Jump to content

Labour


jake

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Yes and no. We do elect the Government. Democracy is a joint responsibility between the people and those elected. 

 

I've accepted your point on the term Jewish being used rather than Israeli but that aside, I think you're taking it far too literally. Do you disagree with the premise it's much more likely that Israeli's themselves could bring about change in regards their Governments actions than anyone else?

 

I don't disagree with the premise that Israelis as citizens of a nation with voting rights can bring about change in the state of Israel. 

 

I reject the notion Jews by virtue they are Jewish can do so because they share the same faith as most Israelis. 

 

I don't think I am taking it too literally. I think it's clear what Hatton said. I think its clear in line with the IHRA what that means.

Edited by JamboX2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 954
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • maroonlegions

    110

  • ri Alban

    69

  • Governor Tarkin

    62

  • doctor jambo

    53

2 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

“British people with any sense of humanity need to start speaking out publicly against the ruthless murdering being carried out by Britain!”

 

“Israeli people with any sense of humanity need to start speaking out publicly against the ruthless murdering being carried out by Israel!”

 

“Jewish people with any sense of humanity need to start speaking out publicly against the ruthless murdering being carried out by Israel!”

 

Spot the odd one out.  At least, I think that's what he's saying.

Surely that makes it clumsy, poorly thought through - but anti-semitic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/20/derek-hatton-suspended-from-labour-over-tweet?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Why should all Jews in any way be required to account for their views towards Israel and the actions of the Israeli state? 

 

That's the anti-semitism in that. Why should British citizens or French citizens or Australian citizens who are Jewish be accountable or required to do anything about the State of Israel.

 

Should all Catholics confirm whether they're loyalties lie with the Vatican? 

How many times have we heard calls for Muslims to call out the actions of ISIS??  Absolutely no different to what Hatton said. A lot of Jews do campaign against the actions of the Israeli government    guess they are anti semites  too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, XB52 said:

How many times have we heard calls for Muslims to call out the actions of ISIS??  Absolutely no different to what Hatton said. A lot of Jews do campaign against the actions of the Israeli government    guess they are anti semites  too

 

That is Islamophobia. 

 

No. Again. This isn't hard. 

 

Anti-semitism: a hostility or prejudice towards Jews.

 

Anti-Zionism: being against the right to self-determination for the Jewish people (in the form of Zionism, I.e. to have a Jewish state in the holy land).

 

Anti-Israeli: against the policies of the Israeli government.

 

You can be one. All three. Or a couple of these. But that is not to say being against the policies of the Israeli government in its dealings with Palestine is anti-semitic. But to argue Jews should be called upon to speak out is anti-semitic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JamboX2 said:

 

That is Islamophobia. 

 

No. Again. This isn't hard. 

 

Anti-semitism: a hostility or prejudice towards Jews.

 

Anti-Zionism: being against the right to self-determination for the Jewish people (in the form of Zionism, I.e. to have a Jewish state in the holy land).

 

Anti-Israeli: against the policies of the Israeli government.

 

You can be one. All three. Or a couple of these. But that is not to say being against the policies of the Israeli government in its dealings with Palestine is anti-semitic. But to argue Jews should be called upon to speak out is anti-semitic.

I sort of agree with you. Just pointing out the double standards at play here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, XB52 said:

I sort of agree with you. Just pointing out the double standards at play here

 

But in the context of Labour that's whataboutery. 

 

The Tories in particular as a party have an issue there. But as a society as a whole we are more and more intolerant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AlphonseCapone
10 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

I don't disagree with the premise that Israelis as citizens of a nation with voting rights can bring about change in the state of Israel. 

 

I reject the notion Jews by virtue they are Jewish can do so because they share the same faith as most Israelis. 

 

I don't think I am taking it too literally. I think it's clear what Hatton said. I think its clear in line with the IHRA what that means.

