Tag Archives: omit

Theresa May didn’t mention Jews in her Holocaust message – but Jeremy Corbyn was attacked for it

Jeremy Corbyn, writing about Jews including Roza Robota, Szmul Zygielbojm and Anne Frank, in the Holocaust Educational Trust’s book of remembrance.

One of the themes of Holocaust Memorial Day, and the charity behind the event, is that people should come together to prevent future holocausts and genocides.

It shames us all, therefore, that some people have been encouraged to complain about Jeremy Corbyn’s Facebook message, in which he did not mention Jews.

People were quick to attack the omission, which was said to be from the message he wrote in the Holocaust Educational Trust’s book of remembrance.

In fact, it was not. One wonders how that mistake happened. The message from the book – which certainly does mention Jews, appeared on Facebook later, and can be read here.

But the damage was done. Critics arose to question Mr Corbyn’s omission, including the writer of this on the Christians United For Israel website:

Jeremy Corbyn shared a message ahead of Saturday’s Holocaust Memorial Day. However the Labour leader did so without mentioning Jews.

The omission raised eye-brows with many of social media questioning his reason. Over six million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust. With the “power of words” being a theme of this year’s Memorial Day, it would have been an appropriate opportunity to have addressed this directly, especially considering the Labour leadership’s recent problems with antisemitism in the party.

Another critical article, in The Tablet, quotes Hugo Rifkind – who This Writer so resoundingly trounced in a discussion on anti-Semitism in 2016 – as follows:

I literally cannot understand why he would do this. Can it be accidental? You mention Jews, just like you mention gypsies, homosexuals and dissidents. If you don’t, you are making a specific point of not doing.

Really?

Perhaps Mr Rifkind had not read Theresa May’s message in the same book of remembrance. Here it is:

The pages of this book unite us in a commitment to remember all those who suffered during the Holocaust. We stand together to honour the lives lost and those who survived.

As Prime Minister, I pledge to do everything in my power to ensure we never forget where prejudice and hatred can lead. The new national Memorial to the Holocaust will sit in the shadow of Parliament, alongside a world class learning centre to do just that. It will make a permanent statement of our promise to remember and our commitment to teach future generations to fight hatred in all its forms.

By supporting the Holocaust Educational Trust and all its partners we will safeguard the memories of survivors and learn the lessons for generations to come.

The evidence shows that it is Mrs May who made not a single reference to the Jews – either individually or as a race.

Nor, for that matter, did she mention Romani, homosexuals or dissidents. Perhaps she was making a specific point not to do so.

It may interest you to recall that in my most recent article on this subject, I mentioned all of the above, along with many other people whose sacrifices should be recalled during Holocaust Memorial Day – if the charity that runs the event is serious about commemorating all victims of holocaust and genocide: The disabled, the mentally ill, neurotics, prostitutes, recidivist criminals, Prisoners of War, and among the political prisoners: trade unionists, Socialists, Communists, Anarchists, and slave workers from the Slav nations. Also: Armenians, and those who died in the genocides in Cambodia, Darfur, Bosnia and Rwanda.

Other genocides go uncommemorated, as I have mentioned in another article.

Do I get some sort of prize for commemorating all victims of these atrocities?

No. As many readers are aware, I have been accused of anti-Semitism.

In fact, one of the accusations against me is for suggesting that, referring to another organisation that did not mention Jews in its discussion of the Holocaust, it seemed likely that the organisation in question was simply being “politically correct” in using an umbrella term – “victims” – to cover them all.

The theme of this year’s Holocaust Memorial Day is “The Power of Words”, and the Theme Vision statement makes it clear that “words used to good effect can restore hope, courage or faith. Words can challenge prevailing views and can state solidarity”.

This Writer would hope that this is the purpose to which most people are putting their own words with regard to HMD.

But the same document also states that “harsh words, or words that feed negative stereotypes, can fuel tensions, increase vulnerability and even incite violence”.

In other words, they can be hugely divisive – in exact opposition to the aim of the event, which is to “ensure that everyone works together to create a safer, better future”.

I would suggest that the accusations against Mr Corbyn are exactly the kind of “harsh words” that are intended to “fuel tensions, increase vulnerablility and even incite violence” – it is “the language of hatred and exclusion”.

It is language used to attack Mr Corbyn under a false banner, while giving Mrs May a free pass. It is the language of hypocrisy, of division, of hate.

And I’m willing to bet that those responsible will get away with it.


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 and Green candidates left off postal ballot papers

Postal ballot papers for Hull East. Notice that no Labour or Green candidates are listed.

Postal ballot papers for Hull East. Notice that no Labour or Green candidates are listed.

High-profile Labour MP Karl Turner’s name has been omitted from 480 postal ballot papers in his Hull East constituency due to what the local council is calling an “inadvertent mistake”.

Yeah, right.

If that is the case, why were Mr Turner and Green candidate Sarah Walpole only missed off the papers for people who registered to vote after April 1? Doesn’t that imply that somebody removed their names deliberately?

Hull City Council had better check every single ballot paper it is preparing for election day, to prevent any further “inadvertent mistake”. Mr Turner was elected with a majority of more than 8,000, so the potential loss of 480 votes was unlikely to affect him. The loss of who-knows-how-many votes on the day might be a different matter!

Mr Turner told the BBC the mistake was “concerning” because people were “being denied the right to vote and take part in the democratic process”.

