Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Difference is we've been suffering waves of terror attacks from radical Muslims over the last two decades. We've had zero terror attacks from radical Jews. Its a lot easier for society and the media to overlook bigotry against a particular community when a radicalised minority of that community regularly carry out acts of violence and mass murder.

I guarantee that this would change in an instant if Jews started detonating bombs in Europe, the media would begin turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism and you'd get the likes of the Daily Mail running the same stores but this time targeting Judaism instead.

So you think that's why there's been no coverage of conservative islamophobia in the press, and no calls to tackle racism in the Tory party root and branch?

Isn't that just an excuse to not tackle the issue at all? Are you saying that because there are Muslim terrorists, and attacks that Islamophobia is justified and understandable, and should therefore be ignored?
What happens if we face a resurgence of Irish terrorism. Will it be acceptable to see "no-irish" signs pop up all over the place again?

It seems pretty hypocritical to me especially as we've seen that the conservatives don't just have a problem with islamophobia, but also with racism against pretty much everyone else too. Are the conservatives not obliged to deal with this, just as Labour is obliged to deal with racism and antisemitism? Is the media not obliged to hold conservatives to account the same way they do all other political parties?
Why is there never any real action on this issue? What will it take for us to not accept racism of any kind in any political party?

It's partly Corbyn's fault. He's shilly-shallied and dilly-dalied all round anti-semitism in Labour.

If Corbyn had taken a robust position at the outset, not only would the problem be drifting far astern by now, also he would hold the moral high ground and Labour would be able to spank the government again and again at PMQ.

It's very difficult to be a public figure who is officially 'anti-Israel' and not also be construed as 'anti-Semite'.

Partly because of concerted efforts by Israel lobbyists to ensure that is the case.

Sorry, how is islamophobia in the conservative party Jeremy Corbyns fault exactly?

It's like fething meme.

Stop blaming the left for everything the right feth up with,it gives them a free ticket.

The question is, why are the conservatives not being taken to task for racism and islamophoboa?

Try and answer without making excuses involving terrorists or Corbyn.

I think the answer is pretty obvious.

The Conservative Party is islamophobic because it's composed of people many of who are islamophobic and has a lot of islamophobic supporters. This may seem like a circular argument but it's actually a self-reinforcingThis circle.

The point is that they aren't going to take themselves to task.

Then look at the Conservative supporting press. The Daily Mail, Telegraph, the Sun, etc. I don't think I need to explain any further.

Not wanting to dredge it up, but apparently the defence for the case Robinson was 'reporting on will be filing for a mistrial due to the intimidation. He might have just managed to set these people free in a massive own goal.

That's why we don't allow it.

I would always advise people to be aware of moral panics regarding Islamophobia and anti-Semitism.

Genuine Anti-Semitism needs to be rooted out. Genuine hatred of a person simply because they are a Muslim needs to be rooted out.

But too often, critics of Israel and critics of Islam, even when they present legitimate arguments of say, Israeli policy towards Palestinians or Islam's compatibility with Democracy, are often accused of being phobic. But I do sympathise with British Jews who are blamed for Israeli policy, even if they've never been to Israel before in their lives.


None the less, Phobic suggests a disease, to pathologise something, as though the person is 'ill.' I needn't remind people that it was an old trick of the Soviet Union to accuse its opponents and critics of being 'mentally ill.'

With regards to the Labour party and anti-Semitism, I do think there is a lot of horsegak surrounding it. If Labour is as anti-Semitic as its critics make it out to be, they wouldn't have elected a Jewish leader, and the fact that millions of Britons voted for Ed Miliband's Labour, suggest the British people are none too bothered about having a Jewish PM either.

This is the crux if the issue as far as I'm concerned. This very thread had pages devoted to anti semitism in the Labour party, yet racism and islamophobia draws a near deathly silence. It's hypocrisy at the very least.

