https://www.councilestatemedia.uk/p/labour-bans-its-members-from-using
What other words are people supposed to use?
Sep 24, 2024

If there is one thing I could not be less enthused about, it’s a friggin’ Labour conference, but Labour has only gone and made this one interesting, only it was interesting for all the wrong reasons.

First of all, there was the Orwellian manner in which they banned attendees from using the words genocide and apartheid. The International Court of Justice has just recognised that Israel is an apartheid state, agreeing with the United Nations and human rights groups all around the world, but Labour has decided it’s racist to accurately describe apartheid. What word will they be banning next? Slavery?

The only reason to limit the language people can use is to lower the understanding of what’s taking place. Imagine, for example, someone said you weren’t allowed to use the words rapist or paedophile when describing Jimmy Saville, in case it offended his supporters. People would say you’d lost your fucking mind, but what Labour has done is even worse because the crimes are much bigger.

Apartheid has a clear definition under international law and Israel absolutely fits the criteria of an apartheid state. Here is how Wikipedia describes apartheid:

The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity “committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime”.

Apartheid is up there with slavery, ethnic cleansing and genocide as one of the most overt ways racism can manifest and yet the Labour Party doesn’t think it’s racist to impose apartheid, it thinks it’s racist to oppose it.

Not only does Labour think its racist to call out apartheid, it thinks it’s racist to call out genocide. As we all know, the ICJ has ruled that a “plausible genocide” is taking place in Gaza and they do not use the term “plausible” lightly. Plausible in this context means there is a strong case to be heard by the ICC. It means international arrest warrants are almost certainly coming. This would oblige the UK to arrest any wanted Israeli officials who set foot on our soil. Yet our police are more likely to arrest someone who demanded their arrest.

Genocide is the very worst crime human beings can commit, and instead of calling out genocide (as it is legally obliged to do), Labour has banned the use of the word genocide from its conference. Make no mistake, if they thought they could get away with stopping the wider public using the words apartheid and genocide, that is exactly what they would do.

The censorship aspect is despicable enough, but there is an even bigger problem: when a genocide is taking place, world leaders are obliged to do everything in their power to stop that genocide. As a bare minimum, they are supposed to condemn the genocide in the strongest possible terms, end economic and military support for the genocidal regime, and stop their citizens from supporting the genocide. Instead, our government is banning members of its party from accurately describing a genocide and treating members of the public as terrorists if they try to raise awareness.

Sorry to labour the point, but its important to establish the backdrop because it explains so much of what took place at conference. There have never been protests outside a Labour conference on this scale before, but instead of addressing people’s concerns, Labour loves telling us how much it hates protesters. Apparently, ignoring the public’s concerns about our government’s participation in genocide is “grownup politics”. Personally, I would call it fascism.

Labour banned journalists from Declassified UK from the conference because it’s fine for the prime minister to write columns for The S*n, but he draws the line at people who are anti-war. Labour even allowed GB News (the British version of Fox News) to hold a fringe event. It gets even worse, a former IDF chief of staff called Yair Golan was a special guest. What do you even say to this?

A whopping 15,000 protesters marched to the Labour conference, waving banners calling for an end to Labour’s support for genocide. It’s the most reasonable demand anyone could make and yet Labour would give all protesters the Sarah Wilkinson treatment if they could get away with it.
Protesters march towards the Labour Party conference in Liverpool

Given what was going on before the conference and outside, it hardly came as a surprise what took place inside. Rachel Reeves had a Kamala “shh, I’m speaking” moment when a member of the audience pointed out: “We are still sending arms to Israel”. This was Reeves’ cue to feign sympathy for Palestinians and pretend the issue is too complex for us to simpletons to understand. However, she has such little understanding of human emotion, she could not even manage that.

A weed of a security guard started dragging and shoving the young man who challenged Reeves by his neck, at one point putting his hand on his throat.
A man is violently removed from the Labour conference for challenging Rachel Reeves

Another security guard came to double-team the man, even though he was not resisting. Disturbingly, attendees applauded the assault. The victim later showed bruises on his arms and neck.

It gets even worse, another attendee was removed and his head was slammed into a wall, but unfortunately, I’m struggling to find the clip.

Reeves could have pretended to be human, but instead she robotically boomed: “This is a changed Labour Party. This is a Labour Party that represents working people, not a party of protest”. She spoke with all the warmth and charm of a dictator in a dystopian movie who had just ordered the execution of a thought criminal. Shit, I think Reeves would have ordered executions if she could.

Now I don’t know about you, but I resent the idea that working people support arming a genocidal regime. Genocide support is not the type of thing you are supposed to boast about. You do not win people over by violently removing those who ask you to comply with international humanitarian law.

