‘Corbyn ally’ told Labour official that antisemitic image was just ‘anti-Israel’
Kayla Bibby was suspended last month, after Dame Louise Ellman raised the case at a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party
A “Corbyn ally” directed Labour’s complaints official not to suspend Kayla Bibby, a Liverpool activist who shared an antisemitic image from a far-right website, according to a report.
Bibby was suspended last month, after Dame Louise Ellman raised the case at a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
In emails from May last year leaked to The Times, the unnamed “Corbyn ally” claimed the image depicting the Statue of Liberty smothered by an alien with a Star of David on its back was “anti-Israel, not anti-Jewish”.
The unnamed “Corbyn ally” made the comments in response to an email from a complaints official proposing suspension, which read: “We have received a complaint about Kayla Bibby relating to the attached posts.
“The most worrying of which being the final one that depicts a monster with the NStar of David printed on it on the face of the Statue of Liberty suggesting that Jewish people control America.”
The Corbyn ally opposed suspension in an email sent from a parliamentary email about a week later, suggesting a “reminder of conduct” instead.
They added: “There does not appear to be use of generalised use of antisemitic imagery, but rather these are generally distasteful cartoons about the perceived relationship [between] Israel and the US”.
These are the second set of emails relating to Labour’s handling of complaints of antisemitism to have been leaked to The Times this week.
Yesterday, Laura Murray opposed the suspension of a Labour member from Devon, after she defended in a Facebook comment an antisemitic mural in East London depicting Jewish bankers playing Monopoly on the backs of slaves.
Murray suggested the member’s defence of the mural might come from a place of “ignorance”, and that she should be educated instead.
In a statement to The Times, a Labour party spokesperson said: “This is a malicious, selective briefing from a disgruntled former employee.
“It is a deeply unfair attack on staff working in good faith to apply the Party rule book to individual cases and progress complaints through the party’s disciplinary processes.”
comments