Tag Archives: Lord

Brexit: outrage as Tory lord falsely claims businesses have ‘head in the sand’

Lord Agnew: he appears to have an honesty deficit.

Business leaders are furious after Cabinet Office minister Lord Agnew told them they’ve had their “heads in the sand” by failing to prepare for new border checks at the end of the Brexit transition periods.

They say they have spent the last four years asking the Tory governments of David Cameron, Theresa May and now Boris Johnson what they need to do, only to be met with silence.

You can read the news story here

… or just see the reactions for yourself:

The facts seem clear:

  1. Businesses have spent four years – ever since the EU referendum vote happened – demanding clarity from the Tories on what Brexit will mean for them. They received no response.
  2. Now that the reality is almost upon us, Lord Agnew has been wheeled out to pretend that the situation in 1. above has not taken place.
  3. His lie has been exposed, and
  4. The government has still not told businesses what they need to do.

Have I missed anything?

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

We knew the Tories’ inquiry into court challenges of their decisions would be corrupt; this just proves it

Lord Faulks: He thinks a Tory government should be above the rule of law.

Typical Tories – they won’t keep their promise to test people in care homes, but they will keep one to stop us making a fuss about it.

I refer to the promise on page 48 of the Conservative Party’s 2019 election manifesto. You know the one: “We will ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays.”

It seems reasonable but actually means: We will impose a Conservative dictatorship that the courts cannot stop from acting illegally.

A judicial review stopped Johnson’s illegal prorogation of Parliament last autumn and showed the nation what a rancid liar he is.

Sadly, too many people were happier to believe a lot of lies about Jeremy Corbyn and voted him back into power last December with a whopping great 80-strong majority in the House of Commons.

So now he’s getting round to ensuring that the courts will not be allowed to examine his government’s decisions on the Covid-19 crisis, by opening an inquiry into court challenges against his decisions – headed by a former Tory minister who has already indicated he wants to gag the courts:

Basically, he thinks a Tory government should be above the rule of law. The Nazis felt the same way about their government in Germany, I believe.

This Writer is willing to bet the judiciary will be tied up in all the red tape that David Cameron said he’d eliminate 10 years ago, by the time anyone gets around to an inquiry into what the Tories did during the Covid crisis.

Such an inquiry has already been demanded, by the way. Johnson said it wasn’t the time for that kind of investigation.

You see how this is working for him – and against the rest of us, and democracy?

Source: Judicial review: Labour query independence of government probe – BBC News

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Tories should blame their own bad messaging for the Covid-19 deaths of poor people

Johnson’s Covid-19 strategy: muddle the message.

Here’s another reason to abolish hereditary peerages: Lord Bethell.

This Tory health minister, who inherited his place in the House of Lords rather than earning it, tried to blame poor people for making poor decisions that result in their own deaths from Covid-19.

He said there were “behavioural reasons” for these deaths, listing “the decisions that people make about social distancing, about their own health decisions”.

But those decisions are influenced by his Tory government’s messages!

The Tory response to Covid-19 is now well-acknowledged as muddled, confusing and dangerous.

Boris Johnson made bad decisions before the virus even arrived in the UK that increased the death toll when it did – and he has continued as he started ever since.

The fact is that more poor people have died because poor people have not had the opportunities to hide from exposure to the disease that the rich have enjoyed – mostly because Johnson’s administration told them to stay at work.

So people in service industries were told to put themselves in danger – and many of them died as a result. Black people and those from ethnic minorities were particularly hard-hit because more of them work in these low-paid jobs due to the systemic racism underlying the UK’s culture.

The government said hospitals should send care home residents who had the disease back to those homes, even though those places did not have the facilities to treat them – and tens of thousands of them died.

The government said people could go to the beach, to the pub, back to work – and Covid-19 infection rates spiked every time.

So now nobody at risk trusts a word the Johnson government has to say about Covid-19.

survey by King’s College London and Ipsos Mori has found that 52 per cent of British adults aged 16 to 75 were sceptical about the relaxation of lockdown.

It also showed that more people thought the coronavirus crisis had been handled badly in the UK (42 per cent) than believed it has been handled well (36 per cent).

The figures revealed that Labour voters, who are more likely to be poor, were three times more likely than Conservative voters to believe the response was mismanaged. Because they have been twice as likely to die as rich Tories?

It follows that people should not trust the government’s advice on when it is safe to return to work, school and leisure activities – even when it may actually be accurate.

The result is a much more dangerous society – because the Tories made it that way. Crocodile tears from a know-nothing toff won’t change that.

Source: Minister Accused Of ‘Blaming The Poor’ For Their Own Deaths From Coronavirus | HuffPost UK

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Bread and circuses: why should we be uplifted if £100 million of our cash is spent on a new royal yacht?

