Keir Starmer is the candidate that the Deep State & the British Establishment want you to vote for
Starmer Prosecuted Julian Assange, Refused to prosecute the Police Killers of Ian Tomlinson & advocated 10 year prison sentences for Claimants – Anyone who thinks he is a socialist needs their head examining!
Above is the video of Ian Tomlinson, a man going about his job selling newspapers, who was viciously attacked by the Police riot squad. Starmer is personally responsible for the killers getting off scot free. He is a Red (or Pink) Tory.
Starmer has made great play in the election for Leader that he is the ‘unity candidate’ – only he can bridge the gap between left and right.
Starmer is the candidate of MI5 and the Political Police – he is Establishment down to his manicured fingers. ‘Sir’ Keir has pointed to his role in providing legal advice to striking miners and print workers. This is true but it was a long time ago when he was a socialist. Today he is the darling of the Right.
As Director of Public Prosecutions he was, as the Canary states, ‘responsible for prosecuting all those lovely people he previously defended.’
Activists in his Holborn and St. Pancras constituency have spoken out in a letter to the Camden New Journal. Over 30 Labour Party members, including Stephen Kapos, a child survivor of the Hungarian Holocaust and the Budapest Ghetto and anti-racist campaigners Amanda Sebestyen and Jewish Socialist Group member Ruth Appleton wrote that:
Time and time again, as left-leaning members we have been subjected to hostility and abuse… Those that are close to Keir Starmer, rather than welcome involvement from the left, have actively prevented it….
Keir Starmer presides over a constituency Labour Party which contains only officers with a history of outright opposition to Jeremy Corbyn. As left-leaning party members we have been completely marginalised by the right in the local party who support Keir Starmer.
Claiming to be the unity candidate should be more than a catchy campaign slogan. We are gravely concerned that under a Keir Starmer leadership all socialists in the party will be treated as we have been.
Therefore any socialist thinking about supporting Keir Starmer should think again and instead support a candidate that welcomes and supports socialist policies and encourages the active involvement of socialist members!
Attacking Benefit Claimants
One of the particularly ugly features of New Labour was the repeated attacks it made on benefit claimants. It began in 1997 with the removal of single parents allowance and they never looked back. New Labour ran ads on ‘benefit thieves’ but never about tax dodgers even though far more benefit is left unclaimed than lost through false claims.
The scale of multi national and other tax dodging is huge yet ‘Sir’ Keir was unconcerned about prosecuting his establishment buddies. The Independent of 16th September 2013 reported that ‘Benefit cheats face 10 years in prison as Keir Starmer sets out ‘tough’ new Crown Prosecution Service guidelines.’
People on benefit, by definition, live in poverty. The level of JSA, £75 per week, makes it impossible to live on it for any prolonged period of time. It is probably what ‘Sir’ Keir pays for a good bottle of wine when he sits down to have a meal in a fancy restaurant.
At a time when New Labour gave out corporate tax breaks, handed lucrative contracts to PFI companies like Carillon to privatise the NHS and paid farmers ‘set aside grants’ not to grow food, the attack on benefit claimants was one of the most disgusting features Blair’s period in office. Starmer was more than happy to contribute to New Labour’s attack on civil liberties.
Someone trying to put clothes on their children and feed their empty stomachs by earning a few pounds a week over and above their poverty allowance from the state was branded a criminal whereas the real criminals who hid billions away in offshore islands got off scot free. ‘Sir Keir’ said nothing about them and recommended no prison time for his rich friends.
The Murder of Jean Charles de Menenzes
In the wake of 7/7 Jean Charles Menenzes was murdered by the Metropolitan Police. He was shot at point blank range. The Daily Record (14.2.09.) wrote about how the family of Jean Charles de Menezes dropped their legal battle for justice last night after prosecutors refused to bring charges over his death.
They said almost four years of relentless campaigning had brought them little closer to holding any individual to account for the innocent Brazilian’s death.
Keir Starmer QC, Director of Public Prosecutions, approved a decision not to prosecute any police over the shooting.
Starmer Explains His Refusal to Prosecute a Police Killer
Police Murder of Ian Tomlinson
As George Monbiot wrote in Ian Tomlinson ruling: we must all fight this whitewash ‘First Blair Peach. Then Jean Charles de Menezes. Now Ian Tomlinson. It is our duty to raise Cain this time.’
Perhaps the most outrageous decision of all was Starmer’s decision not to prosecute the Police over the murder of Ian Tomlinson, who was viciously attacked by the Police in central London.
‘Hundreds of thousands of us have now seen the footage of the newspaper-seller shambling peacefully home from work. We’ve seen how, without warning or provocation, PC Simon Harwood attacked him from behind, hitting him with a baton then shoving him to the ground. We know that the officer had unlawfully removed his badge, and that his face was obscured by a balaclava. We know that, a few minutes afterwards, Ian Tomlinson collapsed and died. We also know that the Metropolitan police lied about his death to the media and to Tomlinson’s family.
