Remainer death spasm pic.twitter.com/xoVetZXQy1
Geoffrey Cox, a Brexiteer and Boris Johnson’s first Attorney General, coming out against the NI clauses in the withdrawal bill in such trenchant terms will add to the unease on the Tory benches https://t.co/uxnTsBM0Fd
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:
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.
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!
Desmond Parkinson: The new ‘rainbow man’ of Mid Wales politics.
Well, this is embarrassing – for This Writer and for the Brexit Party.
Nigel Farage’s company-posing-as-a-political party has been threatening to stand a candidate in the Brecon and Radnorshire by-election – but when it did, so few people noticed that I got the wrong end of the stick and wrote a story about something involving him that happened 13 years ago, by mistake.
The genuinely amusing aspect of this is that nobody noticed. I only discovered the mistake when my source contacted me at around 2.30am to tell me they thought I’d got the timeline muddled up.
(I must, of course, take this opportunity to sincerely apologise for the mix-up, which was due to me being sent background information about the gentleman in question by my source, without any links to the announcement.)
So the story is that the Brexit Party’s candidate for Brecon and Radnorshire is a “rainbow” man who has flitted between hard right-wing parties after quitting a council job from which he had been suspended.
Desmond Parkinson is a former police chief superintendent and former national assistant secretary of the Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales. While in these roles, it seems he did score some notable achievements – it is said that he was responsible for the creation of the Sex Offenders Register and also championed a successful campaign to ban handguns following the Dunblane tragedy in 1996.
And he was said to have fought to overturn the double jeopardy law, thereby enabling the convictions of Gary Dobson and David Norris for the murder of Stephen Lawrence. One wonders what he thinks of Marc Wadsworth, the anti-racism activist who campaigned for justice for the Lawrence family but was subsequently and falsely accused of anti-Semitism by the Labour Party.
He was employed by Telford and Wrekin Council as a senior licensing officer in 2004 but was suspended from that position in 2006. Neither the council nor Mr Parkinson himself would comment on the reasons for his suspension, according to the Shropshire Star.
He resigned as a council officer the following year, it seems, and I have been able to find no further information about that matter.
He next appeared six years later when – in 2012 – he stood as Conservative candidate to be the West Mercia Police and Crime Commissioner, losing to Independent Bill Longmore.
Then – in 2016 – he sought election as the UKIP candidate to be Dyfed-Powys Police and Crime Commissioner, losing to Plaid Cymru’s Dafydd Llewelyn. It seems he also campaigned as a UKIP candidate for election to the Welsh Assembly at the same time.
The following year, he switched parties to become a Conservative candidate for a Welshpool Town Council seat in 2017.
Now he has switched loyalties again – to the Brexit Party.
Can you really trust someone who changes his allegiance with the wind? Someone who was suspended from a position of responsibility with a local authority for reasons unknown, and quit before it was possible for the public to find out what those reasons were?
According to the BBC, Mr Parkinson said the by-election was a “matter of integrity” and people had been “let down” by the Conservatives.
Fine words. A man who forged expenses claims (Chris Davies – who was re-selected as Tory candidate against all reason) being criticised by one who left his licensing job under a cloud – and both have been members of the Conservative Party, which tends to indicate that that organisation will let anybody in!
And what does it say about the Brexit Party when it takes in Tory cast-offs?
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:
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.
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!
Appropriate: Use of the word ‘poison’ to describe Universal Credit is well-justified, considering the Tory forcing it on us is Esther McVey.
David Cameron’s former speechwriter is only wrong about the timescale here – Universal Credit has been poisoned, by Tory determination to harm those who have fallen on hard times.
Tories have no sympathy for people who aren’t independently wealthy – and who therefore need help from the state from time to time.
That’s why they have made Universal Credit such a trial for claimants; they want as few people claiming it as possible.
If that means the millions – including 4.5 million children, we have recently learned – have to rely on food banks, that’s no problem to a Tory.
Clare Foges, David Cameron’s ex-speechwriter, declared “the lefties have a point” that Universal Credit leaves people in “debt, depression and anxiety about whether children can be sustained on sliced bread alone”.
And she warned further “screw-ups” could turn into “poison” and “tragedy” for the Conseratives in the next election – not to mention a tragedy for the millions of Brits struggling to claim it.
The benefit once trumped by Mr Cameron – in his speeches, no less – has replaced six payments for more than a million people and will ramp up its rollout in January.
But experts and Tory founder Iain Duncan Smith warn it does not fulfil its aim of “making work pay” after billions were slashed from its budget.
It has been blighted by delays and evidence soaring numbers of families need foodbanks, fall behind on rent and struggle to pay the gas bill.
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:
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.
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!
