I want to say something about #antisemtism within the two main UK political parties - @UKLabour & the @Conservatives - & the grotesque disparity in responses to each, from Jewish leaders & communities, the public, politicians, & especially the print & broadcast news media.
Any & all antisemitism is despicable, & has no place in contemporary society - & especially no place in political discourse.
Wherever it is found, it must ALWAYS be exposed & very robustly challenged, as we all know where the scapegoating & demonization of minorities can lead.
As a passionate anti-racist all my adult life, it was heartbreaking to find instances of #antisemitism within @UKLabour.
There are discussions around the point at which legitimate criticism of the Israeli Govt becomes antisemtism - but that is not what I want to address here.
Moral Panic theory is instructive. Contrary to popular usage, calling something a 'moral panic' does NOT deny the reality of the problem, but rather suggests distortions in representation of the true nature of the problem, which limit our ability to effectively tackle an issue.
Stan Cohen made a distinction between internal & external 'disproportionality': internal refers to the disjunction between the threat of a given behavior & the fervor or concern which that behavior generates. External refers to a comparison between other similar phenomena.
'Internal disproportionality' - the REAL extent of antisemitism within Labour, compared to the unprecedented news coverage, levels of public concern, & response from Jewish leaders, MPs, & communities - has been widely discussed.
Again, this is not what I want to address.
I want to discuss two forms of 'external disproportionality':
1) the comparison with other similar forms of bigoted speech & actions
2) (imho more significant & concerning), the differences in responses to @UKLabour's antisemitism, & the antisemitism of the @Conservatives.
In 2018, there was unprecedented print & broadcast news coverage of antisemitism, most of which focused either on Corbyn's perceived past misdemeanors, including the lamenting of the removal of a mural, or on social media posts by alleged Corbyn supporters considered antisemitic.
News became sensitised to the issue of #antisemitism to the extent that the broader issue of rising instances of bigotry & hate within the UK, in part triggered by Brexit & the rise in populist nationalist discourse, was surprisingly - relative to antisemitism - largely ignored.
While the news media focused almost daily & almost exclusively on antisemitism, it was reported that hate crimes in England & Wales had doubled since 2013, to 103,379 during 2018/19:
76% race-related
14,491 sexual orientation
8,256 disabled people
3,530 Muslims
1,326 Jews.
So this is my first point: that given the MASSIVE INCREASE in UK hate crimes - particularly around race, sexual orientation, Islamophobia, & against those with disabilities - why on earth would there be such a preposterously disproportionate focus on just ONE kind of bigotry?
My second, MAIN point, concerns the almost total absence of reaction within the UK press & broadcast news (& politics) media, to high profile, senior @Conservatives - including Boris Johnson - making clearly antisemitic statements & mobilising antisemitic conspiracy theories.
The THREAD that follows outlines some of the main cases of crystal clear #antisemitism from high profile, senior @Conservatives - almost all of which have been brushed under the carpet by the national news, & largely ignored by Jewish leaders, Jewish MPs, & Jewish communities.
Draw your own conclusions about the grotesque disparity in news coverage of antisemitism within @UKLabour & @Conservatives, but that the CRYSTAL CLEAR rise in dangerous populist nationalist rhetoric, unseen since the Nazis, is happening in the UK YET IS UNREPORTED, shames us all.
THREAD of some of the instances of #antisemitism from senior @Conservatives, which the news media have largely ignored.
If the "free press" is supposed to hold the powerful to account, then it is currently not fit for purpose, & voters are being conned.
A multibillion-dollar scheme that exchanges cash from drug and gun sales in the UK for crypto—digital tokens hiding users’ identities—has enabling “sanctions evasions and the highest levels of organised crime, including providing money-laundering services to the Russian state”. theguardian.com/politics/2025/…
In 2023, the hedge fund co-founded by GB "News" owner Paul Marshall, who employs 60% of anti-Net Zero Reform UK's MPs, had £1.8 BILLION invested in fossil fuel firms.
Harborne (who has Thai citizenship under the name 'Chakrit Sakunkrit) also makes money from fossil fuels.
I and countless others are sick to death of the billionaire-funded Reform UK propaganda machine, GB “News”, and their decontextualised ‘facts’ that would make Goebbels blush.
Let’s examine the claim that “one quarter of foreign sex offenders come from just five countries”.
Yes, the raw data comes from a genuine Ministry of Justice (MoJ) prison census, but the way it’s being weaponised is deeply misleading.
The statistic sounds explosive, and deliberately so: a factoid engineered to sound like a revelation of hidden danger.
The right-wing information pipeline: a cherry-picked fragment of official data stripped of context, laundered through an opaquely funded “think tank” that isn't a think tank, amplified by billionaire-funded media, and weaponised by opportunistic politicians for electoral gain.
In the September 2025 @SkyNews Immigration Debate, chaired by Trevor “Muslims are not like us” Phillips, Reform UK’s head of policy Zia Yusuf made a series of inaccurate and highly misleading claims about migration, and more recently, on @BBCNewsnight, about social housing.
These assertions are easily disproved with publicly available data, but often go largely unchallenged on air, despite being about some of the most sensitive and polarised issues in politics.
Yusuf started by claiming that UK net migration “last year” was “about a million.”
When a newspaper repeatedly publishes misleading, distorted, or outright inaccurate stories, the public expects independent regulators to step in.
What if I told you the editor responsible for these stories is now in charge of writing the very rules that govern press ethics?
Privately educated Chris Evans, editor of The Daily Telegraph since 2014, has—since January 2024—simultaneously served as Chair of the IPSO Editors’ Code of Practice Committee, the body that drafts, reviews, and rewrites the ethical rulebook that the UK press is meant to follow.
Evans holds this regulatory role at a time when his own paper is producing more factual corrections and clarifications than almost any other major UK outlet — with an overwhelming concentration in politically weaponised right-wing themes.
The BBC isn’t perfect — but it’s ours. As coordinated attacks on its independence intensify, I warn that if we don’t defend it now, we may lose more than a broadcaster — we may lose a cornerstone of British democracy...
As a long-time critic of the @BBC, let me spell it out: what we’re seeing right now isn’t organic outrage — it’s a sophisticated coordinated campaign by ideological enemies and commercial competitors to undermine the BBC’s independence and funding.
If you can’t see that, you’re being played — and that’s exactly the point.
Let’s start with Michael Prescott, author of the dodgy dossier leaked exclusively to The Telegraph, who is a PR man and former political editor at Murdoch’s Sunday Times.
Growing numbers of people are angry and disillusioned with the political establishment.
Desperate voters are easy prey for manipulative populists—as they were in Germany in the 1930s.
But the problem isn't immigrants or religious minorities. It's always wealth distribution.
The story of wealth in Britain over the past eight decades since WWII is not one of ‘the invisible hand’, but of deliberate policy choices—choices that once built one of the most equal society in modern history, but now sustain one of the most unequal in the developed world.
Data tracking wealth distribution from 1945 to 2025 reveal a striking U-shaped curve: a rapid reduction in wealth inequality after World War II, making Britain one of the most equal countries on earth by the mid 1970s, followed by an unbroken rise.