Suella Braverman and Rishi Sunak: that vile gaze of mutual adoration says it all. I don’t think her threat to resign is real.
Do you think she’d be able to stay resigned, if she decided to actually do it this time?
Suella Braverman reckons she’ll head for the backbenches if Rishi Sunak’s latest attempt to negotiate a deal to replace the Northern Ireland Protocol of the Brexit agreement doesn’t satisfy the Democratic Unionists in Ulster and Westminster, and (we may expect) the Conservative Party’s own European Research Group (ERG), of which she is a leading member.
At least, that’s what we’ve heard.
Ms Braverman has already resigned her position as Home Secretary once – only to take it up again the very next week – and she has brazenly refused to accept the consequences of evidence showing that she is a security risk who should not have the job.
So we really have no reason to believe anything she’s saying now.
Happily, we have all been able to extract some mirth from the situation, as it has created considerable hilarity on Twitter (and, one presumes, elsewhere). Consider:
Suella Braverman is threatening the prime minister with her imminent resignation regarding his stance on the NI protocol. Sunak will once again throw the UK under the bus to appease a grubby, ERG fascist.
Dear @SuellaBraverman – heard you might resign – obviously agree that you should, wanted to offer you full encouragement to get that done. Do give us an update on your progress and whether or not you succeed this time & don't accidentally accept your job back again. Kind regards,
Suella Braverman belongs to a minority sect in Buddhism, which believes that no matter how many times she resigns, she'll always be reincarnated as a cabinet minister the following week
So, Suella Braverman is 'threatening' to resign. I wonder how many people who aren't right wing nutjobs, members of the ERG or the DUP, are thinking, 'Noooooooooooo, we can't afford to lose talent like Suella Braverman from the cabinet!!!' https://t.co/3Yw6xM7qsI
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!
Mr Putin’s spokesman said the former prime minister’s claim was “either a deliberate falsehood, in which case you need to ask Mr Johnson why he lied, or it was not a deliberate lie. That is, he didn’t understand what President Putin was saying to him”.
“There were no threats to use missiles,” Dmitry Peskov told the BBC.
The Kremlin leader, he said, had simply pointed out that “if Ukraine joined Nato the potential deployment of Nato or US missiles near Russia’s border would mean that any missile could reach Moscow within minutes”.
But some are saying there was no reason for Johnson to lie:
What do you think?
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!
We’ve heard the expression, “look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves”, but this is ridiculous.
It seems that a man whose sole contact with the benefit system was a week on Housing Benefit has been contacted by the Department for Work and Pensions about an overpayment – of just 2p.
The letter, which cost more than the alleged overpayment, threatens court action that would be even more expensive if Damien Dove, of West Rainton in Sunderland, fails to pay up.
It states – in all seriousness: “If you cannot pay this amount in full we can discuss terms for repayment… We recommend that payments are made by Direct Debit.”
Mr Dove, 53, has said he will pay but questioned whether the DWP was “having a laugh”.
The Department itself has pointed out that the debt is actually owed to local government, which administers Housing Benefit.
Apparently the DWP is required to collect such debts when requested, and the process is automated, meaning no human being was involved in the notification process.
That seems feasible – but it still isn’t good enough. If collection of a debt costs more than the debt itself, then it clearly isn’t worth the effort.
There is no reason this cannot be written into any automated debt collection process and it staggers the imagination that it was not anticipated before such a process was implemented.
What’s even more astonishing is that nobody has mentioned making these changes now.
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!
Feel free to post this infographic wherever you like.
In rational times, a Labour leader caught taking orders from a former Tory minister would automatically apologise and resign.
Clearly we don’t live in a normal world.
Because Keir Starmer, who followed the demand of former Tory minister David Gauke by threatening Labour MPs with the removal of the party whip for criticising Nato by supporting a statement opposing the war in Ukraine, has doubled down on his threat instead:
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has warned his MPs that any of them who attempt to attack Nato or indulge in “false equivalence” with Russian aggression will be kicked out of the party.