If you’re not complying with international humanitarian law, you are the criminal, not them. Yet Merseyside Police did not arrest the politicians committing war crimes, they arrested the person who objected to the war crimes. The man who challenged Reeves was called a “weasel” by a police officer and held for an hour before being released.

If we get back to the way the two men were removed by security, I would like to explain I received a Security Industry Authority licence in 2019. A fundamental aspect of my training was how to safely remove someone from a building.

First of all, you don’t remove someone unless it’s absolutely necessary, and if it is necessary, you are supposed to politely ask them to leave. If they are reluctant to leave, you are supposed to gently guide them out, using little or no contact. If you have to forcibly remove someone, there are techniques you are supposed to use. These techniques are not optional.

During our training, it was made clear that under no circumstances do you grab someone by the neck because it’s dangerous and you could be held criminally liable for any injury sustained. We were told that excessive use of force would mean we would lose our SIA licence and potentially be sued or prosecuted. Based on what I’ve seen, the men who were removed from conference would have a strong legal case and should consult a lawyer.

Bizarrely, Reeves seems proud of how she handled things, like we’re supposed to be impressed. In one incident, someone said the word “genocide” and Reeves twice growled “for god’s sake” and was so riled her whole body turned rigid. This woman is not normal.

Are we going to pretend Reeves girl-bossed this one? Are we going to make “Labour is a changed party” t-shirts like brainwashed Democrats did with “I’m speaking”? Or are we going to find our conscience as a nation and turn our backs on this wretched party?

Not every Labour MP was a disgrace at conference, but I’m unclear why the few decent ones are still hanging around. Bell Ribeiro-Addy tried to say the right things at a fringe event called Justice for Palestine, saying “the conflict is intensifying, so our political lobbying must intensify as a result”. She was speaking in defence of Palestinians, but a neoliberal demanded she resign and accused her of being “racist” for wanting to end violence. Others told the heckler to shut up, but the fact is people like the heckler are in charge of Labour now.

Rachel Reeves wasn’t the only Labour MP who had a disaster and Palestine wasn’t the only issue in which Labour disgraced itself. Wes Streeting left Victoria Derbyshire aghast during an interview in which he failed to explain what pensioners frightened about losing the Winter Fuel Allowance are supposed to do when it gets cold.

In case you’ve forgotten, the Winter Fuel Allowance was introduced by Gordon Brown because it was a national disgrace that pensioners were freezing to death every winter. It’s estimated that Labour’s change of policy could cost 4,000 lives, according to their own report, and the wild-eyed Streeting’s answer was basically tough shit.

Sir Keir Starmer even banned the trade unions from introducing a motion to debate whether we should keep the Winter Fuel Allowance. The party that was set up by trade unions to represent democratic socialism has abandoned trade unions and internal party democracy, but at least MPs are getting free designer clothes and Taylor Swift tickets. That’s what matters…

About those freebies… Novara Media pointed out:

“Jonathan Reynolds and two senior staff went to Glastonbury as guests of YouTube. Until then, Labour was promising to increase the digital service tax from 2% to 10%. Literally the day after the festival, it emerged that Reynolds had ditched the policy.”

I’m pretty sure this counts as corruption and even Labour supporters like Marina Purkiss, who had previously defended the bribes, called this one out. Purkiss tweeted:

“This appears to be very problematic… Shut this down UKLabour or be prepared for a very short and bumpy time in office.”

Twitter users mocked Purkiss for the sudden U-turn, but I don’t mock people for coming over to the right side of an argument because you risk pushing them away. It seems the penny is dropping with those who backed Starmer, and if even they turn against him, he is finished and so are his repugnant allies. I can’t decide if Sir Keir Starmer, Wes Streeting or Rachel Reeves is the least likeable person in UK politics so I’m going with all three.

The prime minister’s approval ratings have fallen through the floor and he’s supposed to be in his honeymoon period. He and his team are so odious, so charisma free, so shifty that it’s impossible to warm to them. My guess is they will go into the next election as the least popular Labour government in history and it’s absolutely what they deserve. They are treating their own party members as the enemy, trade unions as the enemy, their voter base as the enemy, cold pensioners as the enemy, hungry children as the enemy, the working class as the enemy, and anyone who opposes apartheid and genocide as the enemy.

Opposing genocide and apartheid is supposed to be the human default. It is the absolute minimum you have to do to be considered a decent human being. This means every person in the country with decency is seen as the enemy of their government. The only acceptable people are pro-genocide, pro-poverty and anti-worker. Just think about that.