Witch Hunt Against Jeremy Corbyn Launched by Zionist BBC Extremists with Links to Israel Lobby

With Panorama’s hatchet job on Labour “antisemitism”,
the BBC has become the Tory Party’s attack dog.

By Jonathan Cook
11 July 2019
jonathan-cook.net via truthseeker

Score-settling may make for lively TV, but it is execrable journalism

LD: When I saw this documentary demonising Jeremy Corbyn for his alleged “anti-Semitism” and accusing the British Labour party of “institutional racism”, I almost had to rush to the bathroom and sick up in the toilet bowl.

This disgraceful witch hunt against Corbyn and his allies was a hatchet job orchestrated by Jews and their Zionist cheerleaders, with almost every witness called to give evidence being a disgruntled  Jew.  There was no attempt to inform the viewer that the witnesses for the prosecution were Jews almost without exception, all with an ethnic axe to grind and with close links to the Israel lobby. 

Reader, ask yourself this question: How would you like to be accused of “anti-Semitism” and find yourself facing a jury stacked with stony-faced Jews and presided over by a grim-lipped guy in a wig called Judge Goldstein?  This disgusting BBC  “documentary” was a bit like that: biased, unfair, and seething with barely suppressed hatred against Muslims and anyone who dares to criticise the crimes  of Israel in Occupied Palestine. It was journalism at its worst—gutter television designed to deceive the masses and advance the agenda of a super-rich and sinister elite. 

If you have no time to read this excellent 2750-word article in full, check out the picture below and then scroll straight down to the 59-minute video at the end of the article. This will tell you all you need to know  about the BBC’s role in acting as an agent for Zionism and Cultural Marxism—in a Britain that would have shocked even George Orwell to the core.  [LD] 

JONATHAN COOK:  It is difficult to describe as anything other than a hatchet job the BBC Panorama special this week that sought to bolster claims that the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn has become “institutionally antisemitic”.

The partisan tone was set from the opening shot. A young woman whose name was not revealed tearfully claimed to have been abused with antisemitic taunts at a Labour Party conference.

The decision not to disclose the interviewee’s identity is understandable. It would have discredited the whole narrative Panorama was trying so hard to build.

The woman’s name is Ella Rose, a senior official in the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM), an organisation representing Jewish and non-Jewish members of Labour at the forefront of attacks on Corbyn. Rose has a secret past too: she once worked at the Israeli embassy in London.

Self-fulfilling prophecy

Two years ago she and other JLM officials were exposed collaborating with Shai Masot, an Israeli embassy official. He had to be hurriedly removed from the UK after an undercover Al Jazeera documentary showed him plotting with activists in the Labour and Conservative parties to discredit British politicians seen as a threat to Israel.

Most observers believe that Masot was operating within the embassy as part of Israel’s strategic affairs ministry, which in turn has been running black ops against western critics of Israel. Corbyn, we can safely assume, is high on that list.

Rose is on record as saying she was a close friend of Masot’s.

Her emotional, quavering voice as she spoke to Panorama presented a very different image from her appearances in Al-Jazeera’s undercover footage. There she is shown threatening to use physical violence – employing Krav Maga, a martial arts technique developed by the Israeli army – against another Jewish party member prominent in support of Corbyn.

Panorama chose to follow in the footsteps of the rest of the British media in ignoring Al Jazeera’s revelations, even though they provide vital context for challenging claims of a supposedly growing “antisemitism crisis” in Labour. For the past three years, the media have produced little more than anecdotal evidence, like Ella Rose’s, to support this narrative.

In a self-fulfilling prophecy, however, the more the media has fear-mongered about antisemitism in Labour – despite the absence of objective data to back up such claims – the more polls have shown British Jews panicking at the propsect of Corbyn reaching power.

The Panorama investigation, titled “Is Labour Anti-Semitic?”, will undoubtedly have further stoked such fear by interviewing a handful of disgruntled former employees involved in the party’s handling of antisemitism complaints.