 

OK fine but I've already agreed with you on that point. What I'm trying to say is could this not just be clumsy language, probably based on ignorance yes, rather than anti-semitic?

 

It might be there is much more to this guy that suggests he is anti-semitic that I just don't know about, I've never heard of him till this week. But I'm simply challenging the automatic accusation of anti-Semitism in this case when it could equally be clumsy and albeit unfortunate language choice. 

 

I think it's important because criticism of Israel is often met with instant accusations by some people of anti-Semitism when that's not the case. It's actually really dangerous if the Israeli state can hide from criticism behind the cloak of anti-Semitism. I do appreciate that this guy using Jew when he should have said Israeli further muddies the water. It's his intention that's important and I can't glean that from one statement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JamboX2 said:

 

But in the context of Labour that's whataboutery. 

 

The Tories in particular as a party have an issue there. But as a society as a whole we are more and more intolerant.

Intolerant of what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a bit disco
1 hour ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Spaniards.

 

The same ones who collectively never stood up to the Spanish Inquisition and their ruthless murdering of murder victims?

 

Those Spaniards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

Intolerant of what?

 

Tories? There's been recent studies showing heightened Islamophobia within Tory members and people who identify as Tory voters 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

That is Islamophobia. 

 

No. Again. This isn't hard. 

 

Anti-semitism: a hostility or prejudice towards Jews.

 

Anti-Zionism: being against the right to self-determination for the Jewish people (in the form of Zionism, I.e. to have a Jewish state in the holy land).

 

Anti-Israeli: against the policies of the Israeli government.

 

You can be one. All three. Or a couple of these. But that is not to say being against the policies of the Israeli government in its dealings with Palestine is anti-semitic. But to argue Jews should be called upon to speak out is anti-semitic.


Still seems muddled to me

Would it follow, for instance, that to call on Rangers fans to condemn the abuse of Stevie Clarke last night is anti-Rangers? Does that call indicate a hostility or prejudice towards Rangers fans?

I realise this is trivial in comparison but I don't see that it follows that the "call" implies "hostility or prejudice"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the problem is Israel is the Jewish state. Many Jews perceive criticism of Israel as criticism of Jews. There is a lot of sensitivity. 

 

As others have said Israel itself labels criticism as anti-Semitism. 

 

I think people do need to be careful. Supporters of Palestine have let hatred of Israel be seen as anti-Semitism. So while it's fair to criticise Israel a bit more effort to qualify that would help. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

Part of the problem is Israel is the Jewish state. Many Jews perceive criticism of Israel as criticism of Jews. There is a lot of sensitivity. 

 

As others have said Israel itself labels criticism as anti-Semitism. 

 

I think people do need to be careful. Supporters of Palestine have let hatred of Israel be seen as anti-Semitism. So while it's fair to criticise Israel a bit more effort to qualify that would help. 

 

You're bang on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

Part of the problem is Israel is the Jewish state. Many Jews perceive criticism of Israel as criticism of Jews. There is a lot of sensitivity. 

 

As others have said Israel itself labels criticism as anti-Semitism. 

 

I think people do need to be careful. Supporters of Palestine have let hatred of Israel be seen as anti-Semitism. So while it's fair to criticise Israel a bit more effort to qualify that would help. 

 

A fair few supporters of Palestine go way beyond criticising Israeli policies and call for Israels destruction and the jews to be wiped out .. That is where the problem lies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JimKongUno said:

 

A fair few supporters of Palestine go way beyond criticising Israeli policies and call for Israels destruction and the jews to be wiped out .. That is where the problem lies

But if the point here is that you can't hold one group accountable for the actions of one part of that group, then that's just the exact same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Part of the problem is Israel is the Jewish state. Many Jews perceive criticism of Israel as criticism of Jews. There is a lot of sensitivity. 

 

As others have said Israel itself labels criticism as anti-Semitism. 