Lord Sacks: Look into his own behaviour and beliefs and his attack on Jeremy Corbyn loses all credibility.
It must be an amazing thing to see the world through the prism of Jonathan Sacks’s mind.
I would not recommend it, though; it does not seem pleasant at all.
Take a look at the way this former Chief Rabbi has perverted the words of Jeremy Corbyn, regarding that incident with the Zionists in 2013. Mr Corbyn, you will recall, had said a group of Zionists had listened to a speech by Palestinian representative Manuel Hassassian at Parliament, then complained about it by deliberately misrepresenting his words. He said they did not understand English irony – a clear reference to the fact that people whose first language was English had distorted the very clear meaning of a person for whom it was not the mother tongue. It was an entirely reasonable response.
And Lord Sacks said it was the most offensive statement by a senior UK politician since Enoch Powell’s “rivers of blood” speech!
Bizarre.
But it gets worse. He also said Mr Corbyn had “given support to racists, terrorists and dealers of hate who want to kill Jews and remove Israel from the map” and labelled the Labour leader as an anti-Semite.
He has provided absolutely no evidence to justify these claims. None at all.
Let’s look at what he said about Mr Corbyn’s 2013 comment: “It was divisive, hateful and like Powell’s speech it undermines the existence of an entire group of British citizens by depicting them as essentially alien.” No, it does not.
If any part of the incident was hateful, it was the way the Zionists mentioned by Mr Corbyn had tried to twist Mr Hassassian’s words in order to score a political point. If anyone was being divisive, it was the same group of Zionists, for the same reason.
The claim that Mr Corbyn depicted an entire group of British citizens by depicting them as essentially alien falls for two reasons. Firstly, he was referring to a specific group of individuals – not every single Zionist who ever existed. Second, he was not depicting anyone as essentially alien by saying they did not understand English irony – thousands upon thousands of schoolchildren have grappled with the concept over the years and many adults still don’t understand it. He was simply pointing out the inherent irony in somebody who should understand English perfectly well, deliberately misrepresenting the very clear words of somebody whose grasp may justifiably be less strong.
I have laboured that point a little, but it needed to be made perfectly clear. Lord Sacks’s words were not true.
“When he implies that, however long they have lived here, Jews are not fully British, he is using the language of classic prewar European antisemitism.” It’s a good thing he wasn’t doing that, then.
Again, Lord Sacks raises a couple of points. First, Mr Corbyn was talking about Zionists, not Jews. The two are not the same and should never be conflated. As a rabbi, Lord Sacks knows that, and the fact that he did it anyway raises gravely serious questions about his motives. Secondly, Mr Corbyn said nothing about the bona fides of the Zionists’ nationality. He said they did not understand English irony, and that does not and cannot equate to implying that they are not British.
“When challenged with such facts, the evidence for which is before our eyes, first he denies, then he equivocates, then he obfuscates.” No, no, no and no.
First, the evidence of Lord Sacks’s claims is not before our eyes. The evidence supports Mr Corbyn every step of the way. Secondly, Mr Corbyn did not deny the facts – he stated them. Thirdly, he has not equivocated – it means using ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself and if you need an example, watch Theresa May’s disastrous attempt to avoid telling Michael Crick whether she thought Nelson Mandela was a terrorist. Mr Corbyn was entirely straightforward in his response to the allegations against him. In a statement, he said he spoke to “defend the Palestinian ambassador in the face of what I thought were deliberate misrepresentations” from people “for whom English was a first language, when it isn’t for the ambassador”. He said: “I described those pro-Israel activists as Zionists, in the accurate political sense and not as a euphemism for Jewish people – and that is made clear in the rest of my speech that day. I am now more careful with how I might use the term ‘Zionist’ because a once self-identifying political term has been increasingly hijacked by anti-Semites as code for Jews.” No equivocation there! Obfuscation is the act of making something obscure, unclear or unintelligible and, again, it does not apply as a description of Mr Corbyn’s words.
“This is low, dishonest and dangerous.” Lord Sacks’s words are low, dishonest and dangerous.
“He has legitimised the public expression of hate.” There is no evidence to support this claim.
“Where he leads, others will follow.” This is meaningless. Lord Sacks may be trying to imply that Mr Corbyn is inciting others into hatred of Jews, but without evidence of him actually doing this, all he is saying is that people will follow the leader of the Labour Party. It is accurate to that extent, but no further – and that does not help Lord Sacks’s argument.
“We know our history better than Mr Corbyn.” But do they know Palestinian history better than Mr Hassassian? Mr Corbyn was not speaking in his own defence when he made his remarks, so Lord Sacks is trying to twist the facts here.