Typical Tories: faced with a choice between helping people who need it and spaffing a fortune on a boat for a super-rich toff’s jollies, they will always make the wrong decision.

This is the third time a Tory has tried to foist a new Royal Yacht on us; the twist this time is a proposal to split funding three ways between businesses, the public and the National Lottery (so the public pays twice).

This time the idea is being suggested by Lord Jones of Birmingham, formerly Digby Jones, who ran the Confederation of British Industry for six years between 2000 and 2006. He also served as a minister in Gordon Brown’s Labour government, which tends to ruin any left-wing credentials New Labour might have claimed.

The cost – this time – is £100 million. That’s the same as it was in 2016 and £40 million more than in 2012, when Michael Gove was the one putting it forward.

In 2012, This Site treated the idea as comedy. We were in the grip of the Tories’ pointless austerity drive that caused a huge amount of harm – we may never know how many UK citizens died as a result of the cuts inflicted on them by David Cameron and his cutthroat cronies, because they simply didn’t bother to keep a record of the fatalities.

I wrote: “Would he [Michael Gove] spend his own money on such lavishments? Perhaps he’s trying to tell us that his Department for Education and Science is bucking the national trend by making money hand over fist. This would be strange behaviour for an organisation that is supposed to spend money in the most cost-effective way possible.”

In 2016, I concentrated on other uses for the cash: “We learn that Conservative MPs want to give the Queen another yacht – at a cost of £100 million that could be better-used elsewhere, perhaps on benefit payments for a further £16,666 sick people for a year.

“Ah, but the last Royal Yacht secured trade deals worth billions between 1991 and 1995, they argue.

“Sure – but times have changed hugely since then. With no guarantees, this is the equivalent of burning £50 notes in the faces of the poor.

“Perhaps Conservative MPs should be searched for matches and cigarette lighters before being allowed into the Treasury.”

The point about trade deals is interesting at a time when the Tory government is desperately trying to re-establish the UK as a trading nation after severing ties with the European Union.

But who benefits from such deals?

Rich businesspeople, perhaps – but would they pay their taxes or send the cash to tax havens?

If the latter, then why should the public pay for something that will not help us in the slightest?

And why should we ever be expected to be happy about it?

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Labour anti-Semitism report: Starmer acts – to cover his supporters’ arses

No Labour leader: Instead of taking action to identify and expel the wrongdoers in the leaked Labour report on anti-Semitism, Keir Starmer seems to be trying to protect them.

Labour leader Keir Starmer has issued a statement on the leaked Labour report that shows evidence that right-wing party staff members actively campaigned to undermine previous leader Jeremy Corbyn – by promising to protect the members implicated in wrongdoing, and investigate how the public got to find out about them.

Or so it seems to me.

In a joint statement with deputy leader Angela Rayner, he said the following. I’ll comment on his words [in bold] as we go through it:

“We have seen a copy of an apparently [apparently? It is an official Labour document on anti-Semitism and as such he is certain to have known about it. Isn’t he? Skwawkbox reckons he had a copy of the report shortly after his election as leader was announced yet he was completely relaxed about it until it was leaked] internal report about the work of the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit in relation to antisemitism. The content and the release of the report into the public domain raise a number of matters of serious concern.

“We will therefore commission an urgent independent investigation into this matter. This investigation will be instructed to look at three areas. First, the background and circumstances in which the report was commissioned and the process involved [which, as leader, he should already know. In any case, it is made explicitly clear in the text of the report]. Second, the contents and wider culture and practices referred to in the report [which suggests an attempt to deny the findings and whitewash the wrongdoers]. Third, the circumstances in which the report was put into the public domain [which suggests he would have preferred it to remain secret and the wrongdoers to go unquestioned, let alone punished].

“We have also asked for immediate sight of any legal advice the Labour Party has already received about the report.

“In the meantime, we ask everyone concerned to refrain from drawing conclusions before the investigation is complete [why? The report is complete and its conclusions are clear] and we will be asking the General Secretary to put measures in place to protect the welfare of party members and party staff who are concerned or affected by this report [but not party members and former party members who were clearly victimised by those party members he is trying to protect].”

I would not want to see anyone face unreasonable abuse – either verbal or physical – for having taken part in the activities mentioned in the report.

But the behaviour it describes is utterly vile and, if true, anybody who was involved in it should – no, must – be expelled from the Labour Party forever.

If anyone thinks a lifetime expulsion is too much, bear in mind that these senior Labour staff used language that was considerably more abusive and inappropriate than that cited as justification for suspending many Labour members who supported Jeremy Corbyn in 2016.

Labour members past and present are lining up to demand action.

But it seems Mr Starmer is more interested in protecting the perpetrators of these offences.

