ExileinMexico

Anthony Stolarz has had enough

EXCLUSIVE: A group of around two dozen grassroots organisers has launched a surprise bid to lead the new leftwing party, provisionally called Your Party, after a public spat broke out between co-founders Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn. The group, calling itself Our Party, is drawn from the trade union, tenants’ union, anti-racist and pro-Palestine movements, as well as local Your Party groups. Among them are renters’ union organiser Josh Virasami and Palestine solidarity organiser Jeanine Hourani. Our Party's petition, which it is calling on members of the public to co-sign, demands that the six Independent Alliance (IA) MPs – including Sultana, Corbyn and the four “Gaza independents” – step back from the leadership and allow members to take over. “The MPs got us this far, but now it's time to hand over the reins,” the group said in a statement. “The people should take things forward from here.” “A mass party is nothing until it belongs to the masses,” they added. The group demands that the leadership of the party be given to a handover committee, including a trade union general secretary, a social movement lawyer and a representative from the climate movement, whose names will be confirmed next week. Infighting broke out within the new left party this week when an email was sent out to the more than 800,000 people who had registered their interest with the party, inviting them to sign up to join. Corbyn released a statement saying that the email was “unauthorised” and that “legal advice is being taken”. Sultana later claimed she had acted unilaterally “after being sidelined” by the other IA group members, saying she was the victim of a “sexist boys’ club”. “We watch with frustration and disappointment the public divisions within the steering group, whose process for constructive resolution has clearly broken down,” Our Party said in its statement. “The opportunity to build a new mass party truly of the people is quite possibly a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Far too much is at stake. We cannot waste it.”

Jen Psaki says Democrats must double down on pushing the transgender agenda on Americans, including allowing men to play against girls in sports She says it's not an issue and that men playing against girls in sports presents "no threat to safety or fairness."

**STATEMENT** 🚨As of tomorrow, it will be illegal to "influence" someone within 150m of an abortion facility in Britain. We've already backed the legal defence of several citizens prosecuted for their silent prayers, or offering to hold a conversation, in local areas where similar laws have been enforced. This is a watershed moment for freedom of speech, and freedom of thought. ADF UK Legal Counsel Jeremiah Igunnubole has given the following statement: “We all stand against harassment and intimidation. But the Public Order Act goes much further by banning “influencing”. "Could this apply to the advice given by a parent? A concerned word from a friend? Information made available through a crisis pregnancy volunteer? "The law is written so vaguely that peaceful, consensual conversations or even silent thoughts could be made illegal on certain streets of England. "We have already seen the prosecution of individuals like Adam Smith-Connor, who only stopped to pray in his mind for a few minutes, under these censorial and far-reaching “buffer zone” rules. “The right to hold a consensual conversation, or engage in silent prayer, constitute the most basic of human rights. They are protected robustly by international legal provisions relating to freedom of thought and speech. "The entire premise of censorial buffer zone legislation is that women should be able to choose to access abortion without hindrance. "The legal elephant in the room should be obvious to see. If the law states that a woman can choose to abort their unborn child without hindrance, even the “hindrance” of lawful alternatives to abortion, how can the law criminalise women when they choose to engage in lawful, harmless and consensual conversations? “This is a watershed moment for British freedoms, and one the public must not take lightly. A failure to protect thought and peaceful speech anywhere creates a threat to these rights everywhere. "Buffer zones or otherwise, we should uncompromisingly safeguard the rights on which our democracy is based.”