Sir Keir said there would be “no room” in Labour for anyone who seeking to blame the western alliance for Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
It follows a telling off for the 11 left-wing Labour MPs who were threatened with the loss of the party whip if they didn’t pull support for a Stop the War letter criticising Nato.
“False equivalence” is a logical fallacy that can most easily be defined as “comparing apples with oranges”.
And if anybody is guilty of it, then Starmer is.
He wants to say that opponents of the war are comparing Russia’s behaviour in invading Ukraine with Nato’s posturing immediately before.
But in fact, the anti-war protesters were comparing Nato’s willingness to allow Ukraine to join the organisation – so it could put military bases on that country’s border with Russia, with Russia’s concerns that it was being encircled by members of an organisation hostile to it.
The language used by Nato and representatives of its member states was highly provocative, while ignoring the concerns that had been expressed to them – as Russian President Putin showed when he singled out the idiotic bluster of UK foreign secretary Liz Truss.
Starmer’s claim makes it seem as though these anti-war protesters are actually supporting Russia’s war – which is a clear contradiction of their fundamental position.
But then, he is (apparently) taking orders from the Conservative Party.
Incidentally, Starmer apparently used Ukraine as an excuse not to attend a regional Labour conference – but instead of actually doing anything related to that crisis, he went to Birmingham’s Erdington constituency to try to shore up crumbling support for his right-wing candidate there:
Keir Starmer dodged going to Labour's North Conference citing the situation in Ukraine. The reality was he went to #erdingtonbyelection to shore up support for his flailing candidate Paulette Hamilton & rather than be honest about it, he lied to his own members. #DamoRantspic.twitter.com/KyRL3Lc1YK
The genuine left-wing alternative – Dave Nellist – is enjoying considerable grassroots support, which is why the mainstream media are doing all they can to cancel him.
As I type this, BBC Radio West Midlands is holding a “debate” with “some of” the candidates. Nellist isn’t among them, having been deliberately excluded, it seems:
This is unlike the Reform UK, Green and Liberal Democrat candidates, who have all been asked to participate.
2/8
— Dave Nellist – A Socialist MP For Erdington (@Dave4Erdington) March 1, 2022
This says a lot about who the real anti-establishment candidate is in Thursday's by-election!
4/8
— Dave Nellist – A Socialist MP For Erdington (@Dave4Erdington) March 1, 2022
It's being held at 7pm tonight, Tuesday 1st March, at the Erdington Club, 33 Sutton New Road B23 6TD – all welcome.
6/8
— Dave Nellist – A Socialist MP For Erdington (@Dave4Erdington) March 1, 2022
So there you have it.
The mass media – headed by your lovable, “impartial” BBC – are suppressing the left-wing candidate in this important local election, while Tory stooge Starmer has been snubbing his party members to go canvassing on a fake lefty ticket.
I only hope listeners boycott the BBC debate and go to meet Nellist at the Erdington Club rally instead.
And then let’s see a huge vote for Nellist rather than Starmer’s puppet on Thursday.
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!
Keir Starmer: Putin down his people (sorry – I couldn’t resist the pun).
People across Russia who have stood up in protest against their country’s invasion of Ukraine are winning praise from politicians in the UK and across the world.
What a stark contrast with the reaction of – for example – UK Labour leader Keir Starmer, who has forced 11 of his MPs to withdraw their protest against the war under threat of losing the party whip!
Here is video evidence of some of the protests in Russia, as citizens there exercised their right to free speech:
Phenomenally brave Russians taking to the streets in St Petersburg to protest the invasion of Ukraine. The consequences of protesting could be severe. pic.twitter.com/ChYxbXaIxu
All of these protests if they took place in the UK, would soon be illegal under the Tory government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts legislation that is currently working its way through Parliament.