LD: If you wish to stop here and view the documentary in full, scroll dow to the 59-minute video at the end of this article. This is well worth an hour of your time.

Bitter feuds

Stripped of context, these testimonies offer a superficially plausible argument that the Labour leadership sought to minimise, or even indulge, antisemitism in the party. But the comments made by these ex-staff have to be viewed in terms of a wider power-play raging in Labour since Corbyn was elected leader.

The party has been riven by bitter, very public feuds between an old guard, which dominated under Tony Blair, and the rapid rise of the party’s left wing under Corbyn, buoyed by massive support from the wider membership.

Panorama referenced these rifts only to dismiss them as a conspiracy theory. Instead, the programme refashioned the split as a culture war between those presented as anti-racist centrists, like the disputes team’s former staff, and a supposed influx of anti-Israel, Jew-hating “Marxists” cultivated by Corbyn.

The mass purge

Some of the former members of the disputes staff interviewed by Panorama appear to have served effectively as a Trojan horse within Labour’s head office, assisting the Blairites in damaging Corbyn.

Though it was not mentioned by Panorama, these staff members were caught repeatedly violating the party rulebook by excluding thousands of Corbyn supporters during the two leadership contests, in 2015 and 2016. These mass purges had nothing to do with antisemitism. People were oustedfor “offences” such as retweeting posts by the Green Party or, in one case, praising the band the Foo Fighters.

It was the enormous backlog created by these exclusions that overwhelmed the party machinery, leaving it incapable of handling disciplinary matters involving antisemitism.

Labour officials note that, even after Corbyn was secure as leader, the obstruction continued. A small number of staff – the people Panorama interviewed – actively blocked the rapid resolution of high-profile antisemitism cases, dragging them out to embarrass the leadership.

Since a new general secretary, Jennie Formby, was brought in and a new and larger disputes team appointed, including staff with legal training, the speed of handling antisemitism complaints is reported to have increased four-fold.

The paradox is that those telling Panorama that Labour is “institutionally antisemitic” are the very people who failed to deal effectively with antisemitism complaints when they were in charge.

Fears of a stitch-up

The most astounding and intentional omission from the programme, however, are the countervailing voices in support of Corbyn. The Labour leader himself and senior staff like his chief strategist, Seumas Milne, declined to be interviewed. That is understandable. They had strong grounds to suspect that Panorama planned a stitch-up.

Interviews of Labour leaders denying “institutional antisemitism” set against footage of tearful Jewish party members like Ella Rose speaking of abuse would have been a bad look.

But what was undoubtedly inexcusable was Panorama’s failure to interview even one of the many Jewish Labour members who deny the antisemitism narrative, or to note that many of the most high-profile party members suspended or expelled for antisemitism are, in fact, themselves Jewish.

Jewish members expelled

One of the explusions briefly mentioned by Panorama was Jackie Walker, who is herself Jewish, as well as black.

The fact that Jewish activists have been disciplined for their criticisms of Israel or disputing the Labour antisemitism narrative suggests that the furore, in part at least, represents the redrawing of battle-lines within the Jewish community about who gets to speak for Jews about Israel.

This was vital, but missing, context for understanding one of Panorama’s central charges: that Corbyn’s inner circle had interfered in the complaints process by offering advice to the disputes team.

What Panorama failed to mention was that the advice was actually sought by the disputes staff. And it related to the need to handle sensitively the issue of the party being seen to take disciplinary action against Jewish members accused of antisemitism by other Jewish members.

Labour administrators were effectively being asked to take sides in an ideological fight between different kinds of Jewish activists – hardline Zionists and anti-Zionists.

‘Wrong kind of Jews’

Why, one can reasonably ask, did Panorama ignore Jewish Voice for Labourin this supposed “investigation” of Labour and anti-semitism? The group was specifically set up by Jewish members to counter the claims being made by activists like Rose.