 

I think people do need to be careful. Supporters of Palestine have let hatred of Israel be seen as anti-Semitism. So while it's fair to criticise Israel a bit more effort to qualify that would help. 

 

Agree!

 

1 minute ago, Toggie88 said:

But if the point here is that you can't hold one group accountable for the actions of one part of that group, then that's just the exact same. 

 

Agree too!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toggie88 said:

But if the point here is that you can't hold one group accountable for the actions of one part of that group, then that's just the exact same. 

 

The problem goes right to the top in labour , for example Jeremy Corbyn visiting the graves of the terrorists that murdered the Israeli Olympic team for a wreath laying ceremony while his party is in the middle of an anti semetism row ..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JimKongUno said:

 

The problem goes right to the top in labour , for example Jeremy Corbyn visiting the graves of the terrorists that murdered the Israeli Olympic team for a wreath laying ceremony while his party is in the middle of an anti semetism row ..

 

Aye but that wasn't why he was there.

Those graves were in the same graveyard but he didn't lay a wreathe or pay respects to those guys.

Stop believing what you read in the Sun, Mail and Express.

 

You are also ignoring that Corbyn spent Passover with a Jewish charity group.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, JimKongUno said:

 

The problem goes right to the top in labour , for example Jeremy Corbyn visiting the graves of the terrorists that murdered the Israeli Olympic team for a wreath laying ceremony while his party is in the middle of an anti semetism row ..

 

 

Aye.  AK47 slung over the shoulder anaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cade said:

Aye but that wasn't why he was there.

Those graves were in the same graveyard but he didn't lay a wreathe or pay respects to those guys.

Stop believing what you read in the Sun, Mail and Express.

 

You are also ignoring that Corbyn spent Passover with a Jewish charity group.

 

 

Sure it wasnt , just by some extraordinary coincidence he happened to stop by a graveyard the same day Palestinian terrorists were being celebrated with a wreath laying . Happens to me all the time right enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JimKongUno said:

 

Sure it wasnt , just by some extraordinary coincidence he happened to stop by a graveyard the same day Palestinian terrorists were being celebrated with a wreath laying . Happens to me all the time right enough

 

Nah he photo bombed the ceremony totally ignorant of what was going on!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, JimKongUno said:

 

The problem goes right to the top in labour , for example Jeremy Corbyn visiting the graves of the terrorists that murdered the Israeli Olympic team for a wreath laying ceremony while his party is in the middle of an anti semetism row ..

 

 

You're not conflating Israel with Jews per se, are you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JimKongUno said:

The victims were exclusively Jewish

 

Yeah, but they were murdered as Israeli's not as Jews, surely?

 

Edit: So, if it is anti-semitic to ask for Jew's opinion of Israel merely because they are Jewish, surely the opposite also applies?  i.e. Israel is not Judiasm and Judiasm is not Israel?

Edited by Boris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Yeah, but they were murdered as Israeli's not as Jews, surely?

 

I feel this starting to go round in circles

 

Im sure you can agree that going there wasnt a great picture for a guy denying his anti semetic leanings

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
2 hours ago, Cade said:

Aye but that wasn't why he was there.

Those graves were in the same graveyard but he didn't lay a wreathe or pay respects to those guys.

Stop believing what you read in the Sun, Mail and Express.

 

You are also ignoring that Corbyn spent Passover with a Jewish charity group.

 

Passover was spent with a group of extreme left wing Jews who hate Israel.

 

Check the group out , they are nutters .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Part of the problem is Israel is the Jewish state. Many Jews perceive criticism of Israel as criticism of Jews. There is a lot of sensitivity. 

 

As others have said Israel itself labels criticism as anti-Semitism. 

 

I think people do need to be careful. Supporters of Palestine have let hatred of Israel be seen as anti-Semitism. So while it's fair to criticise Israel a bit more effort to qualify that would help. 

agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
15 minutes ago, Craig_ said:

 

Great bunch of lads.