And it seems Labour’s current leadership tacitly supports such suppression; here’s how Starmer reacted to his MPs’ exercise of their right to free speech:
Keith Stalin strikes again. Dissent will not be tolerated, Obey your leader or else. https://t.co/r1OpPesom9
“This dispute could and should be resolved peacefully, and that remains the only basis for a lasting settlement, rather than the imposition of military solutions. That it has not been resolved is not, however, the responsibility of the Russian or Ukrainian governments alone.
“The conflict is the product of thirty years of failed policies, including the expansion of NATO and US hegemony at the expense of other countries as well as major wars of aggression by the USA, Britain and other NATO powers which have undermined international law and the United Nations.
“The British government has played a provocative role in the present crisis, talking up war, decrying diplomacy as appeasement and escalating arms supplies and military deployments to Eastern Europe.
“If there is to be a return to diplomacy, as there should be, the British government should pledge to oppose any further eastward expansion of NATO and should encourage a return to the Minsk-2 agreement, already signed by both sides, by all parties as a basis for ending the crisis in relations between Ukraine and Russia.
“Beyond that, there now needs to be a unified effort to develop pan-European security arrangements which meet the needs of all states, something that should have been done when the Warsaw Pact was wound up at the end of the Cold War. The alternative is endless great power conflict with all the attendant waste of resources and danger of bloodshed and destruction.
“We send our solidarity to all those campaigning for an end to the war, often under very difficult conditions, in Russia and Ukraine. Stop the War can best support them by demanding a change in Britain’s own policy, which can be seen to have failed.”
Stop the War expanded on this in a message to followers:
“The Russian invasion of Ukraine overnight is a massive escalation in the conflict there. Stop the War is calling for the withdrawal of Russian troops and for an immediate ceasefire. Our statement is here and our resolution for union branches/CLPs here.
“The danger of war involving nuclear weapons is more real than previously and must be opposed. The real losers will be the ordinary people of Ukraine, Russia, and the rest of Europe.
“We should, however, take no lessons in peacemaking from our own government and its allies. They have brought us decades of escalating wars, each of which has been a failure. They have encouraged a growing arms race internationally. And they have set on a path of Nato expansion which has brought the military alliance to the borders of Russia, in contravention of agreements made at the end of the Cold War.
“Nato is not a defensive alliance but an aggressive one, centrally involved in wars in Afghanistan, Libya and Yugoslavia, and engaged in more and more ‘out of area operations’ including in the Indo-Pacific.
“Our government wants to hide its domestic problems behind its belligerent statements, and we can be certain that this will continue, at the same time that it will provide unlimited money for war but increase student loan repayments and cut the NHS.
“There is a surge or argument in favour of greater sanctions, including from those who purport to be anti war. But sanctions are not an alternative to war – they are economic warfare and therefore a prelude to war. We have seen this in Iraq where all they did was bring war closer, at the same time as bringing real suffering to the people of Iraq.
“As an anti-war and peace movement, our first priority is to stop war. This conflict has not developed in the last few weeks alone, but reflects a society where war is being turned to increasingly to solve other problems. However, we are also aware that this is a different situation from previous wars where our government has been directly involved in military action, and we need to do as much as we can to explain and discuss the issues with those around us.
“We are asking our members, supporters, groups and affiliates to do the following:
Make sure our statement and resolution are disseminated as widely as possible.
Do everything to publicise and support our international meeting on Saturday 26th February and our in person rally on Wednesday 2nd March in Conway Hall, London.
Hold urgent meetings in all localities – in person where possible – calling for withdrawal of Russian troops, ceasefire now and against Nato expansion.
Attend the demos and actions in support of the NHS with placards linking cuts in public spending with money for war- you can download and print our new placard design from our website.
Prepare for a day of action (tba) where we hold protests and vigils against the war.
“Please contact the office for materials and more information, and for speakers.
“Due to the high volume of traffic we are currently experiencing, we apologise for any difficulties you may encounter whilst trying to access our website today; please keep refreshing or try again later.”
This Writer leans toward the belief that Starmer – who only recently and loudly announced his support for Nato as Labour’s current policy (not that it ever changed from that) – has been incensed by the support of opposition to the organisation by Labour backbenchers.
So he did what bullies do – he threatened them with reprisals.
Even facing World War III, Keir Starmer decides to split the Labour party again by trying to purge 11 of his own MPs.
And he drew comparisons between himself and Russian president Vladimir Putin in an ironic but entirely appropriate unintended consequence:
Starmer demanding 11 left MP's withdraw their signatures from a Stop The War motion criticising NATO (justified & doesn't make you pro Putin) or risk losing the whip is literally something Putin would do. When he does it anyway, his war on the left will be publicly exposed.
Damo expands on this in a well-argued ‘rant’ that critics of the Stop the War 11 should consider with care:
11 Labour MP's have withdrawn signatures to a Stop the War letter allegedly under threat of suspension. Difference of opinion is unacceptable in Keir Stalin New New Labour order. But were their actions weakness on their part, or have they called Keith's bluff? #DamoRantspic.twitter.com/i9quZEhazU
And how will this play out in the United Kingdom at large?
Well, with a by-election set to take place in Erdington, Birmingham on March 3, we shouldn’t have long to wait. And people are already making their wishes clear:
I am about to go off line. I am 2 upset by the SCG's surrender. But let me say it is now of critical importance that @davenellist do well in Erdington. Somewhere the Left must draw a line & say we r fighting back. Let it be in Erdington.
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!
Habitual cruelty: if you thought the Tories stopped persecuting people with long-term illnesses and disabilities during the Covid-19 crisis, think again.
This is the UK in 2021, summed up in one series of tweets:
Here's a 'thing', purely anecdotal but I have no reason to doubt. A friend has a Job Centre face to face meeting next week. NHS 111 has advised a PCR test and ten day self isolation. She's phoned the JC and explained the situation…threatened with sanctions for non attendance.
1. If her results arrive before her appointment and are negative she will not have to isolate and can attend…this is obvious. 2. If positive and she fails to attend she faces a sanction. 3. It the results do not arrive before her appointment, what shall she do?
I've advised her not to attend. If she is infectious then the other claimants are at risk. I'm sure that 'possibly infectious' is a reasonable excuse for non-attendance.
I don’t know where this Job Centre is, but its staff are clearly trying to create another Jodey Whiting.
Jodey had incurable conditions – they could only get worse – and failed to attend a benefit re-assessment interview because she was in hospital with a brain cyst at the time.
All her benefits were cut off – even though the interview can only have been to work out whether her conditions had worsened enough for her to require increased payments.
She took her own life soon afterwards. A coroner ruled that it could not be described as suicide because there is reason to believe her action could have been a cry for help.
This Writer has no doubt that Ms Whiting was pushed towards taking her own life by the Department for Work and Pensions.
If somebody on benefits contracts Covid-19, fails to attend a benefit interview, and the DWP cuts off all her payments – in the full knowledge of what happened with Ms Whiting – doesn’t that indicate, to you, that this government department is hoping for the same end result?
It does to me.
Let’s hope it doesn’t get that far.
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!
Rosie Duffield: she reckons she can’t go to Labour’s conference because of threats from LGBT+ party members. Or possibly white male party members. Luciana Berger said she was intimidated by anti-Semitic party members a few years ago. She wasn’t – and Duffield has yet to divvy up any evidence for her own claims.
A Labour MP who broke genuine lockdown rules to meet her married lover has claimed she has been forced to pull out of the party conference because of threats to her safety that seem entirely imaginary.
Rosie Duffield told The Times that she had received online threats from “militant transgender activists”.
But where readers could have expected to see evidence to support her claim, all we got was this: “‘LGBT+ Labour now seem to hate my guts and I feared they’d have a massive go at me at conference,’ Duffield said.”
Ah! So there were no actual threats that she would be harmed if she attended conference at all, then?
“‘The people who threaten me I don’t think are actually likely to harm me.'”
Which people are these? We haven’t seen any evidence of any threats at all. And if they aren’t likely to harm her, why is she making such a fuss?
“‘They just say it often and very loudly.'”
Yes? Then The Times should have been able to show us evidence of this behaviour. And it didn’t.
In fact, This Writer has checked this story as it appears in 10 different newspapers, and none of them were able to show a single abusive tweet that Duffield had received, to support her claim.
And I’m not the only one.
Incredibly telling how every single article about Rosie Duffield staying away from Labour conference due to the ‘threat’ of an LGBTQ+ backlash contains literally zero evidence of even a single legitimate threat.
It’s almost as if she whipped the story up herself to get sympathy.
Duffield tried to claim that this nonexistent abuse is a product of “misogyny” by “straight white men”.
She said, according to The Times: “It looks like, feels like, and smells like misogyny.”
Then how come the rest of us can’t see it, feel it, or get a whiff of it?
And if straight white men were responsible for the abuse, why had Duffield already blamed LGBT+ activists within the Labour Party?
For the same reason 99% of MSM "journalists" neglected to mention that none of the men charged and convicted of antisemitic hate crimes against Luciana Berger were members of the Labour Party. They were all from the far right.
— Frank Owen's Legendary Paintbrush 🟨🟥🥀🇵🇸 (@WarmongerHodges) September 19, 2021
Oh yes. That seems logical.
LGBT+ Labour itself has denied any involvement in abuse of the MP. According to the Huffington Post, a spokesperson said: “We have made clear our political disagreements with Rosie on policy affecting trans people, but political disagreement should never result in abuse or physical threats.
“LGBT+ Labour has never conducted itself in this way and would never encourage anyone else to. It is utterly unacceptable.
“Women in politics are subject to appalling levels of abuse and we are clear it has no place in our party or society.”
The HuffPost piece also falsely reported that former Labour MP Luciana Berger was given police protection at a previous party conference after months of anti-Semitic abuse. In fact, she was advised to have a police escort to and from the conference – and the only people who were ever found to have given her anti-Semitic abuse were far-right activists who had nothing to do with the Labour Party at all.
Nevertheless, Berger tried to blame then-leader Jeremy Corbyn for the anti-Semites who weren’t in the Labour Party, saying he was responsible for an influx of anti-Semites into the party that hadn’t actually happened. Indeed, anti-Semitism in the Labour Party fell under his leadership.
But considering Berger’s precedent, this seems a perfectly reasonable comment:
If Rosie Duffield 'doesn't feel safe' to attend Conference in Starmer's Labour Party, why isn't this Starmer's fault?
In fact, the similarity with Berger’s fakery is prominent:
A Labour MP makes allegations of threats of violence and intimidation in a national right wing newspaper. Claims she cannot attend conference. Presents no evidence of these threats. Nor can anyone find any evidence of these threats. Does that remind you of anything?
I think we're all familiar with this manoeuvre now. There have been no threats made against Duffield. The Times article was based on unchallenged assertions & devoid of any facts. "Left misogyny" isn't actually a thing. pic.twitter.com/Ydjd6iUPCy
Of course, Ms Duffield, who is apparently afraid of phantom misogynists accosting her within an event that will be, undoubtedly, patrolled very thoroughly by security guards, had absolutely no problem with breaking lockdown rules and avoiding the police in order to have an affair:
Sooooo familiar…weird that same MP had no problem breaching lockdown last year… https://t.co/QR8oPGwQcn
It’s interesting that the same people who supported Berger are popping up to support Duffield, showing stunning ignorance of their own hypocrisy. Jess Phillips, for example.
Well, he couldn’t could he? If he had requested evidence, he would have been accused of hypocrisy because he has never shown any interest in seeing evidence to support anti-Semitism accusations.
It is, by now, a classic attack tactic: fabricate offensive behaviour, blame somebody you want to vilify, and get a story published by the papers. Remember Angela Eagle?
2. I'm sure you all remember the claims that a brick (it wasn't) had been thrown through her window (it wasn't) by Corbyn supporters to threaten Eagle. In fact, the police later confirmed it was a bit of masonry, but never found out who did it.
— CrémantCommunarde#TimeToBreakthrough 🕊️⚖️ 🟠🌤 (@0Calamity) September 19, 2021
4. So forgive me if I don't leap to Rosie Duffield's defence as she alleges "threats" from trans allies. I am fairly sure she gets abuse on social media. All MPs do (with Diane Abbott, sadly, the leading recipient).
— CrémantCommunarde#TimeToBreakthrough 🕊️⚖️ 🟠🌤 (@0Calamity) September 19, 2021
6. Especially in the lead-up to party Conference. She didn't want to show up at her own city's Gay Pride which is, to Labour's eternal shame, actually sponsored by the Tories. If she doesn't want to turn up to Conference, good for her. But she needs to stop blaming others. 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️
— CrémantCommunarde#TimeToBreakthrough 🕊️⚖️ 🟠🌤 (@0Calamity) September 19, 2021
It is unsurprising that Duffield is being supported by people like Phillips who bought into Berger’s fakery in order to target innocent fellow party members; she has a shameful history of it herself.
The Labour MP for Canterbury marched in the ‘lynch’ mob with Ruth Smeeth and others to have Marc Wadsworth ejected from the Labour Party in the kangaroo court that was his hearing before the party’s National Constitutional Committee.
She campaigned for Chris Williamson to get the same treatment from his kangaroo court (NCC) hearing.
And she was caught trying to blame her own victims for abusing her in a classic DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) trick, which This Writer called out in a previous article:
She has given an interview in The Times in which she claims that she is the victim of misogynistic abuse and death threats over her opinions about anti-Semitism, Brexit and – particularly – transphobia.
Metro give[s] an example that is pertinent to Duffield’s case:
“Let’s say an influential person is accused of transphobia. They issue a response in which they deny that they are transphobic – ‘I love trans people! I have many trans friends!’ – then attack their critics – ‘people saying I’m transphobic are just cruel, hateful people who want to cause division’. Finally, they Reverse Victim and Offender: ‘I’m receiving so much online abuse because I’m a woman and we live in a sexist society’.
“Now, as a critic, you’re stuck. If you continue to call that person out, you’re ‘cruel, hateful and want to cause division’. You’re being sexist. You’re piling on the online abuse.”
Isn’t that exactly what Duffield is trying to do?
Sadly the right-wing media have been all over this like a rash – and in their usual, casual disregard for fact-checking, none of them have actually bothered to seek corroboration of the claims they have blithely repeated.
And I can’t wait to see the creaking attempts to shoe-horn me into the role of abuser as a result of this article!
But unless and until Duffield can actually demonstrate evidence of LGBT+ Labour members and/or male members of the party threatening harm to her if she attends the party conference, I’ll stick to my evidenced opinion that Duffield is a liar.
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!
BFAWU president Ian Hodson: the union is threatening to disaffiliate from Labour – the party it helped create – after Starmer’s rabble threatened to expel him over a connection with a proscribed organisation.
This will be a stunning humiliation for Keir Starmer – if it happens. The decision on timing is a masterstroke.
One of the unions that helped set up the Labour Party at the beginning of the 20th century has threatened to sever its connection with Keir Starmer’s right-wing perversion of that organisation.
The Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union is recalling its national conference to take the vote after learning that Labour is considering expelling its national president, Ian Hodson, over connections with one of the organisations that Starmer’s Labour recently proscribed for no very good reason.