Groups like the Jewish Labour Movement have implied that Jewish supporters of Corbyn are the “wrong kind of Jews” – an extremely ugly insinuation that Panorama appeared to endorse by entirely sidelining them. This was one of the reasons the Labour leadership censured the programme-makers in a 50-page document presented to BBC boss Tony Hall, in which it argued that Panorama had “pre-determined the outcome of its investigation”.

As Corbyn’s office noted, Panorama had cherrypicked and distorted evidence, presented only one side of the story, and relied almost exclusively on staff who have very large axes to grind.

Score-settling may make for lively TV, but it is execrable journalism.

As a public service broadcaster, the BBC is subject to an editorial policy requiring it to be impartial. Its guidelines also state that audiences should not be able to infer “the personal prejudices of our journalists or news and current affairs presenters on matters of public policy, political or industrial controversy, or on ‘controversial subjects’ in any other area.”

But the fact that Panorama made no attempt at even-handedness or fairness in its programme on Labour should have come as no surprise. The man in charge of the investigation was John Ware, a former Sun journalist. He cannot be considered dispassionate either about Corbyn or the prospects of Labour defeating the Conservative Party at a general election, which may be just around the corner.

Strident supporter of Israel

Two years ago, Ware wrote a lengthy article for a right-wing magazine warning of the danger of Corbyn reaching power. He was a politician, wroteWare, “whose entire political career has been stimulated by disdain for the West, appeasement of extremism, and who would barely understand what fighting for the revival of British values is really all about”.

Shortly after Corbyn’s leadership election victory in 2015, Ware headed a Panorama documentary that sought to malign the new leader.

Ware is also a strident supporter of Israel and of its state ideology, Zionism. In a 2005 edition of Panorama he suggested that Muslims in Britain who spoke out about Israel’s crimes against Palestinians were “extremists”.

In an article in the Jewish Chronicle last year Ware concluded that anti-Zionism had “morphed into anti-Semitism – itself a Corbyn legacy”.

But that claim – that criticism of Israel is equivalent to antisemitism – needed to be interrogated rather than, as it was, assumed to be true by the Panorama special. It lies at the heart of both the split between the right and left wings of Labour, and the divisions within Labour’s Jewish membership.

‘Witch-hunt against Muslims’

Equally disturbing is Ware’s apparent view that some kinds of racism matter far more than others. This appears to be what he means by “British values”.

While he has repeatedly expressed concern about criticism of Israel, and has himself conflated it with antisemitism, his work has shown an apparent indulgence of Islamophobia. Over nearly two decades Ware has produced reports for the BBC that have antagonised Britain’s Muslim community.

In 2003 David Blunkett, Labour’s home secretary of the time and no ally of Corbyn’s, compared a programme by Ware on asylum seekers to the notoriously racist hate speech of Enoch Powell back in the 1960s.

Two years later the Muslim Council of Britain accused a Panorama documentary headed by Ware of amounting to a “witch-hunt against British Muslims”.

Islamophobia ‘rational’

In 2013 Ware claimed that Islamophobia, or what he called the “I-word”, was stopping people – though not himself, it seems – from talking about Muslim “extremism”. Ware argued that Islamophobia, unlike antisemitism, was rational and justified – or in his words, hatred of Muslims was simply “reactive”.

He wrote in the Jewish Chronicle newspaper: “It is surely Muslim radicals who have brought it [anti-Muslim bigotry] on their fellow Muslims – by their promotion of Islam as a political ideology, and by invoking Islamophobia to close down criticism of this ideology.”

Imagine how that would sound if one replaces “radical Muslims”, “political Islam” and “Islamophobia” with the equivalents of “Israel zealots”, “hardline Zionism” and “anti-semitism”. Let’s try it:

“It is surely Israel zealots who have brought it [anti-Jewish bigotry] on their fellow Jews – by their promotion of hardline Zionism as a political ideology, and by invoking anti-semitism to close down criticism of this ideology.”

Suggesting that Jews are to blame for the racism they face because some extremists among them are fanatical supporters of Israel and its oppression of Palestinians would surely amount to antisemitism in most people’s view.

Skewed political priorities

The relevance of this is that Ware and the BBC made a highly politicised decision to choose to focus exclusively on Labour and antisemitism, while ignoring the well-documented racism of the Conservative Party. That choice matches Ware’s own skewed political priorities.

The BBC’s flagship political documentary assumed that Labour suffers from an “antisemitism crisis” so severe that it needed to be the sole focus of an investigation into racism in British politics.

The decision to ignore the more visible issue of racism in the Conservative Party smacks of dangerous interference by the state broadcaster in the democratic process.

Panorama’s choice is even more astonishing given that the objective data – again overlooked by the programme – indicates that Labour has much less of a racism problem than the ruling Conservative party.

survey this week confirmed what was already widely known: that Islamophobia – racism towards Muslims and Arabs – is rampant in Conservative ranks. A YouGov poll showed an astounding 56 per cent of party members believe Islam threatens the “British way of life”.

The Tory party’s former chair, Sayeeda Warsi, has long been ringing the alarm about senior officials, warning that they are indifferent to, or supportive of, Islamophobia in the party.

Rampant Tory racism

In addition to rampant Islamophobia, figures show that the Conservatives also have a greater problem than Labour with antisemitism.

While Corbyn has been critical of antisemitic world leaders, the Conservative leadership has been cosying up to figures like Viktor Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, who is known for his Jew-baiting and expressions of support for former Hungarian pro-Nazi leaders.

Boris Johnson, the Conservative MP widely expected to become the next prime minister when Theresa May steps down, has a long track record of making inciteful, racist statements.

Anti-semitism data ignored

While the Conservatives’ undeniable racism problem has failed to attract any sustained media attention, the Labour Party’s much less serious antisemitism problem has been blown out of all proportion.

The Panorama team ignored the most elementary facts undermining the now-pervasive narrative of a Labour “antisemitism crisis”.

First, surveys show Labour voters are less likely to hold antisemitic views than the wider general public or Conservative voters, and the proportion of Labour supporters expressing such views has fallen dramatically under Corbyn. The data clearly refute suggestions that Corbyn has made the party more attractive to antisemites.

Second, Labour’s disciplinary process has found that instances of discernible antisemitism is marginal, at 0.06 per cent of its half a million members. And that is after Corbyn’s political enemies have been scouring party members’ accounts seeking evidence of antisemitism.

And third, much of the media coverage has attributed often anonymous hate speech on social media targeting Jews, including Labour MPs, to Labour activists when no evidence exists to support such attribution. The politicised climate is such now that far-right antisemitism is also being blamed on Corbyn.

Questions for the BBC

Corbyn’s critics, of course, have been trying to deflect criticism of the BBC, Panorama and Ware by arguing that Labour’s complaint is some kind of Trumpian attack on journalism. That is patent nonsense.

The BBC is a public service broadcaster paid for by British taxpayers. Its credibility and legitimacy depends on it being seen to maintain strict neutrality and a commitment to evidence, not become a media attack dog in the hands of the ruling party.

The question is why did the BBC’s flagship political investigations show decide that the marginal problem of racism in Labour was a much more urgent matter than the provable and significant racism in the Conservative Party?

Unlike Labour, the Conservatives are actually in power and, through policy-making, are in a position to improve or damage the fabric of life for minority communities in Britain.

This isn’t about protecting Corbyn. It is an expectation that the BBC sticks by its commitment to assess dispassionately British political life rather than interfere, as it did with the Panorama special, in an overt, partisan manner.

Source

WARNING!
This video may cause feelings of nausea.
Be ready.  Have a sick bucket at hand.