 

They gave us Natalie Portman, and their aversion to pork means there's more of those wee sausages wrapped in bacon to go round at dinner time on Jesus' birthday. For that we should be eternally thankful.

 

I could get on board with being anti the rest tbh.

Edited by Governor Tarkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cade said:

Aye but that wasn't why he was there.

Those graves were in the same graveyard but he didn't lay a wreathe or pay respects to those guys.

Stop believing what you read in the Sun, Mail and Express.

 

You are also ignoring that Corbyn spent Passover with a Jewish charity group.

 

yes but they were the wrong sort of Jews though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Geoff the Mince said:

Passover was spent with a group of extreme left wing Jews who hate Israel.

 

Check the group out , they are nutters .

But Jews none the less. If one was anti semitic why hang out with Jews? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
Just now, Boris said:

But Jews none the less. If one was anti semitic why hang out with Jews? 

 

They were jew hating jews, ergo the good guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boris said:

 

Yeah, but they were murdered as Israeli's not as Jews, surely?

 

Edit: So, if it is anti-semitic to ask for Jew's opinion of Israel merely because they are Jewish, surely the opposite also applies?  i.e. Israel is not Judiasm and Judiasm is not Israel?

 

That it's necessary to defend his choice with semantics like this pretty much says all that needs to be said about the guy's self-awareness and ability to lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

 

That it's necessary to defend his choice with semantics like this pretty much says all that needs to be said about the guy's self-awareness and ability to lead.

The semantics aren't about defending Corbyn's attendance at some graveyard or another. 

 

If someone is going to be labelled anti semitic based on a dislike of the state of Israel, then surely that has to be qualified? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
1 minute ago, Boris said:

But Jews none the less. If one was anti semitic why hang out with Jews? 

A group that actually hates thier fellow Jews .

 

Corbyn also gave an interview to a journalist from Press TV who openly denies the Holocaust .

 

An interview with an Iranian news channel who funnily enough hold the same views .

 

Nothing to see , Jeremy is great .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Geoff the Mince said:

A group that actually hates thier fellow Jews .

 

Corbyn also gave an interview to a journalist from Press TV who openly denies the Holocaust .

 

An interview with an Iranian news channel who funnily enough hold the same views .

 

Nothing to see , Jeremy is great .

Do they hate Jews? Or is it zionism? A genuine question. 

 

Another question, what did Corbyn say in these interviews? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Boris said:

The semantics aren't about defending Corbyn's attendance at some graveyard or another. 

 

If someone is going to be labelled anti semitic based on a dislike of the state of Israel, then surely that has to be qualified? 

 

I know, but he's the topic. The conflation of anti-Israel policy and anti-semitism is in bad faith, but the subject just then was optics for Corbyn himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
7 minutes ago, Boris said:

Do they hate Jews? Or is it zionism? A genuine question. 

 

Another question, what did Corbyn say in these interviews? 

1st question they hate both , they believe in a return to the Soviet Union .

 

On the 2nd question . . Surely you should be asking why was he allowing himself to be interviewed by a Holocaust denier ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Tories? There's been recent studies showing heightened Islamophobia within Tory members and people who identify as Tory voters 

What you said was 

"The Tories in particular as a party have an issue there. But as a society as a whole we are more and more intolerant."  so you have already stated that Tories are not as inclusive and fair minded as we might hope. Your statement related society as a whole being more and more intolerant likening the rest of society to the Tories and i asked who this applied to. Almost any group in society could have been cited except the Tories because you had already mentioned them. I thought you might be alluding to Nationalists. 

I actually think our society is much more tolerant than it used to be even among Tories, clearly you have a different experience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Geoff the Mince said:

1st question they hate both , they believe in a return to the Soviet Union .

 

On the 2nd question . . Surely you should be asking why was he allowing himself to be interviewed by a Holocaust denier ?