The fact of the matter is that the left has to endure criticism about racism and is expected to do something about it, but the right is allowed to be racist because of"reasons". Frankly it's fething bollocks. I'm just sick of racists, particularly those on the right, getting free reign over this.

 r_squared wrote:
This is the crux if the issue as far as I'm concerned. This very thread had pages devoted to anti semitism in the Labour party, yet racism and islamophobia draws a near deathly silence. It's hypocrisy at the very least.

The fact of the matter is that the left has to endure criticism about racism and is expected to do something about it, but the right is allowed to be racist because of"reasons". Frankly it's fething bollocks. I'm just sick of racists, particularly those on the right, getting free reign over this.

Well, I don't blame you for being fed up with it. We rarely see eye to eye on the EU, but I'm with you on this one.

As I always remind people on dakka, there are still Tories on the go who had dubious links with the Apartheid South African government or were sympathetic to them, John Bercow being a prime example.

And yet Jeremy Corbyn, the man who has fought racism his whole political career, and who has attended numerous anti-racism rallies, and who had a black girlfriend at one time (Diane Abbott) is the 'racist.'

That's the twilight zone politics we live in.


And the fact that Labour get blamed for 'wrecking' the British economy, despite the Tories being in the majority of government the last one hundred years, is something else that really annoys me.


The Tories gave us Black Wednesday and rail privatization but they still bang on about the 1970s, even though Ted Heath was seriously considering an IMF bailout as well...

I've been on God's earth for 5 decades, and the vast majority of that has been under Tory governments, and I've never voted Tory in my life...

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I've been on God's earth for 5 decades, and the vast majority of that has been under Tory governments, and I've never voted Tory in my life...

I don't wish to factually deter from anything else you've said recently, but "vast" may be over cooking your eggs a bit.

From what I can recall, the Tories have been in power around 56% of the last 100 years.

It would be true to say they've been in power the majority, but you'd be stretching the point to say it was the vast majority.

Just asking quickly: what's the difference between high and low torry ?

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/03/uk-faces-two-years-of-severe-terrorism-threat-warns-home-office

34 years late, but I actually think that the conservatives believe that 1984 was not a warning, but a blueprint.

High Tories are old school, paternalistic, monarchistic. Low Tories are Thatcherite neo-liberal, free market.

 Henry wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I've been on God's earth for 5 decades, and the vast majority of that has been under Tory governments, and I've never voted Tory in my life...

I don't wish to factually deter from anything else you've said recently, but "vast" may be over cooking your eggs a bit.

From what I can recall, the Tories have been in power around 56% of the last 100 years.

It would be true to say they've been in power the majority, but you'd be stretching the point to say it was the vast majority.

Well, there's a calculating tool out there that tells you how long you've lived under a Tory government when you enter the year of your birth.


I entered my birth year and I've lived 61% of my life under Tory governments

That's pretty close to the 66% 2/3rds vast majority thing I mentioned earlier.

I'm not clear how this is relevant.

Do you mean to argue that the FPTP system produces unfair results, and we should introduce PR of some kind?

don't worry though Gove, Johnson and Grayling will save the day !





26th of May

https://twitter.com/CharlieElphicke/status/1000351467474219008

Lorry tailback now stretching all the way to the Roundhill tunnels. Underlines the need for @transportgovuk to get on with dualling the A2 & deliver the long promised lorry parking.

Most terrifying part the most: the Dexeu response saying “none” of this will come to pass.

None

In defiance of official advice, experts and logic and events thus far.

It feels like the absolutism of a cult.

If this is not going to happen then tell/show us the argument or evidence for this, surely it must exist ?

Part of the Dexeu is ran by Suella Fernandes

this is her if you recall :

https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/850110198752591872

stating with absolute confidence and conviction that we will not face or have to pay any monies to the EU and we will in fact receive a windfall of money .

If you recall this is in fact 100% false, so we can all feel tremendous confidence that we have such razor sharp minds working on our behalfs.

the Port of Dover paid for adverts at the last Tory party conference explaining the issues we will face here -- up to 17 miles of jams


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/03/world/europe/brexit-customs-union-dover-border.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimesworld

and the response in return thus far ha been Rees-Mogg explaining that if Dover cannot cope then the freight traffic will go elsewhere...