VIDEO  :  59 mins

UPDATE: Apologies to our readers.  The video has just been removed by YouTube. You will be spared the sick bucket. Frankly, the BBC and the mendacious malefactors responsible for this putrid exercise in Zionist propaganda need to be put in front of a firing squad. They won’t be. They will be richly rewarded. And their critics will be silenced and severely punished for daring to stand up to their thuggish intimidation.

10 thoughts to “Witch Hunt Against Jeremy Corbyn Launched by Zionist BBC Extremists with Links to Israel Lobby”

  1. To be or TV – that is the question.

    While TV is an acronym for “TeleVision,” it is also the acronym for “transvestite.” Is there a connection? Is TV converting males into TVs assuming minority roles?

    Television was designed to create a stupid, ignorant, gullible public and keep them stupid, ignorant and gullible. And guess what – it works. Before the dawn of the PC, even before I suffered the full impact of the active verb, “Jew,” I had pretty much quit watching (((their))) TalmudVision. There was no longer time for it in my life. The age of TalmudVision gave one a choice of either living life or watching a perversely twisted simulacrum of it through a Jews’-eye view.

    When the internet age dawned, I literally threw my TV in the garbage. Around that same time, techo-dweebs labeled this act, “GIGO” – “Garbage In Garbage Out.” Today, I cannot stand to be in a room with a TalmudVison screen. The appalling, flashing imagery and obnoxious, repetitive sounds drive me from the room. Have you noticed how on screen media personalities don’t look quite human, not quite real? That’s because they aren’t. Not being quite real or human, these smaller-than-life, cardboard cutout characters are every bit as shallow, vapid and two dimensional as their unreal, comic-book counterparts.

    The pollution of our psyche with noise and strobing imagery has turned our nations into a muck of anthills populated by mindless, obedient drones almost too confused to function. One can hardly find a public spot absent the hammering, audio/visual racket. The distraction of either TalmudVision screens or what is termed “music,” combined with adulterated food, makes the public environment a toxic mix for mind, body and soul. There is no mistake or accident in any of this. It is not happenstance, it is the design of those antihuman parasites called JEWS.

    TalmudVision’s subliminal portrayal of Jewish cultural traits, e.g. greed, scheming, vengeful viciousness, murderous psychopathy, as being not only favorable but desirable, has created a nasty nation of dimwitted Jew wannabes whose overriding question is, “have I had my bagel today?” When one knows who is behind it all, there is no longer any reason to wonder about Hollywood’s weird fixation on blond, teenage girls wielding chainsaws and heavy weapons, it’z all a Jewish wetmare.

    Perhaps the most uncomfortable part of this transition comes when one realizes that watching all that sickness, all that horror, all that murder, all that greed, all that perversion, all that ugliness, all that hatred, all that intolerance; one is in fact watching the mind of the Jew at work. The realization that such minds even exist in our world should be most alarming.

    I usually profess my ignorance of the latest “must see” events blaring forth from the Jews’ tube. I first heard about the trade tower debacle from a second hand source who of course parroted the Talmudic narration of the event as being committed by Muslim terrorists. Upon hearing the news, my response was “bullshit! It’s a lie.” That is the difference between TV and no TV. People say, “Do you live in a cave or something?” To which I reply, “No, I just don’t watch TV like people living in Plato’s Cave.”

    Although TV’s impact is rapidly fading with the advent of the “smart phone,” (for stupid people) it still wreaks havoc on our nations and cultures.* Perhaps the most productive thing the white man could do is start a quiet campaign denigrating Jew TV; shaming viewers to a point where they are afraid to even admit they watch it. Like those anti-smoking campaigns that featured cancer victims, the anti-TV campaign could feature clueless, drooling idiots who can only talk about sports and TV shows. Minorities could play a perfect supporting role in this campaign, but thanks to media programming, I think that can be effectively ruled out.