Fifteen months later the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, decides that “there is no realistic prospect of a conviction against [Harwood] for any offence arising from the matter investigated and that no charges should be brought against him”. The evidence for his role in Tomlinson’s death, Starmer says, is contradictory, and the time limit for pressing lesser charges has sadly expired. Starmer provides no convincing explanation of why it has taken him so long to make his decision, or of why a jury should not be allowed to make its own assessment of the evidence.
Now picture the opposite case: a civilian launching an unprovoked attack on a policeman, captured on film, which is immediately followed by the policeman’s death. The Crown Prosecution Service ponders and dithers before deciding that the assailant should get away scot free. Implausible? You have just understood that in the United Kingdom equality before the law exists only in textbooks.
Starmer Covered Up for the Metropolitan’s Spy Cops and their wrongful convictions
Equally appalling was that Starmer was DPP when revelations were published about the first known ‘spycop’, Mark Kennedy. Kennedy infiltrated environmental and anticapitalist groups between 2003 and 2009. In 2011, a trial of environmental activists accused of plotting to break into Ratcliffe power station collapsed after it emerged that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had covered up vital evidence. This consisted of recordings Kennedy had made of planning meetings. Starmer was present in court the day the case was thrown out.
20 people already prosecuted from the same action had their convictions overturned. And a further 29 people convicted of blocking a train carrying coal to Drax power station also had convictions quashed due to Kennedy’s involvement.
The CPS ordered an investigation into what had happened. Interviewed about the ensuing report in 2011, Starmer said:
If Sir Christopher Rose had found systemic problems, then I would quite accept perhaps a retrospective look at all the cases. But he didn’t, he found individual failings.
But it was systemic. In 2015, the Guardianreported that 83 people could have been wrongfully convicted after evidence of spycop involvement was withheld. On 6 January, the Guardian published details of the case of an 81-year-old man trying to get a conviction overturned for an anti-apartheid protest in 1972. Following revelations from the Undercover Policing Inquiry, he discovered that the person he was convicted alongside was actually an undercover police officer.
The Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance claims:
If the other 150 or so officers have similar tallies [as Kennedy], it means about 7,000 wrongful convictions are being left to stand. It may well be that spycops are responsible for the biggest nobbling of the judicial system in English history. So Starmer’s suggestion that Kennedy’s actions were not systematic is bullshit.
Released papers showed the Crown Prosecution Service had been deeply involved – they knew about the plan before the arrests, they worked with the police to withhold evidence from the defence and the courts.
Fake Anti-Semitism Campaign
I have a personal interest in this. I was the first Jewish person to be expelled under the fake anti-Semitism campaign. After all if you want to fight ‘anti-Semitism’ it’s a good idea to expel a few Jews! But this was not about Jews or anti-Semitism but Israel. When I was expelled on February 18th 2018 who was first out of the stalls to support the expulsion? Arise Sir Keir with this tweet from the ‘unity’ candidate.
As the Telegraph wrote in Keir Starmer: the high-flying law man desperate to stress his working class credentials
Sir Keir has spent his life “fighting for justice, standing up for the powerless”, but cringes if anyone brings up his knighthood, let alone his £1.8 million house.
And Politics Home, run by Kevin Schofield, an ex Sun ‘journalist’ reported that Keir Starmer – top prosecutor lurches left to cement favourite status.
Anyone who is fooled by this ‘lurch to the left’ is truly pathetic. Starmer is the candidate for the Police, MI5 and the British State that eviscerated Corbyn. It was just one of Corbyn’s idiocies that when Starmer resigned in the chicken coup that he was let back in to wreak more havoc.
In his resignation letter Starmer wrote that
‘In the last few days I have maintained my support for you notwithstanding my reservations. However. the resignations across the Shadow Cabinet and the Shadow Frontbench … materially change this. It is simply untenable now to suggest that we can offer an effective opposition without a change of leader.’
Starmer was also criticised for the decision not to prosecute the black cab rapist John Warboys on further charges which allowed him to apply for parole and very nearly get it.
It is quite clear that ‘Sir’ Keir’s claims to left-wing credentials, based on his youth, are fake and phoney. He long ago abandoned all of that. His revolutionary days are behind him.
Starmer demonstrated during his time as DPP that he was deeply hostile to civil liberties. The decision over Ian Tomlinson’s death was particularly shocking. A bent Home Office pathologist, who was contradicted by 2 other pathologists and who was the subject of disciplinary proceedings by his own professional association was used by Starmer as an excuse to allow a killer Policeman to go free.
This decision, on its own, makes Starmer unfit to be Labour leader. He is literally an accessory after the fact to Police murder.
And those ‘feminists’ supporting Starmer should be aware that Women Against Rape, based in Camden, pressed Starmer, as head of the CPS to end the policy of prosecuting rape survivors disbelieved by the police, similar to the recent case in Cyprus.Starmer refused to change the policy, undermining women’s ability to report rape and landing some in prison for years.
See Oliver Eagleton’s The case against Keir StarmerTony Greenstein