..

.. I mean ...

..what ?

In comparison :

Government*offers personalised 11 page “Brexit impact scan” for millions of small businesses covering issues such as customs, plant, medicine imports, UK passport holder rights for changes from 29.3.2019.



https://www.brexitloket.nl/impactscan

minor downside here being that this is the Dutch Govt. , not ours which still won't reveal anything.

"In the second scenario, not even the worst, the Port of Dover would collapse on day one"

watch the reverse ferrets and blame shifting really intensify

Farage is technically correct in that he never said that everyone would be better off, just that a nebulous "we" would be.

Which, of course, only makes him more of a complete git.

Crash the country, buy up the assets cheap when we're forced to flog them off, strongarm the govt. into giving you outrageous deals and benefits, simply trot out "brexit and will of the people" in respsonse to any complaints for the next 10 years or so.

Then watch as the tories blame it on Labour, for not stopping them.

Disaster capitalism, dressed up as patriotic public will.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Farage is technically correct in that he never said that everyone would be better off, just that a nebulous "we" would be.

Which, of course, only makes him more of a complete git.

Hopefully more Leave voters will come to recognise Farage for the self-serving idiot he is, and perhaps reconsider the whole situation.

Everyday I think a second referendum becomes more likely. It needs a good push by Labour, which requires Corbyn to pull his thumb out and make a decision.

In other Brexit related news, it's rumoured that hard-Brexiteer Tories are trying to dump May in favour of Gove.

I suppose Gove is preferable to Boris Johnson. I could almost like Gove except that he's a core Leaver. I don't know how much of a hard-Brexiteer he is.

Although I"m in the Labour Party, I have to recognise that the Conservatives can choose whoever they want for PM while they are the party of government. If they decide to dump May, I would prefer Hammond because he is soft Brexit.

Gove is an idiot who thinks he's an intellectual.

He went to state school, got a scholarship to a private school and went from there to Oxford University, so I think he can't really be an idiot.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
He went to state school, got a scholarship to a private school and went from there to Oxford University, so I think he can't really be an idiot.

His record in government says otherwise.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
He went to state school, got a scholarship to a private school and went from there to Oxford University, so I think he can't really be an idiot.

Remember he is the one that noted that the country had enough of experts. It really depends on the definition of 'idiot'. If it is someone that will just do what they think without listening to the evidence then that could quite easily result in someone calling him an idiot when it comes to running the country. His 'strength' is that he is better trained in the use of English and knows more than TM in how to abuse the masses that read certain papers like the Daily Fail. So he's not uneducated, but does spout a lot of idiocy.

It seems a pointless digression. If May goes, someone in the Conservative Party is going to be prime minister until Corbyn gets his thumb out of his bum about Brexit.

Here are the front runners -- Gove, Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson -- whom do you prefer?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
whom do you prefer?

Whichever one has the lowest chance of winning the election. Although Rees-Mogg ruled himself out, didn't he?

Gove might be the best (as in least awful) choice, actually. Do we really want a PM who could be assassinated by sprinkling him with salt, though?

 Duskweaver wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
whom do you prefer?

Whichever one has the lowest chance of winning the election. Although Rees-Mogg ruled himself out, didn't he?

Gove might be the best (as in least awful) choice, actually. Do we really want a PM who could be assassinated by sprinkling him with salt, though?

He said he wouldn't challenge TM for being PM. Of course if/when she is kicked out then he would no longer be challenging TM for the position so what he said would be correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Here are the front runners -- Gove, Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson -- whom do you prefer?

None of them. It will be decided mainly by the small number of party faithful; which will support the hardest possible type of Wrexit. There are three possible scenarios that I can see.

(a) The Tories split and we end up with a Remain / Leave candidates - in this case I'd expect the Leave candidate to win
(b) We end up with two leave candidates - In this case we end up with the one that proposes the hardest possible leave option.
(c) The Remainers in the Tory camp effectively split in two to block a Leave candidate going into thr final round (tricky to do but possible) and we end up with two remainer options. Who would then get chosen I am unsure.