He added: “I have had calls from people in East Hull who are going on holiday this week and are angry that they are unable to vote. I have asked Hull City Council to urgently look into the matter and review their processes surrounding sending out ballot papers.”

The campaign is moving from desperation into criminality now, it seems. This Writer does not believe for one moment that those ballot papers were altered by “mistake”.

Expect further incidents like that in the last days of the campaign – and we can be sure plenty of last-minute voters will be locked out of their polling stations again, on the stroke of 10pm, just like last time. This gives Conservative candidates an edge over others because Tory voters are whipped into voting as early as possible.

In other news, it seems more than 70,000 ballot papers destined for Hastings and Rye, in East Sussex, were stolen along with the van that was transporting them there. Hastings Borough Council says it is putting measures in place to ensure that none of the stolen papers can be used, and we are being asked to believe that the loss of the papers was incidental to the theft of the van.

Yeah, right. But opportunism is a wonderful thing. Let’s see what happens there.

Both these events could lead to electoral fraud, which is a crime. Vox Political readers are urged to be alert for any possible “inadvertent mistake” in your own constituency and report anything suspicious to the Returning Officer (usually your local council’s chief executive) and to the police.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have enjoyed 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!

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

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
raising awareness of electoral fraud.

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

Jail the DWP fraudsters who tried to fix UK unemployment figures!

[Image from a post on Facebook]

[Image from a post on Facebook]

Iain Duncan Smith and everybody else associated with this scam should be facing charges and the possibility of imprisonment, rather than re-election next year.

Let’s be honest about this: The government hasn’t messed up by omitting Universal Credit claimants from the official unemployment benefit claimant count – the Department for Work and Pensions messed up by admitting this had happened.

It means we may be looking at a long-term attempt to defraud the electorate. The plan seems clear: When the general election finally takes place next year, Iain Duncan Smith would have claimed that his policies have been a brilliant success in creating jobs and cutting down the number of people claiming benefits.

If people are convinced that the DWP has succeeded in cutting the amount of money being paid out in benefits – the burden on the taxpayer – then they are more likely to vote for the Conservatives. Electoral victory means more money for everybody involved – what’s known as a pecuniary advantage.

But the claim has been made by deception. Obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception is the dictionary definition of criminal fraud.

There can be no doubt that the omission was deliberate. When it comes to fiddling the official figures, the DWP has ‘form’ going back for years. Look at the lies about the benefit cap pushing people into work; the way people on ESA were encouraged to say they were self-employed and claim tax credits – even though this is not permitted and they were racking up a huge overpayment.

Look at the abuses of the sanction system; look at the abuses of the IB/ESA work capability assessment; look at the number of successful appeals against the DWP that have been kept out of official figures.

The claimant count, which provides the headline unemployment figure, is the number of people claiming Jobseekers’ Allowance every month – and has been for many years.

But Iain Duncan Smith’s flagship (if the ship was the Titanic) Universal Credit is up and running – on an extremely limited basis – in certain pilot areas of the country, and people without a job in those areas should be included in the claimant count.

This has not happened. It is possible that this is yet another oversight by Mr Duncan Smith, the government’s top bungler (indeed, he was recently voted favourite cabinet minister by ConservativeHome, so he must be doing something right, and the thing he does most often is make mistakes).

Mr Duncan Smith himself would disagree, however. He has claimed repeatedly and vehemently that his department does not make mistakes with statistics; that everything done on his watch has been justified and that everybody at the DWP is entirely competent.

So we must accept that there was a decision to keep Universal Credit claimants out of the claimant count, meaning that there was a decision to make it seem there are fewer people unemployed than is actually the case.

This seems to be supported by the complaint from the Office for National Statistics, which publishes unemployment figures. The wording runs as follows: “The DWP have not been able to supply ONS with this information in a way that has allowed its inclusion within the Claimant Count [italics mine], resulting in the exclusion of UC claims from this measure.”

This implies that the DWP is perfectly capable of supplying the figures in a manageable way but has deliberately done otherwise.

Further indication that DWP officials knew exactly what they were doing comes from a spokeswoman’s response to this affair, published in the Daily Mirror: “We have been fully transparent in publishing the number of people claiming Universal Credit.

“To ensure consistency the Department released these figures alongside the employment statistics. Universal Credit is both an in- and out-of-work benefit so some claimants may be working.”

In that case, the DWP cannot have been “fully transparent”, can it? Transparency would have required the department to separate UC into “in-work” and “out-of-work” claims, and we have no evidence that this has happened. Until it does, neither the ONS nor the rest of us have any way of knowing how many people are unemployed in the UK.

This has been going on for nearly a year, as Universal Credit was rolled out in its first pilot area in April last year. This means that all unemployment statistics since then have been falsified by the DWP and unemployment figures have been higher than claimed.

The Labour Party has tried to paint this as incompetence, but it is wrong to do so.

This was deliberate, premeditated disinformation.

Now the deception has been uncovered, they are unrepentant.

Perhaps someone should remind them that fraud is still a crime.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Vox Political deplores criminal activity – especially by the government.
But the site needs funds if it is to continue exposing this behaviour.
In short: Vox Political cannot continue without YOUR help.
You can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Alternatively, you can buy the first Vox Political book,
Strong Words and Hard Times
in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook