Royall Inquiry
into ‘Anti-Semitism’ Gives Carte-Blanche to Labour’s
Baroness Royal – a Zionist chosen who had reached her conclusions before she even set foot in Oxford

The ‘findings’
from Baroness Royall’s ‘investigation’ into anti-Semitism at Oxford University Labour
Club were written before she even entered the hallowed portals of Oxford.  It is fitting that they weren’t accompanied
by anything as grand as evidence.  Indeed
that was the whole purpose of the report. 
It is evidence free.
As Asa
Winstanley demonstrated in his article How Israel lobby manufactured UK Labour Party’s anti-Semitism crisis the whole issue of ‘anti-Semitism’ was
contrived and manufactured from the start by those whose main target is Corbyn.  The means to bring him down is ‘anti-Semitism’.  They have already tried to associate him with
‘terrorists’ and holocaust deniers.  Now those
who are running this campaign – the media, the Israel lobby and Progress – are alleging, on the basis of years old tweets, that there
is an endemic problem of ‘anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party.
It wasn’t anti-Semitism but Israel Apartheid week that was the problem
Alex Chalmers was a Zionist activist had been an intern at BICOM – the British Israel propaganda group
It began
in March when the co-Chair of Oxford University Labour Club Alex Chalmers resigned
claiming that his fellow students had a problem with Jews.  As Chalmers made it clear on his Facebook page, the
reason for resigning was that the Labour Club had voted to support the Israel Apartheid
week.  In other words it opposed the
systematic and institutionalised racism that exists in Israel.  Far from being the innocent abroad, Chalmers had been, according to his Linked-in profile, an intern at BICOM, the British-Israel propaganda outfit.
When the Israeli Labour Government held power Apartheid South Africa was its closest ally
If Oxford University were
situated in Tel Aviv then its Jewish students would have the opportunity to
choose whether or not they wished to share accommodation with Arab students or
not.  Imagine if the same
happened in reverse at Oxford and non-Jewish students were given the option not
to share with Jewish students.  There
would, rightly, be uproar at what would be anti-Semitism. Arab and Jewish students live in separate housing at the Technion 
herself, a former Kinnock adviser, went on a Labour Friends of Israel trip in
2007 Fresh Row Over Labour Anti-Semitism Inquiry As Unite Official Raises Links To Labour Friends Of Israel
The Jewish Labour Movement is an appendance of Israel’s Apartheid Labour Party
Of one thing
there was no doubt, Janet Royall was determined to find anti-Semitism.  The only problem is that even she couldn’t
conjure ‘institutional anti-Semitism’ out of thin air.  The mere fact that she could even entertain
the idea that Jews in Britain might suffer from institutional anti-Semitism demonstrates
what planet she is living on.  As William
Rubinstein, the former President of the Jewish Historical Society, wrote: ‘the rise of Western Jewry to unparalleled
affluence and high status’ which ‘has led to the near-disappearance of a Jewish
proletariat of any size; indeed, the Jews may become the first ethnic group in
history without a working-class of any 
’ W.D.
Rubinstein, ‘The Left, the Right and the Jews’, p.51, Croom Helm, London 1982
In short British
Jews are privileged and prosperous.  The
days are long gone since they lived in the East End, worked in the tailoring
trade and voted Labour as naturally as the sun going down  at night.  
The idea that Jewish students at Oxford University Labour Club suffer
from ‘institutional racism’ or that Jews in Britain suffer from it is
risible.  Jews are one group who do not
suffer from police violence, disproportionate stop and search, immigration controls
and deportation.
As soon as her Report was released, Royall blogged on the site of the racist Jewish Labour Movement
another indication of where Royall was coming from, no sooner had she reported
than she blogged on the web site of the Jewish Labour Movement.  [Blog:
Baroness Royall on her report: “There is too often a culture of intolerance where Jews are concerned and there are clear incidents ofantisemitism”]  
The Jewish Labour Movement is the British wing of the Israeli Labour Party – a party which since 1930 has been devoted to Zionist Apartheid – see this quotation from one of its earliest pioneers, David HaCohen
The Jewish
Labour Movement is affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation via the
World  Labour Zionist Movement, which in
essence is what remains of the Israeli Labour Party.  The WZO 
actively funds settlement and colonisation in the West Bank.  The Israeli Labour Party was the initiator of
the first settlements in the West Bank as well as having presided over the Nakba, when ¾ million
Palestinians were expelled and thousands massacred. The Israeli Labour Party
supports some form of bantustan and segregation.  It doesn’t support a 2 state solution.  The possibility of a 2 state solution is in any case non-existent
yet JLM pretend that they are supporters of this fantasy solution.
The fact
that Royall saw fit to blog on a pro-Israel site is indicative of the fact that she was hopelessly compromised from the beginning.  From the outset she assumed that which she was supposed to be proving, or not as the case may be..
As a Jews
remarked on the JLM blog that ‘Many
students reported that should a Jewish student preface a remark “as a Jew …”
they are likely to face ridicule’

This is indeed a disgraceful thing to happen if it’s true.  It’s a problem I’ve faced quite a number of
times, but as an anti-Zionism Jew.  Let’s take one take one such example of this form of racism.
David Aaronovitch’s ‘As a Jews’ column – anti-Semitic?
In an article entitled ‘Have I got Jews for you!’ (I trust you appreciate the pun) in the Jewish Chronicle of 5th
May 2016, David Aaronovitch waxed lyrical about Jews who spoke up as Jews against the practices of Israel:

‘my online world was invaded by the
Asajews…. The “these people” were the Asajews. I heard quite a few of
them on Any Answers last week. “As a Jew myself, I want to tell you
that…” And there followed something that would say that the contributor
believed that Labour had no antisemitism problem and that the real problem was
those who kept on going on about antisemitism when what they were truly
objecting to was any criticism of the state of Israel…. The Asajews used in
this way are just a stage army and their deployment, frankly borders on the

Of course there will be no remonstrance about Aaronovitch’s article because
it is deployed in support of Israel and against its opponents.

As the Press Release from the group Free
Speech on Israel
says what we have here is a modern version of Orwell’s
Thought Police.  Royall advocates ‘training
to eliminate anti-Semitism.  And who
should provide it?  But the defenders of Israel’s
Apartheid society.  The Jewish Labour
Royall talks in her recommendations about ‘a safe space in order to discuss and debate without discrimination’  What she really means is for a protected
space for supporters of Israel to peddle their racist nonsense.  Those who justify and support the bombing and
siege of Gaza should be able to do so with impunity.
Royall also recommends that ‘The Labour Party should consider whether adopting the Macpherson
Principle that an antisemitic incident that may require investigation is any
incident that is perceived to be antisemitic by the victim or any other person
is appropriate.’ 
In  other words if someone who defines their
identity with reference to Israel then anti-Zionism is automatically perceived
as anti-Semitic.  This is what Jonathan
Freedland was arguing for when he contended wrongly that ‘A recent survey found that 93% of British Jews said Israel formed some
part of their identity.’
Labour and the left have an antisemitism problem  In other words it is a backdoor way of
saying that anti-Zionism is equal to anti-Semitism.
didn’t say, nor does the law say, that a racial incident is defined by someone
who claims to be a victim.  Whether
something is a racial incident or crime is determined by the objective evidence.  Otherwise everyone could claim to be a
victim.  What MacPherson was saying was
that because the Police had historically dismissed allegations of racist crimes
they must treat an allegation as being a racial incident before it could be
investigated.  This was specifically to be applied to the police.  It had no wider implication.
One of the most insidious of Royall’s
recommmendations is that ‘There should be
no  statute of limitation on antisemitic
behaviour.  any incident of antisemitism,
even when not in Party membership, may be considered by Labour’s disciplinary
procedures in respect of current members.’
In other words this is an open invitation to trawl
through past tweets and FB posts to nail anyone you don’t like.  It is a witch hunter’s charter.  It is also a charter for the perpetuation of the present crisis as an until Corbyn is removed.  Racism isn’t a few words exchanged five years
ago, racism is a system of oppression.  It is a power structure.  It is discrimination at work, it is police harassment, violence and
spying, it is a constant barrage of Daily Mail and Sun headlines making Muslims a scapegoat.  The kind of headlines that Jews had to put with once.  It is not dead tweets.  Nor is it a challenge to an identity of the oppressor, which is what Zionism is.
Perhaps the
most dangerous of all the proposals and it is the thin end of the wedge in many
ways for the Right in Parliament who seek to preserve their monopoly, Royall
recommended that ‘That new
procedures for the selection of local government and national candidates must
include more rigorous vetting procedures. It is noted that volunteers manage
many selections and the procedures must be appropriate for the task in hand.’
  In other words the party bureaucracy and
those who know what they are doing will determine who is selected.  Out will go left-wing trouble makers and in
will come clones of John Mann and Wes Streeting.
This ‘Report’ should be rejected in totality.  Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn having appeased
the Right for the last 8 months is likely to go along with anything until the
knife is slipped between his shoulder blades.
Baroness Royall Inquiry
Oxford University Labour Club
Executive Summary and Recommendations
I was asked by the National Executive Committee of
the Labour Party to examine the allegations of antisemitism that arose
surrounding Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) after the resignation of a
former co-Chair.
This was followed by a number of allegations of
incidents of antisemitism against members of the Labour Party, including
against one Member of Parliament and a member of the National Executive
I was also made aware that there was at least one
case of serious false allegations of antisemitism which was reported to the
The context of the wider allegations means that I
had to consider the matters of Oxford University Labour Club in that broader
landscape. My recommendations will have a positive impact, not only on OULC,
but on Labour clubs and the Labour Party more generally.
I do not
believe that that there is institutional antisemitism within OULC.
Difficulties however, face OULC which must be
addressed to ensure a safe space for
all Labour students to debate and campaign around the great ideas of our
It is not possible to simply make recommendations
about the OULC without considering how our Party itself responds to these
events. I am therefore, today making recommendations about how Labour tackles
antisemitism to minimise the chance of any
repetition of incidents
such as those described at OULC. I am making eleven
recommendations for immediate and sustained action. In addition, I am advising
the second, wider inquiry led by Shami Chakrabarti of a further seven issues
which she may wish to consider.
Many of my recommendations may be implemented such
that they have a positive impact in other areas where Labour will want to
demonstrate in a practical and sustained way that our Party “promotes
a just society, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as
much as the strong, provides security against fear, and justice at work; which
nurtures families, promotes equality of opportunity, and delivers people from
the tyranny of poverty, prejudice and the abuse of power”
OULC should
consider procedures that allow for greater continuity of leadership than is
provided by electing new leadership each term
Executive of the OULC, and other Labour Clubs, should examine the culture of
their Club and take action to ensure that all those who wish to participate in
meetings feel that there is a safe space in order to discuss and debate without
discrimination. –
Training should be organised by Labour Students
together with the .Jewish Labour Movement for officers of all Labour Clubs in
dealing with antisemitism.
Executive of the OULC, and all Labour Clubs, should have a clear line of reporting
for incidents of antisemitism and other forms of racism, discrimination and
harassment. (his should include the ability of individual students to report
incidents directly to the Executive Director of Governance of the Labour Party
documented evidence of incidents which are alleged to show antisemitic
behaviour has been presented in respect of members of OULC who are members of
the Labour Party, I will be recommending to the General Secretary that these
allegations are investigated in line with normal procedures.
There should
be no requirement for the Labour Party to determine its own investigation into
antisemitic behaviour on the outcome of any criminal investigation or other
third party inquiry.
The Labour
Party and the NEC should provide the leadership and training in equalities
issues including antisemitism and ensure that post-holders throughout the Party
have access to materials and guidance which will help them identify and deal
appropriately with any incidents.
That the
national complaints procedure is properly resourced so that it may deal
effectively with complaints of antisemitism.
There should
be no  statute of limitation on antisemitic
behaviour.  any incident of antisemitism,
even when not in Party membership, may be considered by Labour’s disciplinary
procedures in respect of current members.
That there
is a standing report to each meeting of the NEC Equalities Committee, and the
NEC Disputes Panel, of any complaints and the action taken.
It is not recommended that where a person is
excluded from membership for antisemitism this should automatically be a life
ban. I recognise that people may change their views and that where that is
demonstrable a person may be allowed to seek NEC approval for any future
application to join the Labour Party.
Other issues
submitted to the Chakrabarti Inquiry for consideration
The Labour Party should consider whether adopting
the Macpherson Principle that an antisemitic incident that may require
investigation is any incident that is perceived to be antisemitic by the victim
or any other person is appropriate.
The Review
should consider whether it would be useful for the Labour Party to adopt a definition of antisemitic discourse
should consider adopting rule changes that will allow swifter action to deal
with antisemitism. This could include empowering the NEC, through an appointed,
authoritative and independent panel, to exclude members where there is credible
evidence of antisemitism with a right of appeal to the National Constitutional
Committee (NCC). The panel must be able to both speak with authority on these
issues and seek advice from experts in the field where necessary. No doubt such
a procedure could be considered for wider use.
That the
membership procedures be adjusted such that, should evidence of antisemitic
behaviour be discovered within the first year of membership, it should be
treated as though it were discovered during the eight-week probationary period.
That new
procedures for the selection of local government and national candidates must
include more rigorous vetting procedures. It is noted that volunteers manage
many selections and the procedures must be appropriate for the task in hand.
Consultations should take place with the Leader and Deputy Leader of the
Party in respect principles of how we conduct on-line debate in a way which is
both welcoming and productive. No form of antisemitism or racism is acceptable,
including being used as a factional political tool.
Baroness Royall Inquiry

Young Labour Conference Recommendations