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Johnson spits on democracy: he’s putting ousted MP Goldsmith in the Lords to keep him in the Cabinet

Zac Goldsmith: In this image, he appears to be trying to pretend he’s Hugh Grant in the new film Corruption, Actually.

Remember that racist Tory?

No, not Boris Johnson.

The one who ran a despicable campaign to become Mayor of London by making racist comments about Labour candidate (and now Mayor) Sadiq Khan, who was labelled “the Muslim”. Remember him?

His name was Zac Goldsmith. After his racist mayoral campaign failed, he went back to being Tory MP for Richmond – until he was removed from Parliament by the democratic vote of the people on Thursday, December 12.

Apparently that’s not good enough for our prime mop-headed muppet Boris Johnson. He has decided to ennoble Mr Goldsmith, in order to retain him as a Cabinet minister.

It seems that, despite having 365 MPs from whom to choose, Johnson can’t find enough supporters to form a full cabinet without spitting on democracy.

Either that or there aren’t enough racists.

It seems Mr Goldsmith will continue as Environment Secretary.

As a Lord and not a member of the Commons, it will be impossible for MPs to question him on government policies.

But he will be able to vote on all legislation. Does that seem right?

The Electoral Reform Society would say it doesn’t:

It’s cronyism. Johnson is surrounding himself with his gang, in mockery of his own claims to be creating a “People’s government”.

It’s perfectly in character, though – as I tweeted myself:

Source: Zac Goldsmith ‘to get Tory peerage so he can serve as minister’ | Metro News

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Peers’ vote of ‘no-confidence’ in Corbyn called off | The SKWAWKBOX

Anti-Semitic: Lady Hayter.

It seems more level heads have prevailed over those Labour peers in the House of Lords who thought it would be a good idea to hold a vote of no confidence (VONC) in Jeremy Corbyn.

Perhaps the peers who advocated the vote have realised that, with 179 Labour representatives in the Upper Chamber, they might not get the result they wanted.

According to Skwawkbox, it seems a vote in support of sacked peer Dianne Hayter may still take place.

This still seems off-colour. Lady Hayter compared Mr Corbyn’s leadership to the “bunker mentality” in the “last days of Hitler”.

A Labour spokesperson rightly responded that this was “grossly insensitive to Jewish staff in particular.”

Indeed. Some would call it anti-Semitic.

It seems entirely likely that the VONC was called off because of this double-standard – that peers would be claiming anti-Semitism against Mr Corbyn by supporting an anti-Semitic statement by one of their own.

So how can they be still contemplating a debate and vote in her support?

Source: Peers’ no-confidence vote called off | The SKWAWKBOX

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

As ‘re-admit Chris Williamson’ demands swell, Labour’s leaders sit on their thumbs

Jennie Formby: She acts fast when there’s an opportunity to look tough, but when those decisions turn out to be wrong, she’s nowhere to be found.

When less than 200 MPs, peers and staff wrote to demand Chris Williamson’s re-suspension after his Labour membership was restored following an investigation into false allegations of anti-Semitism, general secretary Jennie Formby acted at once. Now more than 6,000 party members have demanded that this decision be reversed, and she has done nothing at all. Why?

To put this in proportionate terms, more than 30 times the number of Labour members who had Mr Williamson re-suspended have said the decision should be reversed. Labour is supposedly a democratic party and the will of the majority should prevail. But Ms Formby has done nothing.

The figures come from a LabourList weekly survey, which also revealed that an even larger majority of respondents believe that Labour’s disciplinary process – which sends serious cases to the “quasi-judicial” National Constitutional Committee – is subject to political interference and should be scrapped in favour of an independent process. The treatment of many cases – in which mere accusation was taken as an assumption of guilt – led to the NCC being dubbed the “National Kangaroo Court” by many, including This Writer.

And this is not the only development. The Labour Party of Northern Ireland has published a statement on Mr Williamson’s suspension, along with a motion that may be taken as a model for other Labour constituency parties.

The statement quotes in full the words said by the MP which have been selectively quoted by his critics, and also quotes analysis of anti-Semitism in the party that shows it is a negligible issue with only 0.05 per cent of members being said to have engaged in any activity that could even be claimed to have been anti-Semitic. This compares with a national average of around five per cent (which in itself is a shocking figure).

It continues: “All anti-semitism should be considered a scourge and a problem that needs addressing. However, it is a fair comment to say that the Labour Party does not have any form of particular problem with anti-semitism . It is also fair to say that Labour Party members are not to blame for the narrative that suggests that there is a particular problem with anti-semitism in the party.

“It logically follows that members of the Labour Party should not feel that they should be apologetic about something that has been shown to be false.

“It does not diminish the scourge of anti-semitism to state these things. Members are entitled to feel proud of the Labour Party’s history of anti-racism and support for minority communities and for all of those facing discrimination and oppression. They are entitled to encourage others to join the party and to support it on the basis of its anti-racist and wholly inclusive credentials.

