Tom, it’s really not that difficult to understand the fudged disciplinary panel decision – they shouldn’t have found him guilty of the charges in the first place. You talk of shame and distress. I am ashamed for my party, and I am distressed by your words and actions. And I do wish people would stop referring to the Jewish Community as a homogenous group of people when it is so clear from the discussion and debate that they are not. It is patronising and offensive to think otherwise.

Seeing you still push the anti-semitism red button is appalling, Mr Livingstone was not accused of being anti-semitic that charge was untenable and you failed to make a case that he was guilty of antisemitic conduct, his accusers alleged that he was nonetheless guilty of conduct grossly detrimental to the party because, according to them, he had upset the UK’s Jewish population. Being offensive not anti-Semitic, You will find a better response to this blatant political manoeuvring by you and the other Labour defenders of modern day atrocities elsewhere, you should resign you are bring the Party in to disrepute, with this hollow, jaded and sordid conflation.

Walter Wolfgang
“I am a Jewish member of the Labour Party and was a member of its National Executive Committee from 2006 to 2008. I regard anti-Semitism as an extremely serious issue.
I am 93 years old. I was born in Germany in 1923. My family were persecuted by the Nazis. In 1937, at the age of 13, I left Germany and came to live in Britain. It was the strength of my commitment to Judaism and Jewish ethical values of human equality which caused me to join the Labour Party in 1948……..
Allegations of anti-Semitism should be made only when people express hostility to Jewish people because they are Jewish. Such allegations should not be made when this is not the case. It is not anti-Semitic to hold or express views about the government of Israel or about Zionism.
Ken Livingstone has an outstanding record of fighting against racism and anti-Semitism. Labour’s National Constitutional Committee hearing into Ken’s actions is a travesty. His public defence of Naz Shah MP in April 2016 was not offensive and did not involved him in making any concession to anti-Semitism.
Ken Livingstone’s remarks in April 2016 about the Transfer Agreement were broadly correct. Hitler was in favour of Jews leaving Germany for Palestine. The agreements reached between the Nazis and some Zionists are simply indisputable facts.
Advocacy of Jews leaving Palestine was made by some Jews who were Zionist, some non-Jews who were anti-Semitic, by some non-Jews who were friendly and some who were indifferent to Jews. Anti-Semitism is hostility to Jews because of religion, race or ethnicity. It is nothing else. Many Jews, Zionist and non-Zionist – including myself – disagree with the present policy of the Israeli government.
It is evident that Livingstone is being attacked because he supports the Palestinians, and not because he is either offensive or anti-Semitic. He is not guilty of any conduct detrimental to the Labour Party. His suspension was unjustified. Any further disciplinary action would bring the party into disrepute” Walter Wolfgang

""My party is not living up to its commitment to have a zero tolerance approach to anti-semitism""

personally Mr Watson i think you are not living up to members expectations as a deputy leader either.

Ken’s suspension is almost a year old so why wait until now, a few weeks before the May 2017 elections, to address it in such a poor way – even down to delaying the verdict until the launch of campaigning? The only reason I can think of is to stir up media rhetoric against Labour to damage our chances, just like the media was stirred up prior to the May 2016 elections (Labour lost 18 seats then, against the ‘150’ predicted, but nothing was said by you or anyone from Progress etc.. about the Tories losing 45 seats in the same elections). The level of disrepute that Ken has brought to the party pales into insignificance to the level of disrepute the antics of many Labour MP’s has had in their continued attacks on the twice democratically elected leader IMHO.

There was nothing anti semitic in his statement of historical truth. Why in earth should Ken apologise for stating verifiable historic facts? Is the Labour Party attempting to rewrite the history of WW2 and it’s run up now?
Appalling behaviour for those of us so affected by family deaths and wartime deprivation to try and sanitise the causes and history to suit your own agenda.

You should be looking at what constitutes anti Semitism. Stating historical facts certainly does not.

I’ve voted Labour for over 60 years and been a party member for around 20 but I am really finding hard to love the Labour Party at the moment with it’s appalling decisions in backing article 50 with a three line whip and now unbelievable lack of justice for someone who has worked harder than the majority of members for the Party all his political life.
Roy MacDonald