Saturday, 22 October 2016

John Mann responds to a fake letter promoted by Tony Greenstein

1905 2fnl Velikoe v malom i antikhrist.jpg
In the tradition of the forged protocols of Zion

The self-styled and obsessive "anti-Zionist" activist Tony Greenstein has published a letter from a Dr Sam Glatt, a 90 year old man that is a forgery.

You can find this letter on his hate-site here:

I posted the following reply:

(Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by www,

This letter is fake and it's sentiments disgraceful but you and your vile supporters know this or should by now. Here is the response from the recipient which you and those who praise this travesty should read. If you dare to allow this to be published of course. Up until now I have ignored your ridiculous attention seeking nonsense but you have gone too far on too many occasions:

"It is the most vitriolic and dramatic letter. A 90 year old Jewish doctor, Sam Glatt publishing an open letter in which he starts and ends by saying how much he despises me.

Time and again in his word processed letter he attacks my motivations and character. Gleefully activists have circulated this attack across Facebook in a kind of wise 'told you so' celebration.

Except Dr Sam Glatt never wrote the letter.

It arrived, beautifully printed out by recorded delivery. But Dr Glatt doesn't use a computer these days. He hadn't been to the post office to record its delivery. But he was very happy to chat and we did for a long time.

He is a very gentle man, polite in a way that symbolises his generation. He has views, clear and precise and we agreed on some things but not all. Like most civilised people.

But he never once attacked nor abused me. He was mortified to hear what had been written in his name. He would never dream of writing to someone telling them how much he hated them and he was interested to be sent copies of what I had said and written on anti-semitism. You see, he had never heard nor read any of them.

He suggested I rang the man who actually wrote the letter, someone called Graham Martin, whose father was a close friend of Dr Glatt. So I rang Mr Martin, who yelled at me for a few seconds and put the phone down stating that he and I would never have anything in common. Evidently.

I have invited Dr Glatt to Parliament and I hope he is well enough to come. We will discuss and agree and disagree. Without hatred or animosity.

As for the actual author of this hate mail, Graham Martin, I see little point in inviting him in. Parliament is a democracy and in a democracy you should have the courage to say things yourself and not masquerade as a 90 year old doctor."

Friday, 21 October 2016

By-election blues

Liberal Democrats logo 2014.svg

Until yesterday most people were virtually ignoring the two by-elections that were due to take place. The first was a very low key affair as voters went solemnly to the polls to elect a replacement for the tragically murdered Labour MP Jo Cox.  Neither the Conservative Party, the Liberal Democrats, UKIP or the Greens contested the seat out of respect.

Labour candidate & former soap star (from Corrie) Tracy Brabin was opposed only by the usual assortment of nutters and fascists that inhabit the fringes of politics. Labour polled 86% of the vote on a 25% turnout.

Meanwhile Witney was supposedly a (very) safe Tory seat previously held by David Cameron with a whopping 20,000 vote majority. Nothing to see here right. The polls show The Conservatives with 47% of the vote, 17% ahead of the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats almost out the picture with just 8%, just half a dozen MP's and seemingly unforgiven by the electorate.

Yet rumours started spreading on social media the night before the election that not only was there a "Liberal surge" but they might even win. The latter quite wishful thinking, but a surge there certainly was.

Although the Conservative candidate won as expected, Robert Courts was left with a greatly reduced majority of just over five thousand with 17,313 votes (down by 15.2%) whist the Lib-Dem challenger increased her vote by 23.4% coming second (up from third) with 11,611.

Labour went down to third place with just 15% of the vote (down 2%). It could have been worse for Corbyn but not all is at seems.

So many people (myself included) had written off the Liberals because Clegg let everyone down so badly when he was in coalition with Cameron. Student Fees and PR his broken promises. The electorate punished the Lib-Dems by purging nearly all their MP's from parliament. They seemed finished for good.

However since the general election the Liberals have won around 20 council seats and are seemingly reviving. Labour is in such disarray it has become unelectable, the Liberal Democrats are the usual beneficiaries of any decline in Labour's support.

However this by-election was in a solid Tory seat. Clearly a lot of traditional voters switched votes. The question is why?

Is it Brexit? Grammar schools? Immigration?

By-elections are difficult to analyse as they usually have lower turnouts and sometimes there are protest votes which return to their usual loyalties come the election. One thing is clear though Labour has proved unattractive.

A Liberal Democrat resurgence could be good news for Labour moderates and increases the much needed possibility of a new political re-alignment.

I certainly hope so.

Thursday, 20 October 2016

Musical Interlude Two - Hammerfall

Normal service will resume shortly so in the meantime here's another track from Hammerfall.

Tuesday, 18 October 2016

Musical Interlude - Anilah

And now for something a little different. Anilah hails from British Columbia and her music is well, just beautiful and the video that goes with this track is just stunning.

Put on your headphones and relax for the next fifteen minutes. It's worth the journey!

Monday, 17 October 2016

Gravity is white colonialism.... apparently

Portrait of man in black with shoulder-length, wavy brown hair, a large sharp nose, and a distracted gaze 

Whilst American and British students fight for safe spaces to prevent their pre-conceived ideas being challenged either by those who disagree or simply reality itself, some African students have moved against that final frontier of imperialism and colonialism science.

Science is "Eurocentric" according to these new radicals in South Africa.

The Times reports (no link£):

Sir Isaac Newton's law of gravitation has come in for particular criticism from the movement #sciencemustfall. In a meeting with the science faculty at the University of Cape Town, Kealeboga Ramaru, student leader, questioned  the cause of lightning and dismissed Sir Isaac's work as colonial.