    Perhaps T-shirts or bumper stickers that read, “TV is designed to program stupid people – you don’t really watch it, do you?” Better still would be a national “Smash Your TV” day. A fun, festive, outdoor event featuring parties and BBQs celebrating the destruction of TV. The day’s festivities would culminate with the smashing of TVs with sledgehammers at parties and gatherings on front lawns and in parks. TVs would be hung from trees or poles to allow blindfolded participants a swing at it with an eight-pound sledgehammer, much like a glass Piñata. A good turn out for the event would send a clear message to stupid goy still gulping down the Jews’ visual swill.

    Now what to do about those “smart phones.”

    *The first rule of communication falls in the same category as never allowing a toddler to play with sharp objects, i.e. never play with a device smarter than yourself, like those “smart bombs” one hears about. “Smart phones” are sharp objects peddled by sharp Jews.

    1. Arch –

      Neither television nor smartphones are evil of themselves however they might be USED to achieve nefarious goals. I enjoy watching movies, all the while realizing they can be used for propaganda purposes. They are like guns, in that they can be used to kill – or defend – depending on your perspective. The onus is on the user. Stupid is as stupid does,

    2. Rock stars used to throw TVs out of hotel windows. I absolutely agree with you Arch. Often stuff on TV, even the presenters of the news, look like CGI to me. And over the years they’ve speeded everything up so it’s getting harder to follow.

  2. Anti semitism is not a crime it is a virus that has infested the globe with lawlessness and double talk while now reigning above ALL LAWS of ordinary man. The few good politicians left that value truth and patriotism combined for their own countries will vanish quickly now while the populace in UK and elsewhere is just too busy with themselves to notice. Corbyn is a very decent guy that sticks out from usual kosher British politics like no other. Bojo is the new and old face of a political future in decline that the not so English management of British affairs has chosen. Selling ones soul to the money changers always comes with a price.

  3. So what are the white British to do? Ally with the Muslims against the LGBT+ and the Jews or vice versa? Silly question really as these are all still minorities but then who is taking the side of the white British majority in politics? Or are they even allowed to? Sad that one should even have to think along these lines. I suppose if you have no kids or a stake in the future you can just watch it all unfold, or take out the popcorn as they say.

    1. CM –

      People should, at least, abstain from active support of anything which even HINTS of being voiced for “korrekt politik”. Their actions or non-actions are what matter. Even cowards can keep their mouths shut.
      Every day, we Americans are flooded with false promotions lauding “diversity” – when we know damn well that “diversity” has polluted this country. The fifty-six men who signed the Declaration of Independence were, without exception, WASPs. Later, some Jews sneaked into the fold, but those (like Hamilton) met their Waterloos. The blacks are being grossly promoted to “mix” with whites, but even many of them KNOW it is a false, stupid endeavor.
      I heard a black man say that blue birds don’t mix with pigeons, so why should we think it “natural” for humans to do what birds cannot??
      Britain, likewise.

      1. Gil –

        I remember from research decades ago that Charles Carroll from Annapolis was the lone Roman Catholic, and a few others were Deists. More than half had divinity training of some sort.

      2. Thanks, Pat, for this information. I knew about the deists, but I was unaware that Carroll was Catholic. No problem, however, because we ALL were Catholic, anyway, before the Reformation. My own ancestors who signed were probably not “devout” Protestants, either (Thomas Nelson, Jr., and Carter Braxton). However, all the signers were remarkable gentlemen.

  4. The zionists are enemies of the poor peoples and of the working class. They are plutocrats,support private education and spreading economic inequality. They manage the italian system of political partitocracy and newspaper propaganda,from the center-left to center-right. Matteo Salvini is the new italian far-right zionist puppet. He defends the fiscal policy of “flat tax”,made by a jew,and tested by russian putinist,plutocrats jew-mafia,supporting tax evasion,freedom and the advantages of the rich people. The talks about the zionists and the jews,often under monopoly of right-wing “tea party style” perspective, should not be only about religion,but they should also cover other issues.

Comments are closed.