 

I don't know the backgrounding to this story, but you, me and everyone else may have interacted in a way with a holocaust denier and not even known it. Was the interview about the holocaust or something else?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/02/2019 at 00:32, JamboX2 said:

 

Never said we were a beacon of ethical foreign policy. 

 

The Labour party under Blair claimed to operate an ethical foreign policy. They hid behind this to carry out some appalling atrocities. You claimed that the foreign policy adopted by Blair was better than that espoused by Corbyn as his was “far left”.

 

 

Iraq was wrong. 

 

Kinda think interventions in Bosnia/Kosovo, Gulf 1, Falklands, Sierra Leone were justified uses of force.

 

We are talking about Labour and Gulf 1 and the Falklands happened under the Tories. Sierra Leone is often cited as an example of humanitarian intervention but some of those on the ground at the time tell us that Blair’s motivation was more about regaining access to blood diamonds for his sponsors and influential people in the House of Lords. Have you read the Orangemen of Togo?

The actions in the former Yugoslavia were utterly despicable too. They bombed civilian targets like the TV station and bridges in Belgrade which Blair attempted to justify claiming that the TV station was a legitimate target because they supported the Milosevic regime. They used depleted uranium in their weapons too, which I believe was illegal and likely to cause long term genetic effects. The legality of it is not important though as they did not have a UN resolution to carry out the attacks in any case.

 

He wasn't against it. He said if OPCW gave a thumbs up he'd back it. But the Syrians limited access to the area for weeks after limiting the chance of a thorough investigation. The UN's World Health Organisationstated that 43 of the 70+ deaths exhibited "symptoms consistent with exposure to toxic chemicals". 

 

Corbyn was against military action in Syria.

.  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-syria-uk-military-action-trump-theresa-may-war-russia-a8301256.html

But maybe he didn’t mean it and was  waiting for a “thumbs up” or maybe he was unconvinced of the case for bombing Syria. The Labour party bottled it too. They knew the allegations against Assad would not stand up to scrutiny any more than WMD on Iraq would.

You also said “Miliband's tenure was statesmanlike in comparison to now. Even on Syria he held a better line”.  Which of Miliband’s lines do you think was better, his pro bombing stance or after he changed his mind? Many seemed to think that his Syria line was disastrous prompting very undiplomatic language from politicians and civil servants as well as jeopardising the UK’s international relationships.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-sources-say-ed-miliband-is-a-copper-bottomed-s-who-changed-his-mind-on-syria-8789496.html

I think Miliband was a bit Gung Ho after his I am a Jew speech in Israel but then had to change his mind when he realised that Labour supporters and the public in general did not support the bombing campaign. Obviously I’m not suggesting that Israel has undue influence over UK foreign policy and certain elements of the Labour party as that might construed in some quarters as anti-semitic. I can only imagine that Corbyn would have done a much worse job than this though but I’m struggling to see how.

 

The OPCW would later state there was no conclusive proof that they had gathered (despite being denied access two one of the storage facilities, not being allowed access by Russian and Syrian forces for days after the event and coming under fire in both areas under Syrian control) of an attack. But did state the reported injuries and images appeared to be in line with a chlorine based toxin. 

 

The GPPI institute have, on their research, noted 300 chlorine gas type outbreaks in the 8 years of war and attribute that to the Syrian regime:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/syrian-military-linked-to-more-than-300-chemical-attacks-report-says/2019/02/16/c6e128de-31d4-11e9-ac6c-14eea99d5e24_story.html?utm_term=.a4751ba1a87c

 

 

Yes. Why shouldn't they? It's their home. I do, however, think members of the Assad regime should face a ICC Investigation over the conduct of the conflict along with other state and non-state actors in that conflict. As was done in Bosnia and the Yugoslav Wars.

 

Why would you expect thousands of Syrians to return home if their leader was such a murdering despot? Don’t you think the main reason most are returning is because the western backed terrorists have been removed.