I have a question for all the science people" she said. "There is a place in KNZ (KwaZulu-Natal Province) called Umhhlab'uyalingana..They believe that through the magic, you call it black magic, they call it witchcraft-you are able to send lightning to strike someone. Can you explain that scientifically, because it's something that happens.

Of course they are...

The Flat Earth Society were not available for comment as they were busy visiting the Hollow Earth where Nazi UFOs come from....

The world is truly going backwards...

Strange Tales Vol 1 173

Sunday, 16 October 2016

Corbyn & Chakrabarti in denial over anti-Semitism

Campaign Against Antisemitism

The release of the Parliamentary enquiry into anti-Semitism is damning and unsurprisingly Jeremy Corbyn is not happy particularly with it's specific criticisms of Lady Chakrabarti who went from "independent" to the House of Lords as the result of her whitewash of a report and is now in Labour's Shadow Cabinet.

How can this fool of a man not see the problem he has created for himself?

The full report can be found here:

I have extracted part of the report addressing Corbyn & Chakrabarti's sordid role:

113.While the Labour Leader has a proud record of campaigning against many types of racism, based on the evidence we have received, we are not persuaded that he fully appreciates the distinct nature of post-Second World War antisemitism. Unlike other forms of racism, antisemitic abuse often paints the victim as a malign and controlling force rather than as an inferior object of derision, making it perfectly possible for an ‘anti-racist campaigner’ to express antisemitic views. Jewish Labour MPs have been subject to appalling levels of abuse, including antisemitic death threats from individuals purporting to be supporters of Mr Corbyn. Clearly, the Labour Leader is not directly responsible for abuse committed in his name, but we believe that his lack of consistent leadership on this issue, and his reluctance to separate antisemitism from other forms of racism, has created what some have referred to as a ‘safe space’ for those with vile attitudes towards Jewish people. This situation has been further exacerbated by the Party’s demonstrable incompetence at dealing with members accused of antisemitism, as illustrated by the saga involving the suspension, re-admittance and re-suspension of Jackie Walker. The ongoing membership of Ken Livingstone, following his outbursts about Hitler and Zionism, should also have been dealt with more effectively. The result is that the Labour Party, with its proud history of fighting racism and promoting equal rights, is seen by some as an unwelcoming place for Jewish members and activists.

114.The decision by the Leader of the Labour Party to commission an independent inquiry into antisemitism was a welcome one, notwithstanding subsequent criticisms. The Chakrabarti report makes recommendations about creating a more robust disciplinary process within the Labour Party, but it is clearly lacking in many areas; particularly in its failure to differentiate explicitly between racism and antisemitism. The fact that the report describes occurrences of antisemitism merely as “unhappy incidents” also suggests that it fails to appreciate the full gravity of the comments that prompted the inquiry in the first place. These shortfalls, combined with Ms Chakrabarti’s decision to join the Labour Party in April and accept a peerage as a nominee of the Leader of that Party, and her subsequent appointment as Shadow Attorney General, have thrown into question her claims (and those of Mr Corbyn) that her inquiry was truly independent. Ms Chakrabarti has not been sufficiently open with the Committee about when she was offered her peerage, despite several attempts to clarify this issue with her. It is disappointing that she did not foresee that the timing of her elevation to the House of Lords, alongside a report absolving the Labour Leader of any responsibility for allegations of increased antisemitism within his Party, would completely undermine her efforts to address this issue. It is equally concerning that Mr Corbyn did not consider the damaging impression likely to be created by this sequence of events.

115.The recommendations of the Chakrabarti report are further impaired by the fact that they are not accompanied by a clear definition of antisemitism, as we have recommended should be adopted by all political parties. We remain unconvinced of the robustness of the Labour Party’s code of conduct (and whether it will be effectively enforced), and the report does nothing to address a severe lack of transparency within the Party’s disciplinary process. There are examples of Labour members who have been accused of antisemitism, investigated by their Party, and then reinstated with no explanation of why their behaviour was not deemed to be antisemitic. The Labour Party, and all other political parties in the same circumstances, should publish a clear public statement alongside every reinstatement or expulsion of a member after any investigation into suspected antisemitism.

116.We see no good reason for the Chakrabarti report’s proposed statute of limitations on antisemitic misdemeanours. Antisemitism is not a new concept: an abusive, antisemitic tweet sent in 2013 is no more defensible than one sent in 2016. If the Labour Party or any other organisation is to demonstrate that it is serious about antisemitism, it should investigate all allegations with equal seriousness, regardless of when the behaviour is alleged to have taken place.

117.In its determination to be inclusive of all forms of racism, some sections of the Chakrabarti report do not acknowledgeJewish concerns, including its recommendations on training, which make no mention of antisemitism. This has generated criticism among some observers that antisemitism may be excluded from future training programmes. The Labour Party and all political parties should ensure that their training on racism and inclusivity features substantial sections on antisemitism. This must be formulated in consultation with Jewish community representatives, and must acknowledge the unique nature of antisemitism. If antisemitism is subsumed into a generic approach to racism, its distinctive and dangerous characteristics will be overlooked. In addition, the Labour Party’s disciplinary process must acknowledge the fact that an individual’s demonstrated opposition to other forms of racism does not negate the possibility that they hold antisemitic beliefs; nor does it neutralise any expression of these beliefs.

118.The Chakrabarti Report is ultimately compromised by its failure to deliver a comprehensive set of recommendations, to provide a definition of antisemitism, or to suggest effective ways of dealing with antisemitism. The failure of the Labour Party to deal consistently and effectively with antisemitic incidents in recent years risks lending force to allegations that elements of the Labour movement are institutionally antisemitic.

Saturday, 15 October 2016

Musical Interlude: Heart

Taking a break on a Saturday night with this great little number from Heart.