“We have learned that the hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews. Mr Corbyn’s embrace of hate defiles our politics and demeans the country we love.” The first sentence is so wide open to interpretation that it is essentially meaningless in the current context. The second is emotive nonsense. Mr Corbyn has not embraced hate – but a very good argument could be made that Lord Sacks has.
So Lord Sacks has deliberately twisted Mr Corbyn’s words; conflated Zionism and Judaism for no reason; and made unevidenced, false allegations.
These are typical examples of the tactics used by the anti-Corbyn element that has been trying to have Jeremy Corbyn removed under false pretences since 2016. Isn’t that when Shai Masot put up £1 million of Israeli government money for that very purpose?
Fortunately, the Labour Party is having none of this nonsense.
A spokeswoman said: “This comparison with the race-baiting Enoch Powell is absurd and offensive. Jeremy Corbyn described a particular group of pro-Israel activists as Zionists, in the accurate political sense – not as a synonym or code for Jewish people. Jeremy Corbyn is determined to tackle antisemitism both within the Labour party and in wider society, and the Labour party is committed to rebuilding trust with the Jewish community.”
And the luminaries of the social media were quick to seize on the former Chief Rabbi’s words – and rejected both them and him:
.@JewishChron and @BoardofDeputies Now Rabbi Jonathan Sacks They all grossly libel Jeremy Corbyn I am ashamed of being a British Jew They do not speak for me or for decent people
Corbyn's comments most offensive since Enoch Powell, says ex-chief rabbi https://t.co/DXlmKpAuON
They picked up on his claim to know history better than Mr Corbyn, and turned it on him:
By likening Corbyn to Enoch Powell, they forget history. 23 April, 1977. Jeremy Corbyn, then Haringey Councillor, organised a counter demo in defence of London's Jewish Community & others, against the National Front -1,000 of whom marched through Wood Green. Corbyn is anti-racist pic.twitter.com/l1EpzsapZE
They found evidence to show that he was being disingenuous in comparing Mr Corbyn with Enoch Powell; he himself sees nothing wrong with Israel’s new “nation state of the Jewish people” law that established that country as a racist, apartheid state – so he himself supports racism:
Sacks on Israel’s new nation-state law: “I’m not an expert on this. My brother is, I’m not, he’s a lawyer in Jerusalem, he tells me that there’s absolutely nothing apartheid about this, it’s just correcting a lacuna".
Remarkable this gentleman would compare Corbyn to Powell.
And then there are the actions of Lord Sacks himself.
Sacks led a far-right march through Palestinian communities where protestors shouted "Death to Arabs". The intention was to drive Palestinians out of East Jerusalem. To the @guardian, this merely shows Sacks has "robust views". Now can you see how our media treats Palestinians? pic.twitter.com/CsXYSsXgzJ
Supporters of Lord Sacks tried to bite back, but all they did was confirm the points being made against him. The following tweets, involving Aaron Bastani’s suggestion that the rabbis who signed a letter condemning Mr Corbyn several weeks ago should have been researched, make this clear.
Mr Bastani attracted criticism for making the suggestion, and for pointing out that Lord Sacks recently supported a book that is said to have praised Enoch Powell and promoted racist ideas. In response, he demonstrated the falsehood of the argument put forward by Lord Sacks’s supporters, who were saying that his revelation of the former Chief Rabbi’s support for far-right and racist ideas meant that he – Mr Bastani – must be a racist.
Doesn’t compute, does it?
First thing leader of the opposition’s office should have done was examine record of 68 Rabbis signing letter. With most it is going to be a question of agreeing to disagree. Others like Sachs, will be right wing ultra-nationalists. Labour shouldn’t concede to such voices. https://t.co/jbsYVw4H2C
My pointing out Sack’s involvement with far-right elements within Israeli politics, as well as his saying a book by Douglas Murray was one of the best of 2017 (in it Murray praises Enoch Powell and promotes racist ideas) makes me a…racist.
Here’s Owen Jones, providing support for Aaron Bastani’s position.
What's even more astonishing is that Douglas Murray's book – which Rabbi Sacks describes as one of his best books of 2017 – favourably cites none other than – Enoch Powell. https://t.co/ECtORGiK5u
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:
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.
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!
This Writer believes serious questions should be asked of the people who made this appointment.
Don’t you?
In yet another example of the utterly disgraceful revolving door between business and politics, a recently disgraced former-boss of the collapsed government outsourcing firm Carillion has, incredibly, been appointed Managing Director of another company who were recently handed a lucrative multi-billion pound contract by the Tories to oversee HS2.
Mark Davies, who is best known for his ‘stellar’ work at now-collapsed firm Carillion, where he was in the same role from 2011 until its collapse in 2018, was rewarded for his disastrous failure by being appointed MD of Balfour Beatty Vinci’s HS2 joint venture just last week.
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:
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.
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!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