 

Pardon? So we're going with the RT/Sputnik line. I'm inherently dubious of anything broadcast by either organisation. Given they are state funded arms of the Kremlin. And given they are implicated in spreading Russian propaganda across the west as part of the wider aim to do so:

 

https://www.rferl.org/a/are-russian-trolls-saving-measles-from-extinction/29768471.html

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi8mPSEh8ngAhVGgxoKHT75B1UQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fmedia%2F2017%2Fnov%2F29%2F24-hour-putin-people-my-week-watching-kremlin-propaganda-channel-rt-russia-today&psig=AOvVaw24Y5lCSLGXCZPpN0rRCltk&ust=1550708922159896

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/world/national-security/russian-propaganda-skripal-salisbury/?utm_term=.ad841ae33f4c

 

THE Russian news agencies obviously promote a pro Russian line and they are a lot better at it than they used to be. They have some excellent contributors and some of their stuff is particularly interesting because it’s not covered by our media. Some might say that it is the rapidly declining UK print media and increasingly US focused and deskbound BBC that often makes it a plausible source of information. Were it not for RT, Sputnik and other alternative media we would not know of the BBC’s Syria producer’s claim that the gas attack on Douma was staged.

     You might have thought, given the implications of the Douma attack that the BBC might have wanted to clear this up but I haven’t seen anything about it. Bias can be through omission too, there’s virtually nothing about the political trials in Spain, very little about the Gilet Jaune and coverage of huge anti TTIp marches in Europe a year or two ago. They never miss Corbyn though or anybody on the left of the Labour party. Thank goodness for our state funded  institute of statecraft and Integrity initiative and their sterling efforts to counter the red propaganda menace.

 

I'm not really here to defend the White Helmets but the issue with them is very very mixed and subject to different stages of the war. C4 news factcheek has said they pose Assad no threat. France 24 has a detailed 3 page report which shows caution should be exercised in how they operate and how the west deals with them but does not confirm them to be terrorists:

 

https://observers.france24.com/en/20180511-white-helmets-syria-fact-fiction-debunking

 

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/syria-chemical-attack-the-evidence

The White Helmets are being resettled to the UK and Israel. Have you considered why at a time when thousands are returning to Syria that so-called humanitarian rescue groups cannot remain.

 

But what's this got to do with JC? 

It's UK policy that Corbyn opposes.

 

Corbyn is an affable man who seems willing to facilitate withdrawal of the UK from the EU, perhaps one of the great international institutions ever established. He should be honest in that rather than simply hiding behind the strained interpretation of the party's Brexit policy. 

 

There will be no general election before March 29th now. He should now back a people's vote as he is committed to by party motion. He wanted democracy, abide by it. 

 

His allies get a fair hearing often; Abbott has been listened to as a voice of reason on the Home Office's harsh and regressive immigration and hostile environment policies. I've read pro-McDonnell lines in centre right papers on economic issues. Labour's opposition to UC, largely without alternative, is gaining a good response. As is his critique of Failing Grayling.

 

 

I'm not a member these days nor am I on any of the disciplinary committees, so personally no.

 

But Jewish members within Labour - not just MPs - feel they're being asked to account for Israeli policies, that they're marginalised and claim they face intimidation. Labour as a party should spend less time inviting Derek Hatton back into its ranks and more time addressing these concerns with practical steps.

 

Jim Sheridan said he had respect for the Jewish community but that "they and their Blairite plotters" - so Jews in the labour party are intrinsically anti-Corbyn to our Jim. Since readmitted I should add. But that's not racist then? Anti-semitic isn't here in the fact he's classed a whole group of members of one faith of something? 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/18/jim-sheridan-suspended-from-labour-over-antisemitism-row-comments?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Naz Shah and Ken were also suspended for anti-semitic remarks.

 

Even if it is small scale. Any perception of racism or discrimination within Labour must be challenged and dealt with swiftly. Much like it should in the Tories who have an equally big issue around Islamophobia.