“Any member is entitled to say that those who are agreeing and apologising for the Labour Party having a particular problem with anti-semitism, is a concession to falsehoods and distortions. In a climate where such falsehoods and distortions proliferate, members are entitled to challenge the narrative. They are entitled to scrutinise complaints. They are entitled to adopt an inquisitorial approach to allegations. Every member who is accused is entitled to the absolutely fundamental principle of justice; that they are considered innocent until it is established otherwise.

“Most of all, every member is entitled to be subject to the democratically determined rules and procedures governing the Party and to demand that those rules and procedures be upheld and not be subject to the arbitrariness of public opinion and pressure.”

In my own case, I was treated as though I were guilty from the moment I was falsely accused. Chris Williamson has had the same treatment. So have many others.

And those who endorse the falsehoods and distortions are still being given the oxygen of publicity by mass-media news organisations. Only last week, Labour Lord Falconer appeared on the BBC’s #PoliticsLive to deplore Mr Williamson’s perfectly reasonable comments as anti-Semitic and to damn him further by association with (among others) Jackie Walker, who had been accused of saying that Jews were chief financiers of the slave trade – except, of course, we know that she didn’t say that. The other person in the video is Tosh McDonald, a friend and supporter of Mr Williamson.

I reckon Charlie Falconer knew that what he was saying wasn’t true. Ms Walker would have made it perfectly clear in her defence and I made it perfectly clear in mine (two of the charges against me related to my support for her). He referred to notes, so he should have had that information. And now, of course, the BBC has confirmed the falsehood of the claim.

Yet Lord Charlie Falconer has faced no censure whatsoever for his words. When will his party membership be suspended? When will his misbehaviour be investigated? When will questions be asked about his motivations?

I reckon we all know the answer to that: Never.

Labour’s general secretary, Jennie Formby, was bombarded with tweets demanding action to reinstate falsely-purged party members including myself, Ms Walker and Mr Williamson after the BBC’s admission. To my knowledge, she has not responded in any way at all. She is running away from her party’s mistakes prejudice.

Perhaps she’ll respond if a party member – or several of them – makes an official complaint.

Who’ll give it a go?

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.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Lord Sugar got precious about his pledge to emigrate if Corbyn becomes PM – and got what he deserved

Sugar: He’s not feeling too sweet right now (I went with the cartoonised image because he’s acting like a cartoon character, of course).

What do you say to a guy who received a peerage thanks to a Labour prime minister, and then vowed to leave the country if another Labour leader gets to become PM?

Lord Sugar found out over the last few days – and wasn’t very happy about it.

Here’s the tweet that set him off:

https://twitter.com/Redlabour2016/status/1073270116551401474

This Writer’s first instinct, on watching the clip, was that Sugar had bought into all the nonsense about Mr Corbyn, the Labour Party under him, and anti-Semitism (for the record, anti-Semitism in Labour was low when Mr Corbyn became leader and has diminished since; it is far more prevalent in right-wing parties like the Conservatives). But it seems I need not have worried as his words imply he was suggesting the economy would fall off a cliff.

And that’s odd – hasn’t he noticed what’s happening anyway, due to eight years of Tory failure – and Theresa May’s Brexit?

Lord Sugar spotted the Red Labour tweet and responded – and this is where the story really starts:

Jealous? Anti-enterprise? Anarchist? Losers?

How does he know what these people have achieved?

As for his tax bill – yes, very large, but does he not understand that many, many other citizens of the UK have been held back from reaching the higher pay grades that would make a higher tax bill possible, because of the repressive political philosophy championed by the Conservatives, which is about making the poor poorer and keeping all the privilege for those who already have it?

Is it any wonder the Twittersphere yelled at him? Check out these responses:

If anyone complains about the spelling in the next one, you need to get a sense of perspective:

https://twitter.com/mevrouwbee/status/1073526185236283397

All good points, I’m sure you’ll agree. And only a few (there are many, many more such tweets) descend to Lord Sugar’s level.

The chances are he won’t leave, of course.

The guys who make such threats are always determined that we’ll do worse without them – and they’d never follow through on those threats in case we don’t.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


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

The twisted logic of Jonathan Sacks

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:

They picked up on his claim to know history better than Mr Corbyn, and turned it on him:

https://twitter.com/HowardCover/status/1034525008444502016

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:

And then there are the actions of Lord Sacks himself.

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?

Here’s Owen Jones, providing support for Aaron Bastani’s position.

There is an obvious conclusion to draw from this – and, strangely enough, it is one that Lord Sacks might have tried to present himself.

Always think for yourself and never give your blind faith to anybody… especially people like Lord Sacks.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


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