The union also condemned Starmer’s apparent decision to repair its relationship with bosses while widening divisions with representatives of labour – the trade unions.
In a statement, the union’s representatives said: “The recent decision to proscribe organisations is seen as a divisive and a purely factional attack which will do nothing to unite the party or provide any real opportunity for the party to be able to unite to fight and defeat our real enemy The Tory Party.
“Our National President has only ever conducted himself in line with the policies and the decisions taken by this trade union.
“The executive expressed dismay and anger at the idea the Labour Party should consider expelling the office of our nominated political lead in our organisation, and agreed that a firm response was required should the party take such actions.
“The BFAWU executive unanimously agreed a timeline that would coincide with the leaders address to national Labour conference in September should such a situation arise.
“An attack on one of ours is an attack on all of us.
“We will not accept bullying from any bosses or a party that seems to be choosing to prefer to be on the bosses side.”
The threat puts Starmer in an impossible position. If he refuses to give in, he’ll suffer a huge public relations defeat and personal humiliation. If he doesn’t, then others will demand to know why Hodson is getting special treatment – and his proscription of left-wing groups will become meaningless.
In making this decision to stand with its president, the Bakers’ union has shown the way for everybody – including individual party members.
What’s to stop individual Labour branches and constituency parties from choosing to disaffiliate, if one of their members is threatened with expulsion unfairly? Nothing.
It seems likely that such solidarity is the only response that Starmer will understand.
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!
Around six months ago, This Writer received a form letter from the Department for Work and Pensions, demanding details of my self-employed earnings from me (if I recall correctly) and saying my claim for Carers’ Allowance was in danger if I didn’t respond.
I found this behaviour extremely odd as I had quit Carers’ Allowance more than a year previously.
I wrote back, pointing this out, and also the fact that we had agreed at the time that I had done the right thing and that my finances were in order.
I did not receive a reply – neither acknowledgement nor apology.
I mention this because yesterday, on Twitter, I read the following:
Surprised to receive a letter from HM Government saying that I need to apply for #settlementscheme, being a EEA or Swiss national, while I've been a British Citizen since 1998 and have my Certificate of Naturalisation as well as British passport. Are there more cases like mine?
Apart from the anxiety this is caused individuals—it’s obviously appalling that this has happened—this again shows that Home Office system are not good enough. I really do dread 1 July of this year. There will be, a have no doubt, an avalanche of problems. https://t.co/7FG2hfbOLi
— Prof Tanja Bueltmann (@TanjaBueltmann) May 17, 2021
The Home Office letter, according to the article, tells long-term British citizens they risk losing the right to work, benefits and free healthcare unless they apply for UK immigration status in the next six weeks.
The article states that people are concerned that it reveals weaknesses in the Home Office’s databases, but I don’t think that’s right.
It seems more likely to be an attempt to repeat what I think the DWP was trying to do to me – catch me out by inducing me to provide evidence that could be used against me; a fishing expedition.
And the Home Office has the perfect cover for it at the moment: Brexit.
So officers can say (as they have) that they are using every avenue available to ensure that everyone who needs to apply for the EU settlement scheme may do so, before it is too late and they have to face other consequences.
They say the letter does include a paragraph stating that those who already have citizenship that they do not need to apply – but this is buried on page two, far below the shock announcement that recipients may lose their right to work, benefits and free healthcare (free? It’s supported by our taxes/NI).
It seems clear to me that the Conservatives are abusing their control of the UK’s bureaucracy in order to cause as much fear and confusion as possible, keeping the public off-balance.
This makes people more susceptible to manipulation – and more likely to accept that they deserve punishment when they haven’t done anything wrong.
It’s gaslighting – and right on the border of fraud.
It could be interpreted as a new development of the Tory government’s racist “hostile environment” policy.
I wonder how many people have been fooled by it – and how many other such scams are being run by the Tories?
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!
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.