 

It is not contradictory to believe Corbyn has a good domestic agenda but also think he is not doing enough to root out any form of anti-semitism or racism in Labour. Nor is it mad to appreciate his agenda and think he is fundamentally out of touch with the Labour party on Brexit and on our relationship with NATO. 

When it comes to antisemitism who better to explain than Chomsky.

 

 

 

For me, the party backed him twice. He is leader. End of. But he doesn't get a blank cheque. I expect more from Labour as a party. I want them raising the issues at the heart of May's deal with vigour, to stand up to vested interests within its ranks and to any harassment and bullying. Where is Corbyn on the dodgy funding of Vote Leave? Where is his alternative welfare plan? What is his agenda internationally once we Brexit? He's been found wanting of late. I do not think he has proved himself of late. Not at all. Others have. He has not.

 In the context of Chomsky’s comments how do you feel about former Labour MP Joan Ryan in her capacity within Labour Friends of Israel being given a million pounds from the Israeli government?

Have you seen Joan Ryan branding people antisemitic for asking awkward questions at the LFOI stall at the conference.

Chomsky said he used to be viewed as a Zionist because of his views on Israel but now he is seen as antisemitic even though his views have not changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
15 minutes ago, Toggie88 said:

 

I don't know the backgrounding to this story, but you, me and everyone else may have interacted in a way with a holocaust denier and not even known it. Was the interview about the holocaust or something else?  

Corbyn knew the journalist and his views as they had met at previous Hezbollah linked rallies .

 

Corbyn  was fully aware that Press TV knew this and continued to interact with them .

 

I  honestly can't remember what the interview was about but it will be online somewhere .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
8 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 In the context of Chomsky’s comments how do you feel about former Labour MP Joan Ryan in her capacity within Labour Friends of Israel being given a million pounds from the Israeli government?

Have you seen Joan Ryan branding people antisemitic for asking awkward questions at the LFOI stall at the conference.

Chomsky said he used to be viewed as a Zionist because of his views on Israel but now he is seen as antisemitic even though his views have not changed.

Dispicable actions in Yugoslavia was the  bombing of a TV studio ? 

 

What do you call Russian involvement in sending milita and weapons to the Serbs ?

 

You watch too much RT mate .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maroonlegions
On 20/02/2019 at 20:02, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Not intelligent enough.

 

Like you can see it coming, yes even you darling have masters, the ones you  bend over too, the banks  or those withy so much more than you that in realty own you and the rest of us.

 

Mind you, people vote for this Tory junta, you know the ones in power just now, who in reality fecking STEAL from the poor, the old and even those in WORK through their "in it together "bullshit to justify their draconian austerity 

 

So dont give me your uneducated  working class v privileged super know all smug up their own arses dig. 

 

Every one of my posts on here was relating to or about Labour and her enemy the Tories.

 

So BOT remark was pedantic in essence. 

 

Your so called intelligence lacks one primary thing ,and that is the fecking ability to admit when you are wrong by   lacking  empathy towards those  that are suffering under this Tory austerity CON.

 

The ability to see and recognise that  this  last 10 years of Tory austerity war on the less fortunate and poor , in work too, is nothing short of near welfare  and in work genocide. 

 

Poverty wages , (10 year wage stagnation),  and zero contract  hours are a Tory manifestation of class war, just ask ..old Jacob, decent chap.

 

Here is a couple of FACTUAL memes that will hopefully piss off a certain poster , can  sense him seething just know with the cries of , its just not cricket.  

 

Related image

 

Related image
 

 

You may come across as intelligent but intelligence is nothing if it lacks empathy .

 

Oh and here is..... the BUTCHER of Baghdad, yes the red Tory , the fecking war criminal. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image may contain: one or more people and text
 
 
:kirk:
 
 
 
 

 

 

 
 
 
 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...