So the Guardian is the only news outlet even vaguely interested in institutionalised and acceptable racism on the right and in the Conservative party...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/03/tories-islamophobia-gentrified-theresa-may-rightwing-politics

The Conservative party has a problem with Muslims. It is not a few bad apples; not a few social media posts taken out of context. The problem has been growing unchecked for years, despite warnings by Muslim party members, and has now become so normalised that incidents are being reported with alarming frequency. Last week, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) called for an independent inquiry into Islamophobia following more-than-weekly occurrences in the party last month. In these past four weeks alone, Conservative party representatives and candidates have called Islam “the new Nazism”, posted a picture of bacon on a door handle as a way to “protect your house from terrorism”, and shared an article that called Muslims “parasites” who “live off the state and breed like rabbits”.

...Those that have been grappling with the whole “Islam is not a race” diversion for a while now know that it is obvious that hate speech, mockery, calling for internment and damaging people’s employment prospects, as studies have found, is not a legitimate interrogation of a faith. The religion-not-race canard is a threadbare semantic excuse deployed cynically by those who know that, once the religion element is stripped away, all that is left is the racist bigotry.

A party that engages in populist rhetoric against immigration, the party of the Windrush scandal and the “go home” vans, is the natural home for the politics of fear. Zac Goldsmith’s shameful smear campaign against Sadiq Khan still stands as its monument.

The conservatives are not cynically ramping up the right wing racist rhetoric to attract the UKIP and far right vote, they ARE right wing racists, and are completely unwilling to do anything about it because it is hardwired into the majority of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In other News...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/03/mps-call-on-may-to-decriminalise-abortion-in-northern-ireland

I wonder if this will be followed through, however Arlene Foster claims that she has had Sinn Fein voters contact her to say that they will vote for the DUP over this issue.

The fact that this "political party" can still treat half of it population like criminals over a medical procedure in a 21st century western democracy, whilst holding the rest of the UK hostage to their vision of a hard BREXIT whilst also only making up a tiny proportion of the whole electorate is staggering.

From a former Unionist perspective, the sooner the Province is re-united with Eire and we're rid of the bastards, the better.

Aw cheers r-squared, leave us to clean up yer mess, eh?

I also noted the Guardian covering this, though not as thoroughly as the antisemitism thing.

 r_squared wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:
In other News...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/03/mps-call-on-may-to-decriminalise-abortion-in-northern-ireland

I wonder if this will be followed through, however Arlene Foster claims that she has had Sinn Fein voters contact her to say that they will vote for the DUP over this issue.

The fact that this "political party" can still treat half of it population like criminals over a medical procedure in a 21st century western democracy, whilst holding the rest of the UK hostage to their vision of a hard BREXIT whilst also only making up a tiny proportion of the whole electorate is staggering.

From a former Unionist perspective, the sooner the Province is re-united with Eire and we're rid of the bastards, the better.

I really can't see the DUP gaining much from this, some voters of SF will be put off by the parties stance on abortion but this has happened before and most will either end up going back to SF or else start to follow independent republican politicians.

It's important to remember that there has been nothing to back up these claims by the DUP, who as the RHI scandal has shown are more than will to play fast and loose with the truth.

 Da Boss wrote:
Aw cheers r-squared, leave us to clean up yer mess, eh?

Yeah, sorry about that. If it helps, you have my sympathy, I know there are many down south who aren't particularly enamoured of the idea of having this bunch suddenly becoming their responsibility. Not withstanding the shift to the right that the DUP and their voters might eventually bring to the Dail.

 Da Boss wrote:
I also noted the Guardian covering this, though not as thoroughly as the antisemitism thing.

Goes back to the left holding itself to a higher standard than the right. However, the Guardian is pretty anti-social democrat and Corbyn in particular. They're naturally a centre left, nu-labour paper.